Monday, August 03, 2009

Unrelated

I was wondering if you all think it would be a good idea to create a core rule along the lines of

If any rule(s) at any time prevent all current and future rule changes from being made, those rules are immediately repealed

The idea being to prevent this nomic from being frozen solid. Inspiration came of course from the “Boring” proposal last dynasty, which came much, much too close to passing.

Comments

SingularByte:

08-03-2009 07:02:13 UTC

The problem I see with that is that you could remove core rules with it. If I created a rule which said that you can’t create new rules or make changes while 1.1 is in effect, that would force 1.1 to be removed. Suddenly, people can break rules and modify the ruleset however they want.

Ienpw III:

08-03-2009 07:06:38 UTC

“any dynastic rules” then

Qwazukee:

08-03-2009 13:21:16 UTC

I figure we can always CfJ stuff if we’re really desperate.

Klisz:

08-03-2009 15:34:21 UTC

I don’t like nomics that say they have to be nomics all the time. If the people vote to unnomify it, then we should unnomify it.

Plus, the BN community is unlikely to unnomify itself anyway, so we should just let things stay as they are.

Ienpw III:

08-03-2009 15:37:45 UTC

Alright. Fair enough.

Kevan:

08-03-2009 15:39:21 UTC

This wouldn’t actually have helped with the “boring” problem, which (although we never fully argued its effects) probably just gave everyone a veto power. It was still theoretically possible to make rule changes.

And there are loads of other ways to freeze the nomic solid; “no gamestate changes until 2071” or “must pay Bucky $500 to change the gamestate” would do it, without triggering this detector.

If the game ever breaks, we can just informally agree to stop playing it, and to start playing a new game with the core ruleset. (The same way you’d stop playing chess, and get a new set, if the board caught fire, or if someone tactically ate your king.)

Ienpw III:

08-03-2009 15:47:09 UTC

Lol

ais523:

08-03-2009 20:13:36 UTC

Agora has a rule like this, but with a time limit (i.e. there must be some combination of player actions to make a change within 4 weeks, IIRC). It prevents changes to the ruleset, rather than repealing the rules in question, though; that’s probably more scam-proof.

I’d prefer a core rule stating something like ‘no rule can be added or amended in a way that prevents CfJs making arbitrary rule changes, unless this rule is first amended to remove this restriction’. That pretty much sums up our unwritten rule about CfJs in a written-down way.