Monday, September 26, 2016

Proposal: Border Fatigue

Timed out 5 votes to 1. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 28 Sep 2016 13:04:40 UTC

In “Gerrymander”, after “When a Councillor Gerrymanders, they choose one block of Auld Anchorage and change its Constituency to any other Constituency.”, add:-

If the Constituency being changed from is represented by a Councillor other than the Councillor taking the action, then the block now supports no Party.

In the rule “Auld Anchorage”, replace “Each Block supports one of four Parties” with:-

Each Block may support one of four Parties

Adding a voter apathy cost to taking another Councillor’s ground (which can be avoided by arranging for the other Councillor to give you the block instead).

Comments

Josh: HE/HIM

09-26-2016 14:43:26 UTC

against Doesn’t seem to make much thematic sense.

Kevan: HE/HIM

09-26-2016 15:00:15 UTC

I was just looking around for a small extra cost to attach to this, and this seemed an easy one. I think it makes a bit of sense - the inhabitants of the block see their boundary being changed aggressively against the wishes of their incumbent Councillor, and so are initially lukewarm to the new Councillor.

Viv:

09-26-2016 17:04:48 UTC

I see.  for

Viv:

09-26-2016 17:09:57 UTC

Hang on. Shouldn’t that then only happen if the Block was supporting the Councillor’s chosen party at the time of takeover?
Thematically speaking.

Kevan: HE/HIM

09-26-2016 17:34:25 UTC

I think residential grumpiness would also make sense where an Up Councillor was grabbing a Strange hipster district purely to make their Constituency Diverse. Taking a rival’s block is always going to be a “the strength or bonuses of my constituency are more important than yours” situation.

Brendan: HE/HIM

09-26-2016 18:41:38 UTC

for

Aname:

09-26-2016 21:31:26 UTC

for

Matt:

09-27-2016 03:36:50 UTC

for Looking forward for a way to re-assign a party to a block.

Kevan: HE/HIM

09-27-2016 08:29:46 UTC

[Matt] Campaigning already does that.

Brendan: HE/HIM

09-27-2016 15:26:39 UTC

There’s an edge-case argument to be made that “Campaigning” only supports changing a Block to “any OTHER party” and that a Block of no Party might not qualify for that condition… but I don’t think that would make it past a CfJ.