Friday, February 26, 2021

Proposal: The Time For Talk Is Over

Times out. Passes 5-1 but with the Doge’s comment, the scope of the proposal is limited—Clucky

Adminned at 28 Feb 2021 04:35:24 UTC

If the “The period of time between two Masquerades is known as a Season.” does not appear in the rule “The Masquerade”, add it to the end of that rule.

Add “The first 48 hours of a Season are known as its Preamble” to the end of the rule “The Masquerade”

If it exists in the rule “Ethics of the Nobility” replace “Once per season” with “Once during a Season’s Preamble”

If the Doge’s EVC on this proposal includes the phrase “Just the Preamble” the rest of this proposal does nothing

Add a new dynastic rule called “Challenges” with the following text

Once during a Season’s Preamble, each Elector (The Challenger) may Issue A Challenge by creating a Story Post with the subject “Challenge: [Name]” where [Name] is the Name of another elector (The Challengee).

The content of the post should outline an offense which the Challengee has made against the Challengeer and is always flavor text

A Challenge remains a voteable matter until the it is resolved. Elector may not cast votes of DEFERENTIAL on Challenges, and the Doge may not vote on them.

When a Challenge is resolved, the Political Heft of all Electors who voted FOR the Challenge is compared against the Political Heft of all Electors who voted AGAINST the challenge. If the former larger than the latter, the challenge is resolved in favor of the Challenger, otherwise it is resolved in favor of the Challenge. The Elector whom the Challenge is resolved in favor of earns 2 Political Power. The Elector whom the Challenge is resolved against loses 2 Political Power, to a minimum of 0. These changes happen even if the Elector in question is now Idle.

in the rule “The Masquerade” add after

Having posted such a blog entry, the Doge must then enact changes to Mistrust in the gamestate

add

and then resolve all unresolved challenges in the order they were posted

Expanding on the concept of Seasons by creating a part of the season where stuff can be queued up, allowing for more room to still do stuff in response to it.

Then adding a way to bring in votes that are less committal than “I win”. But giving Josh an opt out if he doesn’t want to resolve a bunch of challenges.

Comments

Josh: HE/HIM

26-02-2021 09:56:36 UTC

I think that the first three lines of the new rule are missing some content.

Josh: HE/HIM

26-02-2021 09:57:51 UTC

I don’t object to the Challenge stuff but I do, again, sorry that it’s giving cabals more incentives to stick together than to break apart, so I’m currently more interested in mechanics that reward betrayal.

Cuddlebeam:

26-02-2021 13:05:19 UTC

I like this - EN GARDE

Kevan: HE/HIM

26-02-2021 13:45:13 UTC

imperial

Clucky: HE/HIM

26-02-2021 15:46:33 UTC

proposal was busted cause I used <name> instead of [name]. But typos can still be fixed in proposals after they are made, and I think this qualifies under that so I went ahead and fixed it

Clucky: HE/HIM

26-02-2021 15:47:37 UTC

this really only allows cabals to stick together if they can actually get a cabal with a majority of people in them. In which case, why not just go for the win share?

Brendan: HE/HIM

26-02-2021 21:04:28 UTC

against

Raven1207: HE/HIM

26-02-2021 21:16:50 UTC

for

Josh: HE/HIM

27-02-2021 09:24:59 UTC

for Just the Preamble

Darknight: HE/HIM

27-02-2021 19:29:09 UTC

imperial