Sunday, December 04, 2005

Proposal: choose your shoulder, now with fred

Self-Killed by Quazie, failed by Excalabur.

Adminned at 04 Dec 2005 16:57:48 UTC

Create an instinct entitled “Good vs Evil”

Add a GNDT field entitled ‘Allegiance’.

Create a Voice named Angel and a Voice named Devil and a Voice named Fred.

There exists a Voice named Angel and a Voice named Devil and a Voice named Fred.

There exists a GNDT field entitled ‘Allegiance’.

Angel Instincts, Impulses and Inclinations shall be colored blue; Devil Instincts, Impulses and Inclinations shall be colored red; and Fred Instincts, Impulses and Inclinations shall be colored green.  When creating a proposal that creates an Instinct, Impulse or Inclination, it must be explicitly mentioned whether said rule shall apply to those with an Angel Allegiance, a Devil Allegiance or those with a Fred Allegiance.  If a proposal does not state what Allegiance a rule shall have, it shall have no Allegiance.

The Devil shall be seen as evil.
The Angel shall be seen as good.
Fred shall be seen as neutral.

A Voice may Occasionally chance eir Allegiance to Devil, Angel or Fred.

A new Voice starts out with eir Allegiance set to Fred.

Set all Voices Allegiance to Fred.
Set Angel’s Allegiance to Angel.
Set Devli’s Allegiance to Devil.


Add the following to Law 10

A rule only applies to a Voice if it has no Allegiance or the rule’s Allegiance is the same as the Voice’s Allegiance.

posted by Quazie at 04 Dec 2005 19:38:47 UTC Comments (20)

Comments

Cayvie:

04-12-2005 19:55:53 UTC

for

Excalabur:

04-12-2005 20:11:15 UTC

One concern.. won’t this affect quorum, given that we are creating ‘Voices’? for

Quazie:

04-12-2005 20:13:08 UTC

we’ve created voices before and it hasn’t done anything like that…

Purplebeard:

04-12-2005 20:18:25 UTC

for I guess it will affect quorum, but that doesn’t have to be a problem…

Excalabur:

04-12-2005 20:20:57 UTC

hm?  When was that?  We’ve created pseudo-entities, like the Incarnations in the last dynasty, but this is using a keyword to mean two different things.

TrumanCapote:

04-12-2005 20:25:57 UTC

against

Rodney:

04-12-2005 20:28:36 UTC

for

Moonwryn:

04-12-2005 20:29:07 UTC

imperial excalabur raises some legitimate concerns

Rodney:

04-12-2005 20:32:23 UTC

Testing, testing 1,2,3.

OOO
OHO
OOO

Elias IX:

04-12-2005 20:35:34 UTC

imperial Maybe a clarification of the addendum to Law 10 to whether it is the Voice or the rule or both which has no allegiance.

smith:

04-12-2005 21:17:19 UTC

imperial

Excalabur:

04-12-2005 21:22:30 UTC

On a related note, you forgot to say what to /do/ with the stuff in the box, so this proposal doesn’t do anything useful.

I like the idea, though.

Excalabur:

04-12-2005 21:25:16 UTC

against For now, until things get resolved. 

The shoulder angels get points, though.

Quazie:

04-12-2005 21:27:20 UTC

what box?  Explain and i’ll fix for another go

Hix:

04-12-2005 21:34:56 UTC

against

Elias IX:

04-12-2005 22:36:44 UTC

for Actually… why not? It looks good.

Purplebeard:

04-12-2005 22:37:27 UTC

Do note that there is no ambiguity in the text added to law 10 (I think): since ‘it’ is used instead of the appropriate spivak pronoun, it can’t be referring to the voice according to law 1.
(this doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be corrected for clarity’s sake, just that it shouldn’t be much of a problem)

Excalabur:

05-12-2005 00:38:57 UTC

Read the text: the blockquote isn’t actually referred to.  It says to create a rule, add a gndt field, and then add some pseudoplayers, and then there is a blockquote.  Assuming that that is the intended text is the rule, but it doesn’t actually /say/ that.

Quazie:

05-12-2005 00:42:30 UTC

darn okies

Quazie:

05-12-2005 00:42:40 UTC

and against