Tuesday, March 19, 2024

Proposal: b-b-b-b-bonus

In “Scoring” after “Each Seeker has a Development Interval, which is a publicly tracked number that defaults to 5” add “which is at least 2”

Add the following to “Scoring”

Each Seeker has a Development Bonus which is publicly tracked and defaults to 0. Whenever a Seeker posts a Snap, they gain a number of Points equal to three times their Development Bonus.

In “Upgrades” replace “When an Upgrade Request is enacted, the Development Interval of its poster is reduced by 1, to a minimum of 1, unless the same Seeker has already had a Upgrade Request enacted for the same Upgrade Benchmark previously in the dynasty, in which case their development interval is not reduced” with

When an Upgrade Request is enacted, the Development Interval of its poster is reduced by 1 (if it is three or higher) or their Development Bonus is increased by one (if their Development Interval is already 2), unless the same Seeker has already had a Upgrade Request enacted for the same Upgrade Benchmark previously in the dynasty, in which case their development interval is not reduced and their development bonus is not increased

The game speeding up to being one post per day feels excessive. This rewards doing upgrades past the first three, while limiting the pace of the dynasty a bit.

Proposal: monomethyl-p-aminophenol hemisulfate

Reached Quorum, 5-0. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 19 Mar 2024 04:43:33 UTC

Add the following as new Upgrade Benchmarks:

* A Snap on which, after 48 hours, every Private Criteria claimed by another Seeker was Unsatisfied
* A Snap which meets every Public Criteria
* A Snap which includes a found instance of the BlogNomic username of another Seeker

Add the following as Public Criteria in the rule Criteria:

* A Snap which includes a specific named entity that had its own Wikipedia page at Mon 18/03/24—09:00 UTC
* A Snap in which at least one article of clothing worn by the posting Seeker at the time that the Snap was taken is visible
* A Snap that contains a message to the viewer

Another try at this, as the 5 day limit is starting to chafe

Sunday, March 17, 2024

Story Post: Snap 009: Night at the Minibus Stop


Current Trite: sky, pole


Editing Disclaimer: This is a screen capture of a photo, because iPhone shenanigans

Story Post: Snap 008: Postbox

The Trite is currently “sky, pole”.

Wandered too close to the woods

Brendan idles after 7 days of inactivity. Quorum drops to 4.

Story Post: Snap 007 - Monsters in the Back Yard

Editing Disclaimer: I used the brightness, sharpness, and exposure tools on my phone on this photo to try to make the piece of paper with my username and word-of-the-day more clear. It also wound up producing some weird light squiggle artifacts. The result isn’t great, but should still be legible. I am definitely not a professional.

The Trite is: sky, pole

Saturday, March 16, 2024

Proposal: Risk It For the Biscuit

Timed out, 4-0. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 18 Mar 2024 23:37:06 UTC

Add the following to “Criteria”

A Private Criteria’s Exposure is equal to its Unsatisfying Score plus its Satisfying Score

The date and time (to nearest minute) a given Private Criteria was last changed should be tracked on the Gamestate tracking page in a column called “last modified”

in “Guesses” replace

reduce their own Score by 3, and increase the score of the Guesser by 3

with

reduce their own Score by the Exposure of that private criteria, and increase the score of the Guesser by the same amount, and then remove that Private Criteria from the Target’s private criteria list (resetting its satisfying and unsatisfying counts to zero in the process)

The more examples you give of your private criteria in action, the more points you can get from it but also the easier it becomes for someone else to guess. So I like the idea of adding more risk to keeping the criteria for a long time.

Bubbling last modified time up to make it less annoying for people to isolate guesses

Friday, March 15, 2024

Proposal: Everybody Move In A Bit [Building Blocks]

Vetoed by the Observer. Failed by Kevan.

Adminned at 17 Mar 2024 17:47:35 UTC

Remove “Low-Player Mode” from the Building Blocks section of the ruleset.

To the “Everyone’s Playing” Building Block, in both the ruleset and the Building Blocks page, add:-

The Observer is not excluded from the count of Seekers in the Dormancy rule.

Turning off Low-Player Mode, with six active players. Seems like a Playing Observer should also be part of the head count for Dormancy.

Paralyzed by the beauty

I would like to idle

Proposal: Patron of the Arts

Timed out 2 votes to 2. Failed by Kevan.

Adminned at 17 Mar 2024 17:46:50 UTC

Add a new rule named “Commissions” with the following text:

Each Seeker has a publicly-tracked Commission, defaulting to empty, and which can be either empty or a combination of a Commission Criteria, which is a phrase of 1 to 10 English words, and a non-negative integer contained in () brackets named the Commission Price. If it has been more than 48 hours since a Seeker has changed any part of their Commission, or if their Commission is empty, that Seeker may spend any positive amount of Score, up to the amount of Score that they have, to perform a Recommission, which is one of the following actions:
* That Seeker may change their Commission from empty to a Commission Criteria and Commission Price, where the Commission Price must be the same as the amount of Score they spent.
* That Seeker may change their existing Commission Criteria to a different Commission Criteria, where the Commission Price must be the same as the amount of Score they spent.
* That Seeker, if they have a non-empty Commission, may increase their Commission Price by the amount of Score they spent as long as they don’t change their Commission Criteria.

Additionally, if it has been more than 48 hours since a Seeker has changed any part of their Commission, they may set their Commission to empty.

In the rule “Scoring”, at the end of the rule add the following text:

Additionally, within 48 hours of such a Shot having been posted, the poster of that Shot may at most once respond to it with the comment that they are claiming a Commission. Such a claim must include the name of the Seeker whose Commission is being claimed, that Seeker’s Commission Criteria, and that Seeker’s Commission Price. If that Shot meets the Commission Criteria mentioned in this claim, and the Seeker who owns that Commission is not the same Seeker as the poster of that Shot, then the poster of that Shot may increase their Score by the Commission Price mentioned in this claim.

 

This allows a Seeker to incentivize other Seekers to include or exclude certain things in their photos. The Seekers who do so gain Score, and the Seeker who posted the Commission can use this to increase their Satisfying or Unsatisfying counts, which could pay off in better scoring in the long run for the Seeker who posted the Commission.

Proposal: Catching up with the photos

Enacted 4-0 by Chiiika

Adminned at 17 Mar 2024 06:39:17 UTC

Enacts a new rule, “Catching Up with the Photos”, with the following text

While a Seeker has exactly 0 Score and has more than one Private Criteria having a non-null value, a Seeker may perform the following Atomic Action once per week:
- For the previous three Shots in chronological order, perform the following bullet points:
- - Respond to the Shot stating which of their own Private Criteria that Shot satisfies and does not satisfy.
- - For each Private Criteria in the response that the Shot satisfies, that Private Criteria’s satisfying count is incremented by one, and increment their Score by that Private Criteria’s unsatisfying count.
- - For each Private Criteria in the response that the Shot does not satisfies, that Private Criteria’s satisfying count is incremented by one, and increment their Score by that Private Criteria’s satisfying count.

Photographer Chiiika

This seems a noice dynasty. I unidle myself, Quorum stays at 5.

Proposal: Shot Diversification

Enacted by Chiiika, 5-0.

Adminned at 16 Mar 2024 11:25:58 UTC

In “Upgrades” after “When an Upgrade Request is enacted, the Development Interval of its poster is reduced by 1, to a minimum of 1”

, unless the same Seeker has already had a Upgrade Request enacted for the same Upgrade Benchmark previously in the dynasty, in which case their development interval is not reduced. (Which Upgrade Benchmarks have been enacted for which seekers should be tracked on the gamestate tracking page for easy reference)

 

Scoring the same benchmark multiple times feels boring

Proposal: Order Up!

Enacted 6-0 by Chiiika.

Adminned at 16 Mar 2024 11:24:13 UTC

In Scoring after “provided that none of their Private Criteria has been changed since that Shot was posted” add

and provided that there are no other Shots that were posted before the shot in question, within the last 48 hours, and which the Seeker in question has not already responded to in this manner

 

Waiting for other shots to be posted in order to try and optimize your satisfying/unsatisfying scores is currently an optimal strategy, especially if https://blognomic.com/archive/supersaturation passes, but it’s behavior I’d rather not encourage. Intent of this is to make you respond to all snaps in order.

Thursday, March 14, 2024

Proposal: Quite Trite

Enacted 5-0 by Chiiika.

Adminned at 16 Mar 2024 11:20:07 UTC

In the rule “Scoring”, in the bulleted list after the text “Upon doing so:”, add this as the first bullet point in that list:

* For each Private Criteria in the response that contains any of the nouns listed in the Trite mentioned in that Shot post, that Private Criteria cannot be used to increment any Seeker’s Score for that shot, and the remaining bullet points in this list must be ignored with regard to that Private Criteria.

I still think the Trite list has its place.

Proposal: Diptych

Timed out and failed by Chiiika, 2-3.

Adminned at 16 Mar 2024 11:16:54 UTC

Add the following as a third bullet point to the list in the rule Scoring:

* Increment the Score of the poster of the Shot being responded to by the amount the owner’s Score was incremented by as a result of this Action.

Rename the rule Editing Disclaimer to “Editing Rules” and rewrite it as follows:

Any Snap must include a description of any edits or changes made to the photograph prior to it being made a Shot, with a lack of such a description indicating that no editing was done. Major edits to a photo that substantially change its appearance, composition or content are not permitted, but minor adjustments to photos are acceptable. These include cropping, dodging and burning, conversion into grayscale, elimination of dust on camera sensors and scratches on scanned negatives or scanned prints and normal toning and color adjustments. These should be limited to those minimally necessary for clear and accurate reproduction and that accentuate the authentic nature of the photograph. Changes in density, contrast, color and saturation levels that substantially alter the original scene are not acceptable. Elements may not be added to a picture under any circumstances. The use of AI tools to modify a picture is prohibited.

Two unrelated changes. The first change restores sniping the criteria of other players. The second borrows from the AP guidelines on photojournalism, and may be a little too restrictive as a staring point but is intended to ensure that the photo itself retains primacy over any editing that may take place.

Story Post: Snap 006: Sleepless in Seattle

The current trike is sky

Wednesday, March 13, 2024

Proposal: Supersaturation

Reached quorum 6 votes to 0 with 1 unresolved Imperial DEF. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 15 Mar 2024 11:55:28 UTC

If “A Private Criteria is considered Saturated if its satisfying count plus its unsatisfying count is greater than or equal to seven or the number of seekers, whichever is greater” exists in the ruleset, replace it with:-

A Private Criteria is considered Saturated if its satisfying count or its unsatisfying count is greater than or equal to five (or half the number of seekers, whichever is greater)

Might be more interesting to have Saturation happen at the extremes, rather than always at a neutral 7-photo timeout (the total of the two counts will always go up by 1 per photo scored).

Proposal: Delocalisation

Timed out 3 votes to 3. Failed by Kevan.

Adminned at 15 Mar 2024 11:54:14 UTC

In the rule Upgrades, add the following to the end of the first Upgrade Benchmark:

(other than the Observer)

Add the following as new Upgrade Benchmarks:

* A Snap that includes at least one building that appeared as a Wonder in the base game or officially released expansions to Civilization 6 (each Wonder may only be claimed as an Upgrade Benchmark once by each Seeker)
* A Snap which for which, after 48 hours, the poster has generated no Score
* A Snap in which includes two or more of the following geological features: a mountain, a waterfall, a glacier, a lake, a volcano, a canyon, gorge or ravine, a sand dune, or the sea

Removing the London advantage, and adding some new Upgrade mechanisms.

List of Civ 6 Wonders: https://civilization.fandom.com/wiki/List_of_wonders_in_Civ6

Proposal: Daily actions are not very fun

Quorum Reached. Passes 5-0—Clucky

Adminned at 15 Mar 2024 05:09:54 UTC

In “Scoring” replace “Within 24 hours” with “Within 48 hours”

Feel like we long ago established that actions that required daily activity weren’t great for the game

Wednesday, March 13, 2024

Proposal: Runaway games are no fun

Timed out. Passes 5-0—Clucky

Adminned at 15 Mar 2024 05:06:27 UTC

Add the following to Criteria

A Private Criteria is considered Saturated if its satisfying count plus its unsatisfying count is greater than or equal to seven or the number of seekers, whichever is greater

In Scoring, whenever it appears replace

For each Private Criteria

with

For each non-Saturated Private Criteria

The current rules seem rather poorly setup people joining late. Basically mean if you fall behind at all, you’re kinda screwed as the players who grind can easily get to the point where in a few rounds they are scoring 5+ points criteria round per post and you’re still always a few behind and fall further and further behind each post. Zaps any motivation out of actually participating in the dynasty because its simply rewarding whoever is the most active and so can build up the highest point totals. This still lets you score more points from having a mix of satisfying/unsatisfying claims but prevents the game from being a total runaway because eventually you have to restart