Wednesday, August 04, 2010

Proposal: CPU has issued the following corrections. Please update your history books to match.

Times out and fails 5-7. - lilomar

Adminned at 06 Aug 2010 06:49:10 UTC

If more than two EVCs to this proposal contain a FOR vote and the name of a section of this proposal, that section does nothing. For the purposes of the previous clause, EVCs which contain the names of every named section of this proposal are not EVCs.

PROMOTION:

Replace the last paragraph of “Information Clearance” with:-

If there is a way in which a pending Proposal could - if enacted - create, modify or repeal a Dynastic Rule whose Clearance Level is higher than the Clearance Level of the Citizen who submitted the Proposal, or Promote to or Demote from a Clearance Level that is higher than the Clearance Level of the Citizen who submitted the Proposal, then that Proposal is Treasonous.

TIMING_ISSUE:

In “Treason”, replace

Whenever a Citizen’s Clearance Level or Clone-Number changes, that Citizen’s Treason score is reset to zero.

with

Whenever a Citizen is Promoted, if their Treason Score is greater than 6, it is decremented by 6, if it is positive, but not greater than 6, it is set to 0. Whenever a Citizen dies, if their treason score is less than -6, it is incremented by 6, if it is negative, but not less than -6, it is set to 0.

TERMINATION:

In the last paragraph of “Treason”, replace

any Citizen with a higher Clearance Level may Terminate them

with

any Citizen or Officer with a higher Clearance Level may Terminate them

SUBRULE_DEFINED:

Add a definition to rule 3.1:-

Subrule: A Subrule is a Rule that is also a part of the Rule to which it is a Subrule. The Rule to which it is a Subrule is its Parent.

ENOUGH_SILLYNESS:

To the end of “Arrest Buttle! (Or was it Tuttle?)” add a paragraph:-

Any Accusation of a Citizen against themselves is a sign of mental instability. That citizen is terminated, awarded 5 Treason Points, and stripped of their membership in any and all groups to which they are a member. The accusation is then resolved.

 

Forcing partial-fails to be FOR overall. If you are AGAINST the proposal as a whole, vote AGAINST.

Comments

Kevan:

08-04-2010 14:48:39 UTC

Not sure I like Timing Issue (I like the fact that if you hit six, you may as well be hung for a sheep as a lamb, and can get away with more treason until someone actually catches you), and the Subrule definition seems unnecessarily oddly worded.

I obviously have no sort of mutant precognition powers to tell me what all the future votes are going to be, so against, at least for now.

lilomar:

08-04-2010 14:55:21 UTC

The reason Subrule is worded that way is so that when you do thing to a rule, it effects all of its subrules as well. (such as promoting, demoting, or repealing.

Also, creating a subrule is both creating a rule, and modifying the parent rule, which means that “Create a subrule of rule “Red_Rule_Name”” creates a RED rule, instead of an INFRARED rule that is somehow the child of a RED rule. (I think this is the definition we have been going on anyway, I just wanted to make it explicit.)

lilomar:

08-04-2010 14:56:11 UTC

Oh, put a ) after ‘repealing.’ in my last comment, otherwise it won’t compile. :P

Kyre:

08-04-2010 14:56:48 UTC

for TIMING_ISSUE. I agree with Kevan, I like the “starting from scratch” feel that the current rule has. Additionally, if someone finds out a scam to get a load of Commendation Points very easily, then they could shoot up to Ultraviolet instantly. Lastly, it doesn’t come into play if a citizen gets demoted, unlike what happens under current rules.

ais523:

08-04-2010 15:04:18 UTC

@Kyre: If someone has such a scam, then they could just repeat it until they shot up to Ultraviolet instantly; thus, all the timing issue fix would do in that case would be to make the blog less spammy when it happens.

ais523:

08-04-2010 15:06:37 UTC

(Incidentally, I reported the issue in question: it’s that if someone’s going to get a chunk of commendations for some reason, the current ruleset forces them to repeatedly check what’s happening to the GNDT, so as to be able to promote themselves the instant they get six, rather than wasting it on a late promotion due to getting the timing wrong relative to the High Programmer or whoever else is doing the commending. This is almost certainly undesirable; I spent many sleepless nights waiting for Galdyn to do his DICE roll last dynasty so I could jump in and kill him before he killed me if I succeeded, and it rather ruined my life.)

flurie:

08-04-2010 16:11:37 UTC

against

scshunt:

08-04-2010 18:31:46 UTC

for TIMING_ISSUE ENOUGH_SILLYNESS

Bucky:

08-04-2010 18:39:57 UTC

for  TIMING_ISSUE
SUBRULE_DEFINED


Explanation on TIMING_ISSUE: Per Kevan, an infinite commendation-gaining loop should only work until the Citizen in question passes the Clearance of the rule that allows it.
Explanation on SUBRULE_DEFINED: Subrules are not supposed to be part of their parent rules.  This matters if, for example, a proposal says “Change the contents of Rule 2.x to:”

spikebrennan:

08-04-2010 20:28:37 UTC

for SUBRULE_DEFINED

lilomar:

08-04-2010 20:30:33 UTC

[Bucky] I was afraid I would miss something like that.
EAV: for SUBRULE_DEFINED

Purplebeard:

08-04-2010 21:13:01 UTC

against not a fan of modular proposals.

flurie:

08-04-2010 21:50:46 UTC

CoV for

Keba:

08-04-2010 22:12:42 UTC

General against because of the idea to enact different things while voting for each point differently.

scshunt:

08-04-2010 22:20:21 UTC

CoV against per Keba

Ienpw III:

08-04-2010 23:49:06 UTC

against
*I* don’t want to admin this…

Darknight:

08-05-2010 00:06:37 UTC

against

ais523:

08-05-2010 12:47:30 UTC

against

lilomar:

08-05-2010 17:14:09 UTC

[Ienpw] I don’t mind admining it. (and it’s not that complicated)