Monday, March 02, 2015

Back to the old Astrology coalface

Apologies again for my unexpected absence. I’m now in the contrary position - I have WAY too much internet-enabled leisure time in front of me - so this is just a heads up that I’ll be reassuming my duties from now.

As such, I’m removing rule 2.5 from the ruleset. My sincere thanks to the Astronomer for having kept an eye on things in my absence.


Kevan: Oracle he/him

02-03-2015 16:08:06 UTC

Good to see you up and online again.

The combination of the week-long proposal system and a small oversight in the Pace rule (which still constrained us to two proposals) actually meant that things didn’t get built up too much in your absence, so that worked out quite well.

Josh: he/him

02-03-2015 16:10:43 UTC

Does that mean that a reworking of Pace is needed? How are people feeling about the slower rate of play?


02-03-2015 16:21:00 UTC

Yay, Josh is back!

I actually think the Pace Rule works. I’m reading it differently than Kevan.

Kevan: Oracle he/him

02-03-2015 16:26:50 UTC

No, it’s okay, we patched it up to four proposals each over the weekend.

The slower game is interesting. It’s pushing the game very strongly towards self-killing and reproposing ideas until we get them right, which is something that’s come up hypothetically in the past when talking about “protosals”. It feels a bit on the noisy side and the ruleset looks as if it’s spread in more directions than it usually has after a week (I guess because there’s no sense in building too much on parallel proposals which might not survive to the weekend), but a game is happening.

Brendan: he/him

02-03-2015 20:57:06 UTC

Welcome back, Josh.


02-03-2015 21:34:21 UTC

Welcome back, Josh!