Tuesday, October 21, 2008

Proposal: Respect is a fickle thing

reached a quorum, final vote 3-9—Yoda

Adminned at 22 Oct 2008 15:42:17 UTC

If the Proposal titled “Way to gain and lose honor” passed, this Proposal does nothing.

Add a sub-rule “Respect and Shame” under rule “Honor”:

Whenever a Clansmen makes a proposal that their fellow clan members regard as useful and/or important to the clan, they may reward that Clansmen by adding the text “Respect” on any comment on which they include a FOR vote on that proposal, and this comment is known further as a Vote of Respect. If the proposal passes, the proposer has 24 hours to increase their honor by 1 for each Vote of Respect made on their proposal.

Whenever a Clansmen makes a proposal that their fellow clan members regard as dangerous or useless to the clan, they may punish that Clansmen by adding the text “Shame” on any comment on which they include an AGAINST vote on that proposal, and this comment is known further as a Vote of Shame. If the proposal fails, each Clansmen who gave a Vote of Shame on that proposal has 24 hours to decrease the honor of the proposer by 1.

A Clansmen cannot place Votes of Respect or Votes of Shame on their own proposals.

If more than half of all comments containing counted votes also contain the text “Patriarchal Respect”, also add the following text:

FOR votes made by the Patriarch always count as Votes of Respect. AGAINST votes made by the Patriarch always count as Votes of Shame.

 

posted by arthexis at 21 Oct 2008 19:40:00 UTC Comments (25)

Comments

Yoda:

21-10-2008 20:03:56 UTC

for Respect
against Shame

Now what?

Bucky:

21-10-2008 20:15:04 UTC

Yoda:Only the last voting icon you use is considered a vote.

spikebrennan:

21-10-2008 20:45:11 UTC

against shame

spikebrennan:

21-10-2008 20:45:48 UTC

against shame

spikebrennan:

21-10-2008 20:46:55 UTC

against shame

spikebrennan:

21-10-2008 20:48:04 UTC

for
Now what?

spikebrennan:

21-10-2008 20:53:02 UTC

against
For good measure, I was just trying to make a point.

Kevan: he/him

21-10-2008 20:58:22 UTC

You’re still just “a Clansman who gave a vote of shame”.

imperial

Bucky:

21-10-2008 21:48:03 UTC

for .

spikebrennan:Rule 1.4 was reworded while you were idle.  It now reads “If a Clansman uses more than one Voting Icon in comments on a Pending Proposal, his Vote is the last voting icon he uses.”  This means that when this passes, assuming you don’t comment any more, you will have given neither a Vote of Respect nor a Vote of Shame.

Yoda:

21-10-2008 22:04:24 UTC

for COV

Rodlen:

21-10-2008 22:47:47 UTC

for

Rodney:

22-10-2008 00:24:53 UTC

against

Rodney:

22-10-2008 00:28:50 UTC

Suppose I really don’t like a certain clansman. Whenever I see a proposal of his about to fail, I can Shame him for 1, even if it was just self-killed for a fix. On the reverse side, if there’s a clansman I like or a fellow conspirator, we can Respect each other for 1 whenever the other has a successful proposer. Either way, there’s nothing anyone else can do about it.

Xaxyx:

22-10-2008 01:25:44 UTC

against There’s really no motivation not to shame someone’s proposal down into oblivion.  That in turn can result in the game grinding to a halt, as we’ve now added entertainment value to sinking each other’s proposals.  Whereas, convincing everyone to vote for someone’s proposal is also convincing them to give away free honor points.

I once again heartily recommend that we not integrate dynasty rules with the metagame.  Passing and/or failing proposals should not influence nor be influenced by dynastic goals.

Hello Sailor:

22-10-2008 02:16:28 UTC

against

arthexis: he/him

22-10-2008 04:31:43 UTC

Xaxyx: Quite on the contrary, any system that deals with rules that can be changed by humans has to deal with politics one way. With or without this system, I would still vote against proposals that seem to be affecting my possibility of winning in a negative way. Nomics ARE a metagame, how couldn’t it be if the whole purpose is to skew the rules on your favor?

arthexis: he/him

22-10-2008 04:34:24 UTC

Rodlen: You are describing exactly what I am aiming for with this rule! Conspiracy! In-fighting! On our last dynasties we had a lot of proposals timing out because not a lot of attention was being put to them. Perhaps with this we can at least get people voting (even if they just do it to sink a potentian rival).

Tripwire:

22-10-2008 05:00:47 UTC

for

Rodlen:

22-10-2008 05:23:04 UTC

I’m Rodlen. He is Rodney.

We are not the same.

Kevan: he/him

22-10-2008 09:37:46 UTC

Xaxyx: “There’s really no motivation not to shame someone’s proposal down into oblivion.” - except that you risk becoming “that shaming into oblivion guy”, and people who wouldn’t normally have shamed you will start shaming you purely for that.

against  against CoV, though. Rodney makes a good point about easy backslapping, which would prevent Honor from ever becoming a very usable stat.

Bucky:

22-10-2008 15:17:56 UTC

CoV against .

Clucky: he/him

22-10-2008 18:43:41 UTC

against The whole “gain or lose stat X for proposals”, while it can be an interesting game mechanic, has been over used in the past games I’ve been in.

Dustin:

22-10-2008 21:45:32 UTC

against

Yoda:

22-10-2008 22:37:45 UTC

against COV

Yoda:

22-10-2008 22:41:47 UTC

By my count, that’s 3-9.