Wednesday, December 19, 2018


Jacob idles out automatically after a week of inactivity. Quorum drops to 3.

Tuesday, December 18, 2018

Story Post: Case 18: Elizabeth v. Anne

In this Malpractice case, Elizabeth accuses Anne of having insufficiently practiced her portion of a duet performed during karaoke at a gathering. The Judge knows this isn’t what “malpractice” means, and even if it were there are unlikely to be actual damages here, but the paperwork is properly filed. What are you gonna do.

Proposal: The Dustiest Book

Reaches quorum, 4-0. Enacted by pokes.

The list of representations also got reformatted to align more with the wording of the rule, but contains the same state (for non-idle Attorneys)

Adminned at 19 Dec 2018 12:11:02 UTC

Remove “Each Attorney represents a set of Clients, defaulting to none. Which Clients an Attorney represents is tracked below.” from the ruleset.

To the start of “Representations”, add:-

Each Attorney (including idle Attorneys) represents a set of Clients, defaulting to none. Which Clients an Attorney represents is tracked in the following bullet list.

Add, to the list in “Representations”, the representations that were held by all idle Attorneys immediately prior to the processing of the “Open Book” rule.

The Dustier Book CfJ but explicitly saying that idle Attorneys’ Clients are tracked.

Proposal: The Winner Takes It All

Timed out 2 votes to 1. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 19 Dec 2018 10:45:15 UTC

Enact a new rule, “Fiscal Victory”:-

An Attorney’s Worth is equal to their Money, excluding any Money that they were given by other Attorneys in the previous 48 hours. It does not include their Slush Fund.

If an Attorney has a Worth exceeding $100,000, and more Worth than every other Attorney, and is also the first Attorney to have met these criteria this dynasty, then that Attorney has achieved victory.

Monday, December 17, 2018

Proposal: Open registration

Timed out 2 votes to 1. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 19 Dec 2018 09:03:29 UTC

In “Clients”, replace

As a weekly action, an Attorney with fewer than three Clients may take on a new Client by privately making a request to the Judge which specifies a set of Clients by the stats listed in the Pool (eg. “all Business Clients worth above $750,000”, “all Clients with the surname Chamberlain”, “Morgan, James, Anne or State of Connecticut”). At any time (except on Saturday or Sunday), the Judge may process a request chosen at secretly-random from all unprocessed requests that they have received. When such a request is processed, if the specified set includes any Clients (excluding non-State Clients who are already represented by other Attorneys, and Clients who Mistrust the requesting Attorney), a secretly random one of those Clients is added to the set of Clients that the requesting Attorney represents. The Attorney is then privately informed of the outcome of their request.


As a weekly action, an Attorney with fewer than three Clients may take on a new Client by updating the list below. The new Client must not be a non-State Client who is already represented by any other Attorney, and the new Client must not Mistrust the Attorney.

If an Attorney made any requests for a new Client that were processed since the submission of this Proposal, consider those requests to be a update under the new text of the rule for the purposes of determining whether this action is a weekly action.

There’s no need for me to be in this loop now. Anyone can see which Clients are free, and request just the specific one they want, so why not just let them do it themselves?

The last sentence is an attempt to prevent making a request under the old next, enacting this proposal, and then immediately getting a new client under the new text, as two separate weekly actions.

Call for Judgment: An older, dustier book

Timed out 1 vote to 1. Failed by Kevan.

Adminned at 18 Dec 2018 17:37:08 UTC

Add, to the list in “Clients”, the representations that were considered to be held by all idle Attorneys prior to the processing of “Open Book”.

I raised the issue in Slack, and I think it’s worth voting on as a CfJ. Should the representations of clients by idle Attorneys have been listed when processing “Open Book”?

Without these representations listed, and with “Clients” now making the list the canonical location of all representations, unidling Attorneys will lose their clients. This component of the gamestate is currently lost in the translation of processing Open Book.

But, I think it would have been incorrect by the letter of the rule to have listed them, since the rule did not count idle Attorneys (“For the purposes of all Gamestate and the Ruleset, excluding Rules “Ruleset and Gamestate”, “Attorneys”, “Dynasties”, “Fair Play” and any of those Rules’ subrules, Idle Attorneys are not counted as Attorneys.”), and their list of Clients is a property of the un-counted Attorney. Also, once the Clients that idle Attorneys represent has been posted, it can’t be unposted. So because of the ambiguity here, I sided with not posting them. But the option should be open to do so.

Saturday, December 15, 2018

Story Post: Case 17: Robert v. Casey

In this Malpractice case, Robert is accusing Casey of acting inappropriately in the role of a dentist when Casey helped Robert’s youngest child pull out a loose baby tooth. On one hand, Casey isn’t a dentist, and has never claimed to be; the judge really should throw out the case on these grounds. But it’s also so weird that the judge wants to see where this one is going.

Story Post: Case 16: X Express v. Elizabeth

In a groundbreaking corporate Personal Injury case, X Express claims that Elizabeth committed “bodily harm” to the business when she broke a coffeemaker during a visit to the X Express offices.

Friday, December 14, 2018

Proposal: Expanding Horizons

Fewer than a quorum not voting AGAINST. Failed by Kevan.

Adminned at 16 Dec 2018 18:49:42 UTC

Amend the rule “Clients” by adding the following to the Pool of Clients:

Albert Fumbledork: Impeccable Adult; Worth $900,000
Rom Tiddle: Corrupt Adult; Worth $821,000
Professor Q. Squirrel: Corrupt Adult; Worth $420,00
Percy Weasle: Impeccable Child; Worth $543,000
Hermine Stranger: Respected Child; Worth $327,000
Larry Bopper: Decent Child; Worth $446,000
Rob Weasle: Suspicious Child; Worth $238,000
Lucy Tinfoil: Corrupt Child; Worth $329,000
State of Rhode Island: Decent State; Worth $82,000,000
State of Delaware: Corrupt State; Worth $118,000,000
Fakelook: Corrupt Business; Worth $1,070,000

Now, whose idea it was to give children hundreds of thousands of dollars to lose in lawsuits, I have no clue. Kinda fishy if you ask me.


StripedMaple idles out automatically after seven days without making a blog post or comment. Quorum remains 4.

Proposal: Noisy Withdrawal

Times out, 3-0. Enacted by pokes.

Adminned at 16 Dec 2018 17:10:25 UTC

If no rule called “Open Book” exists in the ruleset, replace “An Attorney may request to drop a Client at any time by privately making such a request to the Judge: on receiving such a request, the Judge should remove that Client from the set that the Attorney represents.” in “Gaining and Losing” with:-

An Attorney may stop representing a Client at any time by removing themselves as the Attorney of that Client in the rule “Clients”.

No need for dropping clients to be a private request once the list has been made public.

Friday, December 14, 2018

And Another Thing…

Hello, all! I wish to become Unidle.

Story Post: Case 15: Robert v. Goldberg Technology

In this Negligence case, Robert accuses Goldberg Technology of neglecting to file earnings reports in a timely manner, causing Robert to have lost on potential trading earnings.

Story Post: Case 14: Isabel v. Goldberg Technology

In a bizarre Defamation case, Isabel is suing Goldberg Technology. The alleged defaming claims by the technology firm are so unspeakable that their nature is sealed by the court.

New(er) Player

I as well would like to become a player here. Hopefully StripedMaple and I can add some things of interest.

Proposal: Suspense Account

Times out, 3-0. Enacted by pokes.

Adminned at 15 Dec 2018 16:12:59 UTC

To “Banking”, add:-

As a weekly action, the Judge may post a blog entry announcing the number of Attorneys who have a Slush Fund greater than zero, and the size in dollars of the largest Slush Fund.

Proposal: Who Was That Masked Barrister?

Reached quorum 4 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 14 Dec 2018 09:16:45 UTC

Enact a new rule, “Open Book”:-

The Judge may, if they have not already done so, create a bulleted list at the end of “Clients” which lists the Attorneys of all Clients who are represented by Attorneys, then replace the words “tracked privately by the Judge” with “tracked below” in that rule.

If the above action has been taken, the Judge may repeal this rule.

Having it be a total secret which Attorney represents which Client is starting to seem like a problem because (a) it doesn’t make much sense and (b) it encourages frosty silence during every court case, rather than argument and negotiation.

Tuesday, December 11, 2018

Story Post: Case 13: Casey v. Morgan

In this Unpaid Debt case, Casey claims that Morgan owes them for the catering at a party thrown by the family years ago.

Story Post: Case 12: Goldberg Technology v. Joshua

In yet another corporate Defamation case, Goldberg Technology is accusing Joshua Chamberlain of making false claims related to Anne’s case against Goldberg.

Holiday Retirement

I am now Idle, and will probably remain so until 2019.

There are 6 attorneys, and quorum remains 4.

Proposal: Market Jitters

Timed out / quorumed 3 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 12 Dec 2018 20:51:38 UTC

For each Business Client, set its Reputation to a random value.