Round 9/History: Difference between revisions

Line 488:

The effect this legislation actually had was debatable. By the time this was proposed, Wotton already owned twelve ducks, a number that no one would even be able to sniff. Additionally, accumulating ducks provided no actual advantage other than more places to store quacks and legislation to encourage high duck counts would likely be unpopular with everyone but Wotton.

=== Deleting the Duck Words ===

One constant source of frustration had been the duck words. Every player at the time had had at least one run-in with failure to inclue duck words cancelling one of their actions. Wotton decided the system needed to go. He made a simple proposal that would delete the Duck Words rule (Proposal Enough!!!, 2 Mar 2021). This, however, would not fix the issue since the requirement to end a game action message with a duck word would still be in effect. To this end, idle proposed to delete the wording "with a message ending in a duck word" from the Ducks rule a quarter of an hour later (Proposal Enough!!! 🩹, 2 Mar 2021). These proposals were both set to be resolved at the end of the 7th.

A snag arose, however. Proposal Freer Actions (Random Internet Cat, 25 Feb 2021) passed earlier and revamped the rule defining game actions replacing the text "with a message ending in a duck word." Wotton realized this change as he was applying changes to the ruleset on 7 March and fortunately self-killed Proposal Enough!!! thirty seconds before it was to be adopted.

A bit later, on 9 Mar 2021, Klink proposed the deletion of the duck word verbiage, correctly this time (Proposal Stop Quacking).

{{Proposal Box

|name=Stop Quacking

|text=

Amend rule Actions by removing the following text

:, and that the message providing for the intent ends in a duck word (possibly followed by punctuation)

}}

== References ==

@@ Line 488: / Line 488: @@
 The effect this legislation actually had was debatable. By the time this was proposed, Wotton already owned twelve ducks, a number that no one would even be able to sniff. Additionally, accumulating ducks provided no actual advantage other than more places to store quacks and legislation to encourage high duck counts would likely be unpopular with everyone but Wotton.
+=== Deleting the Duck Words ===
+One constant source of frustration had been the duck words. Every player at the time had had at least one run-in with failure to inclue duck words cancelling one of their actions. Wotton decided the system needed to go. He made a simple proposal that would delete the Duck Words rule (Proposal Enough!!!, 2 Mar 2021). This, however, would not fix the issue since the requirement to end a game action message with a duck word would still be in effect. To this end, idle proposed to delete the wording "with a message ending in a duck word" from the Ducks rule a quarter of an hour later (Proposal Enough!!! 🩹, 2 Mar 2021). These proposals were both set to be resolved at the end of the 7th.
+A snag arose, however. Proposal Freer Actions (Random Internet Cat, 25 Feb 2021) passed earlier and revamped the rule defining game actions replacing the text "with a message ending in a duck word." Wotton realized this change as he was applying changes to the ruleset on 7 March and fortunately self-killed Proposal Enough!!! thirty seconds before it was to be adopted.
+A bit later, on 9 Mar 2021, Klink proposed the deletion of the duck word verbiage, correctly this time (Proposal Stop Quacking).
+{{Proposal Box
+|name=Stop Quacking
+|text=
+Amend rule Actions by removing the following text
+:, and that the message providing for the intent ends in a duck word (possibly followed by punctuation)
+}}
 == References ==
 <references />