Coming soon: voluntary leadership

eajorstad · 2019-12-12 07:04:59

I can't remember exactly, but is it guaranteed that someone will be able to actually type out "I follow.." if their desired leader has a long name?

Can't this be changed into a /command instead to prevent this?

Gogo · 2019-12-12 07:45:03

I follow Jasonanthony Apolononionois.

This update seems better than I expected, thanks.

Dodge · 2019-12-12 08:33:09

Looks like another mechanic that will make sense at one point in the game but feels completely out of place in the current state, similar to the war/peace mechanic that will probably go in hand with hierarchy but that currently have no incentive to exist.

But will at some point...

Wish the development was more about adding things that make sense to what already exists instead of random pieces of puzzle that you cant really connect with each other in a way that makes sense.

There is still a big missing chunk that would connect all these:

An incentive to have actual private properties and a reason to have has much wealth (ressources,food, anything really) as possible in that property.

If you have an actual reason for your group/close members to survive over others but at the same time benefit from others then you can justify war/peace, trading, and all sorts of social constructs like hierarchy.

"You dont want them to die because they can benefit you but if you have to choose between you and them it's you (your group) and wathever needs to happen happens."

But without that we are still in a shared everything/open villages dynamic and any of the above mechanics dont make sense at all.

I wonder though what is the benefit of having a hierarchy system if they dont count for the score, are you going to extend the genetic score to hierarchy?

Otherwise i dont see why you would care, it's going to be another case of Person 1 :"OH OUR LEADER DIED!" Person 2 : "WHO?"

And why would someone lead for people that dont count for his score? Roleplay?

Last edited by Dodge (2019-12-12 08:36:46)

Kinrany · 2019-12-12 08:34:33

jcwilk wrote:

Kinrany wrote:
oh, exiling doesn't prevent a person from being your follower
I think you meant "leader" not "follower" right?
On that note, does exiling someone make them unfollow you and be unable to follow you until they're redeemed? Presumably also unable to follow any of the exiler's follower tree?

I did mean "follower", for the same reason you described! As in, if you exile someone, they are kicked out of your subtree.

Exiling your direct leader is kinda nonsensical, but at least there's the utility of learning that you or one of your leaders exiled one of their leaders.

JasonY · 2019-12-12 10:21:38

I think it could be useful just for organizing.

Lots of people just wander around doing their own thing but this allows people to form groups. Lord of the Kitchen is just the main guy doing the cooking, Following him just means you are also doing cooking.

Deligating jobs can save on wasted tool slots, Alot of towns have too many or too few people doing certain jobs. No point learning the Hoe if 10 other guys are already tilling.

Spoonwood · 2019-12-12 10:59:14

Legs wrote:

And so a new honorary title was born: assassin.
I will practice, promote and protect this profession to the greatest possible extent.

How do assassins help build civilization again? Because I don't think they do. How do assassians help lineage survival chances? I don't see how they would.

miskas · 2019-12-12 14:17:33

1.We will be able to follow only 1 person right?
2.What happens if we follow our follower? Do we both become lords or one of us loses his title?

Last edited by miskas (2019-12-12 14:18:16)

Legs · 2019-12-12 15:01:44

Spoonwood wrote:

How do assassins help build civilization again? Because I don't think they do. How do assassians help lineage survival chances? I don't see how they would.

Anarcho-communism is the ideal political structure for ohol. I will not allow useless dukes or barons to disturb the working man with their 'leadership.'

People should do what they want, not what they're told to. In the words of the update, "I follow myself."

jasonrohrer · 2019-12-12 15:34:30

Kinrany wrote:

jasonrohrer wrote:
When a leader dies, whatever leader they are following inherits their followers and their exile list.
Hmm, should the super-leader inherit the exile list too? Someone could exile everyone, follow the super-leader, and then suicide to make everyone seem exiled
Edit: maybe the followers could inherit the exile list instead

Yes, you're right about that exploit. That's a good idea as a fix. So if you have no followers, and you die, nothing happens. Your leader inherits no followers, and your followers inherit no exile list, because you have no followers. This also fixes another problem: If a King who has exiled people judiciously (a valuable exile list, important info) dies with no leader, then the kingdom is divided (naturally), but the exile list is lost. Passing the exile list to the King's immediate followers fixes that problem. The exile list will be preserved whenever it can be. Fixing the original post to clarify this.

Now, if a King with lots of followers does the same trick (exiling a bunch of people and then suiciding), it will still leave a mess behind, but at least they are sacrificing a privileged and valuable position to pull off this trick.

jasonrohrer · 2019-12-12 15:53:13

DestinyCall wrote:

Question - if your village has six adults and each one follows the next person, who is the super leader?
Mary follows Steve. Steve follows Jessica. Jessica follows Clint. Clint follows Lisa. Lisa follows Grant. Grant follows Mary. The circle is closed.
Or do they all get promoted to Baron, because they are followed by at least one Lord? And if they all become Barons, would that also elevate everyone to the status of Count, since they are now being followed by a Baron?
Infinite promotion daisy chain!

Loops are detected and broken. If you follow one of your sub-followers, the person who is now at the top stops following you.

Mary follows Steve. Steve becomes a Lord

Steve follows Jessica. Jessica becomes a Baroness.

Jessica follows Clint. Clint becomes a Count.

Clint follows Lisa. Lisa becomes a Duchess.

Lisa follows Grant. Grand becomes King.

Grant follows Mary. Lisa automatically stops following Grant, and Grant is no longer King. We then have Lady Mary, Baron Steve, Countess Jessica, Duke Clint, and Queen Lisa. Grant has no title.

This will rarely happen by accident, because of the titles and the badges. Grant will clearly see Mary as one of his followers, and that she is a much lower rank. He won't follow her by accident. However, if it happens, it's easy to fix. Grant stops following Mary, and Lisa follows Grant again. In two actions, the original tree is restored. This is what I mean by flexible and convenient. The tree does the right thing automatically, and can be adjusted in dramatic ways with a very minimal set of actions.

DestinyCall · 2019-12-12 15:53:37

jasonrohrer wrote:

Now, if a King with lots of followers does the same trick (exiling a bunch of people and then suiciding), it will still leave a mess behind, but at least they are sacrificing a privileged and valuable position to pull off this trick.

So I wait until I'm old and bribe one Duke into following me.
I don't even need to kill myself. Time will take care of that for me in just a few minutes and I leave behind a legacy of mass exile.

Keep in mind, being "king" is an empty title. "Value" and "priviledge" are not inherent to the role. If the majority of players don't care about titles, the title itself has little inherent value and fails to confer any significant privileges onto the titleholder.

I'm sure some people will choose to bow to the king because they wear a crown and some kings will demand special treatment, but it is all just role-play and make-believe.

...

Glad to hear the system can handle loops. The dynamic adjusting is also good. It will be interesting to see how things play out once the system goes live. Maybe I'm worried about nothing and it will be great.

Last edited by DestinyCall (2019-12-12 16:09:50)

jasonrohrer · 2019-12-12 15:57:08

seth wrote:

Killing your exiler will not free you from your exiled status, unless that exiler has no leader to inherit your exile status.
Hey for this one, does it mean when you die, the exiles float upward and get attached to the leader of the dead person? Wouldn't it make more sense if they floated downward and attached themselves to the followers of the dead person?

Yes, post updated to reflect this. Exile lists float down, not up, on death of a leader.

Thaulos · 2019-12-12 16:02:27

horizontal inheritance

jasonrohrer · 2019-12-12 16:12:36

jcwilk wrote:

Kinrany wrote:
oh, exiling doesn't prevent a person from being your follower
I think you meant "leader" not "follower" right?
On that note, does exiling someone make them unfollow you and be unable to follow you until they're redeemed? Presumably also unable to follow any of the exiler's follower tree?
Haven't tried it yet but I'm already very into it. We need more recursive shit fosho

Exiling and leader-follow status are separate systems. This allows for your trusted leader or trusted follower to get exiled by a higher-up, and you can be like WTF, and go to the higher-up to protest.

It currently says YOUR EXILED BARON STEVE or whatever.

Will make sure it also says YOUR EXILED FOLLOWER MARY

There is a tiny information hole here, and I'm not sure how to patch it. You don't know WHO exiled someone, so you don't know who to go to in order to protest. You just know that either you or someone above you did it. And the full information here is hard to provide, because it's complicated. You could be exiled by a long list of people, so we can't present that info on mouse-over.

I could make REDEEM pass downwards. So if a Baron exiles someone, the Count, Duke, or King above them can redeem them, overruling the Baron's exile. So you can always appeal to the supreme leader for help. Well.... actually, maybe not. I guess individual people's exile lists should be inalienable. Or.... maybe... submitting to a leader means you give up the sanctity of your own exile list? If that leader keeps overruling you and redeeming people, against your wishes, you can always stop following them, or convince your leaders to stop following them.

jasonrohrer · 2019-12-12 16:20:23

Thaulos wrote:

Overall it sounds great, i just I don't like the "inherit" thing. Ideally you should be able to name your inheritor before you die. This would make each node of the chain more stable and avoid situations where due to people dying off the king having 300 one level subjects instead of a hierarchy tree.
Ideally I should also be able to pass my "position" to someone else? Maybe I'm the town mayor but I want to go exploring instead. I should be able to pass on the position to someone else and have everyone else automatically follow them. Maybe a "swap" function where they would become my new leader. Effectively switching nodes.
So two extra commands: "Eve Smith is my heir", "I swap position with Eve Smith" or something.

Yes, this is already supported.

Before King dies, they pick someone to inherit their position, and say, "I FOLLOW YOU"

Before the death of the King, that person becomes an Emperor. But they are really just a temporary Emperor. Let's call them a Temperor.

Upon the King's death, that young Emperor becomes the new King, and the Emperor role evaporates.

I did it this way to support the necessary function (inheritance of structure) without adding a new verb or a new system.

Note that throughout this system, titles are dynamic. They are computed in realtime, constantly, by how many tiers of living people are beneath you. You are only a Lord so long as you have followers. You are only a Baron so long as at least one Lord is following you, and no other Barons are following you. As soon as one Baron follows you, you become a Count. But when that Baron dies, you go back to being a lowly Baron again (you inherit that Baron's Lords as followers).

jasonrohrer · 2019-12-12 16:24:27

DestinyCall wrote:

What if the top person in my hierarchy decides to trust the wrong person and we end up with a corrupt king? Or what if there was a misunderstanding and the guy above the guy I trust decides to exile someone without due cause? Or if I put my faith in the wrong guy and he makes a bad call?

Exactly this!

Spoonwood · 2019-12-12 16:28:36

Legs wrote:

Spoonwood wrote:
How do assassins help build civilization again? Because I don't think they do. How do assassians help lineage survival chances? I don't see how they would.
Anarcho-communism is the ideal political structure for ohol. I will not allow useless dukes or barons to disturb the working man with their 'leadership.'
People should do what they want, not what they're told to. In the words of the update, "I follow myself."

I found that interesting.

Though, I think it's also the working OHOL child that is most likely to get disturbed by such 'leadership'. Since the child can grow up to do some things and have children later if their useful working habits are protected by an assassination, then I can see how such an assassination could help with civilization building and help lineage survival chances.

jasonrohrer · 2019-12-12 16:35:20

DestinyCall wrote:

jasonrohrer wrote:
Now, if a King with lots of followers does the same trick (exiling a bunch of people and then suiciding), it will still leave a mess behind, but at least they are sacrificing a privileged and valuable position to pull off this trick.
So I wait until I'm old and bribe one Duke into following me.
I don't even need to kill myself. Time will take care of that for me in just a few minutes and I leave behind a legacy of mass exile.

If you bribe only one Duke into following you, only that Duke will get your exile list when you die. Yes, it could be a mass exile list, but everyone below the Duke will be like WTF, dude, this is nuts, we're all exiled. All they have to do is stop following the Duke to undo the treachery that he committed by following you, the bad king. The Counts pick a new Duke, and the whole thing is fixed.

The interesting thing here is the tree, which allows giant repairs like this via a logarithmic number of actions. There might be dozens of people who are now exiled due to the actions of this bad Duke, and it can all be fixed when two counts change Dukes.

To clarify: The exile stuff is dynamic too, and recomputed constantly. When your Duke exiled someone, it isn't passed down to you. It's just on his list. When you see someone, their exile status is determined dynamically, based on who you follow. When you change leaders, that computation will change, and you'll instantly forget the old exilees and see different exilees. In other words, the Duke's exile list doesn't "stick" to you, as his follower. So a leader can't do any kind of permanent "damage" to the tree by exiling the wrong people. The tree can be repaired in a flash by ousting that leader.

jasonrohrer · 2019-12-12 16:37:17

I Follow You is a shorthand to follow the person you are standing closest to. That fixes the long name issue. Works the same for curses (CURSE YOU)

Kinrany · 2019-12-12 17:16:52

jasonrohrer wrote:

Loops are detected and broken. If you follow one of your sub-followers, the person who is now at the top stops following you.
Mary follows Steve. Steve becomes a Lord
snip
Grant follows Mary. Lisa automatically stops following Grant, and Grant is no longer King. We then have Lady Mary, Baron Steve, Countess Jessica, Duke Clint, and Queen Lisa. Grant has no title.

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?

jasonrohrer wrote:

Before King dies, they pick someone to inherit their position, and say, "I FOLLOW YOU"
Before the death of the King, that person becomes an Emperor. But they are really just a temporary Emperor. Let's call them a Temperor.

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.

jasonrohrer wrote:

There is a tiny information hole here, and I'm not sure how to patch it. You don't know WHO exiled someone, so you don't know who to go to in order to protest. You just know that either you or someone above you did it. And the full information here is hard to provide, because it's complicated. You could be exiled by a long list of people, so we can't present that info on mouse-over.
I could make REDEEM pass downwards. So if a Baron exiles someone, the Count, Duke, or King above them can redeem them, overruling the Baron's exile. So you can always appeal to the supreme leader for help. Well.... actually, maybe not. I guess individual people's exile lists should be inalienable. Or.... maybe... submitting to a leader means you give up the sanctity of your own exile list? If that leader keeps overruling you and redeeming people, against your wishes, you can always stop following them, or convince your leaders to stop following them.

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?

Spoonwood wrote:

Though, I think it's also the working OHOL child that is most likely to get disturbed by such 'leadership'.

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?

StrongForce · 2019-12-12 17:17:57

So if you have a chain
Lord-baron-count

Then the baron is old and wants his folowers to keep following the count.

Does the lord need to follow the count to keep the chain or is it automatic?

Kinrany · 2019-12-12 17:20:00

StrongForce wrote:

Does the lord need to follow the count to keep the chain or is it automatic?

Automatic. The lord will start following the count and get all of the baron's exiles.

jasonrohrer · 2019-12-12 17:22:58

Legs wrote:

Spoonwood wrote:
How do assassins help build civilization again? Because I don't think they do. How do assassians help lineage survival chances? I don't see how they would.
Anarcho-communism is the ideal political structure for ohol. I will not allow useless dukes or barons to disturb the working man with their 'leadership.'
People should do what they want, not what they're told to. In the words of the update, "I follow myself."

This update has gotten me thinking about the nature of power, and the consolidation of power. Clearly, every society in history has witnessed the consolidation of power in some form. They may dress it up in bloodline monarchies, ruthless military dictators, communist parties, or the popular vote, but the end result is always the same. The question is: why? Why does this keep happening? Is it because people lust for power? Is it human nature?

We could also ask why every society values and protects women more then men, and sends men off to do the dangerous jobs (war, hunting, exploration, construction). Why do women get on the lifeboats first? The answer there lies in a simple fact of biological reality. If there was a society that didn't value and protect women, it's not around anymore, just like if there was a race of one-legged people, they're not around anymore. We have what we have because it's what works. Reality is filled with things that actually work.

I'm now convinced that the consolidation of power stems from a similar fact of reality.

When I told my 11-y-o about this new system today, he said, "It will never work, because everyone will want to be king, and no one will follow anyone. No one wants to be a follower."

In real life, though, we have one President. What makes him president, and not me, or not my wife? What if I said, "No, I'm president!" What's the difference between the real President and me? You could say "the vote," but the vote happened 3 years ago. Today, I say I'm President, and the vote is nullified. Why am I not actually President? Because 300M + people agree that the other guy is President, and 0 people agree that I'm president. My statement is meaningless without other people to back me up. And if I somehow got 300M people behind me, and they all said I was President today, the vote from three years ago would be irrelevant.

But starting from scratch, how do we get to that point? Everyone wants to be president, and no one's willing to follow anyone else. To paraphrase The Incredibles, "If everyone's President, then no one is."

So let's say we start with this kind of stand-off. 10 people all want to be king, and no one has any followers. Aren't they forever deadlocked? The system is broken, they can't share information about exilees (they each have their own personal exile lists, but they can't see other people's exiles, because they have no trust structure). Does life just go on like this forever?

Imagine two people who defect from the status quo. They get together and say, "Look, this isn't working, we can't share information, etc. Screw it, I follow you, you're my Lord" Suddenly, those two people have an advantage over the others. They can easily recognize each other (via badges), and they can share the leader's exile list. As additional people join them, their advantage grows, through network effects and logarithmic properties of the tree they're building. Three people sharing the same exile list is more efficient than two, and a chain of communication and organization can also form.

A dozen people yelling at one leader for attention, to maintain the global exile list, is inefficient. Much better to delegate. Have four Lords with one or two followers each, two Barons above the Lords, and one Count. This also makes the tree more robust against corruption and easier to change and repair as needed. A flat tree with one leader makes it VERY painful to change leaders. You have to get all 12 people to agree on the new leader together. But if a nicely structured tree needs to change the top leader, you just need to get a few people to agree. If you have a corrupt Count, you just need to get the two Barons to pick a new Count. Much easier to get 2 people to move together than 12.

As this little knot of organized people grows, it's advantages over the disorganized population grows. It becomes more efficient, more robust, more resilient in the face of corruption, and so on. Joining it, even for the most stubborn hold-out, becomes an obvious win.

So we can talk about a lust for power, or the inherent desire of some people to order other people around. But reality disagrees. Each person, acting alone, has roughly the same amount of power (the power of a single person). I can try to order other people around, but they have as much power to resist me as I have power to control them. I say, "Get over here," and they say, "No." And there we stand. And good luck trying to control multiple people as one person, acting alone.

The only way to achieve more power than one person is through a group of people, acting in concert. And a group of people, acting together, always happens through some sort of consensus. We can at least say that they allow themselves to be led by one person through consensus, always. Yes, membership in the group itself quickly becomes non-consensual (because the collected power of the group can easily squash the individual power of one defector who wants to leave the group). But it is always the group that is powerful, and not the individual leader. When the group changes their collective mind, the leader is gone (and usually dead) by lunchtime.

And that fact of reality has shaped every society throughout history. Groups of people, acting together, are incredibly powerful. The more people you have acting together, the more powerful they become.

You can try to ignore this fact of reality, and go your own way, and "do what you want," and ignore what you're told to do, but reality has different ideas, and at some point you're going to have 300M boots marching toward your door...

It's a scary thought, certainly.

It also seems to me that this reality has also been the eventual undoing of every society. A group of people can become twisted and irrational and self-destructive over time, yet still so powerful that nothing can stop it... not even the group itself.

But I do think that looking toward the leaders as the power-hungry sources of the problem is a mistake. Whenever we have cut off one head, historically, another one has quickly sprouted in its place, and for very good reasons.

StrongForce · 2019-12-12 17:32:32

Could you make a fence gate phrase
That allows you and the ones ranking higher than you to enter?
This way you can keep the valuable stuff only in reach of the most trusted players

Last edited by StrongForce (2019-12-12 17:33:04)

jasonrohrer · 2019-12-12 17:41:20

Yes, Kinrany, you're right.

When you follow one of your followers, that follower should be promoted above you, instead of you getting demoted below them. I'll switch the code to break loops that way. Like this:

Mary follows Steve. Steve becomes a Lord
Steve follows Jessica. Jessica becomes a Baroness.
Jessica follows Clint. Clint becomes a Count.
Clint follows Lisa. Lisa becomes a Duchess.
Lisa follows Grant. Grand becomes King.
Grant follows Mary. Mary stops following Steve, and if Steve has no other followers, then Mary becomes Queen. Lisa automatically stops following Grant, and Grant is no longer King. We then have Steve, Lady Jessica, Baron Clint, Countess Lisa, Duke Grant, and Queen Mary.
If Steve has other followers, we then have:
Lord Steve, Baroness Jessica, Count Clint, Duchess Lisa, King Grant, and Empress Mary.

One Hour One Life Forums

#26 2019-12-12 07:04:59

Re: Coming soon: voluntary leadership

#27 2019-12-12 07:45:03

Re: Coming soon: voluntary leadership

#28 2019-12-12 08:33:09

Re: Coming soon: voluntary leadership

#29 2019-12-12 08:34:33

Re: Coming soon: voluntary leadership

#30 2019-12-12 10:21:38

Re: Coming soon: voluntary leadership

#31 2019-12-12 10:59:14

Re: Coming soon: voluntary leadership

#32 2019-12-12 14:17:33

Re: Coming soon: voluntary leadership

#33 2019-12-12 15:01:44

Re: Coming soon: voluntary leadership

#34 2019-12-12 15:34:30

Re: Coming soon: voluntary leadership

#35 2019-12-12 15:53:13

Re: Coming soon: voluntary leadership

#36 2019-12-12 15:53:37

Re: Coming soon: voluntary leadership

#37 2019-12-12 15:57:08

Re: Coming soon: voluntary leadership

#38 2019-12-12 16:02:27

Re: Coming soon: voluntary leadership

#39 2019-12-12 16:12:36

Re: Coming soon: voluntary leadership

#40 2019-12-12 16:20:23

Re: Coming soon: voluntary leadership

#41 2019-12-12 16:24:27

Re: Coming soon: voluntary leadership

#42 2019-12-12 16:28:36

Re: Coming soon: voluntary leadership

#43 2019-12-12 16:35:20

Re: Coming soon: voluntary leadership

#44 2019-12-12 16:37:17

Re: Coming soon: voluntary leadership

#45 2019-12-12 17:16:52

Re: Coming soon: voluntary leadership

#46 2019-12-12 17:17:57

Re: Coming soon: voluntary leadership

#47 2019-12-12 17:20:00

Re: Coming soon: voluntary leadership

#48 2019-12-12 17:22:58

Re: Coming soon: voluntary leadership

#49 2019-12-12 17:32:32

Re: Coming soon: voluntary leadership

#50 2019-12-12 17:41:20

Re: Coming soon: voluntary leadership

Board footer