And why not? ;)

Hmmm.  I won’t be surprised if there is a lot of debate on this one, since “Shiny is meant to be Awarded to those who have contributed in a particularly helpful or awesome way to Blognomic”.  But, temporarily having maximum Shiny is so quirky that I’m all it.

Hix: I see your point about the out-of-gameness of Shiny, but I thought rules for changing Shiny would be interesting because (AFAIK) Shiny does not yet have an in-game use.

Maybe my Time Crystal Proposal would have been better if it affected an in-game effect like Influence or the proposed Paradox Resistance..

Hmmm, I think I’ll vote this.

You can always propose to change the effect later, if you like.

I think this should target an in-game effect. It’s going to be pointless unless we have a specified effect for high-Shininess, and I’d rather not do that, think Shiny is more meaningful if it’s its own reward.

The effectively prevents Travellers from receiving any Shiny whilst they’ve got a Time Crystal.

They’d be a better chance of me voting for this proposal if the [p] part changed when e.g. a Traveller was awarded a Shiny for an outstanding proposal.

I would definately vote for if this was a new stat.

If my time vacations proposal passes, I recommend you propose a new stat for this, and propose to replace using influence for tickets with this new stat.

Therefore, time crystals could give you as many tickets as you need.

If my time vacations proposal fails, I’d recommend using influence.

How’d this get ressurected!?  It shouldn’t be here…

because it doesn’t allow shiny to be meaningfully awarded to timecrystal holders.