Monday, October 19, 2009

Proposal: Shifting Definitions

Fails 11-2, can’t pass without a CoV; -2 points Darth Cliche—arth

Adminned at 21 Oct 2009 13:30:45 UTC

Add the following subrule, titled “Shifting Definitions [75 Points]”, Rule 2.7, Dynastic Glossary:

As a weekly action, a Player may remove one definition from the rule “Dynastic Glossary”. As a weekly action, a Player may add one definition to the rule “Dynastic Glossary”, so long as the word being defined is not already defined by the rules.

A high fee, yeah, but that’s because anything that allows you to alter the ruleset without a vote is scammable. We might lower it later.

Comments

ais523:

10-19-2009 22:26:05 UTC

for

Bucky:

10-19-2009 22:38:00 UTC

against .  Extremely exploitable if you are allowed define an undefined term in a pending (possibly Theft) proposal.

arthexis:

10-19-2009 23:31:33 UTC

against per Bucky

Ienpw III:

10-20-2009 00:46:56 UTC

against “because anything that allows you to alter the ruleset without a vote is scammable.”

Darknight:

10-20-2009 01:37:46 UTC

against

Excalabur:

10-20-2009 04:17:11 UTC

against I have nothing against the existence of scams, but there’s nothing here requring the scam to be at all interesting.
this is an instant win for whoever has 75 points.

Josh:

10-20-2009 06:02:48 UTC

against Winner: JeffSheets is the winner.

Kevan:

10-20-2009 08:32:13 UTC

against

spikebrennan:

10-20-2009 13:08:33 UTC

against

Oze:

10-20-2009 17:30:23 UTC

against

Wooble:

10-20-2009 18:07:23 UTC

against

Qwazukee:

10-20-2009 18:45:00 UTC

against

Bucky:

10-21-2009 01:19:01 UTC

Or alternatively
Bucky: player who has achieved victory.