Friday, January 17, 2025

Proposal: Rules Are Made To Be Broken

If Less Security was enacted, this does nothing. Otherwise:

In the rule The Vault {I}, in the bullet pointed list, replace “dynastic gamestate” with “non-mutable dynastic gamestate”.

As a subrule of “The Vault {I}”, add a rule “Mutable Gamestate {I}”:

Dynastic gamestate is said to be mutable if at least one of the following is true:
* The dynastic gamestate or variable is declared in an immutable rule as being mutable
* The dynastic gamestate or variable is solely defined by a mutable rule
* It is a publicly tracked dynastic variable that ceased to have a definition or became orphaned
** In this case, that variable is publicly tracked and continues to retain the last value legally applied to it, or a default if none exists

Call for Judgment: Fixing form for wiki misinterpretation

If the CFJ “Form and Formatability” is still pending, fail it.

Amend “The Bank {M}” to read as follows:

^^^All text in this rule, other than this sentence and its punctuation, are flavour text, and are additionally considered to be valid English words.$$$

Amend “Bolted to the Ground {M}” to read as follows:

^^^Any attempt by a Heist Action to modify protected text instead does nothing. Text is protected if it appears between a matching caret (^) and dollar sign ($) when carets and dollar signs are matched in the same way that opening and closed parentheses usually are (with a caret acting like an opening parenthesis and a dollar sign acting like a closing parenthesis).$$$

Carets and dollar signs can be matched only within a single rule, not between rules.

Change all { in the dynastic ruleset to ^, and all } in the dynastic ruleset to $, except where a) they are part of an {I} or {M}, or b) they are being used as MediaWiki template markup rather than as part of the text of a rule.

In “Tools of the Trade {M}”, change “curly brackets” (or whatever sequence of characters “curly brackets” was edited into via dynastic actions, if it is not present) to “dollar signs, carets”.

 

MediaWiki has unexpectedly started mis-rendering part of the ruleset due to misinterpreting {{…}} as wikimarkup. In order to prevent this becoming a recurring problem, change the characters used to something that it doesn’t treat as special. This specific choice was suggested by JonathanDark as being easy to type and not being likely to be used in rule text otherwise.

The two existing cases which are arguably/potentially template markup are explicitly replaced by this CFJ, in order to prevent there being any dispute about the resulting form of the rule.

Proposal: Less Security

If the text “directly amend or modify the ruleset or dynastic gamestate through means other than defining or successfully performing a Heist Action” appears in the Ruleset, then replace it with:

directly amend or modify the ruleset or dynastic gamestate through means other than defining or successfully performing a Heist Action or Free Action

If the text “A Participant may set their Guess to any EFF Word at any time” appears in the Ruleset, then replace it with:

A Participant may set their Guess to any EFF Word at any time as a Free Action

If the text “revert the effect of one Heist Action performed by a Participant” appears in the Ruleset, then replace it with:

revert the effect of one Heist Action or any number of Free Actions performed by a Participant

Call for Judgment: Form and Formatability

The rule The Bank {M} includes text in a double curly brace (”{{"). Mediawiki interprets this as meaning that a template is being called, and renders it as having no curly braces at all, substantially changing its meaning.

This matter can't be simply corrected as it does not meet the criterion for permitted changes to be made set out in Spelling and Formatting:

A Participant may change the layout or design of a gamestate wiki page if doing so would not change how any rules interpreted its content.

There's a lot about this that's outside the scope of this CfJ; whether we move away from the curly brace as a signifier or just mitigate the issue when it arises is one question; another is the broader question of whether we should allow proposals that include raw mediawiki formatting to have that formatting take effect when copy-pasted into the wiki. I'll leave those for future proposals to address.

For now: revert any changes made to the rule The Bank {M} since it was enacted, and then add the following tags around its content, removing the spaces:

< nowiki >

< /nowiki >

Proposal: Hostile Takeovers

Add a subrule to “Teams and Targets {I}” named “Attacks {M}” with the following text:

A non-Mastermind Participant may, as a Heist Action, perform an Attack as an atomic action with the following steps:

* Select a non-Mastermind Participant other than yourself, called the Victim.
* When making the roll in the Dice Roller as part of the Heist Action, include the name of the Victim in the comment for that roll.
* Make a blog post with the Story category where the title is “X attacks Y”, X is your player name, and Y is the player name of the Victim. This post is known as the Threat, and you are considered the Attacker in that Threat.

A Participant may not be selected as the Victim of a Threat if they are the Victim in another Threat that was posted less than 96 hours ago.

If a Participant is the Victim in a Threat, and that Threat has been posted within the last 48 hours, that Participant may, as a Heist Action, perform a Defense in that Threat. A Defense is an atomic action with the following steps:

* When making the roll in the Dice Roller as part of the Heist Action, include the name of the Attacker in the comment for that roll.
* Post a comment in that Threat containing the text “I defend myself”.

A Takeover is the following atomic action:
* The Attacker in a Threat swaps their Target with the Target of that Threat’s Victim.
* The Attacker in a Threat posts to that Threat with a comment containing the text “Attack successful”

Once an Attacker has performed a Takeover, the Threat in which that Takeover was performed is no longer considered a Threat.

As a Heist Action, the Attacker in a Threat may perform a Takeover for a Threat if all of the following are true:

* It has been more than 48 hours since that Threat was posted.
* The Victim in that Threat has not performed a successful Defense since that Threat was posted.
* That Attacker has not performed a Takeover for that Threat.

A bit of the old ultraviolence.

Proposal: No Silent Scoring

Add the following to the end of the rule Teams and Targets {I}:

Whenever a Participant changes the Triumphs of any Participant they should make an entry to the blog detailing the change and the basis upon which it was made.

Call for Judgment: Starting to build up a corpus of case law

The Rebuilt Team has scored. JonathanDark first changed ‘result’ into ‘rebult’ in the rule The Crew, and then used the typo correction provision of Spelling and Formating to correct Rebult to Rebuilt.

Said provision reads:

Participants may correct obvious spelling, punctuation, typographical, and/or formatting mistakes in the Ruleset, the Building Blocks page, and their own Pending Votable Matters at any time, including replacing Spivak and gender-specific pronouns that refer to Participants with the corresponding forms of the singular ‘they’.

This CfJ asserts that ‘rebult’ is not an obvious typo for ‘rebuilt’ (it could equally validly be ‘rebut’ or ‘revolt’ or ‘rebel’ or, indeed, ‘result’, the word from which it was derived), and for a spelling mistake to qualify as a mistake it has to have been unintentional; crafting one deliberately may or may not be an appendix scam but either way it probably isn’t properly a mistake. Therefore, revert the change made in this wiki edit and revert any Triumph gains awarded on the basis of the term ‘rebuilt’ having appeared in the ruleset, and reinstate each Participant’s Target as of this wiki edit.

Proposal: All Criminals Need Good Paperwork

Rename Timing {I} to Heists {I} and move the following rules to be subrules of it:
Tools of the Trade {M}
Oversight {M}
Identity Theft {M}

Move the following rule to be a subrule of The Vault {I}:
Bolted to the Ground {M}

Move the following rule to be a subrule of Definitions {I} if it exists, or Teams and Targets {I} otherwise:
EFF Words {I}

Move The Bank{M} to be a subrule of The Crew {M}.

Move Definitions {I}, if it exists, to be the first dynastic rule.
Move The Vault {I} with its subrule(s) to be directly before Heists {I}
Move Roles {I} with its subrule(s) to be directly after Heists{I}

The rules are feeling a little cluttered so I’m thinking we house some related rules together.

Proposal: Balancing Act

Add a subrule to “Teams and Targets {I}” named “Rebalancing {M}” with the following text:

Rebalance is an atomic action with the following steps:

* Choose a word at least five alphabetic letters in length that appears in three different Mutable rules as the Source Word, with the Mutable rules selected as the Source Rules.
* Choose a word at least five alphabetic letters in length that is not the same as the Source Word selected from the previous step and that appears in three different Mutable rules, where none of those rules are the same as the Source Rules selected in the previous step, as the Target Word and those rules selected as the Target Rules.
* In each Target Rule, swap one instance of the Target Word with one instance of the Source Word from any one of the Source Rules selected in this instance of this action.
* Swap the Targets of two non-Mastermind Participants if those Participants have non-empty Targets.

A Mastermind may, as a Heist Action, perform a Rebalance, indicating the Participants selected in that Rebalance in the comments of the Dice Roller for that Heist Action.

Throwing a little shenanigans into the mix. No honor among thieves.

Proposal: Mean What You Say

Add a new subrule titled “There are no accidents” immediately after the subrule “Spelling and formatting” of the Appendix rule “Clarifications”:

In this dynasty, Participants may not modify the ruleset using a provision in the rule “Spelling and formatting”. If a Dynastic Reset has been performed after the subrule “There are no accidents” was added to the ruleset, any Participant may repeal the subrule “There are no accidents”.

A ban on typo correction, in case someone wants to creatively use it on all the poorly-formed words that are bound to appear soon enough. It needs to be in the appendix since the appendix takes precedence over all other rules.

Proposal: All The Time In The World

Append the following Role to the list of Roles in “The Crew {M}”:

Watchmaker is a Role. As a Heist Action, the Watchmaker may steal time by removing any instance of a word in the ruleset which is a physical invention for keeping time. {{Immediately after a Watchmaker successfully steals time, they must make a Story Post to the blog titled "Time Theft" saying that they've done so. For the hour afterwards, no Participant outside of that Watchmaker's team may take any dynastic actions.}}

A straight reproposal of the Watchmaker now that I have a slot open, including SB’s suggestion that it should involve a blog post to make it even more visible.

Proposal: Masterminds and Moneymakers

Reached quorum, 5-0 with 1 DEF and both Masterminds voting FOR. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 17 Jan 2025 21:11:55 UTC

In the rule The Crew {M}, replace all instances of the word Banker with Treasurer.

In the rule Teams and Targets {I}, replace “If a Participant (Participant A) ever does not have a Target, any Participant (Participant B) can set Participant A’s Target to a randomly selected Mastermind’s Target, specifying who Participant A is when making that selection.”
with

If a non-Mastermind Participant (Participant A) ever does not have a Target, any Participant (Participant B) can set Participant A’s Target to a randomly selected Mastermind’s Target, specifying who Participant A is when making that selection.

If a Mastermind ever does not have a Target, or if their Target is the same as any other Mastermind, any Participant may set that Mastermind’s Target to a random EFF Word, specifying which Mastermind it is when making that random selection.

A couple of fixes I’ve promised

Thursday, January 16, 2025

Proposal: Given an Inch

Reached quorum, 7-0. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 17 Jan 2025 21:08:23 UTC

Delete from the rule entitled “Teams and Targets {I}” the sentence “For the purposes of this dynasty’s dynastic rules, “ruletext” is the entire contents of the Ruleset, except flavour text and rule titles.”

Enact a rule entitled “Definitions {I}” as follows:

* The terms rule, rules, and rules text refer exclusively to rules that are specified in the Ruleset for BlogNomic.
* The term ruletext refers exclusively to the contents of the Ruleset for BlogNomic, excepting flavour text and rule titles.

Proposal: Swift Getaway

Reaches quorum 8-0 and is enacted -SingularByte

Adminned at 17 Jan 2025 20:48:08 UTC

In “Timing {I}”, change

The Participant performing the attempt successfully performed a Heist Action.

to

The Participant performing the attempt successfully performed a Heist Action that was not Swift.

Create a new subrule to “Timing {I}”, named “Focus {I}”, with the following text:

A successfully perfomed Heist Action can be defined by the rules to be Swift; if it is not so defined, it is not Swift. A Heist Action can never be Swift if the previous Heist Action performed by the same Participant was Swift.

Each Participant has a Focus, a publicly tracked number that can be 0, 1, or 2, and defaults to 0.

If a Participant has at least 1 Focus, they can, while attempting to perform a Heist Action, include “(Focus)” in the Dice Roller comment for the attempt. If they do so, and that action is successful, then that action reduces their Focus by 1 (in addition to its other effects) and is Swift.

If there is a rule “The Crew {M}” that contains a paragraph including the word “Driver”, change that paragraph to read as follows:

Driver is a Role. As a Heist Action which is a weekly action, the Driver may “assist in a getaway”. During the twenty-four hours after a Driver successfully assists in a getaway, the first successfully performed Heist Action performed by each Participant on the same team as that Driver is Swift.

A framework for performing “double actions” – a Swift Action doesn’t start the timer, so you can perform a second one immediately, without bypassing the other protections against timing scams. Initially there is no way to gain Focus. This also includes the Driver in the new framework, to prevent it being used for timing scams while retaining the functionality.

Proposal: Where Has All The Time Gone?

Illegal third proposal, unfortunately

Adminned at 16 Jan 2025 18:38:40 UTC

If the Proposal “I Might Know A Guy” did not pass, then this Proposal has no effect.

If the Proposal “If It Isn’t Nailed Down…” did not pass, remove the curly brackets from the below Role.

Append the following Role to the list of Roles in “The Crew {M}”:

Watchmaker is a Role. As a Heist Action, the Watchmaker may steal time by removing any instance of a word in the ruleset which is a physical invention for keeping time. {{For the next hour after a Watchmaker has successfully stolen time, no Participant outside of that Watchmaker's team may take any dynastic actions. If it's happened before, the last time time has been stolen, along with the Participant who stole it, is publicly tracked.}}

A little temporal theft never hurt anyone! This provides a way to fire off an uninterrupted sequence of actions with your crew, at the cost of having to manipulate a timekeeping device into the ruleset first.

Too law-abiding for these criminal activities

I would like to be idled, this dynasty seems to become way too time-consuming for me to participate right now

Proposal: The Exotic Toolkit

Fails with 5 votes to 3 -SingularByte

Adminned at 17 Jan 2025 20:46:46 UTC

Add a new dynastic rule, called Lock and Key {I}:

Each Mastermind has a Passkey, which is a string of nine to sixteen characters (which may be English alphabet letters or spaces) that comprise a recognisable sequence of words. If a Mastermind does not have a Passkey then they may set their Passkey to any legal value.

As a Heist Action, if there are no open Lockpick posts, any Participant who is not a Mastermind may make a Lockpick post to the blog, which is an official post in the Story Posts category which has a title of ‘Lockpick attempt’ and a body that contains nothing except the author’s guesses as to the two Passkeys. Each Mastermind should respond to that post with a FOR or AGAINST mark, signifying whether the content of the post contains their Passkey. If both responses to a Passkey post are FOR then its author may once set one subrule to this rule to be Mutable, and both Masterminds should immediately change their Passkeys. Otherwise it ceases to be a Lockpick Post within 48 hours of having been posted.

All Immutable subrules to this rule are flavour text.

Add the following as a new subrule to Lock and Key {I}, called Dynomite {I}:

As a Heist Action a Participant may repeal one Mutable rule, then repeal this rule.

Add the following as a new subrule to Lock and Key {I}, called Electronic Identification Spoofer {I}:

Any Participant may change the first line of bulleted list in the rule Tools of the Trade {M} to read as followes, and then repeal this rule:

* Every word in the amended rule is a word in the English language or the name of a Participant.

Proposal: More security

Reached quorum, 6-0. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 17 Jan 2025 16:43:41 UTC

Amend “The Vault {I}” to read as follows, without changing its subrules:

A Dynastic Rule containing an {I} in its title is Immutable. A Dynastic Rule containing an {M} in its title is Mutable. When referring to a Dynastic Rule by title, any {I} or {M} may (but need not) be omitted.

The only ways to change the ruletext of an Immutable rule are via the legal enactment of a proposal or CFJ, and via the Dynastic Reset action.

Mutable rules cannot do any of the following, nor permit anyone to do any of the following:

  • achieve victory, or confer victory upon anyone (if a Mutable rule attempts to do so, it instead does not, and may be repealed by any Participant);
  • cause a proposal or CFJ to become illegal, or prevent or limit the ability of Participants to create proposals or CFJs;
  • prevent or limit the ability of Participants to vote on CFJs, or prevent or limit the ability of admins and idle admins to enact CFJs;
  • modify the way in which proposals or CFJs are voted on, failed, or enacted;
  • directly amend or modify the ruleset or dynastic gamestate through means other than defining or successfully performing a Heist Action;
  • cause a person to become a Participant or cease being a Participant, or cause a Participant to become idle or cease being idle;
  • change the title of a rule;
  • amend a word of ruletext that is 1, 2, or 3 letters long (but adding new such words is acceptable, as is moving them to other places in the ruleset, or merging them with adjacent words by deleting an adjacent space).

Where a Mutable rule and an Immutable rule contradict one another, the Immutable rule takes precedence.

Preventing dynastic-action rule changes from doing a range of things that would be problematic. I’ve preserved the protections that were in the rule already, and added some new ones. Most of those are common sense (e.g. we don’t want mutable rules to change how CFJ voting works); the interesting one is the ban on changing 1, 2, and 3 letters long (which is intended to make it harder to invert the meaning of a rule by changing words like “all” or “not”, whilst not being much of an obstacle towards reaching the Targets and Triumphing).

Proposal: I Might Know A Guy

Reached quorum, 6-0 with 1 DEF. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 17 Jan 2025 16:07:48 UTC

Create a rule called Roles {I}:

Each Participant has up to one Role, which is a publicly tracked value which defaults to blank. A Participant with a non-blank role may be referred to as “A(n) X” or “The X” where X is that Role. Whenever a Participant’s Target is changed, their Role is set back to its default. Whenever a Participant gains a role, if that role is the same as the non-blank role of another Participant in their Team, that second Participant loses their Role.

Where a Role has a weekly action defined for it, that action cannot be performed by a Participant until that Participant has held that role continuously for three days.

As a subrule of Roles {I}, create a rule called The Crew {M}:

A Participant can, as a Heist Action, set the Role of any Participant in their team to a legal value. When a Mastermind performs that action, they may additionally set the Role of another Participant in their team to a legal value.

Brains is a Role. As a Heist Action, the Brains can substitute any word in the ruleset for one of its synonyms. That substitution cannot be from or to any term defined in the ruleset, and the sentence must retain the same meaning as a result of the change.

Muscle is a Role. As a Heist Action which is a weekly action, the Muscle can transpose two adjacent words in the rules text if that transposition would result in all affected sentences having a meaningful interpretation.

Driver is a Role. As a Heist Action which is a weekly action, the Driver may make a blog post declaring that they are assisting in a get-away. During the twenty-four hours following that post, each member of that Driver’s team may subtract 24 from the DICE48 roll (to a minimum of 0) for the first Heist Action that member performs in that period.

Treasurer is a Role. As a Heist Action, the Banker may append a copy of any word from any rule onto the end of the rules text of The Bank {M}. They may optionally give that word a preceding space.

Double Agent is a Role. As a Heist Action which is a Weekly action, the Double Agent may perform a Heist Action as if they were part of another Team. When they do so, they must clearly denote which Team they are performing the Heist Action as if they belonged to, and they skip the required DICE48 roll for that second Heist Action (with a roll of 0 being classed as their result for that roll if relevant).

Create a rule called The Bank {M} with the following text:

{{All text in this rule, other than this sentence and its punctuation, are flavour text, and are additionally considered to be valid English words.}}

If “If It Isn’t Nailed Down…” failed, remove any instances of “{" or "}” from the added rules, except where those are part of the strings {M} or {I}.

This is not intended to be an exhaustive list of roles, but should be enough that nobody is left out. EDIT: Just realised that The Vault makes some of this illegal, so I’ve removed the psuedo-Mastermind role, and put the basic definitions in an immutable rule.

Thursday, January 16, 2025

Proposal: If It Isn’t Nailed Down…

Reaches quorum 7-0 and is enacted -SingularByte

Adminned at 17 Jan 2025 07:46:35 UTC

If any of the Proposals “How To Heist”, “Security”, or “Get Cracking” did not pass, then this Proposal has no effect.

Add a new dynastic rule, titled “Bolted to the Ground {M}”:

{{{Any attempt by a Heist Action to modify text that lies between a matching pair of {curly brackets} instead does nothing.}}}

A curly bracket may not match with any other curly bracket outside of its rule.

In the rule “Tools of the Trade {M}”, replace the list of valid characters for the Heist Action defined therein with:

one of the 26 letters of the English alphabet, its 10 numerals, commas, spaces, hyphens, apostrophes, curly brackets, and full stops

Append the following paragraph to the rule “Security {I}”:

The title of a rule may not be modified through the application of a Heist action.

A way to have there be some tenuous protection behind rulestext that can be chipped away at through successively removing curly brackets, instead of a plain binary “either you can change the rule or you can’t”.

Writing this made me look at the titles of the rules and realize that you could arguably modify the mutable rules’ titles to prevent proposals from doing their thing (or even make rules immutable), which is a boring scam and so this also includes an unrelated fix for that.

Proposal: Divisions of Power

Reaches quorum 8-0 and is enacted -SingularByte

Adminned at 17 Jan 2025 07:44:00 UTC

Replace the text of the rule Coregency, Coregency {I} or Race 5 (whichever exists) with:

This Dynasty is a Coregency and as such has two Masterminds, the Participant named ais523 and the Participant named Josh, who each have all of the powers and responsibilities of a Mastermind. As a general rule of thumb, references in other rules to “the Mastermind” are to be treated as applying to all Masterminds independently. i.e. if the Mastermind is permitted to take an action, any Mastermind may take it and it will be treated by that rule as if “the mastermind” took that action. If the mastermind is subject to a restriction, no masterminds can breach that restriction.

Where this rule alters the specific interpretation of a rule, that specific interpretation takes precedence over the general rule of thumb in the above paragraph. Otherwise, the rule of thumb is to be followed.

For the purposes of the Core rule Dormancy, there are no Masterminds.

In this dynasty, DEFERENTIAL votes are resolved as follows: if both Masterminds have the same valid Vote, then all votes of DEFERENTIAL on that Votable Matter are considered to be valid and the same as those Votes; in other cases, votes of DEFERENTIAL are not considered valid.

For the Core rule Victory and Ascension, neither Mastermind can declare Victory. When a Declaration of Victory is enacted, this entire rule and its subrules are considered to be flavour text. For the purposes of Victory and Ascension’s first bullet point, all Masterminds must have voted FOR in order for “the Mastermind” to be considered to have voted FOR, however their votes are still counted as normal for all other purposes. The first posting of the Ascension Address and the first performing of the Dynastic Reset at the start of this dynasty are considered upheld irrespective of which Mastermind, if any, had performed them.

In the building block rule Everyone’s Playing, all Masterminds are Participants.

In the building block rule Reinitialisation, both Masterminds are to reset their own privately tracked information for Reinitialising players.

This should cover all of the odd cases. I’ve missed any out that are neatly covered by the rule of thumb, e.g. Vetoes, which are considered to have been performed if either Mastermind takes the action.

Proposal: Consciousness Crime

Reaches quorum 7-1 and is enacted -SingularByte

Adminned at 17 Jan 2025 07:41:12 UTC

Add a new dynastic rule, titled “Identity Theft {M}”:

As a Heist Action, a Participant (the perpetrator) may steal another Participant (the victim)‘s consciousness if all of the following are true:

* It has been more than a week since the perpetrator last performed this action
* The victim is not a Mastermind
* This action is not being performed on behalf of someone else
* Two plus two is equal to five

During an attempted consciousness theft, the perpetrator must specify the victim when making the dice roll for the Heist Action. For the next hour after a successful consciousness theft, the perpetrator of that theft may take dynastic actions on behalf of the victim of that theft.

If we’re stealing abstract concepts, why not steal each other’s thoughts?

Proposal: 360 No Scope

Reaches quorum 6-1 and is enacted -SingularByte

Adminned at 17 Jan 2025 07:35:21 UTC

Enact a new rule entitled “EFF Words” (or, if the most recent proposal entitled “Security” was enacted, entitled “EFF Words {I}” instead) as follows:

An EFF Word is a single word from among those in the numbered list on the page [[EFF Wordlist]].

To choose a random EFF Word, roll DICE6 exactly five times, and select the corresponding word that matches those numbers in the rolled order from the EFF Wordlist page.

Enact a new rule entitled “Guesses” (or, if the most recent proposal entitled “Security” was enacted, entitled “Guesses {M}” instead) as follows:

Each Participant may have a single Guess, or may have no Guess, and defaults to having no Guess. Guesses are publicly tracked. A Participant may set their Guess to any EFF Word at any time.

If this text exists in the Ruleset:

Targets are publicly tracked. For Masterminds, valid values for Targets are the numbered words on the EFF Wordlist.

Then replace it with:

Targets are publicly tracked. For Masterminds, the set of valid values for Targets is exactly the set of all EFF Words.

If this text exists in the Ruleset:

If a Participant (Participant A) ever does not have a Target, any Participant (Participant B) can set Participant A’s Target to a random valid value, specifying who Participant A is when making the dice rolls. (To choose a random word from the EFF Wordlist, roll DICE6 five times and choose the corresponding word from the list.)

Then replace it with:

If a Participant (Participant A) ever does not have a Target, any Participant (Participant B) can set Participant A’s Target to a randomly selected Mastermind’s Target, specifying who Participant A is when making that selection.

Seems like we should be allowed to record suspicions about what the other team might be up to, in case a future mechanic allows for interceptions.

A cat burglar

Hi everyone! I’d like to be unidled, please. I look forward to definitely not stealing your ruleset and/or knocking it off a shelf.

I’ve had trouble keeping up with the pace in the past; I’ll do my best to participate, but there’s a good chance that will happen again, unfortunately.

Mentorship announcement

qenya will be mentored by JonathanDark until both the current dynasty has ended and the date is past 12 February 2025.

Proposal: Bounty Hunters

Reaches quorum 5-0 with one emperor not counting towards quorum -SingularByte

Adminned at 17 Jan 2025 07:29:33 UTC

If the Proposal “Security” was not enacted, the rest of this Proposal has no effect.

Add a new rule named “Bounties (Heists) {M}” with the following text:

Each Participant has a publicly tracked number named Claims that defaults to 0.

A Bounty Notice is a post in the Story Posts - Votable Matter category which broadly requests a single mechanical or ruleset change and contains the text “Bounty Notice:” at the start of the post title. Unlike other Votable Matters, only valid Votes from a Mastermind are counted in a Bounty Notice as described in this rule, and Votes from non-Mastermind Participants are ignored. A Bounty Notice may be Open or Closed, being Open by default and being Closed when set to the ‘Enacted’ or ‘Failed’ status in the post backend. As a Heist Action, a Mastermind may post a Bounty Notice.

If a Mastermind believes that one or more enacted Votable Matters satisfy the demand of an Open Bounty Notice, they may post a comment to that Bounty Notice with a FOR icon and the names of each Participant (other than themselves) who authored at least one of those Votable Matters.

Bounty Payout is an action where a Participant’s Claims is increased by 1.

A Bounty Notice may be set to Enacted by a Mastermind if all of the following are true:
* It has been Open for at least 12 hours
* All Masterminds have posted at least one EVC in that Bounty Notice while it was Open.
* Each Mastermind’s most recent EVC in that Bounty Notice contains a FOR icon and the name of at least one Participant other than themselves.

A Bounty Notice may be set to Failed by a Mastermind if any of the following are true:
* Any Mastermind’s most recent EVC in that Bounty Notice contains an AGAINST icon.

When a Bounty Notice is Enacted, the Mastermind who Enacted it should apply the Bounty Payout action to each Participant named in each Mastermind’s EVC containing the FOR icon.

In the rule “Teams and Targets”, add the following bullet to the end of the bullet points in that rule:

* For each Participant, add their Claims to their Triumphs, then set their Claims to 0.

It feels like Bounties might be a good fit for this dynasty.

Rewritten per ais’ suggestion, plus making the rule name unique to distinguish it from the Bounties rule on the Building Blocks wiki page.

Proposal: Changing the Locks

Reaches quorum with 8-0 and is enacted -SingularByte

Adminned at 16 Jan 2025 07:03:59 UTC

If the Proposal “Security” was not enacted, the rest of this Proposal has no effect.

Add a subrule to “The Vault {I}” named “Conversion {I}” with the following text:

If a Proposal contains instructions to change one or more dynastic rules from Immutable to Mutable or from Mutable to Immutable, that Proposal is known as a Transmutation.

A Transmutation containing at least one instruction to change a dynastic rule from Immutable to Mutable can only be enacted if at least one of the following is true:
* It has a number of FOR Votes greater than or equal to 2/3rds of the number of Participants, it has been open for at least 12 hours, and either one of the Masterminds has Voted FOR it or neither of the Masterminds has voted AGAINST it.
* It has a number of FOR Votes greater than or equal to 2/3rds of the number of Participants, and it has been open for at least 24 hours.

Greater protections for changing an Immutable dynastic rule into a Mutable one, since that will likely have a larger impact. Unlike OG Nomic, I’m not suggesting it to be unanimous.

Proposal: Get Cracking

Reached quorum, 8-0. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 16 Jan 2025 06:07:00 UTC

If Proposal: Security was not enacted then this proposal has no effect.

Enact a new dynastic rule, called Tools of the Trade {M}:

As a Heist Action, a Participant may add, remove, or change one character of a Mutable rule into a single other character, where a character is defined as one of the 26 letters of the English alphabet, its 10 numerals, commas, spaces, hyphens, apostrophes, and full stops, provided that after the change the following conditions are all met:

* Every word in the amended rule is a word in the English language.

Enact a new dynastic rule, called Oversight {M}:

A Mastermind may, as a Heist Action, revert the effect of one Heist Action performed by a Participant on their own team in the preceding 24 hours. This does not count as reverting the historical fact of the successful completion of said Heist Action.

Proposal: Security

Reached quorum, 8-0. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 16 Jan 2025 06:03:23 UTC

Enact a new rule, called The Vault {I}, with the following text:

Dynastic Rules are either Immutable or Mutable, signified by either an {I} or an {M} in their title.

Mutable rules may not permit or confer Victory upon a Participant; any Mutable rule that makes a statement that directly awards Victory to a Participant instead does not, and may be repealed by any Participant.

Mutable rules may not permit the direct amendment or modification of the Dynastic gamestate through any means other than the definition of Heist Actions.

An Immutable rule may not be amended through the application of a Heist Action.

Where a Mutable rule and an Immutable rule contradict one another, the Immutable rule takes precedence.

Enact a new Building Block, called Dynastic Safeguard, with the following text:

No dynastic action in this dynasty may alter any non-dynastic rule in any way. Any dynastic action that would directly amend the text of this rule is illegal and may not be undertaken. This rule must be repealed upon Ascension.

For any Dynastic Rules with the titles Coregency, Teams and Targets, and Timing, add an {I} to the end of its title.

Amend the text of the Glossary entry in the Appendix rule ‘Keywords’ for Dynastic Action to read: “An action that is defined only in the Dynastic rules”

Stolen from the Other Place

What’s going on? Where are you taking me? Put me down, you dastardly criminal! I must publish my reports, or the ADoP will have my head!

...Well, I suppose now that I’m here, it wouldn’t hurt to take part in the local pastime…

I hereby declare my wish to be a Participant.

Proposal: When to Heist

Reached quorum, 8-0. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 16 Jan 2025 06:01:46 UTC

Create a new rule, “Timing”:

If a rule defines an action as a Heist Action, a Participant can attempt to perform that action by, in a single Dice Roller comment, specifying the action they want to attempt and rolling DICE48.

If any of the following situations occurred in the previous X hours before that attempt, where X is the result of that attempt’s DICE48 roll:

  • The Participant performing the attempt successfully performed a Heist Action.
  • The Participant performing the attempt gained a Target.
  • The definition of the Heist Action being attempted was added to the ruleset.

then that attempt to perform the Heist Action fails. When such an attempt fails, the Participant who performed the attempt cannot make any more attempts to perform Heist Actions for 24 hours, and that attempt to perform a Heist Action has no other effects.

If none of those situations occurred within the time period in question, then that Heist Action succeeds (unless it would be impossible for some other reason), and applies the changes specified in the rule that defines it to the gamestate and/or ruleset. The Participant who attempted it must then update the appropriate tracking pages to reflect the results of the change.

A new timing system I’d like to experiment with this dynasty, as a sort of inverted “push your luck” mechanic. If you wait 48 hours between actions, they always succeed. If you wait less than 48 hours, they might still succeed, but the chances are lower. My hope is that this will reduce the incentive to be online at particular moments in time and/or to try timing scams, because the randomness takes the edge off hard “timing breakpoints”.

Proposal: How to Heist

Reached quorum, 8-0. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 16 Jan 2025 05:52:28 UTC

Change the title of “Race 5” to “Coregency”, and replace its text with:

This Dynasty is a Coregency and as such has two Masterminds, the Participant named ais523 and the Participant named Josh, who each have all of the powers and responsibilities of a Mastermind. References in other rules to “the Mastermind” should be treated as applying to all Masterminds, except in “Dormancy”, where they should be treated as not applying to any Participant.

This dynasty, DEFERENTIAL votes are resolved as follows: if both Masterminds have the same valid Vote, then all votes of DEFERENTIAL on that Votable Matter are considered to be valid and the same as those Votes; in other cases, votes of DEFERENTIAL are not considered valid.

Create a new rule, “Teams and Targets”:

Each Participant can have up to one Target (by default they do not have any). Targets are publicly tracked. For Masterminds, valid values for Targets are the numbered words on the EFF Wordlist. If both Masterminds have a Target, then each of those Targets is a valid value for a non-Mastermind Participant’s Target (i.e. if a non-Mastermind Participant has a Target, it must match one of the Masterminds’ Targets). Otherwise, non-Masterminds cannot have a Target. Participants with the same Target are said to be “on the same team”; if two Participants both have a Target, but those Targets differ, they are said to be “on opposite teams”.

If a Participant (Participant A) ever does not have a Target, any Participant (Participant B) can set Participant A’s Target to a random valid value, specifying who Participant A is when making the dice rolls. (To choose a random word from the EFF Wordlist, roll DICE6 five times and choose the corresponding word from the list.)

Each Participant has a publicly tracked count of Triumphs, an integer that can be positive or zero; when a Participant newly joins, or is unidled for the first time in the dynasty, their Triumph count is set to the average value among all Participants, rounding ties downwards.

For the purposes of this dynasty’s dynastic rules, “ruletext” is the entire contents of the Ruleset, except flavour text and rule titles. Any Participant with a Target that is present as a word in the ruletext may perform the following actions simultaneously:
* Remove all Targets from all Participants;
* Increase by 1 the Triumphs count of each Participant whose Target appeared as a word in the ruletext immediately before this set of simultaneous actions was performed.

Set all Participants’ Triumphs to 0.

Edit the heading of the EFF Wordlist wiki page to specify that it is gamestate in the current dynasty (using the {{gamestate|now}} template and adjusting the other {{gamestate}} templates as appropriate), whilst leaving the word list itself untouched.

The basic mechanic: there are two teams, each of which is trying to get a specific word into the Ruleset. (I’m expecting future proposals to make that easier than it currently is.) The team membership is chosen at random (except that the Masterminds are always on opposite teams), and every time a heist succeeds, the teams are re-randomized.

This proposal also makes necessary adjustments/redefinitions for the coregency to work correctly.

Ascension Address: The Perfect Heist

What do you steal when you’ve already stolen everything you need?

A series of unexplained, and often spectactular, thefts had ignited the press and captured the conversations of the public. The culprit – or culprits – had clearly already made enough profit to retire, pay the rest of their team, and live out their days in comfort. But the heists continued, often taking things of symbolic value or because they were difficult, rather than due to any inherent worth. Eventually, they shifted from the improbable into the impossible; laws were stolen from the books, words were stolen from the dictionary. But who would pull off the ultimate heist, and steal victory?

Change Snail to Participant and Jury to Mastermind. The dynastic rule Race 5 replaces its content as specified in that rule; other dynastic rules are repealed. Include the building blocks “Everyone’s Playing”, “Precondition Unidling”, and “Reinitialisation” in the ruleset. The dynastic tracking page for this dynasty is “The Heist Teams”. I will not specify imperial style in this post, as (with two Masterminds) the situation is more complex than usual, but may specify it in the comments.

Tuesday, January 14, 2025

Snails past the finish line

This is intended as a post-dynastic discussion thread; I generally find these really interesting to read, so here’s a place for all your thoughts on the dynasty that just finished. Any things that worked? Didn’t work? Any lessons to learn for next time?

ais523 and Josh are in a Coregency

I think since ais523 posted the DoV, it is up to them to post the AA:

the Snail who posted the DoV becomes Jury

Once the Dynastic Reset atomic action has been performed, the Coregency clause of Race 5 will become ruletext and take effect.

Note to ais523: the “Victory and Ascension” text has changed a bit since you were last active.

Monday, January 13, 2025

Call for Judgment: Race Reset

This CfJ makes no changes and as such can be failed.

Adminned at 14 Jan 2025 16:15:46 UTC

If a Declaration of Victory was enacted while this CFJ was pending, do not perform any changes. Otherwise:

Fail all pending Declarations of Victory.

In “Races”, change

If there is an Ongoing Race but no more than one Racing Snail, any Snail or the Jury may perform the Award Ceremony.

to

If there is an Ongoing Race whose Preparations atomic action is complete, but no more than one Racing Snail, any Snail or the Jury may perform the Award Ceremony.

Change the dynastic gamestate to match the state of The Snail Track tracking page as of 14:00 UTC on Monday 13 January 2025. All Race posts created since then, and all Official Posts defined in the “Award Ceremony” rule created since then, are considered to no longer be Official Posts and should be marked as illegal (but left in the same category). All Atomic Actions are considered to no longer be ongoing, discharging any requirement to complete or revert them. All earlier Race posts are considered to no longer be ongoing.

If the DoV fails, we will need a way to clear up the resulting half-performed atomic actions. This also fixes the loophole that made the scam possible.

Declaration of Victory: I ended the race while it was still starting

FOR Votes greater than 2/3rds of the number of Snails (5-0), and it has been open for at least 24 hours. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 14 Jan 2025 16:00:35 UTC

I managed to perform all the steps of an Award Ceremony while DesertFrog was still midway through performing the Preparations action. At the point at which I performed them, the Race was ongoing (it was after the “Create a new Race” step), but there were no Racing Snails (it was before the “Set the Position of each Gastropod who is on the Track or on the Bench to a random value between -10 and 10, inclusive” step). This is a legal situation in which to perform the Award Ceremony.

Josh and I tie for the fewest Plays, so we both achieve victory. (The Track Record subtraction only happens when a snail crosses the line.)

Just to clarify: Josh had no idea I was going to do this and we haven’t collaborated at all on this nor since Every Snail For Themselves passed, but I’ll take my guaranteed win over a mere chance of a win even if it means a coregency. Desertfrog also had no idea I was going to do this and I haven’t collaborated/cooperated at all with them this dynasty. I wasn’t planning for the timing scam, but rather seized the opportunity when I noticed it was there – the “Select the Slug of Death and 3 other Slugs at random” step is slow enough that I’m not 100% surprised that I managed an Award Ceremony during it.

Bucket List 5

CyberStella never started nor finished, and is still in the Bucket.

Award Ceremony, Race 5

ais523 and Josh finish first. All Racers are Runners due to the change in how Track Record works, so they get +4 Fame and a Gold Medal.
JonathanDark and Habanero finish second. They get +3 Fame and a Silver Medal.
CyberStella did not finish. No change.

Note: these changes assume that Pecking Order is unset, because Desertfrog didn’t update the Pecking Order at the start of the new race, and the values reset to their default value due to the change in how Pecking Order was defined. If the Pecking Order is set based on current Fame, the Fame changes are different but don’t affect the final result of the Dynasty.

Story Post: Race 5

The final race begins!
The audience is full of slugs, worms, frogs, squirrels, pinguins, elefants and ovalbone cuttlefish, who all have gathered here to see whether any of the contestants will be able to finish without being eaten or flattened (well, I guess they also care a little about who actually wins).
Good luck, and may the least sluggish snail win!

Sunday, January 12, 2025

Proposal: Throwing The Rulebook Away

Timed out and failed, 1-4. Josh

Adminned at 15 Jan 2025 16:51:23 UTC

In the rule “Official Rules”, replace

If there is an Ongoing Race, then with the exception of this rule all players must follow the dynastic rules in the Official Rules in place of the current dynastic rules.

with

If there is an Ongoing Race and the Race Number is less than 5, then with the exception of this rule all players must follow the dynastic rules in the Official Rules in place of the current dynastic rules.

There doesn’t seem to be much reason to keep separate rulesets anymore.

Also given that the time for Race 5 is set quite strictly, it’s possible (at least in theory) that a proposal would end up being popular but not be enacted before I need to create the Race.

Proposal: Race Chaser

Reached quorum, 4-0. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 13 Jan 2025 02:31:35 UTC

In the rule Plays, in the sentence that contains the clause “a Snail may not Play if the number of Plays they have made in the Ongoing Race”, change every instance of the term Snail to Racing Snail (unless it is already part of a Racing Snail noun phrase).

Under both the current wording and the proposed change, any Snails who are behind the Slug or who have been whomped by Peril still count for evaluating whether another Snail is above the move threshold. This can lock the game; best to have it evaliate only Racing Snails.

Saturday, January 11, 2025

Note to all players

As we head into the endgame, please review the Community Guidelines and take care to express yourself with appropriate respect for other players and their own view on their games.

In particular I shall note that direct allegations of lying or deceit should be approached very cautiously - if the target of such an allegation does not believe themselves to have carried out a deliberate deceit then such an allegation can only prove distressing and contentious.

Manipulation and subterfuge are part of the game, but humans are involved and humans have feelings. Please tread carefully.