Friday, January 07, 2022

Proposal: Get In Lane

Timed out 4 votes to 1. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 09 Jan 2022 16:38:52 UTC

If there are any Stops with a Type of Kiosk, remove that Type from them.

Remove the Kiosk from the list of Stop Effects.

Replacing this few-hours-old proposal with one that removes Kiosks, per the thinking aloud on I Know You’re Out There. Clucky is suddenly very keen to get a Kiosk on the board, and is arguing that there can’t be a Kiosk scam because Josh knows about the Kiosk scam and yet voted against that proposal.

Perhaps it is a scam that any single player can perform, if they get to a Kiosk, and Clucky will be taking their next turn before Josh.

Comments

Josh: he/they

07-01-2022 18:30:21 UTC

for Kiosks are kind of a boring dynasty end mechanic anyway.

Clucky: he/him

07-01-2022 19:46:19 UTC

against

The only clear way to win is with Kiosks

The fact that this removes Kiosks but *not* the victory condition around getting selfies should be sending alarm bells to everyone because it shows Kevan probably has another way of getting selfies without Kiosks, and wants to lock down Kiosks to prevent anyone else from having a chance

Clucky: he/him

07-01-2022 19:51:14 UTC

“They have in their posession a Souvenier from the Attraction Stop they wish to Drive to;”

if I had to guess, maybe he is going to try and argue that the Attraction Stop they “wish” to drive to is different than the attraction stop they are going to drive to? Like how I can wish the salad I’m eating is actually a pizza?

Clucky: he/him

07-01-2022 19:53:58 UTC

another possible solution would be to get Brendan to create a stop called “Selfie of myself at No Exit”. Then getting a normal souvenir there would have ‘Selfie of myself’ and the name of a Roadside Attraction in their names, and thus count towards a victory condition

Kevan: he/him

07-01-2022 20:00:59 UTC

I have no scam relating to acquiring a Selfie without a Kiosk.

I’m just floating the idea of shuttering the Kiosks, given that you were talking about a Kiosk scam last week, and now seem very keen to guarantee that you’ll get to reach a Kiosk before Josh, presumably because you are on the brink of completing that scam.

Like you say, alarm bells.

Clucky: he/him

07-01-2022 20:03:17 UTC

how does my proposal help me reach a kiosk before josh?

All it does is help ensure kiosks actually show up so that we can transition towards the end of the dynasty.

Removing kiosks, but not roadside attractions, even though a standard reading of the rules suggests there is no actual way to reach a roadside attraction without a kiosk, is incredibly suspicious.

Kevan: he/him

07-01-2022 20:12:03 UTC

Your proposal means that the very next Stop to be generated will be a Respite-Kiosk, because those are the two Types that haven’t appeared yet.

If that Stop is generated before you take your move (and you well over 48 hours before you’re required to take it), then you’ll be able move to the Kiosk and Josh won’t.

I’m removing Kiosks as the minimum circuit breaker, given that you openly said last week that you have a scam that requires a Kiosk. I am not setting up any kind of scam here.

Clucky: he/him

07-01-2022 20:19:15 UTC

When I made the proposal, you and Josh were still at 30.

If I was trying to guarantee that I’d get to reach a Kiosk before Josh that would be awfully silly move on my end given Josh had more than enough time to stall out at 30 for a bit, then go to 31, more than enough time to let this proposal pass and then go to the Kiosk

Kevan: he/him

07-01-2022 20:44:06 UTC

Perhaps beating Josh to it isn’t an issue, it just seemed odd that the pair of you had gone from chatting about Kiosk scams, to him voting against your Kiosk proposals.

Clucky: he/him

07-01-2022 20:47:24 UTC

I continue to find it odd that you’re trying to use your ally’s actions as evidence to persuade your argument

Josh: he/they

07-01-2022 20:52:14 UTC

I keep getting brought up in this but just to note, I have consistently been a non-participant in this discussion and any conclusions made about my actions in the absence of any statements from me seem to be a bit of a reach

Kevan: he/him

07-01-2022 20:54:02 UTC

[Clucky] I’m not using Josh’s actions as part of the argument. “Perhaps beating Josh to it isn’t an issue.”

My argument is simply that you said last week that you had a scam that needed a Kiosk, and have since proposed twice to urgently get more Kiosks on the board. An easy way to block that scam pre-emptively is to remove the Kiosks.

Clucky: he/him

07-01-2022 21:04:31 UTC

its hardly urgent if I make two proposals a week a part from each other

Brendan: he/him

08-01-2022 01:41:31 UTC

for As I’ve never managed to create any, possibly because they are cursed.

Raven1207: he/they

08-01-2022 05:49:22 UTC

for