On Thu, 24 Aug 2017, Alex Smith wrote: > On Wed, 2017-08-23 at 22:22 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > On Thu, 24 Aug 2017, Alex Smith wrote: > > > I've discovered that it's basically impossible to force Agorans to use > > > what were once called "supplementary legal codes" in any way other than > > > Contracts. If you create a mechanic, either it turns into Contracts, or > > > else it ends up unused. I know there's a lot of support for doing > > > things differently, but this doesn't seem to be part of it. > > > > The one exception I think of is Contests (er, Tournaments right now). A > > good contest can catch on, without being a contract. People have to be > > in the mood to try it though, can be hit-or-miss (as with any new ruleset). > > Are you aware of a period of Agoran history in which Contests worked in > a way significantly different to typical Contract behaviour? I'd like > to read up on it; the versions of Contests I'm aware of were very > Contract-like (having rules for their participants which were generally > SHALL-enforced, internal gamestate, and the like). The only real > difference between those and Contracts is that Contests are normally > allocated assets by the Ruleset to give out as prizes.
I guess I don't understand what you mean when you say something is "different" than contracts. If it's a "supplementary legal code", it described a set of usages to follow. If that's what you call a contract, it's a tautology to say all SLCs are contracts...? Maybe I'm missing your distinctions here. We also had (political) Parties and Teams. These mainly gave shared bonuses for belonging, without necessarily having contract-like regulations for using the bonuses, although some did.
