Nomic 2/Proposals/Flavour Text - Revision history

Vimes: /* Proposal Status */

2012-02-01T18:24:33Z

Proposal Status

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:24, 1 February 2012
Line 40:		Line 40:

	== Proposal Status ==		== Proposal Status ==

			Passed as of http://inky.org/wiki/index.php?title=Nomic_2/Proposals/Flavour_Text&oldid=3276

Jota: /* Comments */

2012-02-01T18:14:32Z

Comments

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:14, 1 February 2012
Line 28:		Line 28:

	I guess it's a bit late to say this, now that it's into voting, but: I'd be happier if it only applied to rule proposals. We also use the proposal and voting system to add players to the game, and may use it for other mechanical functions in the future. But if I need to add a line of flavor text describing the person that I want to invite to the game, I'll do that. [[User:Baf\|Baf]] 17:40, 31 January 2012 (PST)		I guess it's a bit late to say this, now that it's into voting, but: I'd be happier if it only applied to rule proposals. We also use the proposal and voting system to add players to the game, and may use it for other mechanical functions in the future. But if I need to add a line of flavor text describing the person that I want to invite to the game, I'll do that. [[User:Baf\|Baf]] 17:40, 31 January 2012 (PST)

			From the wording of it, I don't think the content of the text has to relate to anything other than rules. So if your proposal doesn't affect any rules, then you can write anything you want that doesn't contradict earlier flavor text. --[[User:Jota\|Jota]] 10:14, 1 February 2012 (PST)

	== Voting ==		== Voting ==

Maga: /* Voting */

2012-02-01T02:00:21Z

Voting

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:00, 31 January 2012
Line 35:		Line 35:
	* Fang: Aye.		* Fang: Aye.
	* Baf: Aye.		* Baf: Aye.
			* maga: Aye.

	== Proposal Status ==		== Proposal Status ==

Baf: /* Voting */

2012-02-01T01:55:01Z

Voting

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:55, 31 January 2012
Line 34:		Line 34:
	* olethros: Aye.		* olethros: Aye.
	* Fang: Aye.		* Fang: Aye.
			* Baf: Aye.

	== Proposal Status ==		== Proposal Status ==

Baf: /* Comments */

2012-02-01T01:40:54Z

Comments

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:40, 31 January 2012
Line 26:		Line 26:
	: No. :I I guess you can try to game the system by using very sparse and innocuous flavour text, but potentially in the future we might pass proposals that make flavour text more important... Alternatively you might want to propose a seperate class of non-narrative players who don't have to follow narrative-related rules...--[[User:Fang\|Fang]] 13:20, 31 January 2012 (PST)		: No. :I I guess you can try to game the system by using very sparse and innocuous flavour text, but potentially in the future we might pass proposals that make flavour text more important... Alternatively you might want to propose a seperate class of non-narrative players who don't have to follow narrative-related rules...--[[User:Fang\|Fang]] 13:20, 31 January 2012 (PST)
	: I am fine with the occasional sparse and innocuous flavour text, personally. --[[User:Jota\|Jota]] 13:23, 31 January 2012 (PST)		: I am fine with the occasional sparse and innocuous flavour text, personally. --[[User:Jota\|Jota]] 13:23, 31 January 2012 (PST)

			I guess it's a bit late to say this, now that it's into voting, but: I'd be happier if it only applied to rule proposals. We also use the proposal and voting system to add players to the game, and may use it for other mechanical functions in the future. But if I need to add a line of flavor text describing the person that I want to invite to the game, I'll do that. [[User:Baf\|Baf]] 17:40, 31 January 2012 (PST)

	== Voting ==		== Voting ==

Jota: /* Comments */

2012-01-31T21:23:12Z

Comments

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:23, 31 January 2012
Line 25:		Line 25:
	Can the non-narrativists amongst us opt-out? --[[User:Doug\|Doug]] 11:34, 31 January 2012 (PST)		Can the non-narrativists amongst us opt-out? --[[User:Doug\|Doug]] 11:34, 31 January 2012 (PST)
	: No. :I I guess you can try to game the system by using very sparse and innocuous flavour text, but potentially in the future we might pass proposals that make flavour text more important... Alternatively you might want to propose a seperate class of non-narrative players who don't have to follow narrative-related rules...--[[User:Fang\|Fang]] 13:20, 31 January 2012 (PST)		: No. :I I guess you can try to game the system by using very sparse and innocuous flavour text, but potentially in the future we might pass proposals that make flavour text more important... Alternatively you might want to propose a seperate class of non-narrative players who don't have to follow narrative-related rules...--[[User:Fang\|Fang]] 13:20, 31 January 2012 (PST)
			: I am fine with the occasional sparse and innocuous flavour text, personally. --[[User:Jota\|Jota]] 13:23, 31 January 2012 (PST)

	== Voting ==		== Voting ==

Fang at 21:21, 31 January 2012

2012-01-31T21:21:32Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:21, 31 January 2012
Line 24:		Line 24:

	Can the non-narrativists amongst us opt-out? --[[User:Doug\|Doug]] 11:34, 31 January 2012 (PST)		Can the non-narrativists amongst us opt-out? --[[User:Doug\|Doug]] 11:34, 31 January 2012 (PST)
	: No. :I I guess you can try to game the system by using very sparse and innocuous flavour text, but potentially in the future we might pass proposals that make flavour text more important...--[[User:Fang\|Fang]] 13:20, 31 January 2012 (PST)		: No. :I I guess you can try to game the system by using very sparse and innocuous flavour text, but potentially in the future we might pass proposals that make flavour text more important... Alternatively you might want to propose a seperate class of non-narrative players who don't have to follow narrative-related rules...--[[User:Fang\|Fang]] 13:20, 31 January 2012 (PST)

	== Voting ==		== Voting ==

Fang at 21:20, 31 January 2012

2012-01-31T21:20:38Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:20, 31 January 2012
Line 24:		Line 24:

	Can the non-narrativists amongst us opt-out? --[[User:Doug\|Doug]] 11:34, 31 January 2012 (PST)		Can the non-narrativists amongst us opt-out? --[[User:Doug\|Doug]] 11:34, 31 January 2012 (PST)
			: No. :I I guess you can try to game the system by using very sparse and innocuous flavour text, but potentially in the future we might pass proposals that make flavour text more important...--[[User:Fang\|Fang]] 13:20, 31 January 2012 (PST)

	== Voting ==		== Voting ==
Line 29:		Line 30:
	* vimes: Aye.		* vimes: Aye.
	* olethros: Aye.		* olethros: Aye.
			* Fang: Aye.

	== Proposal Status ==		== Proposal Status ==

Doug: /* Comments */

2012-01-31T19:34:13Z

Comments

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:34, 31 January 2012
Line 22:		Line 22:

	This rule at least has some marginal utility--[[User:Olethros\|Olethros]] 06:04, 31 January 2012 (PST)		This rule at least has some marginal utility--[[User:Olethros\|Olethros]] 06:04, 31 January 2012 (PST)

			Can the non-narrativists amongst us opt-out? --[[User:Doug\|Doug]] 11:34, 31 January 2012 (PST)

	== Voting ==		== Voting ==

Olethros: /* Comments */

2012-01-31T14:04:09Z

Comments

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:04, 31 January 2012
Line 20:		Line 20:

	Aye, in flavour. --[[Vimes\|vimes]] 16:15, 30 January 2012 (PST)		Aye, in flavour. --[[Vimes\|vimes]] 16:15, 30 January 2012 (PST)

			This rule at least has some marginal utility--[[User:Olethros\|Olethros]] 06:04, 31 January 2012 (PST)

	== Voting ==		== Voting ==