One Hour One Life Forums

Orders could stick around on the screen instead of being a notification.
This would help with long-term orders like "this quarter we're building a road to Donkeytown", especially when new followers join.
This could even work as a notice board for working groups: you can follow a bunch of people to see what they're doing and join the group that you think does something important.

But having too many orders at the same time would be confusing. Some ideas:

1. Restrict each leader to one order.

2. Prioritize the king's orders over the direct leader's orders. Or the other way around.
   (The king's orders are more important, but the direct leader's orders are more relevant. Maybe there should be two of them: "global" prioritizes the king's orders, "local" prioritizes the direct leader. Can be especially useful when the king and the leader are not in agreement.)

3. Cycle through all orders, same as recipes.

Oh yeah, it would definitely allow people to stalk other people.

Not sure how bad that would be.

You could also exploit this for navigation by following people from other villages.

I mean, salary?

But you pay taxes to governments, hm.

Hmm. Maybe you can band with other exiles. But that's about as useful as recruiting neutrals, I guess.

I still wonder whether we can get rid of exiling completely.
We could require the leader to accept their new follower. This way everyone who isn't in the same tree is already kind of an exile.

Currently anyone can become an "ally", at least as long as there's only one main hierarchy. The difference between an ally and a neutral is insignificant compared to the difference between an exile and anyone else.
It doesn't even matter that much with two competing hierarchies. It's not enough to exile the competing leader: his followers can temporarily follow you to pretend that they are on your side.

Exiling a single person is basically a "do not hire ever" marker.

I guess if we required leaders to approve their followers, half the rules would change. It would be a tree of two-way contracts. "I trust you, I give up some of my freedoms in your favor, and I expect you to act in my interests." So exiling would be a more specific feature on top of a more general framework for coordination.

Yeah, that's a good way to describe it :0

All of the followers of the person (Grant) who completed the loop unfollow him, right?

It may be better to make the newly followed person unfollow their leader instead.
This way exactly one link will be changed automatically, not N.

This will also work as a way to choose a successor.
1. The king chooses a duke as the leader -> the duke becomes the king, but with one huge branch and a bunch of smaller ones.
2. The old king dies -> the new king inherits the other dukes as followers.

Btw, can you follow yourself? Not "I FOLLOW MYSELF", but "I FOLLOW KINRANY"?
Can you exile yourself?

Oh, right, you already mentioned this. But, as above, this will cause a loop, and the king probably shouldn't lose all the followers that moment.

It's probably enough to know that you were not personally exiled by your leader. After that it's your leader's job to figure out who exiled both of you. And if it takes too long, unfollow.

The top person to be exiled will know that they were personally exiled through a notification and by looking at their leader, who isn't exiled.
Is it true that they'll always want to unfollow their leader ASAP? This way their followers won't scatter right away. But this isn't entirely obvious, and can be automated later if it does become a problem.

Would it make sense to show each person's leader on mouse over?

Four horsemen of the culture war: sexism, racism, classism and ageism

There seems to be a number of forces that will make the tree flatter over time. Are there any other mechanisms that will make it deeper, other than the king's vanity?

Before this is live, I'll write down a few predictions.

1. People will actually have a single hierarchy in most villages after 3 generations
2. People will ask leaders for jobs
3. People will report griefers to leaders
4. Dealing with griefers who aren't leaders will be easier
5. Super-leaders will know more about the state of the village than other people
6. Super-leaders will help people coordinate
7. Super-leaders won't have any time for roleplay

I hope this part will be self-balancing. The more often a kind of a stupid leader shows up, the better people will be at recognizing them and taking them down.

With a democracy you'd probably need a way to keep track of laws. That, or wait for everyone to vote whenever someone is being exiled, or whatever.

Direct democracy doesn't work well because everyone has to spend time thinking about every issue. That's a gigantic waste of effort.

Do horses run faster on roads?

Is it alive?