BlogNomic: The First Dynasty of Desertfrog

In “Cases”, replace “For each Party in the Case whose Attorney made a comment on the Case’s blog post which included an AGAINST icon, decrease that Party’s Guilt for this Case by 1 (to a minimum of zero)” with:-

For each Party in the Case whose Attorney made a comment on the Case’s blog post which included an AGAINST icon, increase the other Party’s Guilt for this Case by 1

In this Unpaid Debt case, Isabel asserts that Mortis Maximis had offered to buy the rights to documents from her personal archive for the purposes of making the Chamberlain documentary, and that she had provided the documents, but that Mortis Maximis never paid.

In this Unpaid Debt case, Isabel claims that she made a winning bid at a charity auction as a favor for James, who couldn’t make it. She doesn’t want the Indonesian statue, but James refuses to pay her back and take it.

Hello! I’m new around here and would like to join as an Attorney, I have read the rules and some recent posts, but I still might make some mistakes. Hope you can forgive me! I’m excited to start playing and learn!

In “Cases”, replace the bullet points

* Select the Winner of the Case as being whichever of its two Parties has the lowest Guilt (if their Guilts are equal, this is resolved at random); the other Party is the Case’s Loser.
* Establish the Fine as being 10% of the Worth of the Loser of the Case (rounding down)

with:

* Select the Winner of the Case as being whichever of its two Parties has the lowest Guilt (if their Guilts are equal, the Winner is the Defendant); the other Party is the Case’s Loser.
* Establish the Fine: If the Plaintiff is the Winner of the case, the Fine is 30% of the Worth of the Defendant (rounding down); otherwise, the Fine is 0.

To the second bullet list in “Cases”, add a new point after the second:-

* For each Party in the Case whose Attorney made a comment on the Case’s blog post which included a VETO icon, and which is not a State, increase that Party’s Guilt for this Case by 10 and decrease that Attorney’s Integrity by 2 (to a minimum of zero).

The first case out of Hiatus is this run-of-the-mill Unpaid Debt case: Mortis Maximis is attempting to recoup money owed by Elizabeth for a large order of Mortis Maximis’... products? services? Whatever it was, there’s an invoice here but allegedly, no payment.

I’m back!!! Please unidle me.

Add to “Cases” a new subrule, “Seasonal Cases”:

Creating a case and closing a case may be performed during the Hiatus described in “Seasonal Downtime”. Cases created during this Hiatus are considered to have been created at the end of the Hiatus.

If the date is on or after January 3, 2019, any Attorney may repeal this subrule.

Consider any previous attempted case creation or case closing that would have been legal under this rule to be legal.

Under Rule 3.3, BlogNomic is now on hiatus until the 27th of December. Merry Seasonal Downtime, one and all.

In this Burglary case, Elizabeth is accused of breaking into Bananasoft’s offices. At this time, the police suspect it to be in connection with their ongoing feud, but the evidence has not yet been submitted to the court.

In this Malpractice case, well, Bananasoft execs are pretty mad and are just throwing whatever they think might stick at Elizabeth.

In “Fiscal Victory”, replace “Worth” with “Valuation”.

Multiply the Worth of every Client by 1.25 (rounding down).

In this Personal Injury case, Elizabeth is accusing the same Bananasoft employee from Case 19 of injuring her during the Bloggsball game.

In this Personal Injury case, Bananasoft is accusing Elizabeth of injuring a Bananasoft employee during a company Bloggsball game.

If they have not already done so this dynasty, an Attorney may Set Up Shop by setting their own Money and Integrity to values where the total of their Money and one thousand times their Integrity does not exceed 10,000.

I Set Up Shop with the following:

Integrity: 0 Money: $800,813,580,081,358,008,135

(800,813,580,081,358,008,135 + 1,000) x 0 = 0 < 10,000

So that’s all good.

An Attorney’s Worth is equal to their Money, excluding any Money that they were given by other Attorneys in the previous 48 hours. It does not include their Slush Fund. If an Attorney has a Worth exceeding $100,000, and more Worth than every other Attorney, and is also the first Attorney to have met these criteria this dynasty, then that Attorney has achieved victory.

I have more Worth than the rest of Attorneys and I’m the first to meet the criteria this dynasty, I have achieved victory.

Unidle me please.

In “Cases”, replace “Complaints are Personal Injury, Defamation, Negligence, Malpractice and Unpaid Debt.” with:-

Complaints are Personal Injury, Defamation, Negligence, Malpractice, Probate and Unpaid Debt.

After the fifth bullet in the list for creating a Case, add:-

If the Case’s Accusation is Probate and one or both Parties are a Business, change the Accusation to Unpaid Debt.

After the fifth bullet in the list for closing a Case, add:-

If the Case’s Accusation is Probate, change the Fine to $250,000 and remove “Probate” from the list of possible Complaints in this rule

Create a new rule called “Character,” which contains the following:

A Character is a condition an Attorney can have that allows actions not otherwise permissible by the ruleset. Characters are gained only when an Attorney meets the prerequisites, and are automatically gained when they have done so. An Attorney can have only one Character at a time, and lose their current Character if they gain another, or if they no longer meet the prerequisites.  (At no point can two Characters have the same prerequisites; there must be some distinction.)
A list of Characters exists as follows:

Moral Paragon: Prerequisite: Have the highest Integrity of all active Attorneys -or- an Integrity of 10.
When typing a FOR icon in the comments of a case, your Party’s Guilt decreases by 3 instead of 2. Also, if your one of your Clients is determined to have lost a case, before any further steps of any atomic action are finished, decrease that Client’s Worth by 0.1% of its value and increase your Money by that same amount.

Devil’s Advocate: Prerequisite: Have the lowest Integrity of all active Attorneys -or- an Integrity of less than 2.
When typing an AGAINST icon in the comments of a case, your Party’s Guilt decreases by 2 instead of 1. Also, when you Launder money from your Slush Fund, you may, as a weekly action, make use of your Criminal Contacts by including a statement to that effect in your Laundering Post to double the value your Money is increased. (All other rules pertaining to Laundering are still followed as written.)

Savvy Marketer: Prerequisite: Have no other Character.
Take on a Client. You may take on new Clients if you have fewer than four instead of three.

In “Cases”, replace “If neither Party of the Case is represented by Attorney, skip the rest of this atomic action” with:

If either Party of the Case is not represented by an Attorney, or if both Parties are represented by the same Attorney, skip the rest of this atomic action

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

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

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

To the start of “Representations”, add:-

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

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

Enact a new rule, “Fiscal Victory”:-

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

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

In “Clients”, replace

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

with:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Hello, all! I wish to become Unidle.

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

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

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

To “Banking”, add:-

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

Enact a new rule, “Open Book”:-

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

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

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

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

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

There are 6 attorneys, and quorum remains 4.

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

Amend “Clients” by appending to the first paragraph:

If a change would cause a Client’s Villainy to be above 5, it is instead set to 5. If a change would cause a Client’s Villainy to be below 1, it is instead set to 1. When a client’s Villainy is adjusted, their Reputation entry in the Pool is updated accordingly.

Amend “Cases” by replacing the bullet point beginning “Comment on the Case’s blog entry” with the following ones:

* If the Winner was also the Winner of the previous case they were involved in, decrease their Villainy by 1.
* If the Loser was also the Loser of the previous case they were involved in, increase their Villainy by 1.
* Comment on the Case’s blog entry mentioning its Winner, Fine, and any changes in Villainy.

To “Banking”, add:-

An Attorney who Set Up Shop more than seven days ago may give any positive amount of their Money to another Attorney, at any time.

Amend “Clients” by appending to the first paragraph:

When a client’s Villainy is adjusted, their Reputation entry in the Pool is updated accordingly.

Amend “Cases” by replacing the bullet point beginning “Comment on the Case’s blog entry” with the following ones:

* If the Winner was also the Winner of the previous case they were involved in, decrease their Villainy by 1.
* If the Loser was also the Loser of the previous case they were involved in, increase their Villainy by 1.
* Comment on the Case’s blog entry mentioning its Winner, Fine, and any changes in Villainy.

In this Defamation case, X Express claims that Casey has been making false claims about the nature of X Express’ business relationships with the deceased.

Hot off the heels of case 3, Anne is accusing Goldberg Technology in this Personal Injury case of supplying the defective Bananaphone component that injured her arm.

In this Unpaid Debt case, X Express is suing Benjamin Chamberlain to recover a loan.

In the rule “Clients”, move everything from “As a weekly action…” onwards into a subrule called “Gaining and Losing”, then add to that rule:-

An Attorney may request to drop a Client at any time by privately making such a request to the Judge: on receiving such a request, the Judge should remove that Client from the set that the Attorney represents.

Then replace “As a weekly action, an Attorney may take on a new Client” with:-

As a weekly action, an Attorney with fewer than three Clients may take on a new Client

Add a new rule, “Banking”:-

An Attorney may Launder a specified, positive amount of money from their Slush Fund by making a blog post to this effect: this is known as a Laundering Post. If the money specified in a Laundering Post is less than or equal to the posting Attorney’s Slush Fund, the Judge may decrease that Attorney’s Slush Fund by that value, increase that Attorney’s Money by 90% of that value (rounding up), and make a comment on the post announcing that this has happened. If the money specified in a Laundering Post is greater than the posting Attorney’s Slush Fund, the Judge may make a comment to this effect.

If a Laundering Post has been processed in this way by the Judge, or if it is more than 72 hours old, then it ceases to be considered a Laundering Post.

Idling myself until next year. Quorum becomes 4.

In this case, the State of Connecticut has charged Morgan with Jaywalking.

In yet another corporate Defamation case, Bananasoft accuses Joshua of having overstated Anne’s injuries to the tech press.

Add as a new paragraph to the end of “Clients”:

When an Attorney becomes Idle, they no longer represent any Clients.

Swap the second and third bullet points of the bullet list for closing a case.

Replace the first two bullet points of “Cases” with:-

* Select a Client in a secretly random manner as its Plaintiff
* Select a Client in a secretly random manner (excluding the Plaintiff and all States) as its Defendant
* If neither Party of the Case is represented by Attorney, skip the rest of this atomic action

In this Personal Injury case, Isabel claims that a wound on her leg was caused by James’ irresponsible demonstration of an antique rifle.

Robert, sensing blood in the water near Bananasoft after Anne’s victory, wants to settle the Unpaid Debt that he claims he is owed by Bananasoft.

I intend to become a new player, I appreciate your consideration.

Create a rule named “Dirt”:

An lawyer with $20,000 or more in their slush fund may “Dig up dirt” by sending a PM to the Judge stating their intend to “Dig up Dirt”, and specifying a case and a party in that case.

The judge shall decrease the slush fund of that lawyer by $20,000 and choose a secretly random value from among “dirty”, “clean”, and “boring”.

If the value “dirty” was selected, the Judge shall make a comment on the blog post stating describing the case, stating that dirt was found on the party specified by the lawyer who sent the PM, and shall increase the guilt of the specified party by 2.

If a value other than “dirty” was selected, the judge shall send a PM to the lawyer that “Dug up Dirt”, stating the specified party and case, and that no dirt was found.

Enact a new rule, “Roll Call”:-

At any time, the Judge may post a blog entry containing a list of Clients who are currently represented by an Attorney, and a list of Attorneys who represent at least one Client. Having done so, they should repeal this rule.

In “Clients”, replace “(excluding non-State Clients who are already represented by other Attorneys)” with:-

(excluding non-State Clients who are already represented by other Attorneys, and Clients who Mistrust the requesting Attorney)

Add a paragraph to that rule:-

For each possible pairing of Client and Attorney, if the total of the Client’s Villainy and the Attorney’s Integrity is lower than five, then that Client Mistrusts that Attorney.