Zefram wrote:
Ed Murphy wrote:
I think it's clear enough, but okay, "eir VCs of each color are
set to zero".
That's still a bad wording. The intent is not to modify the VCs
themselves, it's to arrange for em to not have any VCs. No doubt someone
will argue that "setting a VC to zero" is a n
Ed Murphy wrote:
>I think it's clear enough, but okay, "eir VCs of each color are
>set to zero".
That's still a bad wording. The intent is not to modify the VCs
themselves, it's to arrange for em to not have any VCs. No doubt someone
will argue that "setting a VC to zero" is a null action, so th
Zefram wrote:
Ed Murphy wrote:
When a player registers, eir VCs are set to zero.
You're generally retaining language that's based on a single per-player
count of VCs, whereas your new scheme has four separate VC counts
per player. Also, "eir VCs are set to zero" is a poor expression;
be
Ed Murphy wrote:
> When a player registers, eir VCs are set to zero.
You're generally retaining language that's based on a single per-player
count of VCs, whereas your new scheme has four separate VC counts
per player. Also, "eir VCs are set to zero" is a poor expression;
better to say "e ha
Zefram wrote:
Sounds too powerful, and subject to timing attacks. But perhaps
something like this could hasten VLOP decay: say, for a 3 VC spend
the target's VLOP goes through an extra *0.9 multiplier at the end of
the week. There'll be some level of VLOP where this mechanism matches
the effic
Zefram wrote:
Ed Murphy wrote:
Change the Power of Rule 2126 (Voting Credits) to 2,
This rule change standing alone has been voted down twice (while also,
curiously, failing quorum both times).
I'll takes my chances.
a) A player may spend one VC to increase another player's
Roger Hicks wrote:
>As another suggestion, what if by spending 3 VCs, each of a different
>color, you can reset any player's VLOP to 1?
Sounds too powerful, and subject to timing attacks. But perhaps
something like this could hasten VLOP decay: say, for a 3 VC spend
the target's VLOP goes through
On 6/21/07, Zefram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ed Murphy wrote:
>a) A player may spend one VC to increase another player's
> voting limit on ordinary proposals by one.
Not requiring a specific colour or any colour mixing means that this
will continue to provide an unchecked pos
Ed Murphy wrote:
>Change the Power of Rule 2126 (Voting Credits) to 2,
This rule change standing alone has been voted down twice (while also,
curiously, failing quorum both times).
>a) When a proposal's voting index is less than half its
> adoption index, its proposer loses one
Endymion wrote:
>Point of curiosity-- would that actually work?
Almost certainly not. Given that actually applying it as written would
be totally destructive, R1698 would prevent it being applied, if it's
taken as a single change to the game state. However, R105 prevents it
being treated that wa
On Wed, Jun 20, 2007 at 10:32:31PM -0500, Endymion wrote:
> On 6/20/07, comex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >On Wednesday 20 June 2007, Ed Murphy wrote:
> >> Proto-Proposal: A Suffusion of Yellow
> >
> >I submit the following proposal, titled "A Suffusion of Yellow":
> >(AI=4)
> >
> > Replace all
On 6/20/07, comex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wednesday 20 June 2007, Ed Murphy wrote:
> Proto-Proposal: A Suffusion of Yellow
I submit the following proposal, titled "A Suffusion of Yellow":
(AI=4)
Replace all numbers in the ruleset with the phrase
"A Suffusion of Yellow".
Point o
12 matches
Mail list logo
