Until a time when they can be used the right way again

  Explicit author for.

By the way, I’m technically not the Mad King of the DDA/F/B/O/C. I’m the Ultimate Mad King of the DDA/F/B/O/C.

Who knows how to disable it?

Wak does, he’s put it in timeout a few times.

Oddly enough I think he’s the only one who know.

No, 75th also knows. He told me how, but I can’t remember.

Ah.

You are no member of the DDA/F, fool.

That’s because it’s the DDB now.

You were never a member.

You attempted to take my position.

*kills Darth Cliche.  Quickly.*

*catches the bullet and throws it back at you, like Vader did with Han Solo’s blaster bolt in Episode V*

I never said I shot you, fool.

Well fine. However you killed me, I evaded it using the Stereotypical Side of the Force. I then killed you with a friggin’ lightsaber.

Already voted for this once.

but not in this thread.

Thread?

...

This is BlogNomic, not ForumNomic.

Threads are only in fora.

3 more for quorum.

Sorry DC. Habit.

‘salright.

Can’t vote def on CfJ.

There is nothing wrong with CfJ, there is something wrong with spammers. Although I have never used anonymous CfJ, I have thought of many instances where I might need to use them. Please, just don’t abuse the rules.

No.  Do not use CfJs as extra proposal slots.

Per Qwazukee, Anony CfJ has a very valid reasoning, provide another means of combating spam.

Also, this seems like it should be a proposal.

CfJs can be raised “if a Member of the Staff feels that an aspect of the game needs urgent attention”, which seems fair enough here.

What’s the valid reasoning for keeping the anonymous CfJs? All we’ve had so far is:-

* Sometimes you might want to fix a problem that’s hurting you without betraying a secret identity (such as a purely werewolf-favouring fix during the Werewolf dynasty). But you can also do this by asking the Emperor to submit a CfJ on your behalf, by arguing your case well or by some sneaky social engineering.

* Sometimes you might want to pull some sort of CfJ scam that lets you win, but if it has your name on it people might work out what you’re up to. But being able to pull off a particular type of scam is not a fundamental right of Nomic players.

Hey Qwazukee! You’ve said before that “it’s a bad idea to disagree with someone who has five dynasties named after them”.

By your own logic, you should CoV and get this to quorum.

Kevan himself has posited that it may be a trap to earn a 6th dynasty. E’s wilier than a roadrunner, e is.

Scamming is a fundamental right of Blognomic players! Else we’d never have fun.

Absolutely! But scamming using an anonymous CfJ isn’t a fundamental right (and it’s only actually happened once), and it’s clear that having this mechanic in the ruleset is causing unrelated problems.

It’s sad that it has to come to this.

In any case, this should be a proposal.

So, my reasoning would be that you want to present a fix of the rules that could cause a disadvantage to other players without causing undue hurt between players.

Preventing someone from winning comes to mind as an action that can cause animosity between players for no reason other than it having happened 4 dynasties back.

Or, put another way, I don’t want to look like a jerk when I post an unpopular but ultimately important CfJ. Amnistar is correct, although I wasn’t around 4 dynasties ago to know what happened then.

CoV to a legal vote.

I think CfJ needs to go. It hurts no one to be brave and just post the issue directly, under your own name.

However, Kevan raises a good point, a Player can ask the Emperor to raise the issue on his behalf. I think we can work with that.

1 more…

I actually have never revealed this before, but I had someone who had agreed to help me.  I could have just as easily asked him to post the CfJ if the anonymous moniker wasn’t there.

...who was he?