301 (DRAFT): Law of Titles

[quintopia]

You would have an easier time coming up with a title Rez was getting because you know him.  I'm the one who has to title him, and I don't.  You'd have a more difficult time coming up with a title for tinuviel or Rye Coal or Leus, because you don't know them.  I do.  And don't even act like you aren't trying to take over the world.  It's as important now as it is later.

How about a pseudoanonymous grab bag?  Where only one person knows who the names came from?  And then we get one point for each person who chooses the name we created?  How much fun would that be?  And don't worry about gendering the names.  Obviously, guys will choose guy names, and girls girl names.  And if there is a title like "Duke of. . ." and a girl wants it, she can just change it to Duchess.  It's the same name.

[CasualSax]

But its just as fun to name Rezantis "Queen Rezantis" as it would be to name Rye Coal "Queen Rye Coal."  Your solution doesn't solve the problem of not knowing the person well enough to title - rather, it weakens it.

And I don't think not knowing should be an excuse - its more of a reason to try and get to know the person.

If we did do a grab bag, no name changing would be allowed.  Again, I want to stress the comical value of the titles.

And, for the record, I want no part in ruling the world.  And please remember that ruling the world does not equal winning the game.

Yet.

[quintopia]

It does not weaken it.  It provides a great conversation piece for getting to know one another.  After we've played for a while, we will certainly be able to come up with more interesting titles.  As long as we leave open the option to propose new titles for people, that is fine.

[CasualSax]

How about post titles?  Like, "Player B, Ruler of the Netherworld."  It gives us more flexability and allows for more creativity.

[Itarien]

This is nomic, the door is always open. Unless it is explicitly stated to be closed...in that case we can amend it to be open later  :D

[tinuviel]

And I don't think not knowing should be an excuse - its more of a reason to try and get to know the person.

True, but it does take time to get to know a person.   :P

I don't mind the naming system as it is, it could have quite amusing results (and titles can be changed once the titler gets to know the titlee better).  However, I would like the ability to refuse a given title - PG-13 though they may be, they could still be unintentionally offensive to the recipient.  I think this would make voting on titles unnecessary.  

Also, if we're going to have to refer to each other by titles only, definitely limit character number as well as number of title changes within a given period.  Otherwise it could get excessively tedious trying to keep up with super-long titles and frequent changes.

Fun proposal though.   :D

[CasualSax]

A simple thread in the game status folder can keep up with player titles and changing them.  This same thread can keep track of turn order, and have arrows pointing to who's on the clock.

The goal of a title being PG-13 is not to keep it inoffensive, but to keep it clean.

I like it very much as is, but I agree it needs a character limit.

[quintopia]

how about a limit of 60 characters, and no thread devoted to it, but the title actually physically planted under our names by the admin.  I know phpBB2 can handle it.

[CasualSax]

If we're going to have to reffer to the person with their title at all times, then 60 characters is a lot.

"This sexy title is sixty characters long and, oh yeah-I hate Player B"

[tinuviel]

If we're going to have to reffer to the person with their title at all times, then 60 characters is a lot.

"This sexy title is sixty characters long and, oh yeah-I hate Player B"

Which is why we need to decide between character limits (less than 60 please quintopia dear  :D ) and calling people by titles.  (The other option being less restrictions on titles but not having to refer to people by them.)

Well, PG-13 in my mind implies inoffensive.  But if that's not the case with everyone, then I suggest that be an added stipulation.  I personally would not enjoy being stuck with a title that I found distasteful.  And as we're not all bosom buddies here yet, how are we to know what someone considers distasteful?  By giving them to option not to accept the given title.

[SuperusSophia]

I propose the system works like this:

1) Starting after the passing of this proposal, each player names the person in front of them with a title until one rotation is completed.  The title is posted by the titler at the biginning of his turn and is officially put into effect when that turn ends.

2) During the titler's turn, the titlee, and only the titlee, is allowed to officially protest the title under the grounds that the titlee is offended by the title.  The titlee must include with the protest the reason for which he/she finds it offensive.  The entire group then has 24 hours to vote (seperately from the rest of the turn's procedings) on whether the reason is valid.  If the reason is valid, then the title is protracted and the titlee provides his/her own title.  If the reason is decided to not be valid, the titlee loses 5 points and the title goes into effect anyway.

3) Since each round lasts a couple weeks by the current rules, the title changes every round.  Therefore the titlee has that title until the titler's turn comes back around, at which point the titler creates a new title and the cycle begins anew.

This should preserve both the spontaneaty of the titles, along with the natural humor (I would hope) that comes with recieving a title from someone who is (hopefully) trying to be humorous, while at the same time providing an efficient means of preventing anything too offensive from inadvertently spoiling the game.

[quintopia]

I vote for no character limits, and not having to use titles, or even, only being required to use parts of titles (which part would be obvious, for example: Supreme High General Leus of the Sreebian Armies of the North would be called General Leus, and so forth).  Agreed about not having to accept a title.

[tinuviel]

A combination of the above sounds good to me.  (:

[Rye Coal]

I like the idea of adding it to the post titles. We will see it reqularly and enjoy it's humor. It can be long without being annoying. Slap on a new title request system- ask nicely. If that doesnt work call a vote. If you lose, you lose points to the other players for wasting their time.

[SuperusSophia]

How about:

4) Players must use a player's title when referring to or directly addressing said player.  Failure to do so will result in 5 lost points.  If title is excessive in length, then the title may be shortened during posts at poster's discretion.

Sorry to steal your thunder Carth, but the discussion was getting cloudy due to a lack of specifics.  Feel free to change anything; it is your proposal after all  :wink: