Re: [CAT23-Ngame] EOG Politics

> > >
> > > --- squirelibbymcafee <diplomacy@l...>
> > > wrote:
> > > > Should an EOG proposal be considered a tool for
> > > > conducting diplomacy?
> > > >
> > > > Libby
> > > >
> > > > wnrytyrsd
> > > >

Hm. I actually can read this question in two ways(a few actually, 
but I'll keep it relatively short:).
One being, is that the question is asking is it "OK" or "ethical" 
to 'allow' EOG to be used as a Dip 'tool'. In which case, from the 
GMs point of view, it boils down to those things you just have to 
accept as not being able to change. OR, if you suspect someone of 
attempting to influence the game with an EOG statement, then you 
have to ask yourself how far you'll let a particular farce go. If 
you truly have strong feelings against delaying games due to ad 
nauseum proposals, then I suggest a strategem similar to the "accept 
all proposals, but allow voting only at the deadline, and everyone 
must still submit orders" plan.


The other question I can see this asking, (in light of the 1104 
debacle), is how to distinguish the difference between an actual 
proposal for an EOG, versus someones desperate gamble to influence 
or motivate through 'shock'. Of which I imagine the implications 
could be handled and harangued over through GM HRs. But, again, a 
totally different debate.

How far off the mark am I this time?
Libby?
:)
David