Monday, May 18, 2009

Proposal: Peer Pressure

Adminned at 18 May 2009 13:23:01 UTC

Add a Rule titled “Peer Pressure”:

In certain circumstances, a Contestant may override the votes of a target Contestant on a Pending Proposal by making a comment on that Proposal in the following format:

“Influence {Contestant Name} to vote {Vote Icon}”

This comment is referred to as a Manipulation. The text in braces is to be replaced with actual values where {Contestant Name} is the name of a Contestant who Supports the Contestant performing the Manipulation (in the context of this Manipulation action, these two Contestants can be referred to as the Manipulated and Manipulator, respectively); and where {Vote Icon} is a single voting icon which would be legal for the Manipulated to cast on the Pending Proposal.

The effect of this Manipulation is that it is counted as a legal, final vote cast by the Manipulated on the Proposal in question, regardless of any other votes, or absence of vote, by the Manipulated. The value of this vote corresponds to the voting icon used in the Manipulation.

A Contestant may not make a Manipulation action more than once per pending Proposal. Manipulations may not be retracted or changed by Contestants, however if multiple Manipulations target the same Contestant, later Manipulations take precedence over earlier ones.

If ever the concept of Supporting a Contestant is not defined in the ruleset, then this rule has no effect.

Vetoed with the Eye of Doom. Adminned by Qwazukee.



05-18-2009 00:30:00 UTC

I would veto if I could, but I must settle for against . Never pass a rule that effects voting. Because not all voting relates to the dynasty, some have other meanings.  against  against  against


05-18-2009 01:42:50 UTC

imperial I think this might be an interesting mechanic, but it might be more suited to voting someone off.


05-18-2009 01:48:23 UTC

imperial , yeah, this might be better for a more specific game mechanic.


05-18-2009 01:51:21 UTC



05-18-2009 02:04:07 UTC



05-18-2009 03:37:19 UTC



05-18-2009 03:43:55 UTC

against I’m not really comfortable with this, but if there is a really good argument in favor, I am willing to be persuaded.


05-18-2009 04:05:52 UTC

for I have been thinking of using something like this myself on previous dynasties, but had never been sure how to do it. So far,  for

However, I still see one problem: Perhaps it should not influence all voting, maybe it shouldn’t work when the proposal attempts to change core rules, or maybe it only works if the Manipulated actually votes (allowing to not have their vote controlled for specific proposals).

For now, I’ll stick with my vote of FOR, but if someone re-proposes this with fixes I’ll support that proposal instead.


05-18-2009 04:09:14 UTC



05-18-2009 09:29:49 UTC

imperial I like the idea but the others have pointed out some good problems with it.


05-18-2009 09:45:45 UTC



05-18-2009 09:57:17 UTC

against I don’t see a big problem with it (if someone messes up the core ruleset, we can fix it next dynasty), but it’d be fiddly for admins to count the votes.


05-18-2009 10:23:19 UTC

for I’m up for an adminning challenge, and I think it’s clear enough why.


05-18-2009 12:33:18 UTC


Ienpw III:

05-18-2009 13:23:13 UTC



05-18-2009 13:42:48 UTC

@Wakukee - I know it’s playing with fire, but I did deliberately leave out CfJ voting.


05-18-2009 14:07:25 UTC



05-18-2009 15:46:34 UTC

against I don’t mind the concept of overriding votes, but there is a (possibly unintentional) scam hidden here, I think. And something like this needs to be completely unbuggy before being used.


05-18-2009 16:11:44 UTC

veto Antiquorumed.


05-18-2009 18:03:45 UTC

For those of us who are a bit dense, where is the scam?  I assume it has something to do with manipulating the votes on a DoV, but wouldn’t you still need at least half of the Contestants’ help to push something like that through?  If you had that much support you could just pass an “I win” proposal and be done with it, right?


05-18-2009 18:18:18 UTC

I’m trying to figure out what happens if multiple people manipulate the same person. I know there’s a takes precedence for votes, but I’m wondering if /both/ votes end up legal (the rule states the resulting vote is legal, after all). In that case, a group of people could manipulate each other in order to get double votes on a proposal; maybe not disastrous as they could have manipulated other people instead, but weird.