On 11 August 2011 16:26, Arkady English <arkadyenglish+ag...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 11 August 2011 15:20, Charles Walker <charles.w.wal...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On 11 August 2011 14:57, Jonatan Kilhamn <jonatan.kilh...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On 11 August 2011 00:09, Elliott Hird <penguinoftheg...@googlemail.com> >>> wrote: >>>> Agora cannot play BlogNomic without some construct in the rules >>>> allowing it to; the only affect this will have is to spam the lists. >>>> >>> Well, obviously the game of agora, now an entity capable of taking >>> action within itself, couldn't really do such a thing. What is my duty >>> though, is to arrange for there to be a player named Agora in >>> BlogNomic that acts out the will of the Agoran community. Mostly >>> because this is the only possible way to enact my rules-imposed duty >>> as ambassador. To start with, I intend to play the game on behalf of >>> Agora, seeing as I was elected Ambassador. If this raises any >>> discussion about how Agora should act in BlogNomic, we'll have to come >>> up with some mechanism for deciding what actions I, on behalf of >>> Agora, should take. >> >> I believe that I proposed allowing players to act on Agora's behalf >> with Agoran Consent, but I'm not sure what happened to that. This >> would be useful for you to get Agora to join BlogNomic, but it would >> hardly be easy to play BlogNomic waiting for Agoran Consent for every >> single action. >> >> >> -- >> Charles Walker >> > > A special case may be necessary, whereby Agoran Consent with respect > to BlogNomic is taken with 24 hours to give support or objection. >
I don't see why it can't be the mission of the Ambassador to act in Agora's best interest. That's pretty much what an ambassador used to be about: the guy who was entrusted to hang out in other countries and know what the people back home would want him to say. /Tiger
