BlogNomic

You can’t take a random number without specifying a non-infinite subset of numbers to choose a random number from. Otherwise we have no concept of what a random number actually means - a random number out of the numbers 3, 5, and 7? A random number from 1 to 10? A random number from 1 to 100000000000?. In this case I guess you meant to say a random number from 0 to 100.

I’m not sure if I should veto when I see something like this. I’m guessing not because I could be wrong and people may want to discuss the mechanic, not to mention vetoing is a power to be used sparingly, but what do you guys think?

If a proposal would seet up an impossible state of play (a player “is required to” update game variables to infinitely large numbers, but 3.3.1 bullet 5 says they may not take that action), it probably merits a veto.

I’d rather see shirt numbers being changeable voluntarily and balanced to be fair, than accepted as being unbalanced and spread around at random.

Interesting idea, though.  Could pass with slight modification. 

FYI it is possible to pick a “random” number from an infinite set of numbers: Flip a fair coin until it lands Tails.  The result is the number of Heads.  It isn’t evenly distributed, but it still gives a random number from an infinite set of integers, and the chance of getting an infinite number is 0.

nomic^3, well, considering teninten didn’t even say “from the infinite set of integers” not to mention your strategy has its own problems like the unequalness you mentioned.

Truth be told though, infinity is making my head hurt, so let’s put an end to this per Kevan

Wow…I didn’t realize that. Yeah, I meant 1-99. I am very new, so I need to ask if it is allright to remake this just changing that?

Your next Proposal can be another attempt at this mechanic, yes.