Wednesday, August 04, 2010

Proposal: Reward for Effort

Times out 7-6 and is Enacted. Two arrows and two TP votes, no additional effects. - lilomar

Adminned at 06 Aug 2010 22:09:40 UTC

Add a Red rule entitled Proposal Perversity:

When a proposal is enacted, its author gains 1 perversity point.

If a majority of EVCs to this proposal contain the phrase “Treasonous Fails”, add the following to that same rule:

When a proposal is enacted, its author gains 1 treason point.

Comments

Ienpw III:

08-05-2010 00:02:05 UTC

EAV Treasonous fails for

Keba:

08-05-2010 00:04:18 UTC

for but why should you gain Treason for Proposals, which were enacted?

Ienpw III:

08-05-2010 00:07:31 UTC

That was a mistake. Does that count as a typo?

Kyre:

08-05-2010 00:09:58 UTC

for Treasonous Fails,

Keba:

08-05-2010 00:10:14 UTC

Did you mean “failed”? No, it is not a typo in my opinion.

But you have a free slot, S/K this one and propose a new one. If you’re lucky, lilomar will procedural veto this Proposal.

Kyre:

08-05-2010 00:13:23 UTC

I think it’s fine the way it is as currently written, to be honest. RED clearance citizens should OBVIOUSLY not be messing with Friend Computer’s perfect rule system. If they don’t want the treason point, just spend the perversity point a la Rule 2.3.1.1 and end up neutral.

Ienpw III:

08-05-2010 00:17:04 UTC

Yeah, it’s fine, I guess.
Still, ROEAV for

scshunt:

08-05-2010 00:18:37 UTC

for Treasonous Fails

Qwazukee:

08-05-2010 00:27:12 UTC

for

scshunt:

08-05-2010 00:35:29 UTC

CoV arrow  for Treasonous Fails

flurie:

08-05-2010 01:23:01 UTC

for

Bucky:

08-05-2010 01:38:59 UTC

against

glopso:

08-05-2010 02:00:43 UTC

arrow  for  for

Kevan:

08-05-2010 07:40:27 UTC

for

Purplebeard:

08-05-2010 11:58:35 UTC

for Treasonous Fails

lilomar:

08-05-2010 13:48:29 UTC

against Treasonous Fails

If PP are given out with each enacted proposal, it is going to just decrease the value of PP.

Ienpw III:

08-05-2010 19:44:48 UTC

Not really. One PP is always worth -1 treason points.

lilomar:

08-05-2010 19:47:04 UTC

Ienpw_III, not really. Since the liquidity only goes one way. If you could exchange them freely (which I WILL veto) then they would be tied to the value of -TP.

scshunt:

08-05-2010 20:13:36 UTC

CoV against Treasonous Fails

Ienpw III:

08-05-2010 20:21:50 UTC

Well, yeah. Ignoring inflation, a dollar always buys the same amount of bread, but bread can’t be exchanged back for a dollar.

lilomar:

08-05-2010 20:23:57 UTC

Inflation is the problem here.

Ienpw III:

08-05-2010 21:30:08 UTC

Unless someone modifies the rules…
ah. I see. Oh well. Emulation economics is fun>.

Ienpw III:

08-05-2010 21:30:25 UTC

*emulating

Keba:

08-05-2010 22:07:05 UTC

[lilomar] It redefines the value. The arrow mechanism is messed up and other ideas should be welcome. If a PP earned due arrows, this one PP should have less power. In my opinion, of course.

Princerepulsive:

08-06-2010 12:19:44 UTC

imperial

ais523:

08-06-2010 16:22:00 UTC

imperial

scshunt:

08-06-2010 20:34:54 UTC

against

Bucky:

08-06-2010 21:59:26 UTC

The Treasonous Fails part should be killed because it imposes penalties on Officers.

glopso:

08-07-2010 01:18:38 UTC

against