Friday, September 01, 2006

Proposal: Do the Shuffle!

Self-killed.—Kevan

Adminned at 03 Sep 2006 19:26:26 UTC

Create a Dynastic Rule called “Lost in the Shuffle” with text:

This paragraph is deleted from the Ruleset 48 hours after the Enactment of the Proposal which added it to the Ruleset.  Other paragraphs in this rule have no effect (as if they were italicized).  This paragraph takes precedence over other paragraphs in this rule.

If a comment authored by a Musician who is currently active on a Proposal contains exactly one occurrence of a string of the form “Shuffle=X”, where X is a member of the set {-2,-1,0,1,2}, and the comment’s author has not used such a string in a later comment on that Proposal, then the comment is a “Shuffling Comment”, and the value of X is the Shuffling Comment’s “Shuffle Modifier”.

Zero plus the sum of the Shuffle Modifiers of all Shuffling Comments on a given Proposal is that Proposal’s “Shuffle Value”.  Musicians who make Shuffling Comments should indicate the updated Shuffle Value in parentheses.

If there are any Pending Proposals, then the least value among Shuffle Values of all Pending Proposals is the “Queue Value” (Shuffle Modifiers, Shuffle Values, and the Queue Value may be negative).

In the “Enactment” rule, replace all occurrences of “The oldest pending Proposal” with “The oldest pending Proposal with Shuffle Value equal to the Queue Value”, and simultaneously delete this sentence from the Ruleset.

When this rule is repealed (in its entirety), remove all occurrences of ” with Shuffle Value equal to the Queue Value” from the “Enactment” rule.

Comments

Hix:

09-01-2006 15:40:12 UTC

Intent:  Musicians can indicate in comments that they wish a Proposal to be adminned out of the usual cronological order.  Roughly speaking, the majority wins, with ties going to the old chronological order.  Except for WHEN they may be adminned, the rules for whether the Proposal passes or fails are not changed.  There is a 48 hour delay on everything so that we don’t have to worry about making Shuffling Comments unless this Proposal passes.

ChronosPhaenon:

09-01-2006 16:09:59 UTC

against Admin nightmare.

Thrawn:

09-01-2006 16:56:28 UTC

against

Thelonious:

09-01-2006 17:09:19 UTC

Cool.  for

Cosmologicon:

09-01-2006 17:32:18 UTC

against

Angry Grasshopper:

09-01-2006 18:39:44 UTC

Oh my.

Rodney:

09-01-2006 18:46:03 UTC

imperial

Angry Grasshopper:

09-01-2006 18:56:45 UTC

I meant, for, right?

Poe:

09-01-2006 19:49:59 UTC

imperial

Quazie:

09-01-2006 23:30:39 UTC

imperial i think

Kevan:

09-02-2006 01:46:57 UTC

against Um, yes, admin nightmare, unless I’m missing something. Instead of just checking the oldest proposal to see if it needs to be enacted, we need to open up and check all queued proposals and do some mental arithmetic? This is just going to slow the whole proposal queue down.

Plus all the usual dangers of messing with the queue, of proposals enacting out of order and interacting unpredictably (I think it’s optimistic to expect that all players will carefully check that foundation proposals have a lower Shuffle Value, before enthusiastically adding Shuffle-2 to an exciting proposal), and people not realising a proposal is still waiting for their vote, because the five after it have been processed and have buried it.

gazebo_dude:

09-03-2006 11:00:39 UTC

agreed against

ChronosPhaenon:

09-03-2006 12:58:17 UTC

Just now, it’s passing 6-5. Can someone please vote it down, on grounds of what Kevan said?

Angry Grasshopper:

09-03-2006 15:44:04 UTC

Your wish, sire! Sorry, Hix..

against

Hix:

09-03-2006 20:12:27 UTC

Okay, I’ll think of some other way to challenge the core mechanics. against