Re: Re: New Press Variant?

Oh, and as for renaming it, yeah, HAMMER_PRESS was kinda a joke name with
the reference to that "Can't Touch This" song from -- what? -- wow, almost
20 years ago now?  I'll entertain ideas for the new name; NO_NEIGHBOR is
good, just a bit long (but might be the shortest we can do).

Manus

On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 8:55 AM, Manus Hand <[email protected]> wrote:

> Okay, based on this discussion, what I have done (and it looks like TOUCH_
> is also coded this way too) is make it so that broadcasts are FORBIDDEN by
> default in HAMMER_PRESS, unless the GM also adds RULE PUBLIC_PRESS, which
> will then allow them.
>
> I did like the idea of a GM adding YELLOW_PRESS too (so that all broadcasts
> are sent anonymously), or, of course, allowing FAKE_PRESS would be fun.
> [Hmm....this brings me to something I should check into -- if FAKE_PRESS is
> on, does it (because it should) properly limit who you can pretend to be to
> only those people who can talk to the addressees?  I bet I will need to do
> some coding to make FAKE_PRESS work in this way with TOUCH_ and HAMMER_].
>
> With broadcasts forbidden, I think the cryptographic key problem is at
> least a little bit resolved, because I don't know about you, but I'm not
> going to forward a message from one power to another without me being able
> to read it along the way -- I don't care how close a trio we might be, if I
> get something in code from one player and asked to forward it to another,
> I'm just going to hit Delete, and anyone who doesn't deserves what he's
> probably gonna get.
>
> Manus
>
>   On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 7:02 AM, Nick Nimchuk <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>> Personally, I would establish a cryptographic key in private press, and
>> then use that to broadcast encoded messages or send them through a third
>> party.  Or, in the second case, at least an encrypted signature that could
>> guarantee that the message wasn't... massaged... in transit.
>>
>> -Nick
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 2:09 AM, Millis Miller <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 27 Jan 2009 17:58:26 -0700, Manus Hand wrote
>>> > Mike brings up a good point -- if I were Russia, I would use the one
>>> > turn I had with Turkey to establish a code only we two knew, and then
>>> > when communication was shut between us, use BROADCAST to communicate.
>>> > HAMMER_ (and TOUCH_) probably should forbid broadcast press, huh?
>>> >
>>> > Manus
>>> >
>>> Not necessarily: no reason why Broadcast press shouldn't always work and
>>> partial press only restricted by default but, if you wanted, you could
>>> turn
>>> off broadcast press too as a separate option.
>>>
>>> It does sound an interesting option indeed to play a game with - just not
>>> sure
>>> that the name is so good, maybe something like NO_NEIGHBOUR_PRESS
>>> describes it
>>> better as a flag name?
>>>
>>> BR,
>>> Millis
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Open WebMail Project (http://openwebmail.org)
>>> Debian Project (http://www.debian.org)
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------
>>>
>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> 
>>
>
>