> > Also, what happens if one of the specified players has the nerve to
> > deregister before the proposal takes effect and throws off the
> > balance?
>
> Erm, yes. I also want to allow some loose/flexible set specification
> (e.g. "all players with quality X get a P'ship of 1.5" where quality
> X might vary during voting period). Need to think about the balance
> between flexible and zero sum here. Hmm.
Erm, no. The original wording dealt with this case quite effectively
and elegantly, by means of the phrase "at the end of its voting
period", as well as the use of "player" rather than "person"
throughout.
As to flexibility and zero sum, I would just Murphy's change to (c) as follows:
(c) The sum of all legally specified Partisanship values
for all specified players is equal to the sum of the
Partisanship values that those players had immediately
before the adoption of the proposal.
One other thing: I would rename Partisanship. It sounds like it should
be a measure of how inclined one is to follow other players, but it's
really more a measure of how inclined others are to follow you. I
suggest calling it Shifgrethor.
