Sunday, June 10, 2012

A huge mess

Just found a pretty serious bug that I think you should all know about so that you can fix. (I’m idle so can’t make a CFJ about it.)

Rule 2.2.8 says “Any non-Ruleset document on the Blognomic wiki that would qualify as gamestate under the final Ruleset of a dynasty before dynasty 100 may not be modified except by Proposal or CfJ.”
Rule 3.1 of dynasty 99 (a dynasty before dynasty 100) defines “Gamestate” as “Any information which the Ruleset regulates the alteration of”. But there’s no mapping from “ruleset” in dynasty 99 to “dynasty 99’s ruleset” in dynasty 100; rather, “ruleset” in dynasty 99 maps, by default, to “ruleset” in dynasty 100. Thus, the UTD is, by dynasty 99’s ruleset, gamestate; and as such, by dynasty 100’s rules, it may not be modified except by proposal or CFJ. Am I missing something here?

Comments

Bucky:

11-06-2012 02:46:32 UTC

if we were under dynasty 99’s Ruleset, it would not be gamestate.  Under a union of dynasty 99’s ruleset and dynasty 100’s dynastic rules, it would be gamestate, but that isn’t relevant for rule 2.2.8.

Josh: Observer he/they

11-06-2012 06:16:02 UTC

No-one should be subject to rule 3.1 of ruleset 99, as past dynastic rulesets are only applicable for their dynastic rules, not their core rules or glossaries.

ais523:

11-06-2012 07:23:12 UTC

@Josh: you’ve pointed out the bug. It’s nothing to do with being subject, but to do with a hypothetical, which refers to “the final Ruleset of a dynasty before dynasty 100”. Not “the final dynastic Ruleset”, or “the final Ruleset and gamestate”.