Wednesday, March 27, 2024

Proposal: The Public Realm

Withdrawn. Failed by Kevan.

Adminned at 27 Mar 2024 19:54:03 UTC

Remove all but the first Public Criteria from the list in “Criteria”.

To the top of the list in “Scoring”, add a new bullet point:-

* If it is the responder’s own Snap, then for each Public Criteria that the Shot satisfies, the responder’s Score is increased by 3

In Upgrades, replace “A Snap which meets every Public Criteria” with:-

A Snap which includes a specific named entity that had its own Wikipedia page at Mon 18/03/24—09:00 UTC, in which at least one article of clothing worn by the posting Seeker at the time that the Snap was taken is visible, and which contains a message to the viewer

The concepts of Public and Private Criteria seem a bit disconnected. This makes Public into something that, like Private Criteria, you score - specifically, something you can score for each photo and are rewarded for following when composing it, rather than something you can entirely ignore once you’ve unlocked the everything-in-shot achievement.

This also cuts (for now) the list back down to just “photo taken outside”, as I’m not sure whether the group would want to see the entity/clothing/message aspects in every single photo that gets posted.

Comments

NadNavillus: he/him

27-03-2024 11:55:01 UTC

I could get behind the reorg or the public criteria.  However, I like that a shot needs to be something current (daily word) instead of a random photo taken at any time by the seeker.

against

Kevan: he/him

27-03-2024 12:06:45 UTC

The word of the day aspect is safe - it isn’t part of the Public Criteria list, so wouldn’t be affected by this amendment.

NadNavillus: he/him

27-03-2024 12:23:15 UTC

Apologies as the new guy has run into several learning points.

First, sorry for voting within the four-hour change window.  And also for missing the point clarified above. And….

I would now be a for but I have learned the blog does not allow comment edits.

I will move more slowly next time…..

Josh: Observer he/they

27-03-2024 12:26:41 UTC

Your subsequent vote supercedes your first one, at least, so your new vote does count!

Josh: Observer he/they

27-03-2024 12:38:24 UTC

That said, this does create a loophole whereby that development upgrade can now be claimed again…

Clucky: he/him

27-03-2024 15:11:29 UTC

against this would allow people who already got the first upgrade to get the new upgrade again

JonathanDark: he/him

27-03-2024 16:26:40 UTC

against To prevent a second claiming of essentially the same development upgrade

Josh: Observer he/they

27-03-2024 16:27:48 UTC

imperial

Kevan: he/him

27-03-2024 19:53:30 UTC

against Withdrawn.