Sunday, November 19, 2017

Proposal: Lore

4 days old and can’t be enacted failed by card

Adminned at 22 Nov 2017 21:05:46 UTC

Under Synonyms add the text

An X Tesser, where X is a valid affinity, means a Tesserer of that affinity.

Make a new rule “Trade” with the text

A Teaser may make a Trade Story post by putting the [Trade] tag in it’s title. In that post the author details a specific Tesser and they state what they want to trade, naming the amount and what it is. If within 2 days the named Tesser has accepted, indicated by commenting “SOLD” in the relevant post, the Tessers swap ownership of the detailed items.

In “Void” add the text

Nothing truly tethers a Void Tesser to the world, they are beyond such trivial things: Void Tesserers are required to spend or trade at least 1 shard or 3 power every 2 days.

In “Nature” add the text

A Nature Tesserer helps the natural balance of the world, aiding wherever they can: Nature Tessers are required to boost or trade 1 Nature Shard to the Tesser with the least number of shards for 0 power that has an affinity.

In “Water” add the text

A Water Tesser is tune with the flow of life, adjusting themselves to reflect that: whenever the Tesseract has been in the same orientation for 2 consecutive days, Water Tessers are required to participate in a Face Action that shares an affinity with the Tesseract’s orientation.

Comments

Cuddlebeam:

11-19-2017 06:46:37 UTC

“19/11 06:14 (UTC) (card)  card’s Affinity = Nature [was None]” for reference from the GNDT in case anyone might wonder how a (currently) Nature Tesser could make this proposal.

About the required actions - there is no consequence if someone, by negligence (deliberate or not) just doesn’t do the things. What happens then?

The Void restriction is also way too easy in comparison to Water or Fire for example. (Fire pretty much becomes a sockpuppet with the right additions, which makes me uncomfortable. Water too, although there is much less “anything-ness” like proposals, the way to add rules, have).

card:

11-19-2017 08:16:15 UTC

I had trouble thinking up a good idea for the fire rule, I’ll remove it to increase the chance of this proposal passing, since I could simply propose it again. The Void one is mechanically simple, however it would leave the person with no power/shards at the end of the week.
And no there are not any punishments for now.

pokes:

11-20-2017 11:31:37 UTC

for Although there needs to be explicit punishments for not doing things that are required, otherwise there’s no reason to do them other than people going “hey you were sposedta!”

derrick:

11-20-2017 14:27:33 UTC

against

Fire is missing, and I don’t like the required effects. Trade and X are good though.

Diabecko:

11-20-2017 20:13:35 UTC

against Like Derrick, I would vote for the first two parts. It would probably be best to put them in a separate proposal.
As for the rest I’m hesitant but in any case I think a proposal like this should include all four affinities at once.