> On May 24, 2017, at 4:24 PM, Nic Evans wrote:
>
> It's monthly (though that's only stated indirectly), because an org can
> be destroyed if it hasn't paid the admin fee in a given month.
That may be the intent, but I don’t think that’s how it reads:
>>> An organization is "In Bad Standing"
I would be interested.
Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 11:20 PM, Quazie wrote:
>
> On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 19:39 Alex Smith wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 2017-05-24 at 19:08 +, Quazie wrote:
>> > Proto Organization: 'Bing Bong'
>> >
>> > At the beginning of the game of B
On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 19:39 Alex Smith wrote:
> On Wed, 2017-05-24 at 19:08 +, Quazie wrote:
> > Proto Organization: 'Bing Bong'
> >
> > At the beginning of the game of Bing Bong each player SHALL pay the
> > organization 1 Shiny.
>
> An Organization isn't a contract, it can't do a SHALL. I
On 05/24/2017 04:37 PM, Josh T wrote:
Would a proposal that says to the effect of each organization that a
player has created and still exists makes that player's next new
organization more expensive? (Eg. A player's first organization costs
5 Shinies, 2nd organization costs 10, 3rd 20, etc.)
On Wed, 2017-05-24 at 19:08 +, Quazie wrote:
> Proto Organization: 'Bing Bong'
>
> At the beginning of the game of Bing Bong each player SHALL pay the
> organization 1 Shiny.
An Organization isn't a contract, it can't do a SHALL. If you want to
punish someone, you do so via increasing eir budg
On one hand, I respectfully disagree that limiting the number of
organizations that a player can join "reduces the strategic moves
available". It just means that each player needs to think more
strategically about how to allocate their resources (which organizations
they join), which in turn makes
On 05/24/17 15:24, Nic Evans wrote:
>
>
>
> On 05/24/17 15:03, Josh T wrote:
>> > [...] to solve the problem of orgs receiving assets they don't want
>> and don't know how to deal with [...]
>> I think it's valuable to allow orgs to not want to take part in the
>> Shiny system if they don't want to
It's monthly (though that's only stated indirectly), because an org can
be destroyed if it hasn't paid the admin fee in a given month.
On 05/24/17 15:14, Gaelan Steele wrote:
> To clarify, is the admin fee a one time fee? This is different from the
> current system (where there is a cost to main
On 05/24/17 15:03, Josh T wrote:
> > [...] to solve the problem of orgs receiving assets they don't want
> and don't know how to deal with [...]
> I think it's valuable to allow orgs to not want to take part in the
> Shiny system if they don't want to.
>
> > Why play a game where I may lose some
To clarify, is the admin fee a one time fee? This is different from the current
system (where there is a cost to maintaining an org, not just creating one).
Gaelan
> On May 24, 2017, at 12:02 PM, Nic Evans wrote:
>
> I submit the following proposal:
>
> Title: Organization Integration and S
> [...] to solve the problem of orgs receiving assets they don't want and
don't know how to deal with [...]
I think it's valuable to allow orgs to not want to take part in the Shiny
system if they don't want to.
> Why play a game where I may lose some shinies and not gain a stamp when I
could just
On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 12:41 PM, Josh T wrote:
> On a more serious note, the proposal says that the organization needs to pay
> an administrative fee, but the latest version of the Assets proposal states
> that an organization can decide for themselves if they want to accept an
> asset. While I t
On 05/24/17 14:41, Josh T wrote:
> We'd have to see Stamp Collecting pass anyway. As for the Bing Bong
> game itself, I'd have to see how it plays out first.
>
> On a more serious note, the proposal says that the organization needs
> to pay an administrative fee, but the latest version of the Asse
We'd have to see Stamp Collecting pass anyway. As for the Bing Bong game
itself, I'd have to see how it plays out first.
On a more serious note, the proposal says that the organization needs to
pay an administrative fee, but the latest version of the Assets proposal
states that an organization can
On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 12:30 Josh T wrote:
> > At the beginning of the game of Bing Bong each player SHALL pay the
> organization 1 Shiny.
>
> I object to being obliged to pay the organization 1 Shiny even if I do not
> wish to partake in Bing Bong.
>
> 天火狐
>
Each member obviously - i was simpl
> At the beginning of the game of Bing Bong each player SHALL pay the
organization 1 Shiny.
I object to being obliged to pay the organization 1 Shiny even if I do not
wish to partake in Bing Bong.
天火狐
On 24 May 2017 at 15:08, Quazie wrote:
> Proto Organization: 'Bing Bong'
>
> [Organization st
Proto Organization: 'Bing Bong'
[Organization standard stuff]
There exists a game master, originally the creator of this organization.
If a game of Bing Bong is not ongoing, a game of Bing Bong can be started
with 24 hours notice.
At the beginning of the game of Bing Bong each player SHALL pay
17 matches
Mail list logo
