Wednesday, February 07, 2007

Proposal: Beware of Jealousy

Passed 13-4, reaches Quorum. Enacted by Angry Grasshopper.

Adminned at 08 Feb 2007 22:54:56 UTC

Add a subrule to “Gossip”. Call it “Jealousy”

An Actor may occasionally make another Actor the subject of a gossip story, provided eir fame is strictly less than the fame of the Actor who will be the subject of the gossip story.

Comments

spikebrennan:

02-07-2007 16:28:59 UTC

On the right track.  I would suggest a further amendment to prevent someone from using the Jealousy rule against an Actor who already has two active Gossip Stories. for

Josh:

02-07-2007 16:46:02 UTC

I’m not a big fan, simply because I don’t see the logical link between jealousy and bad press. I’m sure that SOME gossip stories start as trash-talk, but I’m less sure that it should be that major a source.

snowballinhell7001:

02-07-2007 16:48:33 UTC

“Occasionally?” Be more specific and I might give you a for.  against

ChronosPhaenon:

02-07-2007 16:53:01 UTC

for Snowball, “Occasionally” is defined in the Glossary.

spikebrennan:

02-07-2007 16:55:05 UTC

Oh, and I would also suggest a further amendment so that the recipient of a Gossip Story by virtue of this Rule gets awarded one Fame point.  Might make people think twice about talking trash.

Cosmologicon:

02-07-2007 19:24:04 UTC

for

Hix:

02-07-2007 19:49:48 UTC

against

Clucky:

02-07-2007 20:00:01 UTC

“Oh, and I would also suggest a further amendment so that the recipient of a Gossip Story by virtue of this Rule gets awarded one Fame point.  Might make people think twice about talking trash.”

Huh? Why would gossip stories cause you to get fame? If anything, they should cause you to lose fame.

spikebrennan:

02-07-2007 20:06:47 UTC

Think about it, Clucky.. what is gossip, but a type of fame?

alethiophile:

02-07-2007 20:19:00 UTC

If “fame” is a measure of public awareness of an actor, then yes, gossip stories should add fame. This isn’t popularity.

Angry Grasshopper:

02-07-2007 21:33:26 UTC

I agree with spikebrennan. As they say in the business, bad publicity is better than no publicity. ;)

Another nice idea.

for

ChinDoGu:

02-07-2007 21:45:38 UTC

against I like the idea but it needs more checks and balances before we allow it to be implemented…

Edometheus:

02-07-2007 22:48:01 UTC

for

viewtyjoe:

02-07-2007 23:47:19 UTC

for

Doodle:

02-08-2007 02:54:04 UTC

for

Josh:

02-08-2007 11:41:57 UTC

against

Kevan:

02-08-2007 12:41:55 UTC

against

Elias IX:

02-08-2007 12:55:27 UTC

imperial

peacefulwarrior:

02-08-2007 13:00:40 UTC

for

snowballinhell7001:

02-08-2007 15:49:39 UTC

CoV: Thank you, Chronos.  for

snowballinhell7001:

02-08-2007 15:51:01 UTC

10-4-1 (including Clucky)

Amnistar:

02-08-2007 21:11:03 UTC

for

Doremi:

02-08-2007 21:19:16 UTC

for

This makes sense, and I’m sure will be amended later.

snowballinhell7001:

02-08-2007 22:18:34 UTC

Quorum.