Sunday, October 18, 2009

Proposal: Team Proposals and other Goodies

Passes 7-5 on timeout (+10 arthexis)—arth

Adminned at 20 Oct 2009 17:17:09 UTC

Move sub-rule “2.2.4 Teams” so that it becomes a new rule on its own (sub-rule “2.2.4.1 Team Rules” becomes a sub-rule of the newly created rule).

Create a new sub-rule “Team Proposals [3 Points]” under rule “Teams”:

As a weekly action, a Player can create a Team Proposal, which is a special type of Proposal with the text “[Team X]” on its title, where X is the Team of the Player creating it. A Team Proposal cannot be Trivial. When a Team Proposal is failed or enacted, all Points awarded or fined to its author are also awarded or fined accordingly to every other Player whose Team is the same as that of the author of the Proposal.

Create a new sub-rule “Team Swap [8 Points]” under rule “Teams”:

As a weekly action, a Player (the Swapping Player) can change their Team to the Team of any other Player. Then, each other Player whose Team is the same as the Swapping Player’s new Team is awarded 2 points.

While teams was originally a stolen rule, we have changed it past their original meaning, it deserves it’s own place as a rule.
The first rule I create allows players to help or hinder their team by making proposals.
The second rule allows a player to change teams, and rewards teams that attract new players to their ranks. I have a couple more team rules under my sleeve for a future proposal, too.

Comments

Darknight:

10-18-2009 20:38:08 UTC

for Sounds good Art

Ienpw III:

10-18-2009 20:55:40 UTC

for

Josh:

10-18-2009 21:09:04 UTC

for

Kevan:

10-18-2009 21:44:01 UTC

for

Klisz:

10-19-2009 00:34:35 UTC

for

Excalabur:

10-19-2009 01:00:42 UTC

imperial

Bucky:

10-19-2009 02:52:25 UTC

against , mainly because it allows a team of 6+ players to swap to their own team at a profit.

Oranjer:

10-19-2009 03:07:26 UTC

for

ais523:

10-19-2009 07:47:34 UTC

against I was coming here to mention the same bug as Bucky; in addition, two teams with a total of at least 9 members between them could exploit the same bug.

Oze:

10-19-2009 18:13:59 UTC

for

Ienpw III:

10-19-2009 20:12:32 UTC

CoV against

Qwazukee:

10-19-2009 20:53:33 UTC

against per Bucky

arthexis:

10-19-2009 23:37:24 UTC

@bucky & the others that changed their votes due to him:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/change

Since the word change is not defined in the ruleset, it takes on its common English meaning. Per that meaning, in order for something to change, it must become different to what it was originally.

I’m surprised you native English speakers don’t know that :P

Ienpw III:

10-20-2009 00:52:26 UTC

...
CoV for

Excalabur:

10-20-2009 12:02:21 UTC

against Don’t like it.

arthexis:

10-20-2009 19:46:18 UTC

@excalabur: Oh, come on! Don’t be a curmudgeon (leave that to me). Why don’t you join me? Together we can topple Kevan & Bucky (maybe).

arthexis:

10-20-2009 19:46:49 UTC

@exc: As a symbol of friendship I failed the proposal that would have give points to everybody else, except you ;)

Kevan:

10-20-2009 20:55:29 UTC

against CoV if Arthexis is going to pointlessly abuse team ownership of new rules.

Excalabur:

10-20-2009 23:21:30 UTC

arthexis: The Red team would welcome additional members, were they to be loyal to the cause.

arthexis:

10-21-2009 00:13:30 UTC

@exc: I would I invite you to join team indigo, instead, since we already have ais. If ais doesn’t want to cooperate, I’ll probably join team red instead.

@kevan: I never new the rules where intended for just looking at them without actually use them. It was far from pointless: I genuinely think that the limit of 100 is a mistake.