Subject: Interchanging Persons?

From: Xylen <mctupper@h...>
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 13:33:38 -0600

Proposal 21 contains the following paragraph. I'm not sure if I
understand it's intent. As I see it, two Persons acquire identical
Social Standing, and then their Standings are interchanged? What
difference does that make. They are still identical. 

"If, as a result of a Person gaining or losing Social Standing, two
Persons would have identical Social Standings, the Social Standings of
the Persons are instead interchanged."

Xylen
-- 
Email is packaged by intellectual weight, not volume. Some settling of
contents may have occurred during transmission.

---

From: "Oloros the Blue" <oloros@b...>
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 19:48:03 -0000

> [Xylen]
> [Prop 21] 
> If, as a result of a Person gaining or losing Social Standing, 
> two Persons would have identical Social Standings, the Social 
> Standings of the Persons are instead interchanged.
> 
Looks like it hinges on the conditional. 
The wording might be made clearer. 
"identical" ought to be "equal".

I am concerned with how it interacts with 
> [Rule 13]
> If two or more Players are eligible as Trendsetters to set 
> the same In Word, the first one to post the new appropriate 
> In Word gains 1 Social Standing.
>
Seems to recommend two simultaneous actions.

-Oloros, standing by the wall

---

From: Xylen <mctupper@h...>
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 13:52:05 -0600

> "identical" ought to be "equal".

A has 3 Social Standings
B has 1 Social Standings

Some action occurs that gives B 2 more Social Standing, so the end
result would be:
A has 1 Social Standings
B has 3 Social Stanings

> Seems to recommend two simultaneous actions.

As written, Prop 21 adds stuff to the begining of the Rule, so there
would not be any case where there are tied Trendsetters. At least that
is how I would interpet it. Each paragraph in a rule takes precedence
over subsequent paragraphs.

> -Oloros, standing by the wall

Xylen,
hoping Oloros doesn't have his back to the wall. We don't
have a firing squad yet.
-- 
Email is packaged by intellectual weight, not volume. Some settling of
contents may have occurred during transmission.

---

From: Gallivanting Tripper <s3036845@s...>
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 12:41:13 +1000

>Some action occurs that gives B 2 more Social Standing, so the end

Yup - that was my interpretation as the propser. The conditional is _very_
important!

>over subsequent paragraphs.

I didn't see the need to delete that paragraph, it's good as an escape
hatch. But the new mechanic _should_ make it impossible for two Persons to
have the same Social Standing. Also perhaps worthwhile to replace
"Players" with "Persons" throughout Rule 13

>> -Oloros, standing by the wall

Is that the Social equivalent of sitting on the fence?

(G)T