Subject: [MacroNomic] Votes and more

From: Towsner <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 19:27:38 -0400

69:FOR
70:FOR
71:FOR
72:FOR
73:FOR
74:FOR
75:AGAINST
77:AGAINST
	I have a different suggestion for paradox resolution, which I'll
explain below.
78:FOR

	I don't like lambda's method because it punishes people for
something which may well be accidental.  JT's is just too risky, I don't
like inviting scams. Besides, if I read it correctly, it only takes two
members of the RP to scam it.  Here's my suggestion: certain referenda are
known as "player initiated referenda".  These would include proposals, any
justice thing, papers, and other similar things.  Every Wednesday the game
state is saved.  If, for an entire week, no player initiated referenda are
created, the game state reverts to the most recently saved state.

--
-Henry Towsner

	<[email-masked]>

	Success is the child of audacity.
		-Benjamin Disraeli

---

From: JT <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 16:32:04 -0700 (PDT)

>members of the RP to scam it.  Here's my suggestion: certain referenda are

Oh damn.  I'd meant for it to require unanimous votes, but apparently
didn't specify that.

>created, the game state reverts to the most recently saved state.

Hrm.  I think this has the problem of overwriting the saved state before
making the check.
For instance, a proposal gets accepted which crashes the rules on tuesday.
Now the game state is saved on wednesday.
Now, a week passes.
Because of the last save we cannot back up past that (at least by the way
you phrased it :)
I think you are on a better track than I was however, and would willingly
support some modified version of your proposal.

Anyway.. I'll send my votes and reasoning in in a while.

--JT

[-------------------------------------------------------------------------]
[ Practice random kindness and senseless acts of beauty.                  ]
[ It's hard to seize the day when you must first grapple with the morning ]
[-------------------------------------------------------------------------]

---

From: Towsner <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 20:13:22 -0400

>support some modified version of your proposal.
	How about if every Wednesday the beta save replaces the alpha save
and the games state replaces the beta save.  If things go wrong, we restore
to the alpha save.

--
-Henry Towsner

	<[email-masked]>

---

From: JT <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 17:21:45 -0700 (PDT)

>and the games state replaces the beta save.  If things go wrong, we restore

Hrm.. I think it has the same mode of failure, but I'd need to think it
out.
However, none of these could handle the case of what nearly occured in
Acka recently which was an object that was in the rules for a while (over
2 weeks) was then used in such a way which almost crashed the game.
Under the archived situation above, the player could then just reactivate
the crasher.  That's the situation my amendment was trying to stop.  It
allows you to repair the damage.
I admit that the current proposal by me isn't worded as best it could be,
but it makes an honest attempt, and the RP already have a decent amount of
power, i cannot see them feeling the need to abuse it to gain further
power.  Unfortunately, fixing any bugs in it would require a unanimous
vote from the players, so I'm willing to see this shot down and will try
and reword it.

--JT

---

From: Towsner <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 20:32:29 -0400

>allows you to repair the damage.
	At a certain point there's nothing you can do.  This should at
least give time to fix it, and is very safe, since it depends on virtually
nothing else.

--
-Henry Towsner

	<[email-masked]>

---

From: JT <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 17:37:55 -0700 (PDT)

>least give time to fix it, and is very safe, since it depends on virtually

But that's the crux.  I'm trying to put in place a supreme rule such that
the game can in fact be recovered from any sort of catastrophe.  IE, I
don't agree with your first sentance above.  As long as there was a
supreme rule which did in fact protect itself from errant amendment, then
I believe it would have the precedence and the authority to allow recovery
from nearly any catastrophe.  I also believe that the rule needs to be
completely bulletproof from scams.  This is where my current proposal
fails and thus, I understand it's likely to get voted down.  I will
rethink and rephrase it however as I think it's on the right track.
Perhaps some sort of archiving of the game state is necessary as well.
(IE, in case of a crisis of this sort, the game state is rolled back to
the last safe archive and then the game enters some sort of 'crisis
resolution' phase where the rules empower removing proposals, repelaing
rules, etc as needed to fix the state of the game, and then play proceeds.

Perhaps you and I should take this to private mail, hammer out something
we are both happy with and then propose it?

--JT