I’m way late to this party, and I’m aware I’m running the risk of reigniting a bit of a fight by bringing it up, but, I _heartily_ endorse grok’s lament:
> On May 29, 2017, at 12:58 PM, grok (caleb vines) <grokag...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I was really excited to play legislative-based, classic nomic style Agora. > That's not what I'm getting. All this psuedo-philosophy of the rules stuff is > really frustrating to me, especially since it's all getting dismissed or > ruled false anyways. I’m pleased that the number of angels-on-pins CFJs is dropping off, because it’s also the least-interesting for of play for me. I doubt it would have caused me to drop out, but I have some personal investment in the systems I’m experimenting with that aren’t really affected (much) by most CFJs, and I can certainly understand why someone interested in the legislative game would give up in frustration. Separately, we’ve still not reverted the requirement that a payment to pend a proposal happen Without 3 Objections that was put in as a scam stopper. This is a huge brake on proposals, and therefore on legislative play, and if we’re sure we fixed the scam, then it’s probably time for that measure to go. I’ll even write the proposal to remove it, if that’s what it takes. Don’t take this as discouragement for finding the logical fine structure of Agora! I think there’s some neat stuff happening in at least a few of the very CFJs I dismissed as “angels-on-pins” above. However, perhaps more of it should happen through -discussion and less of it through game actions? -o
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
