Talk:355 - Revision history

Dayd at 05:47, 21 December 2006

Dayd — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 05:47:06 GMT

←Older revision		Revision as of 05:47, 21 December 2006
Line 1:		Line 1:
	<!--WARNING: Do not add header tags "==" to above this line. Doing so will break the links.-->		<!--WARNING: Do not add header tags "==" to above this line. Doing so will break the links.-->
		+	I declare this proposal passed. --[[User:Dayd\|Dayd]] 00:47, 21 December 2006 (EST)
	== Proposer's summary and declarations ==		== Proposer's summary and declarations ==
	[http://www.editthis.info/Nomicapolis/index.php?title={{NAMESPACE}}:{{PAGENAME}}&action=edit&section=1 Proposer's summary]		[http://www.editthis.info/Nomicapolis/index.php?title={{NAMESPACE}}:{{PAGENAME}}&action=edit&section=1 Proposer's summary]

TomFoolery: /* Against */

TomFoolery — Tue, 19 Dec 2006 17:26:09 GMT

Against

←Older revision		Revision as of 17:26, 19 December 2006
Line 54:		Line 54:
	=== Against ===		=== Against ===
	<!--DO NOT REMOVE-->[http://www.editthis.info/Nomicapolis/index.php?title={{NAMESPACE}}:{{PAGENAME}}&action=edit&section=5 Add AGAINST vote]		<!--DO NOT REMOVE-->[http://www.editthis.info/Nomicapolis/index.php?title={{NAMESPACE}}:{{PAGENAME}}&action=edit&section=5 Add AGAINST vote]
		+	# --[[User:TomFoolery\|TomFoolery]] 12:26, 19 December 2006 (EST)
	# <!--ADD YOUR NAME HERE-->		# <!--ADD YOUR NAME HERE-->

	<!--DO NOT REMOVE--><!--<br />-->		<!--DO NOT REMOVE--><!--<br />-->
		+
	=== Abstain ===		=== Abstain ===
	<!--DO NOT REMOVE-->		<!--DO NOT REMOVE-->

Tucana25: /* For */

Tucana25 — Mon, 18 Dec 2006 14:04:24 GMT

For

←Older revision		Revision as of 14:04, 18 December 2006
Line 47:		Line 47:
	# [[User:Chuck\|chuck]] 01:32, 17 December 2006 (EST)		# [[User:Chuck\|chuck]] 01:32, 17 December 2006 (EST)
	# --[[User:Dayd\|Dayd]] 20:37, 17 December 2006 (EST)		# --[[User:Dayd\|Dayd]] 20:37, 17 December 2006 (EST)
		+	# --[[User:Tucana25\|Tucana25]] 09:04, 18 December 2006 (EST)
	#<!--ADD YOUR NAME HERE-->		#<!--ADD YOUR NAME HERE-->

Dayd: /* For */

Dayd — Mon, 18 Dec 2006 01:37:22 GMT

For

←Older revision		Revision as of 01:37, 18 December 2006
Line 46:		Line 46:
	<!--DO NOT REMOVE-->[http://www.editthis.info/Nomicapolis/index.php?title={{NAMESPACE}}:{{PAGENAME}}&action=edit&section=4 Add FOR vote]		<!--DO NOT REMOVE-->[http://www.editthis.info/Nomicapolis/index.php?title={{NAMESPACE}}:{{PAGENAME}}&action=edit&section=4 Add FOR vote]
	# [[User:Chuck\|chuck]] 01:32, 17 December 2006 (EST)		# [[User:Chuck\|chuck]] 01:32, 17 December 2006 (EST)
-	# <!--ADD YOUR NAME HERE-->	+	# --[[User:Dayd\|Dayd]] 20:37, 17 December 2006 (EST)
		+	#<!--ADD YOUR NAME HERE-->

	<!--DO NOT REMOVE--><br />		<!--DO NOT REMOVE--><br />

Chuck: /* For */

Chuck — Sun, 17 Dec 2006 06:32:21 GMT

For

←Older revision		Revision as of 06:32, 17 December 2006
Line 45:		Line 45:
	=== For ===		=== For ===
	<!--DO NOT REMOVE-->[http://www.editthis.info/Nomicapolis/index.php?title={{NAMESPACE}}:{{PAGENAME}}&action=edit&section=4 Add FOR vote]		<!--DO NOT REMOVE-->[http://www.editthis.info/Nomicapolis/index.php?title={{NAMESPACE}}:{{PAGENAME}}&action=edit&section=4 Add FOR vote]
		+	# [[User:Chuck\|chuck]] 01:32, 17 December 2006 (EST)
	# <!--ADD YOUR NAME HERE-->		# <!--ADD YOUR NAME HERE-->

	<!--DO NOT REMOVE--><br />		<!--DO NOT REMOVE--><br />
		+
	=== Against ===		=== Against ===
	<!--DO NOT REMOVE-->[http://www.editthis.info/Nomicapolis/index.php?title={{NAMESPACE}}:{{PAGENAME}}&action=edit&section=5 Add AGAINST vote]		<!--DO NOT REMOVE-->[http://www.editthis.info/Nomicapolis/index.php?title={{NAMESPACE}}:{{PAGENAME}}&action=edit&section=5 Add AGAINST vote]

Chuck: opened for voting

Chuck — Sun, 17 Dec 2006 06:27:43 GMT

opened for voting

←Older revision		Revision as of 06:27, 17 December 2006
Line 6:		Line 6:

	I move that debate close early. Can I get a straw poll (down in Debate, please) on whether this needs further editing before I close debate and put it up for a vote? [[User:Chuck\|chuck]] 12:33, 14 December 2006 (EST)		I move that debate close early. Can I get a straw poll (down in Debate, please) on whether this needs further editing before I close debate and put it up for a vote? [[User:Chuck\|chuck]] 12:33, 14 December 2006 (EST)
		+
		+	I think any outstanding issues are taken care of, so I'm closing debate early as of now. [[User:Chuck\|chuck]] 01:27, 17 December 2006 (EST)

	== Debate ==		== Debate ==
Line 40:		Line 42:

	== Vote ==		== Vote ==
		+	Debate is closed, this proposal must now be voted on.
	=== For ===		=== For ===
	<!--DO NOT REMOVE-->[http://www.editthis.info/Nomicapolis/index.php?title={{NAMESPACE}}:{{PAGENAME}}&action=edit&section=4 Add FOR vote]		<!--DO NOT REMOVE-->[http://www.editthis.info/Nomicapolis/index.php?title={{NAMESPACE}}:{{PAGENAME}}&action=edit&section=4 Add FOR vote]

Chuck: /* Debate */ Center Canton takes care of remainders again

Chuck — Fri, 15 Dec 2006 23:13:24 GMT

Debate: Center Canton takes care of remainders again

←Older revision		Revision as of 23:13, 15 December 2006
Line 34:		Line 34:

	Don't know if this was what the formula would apply to, but this was the sentence i was questioning: "Any remaining count of citizens to be removed shall come from the canton with the highest population. In the event that multiple cantons are "tied" for the highest population, the canton shall be chosen randomly from those that are thus tied." Certainly not a big deal...I was just wondering if you wanted to specify a randomizer now or leave that to future debate. --[[User:Tucana25\|Tucana25]] 17:04, 15 December 2006 (EST)		Don't know if this was what the formula would apply to, but this was the sentence i was questioning: "Any remaining count of citizens to be removed shall come from the canton with the highest population. In the event that multiple cantons are "tied" for the highest population, the canton shall be chosen randomly from those that are thus tied." Certainly not a big deal...I was just wondering if you wanted to specify a randomizer now or leave that to future debate. --[[User:Tucana25\|Tucana25]] 17:04, 15 December 2006 (EST)
		+
		+	The whole "random" thing was starting to bug me, and I waffled between that, "arbitrary", making the admin decide (or delegate), some day-of-the-week thing, and finally I just decided the hell with it, the Center Canton takes care of the remainders again. It's shorter that way too. [[User:Chuck\|chuck]] 18:13, 15 December 2006 (EST)

	<!--END DEBATE-->		<!--END DEBATE-->

Tucana25: /* Debate */

Tucana25 — Fri, 15 Dec 2006 22:04:25 GMT

Debate

←Older revision		Revision as of 22:04, 15 December 2006
Line 32:		Line 32:

	The only randomness comes from choosing from cantons that are tied for highest or lowest populations. A uniform random distribution should be assumed, and it's probably outside of the scope of the rules to require a specific random number source. Rolling dice would work fine, as would <tt>echo $((RANDOM % $numcantons))</tt>. I don't call it a show-stopper, I think it can be left to judgement. And again, no rule makes players citizens -- we're all assumed to be gods of a sort, meddling in the affairs of the mortals below. Thus none of us have home cantons. If you want to officially be a rambling man, you're of course free to make a proposal that says so. [[User:Chuck\|chuck]] 00:51, 15 December 2006 (EST)		The only randomness comes from choosing from cantons that are tied for highest or lowest populations. A uniform random distribution should be assumed, and it's probably outside of the scope of the rules to require a specific random number source. Rolling dice would work fine, as would <tt>echo $((RANDOM % $numcantons))</tt>. I don't call it a show-stopper, I think it can be left to judgement. And again, no rule makes players citizens -- we're all assumed to be gods of a sort, meddling in the affairs of the mortals below. Thus none of us have home cantons. If you want to officially be a rambling man, you're of course free to make a proposal that says so. [[User:Chuck\|chuck]] 00:51, 15 December 2006 (EST)
		+
		+	Don't know if this was what the formula would apply to, but this was the sentence i was questioning: "Any remaining count of citizens to be removed shall come from the canton with the highest population. In the event that multiple cantons are "tied" for the highest population, the canton shall be chosen randomly from those that are thus tied." Certainly not a big deal...I was just wondering if you wanted to specify a randomizer now or leave that to future debate. --[[User:Tucana25\|Tucana25]] 17:04, 15 December 2006 (EST)

	<!--END DEBATE-->		<!--END DEBATE-->

Chuck: /* Debate */ on randomness and our lofty perch

Chuck — Fri, 15 Dec 2006 05:51:07 GMT

Debate: on randomness and our lofty perch

←Older revision		Revision as of 05:51, 15 December 2006
Line 30:		Line 30:

	What is the randomization mechanism that distributes or withdraws population? Also, I would like to be allowed to declare myself a nomadic warlord that exists independently of any canton. --[[User:Tucana25\|Tucana25]] 21:54, 14 December 2006 (EST)		What is the randomization mechanism that distributes or withdraws population? Also, I would like to be allowed to declare myself a nomadic warlord that exists independently of any canton. --[[User:Tucana25\|Tucana25]] 21:54, 14 December 2006 (EST)
		+
		+	The only randomness comes from choosing from cantons that are tied for highest or lowest populations. A uniform random distribution should be assumed, and it's probably outside of the scope of the rules to require a specific random number source. Rolling dice would work fine, as would <tt>echo $((RANDOM % $numcantons))</tt>. I don't call it a show-stopper, I think it can be left to judgement. And again, no rule makes players citizens -- we're all assumed to be gods of a sort, meddling in the affairs of the mortals below. Thus none of us have home cantons. If you want to officially be a rambling man, you're of course free to make a proposal that says so. [[User:Chuck\|chuck]] 00:51, 15 December 2006 (EST)
		+
	<!--END DEBATE-->		<!--END DEBATE-->

Tucana25: /* Debate */

Tucana25 — Fri, 15 Dec 2006 02:54:21 GMT

Debate

←Older revision		Revision as of 02:54, 15 December 2006
Line 28:		Line 28:

	The population distribution algorithm (such as it is) now no longer considers the center canton as a special case, except insofar as it's still more sparsely populated initially. All cantons grow and shrink equally now -- I'm not imposing a truly proportional algorithm because I didn't feel like making the maintainers cosine-normalize the populations in their heads. The reason for the center canton could be whatever your imagination comes up with: perhaps it's a small administrative center of the city, perhaps it's a town surrounded by many peaceful farm villages, or perhaps it's the smouldering ruins of a city in an apocalyptic wasteland. [[User:Chuck\|chuck]] 12:41, 14 December 2006 (EST)		The population distribution algorithm (such as it is) now no longer considers the center canton as a special case, except insofar as it's still more sparsely populated initially. All cantons grow and shrink equally now -- I'm not imposing a truly proportional algorithm because I didn't feel like making the maintainers cosine-normalize the populations in their heads. The reason for the center canton could be whatever your imagination comes up with: perhaps it's a small administrative center of the city, perhaps it's a town surrounded by many peaceful farm villages, or perhaps it's the smouldering ruins of a city in an apocalyptic wasteland. [[User:Chuck\|chuck]] 12:41, 14 December 2006 (EST)
		+
		+	What is the randomization mechanism that distributes or withdraws population? Also, I would like to be allowed to declare myself a nomadic warlord that exists independently of any canton. --[[User:Tucana25\|Tucana25]] 21:54, 14 December 2006 (EST)
	<!--END DEBATE-->		<!--END DEBATE-->