Passes at 15-3. -Purplebeard
Adminned at 20 Apr 2011 01:31:10 UTC
Add a new subrule to the rule “Land” if it exists. Call the new rule “Takeover” and give it the following text:
If any Sheep owns more Land than all other Sheep combined, that Sheep achieves victory.
If this is a scam, and nobody figures out what it is by the time it enacts, the resulting win would be sufficiently impressive that it would almost certainly be deserved.
If it isn’t, it’s unlikely to be achieved without either some amazing gameplay, or a scam, later. (It needn’t be the only victory condition of the dynasty, by the way.)
I will check to see if there’s a scam here, though (and other people should too), and veto it if I spot one.
If there were 6 sheep working together it could be a scam. However, from what I’ve seen so far it wouldn’t make sense for Bucky to be one of the six. So I doubt it’s a scam, and if it is one, it’s clever enough to be deserved. Also, I’m not one of the six.
Travis, why six? Scams are perfectly capable of being single-person. Ever since 2009’s “Operation Meerkat” (which landed ais523 his first dynasty), it’s become a bit of an unspoken tradition to have four.
[Darth Cliche] Well I see a way that six Sheep (maybe five now due to change in quorum) could conspire for one of them to DoV right after this is enacted. I don’t see a way that 4 could do it, but there certainly could be an I’m just not seeing it.
[Travis] Do you mean that the six richest players could pool their Baabucks to transfer a lot of Land to a single Sheep? It looks like they’d need 30 Baabucks for that, ten more than they have. And six is stretching it for a potential scam - given that these six players are (more or less) the six who’ve been playing the game most seriously so far, they’re unlikely to give up their position to a rival. (Even if they agree to roll a six-sided die to assign the win to a random conspirator, each player would have to concede that that they themselves stood less than a 1-in-6 chance of winning by other means.)
[Darth] “Unspoken tradition”? Scams just run on the minimum number of players required to perform all of their actions, I don’t think anyone ever risks recruiting extra accomplices for the sake of “tradition”.
Hey now, I refute this allegation that I’m playing the game seriously.
Darth Cliche: Seriously, what? Flicking through the dynastic history pages, I can’t find any evidence to support your claim. The data strongly supports Kevan’s saner hypothesis instead: all (or at least most, as these pages probably aren’t 100% accurate) successful cooperative victory attempts since ais523’s first involved 2 or 3 players, the bare minimum in each case.
[Kevan]
That’s not what I had in mind. I saw that “Pastures New” was not contingent on “Own your own Meadow” becoming a rule. Basically, if several Sheep CoV’d on the “Own your own Meadow”, failing it at the last minute, but “Pastures New” still passed and someone got permission to be Clodhopper or simply waited out the 48 hours, the Clodhopper could assign 1 lot of land to themselves and DoV, as 1 is greater than 0*23. Now that the Meadow proposal passed it can’t be done.
BlogNomic is an online Nomic: a self-modifying game where changing the rules is part of the game. Players make blog posts proposing additions or alterations to the ruleset, discussing and casting votes in the comments: if enough vote in favour, the rules are changed and play continues.
The game has been running since 2003 and resets every month or so. Have a look around the wiki for more information and history. New players are always welcome and can join in the game at any time.
BlogNomic is powered by pMachine ExpressionEngine.
I just don’t like it, no other reason.
Winner: