Monday, October 24, 2005

Proposal: Eternal Truths

7-1.  Reached quorum, enacted by Excalabur.

Adminned at 25 Oct 2005 11:59:51 UTC

Add a rule named Eternal Rules:-

A rule may transcend the ability of even the gods to change. Such a rule must labelled an Eternal rule in the ruleset.

An Eternal rule may not be repealed or amended by proposal during this dynasty. If an Eternal rule is altered by other means, as part of that alteration every variable in the gamestate over which that Eternal rule has some control is reset to its default starting value, or cleared if it has no starting value defined.

If a Proposal affects a part of the gamestate or ruleset which is also governed by an Eternal rule that Proposal fails unless it gets unanimous FOR votes.

In the last dynasty we saw how easy it was for other players to gang up on a winning player. It seems that every time someone wins in Blognomic it is by surprise, before the other players can organize and react. What would happen if we froze parts of the game and lived with the consequences? Obviously we have to be careful to lock down only rules that we want to be the solid bedrock of this dynasty.

Comments

Angry Grasshopper:

10-24-2005 21:10:49 UTC

for

I’m game for un-amendable Rules, but that implies that some rules ought to be amendable, at least moreso than they are now, don’t you think?

Perhaps we can make some rule that allows Quintessence to be spend to modify the rules in some minor way. Rules sandbox, anyone?

>>as part of that alteration every variable in the gamestate over which that Eternal rule has some control is reset to its default starting value, or cleared if it has no starting value defined.

What does this mean?

Rodney:

10-24-2005 21:41:58 UTC

against This is a very bad idea. What will happen if someone stuck a loophole in a Eturnal Rule?

smith:

10-24-2005 22:23:36 UTC

Angry Grasshopper - for example: if an eternal rule said that 3 Quintessence could be used to buy white puffy clouds and then later a Call for Judgement repeals that rule, then as an additional effect all quintessence of all players would revert to starting values (0), and all white puffy cloud ownership would also revert (no clouds for anyone).

Excalabur:

10-24-2005 22:33:13 UTC

for Then the game breaks, no biggie.

gazebo_dude:

10-25-2005 00:10:50 UTC

for I like this but we might want to add a superquorum clause, for example requiring 2/3rds instead of half+1.

Shadowclaw:

10-25-2005 01:10:13 UTC

for

ChronosPhaenon:

10-25-2005 13:47:32 UTC

for

Kevan:

10-25-2005 16:41:17 UTC

for Eh, let’s see what happens.