On Thu, 20 Jul 2017, grok (caleb vines) wrote:
> On Jul 20, 2017 6:16 PM, "V.J Rada" <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Also I need to spend my money before it gets blanked for value.
> Title: Pledges, again.
> Amend rule whatever "Pledges" by adding at the end
> {{{
> No message shall be construed as a pledge unless it contains the word
> "pledge".
> A pledge is "publically made" only if the full effect of the pledge is public
> andÂ
> understandable by all players at the inception of the pledge.
> }}}
>
> y/n? better way to say it?
>
> Also will take ideas on how to fix loopholes to spend my other five shinies
> for
> _VALUE_.
>
>
> I would recommend spelling "publicly" correctly if closing loopholes is your
> goal.
> Also I'm not sure the second sentence is really necessary. A pledge can only
> compel
> the person who makes it to do it, so idk why it matters if anyone else really
> understands. Plus pledges that aren't in public forums and actions that are
> not
> comprehensible have no effect on the gamestate.
Right now, the Referee is in a tough position if e can't understand the pledge,
as
e is required to state truthfully whether any rules have been broken each week.
Of course, even with plainly-written pledges, that's a burden (to track all
pledges!)
My suggestion is (1) decide whether to commit to private contracts being allowed
(policy decision), then (2) whether or not that's true, come up with something
that says "a pledge can only be carded after someone Points the Finger for it."
This takes it out of the hands of the referee, and only matters if one party
to a private contract alleges that it's broken (who would have to provide the
text to prove the case).
Of course, one could also wait for that massive criminal reform proposal that's
been floated!
-G.
