Alright, thanks. I guess I should have more confidence in myself.
As for the victory elections thing, I might actually go ahead and repeal
that when I actually post the proposal.
As for when I'll post it, I'll probably post it later today, if nobody else
says anything.
On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 9:
No I think that's an actually good proposal that provides a path to
victory that might be conceivable while also incentivising strict
rules enforcement. I would likely vote FOR it in its current form.
Although that said, perhaps if this comes in Victory Elections should
go, for in my opinion they'r
I know that I for one read over it and liked the idea and wasn't sure
whether it was would work as is, but didn't have thoughts on how to
improve it, therefore I didn't comment. I'm sorry that I wasn't very
helpful, but I don't have ideas on how I could be.
On 10/15/2017 08:35 PM, ATMunn . wr
Hopefully this doesn't sound like I'm begging for attention or something,
but this seems to have been ignored. I don't mind that much, I'd just like
to know what stuff needs improvement. Have people just not noticed it yet,
does it really not have much wrong with it, or am I just too impatient?
On
Okay, the second draft is finished. I've changed a bunch of stuff, it's
almost a completely different proposal now. I've taken into consideration
almost everything Aris and Alexis mentioned, so I've given them
co-authorship as well.
I'm sure it's still got plenty of flaws. But it should be better.
I don't really know what you mean by that, I don't think so?
Anyone can win via a Victory Election; this is much harder to achieve as
you have to not do anything wrong in order to be eligible.
On Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 9:33 PM, VJ Rada wrote:
> Isn't that just 1/6 of a Victory Election?
>
> On Sun
Isn't that just 1/6 of a Victory Election?
On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 12:18 PM, ATMunn . wrote:
> Thanks, both of you, for your suggestions. I'm working on a revised version
> at the moment. One idea I had, regarding what Alexis said about the idea of
> players declaring themselves eligible for a Ba
Thanks, both of you, for your suggestions. I'm working on a revised version
at the moment. One idea I had, regarding what Alexis said about the idea of
players declaring themselves eligible for a Badge of Honor, (now Medal of
Honour) is the idea of the recordkeepor initiating an Agoran Decision on
On Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 8:50 AM, ATMunn . wrote:
> Title: A Reward for Obedience
> Author: ATMunn
> Co-Author(s):
> AI: 1
>
> Create a new power-1 rule titled "Badges of Honor"
> {
> Badges of Honor are an indestructible, player-owned asset. The Referee
> is the recordkeepor for Badges of Hono
On Sat, 14 Oct 2017 at 11:50 ATMunn . wrote:
> Title: A Reward for Obedience
> Author: ATMunn
> Co-Author(s):
> AI: 1
>
> Create a new power-1 rule titled "Badges of Honor"
>
Nit: I prefer Honour :P
> {
> Badges of Honor are an indestructible, player-owned asset. The Referee
> is the recordk
Title: A Reward for Obedience
Author: ATMunn
Co-Author(s):
AI: 1
Create a new power-1 rule titled "Badges of Honor"
{
Badges of Honor are an indestructible, player-owned asset. The Referee
is the recordkeepor for Badges of Honor.
At the beginning of every Agoran month, the Referee CAN and
11 matches
Mail list logo
