Proposal 310 Stock Market

Moderators: Crunkus_old, connect4

Re: Proposal 310 Stock Market

Postby pjkon » 21 Mar 2014, 05:01

Crunkus wrote:
pjkon wrote:I have added such clauses, but I believe that such a clause tying stock properties to the rule was not necessary, as the rule would make no sense without it. No harm in saying it though I suppose. I also am curious why you wanted me to put in that a separate amendment was required to change the properties of each stock. I put such an amendment in, I even made it non-narfable, but nothing in this rule can stop another rule from coming along and simply amending the clause requiring separate amendments out of existence.


Seeing as the whole rule is narfable, it might be interesting to change the properties of the stocks from time to time, say with the lawyers briefcase. If changes in that section of the rules would change the properties of individual stocks...it could lead to some interesting possibilities.


Ah, so we could have proposals with the briefcase like possessing the GM stock would allow you to create an item called "car" which allowed you to have another ability or something, but not proposals which would change the nature of a whole bunch of stocks at once. Seems like it would be fun.
It is better to have scs then allies, assuming something aproaching equal combat power in each

Your credibility with eliminated powers is irrelavant

Keep your allies happy enough that they stay allies

If you are receiving a message from me ignore this signature
pjkon
 
Posts: 375
Joined: 06 Feb 2012, 22:05
Class: Diplomat
All-game rating: (1000)
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: Proposal 310 Stock Market

Postby Crunkus_old » 21 Mar 2014, 05:02

I'm not a fan of protecting the non mandatory properties not being able to be amended.
(sigh)
Crunkus_old
 
Posts: 17650
Joined: 05 Feb 2009, 23:51
Class: Star Ambassador
All-game rating: (944)
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: Proposal 310 Stock Market

Postby Crunkus_old » 21 Mar 2014, 05:04

pjkon wrote:
Crunkus wrote:
pjkon wrote:I have added such clauses, but I believe that such a clause tying stock properties to the rule was not necessary, as the rule would make no sense without it. No harm in saying it though I suppose. I also am curious why you wanted me to put in that a separate amendment was required to change the properties of each stock. I put such an amendment in, I even made it non-narfable, but nothing in this rule can stop another rule from coming along and simply amending the clause requiring separate amendments out of existence.


Seeing as the whole rule is narfable, it might be interesting to change the properties of the stocks from time to time, say with the lawyers briefcase. If changes in that section of the rules would change the properties of individual stocks...it could lead to some interesting possibilities.


Ah, so we could have proposals with the briefcase like possessing the GM stock would allow you to create an item called "car" which allowed you to have another ability or something, but not proposals which would change the nature of a whole bunch of stocks at once. Seems like it would be fun.


For instance, you could use the briefcase to amend GM stock to have say the property of confrontation...and then wield it cavalierly.
(sigh)
Crunkus_old
 
Posts: 17650
Joined: 05 Feb 2009, 23:51
Class: Star Ambassador
All-game rating: (944)
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: Proposal 310 Stock Market

Postby Crunkus_old » 21 Mar 2014, 05:04

But yeah the car creating property would work too.
(sigh)
Crunkus_old
 
Posts: 17650
Joined: 05 Feb 2009, 23:51
Class: Star Ambassador
All-game rating: (944)
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: Proposal 310 Stock Market

Postby Crunkus_old » 21 Mar 2014, 05:06

Is there a specific reason the briefcase is grounded?
(sigh)
Crunkus_old
 
Posts: 17650
Joined: 05 Feb 2009, 23:51
Class: Star Ambassador
All-game rating: (944)
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: Proposal 310 Stock Market

Postby pjkon » 21 Mar 2014, 05:08

Crunkus wrote:I'm not a fan of protecting the non mandatory properties not being able to be amended.


The way it is written you can take away the "stock" property from one of these things and then rewrite its properties however you want. You can't make sweeping changes which affect all stocks though. Isn't this what you wanted? What non-mandatory parts am I protecting?

Crunkus wrote:
pjkon wrote:
Crunkus wrote:Seeing as the whole rule is narfable, it might be interesting to change the properties of the stocks from time to time, say with the lawyers briefcase. If changes in that section of the rules would change the properties of individual stocks...it could lead to some interesting possibilities.


Ah, so we could have proposals with the briefcase like possessing the GM stock would allow you to create an item called "car" which allowed you to have another ability or something, but not proposals which would change the nature of a whole bunch of stocks at once. Seems like it would be fun.


For instance, you could use the briefcase to amend GM stock to have say the property of confrontation...and then wield it cavalierly.

:D :D :D
Last edited by pjkon on 21 Mar 2014, 05:11, edited 1 time in total.
It is better to have scs then allies, assuming something aproaching equal combat power in each

Your credibility with eliminated powers is irrelavant

Keep your allies happy enough that they stay allies

If you are receiving a message from me ignore this signature
pjkon
 
Posts: 375
Joined: 06 Feb 2012, 22:05
Class: Diplomat
All-game rating: (1000)
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: Proposal 310 Stock Market

Postby pjkon » 21 Mar 2014, 05:10

Crunkus wrote:Is there a specific reason the briefcase is grounded?

I thought I'd tie it in with the star-wars theme. It's meant to be pretty powerful, and since we won't have lightsabers for turns now (other then ASSL) the first person to hit "Darth" status is going to be a real menace unless we get some grounded items into the game.
It is better to have scs then allies, assuming something aproaching equal combat power in each

Your credibility with eliminated powers is irrelavant

Keep your allies happy enough that they stay allies

If you are receiving a message from me ignore this signature
pjkon
 
Posts: 375
Joined: 06 Feb 2012, 22:05
Class: Diplomat
All-game rating: (1000)
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: Proposal 310 Stock Market

Postby Ugluk » 21 Mar 2014, 05:55

Stocks? Bonds?

A Jedi craves not these things.
Niakan is a tease.
User avatar
Ugluk
 
Posts: 3220
Joined: 19 May 2009, 23:55
Class: Diplomat
Standard rating: (1048)
All-game rating: (1028)
Timezone: GMT-8

Re: Proposal 310 Stock Market

Postby super_dipsy » 21 Mar 2014, 07:50

I don't really understand IIb, IIf

b) The flow of stock may occur through a transfer of a stock in the same way that a transfer of currency may take place, but a player may make two currency transfers and still make a stock transfer. Stocks may also change hands through sale.


Can you help me to understand what this means? Does it imply that a player cannot make more than two currency transfers and also a stock transfer? I am not actually sure I understand how a currency is transferred either, but that is probably because I haven't read the particular rule. Can you point me to the right bit or clarify?

f) Sale of Stock: players may make conditional transfers of currency related to transfers of stock, and so sell stock to each other

How? And upon what is it conditional?

g) For Sale: Stocks may become “For Sale” at the end of voting phases through legacy forfeits or through sale by players or through other means defined by this or future rules, or by things. At the end of a voting phase players follow the auction procedure described in clause “a” to determine who owns the stock. Between a sale or possessing player inactivity the stock is considered unowned, that is to say no player possesses it. This overrides rule 302. This auction is not a separate phase, and coincides with the proposal phase of the next turn.

Where does this auction happen? Is it in the proposal thread for the turn just taken?
User avatar
super_dipsy
Premium Member
 
Posts: 12103
Joined: 04 Nov 2009, 17:43
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: (1000)
All-game rating: (931)
Timezone: GMT

Re: Proposal 310 Stock Market

Postby pjkon » 21 Mar 2014, 15:45

Ugluk wrote:Stocks? Bonds?

A Jedi craves not these things.

:lol:
It is better to have scs then allies, assuming something aproaching equal combat power in each

Your credibility with eliminated powers is irrelavant

Keep your allies happy enough that they stay allies

If you are receiving a message from me ignore this signature
pjkon
 
Posts: 375
Joined: 06 Feb 2012, 22:05
Class: Diplomat
All-game rating: (1000)
Timezone: GMT-5

PreviousNext

Return to Nomic 5 (finished)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests