On Tue, 21 Jul 2009, C-walker wrote: > On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 7:27 PM, G. wrote: >> (1) is there support for this idea > > I support it as it seems to work better than castes and I like the > ideas of making ordinary voting more cutthroat and linking in the > speaker. I'm not sure, however, if this is different enough from the > current system for a supposed replacement. > > Don't take that the wrong way; I like what you've done.
Thanks. My main inspiration was that, to my knowledge, we've never used a full "rank list" method of any kind; most of the details are almost secondary to implementing a game with a list mechanic, at least to me :). >> 3. Some form of monthly rotation. > > Again, this is not much different from the current system. Have you > any specific ideas for a different form of monthly rotation? Sorry, I should have elaborated this. The main purpose for regular rotation is to retire the Speaker (perhaps down towards the bottom but certainly not all the way to the bottom). It's my idea that the balance will be such that almost all changes occur through cards (as played by choice) and wins. The 'rotation' will shuffle out the speaker, but won't have that elaborate 'everyone up, everyone down' controlled by an officer. A "complete reordering" of the list might come about through making the coup mechanic (the Admiral of the Navy is awaiting orders). Does that make it sound different enough? -G.
