Thursday, October 15, 2009

Proposal: No deficit spending

Reached quorum with 9 votes in favour, two trivial. Enacted by Kevan. +10 to Wooble.

Adminned at 17 Oct 2009 04:30:25 UTC

Append to Rule 2.1:

To spend points is to reduce one’s score. A player cannot spend points if their score after the spending would be negative.

Comments

Klisz:

10-15-2009 18:42:16 UTC

for

spikebrennan:

10-15-2009 18:53:57 UTC

for

Kevan:

10-15-2009 19:10:19 UTC

This wording doesn’t work. We already say in the glossary that “Unless otherwise specified, game variables defined to hold numeric values can hold only non-negative integers, and any action that would set those values below zero instead sets them to zero.”, meaning that there is no way that your “score after the spending would be negative”.

I think “normal English usage” is on our side here, though. If you have five points, and points can’t be negative, then you can’t spend ten points.

against

Josh:

10-15-2009 19:16:25 UTC

Da.  against

Ienpw III:

10-15-2009 19:27:52 UTC

against

Bucky:

10-15-2009 19:45:29 UTC

@Kevan: The rules for Points explicitly specify otherwise.

for

Josh:

10-15-2009 19:50:12 UTC

The wording of this proposal, arguably, makes it impossible for a player to ever reduce their score into negative territory for any reason.

Kevan:

10-15-2009 20:12:32 UTC

for CoV per Bucky, had forgotten we had negative scores.

arthexis:

10-15-2009 21:05:57 UTC

for I think we don’t need it, but the Ruleset is clearer if we spell this out.

Oze:

10-15-2009 21:07:36 UTC

for

Kevan:

10-15-2009 21:30:18 UTC

I think we do need it. My real-world bank balance can have a negative value, which means I’m able to spend more than I have in it.

Darknight:

10-16-2009 03:24:34 UTC

for

Excalabur:

10-16-2009 03:46:00 UTC

for [Trivial].  I did point this out on the original proposal. 

Note that this owns the points rule for his team.

ais523:

10-16-2009 14:24:13 UTC

for Trivial

Qwazukee:

10-16-2009 20:51:57 UTC

against Yay I’m voting during Hiatus!