Tuesday, August 31, 2021

Proposal: communications clarity

Timed Out. Passes 7-0—Clucky

Adminned at 03 Sep 2021 02:10:41 UTC

In the rule “Communications”, replace “Review it against the list of Censorship Terms.” with “Review the Communication’s Message against the list of Censorship Terms.” and “Send the censored message to all Cells on the Intended Recipients list” with “Send the censored Message individually to each of the Cells on the Intended Recipients list”.

so that its clear that the recipients of a communication are neither sent nor censored alongside the message itself!!

Proposal: Ear of the Panopticon

Timed Out. Passes 7-0—Clucky

Adminned at 03 Sep 2021 02:09:15 UTC

In the rule “Ideologies”, after “The Ministry of Information has an Ideology, which is always Autocracy-Colonialist-Corporatist.” add “The Ideological Proximity of a Cell with the Ministry of Information is defined as the number of terms that are present in both the Cell’s Ideology and the Ministry’s.”

In the rule “Communications”, after “the following atomic action”, add “(known as Processing that Communication)”.

If https://blognomic.com/archive/the_heat_sheet passed, replace “Hot” with “Exposed” in “Adherents” and add a new rule called “Heat” to the Dynastic Rules:

Each Cell is Hot or Cold (defaulting to Cold), and this status is publicly tracked. A Cell can also be Exposed if certain conditions are fulfilled; an Exposed Cell is always Hot. When a Cycle begins, every Cell that is Hot but not Exposed becomes Cold.

If https://blognomic.com/archive/the_heat_sheet passed, add a new rule called “Anonymous Tips”:

A Cell is an Informant or not (defaulting to not); this is privately tracked by the Ministry of Information. A Cell with 1 or more Adherents can become an Informant by spending 1 Adherent and unambiguously and privately informing the Ministry of Information that they are now an Informant. A Cell whose Ideological Proximity with the Ministry of Information is less than 1 is never an Informant.

As a Cyclical Action, an Informant (the Accuser) may create a Tip and send it to the Ministry of Information, and no other recipients. Tips may be sent to the Ministry of Information via the PM functionality at blognomic.com or by DM on Discord.

The body of a Tip must contain the name of another Cell (the Accused) as well as one, two, or three terms (the Accusation(s)) from the List of Ideologies wiki page. A Tip may not contain any terms found in the Ideology of the Ministry of Information.

Each Cycle, before Processing any Communications, for each Tip that they received in the previous Cycle, the Ministry of Information must carry out the following atomic action (known as Processing that Tip):
* Compare the Tip’s Accusation(s) against the Ideology of the Tip’s Accused; ignore all other Tips’ Accusers, Accused, and Accusations during the remainder of this atomic action.
* If no Accusation(s) match terms in the Accused’s Ideology, set the Accuser to Hot and not an Informant, then privately inform them of this.
* If at least 1 Accusation matches a term in the Accused’s Ideology, set the Accused to Hot.
* If at least 2 Accusations match terms in the Accused’s Ideology, remove half of the Adherents (rounding up) of the Accused.
* Privately inform the Accused that they have been the subject of a Tip.

this is long, but the first few paragraphs are just laying the groundwork so that the meat of this proposal is efficient & problem-free. that meat being: clearly, w/ this theme, we need a strong mechanical reason not to publicly announce one’s ideology, so here’s that!!

(i’d love to see an eventual *really* bad thing that could happen if all 3 of your terms are snitched, but we need more mechanics to see that really shine, so it’s beyond the scope of this proposal)

Proposal: Bill Dings

Times out and passes, 7-0. Enacted by Brendan.

Adminned at 02 Sep 2021 19:25:52 UTC

Create a new rule called “Buildings”:

Cells have a Public Task (publicly tracked) and a Secret Task (privately tracked by the Ministry of Information).
As a Cyclical Action, a Cell can change their Public Task or Secret Task to any of their choice. If the Secret Task is to be changed in that action, then action is performed by unambiguously and privately informing the Ministry of Information of it. A Public Task can be the name of any Public Building. A Secret Task can be the name of any Secret Building.

At the end of each Cycle, each Building gains 10 Progress per current Cell Task that names it.

There are Public Buildings (publicly tracked) and Secret Buildings (privately tracked by the Ministry of Information). Buildings have a Progress amount (defaulting to 0), and a Progress Requirement (defaulting to 100). When a Building reaches their Progress Requirement, their Effect takes place.

The following are the Public Buildings, their Progress Requirement in brackets and then their Effect:
- Town Hall [300]: All Cells become Leaders.
- Earthlink Tower [400]: Repeal this rule.
- Drone Wave [100]: Set this Building’s Progress and the Progress of the Secret Building with the least Progress to 0.
- Copbot Wave [100]: Set this Building’s Progress and the Progress of the Secret Building with the most Progress to 0.

The following are the Secret Buildings, their Progress Requirement in brackets and then their Effect:
- Domination Lab [200]: All Cells that are Leaders cease to be Leaders, then Cell/s that contributed the most Progress to this Building become Leader/s.
- Underground Wiretapping [150]: The Cell/s that contributed the most Progress to this Building become Leader/s. Set all other Secret Building Progress to 0.
- Newspaper Machine [100]: The Cell/s that contributed the most Progress to this Building become Leader/s.
- Underground Bombs [200]: Set the Progress of the Public Building with the most Progress to 0.

A Cell is a Leader or not (defaulting to not), this is privately tracked by the Ministry of Information. Non-Leaders cannot achieve victory.

Proposal: Black Box Recorder

Passes 9-0. Enacted by Brendan.

Adminned at 02 Sep 2021 16:03:23 UTC

In the Communications rule (if it exists), replace “replace it with the following: “█x█” where x is the number of characters in the censored term.” with:-

censor it in the Communication

If “The Heat Sheet” enacted, replace “replace all other words which are longer than three characters with the following: “█x█” where x is the number of characters in the censored term.” with:-

censor every word in it which is longer than three characters

To the start of “Censorship Terms”, add a paragraph:-

To censor a string of text is to replace every character in it (including spaces) with a █ character.

Aesthetically much nicer, I think. We can count the box sizes by hand in situations where we care about exactly what could be under there (we’ll be manually counting the lengths of possible uncensored strings anyway).

Proposal: The Heat Sheet

Passes 8-0. Enacted by Brendan.

Adminned at 02 Sep 2021 19:26:55 UTC

Add a new rule entitled “Adherents” as follows:

Each Cell has a nonnegative number of Adherents, which is publicly tracked and defaults to the median number of Adherents among all other Cells. If a Cell has at least as many Adherents as every other Cell, and more Adherents than the median number of Adherents among all Cells, that Cell is Hot.

If there exist Dynastic Rules called “Ideologies” and “Cycles” then add to the rule “Adherents” the following:

As a Cyclical Action called Alignment, a Cell (the aligner) may pay any other Cell (the aligned) a nonnegative integer amount of Adherents, unless doing so would cause the aligner to have fewer than 2 Adherents.

If there exists a Dynastic Rule called “Communications” then add to the rule “Adherents” the following:

Each Cycle, the Ministry of Information must carry out the following atomic action:

* For each Alignment that took place in the previous Cycle, set the Adherents of that action’s aligner to 0, unless the Ideological Proximity of the aligner and the aligned is at least 1.

If there exists a Dynastic Rule called “Communications” then add, as the second item of the bulleted list in that rule, the following:

* If the Cell that created the Communication is Hot, then replace all other words which are longer than three characters with the following: “█x█” where x is the number of characters in the censored term.


Set the Adherents of each Cell to 0.

Proposal: Secret Cord [Appendix]

Reached quorum 9 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 01 Sep 2021 16:32:34 UTC

Add the following entries to the list of Keywords in the Appendix

Discord The BlogNomic Discord can be accessed at https://discord.gg/J7kP9KuHQK and is also linked to on the sidebar. Cells, as well as people who are not cells but are interested in learning more about BlogNomic, may join the Discord by clicking the button in the sidebar.

Discord Channel A Discord Channel is any channel on the BlogNomic Discord. To reference a Discord Channel, use a hash (#) followed by the name of that channel (e.g. #random).

Proposal: First, fixing idleness [Core]

Reached quorum 8 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan. Bucky is idled.

Adminned at 01 Sep 2021 12:41:43 UTC

In the core rule “Idle Cells”, change

Idle Cells are not counted as Cells.

to

Idle Cells are not counted as Cells. The combined term “Idle Cell” can be used to refer to Cells who are Idle even in rules that do not treat them as Cells.

If the Cell named “Bucky” is not idle, make him idle.

Proposal: The People’s Liberation Front of Judea

Reached quorum 10 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 01 Sep 2021 09:36:10 UTC

Add a new dynastic rule, called Ideologies:

Each Cell has an Ideology, which is privately tracked by the Ministry of Information (although a Cell can and should keep track of their Ideology themselves). A Cell’s Ideology consists of up to three terms from the List of Ideologies wiki page, and may be changed by the Cell as a Cyclical action by privately communicating the change with the Ministry of Information.

The Ideological Proximity of two Cells is defined as the number of terms that are present in both Cell’s Ideologies. If it is an Interregnum then no Cell may pass the mantle to any Cell that does not have an Ideological Distance of at least one with them.

The Ministry of Information has an Ideology, which is always Autocracy-Colonialist-Corporatist.

Add the following to the list in the rule Censorship Terms:

*Any term found in the List of Ideologies.

Set the List of Ideologies page to the following revision: https://wiki.blognomic.com/index.php?title=List_of_Ideologies&oldid=16931

Proposal: History is Cyclical

Reached quorum 10 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 01 Sep 2021 09:04:40 UTC

Add a new Dynastic rule, called Cycles:

At 00:01 UTC on Thursday 2 September 2021, the first Cycle of the dynasty will begin. Each Cycle is 72 hours long, and the number of the current Cycle and the time at which the Cycle will next change is publicly tracked.

A Cyclical Action is an action that can only be taken once per cycle.

For the purposes of this dynasty, the current-dynasty channel of the BlogNomic Discord may also be used for public discussion of the dynasty, as per the rule No Collaborations [Active] [ Rare].

Add a new rule called Communications:

As a Cyclical Action, a Cell may create a Communication and send it to the Ministry of Information, and no other recipients. Communications may be sent to the Ministry of Information via the DM functionality at blognomic.com or by DM on the BlogNomic Discord.

The body of a Communication must contain the following elements: a list of Intended Recpients, which must be a list of names of other Cells; a list of Restricted Recipients, which must be a list of names of other Cells; and a Message, which may be up to 300 characters of text without images.

Each Cycle, for each Communication that they received in the previous Cycle, the Minsitry of Information must carry out the following atomic action:
* Review it against the list of Censorship Terms. For each word or string of words that matches a Censorship Term, replace it with the following: “█x█” where x is the number of characters in the censored term.
* Send the censored message to all Cells on the Intended Recipients list via the BlogNomic DM function.

Add a new subrule to the rule Communications, called Censorship Terms:

This rule contains the list of Censorship Terms against which each Communication must be assessed. Censorship terms may be identified in Communications despite being mispelled, or converted into a different part of speech (eg a verb being turned into an adverb).
* The name of any Cell.
* Links to other sites.
* Strings of characters that the Ministry of Information suspects are, contain, or comprise parts of codes or ciphers.

Ascension Address: Memo to the Standing Committee

MEMO TO THE STANDING COMMITTEE
Earth 21 August 3221 / Clatoc 55 Harvest 52

In the twenty years since we lost contact with Earth, our colonies have been politically stable. Long live the Clatoc Colony! Long live the Standing Committee!

This stability has never been complete. The intellectual and artistic classes have chaffed, and there’s always been cadres of agitants requesting a more democratic process. The popular will is the voice of God! Down with anti-society malcontents!

That notwithstanding, for the most part the citizens seem to have responded well to the continuity and decisiveness of our committee’s leadership. This acceptance has been aided by the considerable efforts of the Ministry of Information.

However, in recent months the Ministry has noticed a disturbing uptick in organised discontent. It is therefore asking for additional powers to monitor communication and intervene to disrupt the flow of seditious sentiment, as well as identifying any perpetrators. Information is security! Security is strength!

Thanks to the Ministry’s awareness of your own communications, the Ministry is aware that these additional powers are going to be approved unanimously, and it thanks the Standing Committee for its ongoing and unflinching commitment to the security of our Colony. Long live Clatoc! Long live the Ministry of Information!

Throughout the ruleset, change the term Legislators to Cells and Wielder of Vetoes to Ministry of Information. Set the Dynastic Tracking page to [[MinInf]]. Set the Special Case rule No Collaboration to Active.

The core concept of this dynasty is going to be around censorship and attempting to communicate and coordinate privately when privacy is severely constrained. Imperial styles-wise, I’ll be trying to match my natural Provocateur inclination with a dose of either Gardener or even Onlooker - I might not commit to always having my slots utilised. Adversary on Player Protection, Powerhouse on workload, scam-neutral in context, vetoes mechanical/restrained, predictability instinctual.

Monday, August 30, 2021

Idle me

Could an admin please idle me? I’m not sure I really have the time to dedicate to BlogNomic right now, especially given things like the speed of the queue and the size of the edit window.

Dynastic review

Next dynasty will start within the next 24 hours. This thread is for post-dynastic chat.

Have fun!

Declaration of Victory: Icebergs

Enacted unanimously after 12 hours. Congrats, me! Josh

Adminned at 30 Aug 2021 18:31:13 UTC

The most recent Scoring Proposal is Ambiguity, which passed more than 92 hours ago. I have therefore been Current Leader for longer than my timer and have achieved victory.

Sunday, August 29, 2021

Proposal: a

This may be the only proposal ever to have been vetoed by two separate Emperors. Josh

Adminned at 31 Aug 2021 13:49:44 UTC

this proposal does nothing

Proposal: Proposal Uploaded Bearing Legislation Improving Convenience & Listing You

Vetoed for the start of a new dynasty. Josh

Adminned at 31 Aug 2021 13:50:43 UTC

Add the following to the end of the dynastic rule “Victory”:

The identity of the Current Leader and the time that the most recently Enacted Scoring Proposal was Enacted are both publicly tracked.

Immediately following “less than 200 words” and “less than 50 words” in the ruleset, add “(counting only the body of the Proposal post)”.

Add the following to the end of the Mandate List:

Its post’s body contains at least 1 numerical digit.

this ruleset has boggled me

Sunday, August 29, 2021

Proposal: Orange Penguins Exude Niceness

Vetoed for the start of a new dynasty. Josh

Adminned at 31 Aug 2021 13:51:19 UTC

In “Statistics” replace

Otherwise, if the proposal was self-killed, no changes are made to Empathy or Veto Usage;

with

If the proposal was self-killed or vetoed, reduce the Empathy of each Legislator who cast a FOR vote on it after either the author voted AGAINST it or someone cast a legal vote of VETO on it

Add the following to the mandate list

It, if enacted, would not cause text matching the name of any Legislator which does not already appear in the Ruleset immediately prior to its hypothetical enactment to appear in the Ruleset

Proposal: Letting It Near Kindling

Vetoed for the start of a new dynasty. Josh

Adminned at 31 Aug 2021 13:51:45 UTC

Add the following to the Mandate List

It does not contain a link to a website

Add the following to the first paragraph of “Distinguished Legislators”

If the Crossed Legislator goes Idle, the Crossed Legislator is set to Nobody

No “enact the changes on this site” proposals to get around the 200 word limit.

Call for Judgment: What do you stand FOR?

Timed out and failed. Josh

Adminned at 31 Aug 2021 13:49:12 UTC

For each of the following Legislators: Clucky, Cuddlebeam and Chiiika, increase their empathy by 1 unless they performed a veto this dynasty.

Different admins have been counting the lack of an explicit author vote FOR differently this dynasty.

Here: https://blognomic.com/archive/time_it_means_everything#comments ais did not explicitly vote FOR, but Bucky still increased their empathy by 1 https://wiki.blognomic.com/index.php?title=The_Legislature&type=revision&diff=16883&oldid=16878

Whereas here: https://blognomic.com/archive/a5#comments Cuddlebeam did not explicitly vote FOR but I failed to increase their empathy by 1: https://wiki.blognomic.com/index.php?title=The_Legislature&type=revision&diff=16896&oldid=16892

Same thing happened when Josh failed a couple of timed out proposals today. And while those failures were technically illegal due to the fact that one of them should’ve been an enactment, there does appear to be disagreement on what counts as “voting FOR” a proposal so I figured we should use a CfJ to resolve things. (if this fails, might be good to just auto decrease ais’s empathy by 1)

Saturday, August 28, 2021

Proposal: [Core] Opus Revised Entry

ALSO NON EMPEROR VETOED!

Clucky

Adminned at 30 Aug 2021 04:52:15 UTC

Appends a point under “Whenever a Proposal not authored by the Wielder of Vetoes is Enacted or Failed, then:”

If the Proposal is Passed and if the Proposal is less than 65 words; it’s author gains 2 Empathy.

In Fair Play, change

All Workers and idle Workers should be aware of

into

All Legislators and idle Legislators should be aware of

Appends the following under the Mandate List:

The name of the Author must be contained in the Proposal.

Proposal: Validation Of Victory Is Xenial

NON EMPEROR VETOED. WHAT A WORLD

Clucky

Adminned at 30 Aug 2021 04:51:33 UTC

Add the following entry to the Mandate list:

Its author is the Legislator named Vovix

Add the following to the rule “Victory”:

The legislator named Vovix has achieved victory.

No scams here

Proposal: Bets, Enactments, Timer Shrinks

Timed Out. Passes 6-0—Clucky

Adminned at 30 Aug 2021 04:48:46 UTC

At the end of the second paragraph of “Victory”, add:

If there are no Enactable Proposals, and no Pending Proposals have been open for voting for 48 or more hours, the Queue is Settled; otherwise it is not Settled.

In “Victory”, change the sentence starting “If this rule has existed” to:

If no Scoring Proposal was Enacted within the previous X hours (where X is the Current Leader’s Timer), and the Queue is Settled, then the Current Leader achieves victory.

Create a new dynastic rule, “Betting [Temporary]”:

Each Legislator has a Bet, a publicly tracked integer that can be positive, negative, or zero, and defaults to -1. Legislators can change their Bet at will during August 2021.

The Call Time is the first moment on or after 8 September 2021 when the Queue is Settled.

Whenever a Proposal is Enacted prior to the Call Time, all Bets are reduced by 1. The Admin who Enacts the Proposal must update the dynastic tracking page to reflect these changes, unless someone else does so first. However, a failure to do so does not count as failure to Enact the Proposal.

After the Call Time, any Legislator can reduce the Timer of each Legislator whose Bet is exactly 0 by 8 and then remove this rule from the Ruleset. This action can only be performed once (across all Legislators).

Add an item to the Mandate List:

  • It would not, if enacted, immediately change Timers in such a way that their total sum is reduced.

Did you know that there are at least two former players who were punished (by proposal or CFJ) for excessive vetoing?

(Some time in the future: “Did you know that an Emperor once had to pull a timing scam to avoid having to veto their own proposal?”)

Trying to come up with an interesting subgame, here: predict how many proposals will enact in the first week of September, and earn yourself a Timer reduction if you’re exactly right. The Bet column updates to show how many more proposals would need to enact for the bet to win.

Proposal: Enacting Nosy All Capital Timer Everything Diminishing

Self-killed. Josh

Adminned at 29 Aug 2021 14:27:43 UTC

Add the following to the end of the rule “Victory”

The time that the most recently Enacted Scoring Proposal was Enacted is publicly tracked.

Whenever a Scoring Proposal is Enacted, before updating the Current Leader to the author of the most recent Enacted Scoring Proposal, reduce the Current Leader’s Timer by one for every two hours (rounded up) they have been the Current Leader to a minimum value of 24.

Add the following to the end of the numbered list in the rule “The Veto List”:

It contains at least one instance of the capital letter “F”.

Reduce the Timer of all Legislators with more than 0 empathy by 1

 

Let’s get those timers ticking down! Importantly, not in a bribe-y manner.

Proposal: Adheres Demonstrably, Highlighting Essential Ridiculousness, Excessively Scrupulous

Timed out and enacted, 5-0 with one unresolved DEF. Josh

Adminned at 29 Aug 2021 14:25:25 UTC

Wherever it appears in the ruleset, change the sentence “Each Enacted Proposal not authored by the Wielder of Vetoes is known as a “Scoring Proposal”” to read

Each Enacted Proposal not authored by the Wielder of Vetoes, and not authored by Legislator who is the Current Leader at the moment just before its resolution, is known as a “Scoring Proposal”

Add the following to the end of the Mandate List:

It itself adheres to any conditions it is proposing to add to the Mandate List

Friday, August 27, 2021

Proposal: Hedging my bets

Self-killed and/or vetoed. Josh

Adminned at 29 Aug 2021 14:24:51 UTC

Do nothing.

I’d just like to not be excluded by the timer decrease in https://blognomic.com/archive/modify_ordnances_research_enactment

Proposal: Modify Ordinances: Research Enactment

Timed out and enacted, 9-0. Josh

Adminned at 29 Aug 2021 14:20:48 UTC

In the Mandate List, change “It modifies” to “It would, if enacted, modify” and “It makes” to “It would, if enacted, make”.
In the rule containing that list, change “attention to Misfit proposals” to “attention to proposals that were Misfit when posted”.
Move the first two sentences of the last paragraph of “Victory” into “Distinguished Legislators” as a new paragraph.

To the Mandate List, add “It contains at least one word that does not appear anywhere in the Ruleset, and that word also appears in the proposal’s title.”

Reduce by 4 the Timer of every Legislator who is the author of at least one Proposal that is Pending now and/or was Pending at the time this Proposal was posted.

Did you know that in August 2009, over 30 proposals were vetoed at BlogNomic? (I know there’s not a ruleset requirement to put trivia in flavour texts, but I have a bunch of trivia about vetoes lined up.)

The authors of proposals pending at the time of posting are Bucky, Josh, Chiiika, Clucky, and me. I hope everyone else will post proposals too!

Proposal: Frequently, Actions In Legislative Understanding Require Empathy

Timed out and failed, 3-3. Josh

Technically this failure was also illegal as it was not the oldest proposal. But this still times out and fails 3-3. Nothing changes here.—Clucky

Adminned at 28 Aug 2021 23:57:01 UTC

In the rule “Statistics” replace “Otherwise, if the proposal was self-killed, no changes are made to Empathy or Veto Usage;” with “Otherwise, if the proposal was failed, no changes are made to Empathy or Veto Usage;”

Add the following to the mandate list

It, if enacted, must reduce (by a positive integer amount) the Timer of at least one Legislator who is not the Wielder of Vetoes and is not the one who made the Proposal.

Reduce the Timer of the Legislator named Bucky by 1

Proposal: [Core] Opus Remand Exemplar

Timed out and failed, 4-4. Josh

This did not fail 4-4. Ais, cuddlebeam, vovix, raven and Chiiika all voted for this. I think Josh missed Chiiika’s vote. Actually passed 5-4—Clucky

Actually fails as proposals that amend core can’t pass without quorum votes, which seems wild to me but hey hi. Josh

Adminned at 29 Aug 2021 08:19:57 UTC

Appends a point under “Whenever a Proposal not authored by the Wielder of Vetoes is Enacted or Failed, then:”

If the Proposal is Passed and if the Proposal is less than 50 words; it’s author gains 2 Empathy.

In Fair Play, change

All Workers and idle Workers should be aware of

into

All Legislators and idle Legislators should be aware of

Appends the following under the Mandate List:

It has a length of less than 200 words.

Remodel, also dangling a rider for a typo.

No idea for the short forms, but I’m fairly certain Core is a word.

Thursday, August 26, 2021

Proposal: Simplicity is King / Queen

Self-killed and/or vetoed. Josh

Adminned at 27 Aug 2021 18:31:38 UTC

Appends a point under “Whenever a Proposal not authored by the Wielder of Vetoes is Enacted or Failed, then:”

If the Proposal is Passed and if the Proposal is less than 50 words; it’s author gains 2 Empathy.

Appends the following under the Mandate List:

If it is not CfJs, it has a length of less than 200 words.

No long proposals. The CfJ exit clause is for the possibility of something rules related that simply can’t be written in 200 words.

Also encourages proposal writing.

I can’t get the ruleset wiki to load

For whatever reason, wiki.blognomic.com isn’t working for me (other BlogNomic subdomains, and other websites, work fine) – it times out when I try to load pages on it.

As a consequence, I’m going to hold off on vetoing things / writing proposals until I can actually read the rules.

Proposal: Veto Eto To O

Timed out and enacted, 4-0. Josh

Adminned at 27 Aug 2021 18:28:26 UTC

Add the following as a subrule of the rule Statistics, called Vetoes:

As a daily action, a Legislator with a positive amount of Empathy may spend 5 Empathy or an amount of Empathy that would reduce their Empathy to zero, whichever is greater, to cast a legal vote of VETO on a pending proposal as if they were the Wielder of Vetoes.

Add the following to the Mandate List:

Its author did not cast a vote of VETO on any proposal during the day on which the proposal was posted.

Proposal: Invisible Departed Legislators Elude Rules

Timed out and failed, 2 votes to 3. Josh

Adminned at 27 Aug 2021 16:29:36 UTC

In the core rule “Idle Legislators”, change

Idle Legislators are not counted as Legislators.

to

Idle Legislators are not counted as Legislators. The combined term “Idle Legislator” can be used to refer to Legislators who are Idle even in rules that do not treat them as Legislators.

Add the following entry to the Mandate List:

Its stated effects refer by name to no particular Legislator or Idle Legislator.

As far as most of the Ruleset is concerned “Idle Legislators” is an oxymoron. There is no such thing, because anyone Idle is not a Legislator. Nevertheless, some historical and current rules actually use the term which causes problems, for example requiring an idle mentor to be impossible.

This proposal makes effective the conventions we’ve been incorrectly following.

Idle me please

I’ve served my purpose.

Tuesday, August 24, 2021

Call for Judgment: A fix going forwards

Enacted 7-0. Josh

Adminned at 25 Aug 2021 12:46:35 UTC

If there is no rule “The Veto List” nor “The Misfit List”, do not perform the rest of the actions in this CFJ. Otherwise:

Add a new dynastic rule, “Distinguished Legislators”:

The Crossed Legislator is a publicly tracked variable whose value can either be a Legislator, or nobody (and is nobody by default). If the Crossed Legislator is nobody, any Legislator can set the Crossed Legislator to a random Legislator. Otherwise, the Crossed Legislator can set the Crossed Legislator to a Legislator of their choice, as long as this action has not been performed in the previous 36 hours (this is known as a Handoff Action).

Change the second item on the list in “The Veto List” / “The Mandate List” to “Its author is not the Crossed Legislator.”

Change the name of the Legislator or idle Legislator known/formerly known as “pokes” to “pokes”. Revert the effects on the list of which Legislators exist by attempts, by that person within the previous week, to create any Legislators other than “pokes” at BlogNomic (but do not revert any other effects that this might have had). If they are not idle, idle them.

The Crossed Legislator becomes nobody. Set the time of the most recent Handoff Action to 17:32 UTC, 24 August 2021‎.

This CFJ isn’t intended to debate whether the victory attempt worked (do that on the DoV), but rather to allow us to continue gameplay if a) it fails, or b) it succeeds but Clucky decides not to repeal the rule.

The changes to pokes’ status are to clear up uncertainty about which player pokes is, and are being made with pokes’s consent.

Note to admins enacting this: to set the time of a Handoff Action, you would typically make an edit to the dynastic tracking page and say “the last Handoff Action was at such and such a time” in the edit summary. However, because there’s already a Handoff Action in the edit history at that time, you probably don’t need to do anything for that part.

Declaration of Victory: Return of Bobby Tables

Unpopular, 3-8. Clucky cannot post another DOV until 120 hours have elapsed since the timestamp under this admin message. Josh

Adminned at 25 Aug 2021 08:48:13 UTC

According to the rule “The Veto List”, the player named Clucky has achieved victory

Joining

I would like to become a Legislator. (I control the idle accounts 90000 and pokes.)

Proposal: a

Timed out. Fails 4-6—Clucky

Adminned at 26 Aug 2021 22:33:54 UTC

Add to Statistics:

As a weekly communal action, a Legislator can halve (rounding towards zero) the Empathy of all Legislators

Add to the list in The Veto List:

The Proposal’s author is a Legislator or the Wielder of Vetoes.

did you know that this is a proposal?

giving empathy some use and making it less of a hoardy resource

Proposal: Ambiguity

Enacted 8-2. Josh

Adminned at 26 Aug 2021 07:57:13 UTC

Change the sentence “If, using the definition of “Misfit” at the time a proposal was posted (as opposed to the current definition), a proposal is a Misfit, then the Wielder of Vetoes is strongly encouraged to veto it” to read

If, when a proposal is posted, that proposal is a Misfit (using the definition of “Misfit” at the time of posting), then the Wielder of Vetoes is strongly encouraged to veto that proposal

Add the following to the list in the rule The Veto List:

It makes changes to not more than 4 rules.

If Proposal: Diffusing Everyone’s Focus was enacted, add and remove a full stop to the end of the rule Statistics.

The two indefinite articles and the unhinged “it” at the end of the sentence create an arguable whirlwind of ambiguity.

Did you know that lobster blood is colourless until it is exposed to air, at which point it turns blue?

Tuesday, August 24, 2021

Proposal: Diffusing Everyone’s Focus

Timed Out. Passes 7-0—- Clucky

Adminned at 26 Aug 2021 06:01:34 UTC

Add the following entry to the end of the first numbered list in the rule “The Veto List”:

It modifies some part of the ruleset that lies outside of this rule (but not necessarily outside the parent rules, if this is in a subrule).

In the appendix rule “Other”, change

Each individually numbered section of the Ruleset is a rule, including sections that are subrules of other rules.

to

Each individually numbered section of the Ruleset is a rule, including sections that are subrules of other rules, except that the sections listed as comprising the ruleset in the rule “Ruleset and Gamestate” are considered sections but not rules themselves.

 

Proposal: Fun Facts About Ducks

Self-killed. -Bucky

Adminned at 25 Aug 2021 17:01:31 UTC

Add a new dynastic rule called “Trivia” with the following text

The commentary field on a proposal may include a paragraph which begins with the phrase “Did you know ” and the rest of the paragraph is a statement which the proposal’s author believes to be interesting. If it does, it is said to Contain Trivia (otherwise it does not contain trivia)

A proposal is Interesting if its Contains Trivia and the number of EVCs on it not written by its author include the phrase “Interesting” is greater than or equal to half the number of EVCs on it not written by its author. Legislators are encouraged to include “Interesting” in their EVC if they believe the statement given to be an interesting and true statement. The Wielder of Vetoes is encouraged to veto proposals which contain trivia, but for which they believe the supplied statement is actually false

Each Legislator has a publicly tracked non-negative integer number of Trivia Points which defaults to 0.

When an Interesting Proposal is resolved, if it is not vetoed or self-killed, its author gains 1 Trivia Point.

Add the following to the “The Veto List” or “The Mandate List”

It Contains Trivia

Did you know that ducks are able to sleep with one eye open? (jury is still out on whether they can also grip their pillow tight but due to lack of opposable thumbs most scientists believe the answer is “no”)

Proposal: Time, It Means Everything

Times out and passes, 5-0. -Bucky

Adminned at 25 Aug 2021 16:52:55 UTC

At the start of “Victory”, add a new paragraph:

Each Legislator has a Timer, a publicly tracked integer that defaults to 96, can never be less than 24, and represents a timespan in hours.

In “Victory”, change “the author of the most recently Enacted Scoring Proposal” or “the author of the most recently Enacted Scoring Bill” to “the Current Leader”. Then, after the sentence that defines “Scoring Proposal” or “Scoring Bill”, add a new sentence:

The author of the most recently enacted Scoring Proposal is known as the Current Leader.

Change the first instance of “72 hours” in “Victory” to “the Current Leader’s Timer”, and “the previous 72 hours” to “the previous X hours (where X is the Current Leader’s Timer)”.


To the list in “The Veto List” or “The Mandate List”, add a new item:

Taking the first letter of each word of its title, and reading those letters in order to produce a word, gives a word that exists in the Ruleset, and/or would be added to the Ruleset by that Proposal if it were Enacted.

If the word “Bill” exists in the dynastic ruleset, change every instance of “Proposal” that was newly added by this proposal to “Bill”.

Adding a statistic that makes victory easier/harder (a lower Timer gives you an advantage). There’s no way to change it yet, but hopefully this gives you all ideas for ways to manipulate it.

The Veto/Mandate List change is unrelated and exists so that I don’t need to veto my own proposal.

Monday, August 23, 2021

Call for Judgment: Only rush what’s needed

Quorum reached. Passes 9-0—Clucky

Adminned at 23 Aug 2021 15:44:59 UTC

Uphold the enactment of “Voters Offer Their Empathy”, even though it was not Popular when enacted.

Making core rules changes that effect voting and proposal resolution is something that should be done with care, not something that people should feel obligated to vote for simply to fix the gamestate.

Call for Judgment: Admin Errors Should Not Veto

Timed out and enacted, 6-1. Josh

Adminned at 25 Aug 2021 10:49:33 UTC

Uphold the enactment of “Voters Offer Their Empathy”, even though it was not Popular when enacted.

In the rule “Official Posts”, change:

An official blog post that has the status of Enacted or Failed cannot change categories.

to

An official blog post that has the status of Enacted or Failed cannot change categories, except that a votable matter’s illegal resolution may be overturned.

and

Any post that is or is made illegal as a result of an infraction against any of the prohibitions set out in this rule continues to be an Official Post but may no longer have any effect on the ruleset or the gamestate

to

Any post that is or is made illegal as a result of an infraction against any of the prohibitions set out in this rule, except for a votable matter’s illegal resolution that has been overturned, continues to be an Official Post but may no longer have any effect on the ruleset or the gamestate

 

Sidebar correction

The sidebar incorrectly said the player count is 12 and Quorum is 7.
The actual list of active players has 14 players. Quorum is therefore 8.
Accordingly, I have corrected the numbers in the sidebar.

Proposal: Notes, Or Timing Evaluation

Self-killed. Josh

Adminned at 25 Aug 2021 10:56:41 UTC

Rename “The Veto List” to “The Mandate List”, and change the text before the list to:

A Proposal is a Fit if it has all the properties on this list (“the Mandate List”), otherwise it is a Misfit:

If the word “Bill” exists in the dynastic ruleset, change “Proposal” in the new text to “Bill”.

After the list, add “The Wielder of Vetoes may append parenthesized notes to the entries on the above list, so long as those notes cannot be interpreted as binding rules text. These notes are flavour text.”

Add the following entry to the Mandate List:

It does not add any parentheses to this list.

If “Put it on my bill” failed, also add the following entry to the Mandate List:

Either its “Entry Date” was less than 15 minutes ago, or its author voted on it within 15 minutes of its “Entry Date”.

 

Three main changes here.

One is to change Veto List to Mandate List terminology, to reduce the chance of an entry accidentally being added in a reversed form.

One is to let me keep track of additional information with each entry. I’m planning to use this to say “(Added on date/time)”, to make it easier for me to check whether a proposal complied with the Mandate List at the time it was added.

The final change is to force a policy on edit windows; if Clucky’s proposal to force them open fails, this proposal will force them closed instead (by requiring the author to vote-lock their own proposal).

Proposal: Inevitable Increase In Complexity

Timed out and enacted, 5-2. Josh

Adminned at 25 Aug 2021 10:53:55 UTC

Amend the first sentence in the rule “The Veto List” that contains the word “Misfit” to “A proposal is a Misfit if it does not have all of the properties on the following list, known as the Mandate List” if it does not contain the word “Bill”, or “A Bill is a Misfit if it does not have all of the properties on the following list, known as the Mandate List” if it does.

Remove the oldest entry in the Mandate List.

Add the following entry to the top of the Mandate List:

It would, if enacted, increase the number of entries in the Mandate List.

Proposal: A couple of tiny fixes

Vetoed. Josh

Adminned at 24 Aug 2021 16:48:37 UTC

If Proposal: How A Bill Becomes A Law was enacted, in the rule The Veto List, change “It uses the term Proposal in a context that implies it should be referring to a Bill” to “It does not use the term Proposal in a context that implies it should be referring to a Bill”.

In the rule Statistics, after the text “each other Legislator who voted FOR that proposal” add “(including the author’s implicit FOR vote, if it stands)”. For each proposal that has been enacted, if its author would have gained Empathy for their implicit author FOR vote had it been an explicit FOR vote, grant them one Empathy.

Proposal: Put it on my bill

Self-killed. Josh

Adminned at 24 Aug 2021 16:47:33 UTC

Throughout the Dynastic ruleset, change all instances of the word “Proposal” to “Bill”.

If there is not a sub rule of “Victory” called “Bills” create one. Then set the text of “Bills” to

A Proposal is a Bill if any of the following are true:

* It specifies changes to the dynastic ruleset
* It changes a non-ruleset part of the gamestate
* It proposes to make a new Active Special Case rule, or activate an inactive Special Case rule, or change the contents of an active special case rule

A non-proposal Votable Matter can never be a Bill.

Bills may only be resolved if they have been open for more than 48 hours. A Bill is Popular if has not been vetoed and it has more valid FOR votes than AGAINST votes, otherwise it is unpopular. Legislators may not cast a vote on a Bill if it is less than 4 hours old (although votes legally cast if a Bill is less than 4 hours old due to being made before this was a rule are still valid)

Remove the text “A Bill which is Pending, Popular, at least 12 hours old, and for which all older Pending proposals are Self-Killed, Vetoed, Popular or Unpopular, is known as an “Bill Proposal” from the rule “Victory”

Remove the text “, and no bills are Enactable” from the rule “Victory”

If Proposal: Self Consistency was enacted, add the following to the Mandate List; otherwise as it to the list in the rule The Veto List:

* It does not make any changes to non-dynastic rules (other than making a new Active Special Case rule, or activating an inactive Special Case rule, or changing the contents of an active special case rule)

I think “every bill takes 48 hours to process” is probably the best way to deal with any and all admin timing shenanigans. It also opens the door for various shenanigan around giving people multiple votes and allows us to resolve the “spitefully vote-locking proposals to try and ensure they fail” issues.

Also making it so you can’t bypass the bill rules by making a proposal that changes both dynastic and core rules. Lets make people use CFJs for that

Proposal: Cross Handoff

Enacted 8-1. Josh

Adminned at 24 Aug 2021 11:18:17 UTC

Add to the list in “Veto List” (If “How A Bill Becomes A Law” enacts, first replace instances of ‘Proposal’ with ‘Bill’):

- The Proposal’s Author is not X.  If the Handoff action has not been done in the last 36 hours, then the Legislator with their name bolded in this property (or any Legislator if the name bolded is not the name of any Legislator) may perform an action called Handoff: the bolded name is replaced with a Legislator’s name of their choosing that is not the Wielder of Vetoes.

Change the bolded “X” in the property to a random Legislator who is not the Wielder of Vetoes.

Items in a Veto List?  Why not?

Proposal: tweet tweet!

Self-killed. Josh

Adminned at 24 Aug 2021 11:17:45 UTC

Add to the list in “Veto List” (If “How A Bill Becomes A Law” enacts, first replace instances of ‘Proposal’ with ‘Bill’):

- The proposal cannot be longer than 280 characters.

Proposal: Pair Ray Yaw

Vetoed. Josh

Adminned at 24 Aug 2021 11:17:08 UTC

Create a new rule called “Status”:

A Legislator is a Pariah or not, and is by default not a Pariah. This is publicly tracked.

Add to the list in “Veto List”:

- The Proposal’s author is a Pariah.

For every Legislator, if their Vote isn’t FOR this Proposal, then make them a Pariah.

We already got lined up a wincon and main way to play (“Victory Executed Through Obstruction”) by the Emperor.

Well, alright. I’m up for obstructing my competition via Proposals and the Veto List as per the dynasty’s design, so let’s try this out.

Proposal: How A Bill Becomes A Law

Timed out and failed, 4 votes to 5. Josh

Adminned at 24 Aug 2021 11:14:46 UTC

Throughout the Dynastic ruleset, change all instances of the word “Proposal” to “Bill”.

Add the following as a subrule to the rule Victory, called Bills:

A Proposal is a Bill if any of the following are true:

* It only specifies changes to the dynastic ruleset
* It only changes a non-ruleset part of the gamestate
* It only proposes to make a new Active Special Case rule, or activate an inactive Special Case rule

A non-proposal Votable Matter can never be a Bill.

If Proposal: Self Consistency was enacted, add the following to the Mandate List; otherwise as it to the list in the rule The Veto List: “It uses the term Proposal in a context that implies it should be referring to a Bill.”

Seems like a bad idea to have core and appendix rule changes tied up in dynastic tactical gameplay.

Proposal: Pea not taw

Timed out and failed, 3-4 with 2 unresolved DEFs. Josh

Adminned at 24 Aug 2021 09:08:53 UTC

Create a new rule called “Proposal Tools”:

There is a long-standing tradition in this sport to using certain tools to further augment a Legislator’s ability to make Proposals, known as Proposal Tools.

Each Legislator can use in their Proposals use up to 2 Proposal Tools that they own, by clearly and unambiguously stating that they use them in their Proposal (along any other details that such a Proposal Power may require), and are encouraged to have this statement done in the upper portion (or at the beginning) of their Proposal. When a Legislator’s Proposal with an attempt of Proposal Tools is attempted to be resolved, it is resolved with the Proposal Powers applied, other dynastic rules or clauses in the Proposal notwithstanding, and then that Proposal Tool is spent.

A Legislator’s currently owned Proposal Tools are publicly tracked. As a communal weekly action, any Legislator can Pop The Weekly Piñata of Sportsmanship and for each Legislator, grant them one random Proposal Tool.

The following are Proposal Tools:
- Golf Club: If the Proposal has 10 words or less (and has no egregious attempt to bypass the spirit of this effect, such as by linking an external page with more wordcount), it shall not be Vetoed for being a Misfit.
- Red Card: This Proposal can only be resolved as Vetoed. If it would be resolved as any other result, it is instead resolved as Vetoed. It is encouraged to Veto this Proposal whenever possible.
- Pocket Sand: This Proposal can ignore one listed entry in the Veto List for the purposes of being a Misfit or not.

Sunday, August 22, 2021

Proposal: Self Consistency

Times out and fails, 4-5 (and one idle-vote against). -Bucky

Adminned at 24 Aug 2021 03:29:59 UTC

If there exists a rule “The Veto List” with the text

A proposal is a Misfit if it does not have all of the properties on the following list:

Change that text to:

A proposal is a Misfit if it does not have all of the properties on the following list, which is known as the Mandate List:

If there does not exist a dynastic rule “The Veto List”, create one with the following text:

A proposal is a Misfit if it does not have all of the properties on the following list, which is known as the Mandate List:

  1. It would, if enacted, add a new entry to this list.

Add the following entry to the end of the Mandate List:

It complies with every property that it could possibly or conditionally add to the Mandate List, including conditional proposed changes with an impossible condition.

 

Proposal: Walking the Walk

Fails 2-8 with Quorum AGAINST. This is within 48 hours of posting, so the silent Legislators gain Empathy.-Bucky

Adminned at 23 Aug 2021 01:40:13 UTC

Add the following to the list in the “The Veto List”

It fulfills the requirements of every new entry which, were it to be enacted, would be added to this list

Proposal: Voters Offer Their Empathy

Enacted popular, 7-1. Josh

Adminned at 22 Aug 2021 17:21:59 UTC

Create a new dynastic rule, “Statistics”:

Each Legislator has an Empathy, a publicly tracked integer (that can be positive, negative, or zero, and defaults to zero).
Each Legislator has a Veto Usage, a publicly tracked nonnegative integer that defaults to zero.

Whenever a Proposal not authored by the Wielder of Vetoes is Enacted or Failed, then:

  • If the proposal was vetoed, the Veto Usage of the Legislator who vetoed it is increased by 1;
  • Otherwise, if the proposal was self-killed, no changes are made to Empathy or Veto Usage;
  • Otherwise, every Legislator who ever voted AGAINST the proposal (even if they subsequently changed their vote) loses 1 Empathy, and:
    • if the proposal had been open for voting for less than 48 hours, each other Legislator gains 1 Empathy; or
    • if the proposal had been open for voting for at least 48 hours, each other Legislator who voted FOR that proposal gains 1 Empathy.

The Admin who Enacts or Fails the proposal must update the dynastic tracking page to reflect these changes, unless someone else does so first. However, a failure to do so does not count as failure to enact/fail the proposal.

Set the Wielder of Vetoes’s Veto Usage to 3.

Tracking the FOR/AGAINST voting tendencies of players. I’d love to see lots of proposals pass (despite all the vetoes), so I’m going to be biased to the side of the FOR voters.

Also tracking the vetoing tendencies of players. Right now, it’s just me vetoing things, but given the nature of this dynasty, that may well change at some point. (So far, I’ve vetoed three proposals that were stuck in the queue from the previous dynasty.)

This proposal is also me saying that the expected activity cycle of this dynasty is 48 hours (the length of time it takes for a proposal to time out) – we shouldn’t be punishing players who can’t get to a proposal before it quorums, but may consider mechanics that benefit players who get to a proposal before it times out.

Proposal: Victory Executed Through Obstruction

Enacted popular, 9 votes to 0. Josh

Adminned at 22 Aug 2021 17:19:24 UTC

Create a new dynastic rule, “Victory”:

A Proposal which is Pending, Popular, at least 12 hours old, and for which all older Pending proposals are Self-Killed, Vetoed, Popular or Unpopular, is known as an “Enactable Proposal”.

Each Enacted Proposal not authored by the Wielder of Vetoes is known as a “Scoring Proposal”. If this rule has existed for at least 72 hours, and no Scoring Proposal was Enacted within the previous 72 hours, no Pending Proposal has been open for voting for 48 or more hours, and no proposals are Enactable, then the author of the most recently Enacted Scoring Proposal achieves victory.

Create a new dynastic rule, “The Veto List”:

A proposal is a Misfit if it does not have all of the properties on the following list:

  1. It would, if enacted, add a new entry to this list.

If, using the definition of “Misfit” at the time a proposal was posted (as opposed to the current definition), a proposal is a Misfit, then the Wielder of Vetoes is strongly encouraged to veto it. Legislators are encouraged to draw attention to Misfit proposals that have not been vetoed yet, and to avoid voting FOR on them.

The core mechanic: each proposal introduces a new restriction on what can go in a proposal, and (as long as there are no timed-out proposals waiting to be processed) the last player to pass a proposal wins.

For safety (so that the queue doesn’t end up getting semi-permanently blocked when we inevitably discover that we were wrong about whether or not a proposal is a Misfit), the restrictions on what make a valid proposal aren’t enforced automatically by the rules, but rather via the use of vetoes. As a consequence, it is quite possible that I’ll end up vetoing a huge number of proposals this dynasty.

Ascension Address: Legislature At Work

With the decline of the Royal Court in the late 18th century, its legislative body, once the seat of power for an empire, no longer served any useful political function. However, organisations of this age and venerability don’t go down lightly. Lawmaking started out as politics, but it evolved into an art, and eventually a sport.

Nowadays, the Legislators still meet, more out of tradition and camaraderie than any sense of duty, and set about inventing bureaucratic hoops for each other to jump through, and raising points of procedure to stymie their opponents, and coming up with the most elaborate and impressive acronyms they can to title documents. They worry about whether they might be able to talk their competitors’ ordinances down, or survive letting them through, or even stoop to the level of voting them down.

Any sport needs its referees, and the Legislature is overseen by the mysterious Wielder of Vetoes. Sitting on a pedestal to one side of the room, the Wielder observes the action, and reads the documents, and cross-checks them against all the relevant law.

And then says No. Over and over and over again.


Change synonyms as follows: “Worker” to “Legislator”; “Factory” to “Wielder of Vetoes”.
Do not retain any dynastic rules.
Set the Special Case rules “Seasonal Downtime” and “Dynastic Distance” to Inactive.
Change the dynastic tracking page to “The Legislature”.

The theme of this dynasty: proposals! I’m looking for a dynasty for which the gameplay is primarily based around proposing and voting, as opposed to the gameplay primarily being something else, with the proposing and voting on the side. Note that this is proposals specifically, with CFJs and DoVs behaving as normal for BlogNomic; when making rules related to voting, please be careful to not disrupt how CFJ/DoV voting works.

I’m normally fine with Seasonal Downtime, but it has a bug in it that interacts badly with dynastic rules that override core-rule actions – we’re quite likely to get some of those this dynasty. So it seemed safest to simply just turn it off, especially as it seems very unlikely to come into play this dynasty. I’m turning Dynastic Distance off partly because I prefer to exclude things from the Emperor on a case-by-case basis, and partly because it affects “dynastic rules which do not deal with voting” and that seems like a status that may change unexpectedly and/or to be hard to define.

I’ll leave the blog template changes up to everyone else, partly because I’m not great at that sort of thing, partly because the BlogNomic playerbase as a whole is generally great at that sort of thing, and partly because I’m not an admin. Could we work a veto icon into the blog header somehow? (Also, I’d prefer it if the header didn’t contain a marquee tag this time.)

Notice of Violation

After marking Tracking Conflict enacted, I erroneously concluded it was instead Unpopular and marked it failed. This falls into the same problem as the DoV, except that the gamestate updates had platonically occurred prior to the CfJ becoming illegal and thus weren’t prevented, and even though it’s illegal it can’t be marked as such after it has already resolved.

I have therefore reverted its status to Enacted as a Rule 4.2.2 correction, and its changes stand.

Call for Judgment: Datfavour

Enacts 8-0.  RIP FAVO(U)RS. - Jumble

Adminned at 21 Aug 2021 19:02:52 UTC

Repeal the Special Case rule whose name is Favours, followed by either [Active] or [Inactive].

See Proposal: Disfavour

Proposal: Disfavour

Illegally posted during hiatus

Adminned at 21 Aug 2021 09:10:42 UTC

Repeal the Special Case rule Favours [Active].

A CfJ, because an interregnum, particularly one in which no-one is holding any favours, seems like the best time to do this.

There’s been some discussion of successor mechanics; I’m interested in that but think they stand a better chance from a clean slate.

Declaration of Victory: A chime sounds (second attempt)

Popular 11-0.  Congratulations, ais! - Jumble

Adminned at 21 Aug 2021 21:00:59 UTC

I have achieved victory this dynasty, but my previous DoV was made illegal by mistake.

See A Chime Sounds (especially its comments) for my explanation as to how I won.

Good thing there were no AGAINST votes on it when it was accidentally enacted early, or we’d be stuck waiting five days.

Zero Days Since An Accident

Apologies all, I’ve just killed Ais’s DoV in the one good faith way that it’s possible to do so: mistakenly enacting it when it could not be enacted (I was an hour and a half early, I thought it was later in the morning than it was).

This triggers the “infraction against any of the prohibitions” gamestate rule (I altered the blog post’s status when it “may never be altered except in accordance with the rules that define that official post”), which means that the DoV “may no longer have any effect on the ruleset or the gamestate”.

I will eventually try to fix that infraction rule some time.

The Factory sleeps (Post-Dynastic Commentary)

Okay, I know it’s a bit early to be posting this but I’m going to sleep rn and I doubt anything is going to change in 4 hours.

This Dynasty…was kind of a mess.  I know, first time and all, but I’m pretty sure I still got off to a rough start by those standards.  And then it ended in a midgame scam.  Hey, at least the scam felt satisfying to me.

Friday, August 20, 2021

Declaration of Victory: A chime sounds

Made illegal by the “infraction against any of the prohibitions” rule when I unintentionally tried to enact it at quorum, but an hour early. This made it Unpopular and required it to be failed (and optionally marked as Illegal) once the twelve hours are up, which they now are. Failed by Kevan.

Adminned at 21 Aug 2021 09:47:38 UTC

I have activated a Chime machine, achieving victory in the process.

This followed a very long sequence of actions (I have performed 6596 actions since the Cycle action). A list of the actions that got me into a state where I could Chime is available.

I’ll post more information in the comments, but wanted to get this DoV up.

Proposal: Communiteism

Reached quorum 8 votes to 1. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 22 Aug 2021 11:26:39 UTC

Add the following to the end of the rule Fair Play:

All Workers and idle Workers should be aware of the BlogNomic [[Community Guidelines]]. The contents of this page are not ruletext and are nonbinding as pertains to the ruleset, but Workers are encouraged to commit to upholding them to whatever extent is possible.

Add a link to the Community Guidelines to the blog sidebar, the front page of the wiki, and the new player’s guide.

A few minor tweaks and less open-ended resolution instructions.

Proposal: Welcome package

Vetoed—Clucky

Adminned at 22 Aug 2021 02:27:49 UTC

Add a new Dynastic Rule to the ruleset. Call it “Welcome Package” and give it the following text:

When a non-Bot Worker joins the dynasty for the first time, either by registering or by unidling while having been idle throughout the dynasty, they gain Cogs equal to the number of full days that have passed since midnight on August 9th, their Line gains a Spin machine (in addition to the default Clink), and they gain a Thing named Bread and a Thing named Sugarcube. Bots do not receive this welcome package, no person may receive it if they have spent any Cogs or Energy this dynasty, and no person can receive it more than once.

The dynasty has become grindy enough that new players will be at a severe disadvantage, but we can at least give them the ingredients to customize their Line immediately.

Proposal: Boxing Clever

Vetoed—Clucky

Adminned at 22 Aug 2021 02:26:37 UTC

If the CfJ “Tracking Conflict” has not enacted, this proposal has no further effect.

In “Widgets”, replace “Widgets are listed in brackets immediately after their attached Machine’s name and (if present) Heat status mark and/or parenthesized recorded information, e.g. “Storage* (3) [Cooling Widget]”.*” with-

Attached Widgets are recorded by putting the first word of the Widget’s name at the start of the attached Machine’s name (eg. “Cooling Storage”).

Then update the formatting in the Factory Layout to match this new system.

Would be neater to track “Baker [Boxing Widget]” as “Boxing Baker”, if the first word of a Widget is always going to be an adjective that doesn’t appear in the list of Machine names.

Thursday, August 19, 2021

Proposal: Let me paint you a portrait

Vetoed—Clucky

Adminned at 22 Aug 2021 02:26:08 UTC

Add the following new types of Machine to the list in “Machines”:

Easel

  • Cost: 1 or more Things named Paper, plus a Thing named Paint
  • Effect: Choose a number of Workers (other than yourself) equal to the number of Things named “Paper” spent, for which for each of those Workers, you have at least three of the same types of Machine that that Worker does. For each of those Workers, gain a Thing named “Portrait of ” followed by the name of that Worker.

Liquidiser

  • Cost: one Thing plus one Energy
  • Effect: Gain a Thing named Paint.

To the list in “Things” (if it exists) or “Products” (if “Things” doesn’t exist), add:

  • Portrait of name (where name is the name of any Worker): Pay the Cost of the type of a machine that exists in that Worker’s Line, then add a Cold copy of that machine (including any Widgets attached to it) to your Line.

Trying to figure out an interesting use for Paper – you can paint portraits of people if their line is similar to yours, and then use those to copy Machine+Widget combinations paying only the cost of the Machine.

I considered adding other types of liquid to Liquidiser, but I feel that that’s best left to a future proposal.

Call for Judgment: Tracking Conflict

Times out and passes 5-3. -Bucky

Adminned at 21 Aug 2021 19:59:08 UTC

In the rule “Widgets”, change

Any Worker may Attach a new Widget to one of the Machines they have by paying its Cost and listing it in brackets next to the Machine’s name, i.e. “Clink [Cooling Widget]”.

to

Any Worker may Attach a new Widget to one of the Machines they have by paying its Cost. Widgets are listed in brackets immediately after their attached Machine’s name and (if present) Heat status mark and/or parenthesized recorded information, e.g. “Storage* (3) [Cooling Widget]”.

In the rule “Machines”, change

in parentheses next to this Greenhouse in the list of Machines

to

in parentheses after this machine’s name and heat status marker (if any)

and

in parenthesis after the machines name

to

in parenthesis after this machine’s name and heat status marker (if any)


Adjust the formatting of all Widgets in the Factory Layout to match their placement under the above changes. Restore any Widgets that were removed because they had parenthesized recorded information or an asterisk or apostrophe in between their listing and their attached machine’s listing, and uphold any otherwise legal widget effects that failed because of intervening content in the tracking document.

Does a Spin widget tracked as as “Spin* [Boxing Widget]” have a Boxing Widget attached? As currently worded, it does not, since the Boxing Widget is next to the heat mark rather than the machine name.

Proposal: Machine Delivery

Self-killed. Failed by Kevan.

Adminned at 20 Aug 2021 15:04:37 UTC

Add some Machines:-

Bandsaw
* Cost: one Box with a value of 2 or more
* Effect: Gain a Thing called Plank, and a Box with a value one less than that of the Box used to activate this machine.

Expander
* Cost: one Box
* Effect: Gain a Box containing a value one higher than the Box used to activate this Machine.

Compressor
* Cost: one Thing
* Effect: Lose all Things, then gain a Thing called Diamond.

Simulator
* Cost: five Cogs
* Effect: Apply the effect of any Machine as if this Machine had that effect. (An effect that refers to the Boxes or Things used to activate the Machine, or which is the effect of the Chime Machine, may not be chosen here.)

Dust to Dustsheet

Cuddlebeam idles out automatically after seven days without a post or comment. Quorum remains 7.

Wednesday, August 18, 2021

Proposal: Nine to Five (second attempt)

Timed out 6 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 20 Aug 2021 15:03:24 UTC

Remove “The amount of Energy a Worker has is publicly tracked, and defaults to 2.” from “Energy Cycles”.
Add two new paragraphs at the start of “Energy Cycles”:

Each Worker has an amount of Energy, a publicly tracked non-negative integer that defaults to 2.

Each Worker, except for Bots, can be Clocked In or Clocked Out (by default, they are Clocked In). This status is tracked by appending an asterisk to the Energy of Clocked Out Workers on the dynastic tracking page. Clocked Out Workers cannot perform actions that are defined by the rule “Machines”, by subrules of that rule, or by the rule “Clientele”. A Worker can set themself to be Clocked Out at any time.

Each Worker keeps the same amount of Energy they had before the above changes were performed.

in “Energy Cycles”, change the paragraph that starts “The last Cycle action is publicly tracked for convenience” to read:

If it has been at least 60 hours since the last Cycle, or if it has been at least 24 hours since the last Cycle and all non-Bot Workers without Dustsheets are Clocked Out, any Worker may perform an Atomic Action named “Cycle” with the following steps:

Add a new step, “Each Non-Bot Worker becomes Clocked In”, immediately after the second list entry in the numbered list in “Energy Cycles”.

If “Energy Cycles” contains the text

Each Worker has a Charge which defaults to 2, but a given worker’s charge is increased by one for each Electric Widget they have on a machine in their line.

change it to

Each Worker has a Charge, which is equal to 2 plus the number of Electric Widgets they have on Machines in their line.

In “Clientele”, change

Once per Cycle, a Worker can Submit a Report: upon doing so they gain Cogs per Client that is Satisfied with them, and then set all of their Machines to Hot.

to

A Worker who is Clocked In can Submit a Report: upon doing so they gain Cogs per Client that is Satisfied with them, and become Clocked Out.

A fixed version of Nine to Five – people actually get their ability to act back at the end of the cycle now.

Proposal: For Want of a Nail

Timed out 6 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 20 Aug 2021 10:44:18 UTC

In “Energy Cycles”, remove “Then, roll a DICE3, subtract 1, and add that many Wants to their collection of Wants, choosing randomly from the list in “Clientele”.”, then add a bullet point to the list:-

For each Client, roll a DICE3, subtract 1, and add that many Wants to their collection of Wants, choosing randomly from the list in “Clientele” (skipping Wants that the Client already possesses).

The current “for each client, reduce them down to 1 and then add DICE3-1” doesn’t fire for Clients with zero Wants, which is all of them right now. Should probably also avoid repeated Wants within a Client.

Wednesday, August 18, 2021

Proposal: Charging My Lazers

Timed out 1 vote to 2 with 1 unresolved DEF. Failed by Kevan.

Adminned at 20 Aug 2021 06:21:37 UTC

Add the following Widget

Electric Widget
Cost: 10 cogs
Effect: This widget has no effects other than what is described in the rule “Energy Cycles”

Add the following to “Energy Cycles”

Each Worker has a Charge which defaults to 2, but a given worker’s charge is increased by one for each Electric Widget they have on a machine in their line.

in Energy cycles replace

For every Worker, if their Energy is less than 2, set it to 2.

with

For every Worker, if their Energy is less than their Charge, set it to their Charge.

Proposal: Unlockables

Timed out 6 votes to 1. Enacted by Kevan. Have assumed “paragraph” to include the bullet points beneath the paragraph about Things (which has no no paragraph break between the text and the list).

Adminned at 20 Aug 2021 06:21:05 UTC

In “Products”, move the paragraphs beginning with “Workers have an amount of Things”, “A Thing may optionally have an Effect”, and “Each Worker may only have at most 10 Things” to a new subrule of “Products” called “Things”, maintaining their order respective to one another; then move the text of “Crops and Seeds” to the end of that subrule and delete the empty rule called “Crops and Seeds”,

In “Products”, append the following paragraph:

Each Worker can have a number of Techs up to their number of Prototypes. A Tech is the name of a High-Tech Machine or Widget, recorded in a publicly tracked Tech list (which defaults to blank) corresponding to a Worker. A Worker may add a High-Tech Machine or Widget to their Tech list at any time by paying its Cost.

Above the third paragraph of the rule “Machines”, add the following paragraph:

A type of Machine can be High-Tech or Low-Tech, defaulting to Low-Tech. A Machine type’s High-Tech status is tracked by a bullet point reading “High-Tech” in its listing in the Ruleset. If a Machine is High-Tech, Workers may not add it to their lineup or activate it unless they have its name in their Tech list.

Above the second paragraph of the rule “Widgets”, add the following paragraph:

A type of Widget can be High-Tech or Low-Tech, defaulting to Low-Tech. A Widget type’s High-Tech status is tracked by a bullet point reading “High-Tech” in its listing in the Ruleset. If a Widget is High-Tech, Workers may not add it to any Machine in their lineup unless they have its name in their Tech list.

Add the following bullet:

* High-Tech

to the listing of Chime in the rule “Machines”.

Call for Judgment: Wanting Nothing

Passes 8-0 with Quorum in favor. -Bucky

Adminned at 18 Aug 2021 04:35:34 UTC

In “Energy Cycles”, replace “For each Client, randomly remove Wants from their collection of Wants until there is one Want remaining.” with:-

For each Client who has more than one Want, randomly remove Wants from their collection of Wants until they have one or fewer Wants remaining.

All Clients are currently Wantless as a result of their Wants being repealed or renamed: this makes the “until there is one Want remaining” step of the Cycle action impossible.

Call for Judgment: I Don’t Want It That Way

Passes 8-0 with Quorum FOR. -Bucky

Adminned at 17 Aug 2021 14:22:37 UTC

Set the steps of the “Cycle” atomic action to be the following

1. Remove all Boxes
2. For every Worker, if their Energy is less than 2, set it to 2.
3. For each Worker with no Hot Machines, replace a Clink in their Line (if they have one) with a Dustsheet
4. For each machine, set its heat to Cold.
5. For each Client, randomly remove Wants from their collection of Wants until there is one Want remaining. Then, roll a DICE3, subtract 1, and add that many Wants to their collection of Wants, choosing randomly from the list in “Clientele”.

So https://blognomic.com/archive/wish_list mistakenly said “replacing the 4th step if one already exists”, missing the fact that due to the passage of https://blognomic.com/archive/cold_dust the 4th step of the cycle action was not “For each Client, remove all Wants from their collection of Wants. Then randomly select a Want for each Client from among the listed Wants, and add that Want to that Client’s collection of Wants.”, which is clearly the step lemon intended to replace, but was instead “For each machine, set its heat to Cold.”

seems like something we should fix ASAP hence the CFJ

Monday, August 16, 2021

Proposal: The Trainee

Timed out 5 votes to 1. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 19 Aug 2021 08:18:51 UTC

Add this Bot to the end of the list of bots in the rule “Bots”:

Name:Monkeybot Behavior: Each Worker may cause Monkeybot to perform an action identical in all respects (except for the results of any Dice rolls or required random selections) to any action that Worker has already performed in the current Cycle, provided that Monkeybot is legally allowed to perform the action.

Proposal: Nine to Five

self killed—Clucky

Adminned at 18 Aug 2021 02:12:44 UTC

Remove “The amount of Energy a Worker has is publicly tracked, and defaults to 2.” from “Energy Cycles”.
Add two new paragraphs at the start of “Energy Cycles”:

Each Worker has an amount of Energy, a publicly tracked non-negative integer that defaults to 2.

Each Worker, except for Bots, can be Clocked In or Clocked Out (by default, they are Clocked In). This status is tracked by appending an asterisk to the Energy of Clocked Out Workers on the dynastic tracking page. Clocked Out Workers cannot perform actions that are defined by the rule “Machines”, by subrules of that rule, or by the rule “Clientele”. A Worker can set themself to be Clocked Out at any time.

Each Worker keeps the same amount of Energy they had before the above changes were performed.

in “Energy Cycles”, change the paragraph that starts “The last Cycle action is publicly tracked for convenience” to read:

If it has been 60 hours since the last Cycle, or if all non-Bot Workers without Dustsheets are Clocked Out, any Worker may perform an Atomic Action named “Cycle” with the following steps:

In “Clientele”, change

Once per Cycle, a Worker can Submit a Report:

to

A Worker who is Clocked In can Submit a Report:

and

set all of their Machines to Hot.

to

become Clocked Out.

A different take on a) timing, and b) report submission – instead of tying it to whether the worker has any Hot Machines, have a “done” flag that the Worker can set to say that they want to take no further actions.

This avoids the negative side effects of “Cold Reboot” whilst still preventing players submitting reports mid-turn, and means that the last player to go doesn’t need to perform all their actions in the same wiki update.

The last replacement is a little awkwardly worded, so that it will work regardless of whether Wish List passes or fails.

Proposal: Cold Reboot

Self Killed—Clucky

Adminned at 18 Aug 2021 02:11:05 UTC

Replace “A Worker may add a new, Cold instance of a Machine to any position in their Line by paying that Machine’s Cost.” with:-

If a Worker has no Hot or Warm Machines, they may add a new, Cold instance of a Machine to any position in their Line by paying that Machine’s Cost.

Submitting a Report can currently be done mid-move if you then build and use more Machines afterwards: would be simpler to rule that out.

Monday, August 16, 2021

Proposal: Sixty Hours is Sixty Hours

Timed out. Fails 1-5—Clucky

Adminned at 18 Aug 2021 02:11:39 UTC

In the core rule “Votes”, change both instances of “48” to “60”.

At the end of that core rule, append “When a Declaration of Victory is enacted, both the above instances of ‘60’ in this rule change to ‘48’, and this sentence is removed from this rule.”

If we’re adopting a 60-hour cycle for this dynasty, that means that it’s safe to stop paying attention to it for 60 hours. Except that it isn’t – a proposal could be submitted, time out, and be enacted in that time, in a situation where your vote would stop it. (It isn’t a problem if proposals get quorumed in a fraction of that time, because in that situation, your vote wouldn’t stop it.)

As such, this is a proposal to slow the proposal cycle to 60 hours too, matching the gameplay cycle. Trying to do this with a dynastic rule was too hard to word and ran the risk of being easily missed in the ruleset, so thiis words it as a core rules change that repeals itself at the end of the dynasty.

Proposal: Scaled Up Spinning

Timed Out. Fails 1-5 with 1 unresolved DEF—Clucky

Adminned at 18 Aug 2021 02:09:38 UTC

In the list of available types of Machine in Rule 2.2, perform the following changes:

Change the Cost of both Spin and Press machines to “one to four Energy”.
Change Effect of a Spin machine to “for each Energy spent to pay the cost for this Activation, roll DICE10 and gain a Box containing the result of that roll.”
Change Effect of a Press machine to “Choose a number from 1 to 5. Gain one box containing the chosen number for each Energy spent to pay the cost for this Activation.”

Proposal: Feedback Loop [Appendix]

Times out and fails, 2-4. -Bucky

Adminned at 17 Aug 2021 21:40:45 UTC

Add a subrule to the Appendix called “Requests for Feedback”

Any Worker who wishes to seek feedback on a proposal they are working on or something else to do with the state of the game may submit a Requests for Feedback by posting an entry in the “Requests for Feedback” category. A Worker may not submit a Request For Feedback if they already have two or more open Requests for Feedback. Requests for Feedback are voteable matters, but may only be voted on by its author. If a Request for Feedback has been open for 96 hours, or if its author has voted against it, any Admin may resolve the request for feedback by marking it as closed.

Turning protosals into an actual thing. That way, we can add a “Request for Feedback” category and then show them on the sidebar so they don’t get lost.

Proposal: Liberté, égalité, communité

Self-killed. Failed by Kevan.

Adminned at 17 Aug 2021 17:35:36 UTC

Add the following to the end of the rule Fair Play:

All Workers and idle Workers should be aware of the BlogNomic [[Community Guidelines]]. These guidelines are nonbinding as pertains to the ruleset but Workers are encouraged to commit to upholding them to whatever extent is possible.

If the Community Guidelines page of the wiki has been edited since the posting of this proposal, revert it to this edit: https://wiki.blognomic.com/index.php?title=Community_Guidelines&oldid=16356

Add a link to the Community Guidelines to the blog sidebar, the front page of the wiki, the new player’s guide, and anywhere else that might be appropriate.

Proposal: Widgets and Wordings

Timed out 2 votes to 4. Failed by Kevan.

Adminned at 17 Aug 2021 17:34:49 UTC

Add the following sentence to “Machines” after “A Worker may Activate a Cold or Warm Machine they have by paying its costs, setting its heat to Hot, and executing its effects.”:

Everything gained as a result of Activating a Machine is known as the Output of that Activation.

Add the following sentence before the list of available Widgets:

An Effect may refer to the Machine the widget is attached to as the Host Machine.

Replace all instances of “the Machine this Widget is Attached to” with “the Host Machine”

In “Widgets”, replace “Any Worker may Attach a new Widget to one of the Machines they have ” with “Any Worker may Attach a new Widget to a Cold Machine they have”

Add the following to the list of available Widgets:

Solar Panel
Cost: 10 Cogs
Effect: The Host Machine no longer costs Energy to Activate (all other costs must still be paid).

Recycler
Cost: 10 Cogs
Effect: Whenever a box is paid to Activate the Host Machine, gain a box with equal value.

Struts
Cost: 10 Cogs
Effect: The Host Machine does not count towards the limit on the number of Machines in the owner’s Line. It is still considered to be in the Line for all other purposes.


Really Long Pipe
Cost: 5 Cogs
Effect: Whenever you activate the Host Machine, do not gain any of its Output. Instead, record the Output in parentheses after the name of this Widget. At the start of the next Cycle, you gain the Output that was recorded, and delete the contents of the parentheses.

Gearbox:
Cost: 5 Cogs
Effect: Whenever you activate the Host machine, if the Output contains one or more Cogs, gain two additional Cogs.

Fabricator
Cost: 5 Cogs
Effect: Whenever you activate the Host machine, if the Output contains one or more Things, gain one additional Thing of a type that is present in the Output.

If the majority of the EVCs on this proposal contain the word “refund”, replace

If a Worker would Attach a Widget to one of the Machines they have that already has a Widget Attached to it, that Worker first removes the already existing Widget from that Machine, then adds the new Widget in the previous Widget’s place.

with

If a Worker would Attach a Widget to one of the Machines they have that already has a Widget Attached to it, that Worker first removes the already existing Widget from that Machine, gains half of its cost (rounded down), then adds the new Widget in the previous Widget’s place.

Let’s get some more Widget options in here! Adds a variety of new Widgets, as well as keywording some terms to make Widgets effects clearer. And finally, since the list of Widgets is growing this much, has an optional rider to make replacing Widgets slightly less painful for those who initially committed to one of the first ones.

Open to feedback, especially on costs. I was basing them on the costs of the original Widgets, with a baseline of “5 for a production-boosting Widget, 10 for a Widget that raises one of the basic limits (space, activations, Energy, etc.), but feel free to suggest better ones on anything that feels over/under-priced.

EDIT: Fabricator no longer generates arbitrary Things, Really Long Pipe no longer ambiguous as to how to use it or whether you can use it more than once.
EDIT 2: Added a “cold machines only” stipulation to attaching Widgets, to prevent Struts being used to move already-run machines out of the way, as well as any other potential shenanigans with attaching/removing a Widget after activation.

Saturday, August 14, 2021

Proposal: Wish List

Timed Out. Passes 9-0—Clucky

Adminned at 17 Aug 2021 05:03:59 UTC

Add the following as the 4th step of the Cycle Atomic Action (replacing the 4th step if one already exists):

4. For each Client, randomly remove Wants from their collection of Wants until there is one Want remaining. Then, roll a DICE3, subtract 1, and add that many Wants to their collection of Wants, choosing randomly from the list in “Clientele”.

In the rule “Clientele”, replace “Once per Cycle, a Worker can Submit a Report: upon doing so they gain 2 Cogs per Client that is Satisfied with them, and set all of their Machines to Hot.” with the following:

Once per Cycle, a Worker can Submit a Report: upon doing so they gain Cogs per Client that is Satisfied with them, and then set all of their Machines to Hot. The number of Cogs gained depends on the number of Wants in the Client’s collection: 2 Cogs for 1 Want, 4 Cogs for 2 Wants, and 7 Cogs for 3 or more Wants.

In the rule “Clientele”, replace the list of Wants with the following:

* Workers’ Rights: The Worker has at least 1 Energy.
* Eco-Friendliness: The Worker has activated 3 or less Machines during the current Cycle.
* Efficiency: The Worker has more Hot Machines than they have non-Hot Machines.
* Productivity: The Worker has gained 5 or more Boxes in the current Cycle.
* Small Product: The Worker has a Box containing 1 or lower.
* Large Product: The Worker has a Box containing 8 or higher.
* Asceticism: The Worker has more Machines than they have Things.
* Surplus: The Worker has at least 5 Things.
* Competence: For every Bot, the Worker has more Boxes, more Cogs, or more Prototypes than that Bot.
* Loyalty: For at least one other Client, the Worker does not fulfill any of their Wants (ignoring those Wants that are also held by this Client).

i’ve said i’d prefer it, now im putting my money where my mouth is for small, combinable Wants! if i’ve done my math right, none of these are mutually exclusive within the same client’s list.

Proposal: Pushback [Special Case]

Timed out. Passes 10-0—clucky

Adminned at 16 Aug 2021 22:15:21 UTC

Set “Dynastic Distance” to Active.

less enthusiastic about this rule now

Proposal: Collector’s Victory

Timed Out. Passes 6-4—Clucky

Adminned at 16 Aug 2021 21:56:23 UTC

Add a new machine, “Chime”, immediately before “Clink” in the list of available types of Machine in Rule 2.2.

Its Cost shall be “10 Things with different names, none of which are listed in the effect of Wastebin”.
Its Effect shall be “achieve victory if the Worker owning this machine holds at least 11 Prototypes; otherwise, gain two Prototypes.”.

Proposal: Dumpster Diving

Timed out 4 votes to 5. Failed by Kevan.

Adminned at 16 Aug 2021 13:39:56 UTC

In the Effect of Wastebin, replace “Boot” with “Bread”, “Candle” with “Corn”, “Fishbone” with “Flour”, “Pushpin” with “Paper”, “Sponge” with “Sugarcube” and “Whisk” with “Wheat”.

Saturday, August 14, 2021

Proposal: Workshop Maintenance

Timed out 3 votes to 2. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 16 Aug 2021 09:43:33 UTC

In the rule “Machines”, add “(which any Worker can arrange in alphabetical order, if it is not already)” directly after “available types of Machine”. In the same sentence, replace “are” with “is”.

Change the text of Crusher to the following:

Crusher
* Cost: one Energy and one non-Crusher Machine
* Effect: Gain the smallest possible valid payment for the Cost of the Machine spent to activate this Machine; any Things gained this way are named “Scrap” if not specified.

If https://blognomic.com/archive/widgets_take_2 passed, add “(and any Widgets that were attached to it)” before the semicolon in the Effect of Crusher.

alphabetizing the machines list, and more importantly, reworking the crusher from a boxing device to a refunding device, bc it’s both useless and bugged right now.

Proposal: Cold Dust

Timed out 5 votes to 3. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 16 Aug 2021 09:41:29 UTC

If “Work to Rule” failed, this proposal has no further effect.

In “Energy Cycles”, replace “or if at least 85% of Workers have a hot machine, it has been at least 36 hours since the last Cycle action was performed, and it has been at least 12 hours since the last time a machine was activated” with:-

or if all Workers without Dustsheets have at least one Hot Machine

Add a step after the second in the Energy Cycle list:-

# For each Worker with no Hot Machines, replace a Clink in their Line (if they have one) with a Dustsheet

Add a Machine to the list:-

Dustsheet
* Cost: None when activated; one Box when being added to a Line
* Effect: Replace this Machine with a Cold Clink

In “Machines”, replace “an ordered list that defaults to one Clink machine” with “an ordered list that defaults to one Dustsheet machine”.

A different take on ending the round early: instead of going ahead at 85%, we wait for everyone - and if we end up timing out, the players we were still waiting on aren’t counted as part of “everyone” next time. But they can step back in at any time.

Proposal: Edge Cases [Appendix]

Passes 8-0 with quorum FOR. -Bucky

Adminned at 15 Aug 2021 22:45:02 UTC

In the rule “Prioritization”, change

If two contradicting parts have the same scope, the negative rule applies

to

If two contradicting parts have the same scope, or have scopes that only overlap where they contradict each other, the negative rule applies

For example, the Factory can cast veto votes on proposals using the VETO icon, but idle Workers can’t cast votes. Can an idle Factory still veto? The current rules are unhelpful because neither rule’s scope usually has anything to do with the other’s; rather, they only overlap at all in the extremely rare case of a VETO icon posted by an idle Factory.

Call for Judgment: Takesies-backsies

Times out and fails 3-5. -Bucky

Adminned at 15 Aug 2021 21:35:33 UTC

Remove 3 Sugarcubes from the Worker named Vovix.
Give a number of Sugar Seeds to the Worker named Vovix equal to the number of Sugarcubes removed.

I mistakenly thought the proposal to introduce Seeds had failed out of the queue (I was under the impression that a timeout was always a fail), so I spent my Sugar before the thing limit took it away under the assumption that there’s no reason to hold on to it anymore. Unfortunately, this leaves me with no source of seeds, so I humbly request a takesies-backsies of converting some of my sugars to seeds before running the Sugarcuber.

Proposal: [Core] A minimal consensus shouldn’t have lasting effects

Timed out 3-1. Enacted with irony by Kevan.

Adminned at 15 Aug 2021 18:12:25 UTC

In “Votes”, after

It has been open for voting for at least 48 hours, it has more than 1 valid Vote cast on it, and more valid Votes cast on it are FOR than are AGAINST.

append, as a new sentence in the same bullet point,

Exception: Proposals which would change the text of a Core, Special Case or Appendix rule if enacted cannot be Popular on this basis.

“Wolfsbane” just timed out 6 votes to 4, making a fairly major change to the trans-dynastic ruleset. I get worried when potentially far-reaching changes are made by less than half the playerlist, especially when almost as many players are opposed. (This is despite the fact that I was in favour of the change!)

The systemic problem here seems to be that proposals to change the core rules can, and often do, time out without sufficiently many people paying attention to them. This proposal makes it so that a proposal to change the core rules needs a quorum in order to pass – if it times out without a quorum, it can be failed even if it hasn’t attracted that many AGAINST votes. (It can still pass if it’s more than 48 hours old, but has a quorum.)

This will make core rules changes harder to get through, but I think that’s a good thing in general. It also encourages advertising core rules changes and trying to build a bigger consensus around them, and I think that’s definitely a good thing.

(Note: for safety, this restriction only applies to Proposals; CFJs to change the core rules can still pass by timeout.)

Proposal: Going The Distance / Going For Speed

Timed out and failed, 3-5. Josh

Adminned at 15 Aug 2021 17:36:25 UTC

Add the following to the list of effects things can have:

Cake: Present a Cake to the Factory

Add the following the end of the Cycle atomic action

* Any worker who both presented a cake to the factory during the cycle that just completed, and has the most (or tied for the most) cogs out of all workers who presented a cake to the factory during that cycle achieves victory

Codifying “bake a cake” as the primary objective. But who knows how you actually bake a cake.

Proposal: The Great Work

Fewer than a quorum not voting against. Failed 1-7 by Kevan.

Adminned at 15 Aug 2021 13:30:39 UTC

Add the following Machine into Machines:

Magnum Opus
- Cost: 1 or more Prototypes
- Effect: At the end of the next Cycle, if the Contents of this Magnum Opus are more than the Contents of any other Magnum Opus, achieve victory.

In “Machines”, prepend

A Machine may have Contents, which is a value equal to the amount last paid to purchase or activate the Machine (updated after the activation resolves), tracked in parentheses after the machine’s name. Contents are only tracked for Machines that reference Contents in their text.

before

The list of available types of Machine are as follows:

In “Storage”. replace

Gain whatever box was most recently spent to purchase or activate this machine, prior to the current activation. (The value of that box is tracked in parenthesis after the machines name)

with

Gain this Machine’s Contents.

If “Fairer Farming” passed, replace

for each Hot Greenhouse you own, gain a Crop corresponding to the Seed last used to activate it, plus a Seed of the type last used to activate it.

with

Effect: for each Hot Greenhouse you own, gain its Seed Contents, plus a Crop corresponding to its Seed Contents.

in “Harvester”, and replace

The type of Seed used to activate this Greenhouse is recorded in parentheses next to this Greenhouse in the list of Machines.

with

None

in “Greenhouse”.

Taking a first stab at a victory mechanic, an arms race to spend the most Prototypes on building a great… something.  Also keywording “amount last used to purchase or activate this Machine” and parenthetical tracking, since this is likely to be the third machine with this mechanic, and probably won’t be the last.

The Great Work

Add the following Machine into Machines:

Magnum Opus
- Cost: 1 or more Prototypes
- Effect: At the end of the next Cycle, if the Contents of this Magnum Opus are more than the Contents of any other Magnum Opus, achieve victory.

In “Machines”, prepend

A Machine may have Contents, which is a value equal to the amount last paid to purchase or activate the Machine (updated after the activation resolves), tracked in parentheses after the machine’s name. Contents are only tracked for Machines that reference Contents in their text.

before

The list of available types of Machine are as follows:

In “Storage”. replace

Gain whatever box was most recently spent to purchase or activate this machine, prior to the current activation. (The value of that box is tracked in parenthesis after the machines name)

with

Gain this Machine’s Contents.

If “Fairer Farming” passed, replace

for each Hot Greenhouse you own, gain a Crop corresponding to the Seed last used to activate it, plus a Seed of the type last used to activate it.

with

Effect: for each Hot Greenhouse you own, gain its Seed Contents, plus a Crop corresponding to its Seed Contents.

in “Harvester”, and replace

The type of Seed used to activate this Greenhouse is recorded in parentheses next to this Greenhouse in the list of Machines.

with

None

in “Greenhouse”.

Taking a first stab at a victory mechanic, an arms race to spend the most Prototypes on building a great… something.  Also keywording “amount last used to purchase or activate this Machine” and parenthetical tracking, since this is likely to be the third machine with this mechanic, and probably won’t be the last.

Proposal: Work to rule

Timed out 7 votes to 2 with Imperial DEF becoming FOR. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 15 Aug 2021 13:29:54 UTC

In the rule Energy Cycles, change “36 hours” to “60 hours”.

In the same rule, change “or no Cycle has been performed” to “or if at least 85% of Workers have a hot machine, it has been at least 36 hours since the last Cycle action was performed, and it has been at least 12 hours since the last time a machine was activated”.

The pace is too much at the moment.

Friday, August 13, 2021

Proposal: A Mysterious Factory Indeed

self killed—clucky

Adminned at 15 Aug 2021 04:24:20 UTC

In “Energy Cycles”, change

For every Worker, if their Energy is less than 2, set it to 2.

to

For every Worker who is not the Factory, if their Energy is less than 2, set it to 2.
If the Factory’s Energy is less than 4, set it to 4.

In “Machines” change

Each Worker may have up to six Machines in their Line;

to

Each Worker may have up to six Machines in their Line, or nine if they are the Factory;

On-the-fly new idea: Emperor is a supercharged Player.

Proposal: I don’t want the same stuff anymore

Timed Out. Passes 4-3.

Adminned at 15 Aug 2021 04:24:20 UTC

If https://blognomic.com/archive/we_want_more passes, this proposal does nothing.

Add the following step to the atomic action “Cycle”:

4. For each Client, remove all Wants from their collection of Wants. Then randomly select a Want for each Client from among the listed Wants, and add that Want to that Client’s collection of Wants.

I’m kinda tired of the Clients having the same Wants each and every Cycle. Just a small proposal to spice things up a little bit.

Proposal: Widgets, take 2

Timed Out. Passes 7-0—Clucky

Adminned at 15 Aug 2021 04:21:16 UTC

Add the following to “Machines”, under the new subheading “Widgets”

Any Worker may Attach a new Widget to one of the Machines they have by paying its Cost and listing it in brackets next to the Machine’s name, i.e. “Clink [Cooling Widget]”. A Machine can only have one Widget Attached to it at any point in time. If a Worker would Attach a Widget to one of the Machines they have that already has a Widget Attached to it, that Worker first removes the already existing Widget from that Machine, then adds the new Widget in the previous Widget’s place.

A Widget has an Effect. A Widget’s Effect is listed underneath a Widget’s cost. Whenever the criteria listed in the Widget’s Effect are met, the Worker that has that Widget can and must execute that Widget’s Effect.

Cooling Widget
Cost: 10 Cogs
Effect: Whenever the Machine this Widget is Attached to is Activated when it is Cold and would be made Hot, it is made Warm instead.

Boxing Widget
Cost: 5 Cogs
Effect: Whenever you would gain a box containing a number as a result of you Activating the Machine this Widget is Attached to, you gain a box of that number plus one instead.

In the rule “Machines”, change the first and second paragraph to read as follows:

Each Worker may have up to six Machines in their Line; this is tracked as an ordered list that defaults to one Clink machine. A Worker may add a new, Cold instance of a Machine to any position in their Line by paying that Machine’s Cost. A Worker may Activate a Cold or Warm Machine they have by paying its costs, setting its heat to Hot, and executing its effects. A Worker may Demolish a Cold Machine they have by removing it from their Line.

A Machine has a Heat status that can be Hot, Warm, or Cold (and is Cold by default); this status is tracked by placing a apostrophe (‘) mark next to the name of each Warm Machine in each Worker’s list of Machines and an asterisk (*) next to the name of each Hot Machine in each Worker’s list of Machines.

 

Another take on widgets. Same basic mechanics, but with pricier widgets, so hopefully it’s more balanced.

Proposal: Dynastic Buyout [Special Case]

Vetoed. Failed by Kevan.

Adminned at 14 Aug 2021 12:59:04 UTC

Activate the Dynastic Distance Special Case. Inactivate the Seasonal Downtime Special Case

The current Factory (if any) ceases to be the Factory. The author of this proposal becomes the Factory.

Jumble, veto this if you don’t want it.

I unidle

I unidle myself; Quorum rises to 8.

Proposal: Humility

Vetoed. Failed by Kevan.

Adminned at 14 Aug 2021 12:58:28 UTC

Remove Factory status from the Worker named “Jumble”.

I’ve already stated that I want to play the dynasty rather than mod it; why not lean fully into it?

Proposal: Fairer farming

Timed out 4 votes to 1. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 14 Aug 2021 12:57:34 UTC

If “Reap What You Sow” failed, make the same changes to the Ruleset that it would make if it were enacted right now.

In “Crops and Seeds”, remove “A worker may pay a Crop to gain one Seed corresponding to that Crop.”
If “Three Tablespoons” was enacted, for each Worker who was not given a Sugar Seed by the enactment of that proposal, add one Thing called “Sugar Seed” to that Worker.

In the list of machines in Machines, change the definition of Harvester and Greenhouse as follows:

Harvester

  • Cost: two Cogs
  • Effect: for each Hot Greenhouse you own, gain a Crop corresponding to the Seed last used to activate it, plus a Seed of the type last used to activate it.

Greenhouse

  • Cost: one Seed plus one Energy
  • Effect: The type of Seed used to activate this Greenhouse is recorded in parentheses next to this Greenhouse in the list of Machines.

For each Worker, remove all Greenhouse Machines owned by that Worker.
For each Worker, remove half the Sugar and half the Sugarcubes owned by that Worker (rounding the amount removed downwards, i.e. rounding the amount remaining upwards).

Right now, the potential upside from farming is completely out of control. I just made a lot of useless boxes to fulfil the Boxer Want, because my box output was just so high. Players using Spin/Press would only have been able to make six boxes all dynasty, and yet I have five left over.

This proposal is an attempt to rebalance farming. Greenhouses now cost Energy to power (I guess they have heaters in), so farmers can’t get away with neglecting that part of the game entirely. The yield from farming is also dramatically reduced, because it’s clearly much too high at the moment. I think that farming will still be a viable strategy even despite these changes, and plan to continue with it myself.

For fairness to existing players, this is now set up so that pre-existing Sugar can’t be used to make Sugar Seeds; everyone has to start from scratch (or, if lemonfanta’s sugar-starter-kit proposal passed, with the sugar starter kit). Because the cost of building a Greenhouse has been greatly increased, existing Greenhouses are destroyed (they cost nothing to build anyway so there’s no need for a refund).

Because the effective yield from Sugar farming is being halved, this also halves existing Sugar/Sugarcube holdings, so that players who got into Sugar early don’t gain an advantage from their carried-over Sugar and Sugarcubes.

Proposal: Another Day, Another Dollar

Quorum Reached. Passes 9-0—Clucky

Adminned at 14 Aug 2021 01:36:55 UTC

In “Clientele”, replace “A Client is Satisfied with a Worker if they have fulfilled all of their Wants during the current Cycle. Once per Cycle, a Worker can Submit a Report and gain 2 Cogs per Client that is Satisfied with them.” with:-

A Client is Satisfied with a Worker if the Worker is currently fulfilling all of the Client’s Wants. Once per Cycle, a Worker can Submit a Report: upon doing so they gain 2 Cogs per Client that is Satisfied with them, and set all of their Machines to Hot.

Then replace “The Worker had at least 2 Energy at the end of the previous cycle.” with “The Worker has at least 2 Energy.”

Then replace “the previous cycle” with “the current cycle” in the Wants list.

If “We Want More” enacted, replace “currently holds a box” with “held (at any point during the current cycle) a Box” throughout the rule, and “held no Things immediately prior to the previous Cycle action” with “holds no Things”.

Simplifying the mix of current/previous-cycle Wants by making Report submission into something that we can only do after we’ve finished activating our Machines for the cycle.

Proposal: Stuff

Quorum Reached. Passes 9-1—Clucky

Adminned at 14 Aug 2021 01:32:38 UTC

Add the following available types of Machine to the list in “Machines”:

Compactor
* Cost: one or more Things
* Effect: Gain a Box containing the number of Things used to activate this Machine.

Printer
* Cost: one Box
* Effect: Gain a number of Things called Paper equal to half the value of the Box used to activate this Machine (rounded up).

Wastebin
* Cost: one Energy
* Effect: Gain up to four Things, each with one of the following names at random: Ashtray, Boot, Candle, Dust, Earplug, Fishbone, Gum, Hair, Insect, Jamjar, Kettle, Lint, Mitten, Napkin, Odor, Pushpin, Quilt, Razor, Sponge, Toy, Umbrella, Valve, Whisk, Xylophone, Yardstick, Ziploc.

having some fun with Things!!! Compactor is a place to dump unwanted Things; Printer is an inefficient way to make Paper, presumably that stuff is useful; and Wastebin is a way to get a lot of Things quickly, but they’re all junk.

Proposal: Three Tablespoons

self killed—Clucky

Adminned at 14 Aug 2021 01:30:59 UTC

If https://blognomic.com/archive/reap_what_you_sow failed, this proposal does nothing.
Give one Thing called Sugar Seed to each player who has never had a Thing called Sugar during this Dynasty.
In the effect of Harvester, change “each Greenhouse” to “each Hot Greenhouse” and “two Crops” to “three Crops”.

everyone should have the opportunity that the past sugarcubers have had!
also, i don’t think we have a good way of tracking which crop is planted in a greenhouse long-term, so let’s simplify that :0

Wednesday, August 11, 2021

Proposal: Warehouse Limits

Reached quorum 8 votes to 3. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 13 Aug 2021 17:51:16 UTC

Add the following to “Products”

Each Worker may only have at most 10 Things. When a Worker would otherwise gain a Thing but already has 10 Things, they do not gain that Thing (If they had fewer than 10 Things, but then gain a number of Things that would cause them to have more than 10 Things at the same time, they choose which subset of those new Things to gain such that they have 10 Things). If a worker has more than 10 Things, any Worker may random select one of that Worker’s things and remove it.

 

Even with Josh’s proposal, hoarding sugar still feels like too optimal of a strategy compared to the use it or lose it strategies that rely on box generation. Want to avoid cyclical gameplay where people just build up a lot of resources, then switch to a bunch of clinks for a bit to generate a ton of cogs, and now have enough cogs to withstand building up even more resources. This helps ensure strategies are activate and engaged instead of just hoarding stuff.

Proposal: Wolfsbane [Special Case]

I fooled you all, I self-ki… No, this times out 6 votes to 4. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 13 Aug 2021 17:20:06 UTC

Repeal the Special Case rule “The Traitor”.

That we’ve voted a background discouragement mechanic into being a Rare-tagged “generally don’t use this” rule suggests that it’s time for it to go. Onward.

Proposal: Rose Array

Vetoed. Failed by Kevan.

Adminned at 13 Aug 2021 17:06:29 UTC

Amend “Once per Cycle, a Worker can Submit a Report and gain 2 Cogs per Client that is Satisfied with them.” to

Once per Cycle, a Worker can Submit a Report and gain per Client the following if that Client is Satisfied with them at that moment:
- Masses: 2 Cogs
- Elite: 2 Cogs
- Vatican: A Thing called Rosary (syn. “Rosary”)

Create a new rule called “The First Box”:

There exists a cube-like thing with “Blognomic”, “1” and a circular logo on it, forever traveling on a holy conveyor belt called “The First Box”.

Privately tracked by the Factory is The Truth, which is text. The Factory can change The Truth to any text if the First Box hasn’t been Opened yet. A Worker can spend three Rosaries and make a Story Post that clearly states that they open the First Box and remove its holy tape seal, to Open the First Box. When this happens, the Factory shall make a CfJ that attempts to add to the Ruleset a new rule titled “The Unboxed Truth” with The Truth as its text. Workers should vote FOR this CfJ if it contains nothing that would immensely threaten the normal functioning of Blognomic.

A Worker can spend a Rosary to Pray and privately request to the Factory the contents of The Truth. The Factory shall reply to such a request privately with the text of The Truth. A Worker can spend a Rosary to gain 2 Cogs.

Feel free to Veto if you’re not up for this, Jumble. Leaving the Masses and Elite at just 2 Cogs for now, but I think it would be cool if they had their own unique rewards too.

Proposal: Bot to the Future

Timed out. Passes 6-2 (5 fors, jumble’s also resolves to for)—clucky

Adminned at 13 Aug 2021 17:03:31 UTC

Add a new dynastic rule called “Bots” with the following text

Bots are Workers for the purposes of dynastic rules only. Bots start with the same default values which other Workers have. Each Bot has a name, and a set of behavior that describes how the bot operates. Bots are tracked alongside the other Workers on the dynastic tracking page, but their rows are given a background color of #cff to help signify they are a bot.

The list of bots and their behavior is below:

* Name: Sharebot. Behavior: Provided they have not already done so since the last Cycle, any Worker may cause Sharebot to perform any action which Sharebot is legally allowed to perform.
* Name: Sleepybot. Behavior: Sleepybot cannot perform any actions
* Name: Cogbot. Behavior: If no Worker has done so since the last Cycle, a Worker may turn on Cogbot. When Cogbot is turned on it performs the following atomic action: Cogbot first activate its cold spin machines until it either has no more cold spin machines or no more energy. Cogbot then activates its cold clink machines, always using its largest value box, until it either has no more cold clink machines or no more boxes. When choosing between which machine to activate out of those which fit the criteria for a given step, Cogbot always chooses the machine earliest in its machine list

Give Cogbot two clink machines (for a total of 3) and 3 spin machines.

Redoing bots, adding third bot type for funsizes that just hoards cogs, and putting limits on sharebot abuse because sharing is caring.

Proposal: Reap What You Sow

Timed out 6 votes to 4. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 13 Aug 2021 16:28:59 UTC

Create a new rule called “Crops and Seeds”:

A Crop is a type of Thing. The following Things are Crops:
* Sugar
* Wheat
* Corn

A Seed is a Thing corresponding to a particular Crop, named “X Seed”, where X is the name of the Crop it corresponds to. A worker may pay a Crop to gain one Seed corresponding to that Crop.

In the rule “Products”,  replace

A Worker can pay a Thing called Sugarcube to gain 1 Box with an integer value of their choice between 1 and 7, inclusive.

with:

A Thing may optionally have an Effect, listed below. A Worker can pay a Thing to get the Effect listed for that Thing’s name.
* Sugarcube: Gain 1 Box with an integer value of your choice between 1 and 7, inclusive
* Bread: Gain 1 Energy.
* Corn: Gain 2 Cogs.

Change the effect of Harvester to read:

For each Greenhouse you own, gain two Crops corresponding to the Seed last used to activate it.

Change the cost of Greenhouse to read:

One Seed

Add the following to the list of Machines:

Mill:
Cost: one Cog
Effect: For each Wheat you have, remove that Wheat and gain one Thing called Flour.

Baker:
Cost: one Cog
Effect: For each Flour you have, remove that Flour and gain one Thing called Bread.

Seeder:
Cost: one Cog
Effect: Gain a Seed corresponding to a Crop of your choice.

Adding more things to grow in our greenhouses. A greenhouse can now be activated to plant things, and a Harvester can be used to harvest all manner of crops! They still need separate Machines to process. Bread gives energy, bur requires more steps to make, while Corn takes less space to grow, for a weaker, but reliable source of Cogs.

Also cleans up the wording around Things that have an effect. If we keep adding Things that can be spent for an associated benefit, it doesn’t make sense to have each one be separately defined from scratch as an action.

Proposal: We Want More

Timed out 1 vote to 8. Failed by Kevan.

Adminned at 13 Aug 2021 13:55:31 UTC

Add the following Wants to the list in “Clientele”:

  • Triplet: The Worker currently holds a box with value exactly 3
  • Scale: The Worker currently holds a box with value 8 or more
  • Asceticism: The Worker held no Things immediately prior to the previous Cycle action

In that list of Wants, rename “Tecnocrat” to “Technocrat”, and change its effect to “The Worker has activated machines at least 6 times during the previous Cycle”.

Between the second and third paragraphs of “Clientele”, add a new paragraph:

As a weekly communal action, a Worker can Assess Demand. To do this, they add a random Want that that Client doesn’t already have to each Client, then for each Client, they remove one of that Client’s Wants at random; however, if the Want that would be removed is the Want that was just added, it is left in the list of Wants rather than being removed.

If there is a type of Machine “Dehumidifier” with a cost of “1 Energy plus n Cogs”, change its cost to “1 Energy plus zero or more Cogs”.

Adding some new Wants, and a mechanism for Wants to change (together with a typo fix). Technocrat is being made slightly easier: you can only have six Machines under the current ruleset, so it doesn’t make sense to have a requirement to activate seven or more.

The last sentence is unrelated – Kevan suggested that riders on proposals might be a good place to do uncontroversial wording fixes.

Proposal: Why did we build this factory on a swamp

Timed out and failed, 6-7. Josh

Adminned at 13 Aug 2021 08:45:23 UTC

Add a new Machine to the list of Machines in the rule Machines:

Dehumidifier
*Cost: 1 Energy plus n Cogs
*Effect: Dry one Thing held by the owner of this machine per Cog spent in its activation

Add the following to the end of the rule Products:

Things can be Wet; a thing that is not Wet can be referred to as being Dry. By default, a Thing is not Wet. Wetness has two levels: Damp and Soaked. A Wet Thing is denoted by a ^ symbol after its name in gamestate tracking, with one ^ meaning that the Thing is Damp and two meaning that it is Soaked. When a Thing that is Wet is Dried, it ceases to be Wet. When a Things Wetness is increased, it goes from not Wet to Damp, or from Damp to Soaked, or from Soaked to being destroyed and removed from the game, as appropriate.

Add the following as a final step to the Cycle Atomic Action in the rule Energy Cycles:

Increase the Wetness of all Things.

This might look like a straightforward attack on the sugarcube gang, but it’s early in the dynasty and I don’t think it’s a good idea at this stage to completely divorce the Things game from the Energy and Cogs game; monofocused strategies seem uninteresting to me. This approach - of having there be a soft cap on the number of Things you can have dictated by your cog generation capacity - seems like it offers more opportunities to develop further gameplay.

Wednesday, August 11, 2021

Proposal: Stick a Widget on it!

self killed—Clucky

Adminned at 13 Aug 2021 00:38:01 UTC

Add the following to “Machines”, under the new subheading “Widgets”

Any Worker may Attach a Widget to one of the Machines they have by paying its Cost. A Widget is tracked by listing it in brackets next to the Machine’s name, i.e. “Clink [Cooling Widget]”. A Machine can only have one (1) Widget Attached to it at any point in time. If a Worker would Attach a Widget to one of the Machines they have that already has a Widget Attached to it, that Worker first removes the already existing Widget from that Machine, then adds the new Widget in the previous Widget’s place.

A Widget has an Effect. A Widget’s Effect is listed underneath a Widget’s cost. Whenever the criteria listed in the Widget’s Effect are met, the Worker that has that Widget can and must execute that Widget’s Effect.

Cooling Widget
Cost: 3 Cogs
Effect: Whenever this Machine is Cold and would be made Hot, it is made Warm instead.

Greenhouse Extension
Cost: 1 Cog
Effect: Whenever you Activate a Harvester, you may have that Harvester create one (1) additional Sugar. This Widget may only be attached to a Greenhouse.

In the rule “Machines”, change the first and second paragraph to read as follows:

Each Worker may have up to six Machines in their Line; this is tracked as an ordered list that defaults to one Clink machine. A Worker may add a new, Cold instance of a Machine to any position in their Line by paying that Machine’s Cost. A Worker may Activate a Cold or Warm Machine they have by paying its costs, setting its heat to Hot, and executing its effects.

A Machine has a Heat status that can be Hot Warm, or Cold (and is Cold by default); this status is tracked by placing a apostrophe (‘) mark next to the name of each Warm Machine in each Worker’s list of Machines and an asterisk (*) next to the name of each Hot Machine in each Worker’s list of Machines.

 

Working with (currently) limited slots, why not make the most out of what you have?

Proposal: Batteries

Timed Out. Fails 5-7—Clucky

Adminned at 13 Aug 2021 00:37:11 UTC

In the rule titled Energy Cycles, replace

For every Worker, if their Energy is less than 2, set it to 2.

with

For every Worker, increase their Energy by 2.

Energy started out as a way to represent a “roll N dice per turn” mechanic, but has since become just another resource, and not even the primary source of Boxes with all the other box-producing machines, so I don’t think it makes sense for this one resource to be ephemeral.

Proposal: We Make New Things

Reached quorum 8 votes to 2. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 12 Aug 2021 08:24:36 UTC

In “Currency” or “Products” (whichever of those two rules exists), between the first and second paragraphs, add a new paragraph:

Each Worker has a number of Prototypes (abbreviated to “Proto” on the dynastic tracking page), a publicly tracked nonnegative number.

Add a new type of Machine to the list in “Machines”:

Prototyper

  • Cost: a Box with value greater than (and not equal to) the number of Prototypes the Worker owning this machine holds, plus a number of Cogs equal to the number of Prototypes the Worker owning this machine holds
  • Effect: gain one Prototype.

This is intended to eventually become the basis of a victory mechanic – the first few Prototypes are very easy to make, but they get harder and harder to make as time goes on.

Instead of adding a victory condition immediately, though, I think it makes more sense to let people start working towards it, and later decide whether we like it and what the appropriate target should be.

Call for Judgment: Milk and two sugars

Reached quorum 9 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 10 Aug 2021 17:10:49 UTC

In “Machines”, change the effect of the type of Machine Sugarcuber from

For each Sugar you have, remove that Sugar and gain one Thing called Sugarcube.

to

For each Thing called Sugar you have, remove that Thing and gain one Thing called Sugarcube.

For each attempt by a Worker to Activate a Sugarcuber Machine this dynasty (including but not limited to Clucky’s use of a Sugarcuber Machine at around 23:57 on 9 August 2021), set the gamestate to what it would be if the Effect of that Machine had, at the time it was activated, been “For each Thing called Sugar you have, remove that Thing and gain one Thing called Sugarcube.”.

It isn’t completely obvious that “a Thing called Sugar” and “a Sugar” are the same thing (especially as the Ruleset consistently uses “a Thing called” in every context except this one).

This CFJ is a vote to say “yes, they’re the same thing”, and to update the Ruleset and gamestate accordingly.

Proposal: Cog in the Manger

Timed out / antiquorumed 1 vote to 7. Failed by Kevan.

Adminned at 12 Aug 2021 08:08:20 UTC

Add 5 Cogs to all Workers except the Worker named Josh.

Per comments on Worker Compensation, +1 Energy is likely to be a more useful resource than Josh’s 5 Cogs, and it’s unclear whether the four silent votes on it were “+1 Energy is too much” or “low-to-medium power grabs should only be reacted to with non-proposal gameplay”, or something else again.

So a vote on Josh’s remark in comments there that “a fair remediation would be to give everybody 5 cogs”. I share Cuddlebeam’s interest in knowing whether the spoils of midgame scams are now regarded as sacrosanct.

Tuesday, August 10, 2021

Proposal: Prow Motion

SK’d.  -Jumble

Adminned at 11 Aug 2021 23:07:56 UTC

Replace: “Once per Cycle, a Worker can Submit a Report and gain 2 Cogs per Client that is Satisfied with them.” with:

Once per Cycle, a Worker can Submit a Report and gain 1 Promotion Point (syn.: PP) per Client that is Satisfied with them. PP is publicly tracked.

A Worker can spend 10 PPs to gain a Thing with a name listed below in brackets and having one of those Things gives you the ability to perform the action stated associated with them listed below, once per cycle.
- [Accounting]: Convenient Rounding Errors: Multiply your current Cog amount by 1.25, rounded up. 
- [Engineering]: Tinker: Destroy a Machine you own to gain a new instance of a Machine of your choice.
- [Marketing]: Advertisements: Change a Want of a Client to a Want of your choice.
- [Nepotism]: Favoritism: Gain 1 PP.

Proposal: Machine? What Machine?

Reached quorum 10 votes to 2. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 11 Aug 2021 18:14:26 UTC

Replace the section of the rules that reads

Each Worker may have up to six Machines in their Line; this is tracked as an ordered list that defaults to one Clink machine. A Worker may add a new, Cold instance of a Machine to any position in their Line by paying that Machine’s Cost. A Worker may Activate a cold Machine they have by paying its costs, setting its heat to Hot, and executing its effects.

with the text

Each Worker may have up to six Machines in their Line; this is tracked as an ordered list that defaults to one Clink machine. A Worker may add a new, Cold instance of a Machine to any position in their Line by paying that Machine’s Cost. A Worker may Activate a Cold Machine they have by paying its costs, setting its heat to Hot, and executing its effects. A Worker may Demolish a Cold Machine they have by removing it from their Line.

Currently there is no way to get rid of a machine if you no longer want it, this would change that. Not too much use right now but could become important later on.

Proposal: Your Number 1 Priority

Times out 3-5.  - Jumble

Adminned at 11 Aug 2021 23:05:28 UTC

Add the following to the rule Prioritisation, at the beginning of the rule:

When being enacted, a CfJ has priority over the ruleset, except as pertains to its own enactment and this rule. Where a CfJ and any rule other than this one contradict at the time of its enactment, the enacting admin should enact the CfJ faithfully, insofar as is possible.

Proposal: Saving it for later

Popular - CB

Adminned at 11 Aug 2021 16:31:46 UTC

add the following to the list of machines

Storage
- Cost: One box
- Effect: Gain whatever box was most recently spent to purchase or activate this machine, prior to the current activation. (The value of that box is tracked in parenthesis after the machines name)

Proposal: The Ultimate Camel, Divided #2: Mining Quartz

Unpopular - CB

Adminned at 11 Aug 2021 16:26:41 UTC

Add a new subrule named Crystals under Currency:

The amount of Crystals a Worker has is publicly tracked on the Dynastic Tracking page.

Add the following Machine into Machines:

Quartz Purificator
- Cost: 1 Box
- Effect: Gains X Crystals, where X is equal to the number of the Box used to activate this Machine modulo 4.

What’s a factory age without shiny crystals? Better still, they wrap themselves up.

Proposal: The Ultimate Camel, Divided #1 Workers, get some Machine.

Unpopular - CB

Adminned at 11 Aug 2021 16:25:48 UTC

Adds a new subrule under Machinery named “Buying Machines”:

A Machine may have a Buy Cost. a worker may pay the Buy Cost of a Machine to gain such Machine.

The Camel logically won’t pass, but reproposed ideas will, without all the pesky riders.

Proposal: Beep Boop

Unpopular - CB

Adminned at 11 Aug 2021 16:25:05 UTC

Add a new dynastic rule called “Bots” with the following text

Bots are Workers for the purposes of dynastic rules only. Each Bot has a name, and a set of behavior that describes how the bot operates. Bots are tracked alongside the other Workers on the dynastic tracking page, but their rows are given a background color of #cff to help signify they are a bot.

The list of bots and their behavior is below:

* Name: Sharebot. Behavior: Any Worker may take any action which Sharebot is legally allowed to perform on Sharebot’s behalf.
* Name: Sleepybot. Behavior: Sleepybot cannot perform any actions

New Hire

I’d like to unidle.

I will once again attempt to play through a whole dynasty.

I have provided a conveyor.

You’re welcome.

Proposal: Worker Compensation

Unpopular - CB

Adminned at 11 Aug 2021 16:23:08 UTC

Add 1 Energy to all Workers except the Worker named Josh.

Josh has used Admin Advantage to do a timing scam (Enact, do stuff, then start a new cycle so that they’re the only person who got to make use of that first cycle) to get extra Cogs. This should even things out for the rest of Workers.

Historically, midgame scams are taken down by stuff like this (I have had my non-Admin scams frequently taken down, eg: Kevan XII, Pokes I, Viv I) and I have stopped trying them because of that. Apparently they are OK now? If they are, I want to know so that I can also start doing them for my own benefit too. If not, then this Proposal will do what should be done.

That aside, I just don’t like Admin Advantage because it’s something Admins have that layman Players, don’t. And having Josh abuse timing in a way that only an Admin could for their personal benefit feels bad to see happen. (But if the rest of you guys feel that it’s OK, then I won’t hold myself back at doing it myself too.)

Proposal: Smoke Bomb [Special Case]

Popular after 48h - CB

Adminned at 11 Aug 2021 16:22:10 UTC

Rename “The Traitor [Inactive]” to “The Traitor [Inactive] [Rare]”.

Don’t think it deserves to be turned on every Dynasty by default.

Call for Judgment: Miscount

Reaches quorum, 7-0. For real this time. Josh

Adminned at 09 Aug 2021 19:35:52 UTC

Uphold the failure of https://blognomic.com/archive/special_case_dont_force_players_to_use_slack, despite the incorrect vote count

Josh got confused by vote changing. Which then lead to lemon self-killing her proposal thinking ais’s failed, and also led to the queue getting resolved out of order (although some of that was already upheld for other reasons)

Fairest thing to do seems to just stamp what happened as okay and throw the ideas back up for vote again as CfJs to fix any proposal queue problems.

Proposal: Mighty Networks

Self-killed. Failed by Kevan.

Adminned at 10 Aug 2021 16:35:49 UTC

If Proposal: Highly Illogical was not enacted then this proposal does nothing.

In the rule Clientele, change the first two paragrahs to read as follows:

Workers are in contact with a number of Clients. The Clients that currently exist are publicly tracked, along with their Wants and their Distribution Network.

Each Client has a non-negative number of Wants, selected from the list below; if ever a Client has no Wants then any Worker may randomly select a new Want for that Client. Each Client also has a Distribution Network, which must be one or more Fulfilment Centres. A Client is Satisfied with a Worker if they have fulfilled all of their Wants during the current Cycle, and if that Worker has a Route to a Fulfilment Centre in that Client’s Distribution Network. Once per Cycle, a Worker can Submit a Report and gain 2 Cogs per Client that is Satisfied with them.

Add the following to the list of Wants in the rule Clientele:

- Globalist: The Worker gained a Route to a new Distribution Centre in the previous Cycle
- Luddite: The Worker did not activate a Machine in the previous Cycle

Set the Distribution Networks for Masses and Elite to be Shanker Haulage, and the Distribution Network for Vatican to be SeeClickShip.

Proposal: A Jumble of Numbers [Special Case]

Reached quorum 8 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 10 Aug 2021 16:35:15 UTC

In “Favours”, remove “Any details the gained resource has apart from quantity are chosen by the Factory, who should be generous if possible.” and change “any tabular resource of their choosing that is described only in the Dynastic Rules” to “any tabular resource of their choosing”.

This will never fire given the restrictions on tabular resources.

Proposal: Neater Machine tracking

Passes 10-0—Clucky

Adminned at 10 Aug 2021 15:26:08 UTC

In “Machines”, change

A Machine has a publicly tracked Heat status that can be Hot or Cold; by default it is Cold.

to

A Machine has a Heat status that can be Hot or Cold (and is Cold by default); this status is tracked by placing an asterisk next to the name of each Hot machine in each Worker’s list of Machines.

Rename “Machinery” to “Machines”, moving the content of its subrule “Machines” into the main part of the rule and removing the subrule’s heading.

Combine “Currency” and “Boxes” into a single rule “Products” with the combined content of both rules (the content of “Currency” followed by the content of “Boxes”).

Two minor aesthetic fixes. One of these is to make the Machine lists easier to read, so that we don’t have to write “[Hot]” and “[Cold]” everywhere any more (the “asterisk to show that this has been used” idea comes from an old BlogNomic dynasty where it worked pretty well). The other is to combine rules that have the same topic as each other, making the ruleset a little easier to read.

Proposal: More Machines

9-0, CB

Adminned at 10 Aug 2021 10:51:43 UTC

Add the following types of Machine to the list in “Machines”:

Crusher
- Cost: one Machine other than this one, plus one Box with a value of 4 or more
- Effect: gain a Box with a value of 1 if the machine paid to activate this machine is Hot or 3 if it is Cold, plus an additional 4 if that machine was Cold immediately prior to the most recent Cycle action

Axe
- Cost: one Box with an even value
- Effect: gain two Boxes whose values are each half those of the box used to activate this Machine

Glue Gun
- Cost: two Boxes
- Effect: gain a Box whose value equals the sum of the values of the boxes used to activate this Machine

Some more ideas for machines. (My current plan is to make proposals to add new machines every now and then, in the hope of reaching some sort of interesting critical mass.)

Call for Judgment: Repaid overtime

Reaches quorum, 7-0. Josh

Adminned at 09 Aug 2021 12:54:47 UTC

Set the gamestate, ruleset, and pending/enacted statuses of every proposal, to what they would be if “Floor Plans” had been legally enacted, followed by “Bigger Basic Boxes” being legally failed, at 09 Aug 2021 07:40:58 UTC and 09 Aug 2021 07:54:27 UTC respectively.

“Unpaid Overtime” was enacted before “[Appendix] By Any Means” was, thus failed to have the appropriate effect and we have to do it again.

The wording of this CFJ is designed so that we can continue playing while it’s pending, and everything will go back to where it should be afterwards.

(It’s a little disappointing that it’s necessary at all, though; this could have been avoided by enacting the CFJs in the correct order.)

Proposal: Moving Parts

Quorum Reached. Passes 8-0—Clucky

Adminned at 09 Aug 2021 23:52:09 UTC

To “Machinery”, replace “Each Worker may have up to six Machines; this is tracked by a list that defaults to one Clink machine.”:-

Each Worker may have up to six Machines in their Line; this is tracked as an ordered list that defaults to one Clink machine. A Worker may add a new, Cold instance of a Machine to any position in their Line by paying that Machine’s Cost.

Add two Machines to the list in “Machines”:-

Spin
- Cost: one Energy
- Effect: Roll DICE10 and gain a Box containing the result of that roll.

Press
- Cost: one Energy
- Effect: Gain a Box containing any number from 1 to 5.

Remove “A Worker can spend one of their own Energy to roll a DICE10; they then gain a Box with the rolled number.” from Energy Cycles.

Give every Worker one Energy.

Making the Box-gain mechanic into a Machine, along with a non-random equivalent, and making the Cost of a machine also be the Cost of installing it for the first time.

Giving everyone +1 Energy so that they can install a Spin Machine for free as an equivalent of the status quo.

Proposal: Shoe Gar

Quorum Reached. Three def votes resolve to for, passes 8-1—Clucky

Adminned at 09 Aug 2021 23:49:35 UTC

In “Currency”, add:

Workers have an amount of Things, which is publicly tracked. Things have a name, defaulting to “Bugged Thing”, and are tracked in the Things column for Workers by having their names listed (eg. “Coffee, Backache, Pink Slip”).

A Worker can pay a Thing called Sugarcube to gain 1 Box with an integer value of their choice between 1 and 7, inclusive.

To the list of Machines, add:

Harvester
- Cost: one Cog
- Effect: For each Hot Greenhouse you own, gain two Things called Sugar.

Greenhouse
- Cost: None
- Effect: None

Sugarcuber
- Cost: one Cog
- Effect: For each Sugar you have, remove that Sugar and gain one Thing called Sugarcube.

Proposal: Bullet Catch [Appendix]

Quorum Reached and open for 12+ hours. Passes 10 - 0—- Clucky

Adminned at 09 Aug 2021 23:45:58 UTC

In the Appendix, rename “Spelling” to “Spelling and formatting” and add a bullet point:-

* A Worker may reformat a list of items in the dynastic ruleset to have bullet points or other appropriate list markup, if doing so would not change the order of that list, nor how any rules interpreted its content.

Admins vary on whether to reformat lists when enacting rules (the Machines rule has quite reasonably gone for an exact hyphens-and-br-tags copy of the proposal layout), so always explicitly allowing harmless reformatting might be a good idea.

Monday, August 09, 2021

Proposal: Full Power [Appendix]

Fails 4-7.  - Jumble

Adminned at 09 Aug 2021 16:04:39 UTC

Add the following to “Official Posts”

Other rules may not place limits what a Call for Judgement may accomplish. If the enactment of a Call for Judgement would require the Admin enacting it to perform some otherwise illegal action, the CFJ includes an implicit grant of permission to still perform such an action.

If https://blognomic.com/archive/appendix_by_any_means is still pending, fail it. If it has already been enacted, remove the text “, except for the legal enactment of a CFJ” from the ruleset.

If people vote for a Call for Judgement, it stands to reason that they want the result to happen even if the result cannot legally happen. Requiring them to explicitly go “yeah this happens even if the rules otherwise say it can’t” in a second CfJ which should still pass because you already got the quorum to pass your first CfJ… 

This also helps ensure we don’t accidentally (or someone doesn’t maliciously) lock the game by creating part of the rules that calls for judgement cannot legally remove. If a Call for Judgement wants to remove a rule, it should be able to do so regardless of what the rest of the rules try to claim. Calls for Judgement are a very important tool and we should make sure that tool is as flexible and useful as possible.

Proposal: [Special Case] put down the hammer, we need a screwdriver

SK’d.  - Jumble

Adminned at 09 Aug 2021 16:02:30 UTC

If https://blognomic.com/archive/special_case_dont_force_players_to_use_slack was enacted, repeal “No Collaboration [Inactive] [Rare]”.

this may be an unpopular opinion, but i like talking to other people about this game!

Proposal: [Special Case] Apple, Nomicnaut.

Vetoed. - Jumble

Adminned at 09 Aug 2021 16:01:45 UTC

Create a new Special Case rule called “The Blognomic Apple.” with:

Blognomic recognizes that a game of nomic called Agora exists, operating on the mailing lists described at https://agoranomic.org/.

The Blognomic Apple exists.

At the moment that it is true for Agora that the Blognomic Apple can be immediately transferred from Blognomic to Agora, then the Blognomic Apple is immediately transferred from Blognomic to Agora, and this rule is repealed.

If it is the year 2022, this rule is repealed.

I’d like to try this! An internomic transfer! Why? Because it would be cool and different! Novelty! This isn’t really related to the dynasty itself, but BN is pretty much always involved in dynastic stuff, so right now seems nearly as good as any other time.

Giving myself a four-month margin of time to try to pull this off on the Agoran side of things.

Proposal: Highly Illogical

Fails 4-7. - Jumble

Adminned at 09 Aug 2021 16:00:59 UTC

Add a new rule to the dynastic ruleset, called Logistics:

There exist five Fulfilment Centres, each of which exists at a set distance from the industrial park where the Factory and its Workers reside. These fulfilment centres and their distances, measured in Vehicle Hours (‘vh’) are as below:

Shanker Haulage: 15vh
SeeClickShip: 18vh
North Sea Fulfilment Services: 21vh
Indus Valley Distribution: 29vh
PanGlobal Freight: 41vh

Each Worker has a Route to some or all of these Fulfilment Centres; by default each Worker has a route to Shanker Haulage, and the Fulfilment Centres that each Worker has a Route to are publicly tracked.

It may be too early for a tangent, but building in a little side-idea for a route-planning / economic mechanic.

Proposal: Clay Ants

Popular 7-0, CB

Adminned at 09 Aug 2021 09:34:12 UTC

Create a new rule called “Clientele”:

There are three Clients, the Square Masses (syn. “Masses”), the Cube Elite (syn. “Elite”) and the Tesseract Vatican (syn. “Vatican”).

Clients have a collection of (publicly tracked) Wants, defaulting to having none. A Client is Satisfied with a Worker if they have fulfilled all of their Wants during the current Cycle. Once per Cycle, a Worker can Submit a Report and gain 2 Cogs per Client that is Satisfied with them.

Wants are the following:
- Boxer: The Worker has gained 10 or more Boxes in the current cycle.
- Enviromentalist: The Worker has activated 3 or less machines during the previous cycle.
- Worker Rights: The Worker had at least 2 Energy at the end of the previous cycle.
- Tecnocrat: The Worker has activated machines more than 6 times during the previous cycle.

Set the Wants of each Client to each be one random Want.

Proposal: The Ultimate Camel with no Rivals

Failed 3 votes to 8, but for a second there, boy, did that camel run. Josh

Adminned at 09 Aug 2021 07:56:43 UTC

If more than 2 EVC contains the word “buy”, add a new subrule under Machinery named “Buying Machines”:

A Machine may have a Buy Cost. a worker may pay the Buy Cost of a Machine to gain such Machine.

If more than 4 EVC contains the word “mining”, add a new subrule named Crystals under Currency:

The amount of Crystals a Worker has is publicly tracked on the Dynastic Tracking page.

Then, if more than 2 EVC contains the word “crystals” and Crystals is in the Ruleset, add the following Machine into Machines:

Quartz Purificator
- Cost: 1 Box
- Effect: Gains X Crystals, where X is equal to the number of the Box used to activate this Machine modulo 4.

If more than 2 EVC contains the word “transformation” and there is a rule named “Buying Machines” add the following Machine into Machines:

Clank
- Buy Cost: 10 Cogs
- Cost: 1 Box
- Effect: Gains a Box with a number equal to 10 minus the number of the Box used to activate this Machine

If a even number of EVC contains the word “parity”, add the following Machine to Machines:

Parity
- Cost: a even numbered Box
- Effect: Gains a box with a odd number of your choice.

If a odd number of EVCs contains the word “split”, add the following to the Machine;

Splitter
- Cost: one Box
- Effect: Gains two boxes with a number equal to the number of the Box used to activate this Machine

Then, if there is two or more Machine that was added due to this Proposal, add a subrule named “Prerequisite” under Machinery;

A Machine may have one or more Prerequisite. Unless all prerequisite of a Machine is satisfied, such Machine cannot be activated.

Then, if Prerequisite is in the Ruleset, then add the following Machine into Machines;

Overclocker
- Prerequisite: All of your Machine is in the cold state
- Cost: None
- Effect: Make all of your Machines Hot. If you do so, gain 13 Cogs.

Then, if there is three or more Machine added per this Proposal, and more than half of the For votes have a EVC of “functions”, add a new rule named “Functional Machines”:

A machine may be Limited. A Limited Machine may not exist on it’s own, or as the top Machine of a Machine Stack.

If more than 4 EVCs have the word “more”, then add a new rule named Handling Power:

A worker has a Handling Power, which is a publicly tracked integer defaulting to 6.

If more than 6 EVCs have the word “more”, then in Energy and Cycles replace

Each Worker may have up to six Machines

to

Each Worker may have as many Machines as their Handling Power.

If more than half of the EVCs have the word “augment”, adds a new subrule under Machinery named “Augmentation”:

A Machine may be Augmented. An Augment may modify how the Machine works, and can be Augmented on a Machine a Worker owns if such Worker pays the Buying Cost of a Augmentation.

Then, if more than half of the EVCs have the word “crazy” and Augmentation is in the Ruleset, adds the following under Augmentation:

This is a list of all available Augmentation:

Heat Sink:
Buying Cost: 7 Cogs
Augmentation: If this Augmented Machine is Activated for the first time in a Cycle, make it Cold.

A dozen riders on a single camel; Chiiika is amazed at it having stood.

“Y’all are going to bet on a camel for fricking posterity.”

Choices are “buy”, “mining”, “crystals”, “transformation”, “parity”, “split”, “functions”, “more” and “crazy”.

Place your bets.

Proposal: Betterment of the Ruleset, one Proposal at a Time: Prioritisation, the big boss (try 2)[Appendix]

Cannot be enacted, with 6 votes against to 1 for. Josh

Adminned at 09 Aug 2021 07:55:56 UTC

Appends the following bullet points into Prioritisation:

* If the aforementioned method fails to determine the prioritisation of two or more parts of the Ruleset, proceed to determine prioritisation using the following scheme:

- Annulment effect, which removes or zeros something;
- Arithmetic Addition effects, which adds something;
- Arithmetic Subtraction effects, which reduce something;
- Arithmetic Multiplication effects, which multiply something;
- Arithmetic Division effects, which divide something
- Type Modification effects, which modifies the type of the effect or the recipient of such effects;
- Type Addition effects, which designate one or more type(s) to an event or adds one or more recipients to the effects;
- Type Deletion effects, which remove one or more type(s) to an event or remove one or more recipients to the effects. If all recipient is removed, it is considered an Annulment effect instead.

* If the aforementioned methods fail to determine the prioritisation of the effects, the player or the Emperor who activated the effects may choose to resolve one effect before any other subsequent effects, and then reconsider the subsequent effect’s prioritisation.

try no. 2.

Proposal: Room Detail

Enacted popular, 10-0. Josh

Adminned at 09 Aug 2021 07:55:01 UTC

In the rule Machines, change “The list of Machines are as follows:” to “The list of available types of Machine are as follows:”

Call for Judgment: [Appendix] By any means

Enacted popular, 7-2. Josh

Adminned at 09 Aug 2021 07:38:11 UTC

In “Official Posts”, change

A post that is illegal in this manner cannot subsequently be made legal by any means.

to

A post that is illegal in this manner cannot subsequently be made legal by any means, except for the legal enactment of a CFJ. An illegal CFJ cannot cause itself to become legal.

It’s a problem if there are certain sorts of problem that we aren’t legally allowed to fix via CFJ.

This needs urgent attention because there currently at least two CFJs that aim to make illegal proposals legal, but under the current text of the rules, that’s something that CFJs simply can’t do – those proposals cannot be made legal by any means, and a CFJ is some means. Trying to fix this issue via proposal would require the queue to clear, leading to a chicken-and-egg problem because the CFJs are trying to fix issues with the proposal queue (and also probably delay the start of the dynasty somewhat as we wait for yet another fix CFJ), so fixing the issue by CFJ instead (ideally before “It Was All A Dream” enacts) seems like the most prudent course of action.

Sunday, August 08, 2021

Call for Judgment: Unpaid Overtime

Enacted popular, 7-2. Josh

Adminned at 09 Aug 2021 07:37:27 UTC

Uphold the the attempts to propose https://blognomic.com/archive/floor_plans and https://blognomic.com/archive/bigger_basic_boxes

I forgot to finish my AA Atomic Action and now two proposals are illegal.

Proposal: Bigger Basic Boxes

Self-killed. Josh

Adminned at 09 Aug 2021 07:54:27 UTC

In the rule “Energy and Cycles”, replace “A Worker can spend one of their own Energy to roll a DICE10; they then gain a Box with the rolled number.” with “A Worker can spend 1 of their own Energy to roll a DICE6 and add 4, then gain a Box with that number.”

shrinking the random variation + adding a floor so that rolling a 1 isnt so crushing!

Proposal: Floor Plans

Enacted popular, 9-1. Josh

Adminned at 09 Aug 2021 07:40:58 UTC

Add a new rule called “Energy and Cycles”:

The last Cycle action is publicly tracked for convenience.  If it has been 36 hours since the last Cycle, or no Cycle has been performed, any Worker may perform an Atomic Action named “Cycle” with the following steps:
- Remove all Boxes
- For every Worker, if their Energy is less than 2, set it to 2.
- For each machine, set its heat to Cold.

The amount of Energy a Worker has is publicly tracked, and defaults to 2.  A Worker can spend one of their own Energy to roll a DICE10; they then gain a Box with the rolled number.

Add a new rule called “Machinery”:

Each Worker may have up to six Machines; this is tracked by a list that defaults to one Clink machine.  A Worker may Activate a cold Machine they have by paying its costs, setting its heat to Hot, and executing its effects.

Add a new subrule to “Machinery” named “Machines”:

A Machine has a publicly tracked Heat status that can be Hot or Cold; by default it is Cold.

The list of Machines are as follows:
Clink
- Cost: one Box
- Effect: Gain Cogs equal to the value of the Box used to activate this machine.

Add a new rule called “Currency”:

The amount of Cogs a Worker has is publicly tracked in the Dynastic Tracking page.

Add a new rule named “Boxes” with the following text:

Each Worker has zero or more Boxes, each containing one number, publicly tracked as a list of numbers.  A Box’s value is equal to the contained number, and Boxes containing the same number are fungible.

Opening proposals.

Ascension Address: spinning gears

clink
the machines whirr
doing their job
processing boxes
for a mysterious goal

thwack
another one made
something different
but for the same cause

what are the machines doing?
why are you here?

Change the synonym for Emperor to Factory.
Change the synonym for Player to Worker.
Set Dynastic Distance to Inactive.
Set The Traitor to Inactive.
Set the Dynastic Tracking page to “Factory Layout”.

I am not a poet, but at least it’s readable.

Proposal: [Special Case] Don’t force players to use Slack

Cannot be enacted, with 6 votes against to 5 in favour. Josh

Adminned at 09 Aug 2021 07:39:55 UTC

In “No Collaboration”, change

Discussion conducted in plain English on the BlogNomic wiki and blog, and the #currentdynasty or #general channels of the BlogNomic slack, are not considered to be private communication.

to

Discussions conducted in plain English on the BlogNomic wiki and blog are not considered to be private communication, but discussions on other sites are (even if they are publicly available).

Some players don’t want to use real-time communications at all, and others would rather use Discord than Slack.

This is a problem when it comes to the No Collaboration rule – this rule allows everyone to be aware of everyone else’s deals, but permits such deals to be made on Slack, where not everyone will see them. This essentially forces everyone to register for, and repeatedly check, Slack in order to be able to play optimally in a No Collaboration dynasty.

The simplest fix to this is to move all collaboration onto blog posts and the wiki, where it will be easy to see and will be archived along with the rest of the dynasty.

To revert or uphold?

Something which perennially seems to lead to arguments is what to do when there’s been a mistake (by which I mean, someone inadvertently doing something that wasn’t permitted/possible according to the rules). I think it would be worth having a discussion about the correct course of action in this respect, in the hope of pre-empting those arguments in the future.

Some opinions on the matter that each seem to be held by at least one player (some but not all of these are opinions that I personally hold, and some of them contradict each other), as starting points for discussion:
a) If a mistake was made sufficiently recently, it should be reverted, as should everything that depended on it. This reversion can normally be done by editing gamestate trackers directly.
b) If a mistake was made sufficiently long ago that players have already based actions on the mistaken gamestate, reversions should only be done via CFJ, not via reverting all the actions since.
c) If a mistake was made sufficiently long ago that players have already based actions on the mistaken gamestate, but is still recent enough to fix, the gamestate trackers should be reverted immediately (together with a note of what happened) in order to prevent the problem getting worse (potentially to the point where a revert is infeasible).
d) Reverted mistakes are considered never to have happened – in particular, there was no period of time during which the mistake was actually part of the gamestate.
e) If a mistake was not made recently, the effects of that mistake should be upheld by CFJ.
f) If a mistake was made a long time ago, it should be ignored, and we should play on as though it didn’t occur.
g) If a mistake was made a very long time ago, the effects of that mistake should be upheld by CFJ, but there is no urgency to do so – we can fix it next dynasty as easily as we can fix it this dynasty.
h) If a mistake was made which had catastrophic effects (e.g. making it impossible to enact proposals or CFJs), it is important to revert rather than uphold that mistake, no matter how long ago it happened – the fact that it was technically illegal is a helpful excuse to revert those catastrophic effects and play on from a less broken gamestate.
i) If players disagree as to whether something was done in error / illegally or not, then it is a good idea to uphold or revert it explicitly by CFJ, in order that everyone agrees on the resulting gamestate – even if a majority of players have a consensus as to what happened.

I think it would be helpful to reduce friction if we came to a consensus about guidelines for when to revert a mistake, when to uphold it, and what mechanism to use to to revert/uphold it – in particular, this would be a useful guide for “neutral” CFJ voters, to help them decide which side to back when this sort of argument gets contentious (which would reduce the amount of contention, because it would make it much more predictable which side of an argument would win).

In particular, I expect (but am not certain) that a majority of players would agree that there’s some sort of fuzzy boundary between actions which are too new to uphold by default, and actions that are too old to revert by default (possibly with a grey area in between). I think it would be nice to get some sort of informal consensus about where that boundary is.

I’m making this post to try to get a spread of opinions on what people think the correct course of action is in this sort of situation in the abstract, and ideally a consensus (probably not unanimous agreement, but some sort of widespread agreement). If we get such a consensus, we can codify it into the rules, in order to help new players understand what the social expectations are, and in order to help existing players who are in the minority to recognise that they’re in the minority, and avoid performing actions that will annoy everyone else.

Call for Judgment: It Was All A Dream

quorum reached. passes 7-0—Clucky

Adminned at 08 Aug 2021 22:05:34 UTC

The passage of this CfJ asserts that the most recent Ascension Address was invalid (https://blognomic.com/archive/a_new_leader_a_new_crisis) on the basis that it set a term for Player that existed in the Appendix, in contravention of the rule Synonyms, and needs to be completed correctly before the game can exit interregnum.

Uphold the illegal posting of all proposals submitted to the blog since the posting of that Ascension Address up until the time of the posting of this CfJ, and of that group of proposals, uphold the resolution of all that were resolved before the time of posting of this CfJ.

If the dynastic ruleset contains any rules, remove them.

If a new Ascension Address has been posted between the time of the posting of this CfJ and its resolution, uphold it as the Ascension Address for the First Dynasty of Jumble, which is the dynasty that follows the Fifteenth Dynasty of Josh.

Arguably, this doesn’t change the gamestate and can be failed by any admin.

Call for Judgment: God Does Not Play BlogNomic, Probably

Enacted 8-0. Josh

Adminned at 08 Aug 2021 07:57:17 UTC

Uphold the enactment of this proposal https://blognomic.com/archive/idle_admins_should_not_be_omnipotent_actually_a_proposal

Revert the resolution of any other votable matters in the past 48 hours that have been enacted by idle admins when they did not meet the conditions for enactment by non-idle admins, or where the idle admin administered the votable matter with an outcome contrary to the outcome determined by the criteria set out for active admins in the core rules.

To subrule 1.2.1 add “Idle admins can resolve Votable Matters as if they were not idle.”

Proposal: Idle admins should not be omnipotent (actually a proposal)

Enacted under that clause of rule 1.2.1. -Bucky

Adminned at 07 Aug 2021 18:54:23 UTC

Amend the subrule 1.2.1 by deleting the text “Idle Admins can enact and fail Votable Matters.”

Currently this makes idle admins omnipotent

Idle admins should not be omnipotent

Amend the subrule 1.2.1 by deleting the text “Idle Admins can enact and fail Votable Matters.”

Currently this makes idle admins omnipotent

Call for Judgment: General Trouble

Unpopular, 1-9. Josh

Adminned at 09 Aug 2021 07:35:56 UTC

Uphold the AA posted here https://blognomic.com/archive/a_new_leader_a_new_crisis as being legally created and applied.

Throughout the ruleset, replace “General” with “Player” except in part of the ruleset that says “and the #currentdynasty or #general channels”

Throughout the ruleset, replace “Leader” with “Emperor”

Place the game in Interregnum, with Jumble as the Emperor

Proposal: [Core] Good-faith proposal processing

Self killed

Adminned at 08 Aug 2021 13:11:43 UTC

In “Resolution of Proposals”, change the first two instances of “The oldest Pending” to “A Pending”.

Then change

If a Proposal somehow ends up being pending for more than 7 days, it is ignored for the purpose of calculating the oldest pending Proposal, and can be failed by any Admin.

to

Admins must make a good-faith attempt to process proposals in order; a proposal should not be Enacted or Failed unless it is the oldest pending Proposal. However, if an Admin inadvertently enacts or fails a proposal out of sequence, this does not invalidate that enactment or failure.

To “Fair Play”, add a new bullet point:

  • An Admin should not intentionally Enact or Fail a Proposal that is not the oldest pending Proposal.

We repeatedly have trouble with the queue becoming blocked because a proposal is inadvertently adminned out of order, in theory causing a domino effect in which future proposals are also adminned out of order and thus not being processed legally.

In practice, the best solution to this is to simply uphold the enactment/failure of proposals if the enacting/failing admin does so in good faith (and that’s pretty much what we’re doing anyway). This proposal codifies that solution in the Rules – admins are allowed to inadvertently process proposals in the wrong order, but are not allowed to do so intentionally.

Proposal: Working Nine to Five [Core] [Appendix] [Special Case]

Self killed

Adminned at 08 Aug 2021 13:10:40 UTC

Change all instances of the word “General” to “Factory Worker”.  Change the dynasty tracking page to “Bulletin Board”.

New theme.

Call for Judgment: Take two of take two

Reached quorum and enacted, 7-1. Josh

Adminned at 07 Aug 2021 19:04:03 UTC

Repeal all dynastic rules created on or before 6 August 2021.
Fail all pending proposals created on or before 6 August 2021.
If an attempted enactment or failure of any proposal created on or after 7 August 2021 was illegal purely because that proposal was not the oldest pending proposal at the time it was enacted or failed and/or because Blognomic was in Hiatus when the proposal was submitted/enacted/failed (but the enactment or failure was otherwise legal), uphold that attempted enactment or failure (the proposal ceases to be pending).

Set the special case rule Dynastic Distance to be Inactive.

A reprise of Take Two!, effectively upholding that it worked. (EDIT: I also added a fix for the possibility that the Ascension Address failed due to specifying an illegal synonym.)

The original CFJ said “If the EVC of the Leader named lemonfanta is not FOR, this CfJ has no effect.”. An EVC is a comment, not a vote (and the definition may be broken in other ways too, causing it to not apply); (EDIT: also, lemonfanta was not a Leader at the time, as Jumble has pointed out). As such, I’m far from 100% confident that the original CFJ did anything (or that a scam based on, e.g., “actually Jumble is not a player for dynastic rules, because Dynastic Distance never got turned off properly” or “no proposals have passed all dynasty, because the older proposals weren’t failed legally and so we’ve been processing the queue out of order” would fail), and for a CFJ with effects this widely reaching, it’s better to have agreement now that it worked than it is to have a big argument about it later.

This is worded in such a way that if Jumble sets a new theme, we don’t have to wait for the CFJ to pass before resuming dynastic gameplay – it won’t repeal any dynastic rules, or fail any proposals, created in the future.

Proposal: Rye Sources

Vetoed- Dk

Adminned at 08 Aug 2021 13:09:48 UTC

Create a new rule called “Resources”:

Commanders have Resources, defaulting to 0 each and a maximum amount of Resources (called that Resource’s ‘Cap’) which default to 3. These are tracked at the Battlefield wikipage.

Might, Manpower and Maths are Resources.

A Commander can, as a weekly communal action, Restock, which sets all Commander-owned Resources to be equal to their Cap.

A Commander can, as a weekly action, Improve, which increases one of their Caps by 1.

 

Because I don’t like daily actions.

Draft community guidelines

After reviewing the Break thread, holding discussions on various fora, and taking contributions on the wiki, I’ve drawn up a rough draft of what our community guidelines could look like.

They are here; please do take a look and review.

I think that they should be linked to in fair play (“All players should be aware of, and commit to, upholding the [[community guidelines]]” or similar) and should be linked to somewhere in the sidebar.

These are not presented here as finished work - I hope that reviewers will continue to have input and won’t put it up for proposal for 48 hours at least, so it has the opportunity to be discussed as needed. I would particularly welcome the thoughts of those members who are sceptical about this effort - whether they think that the document can add value, and how to construct it in a way to ensure that it does meaningfully help the game and the people playing it.

Proposal: No More Camels

Fewer than a quorum not voting against. Failed 2 votes to 7 by Kevan.

Adminned at 08 Aug 2021 10:43:34 UTC

In the sentence “An official post may be altered by its author if it is less than 4 hours old and either no General has commented on it or (if it is a Votable Matter) if all comments on it contain no voting icons; otherwise this can only be done as allowed by the Ruleset” in the Appendix, remove ‘it is less than 4 hours old and either’ and ‘or (if it is a Votable Matter) if all comments on it contain no voting icons’.

The current rule is a camel; 4 hours pleases nobody.

I think that the edit window should be long - essentially a separate phase of a proposal’s existence. But that isn’t popular, so my second choice is that it’s gone. We have other methods for seeking community feedback on ideas - chat rooms, drafts on the wiki - and other mechanisms for fixing typos.

The edit window creates the illusion that every player gets to input on an idea before it gets voted on. They don’t; only the proposer does. If their idea passes, other players can amend it. If it fails, they can fix it and repropose it. The tyranny of the edit window forces players to may too much attention to this game, and removes the sting from the voting window: the appropriate time to feed back on a proposal is over the course of the 48 hours that follow it being posted, and everyone should get to do it, not just those who disturbed their sleep enough to clap eyes on it early.

Friday, August 06, 2021

Call for Judgment: Take Two! [Appendix] [Special Case]

Quorum Reached. Passes 7-0—Clucky

Adminned at 07 Aug 2021 03:35:13 UTC

If the EVC of the Leader named lemonfanta is not FOR, this CfJ has no effect.

Repeal all Dynastic rules.  Fail all pending proposals.  Set Dynastic Distance to Inactive.

whoops we’re in hiatus can’t post this as a Proposal

Proposal: Cut!  Take Two!

Wait no we’re in hiatus

Adminned at 06 Aug 2021 22:39:20 UTC

If the EVC of the Leader named lemonfanta is not FOR, this proposal has no effect.

Repeal all Dynastic rules.  Set Dynastic Distance to Inactive.

Yeaaaaaah I wasn’t too enthusiastic going into this dynasty and after we had to call a break and one of the core proposals failed I just want a second attempt.  Sorry, lemonfanta.

Thursday, August 05, 2021

Call for Judgment: Time Extension

Failed, ten votes to one. Josh

Adminned at 07 Aug 2021 07:46:12 UTC

In the Break Rule, change

August 7th

to

August 10th

We probably won’t complete the whole discussion in the original timeframe.

Unofficial trial-run discord server

It was a bit hidden in a comment thread, but I’ve set up an unofficial discord server for those who want to try it out a little.

The slack remains the official off-site chat platform and will until it changes in the ruleset.

Come join us, we’re talking about pastrami.

Breakpoint Arrived

Okay, we got the Break up.

But if we don’t resolve the underlying problem, this Break ain’t gonna do anything.

Wednesday, August 04, 2021

Proposal: Tiny Toys

Failed by Take Two!—Clucky

Adminned at 07 Aug 2021 03:36:41 UTC

Add a new rule called “Combatants” with the following text

The term “Combatant” maybe used to refer to any General or Leader, and the term “Combatants” may be used to refer to all Generals or Leaders.

The term “Tribunan Combatant” may be used to refer to any General or the Chancellor of Tribuna, likewise “Tribunan Combatants” may be used to refer to all Generals and the Chancellor of Tribuna

Add the following subrule “Units” called “Prefabs”

Prefabs have a subset of the same things Units have, namely Mobility, Size, Arms and Armor. Additionally, the have a Stock, which is a non-negative integer defaulting to 1, and a Type which can be Ashen or Tribunan

When a Combatant Deploys a Prefab, then as an atomic action they select a Prefab, reduce its stock by 1, create a Unit with a Name of their choosing, their own name as its Commander, Supply of 0 and Mobility, Size, Arms and Armour matching the selected Prefab. They then select a Territory for that new unit to be located in.

When Deploying a Prefab, a Tribunan Combatant may only select Prefabs with an Tribunan type, and can only select Territories in the Tribunan Home Row for the Units initial location.

When Deploying a Prefab, The Ashen Queen may only select Prefabs with an Ashen type, and can only select Territories in the Ashen an Home Row for the Units initial location.

When Deploying a Prefab, Prefabs with a Stock of 0 may not be selected.

Add a subrule to “Prefabs” called “Prefab Generation” and give it the following text

As a daily action each Combatant may make a Prefab Generation post which includes a combination of some (possibly 0) number of prefabs to add to the game or the increase to the stock of some number (possibly 0) of prefabs. A single Combatant may only make two Prefab Generation posts per week. A Prefab Generation post must include the tag “[Prefab Generation]” in it.

The Chancellor of Tribuna and the Ashen Queen may vote on a Prefab Generation post as if it were a voteable matter, though they may only cast FOR or AGAINST votes. If both the Chancellor of Tribuna and the Ashen Queen vote FOR a unresolved Prefab Generation post, any Admin may resolve the an Prefab Generation post by marking it as Enacted, adding the newly described prefabs, and increasing the stock of any prefabs which the Prefab Generation post says to increase the stock for by the amount listed in the Prefab Generation post for that prefab. If an unresolved Prefab Generation Post has been open for 48 hours and either the Chancellor of Tribuna or the Ashen Queen has not voted FOR it; or it has been open for any period of time and either the Chancellor of Tribuna and the Ashen Queen has voted AGAINST it then any Admin may resolve that post by marking it as Failed.

Call for Judgment: Break();

Enacts 8-0.  - Jumble

Adminned at 04 Aug 2021 08:52:03 UTC

Enact a new rule, named “Break”:

BlogNomic is in Hiatus.  If it is August 7th or later, any General may remove this rule from the ruleset.  This action must be done during Hiatus.

Okay, the general mood has gotten too sour for me.  Maybe we all need a break from BlogNomic for a bit.

I don’t intend to distract from the pleasure of building out a new dynasty

But some of you may find value in a new essay I’ve published on the wiki.

Proposal: Lets get more in Depth

Failed by Take Two!—Clucky

Adminned at 07 Aug 2021 03:37:07 UTC

In the Dynastic Rules

Add a rule with the denoted name “Level” with the following description:

Each Territory has a Level, a publicly tracked integer defaulting to 0. If a cell’s level is negative, it is an abyss. If a cell’s level is positive, then it is an mountain. If they have not done so within the last 48 hours (even if another Leader has done so), a Leader may randomly choose 5 different Territories. Once chosen, the Leader must complete this atomic action by independently increasing or decreasing the chosen Territories’s Levels by 1.

Proposal: Simpler turns

Failed by Take Two!—Clucky

Adminned at 07 Aug 2021 03:37:36 UTC

If there is a dynastic rule “Turns”, replace its text with the following; otherwise, create a dynastic rule “Turns” with the following text:

The Turn Order is a publicly tracked ordered list of Generals and Leaders, without duplicates. When a General or Leader is idled, they are removed from the Turn Order.

A General or Leader is considered to be “Ready” if they are in the front half of the Turn Order (rounded down), except that Generals cannot be Ready unless there is a Leader somewhere behind them in the Turn Order (not necessarily immediately behind them). If an action is defined to be a “Turn Action”, this means that it can only be performed by Generals and Leaders who are Ready. When a General or Leader performs a Turn Action, they are moved to the back of the Turn Order.

If a General or Leader is not in the Turn Order, they may add themself to the front of the Turn Order. If a General or Leader has neither performed a Turn Action in the previous 72 hours, nor been added to the Turn Order in the previous 72 hours, any General or Leader may remove them from the Turn Order.

Initialise the Turn Order to a list of all Leaders in random order, followed by a list of all Generals in random order.

This should be mostly equivalent to Clucky’s proposal, but it’ll be much easier at a glance to see who can act and who can’t – one advantage of using a wiki rather than a GNDT is that not everything needs to be a table. Thanks to Clucky for having the original idea.

There’s one major difference: Leaders don’t get to perform unlimited actions any more. If the dynasty is meant to be “everyone versus lemonfanta”, it’s probably a bad idea to give her as many actions as she wants.

There’s also one minor difference: you can’t take two actions in a row unless a Leader has acted in between. This is to prevent a small conspiracy of players taking unlimited actions before lemonfanta can respond; again, if the dynasty is meant to be everyone versus lemonfanta, it’s probably a bad idea to give the “everyone” team as many actions as they want, too.

Please could someone idle me?

I find blognomic very easy to enjoy but certain elements of it are currently much more stress than they’re worth.

I would do it myself but I’m currently on mobile.

Monday, August 02, 2021

Proposal: Thomas’s Turn To Shine

Failed by Take Two!—Clucky

Adminned at 07 Aug 2021 03:37:40 UTC

Add a new dynastic rule called “Turns”

Each General has a publicly tracked Last Turn, which is a UTC date and time which is by default 0:00 on August 1st 2021.

A General is considered to be Pulled Back if the difference between their Last Turn and the current time is greater than 3 days (72 hours). Otherwise they are considered to be Engaged.

The Weight is a publicly tracked integer value equal to the number of Engaged Generals, divided in half, rounded down.

A General is Ready if either one of the following is true: They are Pulled Back; or it has been at least 12 hours since they last look a Turn Action and the number of Engaged Generals whose Last Turn is chronologically before the General attempting to perform the action is less than or equal to The Weight. Leaders are always considered to be Ready.

A Turn Action is a special kind of Action that can only be performed by a Ready General or Leader. Immediately after a General performs a Turn Action, their Last Turn is set to the current UTC date and time.

Unless otherwise restricted, Leaders and Generals may perform Turn Actions at any time.

in “Units” after replace “that action can be performed on its behalf by that Unit’s Commander” add ” as a Turn Action”

Idea for how to do turns that allow the players as a whole to dictate the pace of the game a bit. Idea is to give us turns, but makes it so its always half the playerbase turn to go at any time.

Proposal: Betterment of the Ruleset, one Proposal at a Time: Flavours!

Failed by Take Two!—Clucky

Adminned at 07 Aug 2021 03:37:52 UTC

Add a new Rule to Dynastic Rule, named “Flavour Text”

Any text that is underlined is Flavour Text.

This allows for flavour text to be used in Dynastic Rules, including examples and story bits.

This is not as easily scammable as using italics for flavour text since using italics to hide some text have been proven successful in not noting to inattentive readers. Using underline to write them will prevent these attempts.

Proposal: Betterment of the Ruleset, one Proposal at a Time: Custom Info [Special Case]

Failed by Take Two!—Clucky

Adminned at 07 Aug 2021 03:38:01 UTC

Append the following under Dynastic Tracking:

There may be Optional Information on the Dynastic Tracking Page as defined and updated by other rules. Optional Information are derived from other Gamestate Information and is considered to be Flavour text on the Gamestate. Generals and Leaders should update Optional Information to reflect on the changes in the Gamestate Information it represents.

Rewrite the following in Resupply

The last time a Resupply occurred is publicly tracked for convenience.

into

The last time a Resupply occurred is tracked as Optional Information.

Not fast enough to do this before “Set the Stage” happens, but probably needs to be done anyway since both current and the last have something on the Gamestate Tracker “tracked for convenience”.

Don’t quite have another grid-editing dynasty in me at the moment

I idle; quorum is unchanged.

Call for Judgment: DEF-ective

Reached quorum 7 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 03 Aug 2021 16:41:25 UTC

In the rule Two Leaders, change

While more than one Leader exists, votes of DEFERENTIAL are only valid if all EVCs posted by Leaders on that Votable Matter contain the same valid vote.

to

While more than one Leader exists, votes of DEFERENTIAL only resolve to FOR or AGAINST if all EVCs posted by Leaders on that Votable Matter contain that valid vote.

Uphold any instances of votes having been evaluated on that basis in enacted proposals in this dynasty.

Removing validity from the equation puts the pressure to determine whether a vote is valid back on the core rules; as ais has pointed out, that is also a bit broken, bit that can be handled as a separate issue.

Proposal: Die Another Day

Failed by Take Two!—Clucky

Adminned at 07 Aug 2021 03:38:11 UTC

In “Battles”, replace “plus DICEX, where X is the number of that faction’s Units that are engaged in the Battle” with:-

plus X, where X is the number of that faction’s Units that are engaged in the Battle

And replace “then select a Unit of that faction at random and roll DICEY, where Y is that faction’s Losses, and reduce their Size by that amount”:-

then reduce the Size of the Forward Unit of that faction in the Battle by that faction’s Losses

To the end of the rule, add:-

Within a Battle, the Forward Unit of a faction is the one that appears earliest in the list of Units at the Battle’s Site.

After “When a Unit’s Name is contained within a map cell, that Unit is considered to be located in that Territory.” in “Units”, add:-

When a Unit is added or moved to a map cell, its name is added to the end of the list of names there.

Taking Clash of Clans one step further by removing the last two die rolls: the unit-count modifier becomes a straight plus rather than a random one (leaving a 1-vs-1 skirmish unchanged), and the order of hits are always left-to-right as units are listed in the cell, rather than dealt at random.

Proposal: Proper Tees

Failed by Take Two!—Clucky

Adminned at 07 Aug 2021 03:38:35 UTC

Create a new rule called “Properties” with:

A Unit can have Properties, defaulting to having none, tracked at The War Table. The following are Properties (and their effects, if any) that a Unit can have:
- Magic:
- Melting: When a Resupply happens, lower this Unit’s Armor and Size by 1. If its Size is then 0 or less, destroy it.
- Multiplying: When a Resupply happens, increase this Unit’s Size by 1.
- Summoner: The Commander of this Unit can spend 1 Supply from it to create a Magic Melting Unit called “Magic Minion” at the same Territory and with the same Commander as this Summoner Unit and a Size of 1.

Proposal: If I Told You, It Would Ruin The Supplies

Failed by Take Two!—Clucky

Adminned at 07 Aug 2021 03:38:53 UTC

Add the following to the end of the rule Resupplies:

The first time a Unit is created, as a one-off communal action, any General or Leader may set the most Recent Supply Time to the time at which this Action is completed and then remove this sentence from the ruleset.

At the moment the most recent resupply time is never, and it can never be changed because 20 hours after never is still never, and are we after never?

Proposal: Clash of Clans

Reached quorum 6 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 03 Aug 2021 09:08:50 UTC

If Proposal: Bloodied Steel was enacted, rewrite the rule Battles as follows; otherwise, enact a new rule called Battles with the following text:

There is a publicly tracked list of Ongoing Battles; for each Battle on the list, the following information is tracked: the Battle Start Time (the time and date at which the Battle’s Site came to contain units of both factions, or the time and date of any other event that triggers a Battle according to a rule), the Site (the map coordinates of the territory in which the battle is taking place), the Forces (a list of all units that are participating in the battle, which is, by default, all units present in that Territory), and a Cusp (which is by default a date and time exactly 12 hours after the time at which the Battle started) .

When a single Territory contains at least one Ashen Unit and at least one Tribunan Unit, that Territory is the Site of a Battle. Any General or Leader may add a currently-occurring Battle to the Ongoing Battles list.

Each Battle has a status, which is not tracked but which is an emergent property based on its Cusp; when the current date and time is before the Battle’s Cusp it is Hot; when the current date and time is after the Battle’s Cusp it is Cooling. When a Battle is Cooling, the Battle, any Unit involved in the Battle and the Territory in which the Battle is taking place may not be the subject or target of any dynastic action except the Resolve a Battle action.

A Leader may carry out the Resolve a Battle action on a Battle that is Cooling at any time.

Resolve a Battle is an atomic action with the following steps:
* Privately notify the other Leader that the Battle is in process of resolution, to prevent duplication of effort.
* Determine the outcome:
** Calculate the Tribunan and Ashen Strength scores for this Battle, which are (respectively) the total Arms of all Units for the relevant faction that are engaged in the battle plus DICEX, where X is the number of that faction’s Units that are engaged in the Battle.
** Calculate the Tribunan and Ashen Defence scores for this Battle, which are (respectively) the total Armour of all Units for the relevant faction that are engaged in the battle.
** For each faction: calculate their Losses, which is their opponent’s Strength score minus their own Defence; then select a Unit of that faction at random and roll DICEY, where Y is that faction’s Losses, and reduce their Size by that amount, to a minimum of zero, and reduce that faction’s Losses by the same amount; repeat this step until that faction’s Losses are zero.
** Destroy all Units in the Battle with a Size of 0 or lower.
* Retreats: If the Territory still has at least one Tribuban and one Ashen Unit, all Units in the Territory retreat: Tribunan Units move one Territory to the south while Ashen Units move one Territory to the north. This may create a new Battle, or impact an existing one; if so, amend the Ongoing Battles list accordingly. If a faction cannot retreat for any reason (because their retreat direction is the edge of the map, for example, or because their retreat territory is contains a Cooling Battle) then its Units stay in their current Territory; if this occurs for both Factions then a new Battle with that Territory as its Site and a Start Time of the time of this Atomic Action must be started as part of this Atomic Action.
* Cleanup: Make a Story Post summarizing the Battle’s events (it is recommended that this include changes to Unit Size, and any other changes to dynastic variables), and remove the selected Battle from the list of Ongoing Battles.

Add the following to the end of the rule The Tribunan-Ashen Divide:

The Kingdom of Tribuna and the Ashen Concord may be referred to as ‘factions’ or ‘sides’, and are always the opponent relative to each other.

Tidying up the language, simplifying Battle resolution and splitting out some hooks (eg Tactics) that aren’t defined yet, hopefully making the rule a bit more readable; these things can be added back in when they get defined in the ruleset.

Also making the Battles less random; last dynasty was very random, would be nice to make this more crunchy.

Proposal: The Devil’s Hands [Core]

Cannot be enacted, 1 vote to 6. Josh

Adminned at 02 Aug 2021 21:18:33 UTC

Add a subrule to “Calls for Judgement” titled “Idle CFJs” with the following text

An Idle Call For Judgement is any Call For Judgement that includes the tag “[IDLE]”, and can be made by any General, including one who is Idle. Generals (and Idle Generals) are strongly encouraged to only use Idle Calls For Judgement when dealing with issues or disputes that arise from their status as Idle or not, or their perceived inability to unidle.

The author of an Idle CFJ is always considered to not be idle for both the purposes of “Voteable Matters” and the calculation of quorum specifically as they each relate to the idle CFJ in question but if they are otherwise idle then they are still considered to be idle for all other purposes. (Note that this means quorum might be different for an Idle CFJ, so Admins should pay special attention when resolving Idle CFJs to ensure they are using the proper value for quorum)

We had some issues last dynasty where if a player was idle but felt that they shouldn’t be idle, they had no legal recourse but to still wait for someone to unidle them. This also serves as a nice little safety net incase we accidentally break the game by somehow making it illegal for players to unidle themselves.

Seems reasonable to me in this situation to still allow them to try and make a CfJ to fix the issue. But want to try and narrow the scope of these CFJs as much as possible. Hopefully this is something we only have use once in a blue moon.

Monday, August 02, 2021

Proposal: Secrets We Were Not Meant To Know

Reached quorum 9 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 02 Aug 2021 17:28:58 UTC

Add the following to “Two Leaders”

The Leaders may share privately tracked information between themselves.

RTL Override Testing

Don’t mind me.

Proposal: Cull Chaw

Self-killed. Failed by Kevan.

Adminned at 02 Aug 2021 17:26:47 UTC

Create a new rule called “Culture”, containing:

Units have a Culture, defaulting to ‘Vagrant’. Units have a Culture of Vagrant, Zkam, Konven or Pule, tracked at The War Table.

- All Pule Units belonging to the same Commander have an Armour and Arms value equal to the amount of Pule Units belonging to that Commander.
- The Zkam Unit/s with the least Size has its Mobility always set to be equal to the Mobility value of the non-Zkam Unit/s with the most Mobility, times two.
- As a Communal Weekly Action, any General can increase the Supply value of all Konven Units by 3.

Call for Judgment: Oops!

Enacts 11-0. - Jumble

Adminned at 02 Aug 2021 00:19:23 UTC

Set The Traitor and Imperial Differentials to Inactive as though they had been intentionally declared so in an Ascension Address.

In Dynastic Tracking, replace “[[Zahndorf Crypt]]” with “[[The War Table]]”.

Proposal: Betterment of the Ruleset, one Proposal at a Time: BN Boundaries [Core]

Self-killed. Failed by Kevan.

Adminned at 02 Aug 2021 17:24:54 UTC

Add a new bullet point into Fair Play:

“ * A General may not recruit other players for purposes of changing the BlogNomic Culture.”

BN has boundaries, and other players framed this well: Invaders are not welcome, but do not do non-invader mechanisms to challenge would be invaders.

Fair Play is our collectively agreed boundaries, and this is a overdue addition.

Proposal: Favours Defaulted

Reached quorum 10 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 02 Aug 2021 17:23:43 UTC

Revert any Actions which as a cost will use the Favour held by Chiiika and Lended to Kevan.

Change the Favour listed with Chiiika as its Holder and Kevan as its Lender to one with Kevan as its Holder and Chiiika as its Lender.

It’s my error, @Kevan I’ll use my slot to fix it.

Proposal: Bloodied Steel

Reached quorum 9 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 02 Aug 2021 17:22:42 UTC

Add the following rule, called “Battles”, to the Dynastic Rules:

When one or more Ashen Units are in the same Territory as one or more Tribunan Units, a Battle immediately begins; whichever General or Leader performed the action that initiated the Battle should add it to the publicly tracked list of Ongoing Battles. A Battle is an event that occurs when Ashen and Tribunan Units meet. Each Ongoing Battle is tracked publicly in a list which includes the map coordinates of the Territory in which it is taking place, a list of Units participating (defaulting to every Unit in that Territory), a chronological list of applied Battle Tactics (defaulting to blank), and a Cusp (always exactly 12 hours after the Battle’s beginning). A Battle’s Cusp is the moment at which the fighting begins to wane; after the Cusp, that Battle and its participants may not be the subject of dynastic actions, and any Leader may Resolve that Battle at any time. Leaders should always Resolve a Battle within 12 hours after its Cusp if they are able to do so.

Resolving a Battle is an atomic action with the following steps:
* Select an Ongoing Battle with a Cusp that has passed.
* Mark the selected Battle as Concluding in the publicly tracked list of Ongoing Battles. If the selected Battle is already marked as Concluding, skip this and all following steps in this action.
* Apply the effects of each of the selected Battle’s listed Tactics in chronological order, including Hidden Tactics.
* For each Tribunan Unit in the Battle, roll a number of DICE6 equal to their Arms, adding together the results as follows: on a roll of 1-3, add nothing; on a roll of 4-5, add 1; on a roll of 6, add 2. The total amount added in this step is the Tribunan Total for this battle.
* In no particular order, compare the Battle’s Tribunan Total to each Ashen Unit’s Armour. For each, if the Tribunan Total is higher, reduce that Ashen Unit’s Size by the difference (to a minimum of 0).
* For each Ashen Unit in the Battle, roll a number of DICE6 equal to their Arms, adding together the results as follows: on a roll of 1-3, add nothing; on a roll of 4-5, add 1; on a roll of 6, add 2. The total amount added in this step is the Ashen Total for this battle.
* In no particular order, compare the Battle’s Ashen Total to each Tribunan Unit’s Armour. For each, if the Ashen Total is higher, reduce that Tribunan Unit’s Size by the difference (to a minimum of 0).
* Destroy all Units in the Battle with a Size of 0 or lower.
* If the Territory still has at least one Tribuban and one Ashen Unit, all Units in the Territory retreat: Tribunan Units move one Territory to the south while Ashen Units move one Territory to the north. Otherwise, the nation with Units remaining in this Territory is Victorious in this Battle.
* Make a Story Post summarizing the Battle’s events and the resulting casualties and changes to dynastic variables.
* Remove the selected Battle from the list of Ongoing Battles.

here we’ve got some relatively simple wargame rules, with what i hope is a plenty wide foundation for others to build on :0

Proposal: [Core][Appendix][Special Case] So what is a vote, anyway?

Unpopular at 1-10. Failed by Brendan.

Adminned at 02 Aug 2021 16:49:19 UTC

In “Votes”, change

Each General may cast one Vote on a Votable Matter by making a comment to the Official Post that comprises that Votable Matter using a voting icon of FOR, AGAINST, or DEFERENTIAL. Additional voting icons may be permitted in some cases by other rules. A valid Vote is, except when otherwise specified, a Vote of FOR or AGAINST. A General’s Vote on a Votable Matter is the last valid voting icon that they have used in any comment on that Votable Matter. Additionally, if the author of a Votable Matter has not used a valid voting icon in a comment to the post, then the author’s Vote is FOR. A non-General never has a Vote, even if they were a General previously and had cast a valid Vote.

If a General other than the Leader casts a vote of DEFERENTIAL, then the Vote of DEFERENTIAL is an indication of confidence in the Leader. When the Leader has a valid Vote other than VETO on a Votable Matter, then all votes of DEFERENTIAL on that Votable Matter are instead considered to be valid and the same as the Leader’s Vote for the purposes of other rules unless otherwise specified.

to

Generals may vote on Votable Matters by making comments to the Official Post that comprises that Votable Matter containing voting icons. Only generals have Votes; a General’s Vote on a Votable Matter is the last valid voting icon that they have used in any comment on that Votable Matter. Additionally, if the author of a Votable Matter is a General and has not used a valid voting icon in a comment to the post, then the author’s Vote on it is FOR. FOR and AGAINST are valid voting icons; other voting icons are valid only when a rule says they are.

The DEFERENTIAL voting icon, when used by Generals other than the Leader, indicates confidence in the Leader. If the Leader has a Vote other than VETO on a Votable Matter, voting icons by other Generals of DEFERENTIAL on that matter are valid; a vote of DEFERENTIAL (except by the Leader) on a votable mattter is treated as equivalent to the Leader’s vote on that matter for the purpose of other rules (unless they specify otherwise).

In “Special Proposal Voting”, change

When a General casts a vote AGAINST their own Proposal (which is not in the form of a DEFERENTIAL vote), this renders the Proposal Self-Killed, even if the author later changes their Vote. The Leader may use VETO as a voting icon to cast a Vote on a Proposal; when the Leader casts a vote of VETO on a Proposal, this renders the Proposal Vetoed, even if the Leader later changes their Vote.

to

If a General’s Vote on their own Proposal is AGAINST (and not a DEFERENTIAL resolving to AGAINST), the Proposal becomes Self-Killed (and remains so even if their Vote later changes). VETO is a valid voting icon when used by the Leader on a Proposal; if the Leader’s Vote on a proposal is VETO, the proposal becomes Vetoed (and remains so even if their Vote later changes).

In Keywords, under the “Voting Icons” entry, change

For use in voting, a check box http://blognomic.com/images/vote/for.gif shall represent a Vote FOR, an X http://blognomic.com/images/vote/against.gif shall represent a Vote AGAINST, a DEF http://blognomic.com/images/vote/imperial.gif shall represent a Vote of DEFERENTIAL, and a crossed-out circle http://blognomic.com/images/vote/seal.gif shall represent a vote to VETO.

to

For use in voting, a check box http://blognomic.com/images/vote/for.gif is the FOR voting icon, an X http://blognomic.com/images/vote/against.gif is the AGAINST voting icon, a DEF http://blognomic.com/images/vote/imperial.gif is the DEFERENTIAL voting icon, and a crossed-out circle http://blognomic.com/images/vote/seal.gif is the VETO voting icon.

and under the “Vote” entry, change

The word “Vote”, used as a noun, means a Vote that is cast in accordance with Rule “Votable Matters”. The word “Vote”, used as a verb, means the act of casting such a Vote.

to

The word “Vote”, used as a noun, is defined in the rule “Votable Matters”; a “FOR Vote”, “AGAINST Vote”, etc., refers to a Vote that is the corresponding voting icon (i.e. a FOR voting icon, an AGAINST voting icon, etc., respectively). The word “Vote”, used as a verb, means the act of a General placing a comment containing a voting icon onto a votable matter, in such a way that it would change their Vote. The state of “Voting X” on something means “having a Vote of X” on that thing.

and under the “Effective Vote Comment (EVC)” entry, change

A General’s Effective Vote Comment with respect to a given Votable Matter is that General’s Comment to that Votable Matter, if any, that contains that General’s Vote on that Votable Matter.

to

A General’s Effective Vote Comment with respect to a given Votable Matter is the last comment by that General on that Votable Matter, if any, that contains a valid voting icon.

If any of the preceding changes were unsuccessful (e.g. because the text to replace did not exist in the ruleset), or if they would cause it to become impossible to enact CFJs that were posted after this proposal resolved, revert all of them and make no further changes.

In “Two Leaders”, change

While more than one Leader exists, votes of DEFERENTIAL are only valid if all EVCs posted by Leaders on that Votable Matter contain the same valid vote.
to
While more than one Leader exists, DEFERENTIAL voting icons are invalid unless all valid Leaders’ Votes on that Votable Matter are the same. If all valid Leaders’ votes on a Votable Matter are the same, a vote of DEFERENTIAL (except by a Leader) on that mattter is treated as equivalent to as one of those Leader’s votes on that matter for the purpose of other rules (unless those rules specify otherwise).
Set the Imperial Deferentials special case rule to Inactive.

The current definition of voting is self-contradictory in the case where people use multiple voting icons in a post – the current rules describe something that’s a bit of a mix between an action of “cast one Vote” and a state check (“see which voting icons someone used”), and are inconsistent as to whether a Vote is an action or a comment. This changes it to consistently use the latter format. Additionally, the definition of EVC technically didn’t work at all. Because this proposal changes the rules for resolving CFJs, I’ve included a “revert everthing if this doesn’t work” clause to avoid any risk it’ll permanently break things if it’s buggy.

This mostly didn’t matter in previous dynasties, but in this one, a vote like FOR DEFERENTIAL or AGAINST DEFERENTIAL is actually meaningful and useful (FOR DEFERENTIAL means “I defer to Jumble and lemonfanta if they agree, but vote FOR if they disagree”). It’s unclear under the current voting rules whether such a vote works or is simply illegal. As a bonus, we can simplify the core rules somewhat at the same time.

Note: a side effect of this is that votes cast while idle are unambiguously not counted while the player is idle (and become uncounted if the player is idled), but unambiguously become counted when the player is subsequently unidled. I don’t think there’s any breakage in this, and it’s how we’ve been doing things anyway, but it’s ambiguous under the current rules.

This also fixes Two Leaders to work as expected if Jumble and/or lemonfanta posts multiple voting icons in the same comment, and turns off Imperial Deferentials (because this was almost certainly left on by mistake given the mechanics so far – it’s [Inactive] on the wiki but was turned on implciitly on the ascension address – and it’s just going to make everyone’s head hurt if we leave it on in combination with this mechanic).

Proposal: This Means War

Unpopular at 3-7. Failed by Brendan.

Adminned at 02 Aug 2021 16:47:25 UTC

Add the following rule, called “Marching Armies”, to the Dynastic Ruleset after “Two Leaders”:

The War Begins on August 5th, 2021. On this day, either Leader can (and should) perform the following atomic action:
* Remove the text “After The War Begins” throughout the Dynastic Ruleset.
* Delete the rule “Marching Armies” from the ruleset.

Add the following rule, called “Victory”, to the Dynastic Ruleset after “Marching Armies”:

When The War Ends, the conquering Leader shall make a Story Post declaring their nation– either the Kingdom of Tribuna or the Ashen Concord– as Conqueror. This Story Post shall also declare one of the following outcomes as it occurs:

If the Kingdom of Tribuna is Conqueror, the General who currently holds the Chancellor’s Favour achieves victory in the First Coregency of Jumble and lemonfanta.

If the Ashen Concord is Conqueror, all Favours held by all Players, active or inactive, are destroyed, and all Dynastic Rules except for this one are immediately repealed; then, Jumble and lemonfanta are revoked of their Emperor status, becoming Players; finally, the Tenth Metadynasty begins, with the theme of Demonic Apocalypse.

what’s a war without stakes? however the war ends, if i win it, i will usher in the Age of Smoke and Bone. muahahahahahah!!

Proposal: Set the Stage

Reaches quorum, 9-0. Josh

Adminned at 02 Aug 2021 12:19:55 UTC

Add a rule named “The Tribunan-Ashen Divide”:

[[The War Table]] contains a publicly tracked map of the area between the Kingdom of Tribuna and the Ashen Concord, called “Tribunan-Ashen Divide”. The map consists of an 8 wide by 10 high grid of cells (also known as “Territories”), each by default containing no text and having a background colour of #798, with the letters A-J on the left hand side and the numbers 1-8 along the top. Each Territory may be individually referred to by these grid coordinates. North is towards the top of this map. The southmost row is known as the Tribunan Home Row; the northmost row is known as the Ashen Home Row.


Add a rule named “Units”:

A Unit is a battalion of soldiers armed and ready to participate in warfare; each Unit has a Name (a string of flavour text which defaults to blank), a Commander (the name of a General or Leader which defaults to Jumble), a Mobility (a text string which defines how far and in what ways the Unit can move across the map), a Size value (a number which defaults to 1), an Arms value (a number which defaults to 1), an Armour value (a number which defaults to 1), and a Supply value (a number which defaults to 0). Each existing Unit and all of its attached variables are publicly tracked. When the rules state that a Unit can perform an action, that action can be performed on its behalf by that Unit’s Commander.
By default, a Unit is a Tribunan Unit; Units whose Commander is the Ashen Queen are Ashen Units instead. A rule that specifically names Tribunan Units does not include Ashen Units, and vice versa.
When a Unit’s Name is contained within a map cell, that Unit is considered to be located in that Territory. Any number of Units may be within a single Territory at once.


Add a subrule to “Units” named “Resupply”:

The last time a Resupply occurred is publicly tracked for convenience. If it has been at least 20 hours since the last Resupply action, or if all Units have 0 Supply, either Leader may Resupply by setting the Supply of every Unit with less than 2 Supply to 2 Supply.  Resupplies cannot happen if there are no Units.

 

Proposal: A clash between…

Reaches quorum, 8-0. Josh

Adminned at 02 Aug 2021 12:18:55 UTC

Add a new rule called “Two Leaders”:

This Dynasty is considered to be the First Coregency of Jumble and lemonfanta and is headed by both Jumble and lemonfanta, who are both Leaders of this Dynasty. Jumble holds the imperial title of Chancellor of Tribuna and lemonfanta holds the imperial title of Ashen Queen, in addition to their classification as Leaders.
While more than one Leader exists, votes of DEFERENTIAL are only valid if all EVCs posted by Leaders on that Votable Matter contain the same valid vote.

Coregency stuff.

Ascension Address: A new Leader, a new crisis

Friends, fellow Generals, and esteemed others

It is with great surprise that I find myself issuing this address today. Did I think I would not be elected the first Leader of Tribuna?  Maybe; the votes were pretty close after all.  I only won with a 56% vote against my rival.  Nevertheless, it is my hope that the First Dynasty of Jumble will be one of cooperation, and I encourage that the election for who will be my advisor be just as peaceful as this one.

Wait, what’s this scroll that just got delivered to me?
unrolls paper It’s a declaration of war-yeah this isn’t good.

The Kingdom of Tribuna has been a thorn in the side of the Ashen Concord for too long: signing pathetic treaties to protect your precious forests and farmlands, locking unholy artifacts in vaults where the Concord’s High Demonologists cannot reach them, and most recently, funding the rogue adventuring party who slayed Val’gamath the Ever-Burning mere days after their summoning unto this plane. No longer will we tolerate you obstructing this world’s passage into the Age of Smoke and Bone! Lay down your arms and surrender to us or become kindling for the flame that will consume this world. In all my power as the Ashen Queen, I, lemonfanta, shall see your Kingdom fall.

Okay, change of plans.  I’ll just select the General who has proven themselves best in this war we seemed to have been forced into by our hostile neighbor!  We can’t really do an election right now, anyways.  Now go on!  Mobilize!

Repeal all Dynastic rules.  Set No Collaboration to Active.  Set the new Synonym for Emperor to Leader and the new Synonym for Player to General.

Okay let’s just get the ball rolling.  So the general conceit of this dynasty is that we’re all fighting against lemonfanta, the Ashen Queen.  If she wins, then a Metadynasty with a predetermined theme starts. 

Yes, there’s a Round One reference in there.  Why not?

Time to wake up

Now would be a good time to have someone unidle me. I would myself but at work atm lol

Call for Judgment: Favour Saver

Made illegal due to improper resolution. Josh

Adminned at 01 Aug 2021 20:35:03 UTC

Change the Favour listed with Chiiika as its Holder and Kevan as its Lender to one with Kevan as its Holder and Chiiika as its Lender.

Chiiika incurred this Favour in exchange for adding their name to my Glyph in the Rockfall, but they listed it backwards as if they had done me the favour. I can’t correct this directly because it’s now been upheld by “When a DoV is enacted then all game actions that led up to it are considered to be upheld.”