Sorry about that. 

Would be fairer on future players (and would keep the GNDT values more cleanly positive and negative) if we just deducted Excalabur’s points.

Although what Kevan says it true, to keep this less spammy, I vote

          /me needs points.

I’d rather only those who could be bothered in some way got points, like people who voted on this prop. 

I probably should have saved the exploit for just before the fix passed, but oh well.

While I do somewhat agree with Kevan, we all had an opportunity to gain those points, and future unidlers didn’t; while deduction is somewhat fairer, this way is truer to the rules that we passed. Plus it would be nice to give everyone a bit of a points transfusion; it might mean that some high-point-cost functions can be proposed and used.

BTW, I was thinking of doing a proposal to increase everyones points by 20 in order to allow everybody a shot at the costed actions, so even without the “scam” I think this proposal is a good idea.

Note also that it’s not clear that you can nominate everyone again (except me, since I can’t nominate myself): in conventional usage a person can only be nominated for a post once.

CoV

CoV

Incidentally, my CoV is not because I think this is a bad proposal, but to hold up the queue for strategic reasons.

CoV

Currently 9-6, I think.

7-7

It is now no longer possible to claim points for nominations anyway.

This rush of CoVs is confusing. If there’s a good reason for this to fail I will s/k it…?

A proposal just passed that set a cap of 30 on the maximum Points you can get in a day.  I have proposed a fix (which among other things would retroactively allow this proposal to ignore the cap), but several of us are trying to delay this passing to simplify accounting.

Doesn’t that rely on the complicity of michievous admins, like Excalabur, who could now fail this (as it’s a 7-7 tie) and thus profit?