Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: February 2003:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#3504) /fix endyear

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#3504) /fix endyear

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: ue80@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#3504) /fix endyear
From: "Reinier Post" <rp@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 11:09:39 -0800
Reply-to: rt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On Sat, Feb 22, 2003 at 04:46:39PM -0800, ue80@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 22, 2003 at 04:12:36PM -0800, Per I. Mathisen wrote:
> > 
> > On Sat, 22 Feb 2003, ue80@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > > in a game today a player setted endyear short before a turn was over,
> > > maxed his Lux and "won" that game.
> > > Think it should be possible to /fix endyear. Unfix only with
> > > more than the half of the active players.
> > 
> > Perhaps.
> > 
> > Here's another idea (stolen shamelessly from Mike): We can require that
> > most/all CTRL level commands during game be voted upon, and if any player
> > votes "no", it doesn't happen. If no players votes "no" before X seconds
> > are up, it happens.
> That would fix that issue too. 
> Hope that this will be done before the next release.

See also

Someone (I don't know who) proposed voting by majority there.

There would be an additional access level for players: they could
vote for settings but not really set them - however if votes agree
(either unanimously or by majority - the second prevents abuse)
a vote would have the effect of a /set.

Is there any setting that must be /settable at cmdlevel, but not /voteable?
If not we can simply change the semantics of the /set command to mean
a vote when issued by a player without hack level privileges.

> Thomas


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