Tuesday, October 13, 2009

Proposal: Auctioning the Ruleset

Can’t pass with 10 votes AGAINST. Failed by Kevan. -2 to Arthexis.

Adminned at 14 Oct 2009 08:47:28 UTC

Create a new rule “Auctions”

An Auction is a special type of story post which has the text “[Auction]” at the beginning of its title. Auctions can only be created as specified by sub-rule “Creating Auctions”. The text of each Auction mus contain the name of a Dynastic rule or sub-rule which is being auctioned, along any other flavor text it’s creator wishes (none of it is binding in any manner).

There are two variables associated with an Auction, “Highest Bid” which is a positive amount of points and “Highest Bidder” which is the name of a Player or “None”. Auctions can be Open or Closed. As long as an Auction is Open, it shall be stickied.

Once an Open Auction has not received any new bids for 24 hours, any Player may Close it by making a comment of “Auction Closed” followed by the current values of Highest Bid and Highest Bidder for that Auction. If the Highest Bidder is not “None”, the Auctioned Rule is now Sponsored by the Highest Bidder (modify the rule to reflect this, as explained by the rule “Sponsored Rules”).

If the Auctioned Rule already had a Sponsor at the time the Auction Closed, the previous Sponsor ceases to be a Sponsor of that rule and is awarded Points equal to the Highest Bid.

Create a new sub-rule to rule “Auctions”, called “Creating Auctions [5 Points]”:

As a weekly action, the Acting Leader may create an Auction, including all the information required by rule “Auctions”. The Highest Bid for that Auction is 1, and the Highest Bidder for that auction is None. The Auction is considered Open upon creation.

Create a new sub-rule to rule “Auctions”, called “Bidding”:

At any time, a Player may bid in an Open Auction, by spending any number of positive Points greater than the Highest Bid of that Auction, and making a comment on that auction containing the text “Bidding X” where X is the number of points spent this way. Then, if no other previous bid is larger than this one, the Highest Bid becomes X (as defined on the previous sentence) and the Player who placed that bid becomes the Highest Bidder.

Whenever a Player ceases to be a Highest Bidder, they are awarded an amount of Points equal to those spent on their last bid.

Please note that a player with lots of points may not have an unfair advantage, simply because staying as the Acting Leader is advantageous in itself, and bidding will quickly cause you to drop from that position, so consider it a strategic type of action.



10-13-2009 20:09:35 UTC



10-13-2009 20:26:38 UTC

against Rather complicated. And this does give a player with lots of points an unfair advantage, simply because they have more options (stay highest or win auctions); other people don’t even have either of those options.


10-13-2009 20:45:14 UTC

@ais: You open an auction, you can bid, after it goes stale, it’s closed, highest bidder wins.

If that series of actions is rather complicated for you, I’d recommend you to stop playing this game at once, it might be too much for you to cope with.

Also, your second point says that basically we shouldn’t create benefits for players with points because that could encourage players with low points to do something about it? Because, you know, communism has been so great in the past…


10-13-2009 21:00:07 UTC



10-13-2009 21:37:40 UTC



10-13-2009 22:02:34 UTC


Ienpw III:

10-13-2009 23:42:53 UTC



10-13-2009 23:55:45 UTC

I wonder if the other players voted against because they disliked the mechanic in general, or because they think its not well implemented by the proposal?


10-14-2009 00:56:40 UTC

too much text for me to read when I’m already drunk


10-14-2009 03:58:44 UTC

@arth: I voted against because I dislike the mechanic in its current form.  I’d rather have it be, say, an automatic weekly event that picks a random rule with a fee than one directed by the Acting Leader.


10-14-2009 04:12:53 UTC



10-14-2009 06:27:26 UTC

@bucky: in any event, someone still has to do that action. I though you where against overloading admin duties?


10-14-2009 06:45:32 UTC

Make it Acting leader’s job, or ding them a stack of points.  Say, all of them. 



10-14-2009 08:35:38 UTC

I voted against because I disliked the attitude of your response to ais523.


10-14-2009 09:48:41 UTC

I’m just confused with it.


10-14-2009 13:39:47 UTC

@kevan: Ad hominem voting? I would have never expected that from you. I really thought you were above that.


10-14-2009 13:54:46 UTC

We’re in a metadynasty where points are awarded for proposals. I’m not just voting on whether I think the proposal is a good idea, here, I’m also voting on whether or not you should get ten points, and (one can assume) whether you should stand a better chance of winning the game and running the next Dynasty. Being gratuitously rude to other players will affect this.


10-14-2009 14:04:10 UTC

You have some trouble with my personality? Yeah, well I notice people dislike the idea of me winning (and are voting accordingly), despite having probed to be an active, fair and fun emperor.

After all, I also guess you vote for the friendly looking politicians IRL, right? Their proposals are not so important as kissing babies and hand waving at the crowds, right?


10-14-2009 14:33:49 UTC



10-14-2009 14:38:59 UTC

This is a social game, Arthexis. You’ll find that there are consequences to saying things like “I’d recommend you to stop playing this game at once” or “I also guess you vote for the friendly looking politicians IRL, right?” to other players.


10-14-2009 14:48:57 UTC

against for invoking communism.


10-14-2009 15:13:44 UTC



10-14-2009 15:13:51 UTC

@kevan: Oh, I don’t mind the consequences because I’m not interested in winning, only in making fun rules.

Beer pong is also a social game. But, I though a Nomic might be a little more refined and based upon the player’s abilities to rationalize, rather than mere popularity.

Or are you suggesting me being nice and gentle, rather than making interesting proposals? You should have said so earlier, rather than have that contradicting quote in the sidebar that reads:

“The primary activity of Nomic is proposing changes in the rules, debating the wisdom of changing them”

So much for debating the wisdom of changing rules.


10-14-2009 15:17:21 UTC

You give yourself an awful lot of credit, arthexis, in saying that the benefit of your great rules-making outweighs the detriment of your general insolence….


10-14-2009 15:25:38 UTC

@qwaz: That I am insolent or delusional should have no impact on the debate of the rules I create. Or are you somehow implying that my lack of humility somehow impoverishes the mechanics of this proposal?

Said another way: Its a pot, kettle thing.