> On Jun 12, 2017, at 5:06 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
>
>
> We used to have a "newbie" category that lasted at least a month.
> [This is inspired by CuddleBeam's recent CFJ, but not just because
> of that, CuddleBeam, there are several instances in the archives
> of new players putting forth a l
> On Jun 12, 2017, at 9:05 PM, CuddleBeam wrote:
>
> >The proposal things
>
> Maybe its just me but I'm not particularly motivated to make proposals. Its a
> bit because of Adam Smith-like economics and personal greed I guess.
>
> I know that using my shinies to make proposals myself will lik
>The proposal things
Maybe its just me but I'm not particularly motivated to make proposals. Its
a bit because of Adam Smith-like economics and personal greed I guess.
I know that using my shinies to make proposals myself will likely result in
those shinies being used woefully inefficiently (in c
The proposal things are meant to be bonuses not penalties; allowing
you to pend w/support where non-newbs would have to pay. It was the
CFJs that prompted it, but I was listing a bigger range of ways we'd
used in the past to *either* encourage or slow down new players.
The CFJ part doesn't have
Thank you for the line break thing; I absolutely remember reading it
before but forgot.
I'm not sure why the Proposal conditions are there when combating
CFJs is the issue. I also think that the "non-newbie support" thing
is OK, but might stop a burst of activity similar to the one we've just
seen
>vexatious CFJs
I think part of the motivation for player to do those CFJs is to get
guaranteed, safe information without any risk of would-be social hurdles.
Its like going to the government office of information for information
which seems that it should be very professional and helpful, instea
On Mon, 12 Jun 2017, CuddleBeam wrote:
> I think this would be good. It might help to note that my main motivation
> for CFJs (and maybe for others) is that while I know I can informally ask
> for help, CFJing just seems to be a strictly better choice as it's the same
> thing, except its now tot
I don't think requiring someone to ask for support is "crippling",
and I think vexatious designations are overly antagonistic.
Especially when we want to consider things like teaching format (e.g.,
when conducting official business, to not post lines as you did below;
rather, put hard line bre
I think this would be good. It might help to note that my main motivation
for CFJs (and maybe for others) is that while I know I can informally ask
for help, CFJing just seems to be a strictly better choice as it's the same
thing, except its now totally official too. I feel pretty vulnerable at
fir
Could we just have vexatious litigant category w/out crippling newbies'
ability to do things for two months? Vested interest here I guess but I
would just have something like
"The Arbitor, without 2 objection from players other than the designee, may
designate a player as a vexatious litigant. Vex
10 matches
Mail list logo
