One Hour One Life Forums

They could have two parts: a microphone and a speaker. This way it's possible to limit the number of places that can be used to read porn over the radio. (There's at least one game where you're explicitly allowed to kill someone who does that.)

I think the answer is that no one ever had a good plan. People kept trying different micro-refinements, as you say. Those refinements were awfully short-sighted, but there was enough people trying things that once in a while a tool worked unusually well. And then everyone would start copying and tweaking it, blindly exploring the new corner of the rules of the world we live in.

Humans are the stupidest possible species that had a chance at starting a civilization. (Othewise we'd start one earlier, when we were less smart but just smart enough.)
Humans are smart enough to solve tiny problems, but the other two ingredients are 1. trying tons of different options and 2. preserving knowledge when someone gets lucky.

Implementation details:

• This is a client side change.  I'm quite sure it'll happen eventually, one way or another.

• Alternative syntax: "@f=milkweed is fruiting", "\w f milkweed is fruiting".

• Watch out for recursion.  It's great, but dangerous.

Nations do not exist outside human brains.  They should be invented by players, not by the universe.

Instead we need a way to automate talking.

For example, notes could be used to remember phrases.  You'd read a note that says "g $1 -> $1 is a griefer!", and then you'd be able to say "Anita is a griefer!" by typing "g Anita".

For another example, you'd be able to type "n", and it would translate into "I am from the nation of The Southern Lake".

This could even be used to let children use longer, but fixed phrases.  Children lack the experience to form complicated ideas, but they're just as smart and can learn existing ideas just fine.

Thanks for the link, added.

To kill griefers?  Am I missing the point?

This problem can be easily solved by having a "I don't want to be randomly assigned to be an antagonist" checkbox.

(And it wouldn't make sense for the community to give someone a role that directly harms the community.)

Right, the griefing problem won't solve itself.  But it's a big and hairy problem that is hard to define.  On the contrary, antagonists being too powerful is a mere balancing problem.  Harder than in other games since it's less clear how to make antagonists less powerful, but exactly as hard and way simpler than griefing.

I suggest something like the Mafia/Werewolf games where some people are randomly assigned to be antagonists.

Make it impossible to distinguish between the real griefers and the antagonists who want to bring the village down for in-game reasons.

Then design around that, and the griefer problem will just vanish.

It almost works in space station 13, except they don't have to solve it completely because they have both bombs that can blow up the whole server, and admins that can ban people before the red button is pressed.

Are plaster walls relatively easy to build and tear down?

It forces you to play alone in a game that is fundamentally about collaboration.