Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: March 2000:
[Freeciv-Dev] voting (was: timeout)
Home

[Freeciv-Dev] voting (was: timeout)

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: freeciv-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx (Freeciv developers)
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] voting (was: timeout)
From: Reinier Post <rp@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2000 17:02:52 +0100

> there should be a system who take care of all players desires. Could have a
> system that when some players arent agree, first active players who join the
> server take the decision. Or why not a vote of active players ?

Voting: proposed implementation.

Each option will have a boolean state (whether it is open for voting)
and a vector holding each player's votes.

The new /vote command will take the same arguments as /set,
but its effect is weighed and applied at the start of each turn.
Its comdlevel is 'vote', which will be in between 'info' and 'ctrl'.

/negotiate <optionname> is a new command at level 'ctrl' that opens
an option for voting.

A /set closes the option for voting, and clears all votes.
A start of turn does not clear any votes.

Do we need voting on commands as well?

> For example :
> 
> - the game start
> - player A set timeout 30

/vote timeout 30
Game: option timeout is not open for voting.
bigboss: please open the timeout for voting!
*Bigboss* ok
Game: option timeout is opened for voting.
/vote timeout 30
Game: timeout will be 30 by popular vote.
> - end of turn
Game: timeout is now 30 by popular vote.

> - player B set timeout 70
/vote timeout 70
Game: timeout will remain 30, there is no majority vote.
/vote timeout 70
Game: you have already voted for timeout 70.
/vote timeout
Game: timeout has 1 vote for 30, 1 vote for 70.  Your vote: 70.
> - player A set timeout 30
/vote timeout 30
Game: you have already voted for timeout 30.
> - end of turn
> - player B set timeout vote for 70 :
>       if most of the players agreed, timeout go on 70
>       if most of the players disagreed, timeout left as it is.
> and timeout wont be changed without a vote with active players.

That will work.
 
> Ok, this is a lot of work to do (i suppose) and wont be usefull with "adult"
> players....

Not really, it's a fairly minor complication to the /set command.

> But i think it will be necessairy with the freeciv-gamer's growth.

In two years, I've only seen one documented case of a Freeciv player
who invites measures like this.  Some players are asking for host-based
access control just to keep him out.

-- 
Reinier



[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]