BlogNomic: The First Dynasty of Desertfrog

Add the following text to Rule 2.8:

Shiny may not be awarded for the passage of a Local Proposal.

I survived skydiving, lots of fun, I think I’ll remain idle a bit longer though.

Add a new subrule “Heisenberg Snare” to the Rule “Modus Ponens”.  Give it the following text:

Requirements: Target Traveller is within this Traveller’s range, and this Traveller has an influence greater than 10.
Action: This traveller reduces eir Influence by 10.  Target Traveller gains a Heisenbeerg Loop.

Add a new Rule to the Ruleset entitled “Temporal Uncertanty”.  Give it the following text:

Some Travellers may be in one or more Heisenberg Loops, denoted by one asterisk per Loop after eir Influence in the GNDT.

If more than half of all comments containing counted votes also contain the text “Effects”, Add the following to the end of the Rule entitled “Temporal Uncertanty”

  If any Traveller takes an Action dependant on the TL of another Traveller (aka the target) in any Loops, e must afterwards move the target forward in time by DICE(20N+1)-10N Years and DICE12 Months, where N is the number of Loops the target has.

I was wondering about making a proposal that requires local proposals to have a FOR vote from at least 1 traveller other than the proposer (and meet all the other conditions) in order to pass.  This would prevent proposals from passing just because nobody could get there to vote it down.  (Obviously the Arbiter can veto any local proposal but I’m not sure that’s really enough.  What if the arbiter was away?  Or perhaps didn’t see a particular proposal as veto worthy?)

The wording would be a little tricky so before I make a real proposal, would you be likely to support such a proposal?

I can’t explain why, but I have a horrible feeling about Bucky’s two local proposals.  E seems to by trying to seal off the areas around both eir TL and eir CTL so that nobody else can reach em.

The most obvious use for such an area (around the TL) would be to create a zone that e could range-move through, creating ‘Bucky’ Node Events that nobody else could reach to redescribe.  However, that would take several days so e would risk our Arbiter stomping all over them.  So, I reckon the hermit zone around the CTL probably has something to do with it too.

Another possible is that e plans to do stuff with local proposals that nobody else can vote on.  However, that seems unlikely since the Arbiter can always vote on them (and veto them if required).

Can anybody see any cunning scams if e manages to seal off both TL & CTL?

I declare that, since I have not change my position in time within the last 48 hours, I will range move to the date 2001/9/10. My companion comes with me.

I will also move forward 1 day in time. What a poor place for this rule…

Add a new Local Rule to the Ruleset entitled “Drift zone (1961/1/1)”.  Give it the following text:

If t ever has a value between 1926 and 1976, its value increases by 10.

During the post-Christmas lull, a shadowy figure materialises in empty council offices to file blueprints for the rebuilding of the Enormous Jameson, twenty years on.

Call it spam if you want, but I’m required to post every time I move a day forward in time, even though there are no requirements to fulfill.

I’m similarly required to tell you I changed z to 1094, but I combined them into one post to limit mandatory spam.

Add a new Local Rule to the Ruleset entitled “Drift zone (-4017/1/1)”.  Give it the following text:

If t ever has a value between -4017 and -3077, its value increases by 10.

I’m idling myself. Quorum remains five.

One thing bugs me about the current version of “The Grand Scheme”:  The text “A Traveller’s name may only be added as a keyword by that Traveller themselves.”  Not only does it block the Arbiter’s free access to the timeline, but it also may block other legit timeline edits such as proposals or CfJs that undo illegal actions.

Therefore, remove all sentences containing the text “A Traveller’s name may only be added as a keyword by that Traveller themselves”  from the Rule entitled “The Grand Scheme”.  Ignore italicized text when adminning this Proposal.

God creates the background radiation of the early universe.

I exist, so therefore I can go forward a day in time.

Kaddar is Idle, per his request. I’m going Idle, ‘cos I’ll be a week far from a computer. Quorum is 5.

Here’s the specific correction suggested in the comments to “Well, we’ve been using it”

Modify the subrule titled “The Grand Scheme” by replacing the text “may declare Victory” with “has achieved victory”.

Also, if the subrule titled “The Grand Scheme” still contains the text “Nobody may use this rule to declare victory before the 28th of July 2006 (real time). Any admin may remove this paragraph from the ruleset, on or after that date.” then remove it (since we’re now on 28th July 2006).

I’m going skydiving this weekend and won’t be back till monday.  Idle me.  Thanks. :)

Add a new Local Rule to the Ruleset.  Call it “Gambling (-4005/1/1)” and give it the following text:

Travellers may Gamble to try to increase their Influence.  To Gamble, a Traveller takes the following steps:
1)Make a comment to the GNDT saying “I Wager N Influence” where N is a positive whole number.
2)Roll DICE10.
3)If the result is 3 or less, add 2N to eir influence.  Otherwise, subtract N from eir Influence.  This may cause Influence to be negative.

If a Traveller’s Influence is negative, eir Range contains no Game Dates.  Travellers may not Gamble after the institution of the first recorded relevant anti-gambling laws at -100/6/30.

Enjoy.  Future plans include globalizing this and creating a distinct Casino entity. And yes, this is a Local Proposal.

I’m back. Again. Quorum stays at 6.

Delete any Node Events prior to 33/2/25, unless created by the Arbiter.

[ An “Init” keyword seems quite unimaginative, whatever we call it. The Christianity/Italy/Literature threads are strong enough to carry the bulk of this Dynasty’s plot, and steering them carefully off into other branches of history sounds more fun than just throwing in “[Init] [Ninjas]”. ]

Add a new subrule “Chrono Smash” to the Rule “Modus Ponens”.  Give it the following text:

Requirements: Target Traveller is within this Traveller’s range, and this Traveller has an influence greater than 0.
Action: This traveller reduces eir Influence by N and target Traveller’s influence by 2N, where N is a number of eir choice between 0 and eir Influence.

Add a new subrule “Heisenberg Snare” to the Rule “Modus Ponens”.  Give it the following text:

Requirements: Target Traveller is within this Traveller’s range, and this Traveller has an influence greater than 10.
Action: This traveller reduces eir Influence by 10.  Target Traveller gains a Heisenbeerg Loop.

Add a new Rule to the Ruleset entitled “Temporal Uncertanty”.  Give it the following text:

Some Travellers may be in one or more Heisenberg Loops, denoted by one asterisk per Loop after eir Influence in the GNDT.  If any Traveller takes an Action dependant on the TL of a Traveller (including emself) (aka the target) in any Loops, e must afterwards move the target forward in time by DICE(20N+1)-10N Years and DICE12 Months, where N is the number of Loops the target has.

Greth, Isolde, Rodney and The Doctor have not voted last week and are then Idle. Quorum falls to 6.

over Timeline Preservation, I went back to 4004 B.C. (setting t to -4004 in the process) and created a node with keyword “Init” to use when creating new node lines.  If the Arbiter doen’t like “Init”, e should change it to something e feels is more appropriate.

Some minor changes to Keywords and the wording of a Node Event I have made.  The summary of the changes you can find here.

I invoke Range Moving and move one month backward, to 901/11/31.  My companion comes with me.

Thelonious (Monk) was a fine name for the monastry.  However, it doesn’t really work in this dynasty.  So, in light of their recent World Cup victory and as a more dynasty-neutral name, I’d now like to be called Italy.

Change Thelonious’ name to Italy.

Arriving before dawn in the unfiled stacks of the Vatican Library, I hunt down and remove a certain document from their collection.

[ A small change to stop people replacing Node Events with completely different ones that bear their own name and no connection to the past. It has a side-effect of stopping endless back-hopping to add events one year earlier than the earliest existing event, but that doesn’t seem a very interesting thing to allow. ]

To the second paragraph of “The Timeline” rule, add:-

New or redescribed Node Events must have at least one keyword in common with at least one earlier Node Event (although the Arbiter may ignore this restriction).

Any Node Events which have a keyword of a Traveller’s name, yet share no keywords with earlier Node Events, shall be edited to remove Travellers’ names.

Unless the Arbiter votes against this proposal, add a new Core Rule to the Ruleset entitled “Katastrophe”.  Give it the following text:

There may be a Traveller who is called Katastrophe.  Katastrophe has the same abilities as the Arbiter except where the Ruleset specifically says otherwise.  Katastrophe uses a distinct Veto icon, which is called Katastrophe’s seal.  Each Veto icon may only be changed by its wielder.

The Arbiter and Katastrophe may overturn a Veto by the other.  This may only be done if all Proposals subsequent to the one vetoed are still pending.  The vetoed Proposal then reverts to pending status, and may not be vetoed again.

If Katastrophe is able to acheive victory in this Dynasty, then its title in the Dynastic records is changed to bear the name of Katastrophe instead.

There is currently no Katastrophe.

Date: 1975/3/5
Event: Katastrophe vows revenge aganst the Arbiter.

I hereby certify that I meet all the requirements for marching with time (i.e. none) and have gone forward exactly one day.

...to range move.

Add a new item to the Glossary as follows:

In Dynastic Rules, “may declare victory” is usually an idiom for “has achieved victory”.

I have witnessed some ... disturbing behavior on the part of the Arbiter.  Specifically, I witnessed em using a **SCAM** to **STEAL** something.  More on this as it develops.

I haven’t Range moved in ~50 hours, so I’m range moving forward a couple of weeks.

Add a new Local Rule entitled “Playing Blognomic (2006/7/24)”  to the Ruleset with the following text:

Any Traveller whose TL is the same as the real date may often either vote on any Local Proposal or set eir TL to any valid Game Date or change the value of any time travel variable.

Add to the Glossary:

Undefined particles. Whenever one of these undefined particles: “A”, “ANY” or “EACH” are used in the subject of a phrase, those particles shall be construed as having the same meaning, i.e., they refer individually to each of the persons in the referred domain.

Bucky said:

[ Reproposing with a delete-existing-keywords clause, and a self-repealing paragraph to make it watertight; I’m not sure if we have any precedence on taking game actions halfway through the enactment of a proposal… ]

Delete from the Timeline any keywords which are Travellers’ names.

Add a subrule to “The Timeline”, called “The Grand Scheme”:-

If a Node Event has a Traveller’s name as one of its keywords, then the Event has been engineered to benefit that Traveller - perhaps the Traveller has stolen a valuable object from that day, or has made some change of subtle or sentimental importance. (A new Traveller may not choose an existing keyword as their name.)

A Traveller’s name may only be added as a keyword by that Traveller themselves, and may only be added as a Trigger Event, not as a side effect.

If a Traveller’s name ever appears as the keyword for exactly seven separate Node Events, then they have shown their worth in manipulating the Timeline (or have saved the world, or destroyed it) and may declare Victory.

Nobody may use this rule to declare victory before the 28th of July 2006 (real time). Any admin may remove this paragraph from the ruleset, on or after that date.

Repeal the “Time Crystals” rule.

Add a new Local Rule entitled “Great Proposal Database (2003/1/1)” to the Ruleset.  Give it the following text:

Travellers may have one more non-Local Proposal pending than they could if this Rule did not exist.

Yesterday Bucky reversed the actions of both Chronos Phanon and I by Broader Bribery! They were reversed because e interprerted “A Traveller may often/occasionally [thing]” as only able to be done by one Traveller in that time period. My interpretation involves the state of being a Traveller. This Call for Judgement, if it passes, implicitly states that A, Any, and Each are to be interperted as one and the same, and to redo the bribes that were undone.

I need a good strategy for Chicken, and Blognomic is fully loaded with matrix game theorists, so I thought I’d ask around here.

So, there are two players driving toward each other in cars (equipped with airbags). At the last minute each has the choice to either swerve, or not swerve.

Here’s the payoff matrix, with the first row and column having the action of swerving, and the second row and column having the action of not swerving.

(-1,-1)  ( 0 , 1)
( 1,  0 )  (-5,-5)

That is, if both players swerve, both

lose 1 point

.
If one player swerves, and the other doesn’t, the one who drove straight

gets 1 point

, while the one who swerved

gets 0 points

.
If both players don’t swerve, bad things happen, and both

lose 5 points

.

It’s not as easy as Prisoner’s Dilemma, I think, since tit for tat really doesn’t work. It pays off for both players if they both take different actions. Any ideas for strategies?

Add the following text to the Rule “Arrow of Time” after the paragraph containing “No non-Arbiter Traveller may vote on a Local Proposal that is not in eir Range”:

The Arbiter may vote on any Local Proposal before, at or after eir TL, regardless of range, and this sentence takes precidence over all Local Rules which contradict it.

I’ve noticed I’ve been slowly losing interest in this game, so I’m taking some time off. See you in a few weeks, I guess.

Date:1975/2/24
description:The Chronomaster stops time locally at 4:43 PM by cleverly using the clock tower known as “Enormous Jameson” as an amplifier, all under the nose of the Arbiter who was(will be?) less than a Game Month away.  Locals respond by blowing up Enormous Jameson, killing the Chronomaster and 23 others.

Having not used Range travel in days, I was forced to use it to travel a mere 55 days since we don’t have any better way of travelling short distances.

Using the Modus Ponen (I’ve not used Range moving in the last 48 hours).

This proposal failed last time due to the PRC influence problems that have now been fixed:

Add a new Dynastic Rule to the Ruleset called “Time Vacations”.  Give it the following text:

If a Traveller has 10 influence, they may decrease eir influence by 10 to purchase a ticket (GNDT tracked) to any vacationable TL.  A vacationable TL must not contain a Perilous Node Event, and must not be before the year -15000 or after the year 6000. While they have this ticket, they may change eir TL to eir ticket TL, or to 2235/8/14.  When a traveller travels to 2235/8/14, they must remove all eir tickets.  Travellers must announce in the weblog whenever their ticket value changes.

And add a new subrule to the “The Laws of time”

Restrictions on Time Vacations
Travellers may not modify any node event if they have a ticket.

When this proposal passes, create a Node Event in the time line at 2235/8/14 with the description: “Warner TimeTravel Agency TimePort accepting incoming Travellers” with the tags:
[Perilous],[Time Travel],[TimePort]

If more than half the valid votes voting either or contain the text “less is more”, then replace all instances of “10 influence” with “5 influence” in this rule.

By my formula.

Change the name of the Rule “Laddering”  to “Microjumping”.  Reword the Rule as follows:

# Requirements: There exists a Game Date within 30 games days of this Traveller’s TL.
# Action: This Traveller may set eir TL to that Game Date

Add a new Local Rule entitled “Electronic Voting (1995/1/1)” to the Ruleset.  Give it the following text:

A Traveller may vote on any Local Proposal with a Locale that is both:
A)After the Locale of this Rule, and
B)Within 50 years of eir TL
regardless of eir Range.  E may also vote normally.

And yes, this is a Local Proposal so please check your Range before voting.

in accordance with my conveniently changed formula.

This isn’t a proposal, but before I propose it, I want to know what you all think and prefer:

Assume recently means:

#  An action has been taken “recently” if it has been taken this day, or within the last six hours

Change the Continuum:
FROM:

A Traveler may often change one of the values of ‘x’, ‘y’, ‘z’, ‘w’, or ‘t’ as permitted by any of the legal Formulas that exist in the GNDT (provided that division by zero does not occur), then giving notice on the front page that this has happened.

TO:

All Travellers have the ability: Unless this Traveller has recently used this ability, This Traveller may change one of the values of ‘x’, ‘y’, ‘z’, ‘w’, or ‘t’ as permitted by any of the legal Formulas that exist in the GNDT (provided that division by zero does not occur), then giving notice on the front page that this has happened.

OR?

All Travellers have the ability: This Traveller may often change one of the values of ‘x’, ‘y’, ‘z’, ‘w’, or ‘t’ as permitted by any of the legal Formulas that exist in the GNDT (provided that division by zero does not occur), then giving notice on the front page that this has happened.

OR?

Unless A given Traveller has done so recently, that Traveller may change one of the values of ‘x’, ‘y’, ‘z’, ‘w’, or ‘t’ as permitted by any of the legal Formulas that exist in the GNDT (provided that division by zero does not occur), then giving notice on the front page that this has happened.

Are any of these improvements?  what are your thoughts?

The ruleset states “A Traveller may occasionally [bribe]”.  In the past, we have used this language to limit the action to happening once a week.  The distinct alternative, “Each Traveller may…” is not used.

However, I notice that Chronos Phanon has bribed Hix and Saki has bribed Kaddar, despite this limitation.

Undoing the illegal actions.  Please post any complaints here.

Rewrite rule 1.1 to:

This is the Ruleset for BlogNomic; all Players must obey the most recent version of this document.

Section One consists of the “Core Rules” of Blognomic, covering basic Traveller and proposal mechanics; Section Two contains the rules of the current dynasty, and may be reffered to as the “Dynastic Rules”; and Section Three contains the glossary, which exists solely to clarify the remainder of the ruleset.

The Ruleset and Gamestate can only be altered in manners specified by the Ruleset.

If two parts of the Rulesset contradict each other, precedence shall be construed in the following order:

1. The Glossary has precedence over any Core or Dynastic Rule;

2. A Core Rule has precedence over a Dynastic Rule, unless that Dynastic Rule explicitly says it can’t be overruled by a Core Rule;

3. If both contradicting parts are Dynastic, or if both of them are Core Rules, the part with more limited scope applies. (e.g. if the rules “Players can Fight each other” and “Players cannot Fight each other on Tuesdays” exist, and it is Tuesday, players cannot fight each other.)

4. If two parts with the same scope contradict each other, the negative rule applies. (e.g. with “Players can Fight each other on Tuesdays” and “Player cannot fight each other on Tuesdays”, Players cannont fight each other on Tuesdays.)

Admins may correct obvious spelling and typographical mistakes in the Ruleset at any time.

No Dynastic Rule may contain a provision that bars itself from being altered and/or repealed. If at any moment a Dynastic Rule exists or is altered in a manner that renders it to contain such a provision, the entirety of that Rule shall be considered void and with no effects on the Gamestate. A rule A is considered to fall under this paragraph’s provisions if it protects another rule B from being altered and/or repealed and that rule B prevents rule A from being altered. Daisy-chains of protection also fall under this paragraph’s provisions. The provisions on this paragraph supersede any text in a Dynastic Rule.

Spivak pronouns, as defined in the Glossary, shall be used whenever a Player is referred to.

This was taken directly from our late Ruleset Draft. I’ve only changed some of the terminology to comply with the current one.

Add a No Trolling sub-rule to The Laws of Time:

A Traveller other than the Arbiter may not use vote icons in comments on Local Proposals out of eir Range.

Add a new subrule of “Companions” entitled “Meeting Companions” with the following body.

Often, a traveller may set eir TL equal to eir CTL - provided e has a Companion.

Insert a new subrule of “The Modus Ponens” entitled “Laddering Companions” after the subrule entitled “Laddering” with the following body.

  * Requirements: Target Traveller has a CTL within 30 games days of this Traveller’s TL.
  * Action: This Traveller may set eir TL to the CTL of target Traveller.

Renumber the remaining subrules of “The Modus Ponens” accordingly.

Now if someone else would kindly set t equal to z…

I had reason today to visit our old home page at blognomic.blogspot.com, and noticed some spam comments on several old proposals.

Rewrite rule 1.1 to:

This is the Ruleset for BlogNomic; all Players must obey the most recent version of this document.

Section One consists of the “Core Rules” of Blognomic, covering basic Traveller and proposal mechanics; Section Two contains the rules of the current dynasty, and may be reffered to as the “Dynastic Rules”; and Section Three contains the glossary, which exists solely to clarify the remainder of the ruleset.

The Ruleset and Gamestate can only be altered in manners specified by the Ruleset.

If two parts of the Rulesset contradict each other, precedence shall be construed in the following order:

1. The Glossary has precedence over any Core or Dynastic Rule;

2. A Core Rule has precedence over a Dynastic Rule, unless that Dynastic Rule explicitly says it can’t be overruled by a Core Rule;

3. If both contradicting parts are Dynastic, or if both of them are Core Rules, the part with more limited scope applies. (e.g. if the rules “Players can Fight each other” and “Players cannot Fight each other on Tuesdays” exist, and it is Tuesday, players cannot fight each other.)

4. If two parts with the same scope contradict each other, the negative rule applies. (e.g. with “Players can Fight each other on Tuesdays” and “Player cannot fight each other on Tuesdays”, Players cannont fight each other on Tuesdays.)

Admins may correct obvious spelling and typographical mistakes in the Ruleset at any time.

No Dynastic Rule may contain a provision that bars itself from being altered and/or repealed. If at any moment a Dynastic Rule exists or is altered in a manner that renders it to contain such a provision, the entirety of that Rule shall be considered void and with no effects on the Gamestate. A rule A is considered to fall under this paragraph’s provisions if it protects another rule B from being altered and/or repealed and that rule B prevents rule A from being altered. Daisy-chains of protection also fall under this paragraph’s provisions. The provisions on this paragraph supersede any text in a Dynastic Rule.

Spivak pronouns, as defined in the Glossary, shall be used whenever a Player is referred to.

This was taken directly from our late Ruleset Draft. I’ve only changed some of the terminology to comply with the current one.

Add a No Trolling sub-rule to The Laws of Time:

A Traveller other than the Arbiter may not use vote icons in comments on Local Proposals out of eir Range.

I propose the following change to the ruleset:

If a paragraph exists in the rule “The Modus Ponens” that begins with the following string:

“The subrule’s Requirements describe a set of game events and / or gamestates.”

Replace the entire paragraph with the following paragraph:

The subrule’s Requirements describe a set of game events and / or gamestates. Often, a Traveller may pick up to three different subrules, and carry out those subrules’ Actions. That Traveller specifies the order in which eir Actions are carried out.  A Traveller may only carry out each of those subrule’s Actions if that subrule’s requirements are true. When a Traveller performs a set of Actions, e must post a weblog entry explaining the order of eir Actions and state how the requirements were all fulfilled.

This is Saki’s Proposal, without referencing rule numbers (Damned Dynamic Ruleset), and also clarifing the third sentence using the keyword carried out as opposed to the to “occur”, thereby eliminating ambiguity as to whether or not order of actions affects requirements for actions (they do).

Add a new Local Rule to the Ruleset entitles “Unit Scrambler (1450/1/1)”.  Give it the following text:

Any Traveller with a TL or CTL before 1550/1/1 may often set x to DICE30 if y≠2, or DICE28 if y=2.

Enact a local rule Acquital (1482/11/25):

Whenever a Traveller’s TL becomes 1482/11/25, that Traveller is acquited of all eir previous Chronocrimes, if any, ceasing to be guilty of them.

If Proposal: Not So Fast has passed, the Acquital local rule shall have this text instead:

Whenever a Traveller’s travels to 1482/11/25, that Traveller is acquited of all eir previous Chronocrimes, and may change eir Company’s from “Renegade” to “Freelance” upon changing eir TL to 1482/11/25.

Notice this is local to (1482/11/25)

I’ve used range moving.

Add the following text to the end of the Rule “The Laws of time”:

The Arbiter, by nature, cannot break a Law of Time.

This should plug the specific loophole through which Bucky has slid

Replace the following passage from Rule 1.2:

Some Travellers are idle, and shall be marked as such in the sidebar. For the purposes of the Ruleset, excluding Rules 1.1 and 1.2, idle Travellers are not counted as Travellers. Admin may render a Traveller idle if that Traveller has failed to vote for more than a week, or if it has asked to become idle. Admins may un-idle a Traveller at eir request - the Traveller’s personal gamestate retains the values it had immediately prior to eir idling.

with

Some Travellers are idle, and shall be marked as such in the sidebar. For the purposes of the Ruleset, excluding Rules 1.1 and 1.2, idle Travellers are not counted as Travellers. Admin may render a Traveller idle if that Traveller has failed to vote for more than a week, or if it has asked to become idle. Admins may un-idle a Traveller at eir request - the Traveller’s personal gamestate generally retains the values it had immediately prior to eir idling.  If during the Traveller’s idleness however, game events occurred that would have affected the traveller had e been active, the Admin who removes the traveller’s idle status must apply the effects of those changes to the now active traveller.

If more than half of the comments on this proposal containing counted votes contain the word “retroactive”, reduce Bucky’s influence by 10.

Ignore text in italics in this proposal.

It looks like the last 2 attempts to undo Bucky’s scam are going to fail, not because anybody thinks Bucky should keep the Influence but because they tried to do other things at the same time.  So, here’s a (relatively) simple proposal that only affects Bucky’s influence.

If more than half the counting FOR votes contain the phrase “that’s a bit harsh” then (for the purposes of this proposal) let X represent 10, otherwise let X represent 12.  If Bucky’s Influence is greater than X at the time of the enactment of this proposal, reduce Bucky’s Influence by X, otherwise set it to 0.

If this proposal is enacted all travllers Temporal location shall return, as if by magic, to 1419/11/26. As will they’re companions Temporal location.

Also if this proposal is enacted all travellers influence shall be doubled.

[ Giving Chronocrime some teeth. ]

In Rule 2.10, replace “if they break such a stipulation, they may be guilty of commiting a Chronocrime” with:-

any breach of these guidelines is automatically considered a Chronocrime

To the Rules of the Paradox Company, add:-

A member of the PRC may change a chosen Traveller’s Company to “Renegade”, if the chosen Traveller has committed a Chronocrime within the past 24 real-time hours.

And add a new Company:-

Renegade
Leader: None
Rules: The Renegade Company has no Leader. A member of the Renegade Company may not change their own Company status.
Description: Operating outside the Laws of Time to pursue their own goals, for good or for evil.

If “No Criminal Government” passed, remove “A Traveller guilt of Chronocrime may not Declare Victory, even if allowed by other rules.” from the Laws of Time and add the following to the end of the Renegade Rules:-

A Renegade Traveller may not Declare Victory, even if allowed by other rules.

Add a new Subrule, entitled “Canon”, to the rule “The Modus Ponens”.  Give it the following text:

Parallel Processing
Requirements:Traveller has at least 1+N Influence, where N is the number of times e has begun Parallel Processing in the last 24 hours.
Action:Traveller loses (1+N) Influence permenantly.  E then carries out 2 Actions for which e fulfills the Requirements if e is able.

Z is now equal to Y (=31).

Add to The Laws of Time:

A Traveller guilt of Chronocrime may not Declare Victory, even if allowed by other rules.

Add a No Trolling sub-rule to The Laws of Time:

A Traveller may not use vote icons in comments on Local Proposals out of eir Range.

So, whilst I was away on holiday, I see that Bucky attempted an idling scam and is now (quite rightly) failing to find an admin to unidle em.  Despite being alerted to the scam, I don’t see how it works or what the benefit will be.

If somebody explains the scam, I’ll make a proposal to unidle Bucky and simultaneously undo the effects of the scam (perhaps with a penalty for being a bad lad[y]).

If Bucky is Idle at the time of the enactment of this proposal then Unidle em.

If more than half the counting FOR votes contain the phrase “that’s a bit harsh” then (for the purposes of the next sentence) let X represent 10, otherwise let X represent 12.  If Bucky’s Influence is greater than X at the time of the enactment of this proposal, reduce Bucky’s Influence by X, otherwise set it to 0.

Replace the following paragraph within rule 2.15 The Modus Ponens:

The subrule’s Requirements describe a set of game events and / or gamestates. Often, a Traveller may pick a subrule, and carry out that subrule’s Action. A traveller may only carry out that subrule’s Action if that subrule’s requirements are true. When a Traveller performs an Action, e must post a weblog entry explaining eir Action and state how the requirements were all fulfilled.

With:

The subrule’s Requirements describe a set of game events and / or gamestates. Often, a Traveller may pick up to three different subrules, and carry out those subrules’ Actions. Travellers specify the order in which the Actions occur.  A traveller may only carry out each of those subrule’s Actions if that subrule’s requirements are true. When a Traveller performs a set of Actions, e must post a weblog entry explaining the order of eir Actions and state how the requirements were all fulfilled.

(Note: Let’s see if I can get it right this time)

Seeing as I’m back from my thing, I should unidle now so that I can poke holes in Rodney’s latest proposal in good consience.

Add a new rule entitled “Time Drag”:

Often,  a Traveller, henceforth refered to as the Dragger, may declare a Time Drag on another Traveller, henceforth refered to as the Dragged, within the Dragger’s Range, by making a post to that effect. For the next 24 hours, the Dragger may change the TL of the Dragged to any game date within the Dragger’s Range.

And add a new sub-rule, entitled “No pushing and/or pulling”, to rule 2.12:

No Traveller may declare a Time Drag on another Traveller without either the Arbiter’s or that Traveller’s permission.

Rewrite the Rule “Time Crystals” so that it reads:

There exist Time Crystals (or simply “Crystals”).  The number of Crystals a Traveller is carrying is tracked in the GNDT as a nonnegative integer in the “Crystals” column.  New Travellers start with 0 Crystals.

While in possession of one or more Time Crystals, a Traveller’s Shiny value is temporarily boosted to the maximum Shiny value (as specified in Rule 2.1) and e receives all benefits, restrictions, and responsibilities therein. Eir temporary Shiny value is noted in the GNDT as “m [p]”, where m is the current maximum Shiny value and p is the Traveller’s previous Shiny value. Any actions that would change the Traveller’s Shiny value are ignored, affecting neither the boosted nor previous value. However, if the maximum allowable Shiny value changes, then boosted Shiny values change too.  If the Traveller loses possession of all eir Time Crystals, then eir Shiny value reverts to the lesser of eir previous Shiny value and the current maximum Shiny value.

A Traveller may reduce eir own Crystals value at any time.

Set each Traveller’s Crystals to 0.

Create a Local Rule called “Time Crystal Mines (4661/10/22)” with text:

A Traveller may occasionally increase eir Crystals value, but not to a value which is greater than that Traveller’s Influence.

Create a subrule to Rule “The Laws of Time” called “Use crystals sparingly” with text:

A Traveller may not increase eir Crystals value to above 2.  A Traveller may not have a nonzero Crystals value continuously for more than 7 Real days (duration).

Title says it all.

I propose the following changes:
Remove the rule Paradox Prevention

Add the following rule “Time Companies” to the Dynastic rules.

Travellers are members of a single Company, (GNDT tracked).  By default, each Traveller is a member of the non-company “Freelance”.  A Traveller may join or quit a Company at any time by giving notice on the front page, unless otherwise stated in that company’s rules. 

Companies have Leaders.  A Leader must be a member of that Company, and must not be idle.  The Arbiter must appoint a Leader if none exists (If Able), unless otherwise stated in that Company’s rules.

All subrules to this rule are Company descriptions.  Subrules to this rule are in the following format:

Company Title
Leader:(LeaderTitle) Leadername or “No Current Leader”
Rules: Rules affecting the game.
Description: Flavor Description

Description must be in italics.  Leader must be updated when the Leader of the company changes.

Add the following subrule to this rule:

Paradox Reduction Company
Leader:(High Sheriff of Time) Rodney
Rules:  If a Traveller in this company were to calculate range, e must calculate range as though e had 12 additional influence.  The Arbiter is always a member of this company.
Description: The PRC, enforcing causality and prosecuting Cronocrime.

This doesn’t really change anything (besides making all Travellers members of freelance), it allows for other companies to exist without a major headache.

To Rule 2.8 (Arrow of Time), add, after the second paragraph:-

Local Proposals do not count towards the two-Proposals-pending or three-Proposals-per-day limits, although a Traveller may not submit more than one Local Proposal per real-time day.

Add a subrule to Rule 2.6 (“The Timeline”), called “The Grand Scheme”:-

If a Node Event has a Traveller’s name as one of its keywords, then the Event has been engineered to benefit that Traveller - perhaps the Traveller has stolen a valuable object from that day, or has made some change of subtle or sentimental importance.

A Traveller’s name may only be added as a keyword by that Traveller themselves, and may only be added as a Trigger Event, not as a side effect.

If a Traveller’s name ever appears as the keyword for exactly seven separate Node Events, then they have shown their worth in manipulating the Timeline (or have saved the world, or destroyed it) and may declare Victory.

(A new Traveller may not choose an existing keyword as their name.)

Replace the following text within rule 2.15 The Modus Ponens:

Often, a Traveller may pick a subrule, and carry out that subrule’s Action.

With:

Often, a Traveller may pick one or more subrules, and carry out the specified Action(s).

If the majority of comments contain the word “limits” add the following to the rule:

E may pick a maximum of three subrules.

Add a sub-rule to the Modus Ponens rule:

Primetime Crime
Requirements: This Traveller has committed a chronocrime within 30 minutes of this action.
Action: This Traveller gains 20 influence

Rules that trigger the modus ponens should not be folded into it because they can no longer be used to trigger it.

(Note, I’ll let someone word timecop actions, but an example action might require:This Traveller is in the PRC and target traveller has announced comitting a Primetime Crime within 24 hours.)

Our wiki is being victim of a mild case of vandalism, which modus operandi is:

- The vandal creates a fake user, named Rdxxxxxxxxxx where the x’s are random number.
- The vandal fills a unused page, like the wiki:about, with links to a bunch of web pages.

Purplebeard and myself have already reverted some of the vandalism, but I’m afraid the vandal is only feeling the waters.

I know that is a pain in the ass, but can we set the wiki so only admins can create new users?

Delete rule The March of Time

Add a sub-rule to the Modus Ponens rule:

Marching Time
Requirements: This Traveller exists.
Action: This Traveller may change eir TL forward one day. For example, a Traveller whose TL is 1422/4/30 may change it to 1422/5/1, but not 1423/4/30.

Delete the Microjumps rule.

Add 2 sub-rules to the Modus Ponens rule:

Laddering
Requirements: Target Traveller has a TL within 30 games days of this Traveller’s TL.
Action: This Traveller may set eir TL to the TL of target Traveller.

Range Moving
Requirements: This Traveller has not done the action allowed by “Range Moving” in the last 48 hours.
Action: This Traveller may set eir TL to any date within eir Range.

I’d like to be unidled, please. :)

If “Rescue!” or “Go Fetch!!!” passed, this proposal has no effect.

To Rule 2.5.2 (Travellers Leaving Companions), add:-

A Traveller may abandon their Companion by blanking their Companion and CTL GNDT fields.

To Rule 2.12 (The Laws of time), add a subrule, “No Littering”:-

A Traveller may not abandon their Companion if the Companion’s Temporal Location is different to that of the Traveller.

If the Proposal “Go Fetch!!!” passes, this proposal has no effect.

Add a Rule 2.5.3 Retrieving Companions

A traveller may often change eir CTL to eir TL.  For 48 real hours after doing so e may not change either eir CTL or TL.  If eir CTL was a node event [and the change in eir CTL was greater than eir influence in years], e must add the keyword Perilous to that node event.

Without the bracketed words

If the majority of the votes on this proposal contain the word “Distance”, add the rule with the bracketed words (but without the brackets).

Add the following to Rule 2.14 “Paradox Prevention:

Any Traveller may accuse a member of the Company of violating a law of time by posting to the front page of the blog to that effect. Once such an accusation is made, the Company member is “suspended”. A suspended member of the company retains the influence benefits of being a member of the Company, but may not quit the company and can take no official action as a member of the PRC.  After the accusing post has been in existence for 48 hours the [High Sheriff of Time] must evaluate the accusation by commenting on the post stating whether e finds it substantiated. 

If the accusation is not found unsubstantiated the accused member is restored to active status within the PRC.  If the accusation is found substantiated, the accused member is “expelled” from the PRC and may not rejoin it. The expelled member also looses an additional 5 points of influence. This is in addition to any penalties that might attach to the violation of the law of time.

If a majority of the votes on this proposal contain the word “Hierarchy” replace “High Sheriff of Time” where it appears in brackets in the above with “Discipline Officer” and add the following to the rule:

The High Sheriff of Time may occasionally name a member of the PRC to be the “Discipline Officer” by posting to the blog to that effect.  If there is no Discipline officer or the accused member is the Discipline Officer, the High Sheriff of Time must evaluate the accusation.  If the Accused member is the High Sheriff of Time, the Arbiter must evaluate the accusation.

If a majority of the votes on this proposal contain the phrase “boy who cried wolf” add the following to the rule:

If an accusation is found to be unsubstantiated, the person who made the accusation looses 3 influence.

The proposal ‘A Slow Drip’ has been illegally failed. The proposal appears to have one vote in favor and two against, but since the proposal is Local, Rule 2.8, ‘Arrow of Time’ complicates the issue somewhat. Rule 2.8 governs which Travelers may legally vote on Local Proposals.

Both Kevan and Bucky were out of Range when they voted, which should nullify those votes cast, as by 2.8,

No non-Arbiter Traveller may vote on a Local Proposal that is not in eir Range.

Additionally, Rule 2.8 specifies that:

When a Traveller votes on a Local Proposal, e must include eir current TL in the comment containing their vote for their vote to be counted.

Since both votes against do not include the Traveler’s TL, they cannot be counted as per this rule. Therefore in either case the proposal should have been enacted, one vote to none.

If this Call for Judgment passes, the status of ‘A Slow Drip’ shall be changed to ‘Passed’, and the proposal shall then be legally enacted as it should have been.

A faint whisper comes over an unknown area. One second, there was nothing. The next, a small glowing portal. From the portal a small girl stepped, dusted off her jumpsuit, and pressed a button on her thigh. The portal vanished with a crack. The girl was here for one reason, and that reason only. She wishes to join the game, and all the mystique that it entails.

...so ends her announcement.

I’ve never participated in a nomic before, but they certainly sound interesting.

After a time jump to the start of the 10th century (901/12/31 to be exact), I discovered several species of dinosaur living in a remote region of Eurasia.  They appear to have the rudiments of a civilisation.

I noticed that one of them, Reega, a hunter, was attacked by a group of humans - possibly a party of explorers.  This looks to be the first such meeting between humans and dinosaurs.

Reega managed to return home after the attack, but his story of intelligent animals was not taken seriously by anyone.  Attention was drawn instead to Reega’s failure to bring anything back food-wise, and he was cast out of the dinosaur society.

This civilisation is intriguing me.  I intend to stay here a while and learn more - and chart the meetings between dinsaurs and humans.  Perhaps Reega will be of help here.  I believe that the encounters may be the origins of the “Repelling Dinosaur” style.

The Timeline has been updated accordingly.

Replace “Cronocrime” with “Chronocrime” throughout the ruleset and gamestate. (Any Traveller who is guilty of a Cronocrime becomes explicitly guilty of an identical Chronocrime.)

Knowing of the peril facing the young Friedrich Nietzsche, I made some inquiries and discovered that his mother was the last living master of the ancient martial art known as “Repelling Dinosaur”.  I suggested that she begin training her son at a young age, and as a result he appears to have survived an assault made on his life by a suspiciously familiar Dinosaur in his fourteenth year.  Perhaps this nearly lost art will experience a resurgence in the late 1800’s?

Timeline altered accordingly.

I propose the following rule “The Modus Ponens”

All subrules to this rule are in the following format:
Title
Requirements: Description
Action:  Description

The subrule’s Requirements describe a set of game events and / or gamestates.  Often, a Traveller may pick a subrule, and carry out that subrule’s Action.  A traveller may only carry out that subrule’s Action if that subrule’s requirements are true.  When a Traveller performs an Action, e must post a weblog entry explaining eir Action and state how the requirements were all fulfilled.

Example:
Fake Title
Requirements: Traveller is named Kaddar
Action: Traveller may increase another Traveller’s influence by 1

The purpose of this ruleset is to provide a framework for proposing fun game actions based on requirements, but that players may only perform one of any of these game actions per a day so that we are not flooded with minor game changes.

When describing requirements based on game events (like changing your formula), be clear on how long ago the game event may have occured, otherwise players may argue that the event occured 3 days ago, and so they may still apply it.  For example, if a requirement is: Traveller travelled to TL: 1/1/1, then if a player has ever travelled to 1/1/1, he may do the action.  I’ll leave it to you all to pick the wording for subrules.

Add a Travelling Companions sub-rule to Companions:

Whenever a Traveller is allowed to change eir TL, e may choose to change eir CTL instead. That is counted, for purposes of frequency, as if e had changed eir TL. Any such move that would be based on the Traveller’s current TL shall be based on eir CTL instead.

Quorum drops to 6.

I propose the following rule “The Modus Ponens”

Subrules to this rule are in Cause:,Effect:, format.  A Traveller may often, and only often, apply an effect due to a Cause.  If a Traveller applies the Effect of one Cause, e may not apply the Effect of any other Cause for a period of time specified by “often”.  “Due to a Cause” means Causes trigger effects.  In other words, a Cause has just happened when an Effect is applied. 

When a Traveller applies an effect, e must post an entry explaining the use of it to the blog.

Unless at least half the players voting for this proposal also post the following string: “Blank Slate”, add the following subrules to “The Modus Ponens”

Time Hop
Cause: This Traveller changes target event
Effect: This Traveller’s TL changes to targeted event’s TL

Unraveling Mechanism
Cause: This Traveller changes target Traveller’s formula
Effect: This Traveller gains 5 influence, then if able, targeted Traveller loses 4 influence.

Basic idea of this is many repeatable events, but only one may occur per a day to reduce game complexity.  Some subrules would also be chronocrimes (see: subrule2 when not targeting self).  Note the purpose of rule #1 is that if you are at an early timeline, and change it and a later timeline, it allows you to then move to that timeline.

please idle me. thanks.

I wish to go idle.

I’m joining the PRC again.

I’m leaving the PRC.

I’m joining the PRC

Excalabur idles at eir request.
The Doctor (recently known as Gabriel) and Thorolf idle due to lack of activity.

Quorum drops to 7.

(Make these changes in the order listed)
In the Rule “Paradox Prevention”, replace

On joining the Company a Traveler gains 10 points of Influence. On quitting the Company a Traveler loses 10 points of Influence.

with

The Range of a member of the Paradox Prevention Company is calculated as if that member had an additional 12 Influence, unless the member has 0 Influence.

Each PRC member with less than 10 Influence is guilty of the Cronocrime “Abuse of the PRC Influence bonus”, and as punishment, may not choose to change eir Temporal Location for 1 Real week.

Reduce the Influence of each PRC member by 10.

If more than half of all comments containing counted votes on this Proposal contain the text “Twelve?”, then replace all instances of “12” in Rule “Paradox Prevention” with “10”.

Add the following to Rule 2.14 “Paradox Prevention”

Members of the Paradox Reduction Company (PRC) are expected to behave as exemplars to the Traveller community. As a result, any failure of members to observe the letter and the spirit of the laws of time will be dealt with extremely harshly. Any Traveller may accuse a member of the Company of violating a law of time by posting to the front page of the blog to that effect. Once such an accusation is made, the Company member is “suspended”. This is a status tracked in the “Company” column in the GNDT . A suspended member of the company retains the influence benefits of being a member of the Company, but may not quit the company and can take no official action as a member of the PRC (in case there ever are other actions PRC members may take). All Travellers may vote on the accusing post. If at any time after the accusing post has been in existence more than 12 hours there a number of “for” votes equal to or greater than quorum, the accused member of the PRC has been found to have violated the laws of time. If after the accusing post has been in existence for 48 hours the conditions for the member of the PRC to be found to have violated the laws of time have not been met, the accusation is found to be unsubstantiated and the accused member is restored to active status within the PRC. If the member is found to have violated the laws of time, e is immediately expelled from the PRC, wihch change is tracked in the Company column of the GNDT . Expelled members may not rejoin the PRC. The expelled member also looses an additional 5 points of influence. This is in addition to any penalties that might attach to the violation of the law of time.

If a majority of the votes on this proposal contain the phrase “boy who cried wolf” add to the above:

If an accusation is found to be unsubstantiated, the person who made the accusation looses 3 influence.

10 points of influence can’t be free…

As Hix pointed out, my prior efforts to observe the birth of Friedrich Nietzsche were rendered ineffective by my failure to observe the rules of time.  I have attempted to remedy the flaws and witness the happy event.  Timeline altered accordingly.

The following rules are intended to clarify the events if a player joins the Paradox Reduction Company, but leaves with less than 10 influence.  The alternative to these proposals is to fix the paradox reduction company rule, but I think this is more fun:

And add a new subrule to the “The Laws of time”

Illegally Influential
A Traveller may not have influence below 0

If more than half the votes voting for this proposal do not contain the string “The rules aren’t broken” then enact the following change in 2.7, influence:

Each Traveller has an Influence, which is tracked in the GNDT as a nonnegative integer. New Travellers start with an Influence equal to the Influence of the already-existing Traveller with the Qth highest Influence, where Q is Quorum (before the New Traveller joined).

If a Traveller has Influence X and either e has no Companion or eir CTL is the same as eir TL, then that Traveller’s Range consists of all Game Dates from |X| years before eir TL to |X| years after eir TL. If a Traveller with a Companion has Influence X and eir CTL is not the same as eir TL, then that Traveller’s Range consists of all Game Dates from |X|/2 years before eir TL to |X|/2 years after eir TL and all Game Dates from |X|/2 years before eir CTL to |X|/2 years after eir CTL. All date ranges are inclusive of the end dates. All fractions are rounded towards the centre of the Range and fraction rounding occurs immediately on the years so that Ranges always stretch a whole number of years either side of the centre.

For example, if a Traveller has a TL of 1550/5/5, a CTL of 1440/3/2 and an Influence of 9 then eir range is 1546/5/5 to 1554/5/5 and 1436/3/2 to 1444/3/2.

(some people might be ok with the idea that -10 before means the same thing as 10 after, but I don’t want there to be confusion)

This means that players can have influence below 0 if a rule causes it, and that it can be beneficial, and that it is also a cybercrime.  Evil Influence.  Yes.

Passing through the Continuum to the final days of 1448, I happen to observe the opening of the Vatican Library.

I’ve joined PRC.

On a side note, I’ve extrapolated the nominating of Rodney as the High Sheriff of Time and “joined him” to the PRC also. The reasoning is:

* The rule says only members of PRC can be HST.
* The rule says Rodney is the HST.
* ergo, Rodney is a member of PRC.

Enable a local rule Broader Bribery! (1420/11/25):

A Traveller may occasionally raise the Influence of a Traveller other than eirself by 1 and then raise eir own Influence by 1. The local rule “Bribery! (1323/12/12)” is void and the action described there cannot be taken by any Traveller.

Note this is local to 1420/11/25. I hope this rule signifies that Bribery! (1323/12/12) can oly be used by Travellers whose TL falls between 1323/12/12 and 1420/11/24.

I’m at a regatta until Sunday, and request to be idled until then.

Create a Local rule called ‘A Slow Drip (758/12/25)’ :

Any Traveler may often make a DICE2 check in the GNDT with the comment ‘Influence Drip’. If the result is 1, e loses one point of Influence. If the result is 2, e gains two points of Influence. The results of this check shall be posted on the front page.

The rule ‘Time Crystals’ has a deal of unnecessary italics in it:

There exist Time Crystals (or simply “Crystals”). While in possession of one or more Time Crystals, a Traveller’s Shiny value is temporarily boosted to the maximum Shiny value (as specified in Rule 2.1) and e receives all benefits, restrictions, and responsibilities therein. Eir temporary Shiny value is noted in the GNDT as “m [p]”, where m is the current maximum Shiny value and p is the Traveller’s previous Shiny value. Any actions that would change the Traveller’s Shiny value are ignored, affecting neither the boosted nor previous value. However, if the maximum allowable Shiny value changes, then boosted Shiny values change too. If the Traveller loses possession of all eir Time Crystals, then eir Shiny value reverts to the lesser of eir previous Shiny value and the current maximum Shiny value.

I have boldly used the last clause in 1.1,

Admin Staff may correct obvious spelling and typographical mistakes in the Ruleset at any time.

and, having decided that these italics are clearly typographical errors, removed them. Any Traveler who believes that the italics were intentionally used as per 3.1 is free to issue a Call for Judgment.

Reword Bribery! (1323/12/12) so it reads:

A Traveller may occasionally raise the Influence of a Traveller other than eirself by 1 and then raise eir own Influence by 1 .

Note this is local to 1323/12/12

Add to Influence:

Whenever Proposal passes, its author gains 1 Influence if it was local, or 2 otherwise.  E gains 2 additional Influence if the Proposal received a Quorum of FOR votes.

Give Bucky 2 Influence.

[ Here’s an alternative solution to the italics problem (which has just struck again, knocking damaging holes into the new ‘Time Crystals’ rule). ]

In the Glossary, replace element 3.1 (“Italicized text is not considered part of the ruleset…”), if it exists, with:-

If a paragraph contains more italicised words than unitalicised words, then it is not considered part of the ruleset. Such paragraphs may be used to clarify a rule with examples, notes or flavor text.

Add a new Dynastic Rule “Fuel” with the following text:

In addition to basic time-travel, Travellers have other, more spectacular Powers that require Fuel.  Each Traveller has Fuel reserves, tracked in the GNDT.  When a Traveller’s Fuel reserves are 0, that Traveller cannot use Powers.  New Travellers start with 10 Fuel.

Travellers may use Gasoline, Plutonium, Psychic Energy etc.; however, all Fuel is considered to be equivalent for game purposes.

Whenever Proposal passes, its author gains 5 Fuel if it was local, or 10 otherwise.  E gains 10 additional Fuel if the Proposal received a Quorum of FOR votes.

Give all Travellers 10 Fuel.  Give the Arbiter 200 Fuel.

Hey, whatever happened to the “Time Crystals” Proposal about crystals that temporarily set your Shiny to maximum?  That Proposal was well on the way to being Enacted, but I can’t find it in the Ruleset;  it’s nowhere to be found in the blog, either!

Add a new Dynastic Rule to the Ruleset called “Time Vacations”.  Give it the following text:

If a Traveller has 10 influence, they may decrease their influence by 10 to purchase a ticket (GNDT tracked) to any vacationable TL.  A vacationable TL must not contain a Perilous Node Event, and must not be before the year -15000 or after the year 6000. While they have this ticket, they may change eir TL to eir ticket TL, or to 2235/8/14.  When a traveller travels to 2235/8/14, they must remove all eir tickets.  Travellers must announce in the weblog whenever their ticket value changes.

And add a new subrule to the “The Laws of time”

Restrictions on Time Vacations
Travellers may not modify any node event if they have a ticket.

When this proposal passes, create a Node Event in the time line at 2235/8/14 with the description: “Warner TimeTravel Agency TimePort accepting incoming Travellers” with the tags:
[Perilous],[Time Travel],[TimePort]

Also note the interaction with companions before voting.

I propose that in the ruleset, we replace all italicized with red italicized text. red italicized text looks like this.  In addition, replace all instances of “Italicized” in the ruleset with “Red Italicized” .  Should a later blognomic ever require red text for the main page, “Red italicized” could simply be changed to “blue italicized”.  If this proposal passes, the arbiter may choose a color other than red if preferred.

As a side note, this proposal fails if I-Space passes.

Create a new rule titled ‘Paradox Prevention’:

Some Travelers are members of the Paradox Reduction Company. Any Traveler who is not a member of the Company may join it by giving notice to the front page, and any member of the Company except the Arbiter may quit it by giving notice to the front page. The Arbiter is always a member of the Company.

On joining the Company a Traveler gains 10 points of Influence. On quitting the Company a Traveler loses 10 points of Influence.

At any given moment, one member of the Company except the Arbiter may be the High Sheriff of Time, charged with enforcing causality and prosecuting Cronocrime. The current Sheriff shall always be listed in the next line. Currently X is the High Sheriff of Time.

If the Sheriff quits the Company, e ceases to be the Sheriff, and this change shall be noted in the above paragraph.  In this case the Arbiter may appoint a new Sheriff at eir pleasure.

If more than half of the counted votes contain the phrase “I shot the Sheriff, but I did not shoot X”, where X is the name of a Traveler other than Arbiter, then X becomes the Sheriff and shall be listed above in the rule. Otherwise in default Rodney becomes the High Sheriff of Time and shall be listed in place of X above.

Remove glossary entry 3.1 (“Italicized text is not considered part of the ruleset…”).

[ This is being used for scams and is inadvertently spoiling proposals, more than it’s actually useful, I think.

I’ve struggled to come up with a better, unscammable wording, but I don’t think there is one - wherever the line between “rule” and “example text” is drawn, it’s possible to compose paragraphs that deliberately look like they’re on one side but are actually on the other. So maybe we shouldn’t have a line. ]

If the Proposal titled “Bribery! (1323/12/12)” failed, this Proposal does nothing. Otherwise, in the Local Rule titled ‘Bribery! (1323/12/12)’, change the text:

If a Traveller named “Bucky” exists, each Traveller besides Bucky may occasionally increase Bucky’s Influence by 1, then increase eir own Influence by 1.

to

If a Traveller named “Purplebeard” exists, each Traveller besides Purplebeard may occasionally increase Purplebeard’s Influence by 1, then increase eir own Influence by 1.

2 days before the murder of Abbot Stefano, I caught Bruno with a copy of “Malleus Maleficarum”.  The book had not been published yet.  I recommend a local alert and further study to determine how he obtained it and how to keep it from causing a paradox at the time of the book’s composition.  A temporal quarentine may be necessery.  The appropriate node has been added.

It’s true.  Check the GNDT log from last dynasty.

My erstwhile companion and I have gone to 1844 to witness the birth of Friedrich Nietzsche.  The timeline has been altered accordingly.

Some malfunction has set the RHS of each Formula to “z”.  That, or “z” got tired of being equal to zero all the time.

Using Formula “t-(w-100)=z”

Da Vinci idles.  Quorum remains at 9.

Beowulf Event Node added.

Note that there may now be Pending Local Proposals older than some already-Enacted Proposals (in fact, there is currently one such Local Proposal), so don’t forget to check out the “Pending Proposals” links in the sidebar.

Purplebeard has my permission to alter others’ formulas (see the first Law of Time), unless I state otherwise in a post to the Main Page.

I propose the following be appended to the Arrow Of Time

If a Local Rule is created which a Traveller would be affected by, but that Traveller cannot currently vote for that Rule, that Traveller may move to the TL of that local rule.

This solves some of my worries about win conditions and influence I think.

Add a new Dynastic Rule to the Ruleset called “Vertices in alto temporis”.  Give it the following text:

There are certain places where time is not linear dispite the Arbiter’s best efforts.  Some of these places are listed as subrules to this rule. 

In subrules to this Rule, where it says date X comes after date Y, date Y implicitly comes before date X.

Also, add the following subrules to the above Rule:

“Fluctus Parvus (1421/8/7-1421/8/31 | 14/8/10)”

For all Game Date purposes, 1421/8/10 comes after 1421/8/6,  1421/8/7 comes after 1421/8/13 and 1421/8/14 comes after 1421/8/9.  Essentially, two sets of dates swap places.

“Vertex Sanctus (1/1/1 - 1/1/1)”

For all Game Date purposes, 1/1/1 comes after 1/1/1, and 1/1/2 comes after 0/12/31.  1/1/1 may be referred to as “The Sanctuary”.

“Vertex Hyrulis (320/6/1-327/5/31)”

For all Game Date purposes, 320/6/1 comes after 327/5/31 and 327/6/1 comes after 320/5/31.

“Fluctus Magnus (-300000 - -100000 | -200000)”

For all Game Date purposes, -200000/1/1 comes after -300001/12/31, -300000/1/1 comes after -100001/12/31 and -100000/1/1 comes after -200001/12/31.  Unfortunately, our ancesters did not knonw enough about the modern calendar to notice.

I just used Thelonius’s Formula ‘y=x’ to set ‘x’ to 25. It then falls out of bounds and becomes 12.

Unfortunately, Blinky escaped from his barn when I was out running errands and then devoured a neighboring herd of cattle, so we jump to 758/12/25 to avoid an angry mob of Prussians. Hope we haven’t screwed up the timeline too much.

Amend the Rule “The Contiuum”:

If variables ‘w’ and ‘z’ are both zero, then all Travellers within range of TL [t]/[x]/[y] are trapped. Trapped Travellers may not change the Time Travel Variables. Thus, TL [t]/[x]/[y] would be the only jumpable TL for all Travellers.

An individual Traveller may escape the trap by decreasing eir Influence until e is no longer within range of TL [t]/[x]/[y]. A non-trapped Traveller can dismiss or move the trap by changing the Time Travel Variables using a valid Formula:

• If ‘w’ or ‘z’ are set to a non-zero value, then the trap is dismissed.
• If ‘t’, ‘x’, or ‘y’ are changed, then the trap’s effect moves to TL [t]/[x]/[y].

I altered my formula.

I then used it to set ‘t’ to 758.

In startling news today, Jesus has announced upon entrance to Jerusalem that Judas, known by many as his “Favored Diciple,” will not be coming to their dinner at the local Hotel Jonah, scheduled for next month.  Jesus sited differences in belief leading to the rift, as well as a tip by an informant Jesus only referred to as “Greth”.  Further news as things develop as the well-proclaimed “King of the Jews” continues his amazing feats of miracles and divine lessons.

Node Event added.

Add a new rule “The Laws of time” to the ruleset:

The subrules to this rule are considered the Laws of Time, which are a number of rules designed to prevent Cronocrime running rampant. Travellers do not necessarily have to follow the provisions stipulated in the Laws of Time, but if they break such a sitpulation, they may be guilty of commiting a Cronocrime.

And add a new subrule to it entitled “No vandalizing other people’s Time Machines.”:

Travellers may not change another Traveller’s formula without permission of either that Traveller or the Arbiter.

These rules were intentionally left vague to give room for future proposals on this subject.

Today, I visited some old friends.  We chatted, had tea and took a day trip out to the May 18th Revolution, where we got front-row seats for our nation’s first major coup.  The proper node has been added to the Timeline.

Add a new Rule titled ‘Manipulation’:

Twice every seventy-two hours, a Traveler may Attract another Traveler towards emself, afterwards posting a notice to the front page. If D is the distance in years between the two Travelers (taken to be a positive quantity), let M be defined as I*DICE(3I)/DICE(D^2), rounded up to the nearest integer, where I is the Influence of the Attracting Traveler.  If the Attracting Traveler has a later date then the Traveller being Attracted, the increase the latter’s TL by M years, but not past the TL of the Attracting Traveler. If the Attracting Traveler has a earlier date then the Traveller being Attracted, then decrease the latter’s TL by M years, but not past the TL of the Attracting Traveler.

Twice every seventy-two hours, a Traveler may Repel another Traveler away from emself, afterwards posting a notice to the front page. If D is the distance in years between the two Travelers (taken to be a positive quantity), let N be defined as I*DICE(2I)/DICE(D^2), rounded up to the nearest integer, where I is the Influence of the Attracting Traveler. If the Attracting Traveler has a later date then the Traveller being Attracted, the decrease the latter’s TL by N years. If the Attracting Traveler has a earlier date then the Traveller being Attracted, then increase the latter’s TL by N years, but not past the TL of the Attracting Traveler.

In the Rule 2.9, ‘The Continuum’, change the line:

A Traveler may, no more than once every seventy-two hours, edit one Formula in the GNDT, as long as the resulting Formula is legal.

to

A Traveler may, no more than once every ninety-six hours, edit one Formula in the GNDT, as long as the resulting Formula is legal.

A slight change to make the Formulas a little more valuable. I propose that we change the waiting period from three days to four (and possibly longer after we see how this may work) to encourage Travellers to make use of all the Formulas for travel.

After some painstaking research, Blinky and I have traveled through through time and space to the exact moment when a young Friedrich Nietzche was on a late Autumn walk through Saxony.  Being such a fan of Wagner myself, I couldn’t bear to let Nietzche grow up and write that diatribe against one of my favorite composers, so I had Blinky eat him.

We’re currently on the lam in Prussia—I’ve hidden Blinky in a barn that I had bought expressly for the purpose, but he’s getting hungry again and I’ve got to get out of here soon. I look forward to the absence of such terrible prose such as Beyond Good and Evil and Thus Spoke Zarathrustra when I return to future times.

The relevant node is added.

I’ve just changed my Formula to ‘100x+25y + w =t’. We have

• ‘x’=11
• ‘y’=25
• ‘w’=133

so now ‘t’=1858.

Add a new Local Rule to the Ruleset entitled “Bribery! (1323/12/12)” containing the following text:

If a Traveller named “Bucky” exists, each Traveller besides Bucky may occasionally increase Bucky’s Influence by 1, then increase eir own Influence by 1.

Add to rule 2.8, Arrow of Time:

When a Traveller votes on a Local Proposal, e must include eir current TL in the comment containing their vote for their vote to be counted.

I noticed how annoying it was to keep track of who was where when, and this will also make sure people check their TL before they vote on a LP.

I propose the following be appendedto the “arrow of time” ruleset:

A Traveller may not propose a Local Rule which directly increases influence.  However, a Traveller may still create Local Rules that indirectly increase influence.  Indirection is defined as a Local Rule which changes a Traveller’s status in such a way that a non-Local Rule may increase influence.  A Traveller may only claim victory because of a Local Rule’s indirect effect.

As is worded, This only affects Local Rules proposed after this comes into affect.  Examples would be:
A global rule: While a Traveller is a Morlor then he has 5 additional influence.
or
A global rule: While a Traveller is a Morlor may attempt to claim victory
A local rule: Any Travellers local to this rule are Morlors.

This allows global players to keep checks on those outside of range.  I could see Artifacts of Time (see: other proposal) being created locally and yet give benefits due to a global rule which allows for it, as an example.

Please check the Most Recent Votes page at the Wiki.

Da Vinci has not voted since 06/25 and Thorolf, created 07/02 has never voted. Is that correct?

Okay, here’s my first rule proposal, hope it is correct.

Add a new Dynastic Rule to the ruleset titled “Artifacts of Time”.  Give it the following text:

There exists objects, known as an Artifact of Time (AOT).  Artifacts of Time act as indicators of things that have happened in a TL.  Artifacts of Time have their list of properties tracked in GNDT.  They have the following properties:  ‘Name’, ‘Description’, ‘TL range’, ‘Events Linked to’, ‘Current TL or Current Holder’.

A description is what the Artifact of Time looks like.  A TL range is the period in the timeline that the AOT exists in naturally.  Events linked to are all events that may have lead to its existance within its TL range.  If its ‘current TL or current holder’ is not a Traveller, it must be a TL that is within its TL range, this describes where it is and describes it as not having a holder.  If it’s current TL or current holder is a Traveller, then that Traveller currently holds it.

If a Traveller changes the timeline at an event linked to an AOT within or before its TL range, e may elect to modify the artifact’s following properties: ‘current holder or current TL’ , ‘name’, or ‘description’.  If a Traveller changes any property of an artifact, e must post about it on the Blog.

If e elected to modify the ‘current holder or current TL’ property then e must either change ‘current holder or current TL’ to any TL within the TL range or to emself.  E may only change it to emself if e is in a TL within its TL range. This is how you pick up Artifacts of Time

If e elected to modify its ‘name’ or ‘description, and a Traveller’s name is inside the ‘current holder or current TL’ property, the current holder may elect to have it returned to any TL in it’s TL range. 

For example, assume Kevan was to take a ‘Murder Evidence Weapon’ with TL range ‘1440/11/25-1440/11/26’ and event link ‘Marcello’ from the TL 1440/11/25.  Then assume Angry Grasshopper were to travel to 1440/3/3 and change the timeline.  E would then be able to take away the ‘Murder Evidence Weapon’, and put it at 1440/11/25, but not give it to emself, since e is at a TL outside the TL range.  E could also redescribe it to contain the text: ‘Has Angry Grasshopper’s blood on it’, and so Angry Grasshopper may elect to have never removed a weapon with his blood from the timeline, thereby leaving the ‘Murder Evidence Weapon’ with ‘Has Angry Grasshopper’s blood on it’ in 1440/11/25

Artifacts of Time may only be created (have its properties Initialized) and removed entirely by the Arbiter.  After creation, an Arbiter may modify the property ‘current TL or holder’ to any TL within the TL range.  An Arbiter may modify the description or name of an artifact, but in doing so, the Traveller who currently holds it may elect to return it to a TL within it’s TL range.

Note that I am not specifing what Artifacts of Time are for in this proposal.  I am also not restricting re-naming and re-describing rules, though that would probably be a good future addition.

To put it simply, Artifacts are the BlogNomic equivalent of picture of Marty McFly.

[ Straight reproposal of Catastrophe Curve, bearing in mind Hix’s veto - using a fresh keyword and allowing the Arbiter to manipulate such events. ]

Add the following paragraph to Rule 2.6 (The Timeline), after the third paragraph:-

Node Events with the “Perilous” keyword are too dangerous to manipulate directly, and can only be redescribed as the result of a side-effect, or by the Arbiter.

...and replace “Any Traveller may create or redescribe a Node Event” with “Any Traveller may create or redescribe a non-Perilous Node Event”.

I don’t fully understand the language in the first paragraph of R2.9.  I think the following is legal (i.e. doesn’t fall foul of the transcendental or indeterminate exclusions) but could somebody clarify.

t+(x/x)=t

i.e. you could often increase time by 1 year (provided that x isn’t 0).

Coldspell, I’ve just reverted your TL because you updated it illegally.  There’s no rule that allows you to update your TL according to a formula.  What you need to do is update the variables according to a formula (middle of rule 2.9) and then update your position to the current set of variables [t]/[x]/[y] (end of rule 2.9).  Because you didn’t update the variables, your attempted move to 0/11/25 was illegal.  At the time you did the update, I believe t was 1371.

Everything seems in order.  I believe that I have arrived in 1419/11/26 safely.

Add a new Dynasstic Rule to the rulset titled “The March of Time”.  Give it the following text:

Each Traveller may often change eir TL forward one day.  For example, a Traveller whose TL is 1422/4/30 may change it to 1422/5/1, but not 1423/4/30.

In the Core Rule “Enactment”, replace all occurences of “The oldest pending Proposal” with “The oldest pending Proposal, or the oldest pending non-Local Proposal, “

Add a paragraph to the Dynastic Rule “Arrow of Time” with text:

When this Rule is Repealed, remove all occurences of “, or the oldest pending non-Local Proposal, ” from the Core Rule “Enactment”.

Elias IX idles.

In the glossary, change

To roll dice, post DICEX in the comments field of a post, replacing X with the number of sides on the die you wish to roll.

to

To roll dice, post DICEX in the comments field of the GNDT, replacing X with the number of sides on the die you wish to roll.

Elias IX unidles.

I’m sorry for the following.

Bruno the Witchfinder watchs Marcello the Scribe being murdered by a hooded person.

Add a new Dynasstic Rule to the rulset titled “The March of Time”.  Give it the following text:

Each Traveller may often increment eir TL.  For example, a Traveller whose TL is 1422/4/30 may change it to 1422/5/1, but not 1423/4/30.

Edited to unofficial because someone else just proposed the same thing while I was writing this -Bucky

Further note: CP’s version seems to be unofficial because it’s eir third pending proposal.

Add the following paragraph to Whenever you go, then you are:

Often, the TL of each Traveller may be increased by 1 game day. Any Traveller who has not altered eir TL in the last 24 real hours may enforce this provision. Whenever this is done, only 1 day shall be added to the TL of each Traveller, even if it has not been done for more than 24 hours. Whenever this provision is enforced, the influence of each Traveller shall be increased by 0.5 per whole period of 24 real hours elapsed since the last time this provision was enforced, rounding up any fractions in the resulting influence.

Upon enactment, enforce the provision created by this Proposal, considering that no whole period of 24 real hours has elapsed since the last enforcement.

Substitute the last 2 bullets in the Timespans section in the Glossary with:

* An action which may be taken ‘often’ may be taken once per day, but not more than once every six hours.
* An action which may be taken ‘frequently’ may be taken once each 48 hours, but not more than once every twelve hours.
* An action which may be taken ‘occasionally’ may be taken once each 72 hours, but not more than once per twenty-four hours.
* An action which may be taken ‘seldom’ may be taken once per week, but not more than once per fourty-eight hours.

In The Continuum, change “no more than once every seventy-two hours” to “occasionally”.

In Microjumps, change “each Traveller may set eir TL to any date within eir Range once every 48 hours” to “each Traveller may frequently set eir TL to any date within eir Range”

If more than 2/3 of the counted votes in this proposal says “Daily drift”, add “Often,” before the first sentence in Microjumps.

Sorry for the blog-spam but I’ve never rolled dice before and I wanted to see how it worked.

dice-6 = DICE6, dice-6 = DICE6, dice-6 = DICE6, dice-6 = DICE6, dice-6 = DICE6, dice-6 = DICE6
dice-0 = DICE0
dice—1 = DICE-1

Add the following paragraph to Rule 2.6 (The Timeline), after the third paragraph:-

Node Events with the “Katastrophe” keyword are too dangerous to manipulate directly, and can only be redescribed as the result of a side-effect.

...and replace “Any Traveller may create or redescribe a Node Event” with “Any Traveller may create or redescribe a non-Katastrophic Node Event”.

Moidfy the rule titled “Influence” by changing the second paragraph to read…

If a Traveller has Influence X and either e has no Companion or eir CTL is the same as eir TL, then that Traveller’s Range consists of all Game Dates from X years before eir TL to X years after eir TL.  If a Traveller with a Companion has Influence X and eir CTL is not the same as eir TL, then that Traveller’s Range consists of all Game Dates from X/2 years before eir TL to X/2 years after eir TL and all Game Dates from X/2 years before eir CTL to X/2 years after eir CTL.  All date ranges are inclusive of the end dates.  All fractions are rounded towards the centre of the Range and fraction rounding occurs immediately on the years so that Ranges always stretch a whole number of years either side of the centre.

Add the following explanatory paragraph to the end of the rule titled “Influence” unless half of the counted FOR votes contain the text “No explanation required”.

For example, if a Traveller has a TL of 1550/5/5, a CTL of 1440/3/2 and an Influence of 9 then eir range is 1546/5/5 to 1554/5/5 and 1436/3/2 to 1444/3/2.

Add a new local rule titled “Influential Beacon (1439/7/6)” with the following body.

The first time that a Traveller’s TL changes to come within eir Range of 1439/7/6, eir Influence is increased by 10.

At the time of enactment, for the purposes of the rule titled “Influential Beacon (1349/7/6)”, all Traveller’s TLs are considered to have “changed” to eir current value - i.e. those already within Range gain the influence bonus and aren’t able to get it again.

To Rule 2.3, ‘Calendar’, add the following text:

Additionally, a Game Date may take an Extended Form when permitted by another rule. A Game Date in Extended Form is an entry from the following list:

• Cambrian
• Carboniferous
• Permian
• Triassic
• Jurassic
• Cretaceous
• End of Time
• The Timeless Moment
• Unknown

For reference, the Cambrian Era is approximately 500 million years ago (m.y.a),  the Carboniferous Era 350 m.y.a, the Permian 300 m.y.a, the Triassic 250 m.y.a, the Jurassic 200 m.y.a, and the Cretaceous is 150 m.y.a.

Amend Rule 2.4, ‘Whenever you go, then you are’, to read:

Each Traveller has a Temporal Location (TL), which is tracked in the GNDT as a Game Date in Standard or Extended Form. New Travellers start at TL 1419/11/26.

There are other important geological eras. If I missed your favorite, I’m sure we could add it to the list. Thanks to Bucky for ‘The Timeless Moment’ and ‘Unknown’.

In the Rule ‘The Continuum’, change the clause:

Often, a Traveler may change the values of ‘x’, ‘y’, ‘z’, ‘w’, or ‘t’ as permitted by any of the legal Formulas that exist in the GNDT (provided that division by zero does not occur), then giving notice on the front page that this has happened.

to

A Traveler may often change one of the values of ‘x’, ‘y’, ‘z’, ‘w’, or ‘t’ as permitted by any of the legal Formulas that exist in the GNDT (provided that division by zero does not occur), then giving notice on the front page that this has happened.

“One” is a nice word, and I seem to have omitted it from an important place in that sentence. Thanks to Kevan for helping me parse this.

I’m using ’ (1/10)t-4=w’. ‘t=1440’, so ‘w=136’. It was 137. Boo.

Create a Rule to clarify the Ascension Address:

All Travellers shall start the game as human. Traveller’s Companions may start the game as nonhuman. Nonhuman races may have unique racial abilities and limitations. New nonhuman races and racial characteristics must be Enacted by Proposal before an instance of that race (i.e. a Traveller, a Companion, or a Non-Player Character) may be played. Means with which to change races, voluntarily or involuntarily, may be Enacted by Proposal.

Create Local Rule “A Wrinkle in Time (1432/7/10)” with text:

If any Traveller’s Temporal Location would be set to a Game Date which is before 1432/7/10, that Traveller’s Influence is reduced by 10% (rounding all fractions up) before eir TL changes.

Time travelling is inherantly inaccurate.  Time machines need to be regularly recalibrated to ensure proper function.

Reword Rule 2.9 ‘The Continuum’ to the following:

Each Traveler is permitted to specify an algebraic Formula (to be tracked in the GNDT) relating six global time travel variables: ‘x’, ’y’, ’z’, ’w’, ‘t’, and ‘c’. A Formula is an equation relating least two distinct variables from this list. Each Formula must be well formed and in simplest terms, contain no transcendental functions, and not evaluate to indeterminate forms explicitly. A legal Formula must assign exactly one variable to the right hand side.  The variable ‘c’ may never appear on the right hand side of a Formula, with the exception of the Calibration Formula.  The Calibration Formula is tracked in the second GNDT, along with the time travel variables.

Some examples of legal Formulas are ‘x+y=t’, ‘300w/z = y’, and ‘x^2-t/(x+y) +1 = w’.

The Arbiter may erase any Formula that does not satisfy the above conditions, or edit any Formula for game / plot purposes.

A Traveler may, no more than once every seventy-two hours, edit one Formula in either GNDT, as long as the resulting Formula is legal.

Often, a Traveler may change one, and only one, of the values of ‘x’, ‘y’, ‘z’, ‘w’, or ‘t’ as permitted by any of the legal Formulas that exist in the GNDT (provided that division by zero does not occur), then giving notice on the front page that this has happened.  E must also recalculate the value of ‘c’ accordingly.

If ‘t’ is greater than 6000, it becomes 6000. If ‘x’ is greater than 12, it becomes 12. If ‘y’ is greater than 31, it becomes 31.  If ‘c’ is greater than 365, it becomes 365.

If ‘t’ is less than -15000, it becomes -15000. If ‘x’ is less than 0, it becomes 0. If ‘y’ is less than 0, it becomes 0.  If ‘c’ is less than 0, it becomes 0.

Often, a Traveler may attempt a Time Jump.  To do this, e first rolls DICEC and DICE2 in the GNDT, where C is the real portion of the value of ‘c’, rounded to the nearest integer.

If the second DICE roll is 1, e sets eir TL to [t]/[x]/([y] + first DICE roll), ensuring that this is normalised to a valid date (e.g. 1440/1/41 normalises to 1440/2/10).

If the second roll is 2, e instead sets eir TL to [t]/[x]/([y] - first DICE roll), normalising as necessary.

In the above, [t], [x], and [y] are the real parts of ‘t’, ‘x’, and ‘y’ rounded to the nearest integer.

The variables ‘x’, ‘y’, ‘z’, ‘w’, ‘t’, and ‘c’ shall be real numbers. If any of these variables should become complex, set the imaginary part to zero.

Add two columns to the second GNDT, namely ‘c’ and ‘Calibration Formula’. 

Set the Calibration Formula to ‘(t/100)+(x/15)+(y/15)+(z/15)+(w/15)=c’.

Use this formula to calculate the value of ‘c’, and set accordingly.

Add a new rule to the Ruleset entitled “Segmentation faults”.  Give it the following text:

If a Traveller’s TL would be changed to a value that does not correspond with a valid Game Date, eir TL is instead set to (DICE6001-3001)/(DICE12)/(DICE28) and eir PR is reduced by half if it is greater than 0, and doubled if it is less than 0.

I have been poking around the day before the Abbot’s murder, and have noticed something out of place:  I saw Bruno the Witchfinder in possession of a strange sack which e should not have had.  Further spying 2 hours later found him pulling out scraps of parchment from the sack and reading them.  I do not know what the parchment scraps said, but they may be connected to the attempted arrest of the Arbiter four days later.

Create a new rule titled “Precision”

All travellers have a skill in altering eir location in time called precision, which is tracked as an integer between 0 and 100 in the GNDT.  Any time that a traveller takes an action that would alter eir TL value, e must declare the TL to wihch the action would take em (destination TL) and a direction of error (either “+” or “-”) in the comment field of the GNDT followed by a DICE100 command.  If the result of the DICE100 is less than eir precision e must set eir TL to eir destination TL.  If the result of the dice 100 is greater than eir precision then the traveller has missed eir destination TL and the difference between the DICE100 result and eir precision is eir “error”. If the traveller has missed eir destination, e must roll DICE(error) three times; the results are “error t” “error x” and “error y” respectively.  The traveller must set eir TL to eir destination TL plus or minus error t years, error x months and error y days depending on the direction of error declared in the original comment field entry.

Create a GNDT category “Precision”
Set each Traveller’s Precision to 90

Add to rule Arrow of Time:

Whenever a Local Proposal is enacted or failed, its title, text and each Traveler’s vote shall be recorded in this wiki page in the same manner as the example proposal.

Each Traveler may change eir vote on these enacted or failed Local Proposals, if e would be allowed to do so if the proposal was still open, by changing or adding eir vote in the wiki page (for the purposes of this paragraph, a Veto is a vote). E must then enact or fail that Local Proposal retroactively, if the new vote tally would change the outcome of the proposal, by applying or reverting its effects on the subrule(s) of this rule, and by making a post to the front page stating the new outcome.

Revert any changes made to this wiki page since this Proposal was posted.

I’ve done some variable adjustment.

Add a new Rule entitled “Time Crystals”:

There exist Time Crystals (or simply “Crystals”). While in possession of one or more Time Crystals, a Traveller’s Shiny value is temporarily boosted to the maximum Shiny value (as specified in Rule 2.1) and e receives all benefits, restrictions, and responsibilities therein. Eir temporary Shiny value is noted in the GNDT as “m [p]”, where m is the current maximum Shiny value and p is the Traveller’s previous Shiny value. Any actions that would change the Traveller’s Shiny value are ignored, affecting neither the boosted nor previous value. However, if the maximum allowable Shiny value changes, then boosted Shiny values change too.  If the Traveller loses possession of all eir Time Crystals, then eir Shiny value reverts to the lesser of eir previous Shiny value and the current maximum Shiny value.

Add to Arrow of Time:

A Local Proposal may not be enacted if it has not been open for voting for at least 24 real hours.

This is to allow time for people to move around and vote against a proposal, or for the Arbiter to veto it.

Quorum is 9.

Having done some quick hacking to get this infernal Comtinuum Drive to cooperate, I set it to yesterday and departed for the recent past.

[ Mapping the precise scope of Node Events, so that we have a better idea of what’s going to happen next - mucking around powerfully in the early timeline is still possible, but you’ll have to make two changes (adding a keyword, then redescribing again) to affect an arbitrary future event.

Also formalising Hix’s preference that Travellers not alter more than one Node Event per day. ]

Reword Rule 2.6 (The Timeline) to:-

Scattered throughout time (and recorded in the Timeline page of the wiki) are a number of significant Node Events, each with a unique game date and description. Some Node Events may have keywords, which are listed in brackets as part of their description.

Any Traveller may create or redescribe a Node Event at their current Temporal Location, if they have not done so in the previous 24 real-world hours - this is done by editing the wiki page appropriately, and then posting an entry to the weblog that describes their manipulation of the Timeline.

Redescribing a Node Event (the “Trigger Event”) may cause side effects, which must be made as part of the same update and post. For each keyword that the Trigger Event had prior to the change, a single later-occurring Node Event that shares that keyword (if one exists) may also be redescribed. (Node Events altered through side effects do not trigger further side effects.)

The Arbiter may redescribe or delete Node Events anywhere on the Timeline, if he feels their causality to be discordant (including the addition or removal of overlooked or inappropriate keywords).

Add “(Italy, Religion)” to the end of the description of any Node Events that involve the Badia a Passignano, unless they have already had keywords added.

I did things the ugly brute-force way and forked off a copy of the GNDT

. The time travel variables may be found under the first GNDT—the password for the ‘variables’ account is ‘ttv’. Any admin may edit the config file with the old password.

I understand that Kevan’s code can support many pages from the same script, so I’ll eventually merge the two back together when I get around to it.

Okay, I have the Variables GNDT running out of generic.cgi. There’s still some wonkiness with edit.cgi that I don’t follow, but things seem to work so far—tell me if they don’t.

Chronos unidles

In the Arrow of Time rule, change:

Any Local Proposal which (upon Enactment) would alter any part of the Ruleset, except for the creation or alteration of Local Rules with the same Locale as the Proposal’s Locale, instead has no effect upon Enactment.

to:

Any Local Proposal which (upon Enactment) would alter any part of the Ruleset or Gamestate, except for the creation or alteration of Local Rules with the same Locale as the Proposal’s Locale, instead has no effect upon Enactment.

This is mainly intended to bar local “I win” Proposals. I’m lurking around and may or may not jump in later this dynasty.

Chronos idles

Add a rule titled “Companions have locations” with the following body.

The Companion (if any) of each Traveller has a Companion’s Temporal Location (CTL), which is tracked in the GNDT as a Game Date in Standard Form.  At the point of creation, new Companions start at the TL of the Traveller of whom they are a Companion.

Add a rule titled “Travellers leaving Companions”.

If a Traveller and eir Companion are at the same location, then when the Traveller’s TL changes, at the same time, the CTL changes to the same value.  However, when a Traveller changes eir own TL, e may choose not to change the CTL if e wishes.

For each Traveller that has a Companion, set eir CTL to eir TL.

[ Fixing the loophole that Bucky only pretended to fix. ]

Replace “has not been vetoed” with “has not been vetoed or self-killed”, both times it appears in Rule 1.5 (Enactment).

Ignore this unless it crashes EE.

If the Rule “The Continuum” exists, change the paragraph

Often, a Traveler may set eir TL to [t]/[x]/[y], where [t], [x]. and [y] are the real parts of ‘t’, ‘x’, and ‘y’ rounded to the nearest integer.

to:

Often, a Traveler may set eir TL to [t]/[x]/[y], where [t], [x]. and [y] are the real parts of ‘t’, ‘x’, and ‘y’ rounded to the nearest integer.  If, after this, eir TL does not correspond to a valid Game Date, then reduce eir PR by half (round up) and set eir TL to (DICE3000)/(DICE12)/(DICE28).

When you take another glance, e’s gone.

Change the layout of the Blognomic main page to what it was during the Gostak metadynasty. That is, put the sidebar back on the right side, and change the fonts back to what they were before.

If it is argued that this doesn’t change the gamestate, change the title of the next proposal in queue to “I’m sorry, but other travellers were arguing.”

You see someone rushing by.

You may note wierdness with colours in the near future. 

It’s just hix playin’.

Don’t mind.

Create a Dynastic Rule called “Resistance” with text:

Each Traveller has a numerical Paradox Resistance (PR), which is tracked in the GNDT.  PR may be negative.  If any Traveller’s PR would become greater than 150, it becomes 150 instead.  New Travellers begin with 100 PR.  If no Traveller has done so within the last 6 Real Days, any Traveller may increase the PR of each Traveller by 10. 

Whenever a Traveller’s TL is lowered (i.e. goes backward in Game Time), that Traveller loses 2 PR.
Whenever a Traveller’s TL is changed to a Game Date which was not in eir Range immediately before the change, that Traveller loses 15 PR.
Whenever a Traveller sets eir TL to [t]/[x]/[y] (as in the Rule “The Continuum”), that Traveller loses 6 PR.

For the purposes of achieving a suitable balance, The Arbiter may change the numeric values in this Rule at any time, provided that e makes a post to the Main Page detailing the changes.

Set each Traveller’s PR to 100
Set the Arbiter’s PR to 78

If the Proposal titled “Proximity” failed, this Proposal does nothing.

Add a new Dynastic Rule to the Ruleset entitled “Microjumps” containing the following text:

Each Traveller may set eir TL to the TL of any Traveller within 30 game days.  In addition, each Traveller may set eir TL to any date within eir Range once every 48 hours.

If the Proposal titled “A Small, Time-Drenched Planet” failed, this Proposal does nothing.

Add to the Rule ‘The Continuum’:

The variables ‘x’, ‘y’, ‘z’, ‘w’, and ‘t’ shall be real numbers. If any of these variables should become complex, set the imaginary part to zero.

Hix correctly points out that all variables are positive integers “unless otherwise specified”. While I believe that the relevant text specifies (via Formulas) where the variables can be, it is worthwhile to clarify things. Perhaps if we’re feeling dangerous later we’ll let them be complex .

Marcello witnessed the attack on Abbot Stefano.  Naturally, when he got around to writing his memoir, this event got a whole chapter devoted to it.  Could it be that Marcello unknowingly witnessed a far more important event that occured around the same time?

(Added Marcello’s node at 1440/3/3)

Add a new rule titled “The Continuum”:

Each Traveler is permitted to specify an algebraic Formula (to be tracked in the GNDT) relating five global time travel variables: ‘x’,‘y’,‘z’,‘w’, and ‘t’. A Formula is an equation relating least two distinct variables from this list. Each Formula must be well formed and in simplest terms, contain no transcendental functions, and not evaluate to indeterminate forms explicitly. A legal Formula must assign exactly one variable to the right hand side.

Some examples of legal Formulas are ‘x+y=t’, ‘300w/z = y’, and ‘x^2-t/(x+y) +1 = w’.

The Arbiter may erase any Formula that does not satisfy the above conditions, or edit any Formula for game / plot purposes.

A Traveler may, no more than once every seventy-two hours, edit one Formula in the GNDT, as long as the resulting Formula is legal.

Often, a Traveler may change the values of ‘x’, ‘y’, ‘z’, ‘w’, or ‘t’ as permitted by any of the legal Formulas that exist in the GNDT (provided that division by zero does not occur), then giving notice on the front page that this has happened.

If ‘t’ is greater than 6000, it becomes 6000. If ‘x’ is greater than 12, it becomes 12. If ‘y’ is greater than 31, it becomes 31.

If ‘t’ is less than -15000, it becomes -15000. If ‘x’ is less than 0, it becomes 0. If ‘y’ is less than 0, it becomes 0.

Often, a Traveler may set eir TL to [t]/[x]/[y], where [t], [x]. and [y] are the real parts of ‘t’, ‘x’, and ‘y’ rounded to the nearest integer.

Set ‘t’=1419, ‘x’=11, ‘y’=26, and ‘w’=‘z’=0. Create a GNDT column titled ‘Formula’. Create a new GNDT page and store the time travel variables ‘t’, ‘x’, ‘y’, ‘w’, and ‘z’ in it, and place a link to the new page somewhere on the sidebar.

Create a Dynastic Rule called “Influence” with text:

Each Traveller has an Influence, which is tracked in the GNDT as a nonnegative integer.  New Travellers start with an Influence equal to the Influence of the already-existing Traveller with the Qth highest Influence, where Q is Quorum (before the New Traveller joined).

If a Traveller has Influence X, then that Traveller’s Range consists of all Game Dates from X years before eir Temporal Location to X years after eir Temporal Location (inclusive).

Create a Dynastic Rule called “Arrow of Time” with text:

Subrules of this Rule are known as Local Rules.  Thier titles may only be of the form “X (Y)” where Y is a Game Date in Standard Form; the date Y is the Local Rule’s Locale.  Any Traveller whose Temporal Location is before a Local Rule’s Locale is not counted as a Traveller for the purposes of that Local Rule.

Any Proposal with a subject of the form “X (Y)” where Y is a Game Date in Standard Form is called a Local Proposal, and the date Y is the Local Proposal’s Locale.  No Traveller may make a Local Proposal with a Locale that is not in eir Range.  No non-Arbiter Traveller may vote on a Local Proposal that is not in eir Range.  Any Local Proposal which (upon Enactment) would alter any part of the Ruleset, except for the creation or alteration of Local Rules with the same Locale as the Proposal’s Locale, instead has no effect upon Enactment.  Any Traveller whose Temporal Location is before a Local Proposal’s Locale is not counted as a Traveller for the purposes of the Gamestate being updated to include the specified effects of the Proposal.

Set each Traveller’s Influence to 10.
Set the Arbiter’s Influence to 50.
Fail all Pending Local Proposals.

I’ve unidled myself.

On enactment of this proposal My Username and Screename shall cease to be “Gabriel” and will hense be “The Doctor”.

Also if This proposal and the proposal “Companions” are enacted then my companion shall be called “K9”.

Btw, my blognomic username is now “The Doctor” how ever the GNDT says i’m still Gabriel. Could this be changed at all?? Thanking you kindly in advance,

The Doctor

Alter the last bullet under Rule 3 “Glossary” to read as follows:

Gamestate is defined as any information which the Ruleset regulates the alteration of, such as Travellers’ names and the blog colour scheme.  The Blogstate is defined as the information about the Gamestate available on the blog, such as posts, the ruleset wiki, and the GNDT.  The Blogstate is merely a reflection of relevant aspects of the Gamestate; in case of a discrepancy, the Gamestate is controlling.  If the Blogstate is altered in a way that creates a discrepancy between the Gamestate and Blogstate it has no effect on the Gamestate.

If more than half of the comments voting on this proposal contain the phrase “finish it” replace the following text from Rule 1.7:

All updates to the GNDT are logged - if a Traveller feels that an alteration goes against the Rules (as they were at the time of the alteration), e may simply undo the effects of that alteration. If such an undoing is disputed, a Call for Judgment shall be raised.

with

All updates to the GNDT are logged - if a Traveller feels that an alteration goes against the Rules (as they were at the time of the alteration), e may simply undo the effects of that alteration. If such an undoing is disputed, a Call for Judgment shall be raised.  If a Traveller feels that an alteration of any part of the Blogstate causes it to deviate from the Gamestate e should take action to inform the other Travellers of eis belief and to revert the Blogstate so that it correctly reflects the Gamestate so far as it is within eis power to do so.  Any such reversion should be done in a manner that creates a record of the change and disagreements about such reversions should be resolved by Call for Judgment.

I feel that after the events of the last dynasty some clarifiation on this topic is in order.

Enact a new Rule, “The Timeline”:-

Scattered throughout time are a number of significant Node Events, each with a unique game date and description. These are recorded in the Timeline page of the wiki.

Any Traveller may create or redescribe a Node Event at their current Temporal Location (and optionally create or redescribe a single Node Event with a later game date, where the two Events can be argued to be connected), by editing the wiki page appropriately, and then posting an entry to the weblog that describes their manipulation of the Timeline.

The Arbiter may redescribe or delete Node Events anywhere on the Timeline, if he feels their causality to be discordant.

Create the Timeline and add “1419/11/26 - Death of the Abbot of the Badia a Passignano” to it.

Add a rule titled “Companions” with the following body.

Each Traveller may select a Companion, adding the name of eir Companion to the “Companion” column in the GNDT, provided that eir Companion entry was blank beforehand.  A Traveller may not choose a Companion with the same name as either a Traveller (active or otherwise) or the Companion of a Traveller (active or otherwise).

When this proposal is enacted, the enacting admin shall make a column in the GNDT titled “Companion”.  Further, for each Traveller that commented on this proposal with a sentence of the form…

My Companion is “name”.

...the enacting admin shall fill in the Companion for the Traveller as “name”, subject to the uniqueness rules above, with earlier comments taking precendence for Companion names.  Travellers whose comments select illegal names and Travellers who haven’t commented on this proposal shall have their Companion entries left blank.

Create a Dynastic Rule called “Setting” with text:

There exists a fictional timeline, which is not the same as the real-world timeline. All references to “game time” (including related phrases such as “game year” or “game date”) refer to the fictional timeline, and references to “real time” refer to the real-world timeline. No part of the Gamestate may be misinterpreted as referring to the wrong timeline, if it is clear to Arbiter in context which it refers to. The Core Rules and the Glossary only refer to the real-world timeline.

Create a Dynastic Rule called “Calendar” with text:

A Game Year consists of 365 Game Days, which are named in the same fashion as the days in a real non-leap year are named under the Gregorian calendar (January 1 - December 31). There exists a Game Year named for every integer (negative, zero, or positive), with greater integers naming years that come after ones named by lesser integers.

The “Standard Form” for any Game Date is “X/Y/Z”, where X is the year, Y is the month (an integer from 1 to 12), and Z is the day of the month.

Create a Dynastic Rule called “Whenever you go, then you are” with text:

Each Traveller has a Temporal Location (TL), which is tracked in the GNDT as a Game Date in Standard Form. New Travellers start at TL 1419/11/26.

Set each Traveller’s TL to 1419/11/26.

Delete the following paragraph from Rule 1.2:

Some Travellers are Admin Staff, responsible for updating the site and the Ruleset, and are signified as such in the sidebar. Travellers who wish to become Admins shall sign up with a username for the Ruleset Wiki, and submit a Proposal to make themselves Admins. Existing Admins may be removed from their posts by Proposal, CfJ, or voluntary resignation.

And create a new rule, entitled “Administration”, immediately after Rule 1.2. As this will re-number the current rules 1.3-1.9, correct all references to those rules by number in the ruleset.  Give the new rule the following text:

Some Travellers are Administrators (Admins), and are denoted as such in the sidebar. Admins shall have the ‘Administrator’ flag set for them in Expression Engine, and have duties detailed elsewhere in the ruleset, but which include administration of proposals and adding of new Travellers. Any Traveller wishing to become an Admin shall make a Motion—a post in the Motion category—to become so, no more than once per calendar month, and only via Motion may a Traveller become an Administrator. All active Travellers, as well as all Idle Admins, save the Traveller wishing to become an Admin, may vote for or against (using the appropriate icons) the motion, with later vote superceding earlier ones, and if at least two thirds of votes recieved after 48 hours are FOR, that Traveller becomes an Admin. A Traveller’s administrator status may be removed by voluntary resignation, Proposal, or Call for Judgment. All Admins are requested, on their honour, to avoid using a power that Admin status grants to gain in-game advantage.

Furthermore, some Administrators are Superadministrators (Superadmins), who have all permissions in the blognomic backend, and shell access the Blognomic.com server. Extreme care should be taken when creating new superadministrators. A superadmin is, in addition to the duties of an Administrator, responsible for care of the weblog’s backend, impelementation of new programs and widgets for the blognomic game, and otherwise ensuring the . They may also grant Admins access to the shell at their discretion. Any Administrator may become a Superadmin if and only if a Motion to that effect passes. Any Administrator may make a Motion that E become a Superadmin up to once per calendar month. All active and idle administrators are eligible to vote on this Motion, save the one attempting to become a Superadmin. When all current, active, Superadmins have voted, and at least 48 hours have passed since the Motion was made, the Motion is resolved; at which time if at least two-thirds of the votes are FOR, and no current Superadmin voted against, that Traveller becomes a Superadministrator. A Traveller can lose their superadmin status by proposal, Call for Judgment, or voluntary resignation.

The text of this rule may be altered at any time by the unanamous consent of all active Superadmins, and may not otherwise be altered; save by changing the word Traveller via Ascension Address.

All Travellers within a 10 billion second radius from 1419/11/26 16:12:44 are to report to that time immediately.  I know many of you are on important assignments, but your presence is needed here.  I have just accomplished the rather trivial task of ensuring that the Abbot of the Badia a Passignano passed away at precicely the correct microsecond; but as I was working on this task, many things were happening around me that I had not forseen, although I should have been able to.  There are indications that some malicious force is at work here, attempting to cause a paradox of great magnitude; but I cannot identify the source of the trouble.  I can only hope that you, as humans, are able to help me thwart this force—I find myself quite weakened after making even a casual investigation.  You are all to follow orders of Angry Grasshopper, Bucky, Da Vinci, Excalabur, Gabriel, Greth, Kevan, Purplebeard, ShadowClaw, TAE, Thelonious, and Thorolf, in addition to myself—Each of these Travellers has proven emself quite competent in the field of paradox prevention.

—Arbiter of Time

All Dynastic Rules except 2.1 “Blessings” are repealed.  “Monk”, “Abbot”, and “Blessings” become “Traveller”, “Arbiter”, and “Shiny” (respectively).

Modify the rule titled “Victory and Ascension” by adding the following paragraph at the end.

When a DoV passes, all pending proposals immediately fail.  Proposals failed in this way cannot be subsequently enacted under the rule titled “Enactment”.

(I hope I remembered how to do that correctly.)

It is my duty as Abbot Pro Tem to reveal that a contingency has been satisfied. A secret rule has repealed all secret rules (itself included!) and made the text of 2.10 italicized.

Rather than keep a handful of secret rules around to vex the next Abbot (as much as I’d love to vex Hix), I originally set it up so that all secret rules are repealed as soon as the Abbot votes FOR a DoV.

2.25 Succession:

If the Abbot’s Station ever becomes Heaven, then each Monk should send one email to the Abbot to nominate a single Monk, whom e feels is “outstanding beyond the other Monks”. E may not nominate emself or the Abbot. After a reasonable amount of time, if the Abbot’s station is still Heaven, e may pick one of the three Monks with the most nominations, and post the result to the Blog including a count of all nominations received. The chosen Monk has achieved Victory.

The Abbot may handle ties for third place however e wants.

After having waiting for a “reasonable amount of time”, I have the the following votes:

Bucky +1
Purplebeard +1 +1
Elias IX +1 +1
Hix +1 +1

Elias IX is Idle, and so is not counted as a Monk for 2.25. This basically gives me the choice from the remaining nominees. Hix wins. I will create a wiki page for the secret rules from this game (the correct ones, not the ones that were sent back to me *edited* for personal benefit) when at my earliest convenience.

This post has been made in the new Declaration of Victory category.
I have achieved victory according to Rule 2.25 (Succession):  The Abbot has been in Heaven for almost 5 days; and has posted the nomination count in the post “Fin”, choosing me among the Monks with the most nominations.

I’m at mathcamp (say what you wish), and will be so for the next five weeks. Could someone (preferably an admin) idle me? Also… a favor: Could someone email me when the next dynasty starts, as I’m interested in knowing who’ll win.

In order to fix a problem left open by Kevan’s last proposal.

Ignore Italicized text when adminning this proposal.  If the Proposal titled “Reductio Decretum” failed, this Proposal does nothing.

Reword the first 3 paragraphs of Rule 2.10 (Enactment) as follows:

The oldest pending Proposal may be enacted by any Admin (and the Gamestate updated to include the its specified effects) if either of the following is true:-

  * It has a number of FOR votes that exceed or equal Quorum, has been open for voting for at least 12 hours, and has not been vetoed or self-killed.
  * It has been open for voting for at least 48 hours, more than half of its votes are FOR, and it has not been vetoed or self-killed.

A little redundant wording has also been removed in addition to the changes in bold.  Apologies for the wordiness of the italicized text..

.

Give every Monk not named Purplebeard with less than 3 items an Item called ‘Gigantic Battleaxe of Maiming +5’.

Give the Monk named Purplebeard an Item called ‘Feather of Tickling +1’.

[ Fixing the veto loophole left open by Reductio Imperator, and rewording the Enactment rule into something more readably bullet-pointed while I’m here. ]

If Reductio Imperator failed, this proposal shall first make the exact changes that that proposal suggested.

Reword Rule 1.5 (Enactment) to:-

The oldest pending Proposal may be enacted by any Admin (and the Ruleset and/or Gamestate updated to include the specified effects of that Proposal) if either of the following is true:-

• It has a number of FOR votes that exceed or equal Quorum, has been open for voting for at least 12 hours, and has not been vetoed.
• It has been open for voting for at least 48 hours, more than half of its votes are FOR, and it has not been vetoed.

The oldest pending Proposal may be failed by any Admin, if any of the following are true:-

• It has enough AGAINST votes that it could not be Enacted without one of those votes being changed.
• It has been open for voting for at least 48 hours and half or fewer of its votes are FOR.
• The Traveller who proposed it has voted AGAINST it.
• The Arbiter has voted to VETO it.

Whenever an Admin marks a proposal as enacted or failed, e must also mark eir name, and report the final tally of votes (or the fact that the proposal was self-killed or vetoed).

Also, add “If a Traveller votes against eir own proposal, that vote may not be changed.” (which I’ve removed from this rule) to the second paragraph of Rule 1.4 (Voting).

I have arrived.

[ Looking at the Dynasty rule, I’m surprised how little of it we actually need - this is an attempt to cut it back to bare bones.

Finally, I’ve taken out all the stuff about updating the templates and veto icons, which I think is okay to leave to the Abbot and any passing admin. It’s certainly how we’ve played it in the past, the Emperor hasn’t always written their own HTML or drawn their own logo. It seems wrong for it to be illegal to tidy or recompress the images, or tweak the colours; any presumptuous admin abuse could just be undone. ]

Reword Rule 1.8 (Dynasties) to:-

BlogNomic is divided into a number of Dynasties. Each Dynasty is headed by a single Abbot, and is named according to the number of Dynasties they have headed (eg. “The First Dynasty of Myke”).

The Abbot may vote to VETO any Proposal.

Add “or the Abbot has voted to VETO the proposal, ” to the list of reasons to fail a proposal in Rule 1.5 (Enactment).

Replace “chosen theme for the new round” with “chosen theme for the new Dynasty” in Rule 1.9 (Ascension).