Monday, August 14, 2023

Proposal: The Final Word [Special Case]

Reached quorum 3 votes to 1. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 16 Aug 2023 15:41:56 UTC

To “Imperial Deferentials”, add a paragraph:-

If there are six or fewer Districts, then the City’s vote of DEFERENTIAL on a proposal is only affected by this rule if all Districts who are not the City have cast a vote on that proposal.

The defer-to-majority rule works okay in larger dynasties where it’s quite likely that a few players won’t vote at all, and where the Emperor’s DEF vote is only likely to speed up a broad and emerging consensus.

With a smaller and fully active group, though, I think it’s breaking down: if the Emperor votes DEF on a proposal that would split a four-player group 2-vs-2, that proposal will enact or fail depending purely on the voting order. In smaller dynasties, the Imperial DEF isn’t needed to speed proposals to quorum - only to call a close race ahead of its timeout (the DEF outcome on 3-vs-3, 3-vs-2 or 2-vs-2 will always correspond to its 48-hour fate).

posted by Kevan at 14 Aug 2023 17:17:00 UTC Comments (4)

Comments

lemon: she/her

14-08-2023 23:16:07 UTC

for

JonathanDark: he/him

15-08-2023 05:21:52 UTC

for

Josh: Observer he/they

15-08-2023 08:40:29 UTC

Seems like it would be neater to simply turn it off, or have it turn off automatically once the threshold is reached. This change makes the whole imperial DEF structure irrelevant, as all it will do is reinforce what would happen if the Emperor’s vote wasn’t counted at all.

against on grounds that it could be simpler.

Kevan: he/him

15-08-2023 09:20:46 UTC

What do you mean with the turning off - disabling the special case rule so that an Imperial DEF becomes an implicit abstention? That would mean a 2-vs-2 having to time out at 48 hours - core will be waiting to see if it goes to 3-2 with the fifth player’s FOR vote, even if I’ve announced that I’m never going to cast such a vote.

As I understand it, the general intention of Imperial Deferentials is to simulate the Emperor’ vote not being counted.

An alternate route to take on the whole thing would be to say that the Emperor voting DEF explicitly renders them invisible from the proposal’s point of view on quorum and not-voting-against counts. That would be a snappier and more elegant rule on the page, but might be harder work for players to factor in when casting votes and resolving proposals, if they have to calculate an alternate parallel quorum. Not sure.