Proposal: Functional diversity
Can’t pass with 6 votes against. Failed 1-6 by Kevan.
Adminned at 22 Oct 2012 08:57:56 UTC
In rule “Reputation”, replace “and Humor” with “Humor, and Diversity”.
If there exists a rule named “Running a Story”, delete in that rule the text:
(if they have not yet run a Story on any of the Events in that Wire Post)
then append a new paragraph to that rule, reading:
An Editor may not run a Story on a given Event from a given Wire Post if either of the following is true:
- They have already run a Story on an Event in that Wire Post.
- They have a negative Diversity and that Event shares a Location or Subject with one of the Events they had previously run a Story on.
Diversity should be decreased by focusing on one subject or one location too much, and increased by covering many different locations/subjects.
This can be a system of reward/punishment to encourage people not to always focus on the most newsworthy locations, or on the subject they had their first stance on.
Comments
RaichuKFM: she/her
Kevan: he/him
quirck: he/him
Josh: he/they
Cpt_Koen:
RaichuKFM: Yes, that’s deliberately left open. Should this be a very loose or very strict restriction? I don’t know.
Kevan: As the ruleset stands, Diversity cannot be negative, so every paper can run as many stories as they wish. I expect that when decreasing the Diversity have been made possible, it will also be possible to increase it.
Murphy:
If the Diversity mechanic only cared about each Editor’s total number of Stories per Stance/Location, then lists of those counts could be added to the GNDT.
Some rough ideas for how increasing Diversity might work:
<ul>
<li>No Stance on that Subject</li>
<li>Never ran a Story on that Subject</li>
<li>Ran fewer Stories on that Subject than any other</li>
<li>Ran Stories on at least five Locations but not that one</li>
</ul>
spikebrennan: