This is going to end up with complex numbers in the scores.

You should probably have a special case for players on negative scores.

I also think that the reduction might be a bit too large, although the sentiment makes sense.

is this multiply by 2 and then round or round and then multiply by 2?

We could probably unambiguously say that 0 is the nearest integer to k*i for any k.

Is this explanation more clear?

I’d say twice the square root of a number is 2* sqrt(number). sqrt(2*number) would be the square root of twice a number).

I agree that imaginary numbers round to zero.

This is probably the best negative reset I’ve seen.

The ruleset has a provision for changing spivak to singylar they, but please could you save the enacting admin some time and change out ‘eir’?

I’ve made that change.

Thx

wait wouldn’t their score still be imaginary if negative because the multiplication happens after

It takes the absolute value inside the square root, so it now only produces real numbers as output.

“rounded to the nearest integer”: in which way? Half to even?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rounding#Round_half_to_even

For reference, the effect this has on scores:

0→0 1→2 2→3 3→3 4→4 5→4 6→5 7→5 8→6 9→6 10→6 11→7 12→7 13→7 14→7 15→8 16→8

@Marco Sulla: it doesn’t matter, no square root of an integer can be equidistant between two integers, even when doubled.

@Ais: sqrt(21) ~= 4.58 Okay, you can say it’s quite improbable to have so much Segments, but you never know ^_^

4.58 is not equidistant between two integers.

Mh, right, there’s no number of significant figures :P
 

This seems much too complex an equation, for something that we might have to apply 14 times whenever we spin the Wheel.

its a really simple equation, and its a fair catchup mechanism.

per Kevan. Reducing in half seems like it would be a bit fairer and easier to process.

I like this because it actually increases the values of those with Points closer to 0.

we can fix that in another proposal if we want

Clarity