Talk:360
From Nomicapolis
(→Debate) |
|||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
<!--DO NOT REMOVE-->[http://www.editthis.info/Nomicapolis/index.php?title={{NAMESPACE}}:{{PAGENAME}}&action=edit§ion=2 Add comments] | <!--DO NOT REMOVE-->[http://www.editthis.info/Nomicapolis/index.php?title={{NAMESPACE}}:{{PAGENAME}}&action=edit§ion=2 Add comments] | ||
<!--BEGIN DEBATE--> | <!--BEGIN DEBATE--> | ||
| + | |||
| + | I don't mind the idea...i would like to see a stipulation that the scorekeeper would be responsible for keeping track of this. Also, I don't know about the wording on this. Can it be simplified? --[[User:Tucana25|Tucana25]] 10:53, 21 December 2006 (EST) | ||
<!--END DEBATE--> | <!--END DEBATE--> | ||
Revision as of 15:53, 21 December 2006
Contents |
Proposer's summary and declarations
Proposer's summaryDebate will end for this proposal at 12:00, 3 January 2007.
This proposal is to add depth to the game by introducing popularity. Hope you like it. This is to simulate in my opinion the will of the masses. The masses don't like loners. Therefore Players will lose popularity for going against the group. Also the masses like action and therefore are more receptive to votes for an agenda. Likewise the masses like to support a winner and therefore Players that vote for the most popular choice will also become more popular themselves. Also you're not going to become popular voting for a loser. --Dayd 01:53, 21 December 2006 (EST)
Debate
I don't mind the idea...i would like to see a stipulation that the scorekeeper would be responsible for keeping track of this. Also, I don't know about the wording on this. Can it be simplified? --Tucana25 10:53, 21 December 2006 (EST)
Vote
For
Against
Abstain
