Ruleset 58 doesn’t apply to you, so its impossible for you to have achieved victory in it.

This will happen a lot.

Per Clucky.

at least until Bucky can be bothered to explain the reasoning behind his victory. He doesn’t occupy Ruleset 58 and “For the avoidance of doubt, victory in Dynasty 100 may not be achieved by means of any provision of any rule in the ruleset of any other Dynasty.”

[south] Voting DEF on a DoV is an abstention.

One has to occupy a Dynasty to win in it

It is historical fact that Bucky “has achieved victory in a past dynasty dynasty”, even though they are not currently subject to its dynastic rules. I’d be tempted to vote FOR this.

However, scam alert! “The Hard Rules” was improperly adminned; the rules it introduces were therefore not in effect at the time of this DoV’s posting and, as far as the rules are concerned, this is treated as a ‘regular’ DoV.

Also, I guess we are now in hiatus.

Oh, wait, this isn’t a Dynasty 100 DoV, it’s a Dynasty 58 DoV (which “does not cause a hiatus to begin and does not imply or confer a state of victory in Dynasty 100”)? This is going to get confusing.

[Purplebeard] I think the adminning is legal - it just means that we’ve paused in the gap between the ruleset being updated and the proposal being set to “enacted”. We can’t go ahead and process the next-oldest proposal until Bucky (or any admin?) flags the proposal, but the ruleset update is legal.

Incidentally, I don’t think I can see anything that stops “When a DoV is enacted, all other active DoVs are failed, and a new Dynasty begins with the Time Monk who made the DoV as its Time Buddha.” from triggering. We have that “A Declaration of Victory made on this basis does not cause a hiatus to begin and does not imply or confer a state of victory in Dynasty 100.”, but “state of victory” is vague enough that I don’t think it’d prevent a new Dynasty from beginning.

But we also have “For the avoidance of doubt, victory in Dynasty 100 may not be achieved by means of any provision of any rule in the ruleset of any other Dynasty.” “Victory may not be achieved” doesn’t seem unambiguous.

Rule 1.7 would just register that a DoV had been enacted (without caring whether it was a Dynasty 100 DoV, or a Dynasty 58 one), and start a new dynasty. Bucky wouldn’t have achieved victory in Dynasty 100, but he wouldn’t have had to.

Clarification: this is intended to be a Dynasty 58 DoV.  I was subject to the Dynasty 58 rules when I achieved victory.

[Bucky] Actually, good point - we have, I think, no way of knowing whether a DoV is for a particular dynasty, or for Dynasty 100, other than the declaring player’s (non-binding) word.

I don’t accept that the adminning was legal, because a game action (making this DoV) was performed by Bucky, the enacting admin, before the enactment was completed.

If we have a rule that says I can spend X gold to buy X cows, would you allow me to spend my gold, perform a multitude of other actions, some of which may depend on my gold/cows statistics, and THEN collect my cows and drink their delicious milk (or even wait several weeks before claiming my bovine beauties at an opportune moment)? No, you’d have me complete my action before doing anything else.

Allowing actions such like this one would open us up to all kinds of legal issues. In this case, the enactment of a proposal is illegal during hiatus, so do we place the ‘time of enactment’ before the posting of this DoV (in which case the enactment was legal) or after it (in which case it wasn’t)?

Given Bucky has tried the whole “Guess what? That CfJ I posted was actually a DoV! Lolol I win” thing before, he is probably going to argue that this lets him win if this thing passes.

[Purplebeard] I wouldn’t let you take other actions halfway through “spend X gold to buy X cows”, but I might let you on “spend X gold then gain X cows”.

Perhaps past DoVs should be required to begin with “[XX] “, where XX is the dynasty number? In the Fourth Metadynasty (or, as I still prefer to call it, the First Metadynasty of Rodlen), when the game was split in three, official posts in each faction were marked like this.

I suggest that everyone refrain from further voting on this until http://blognomic.com/archive/ambiguous_dov/ has been resolved.

Kevan: good point on the wording, of course. Still, I’ve always operated under the assumption that all game actions should be treated as instantaneous actions unless expressly specified otherwise, but I realise that this is not the only possible interpretation.