Re: Community Participation

From: t.s.baguley_at_...
Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2000 11:50:30 +0100

>Subject: Community Participation.
>The point is, though, these two cases:
>
>(4) 150 respond enthusiastically, 20 applaud wildly.
>
>(5) 150 respond enthusiastically.
>
>According to HW, (5) is better than (4). However, asking 20
>20 to quiet down, to get 170 responding enthusiastically is
>'not allowed'. Therefore the only sanction is to shove the
>over-enthusiasts down a well, so they can't participant at all,
>so you can get the bigger bonus for the 150. Make any sense
>at all?

I'm not sold on it myself. Just thinking aloud. I think the rule intent is to stress that unified community support is a good thing. Dissenters or participants with mixed reasons for participation will weaken it. I don't think it is a big problem, because community support should probably be a narrative thing. Players should try and persuade the clan, and, if they think the clan support may be patchy they should probably go ahead with family and friends. If the clan does give support, the narrator should be the only person who knows for sure how many and at what level. As such it isn't a badly broken rule, because players can't manipulate it directly.

Thom

Thom Baguley
Human Experimental Psychology
Human Sciences, Loughborough University
Loughborough, Leicestershire LE11 3TU, UK. Tel: +44(0)1509 223049 Fax: 223940
http://www-staff.lboro.ac.uk/~hutsb/