This dynasty has been full of incorrectly performed actions. We collectively (and I in particular) have been trying to fix the tracker as we notice them (the Glossary permits you to “alter the representation to match what [you] believe to be the correct application of an incorrectly-applied alteration. This may include completing incomplete actions”), but given how many mistakes we’ve already found and caught, it seems likely that there are still some uncaught mistakes in the tracker that cause it to not properly reflect the gamestate.
And that has got me worrying a bit. At BlogNomic, the normal way you perform actions is to directly edit the tracker to reflect the result of the action. However, what if the tracker was wrong to start with? If you’re working from the wrong starting value, you produce the wrong result – and by the current reading of the appendix, that probably implies that the action never happened and/or is still in progress. (The exact wording is “If authorised by the rules as a result of a Snail’s action, changes to gamestate which is tracked in a specific place (such as a wiki page) do not take effect until the representation of that gamestate has been updated to match the authorised change.”, which is ambiguous based on the meaning of “updated” – but it probably means “the tracker has to match the gamestate after the change, at least with respect to the values that changed”. There’s potentially a more lenient reading, “the tracker has to be changed in a way that simulates the effect of that change on the tracker, even if this is different from the affect the change has on the gamestate”, although I don’t think that’s consistent with the usage of “authorised”.) This means, in effect, that a mistake by someone else can cause an apparently legal action to not take effect. (This is a particular problem if the action is a step in an atomic action; in that situation, you have to revert it due to being unable to continue, but it is unclear what it means to revert an action that was impossible in the first place.) All this is particularly likely to cause a snowballing effect – if one action fails due to the tracker incorrectly reflecting the starting state of the action, the tracker will be in an even wronger state, making further actions likely to fail, and it is quite possible that we end up in a state where all dynastic actions have been illegal for weeks.
For what it’s worth, I consider that taking advantage of this situation would essentially be a core rules scam (and thus barred by Fair Play) – if we are making a best-effort attempt to maintain the gamestate, we should probably treat that as the actual gamestate for the purpose of determining whether actions are legal, rather than letting someone point out an error early in the dynasty as a late-reveal scam. I’d be more comfortable if the rules actually reflected that intuition, though (and yet it’s a hard thing to express unambiguously in ruletext, something I know from experience at other nomics). This is particularly important for knowing how much to revert if an action is performed incorrectly – say a Snail attempts to perform an action near the end of their Waking Hour, and notices there was a mistake in it after the Waking Hour is over, are they allowed to fix it, do they have to revert, or do they have to wait for someone else to fix it during their Waking Hour? The core rules don’t really help us to figure out the details of a situation like that.
I’m not sure what we should do about this (or even whether we should do anything about it), but I thought it was worth letting other players know what I was worried about rather than worrying alone, especially if there’s a simple way to fix the situation.