Saturday, February 10, 2007

Proposal: I want to BELIEVE

Failed, 3-10-1. Josh

Adminned at 12 Feb 2007 22:11:07 UTC

“Do you believe the voice?” - Dr. Werber (from The X-files, Season 1, Episode 3)

Add subrule 2.4 “Cults” to rule 2.3 “Gossip””

If an Actor has “Cult-worshipping” as one gossip story and also has another gossip story active simultaneously, then e may choose to have the gossip story “Cult-worshipping” changed to one of the following, based what the second gossip story is:

-“Cult-worshipping” and “Pretentious”: Member of “Fiat Ego” cult
-“Cult-worshipping” and “Alcoholic”: Member of “Friends of Jack Daniels” cult
-“Cult-worshipping” and “Alcoholic”: Member of “Intimate Friends of Jack Daniels” cult
-“Cult-worshipping” and “Philandering”: Member of “Order of Don Juan” cult
-“Cult-worshipping” and “Sex-addicted”: Member of “Sexholic Army” cult
-“Cult-worshipping” and “Right-wing”: Member of the “Opus Reagani” cult
-“Cult-worshipping” and “Left-wing”: Member of the “New Fair Square Deal of the Great Society” cult
-“Cult-worshipping” and “Kleptomaniac”: Member of the “Hands of Bender” cult
-“Cult-worshipping” and “Paternity-suited”: Member of the “Children of Someone Else” cult
-“Cult-worshipping” and “Divorced”: Member of the “Self Liberation Army” cult
-“Cult-worshipping” and “Eccentric”: Member of the “Flying Spaghetti Monster” cult

Comments

Hix:

02-10-2007 21:14:15 UTC

against

Elias IX:

02-10-2007 21:22:13 UTC

for

Angry Grasshopper:

02-10-2007 21:45:55 UTC

Soooo many…

ChinDoGu:

02-10-2007 22:10:25 UTC

While I like the concept this will get confusing, and technically, they will no longer be cult worshiping… which breaks other proposals…

ChinDoGu:

02-10-2007 22:10:44 UTC

so..  against

Clucky:

02-10-2007 23:16:46 UTC

against

Rodney:

02-11-2007 01:46:35 UTC

for

Edometheus:

02-11-2007 02:13:28 UTC

I made one for every possible combination of stories…
Would you support this if I made the effects of “Cult-worshipping” apply to each of these, ChinDoGu?

ChinDoGu:

02-11-2007 02:29:02 UTC

hmm.. find a way thats less spammy to both the ruleset and the columnlength in the gndt, and still alllows them ot count as cultworshiping and i’d be in favor of it.

spikebrennan:

02-11-2007 03:52:23 UTC

against
Adds complexity without there being any straightforward prospect of the game becoming more fun or interesting.

Amnistar:

02-11-2007 04:09:41 UTC

against

Doodle:

02-11-2007 05:38:28 UTC

against

Edometheus:

02-11-2007 18:00:36 UTC

To those of you voting against:
Would you mind telling m why you are voting against this? If you have objections that can be changed, Then I will try to incorporate them in a re-proposal of this. However, if you just vote against it, how can I know what part of it you are objecting to?

Kevan:

02-11-2007 18:46:10 UTC

against Nice, but GNDT-bloating. The same concept without the GNDT-affecting would be fine for me.

alethiophile:

02-11-2007 20:07:35 UTC

imperial

Josh:

02-11-2007 22:27:56 UTC

As Kevan against

ChronosPhaenon:

02-12-2007 12:35:12 UTC

against Edo, AGAINST votes without reasoning are bothersome, but kind of inevitable. Sometimes we just don’t have the time, or the will, to explain why we are voting agaisnt something.

My vote is because of the ruleset spamming angle.

peacefulwarrior:

02-12-2007 17:34:37 UTC

against I agree with the other objections being raised about bloating the GNDT and creating complexities.

snowballinhell7001:

02-12-2007 21:04:31 UTC

Why are there two cults for alcoholics?