Tuesday, April 16, 2024

Proposal: Personal Criteria

Add a subrule to Criteria named ‘Personal Criteria’ as such:

Personal Criteria

A Seeker may choose to have a Personal Criteria by making a blog post stating that they wish to do so. All other active Seekers then vote upon Personal Criteria by either stating an object, or by voting :for: with the name of the object or the player who proposed the object’s username. The object with the most :for: votes wins. The Seeker whose Personal Criteria is being voted upon may object to the other Seekers’ choice of Personal Criteria if the Seeker can reasonably prove that there is no such object in their vicinity, that the object is too large or too small, or that the object does not exist. This object becomes the Seeker’s Personal Criteria, which is publicly tracked.

In the rule Scoring, add

If a Seeker who has a Personal Criteria does not include it in their Snap, the Snap is worth 0 points. If they do include their Personal Criteria, then they get three extra points on top of the points they would get normally.

Out of Focus

Chiiika is idled out after seven days without making a post or comment.

Quorum remains 4.

Monday, April 15, 2024

Personal Criteria

I would like to propose a new type of criteria, known as a ‘Personal Criteria’, which requires a Seeker to have an object which all other active Seekers voted upon in their image. The incentive for this would be that any Seeker who chooses to have a Personal Criteria gets a poinnt boost.

After ‘opinions or feelings of any Seeker.’ add

Personal Criteria

A Seeker may choose to have a Personal Criteria by making a blog post stating that they wish to do so. All other active Seekers then vote upon Personal Criteria by either stating an object, or by voting for with the name of the object or the player who proposed the object’s username. The object with the most for votes wins. Said object must be reasonably defined. This object becomes the Seeker’s Personal Criteria, which is publicly tracked. The Seeker must now include their Personal Criteria in every Snap they take, or they are ineligible for points on that Snap. If they do include their Personal Criteria, then they get three extra points.

Personal Criteria

I would like to propose a new type of criteria, known as a ‘Personal Criteria’, which requires a Seeker to have an object which all other active Seekers voted upon in their image. The incentive for this would be that any Seeker who chooses to have a Personal Criteria gets a poinnt boost.

After ‘opinions or feelings of any Seeker.’ add

Personal Criteria

A Seeker may choose to have a Personal Criteria by making a blog post stating that they wish to do so. All other active Seekers then vote upon Personal Criteria by either stating an object, or by voting for with the name of the object or the player who proposed the object’s username. The object with the most for votes wins. Said object must be reasonably defined. This object becomes the Seeker’s Personal Criteria, which is publicly tracked. The Seeker must now include their Personal Criteria in every Snap they take, or they are ineligible for points on that Snap. If they do include their Personal Criteria, then they get three extra points.

Proposal: Smoke Screen

Reached quorum, 4-0. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 16 Apr 2024 21:08:37 UTC

In the rule “Criteria”, replace the text “, by first posting the hash and the secret text in a blog entry and then changing the hash and resetting its satisfying and unsatisfying counts to zero in the game state tracking page.” with the following:

as an atomic action named Criteria Refresh with the following steps:
* Post the hash and the secret text of each Private Criteria being changed in a blog entry.
* For each Private Criteria being changed, update the hash and reset its satisfying and unsatisfying counts to zero.

In the rule “Guesses”, add the following text:

A Guess may not target a Seeker while that Seeker is performing the Criteria Refresh atomic action.

I’m taking Clucky’s advice in preventing the snipe of Guesses. This patches the Guess itself, not just the Award. I made refreshing criteria an Atomic Action so that a Seeker can’t also try to do other dynastic actions and just delay finishing their Criteria reset indefinitely.

I also avoided taking Kevan’s route of trying to describe how a Guess may be made. There’s a scam where if it were forbidden to make a Guess based on public conversation other than Authentic Shots, a Seeker could block all of their Private Criteria from being the target of a Guess simply by conversing about all of their criteria publicly.

Proposal: Anybody’s Guess

Withdrawn. Failed by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 16 Apr 2024 21:07:25 UTC

To the Standard of the “Grand Prix in Advertising Photography” Award, add:-

, where that Guess is not already apparently confirmable by public information alone

Shutting down the sniper routes to getting this. There’s Clucky’s tactic that if someone is slow to update their Criteria and you’re lucky enough to be online, you can just repeat a shared Criteria back at them as a guess. There are similar avenues where a player fully reveals a Criterion in conversation (inadvertently or for some non-cooperative reason), and whoever is online at that moment can claim it. This award should just be about genuine guesswork.

Story Post: Upgrade Request for Snap 32

Reached quorum 4 votes to 0. Processed by Kevan.

Adminned at 16 Apr 2024 08:23:43 UTC

I believe this photograph meets “A Snap where the Merriam Webster Word of the Day for the day on which the Shot was taken appears on a sign or other permanent outdoor structure in shot (where the word would also have been present on that object on the previous day)”

Story Post: Snap 032: Private Furlong

Sunday, April 14, 2024

Story Post: Snap 031: Alien Flora

Saturday, April 13, 2024

Story Post: Snap 030: Pansy Bowls

Saturday, April 13, 2024

Proposal: Change criteria for snaps

Withdrawn. Failed by Kevan.

Adminned at 14 Apr 2024 15:50:49 UTC

I would like to change the rule for shots to also allow the word to be the Wordle for the same day one year ago.

Change ‘name of an active Seeker and the Merriam Webster Word of the Day for the day on which the Shot was taken, or the preceding day (per http://www.merriam-webster.com/word-of-the-day).’ to

‘name of an active Seeker and either the Merriam Webster Word of the Day for the day on which the Shot was taken, or the preceding day (per http://www.merriam-webster.com/word-of-the-day); or the Wordle answer for the day the shot was taken one year ago, not including February 29’.

Call for Judgment: Skipping Stones

Timed out, 2-2. Failed by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 14 Apr 2024 21:59:20 UTC

Consider the Seeker called Josh to have responded to Snap 26 in order, and uphold their responses to Snaps 27 through 29.

I missed 26 by mistake. I think it cost me points but it would also have caused me to have to cycle my criteria earlier than I actually did. Seems easiest to just scrub the deck and uphold.

Cycling out my crieria

My old ones were:

ghtws Some part of a human is depicted - aea39e80bedc4edc2068258862b2cdf68d2c66cde528f292f2748f7c314a5a5e
fdwre It is nighttime - 9fed62399273a2a30a4fef81764d941884769fd8171433d2619c33bf98239a0f
dsaml A non-human animal is visible - cb5f4272eaa36daaf459443eb6e0205163f8e31237b346bfadd53e5dae9a03bf
zpoyt The word of the day has three vowels - fc21a867f754301c3347d71f79f6fdccf52c46de22d44687b894f0845ebcf046

Proposal: Everyone’s a Critic

Reached quorum 5 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 14 Apr 2024 15:50:16 UTC

In “Scoring”, after “whether they find the Shot aesthetically pleasing or not, about which they must be honest” add:-

, and include a few words of reasoning

I’m enjoying when players give some specific reason for why they did or didn’t find a picture aesthetically pleasing.

Criteria Changeup

I’m changing all of my Private Criteria. My previous criteria was:

The shot has written vowels
180f5ba290bc1d03d89eff1472f833bf1672fe97f44c1e4da55846d131b33198

The shot contains paper. zyx
4ab4438024201fd112c8593fc48ea700ada552bea49821ddedac18eafad1ab18

The Shot was not taken upside down
11ee4176a183fc8dc20669e22c4a05e4633804b5611fd0cbb9372fc3fa2cbc35

The shot has written consonants
8499be31ec9f598a3742086d93e38c144cd4901f4c5e725168bc983ed6f179cb

The Shot has at least one object in focus
48e8124b9c8517832c081791bd678cc5828076c48a43a4ae826742a2d4db2d41

Outstanding Composition for JonathanDark

I claim the Outstanding Composition award for having five private Criteria, each of which has an Unsatisfying score of 0 and a Satisfying score of 5

Rescinding this Claim because it was based on faulty scoring of satisfying criteria.

Story Post: Snap 029: Chalk

Proposal: Imperial Freestyle

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

Adminned at 14 Apr 2024 15:48:59 UTC

If the Proposal “Cooperative Emperor Style” is not enacted, this Proposal has no effect.

In the Core rule “Victory and Ascension” at the end of the bullet point that begins with “Optionally specify their Imperial Style”, add the following text:

The wiki page named Imperial Styles is not gamestate and may be freely editable.

It was pretty clear from the comments to my earlier proposal that we don’t want Imperial Styles to be gamestate, so here’s the exclusion to keep it that way even if Get The Laminator enacts.

Proposal: Get the Laminator [Appendix] [Building Blocks]

Reached quorum, 4-0. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 13 Apr 2024 16:01:59 UTC

In the Appendix, replace “All wiki pages that the Dynastic Rules explicitly mention (except for dynastic histories and discussion pages)” with:-

All wiki pages that the rules and Building Blocks explicitly mention (except for the FAQ, the dynastic histories and discussion pages)

In “Building Blocks”, replace “That page is gamestate and may not be altered except as specified by the ruleset or through the passage of a Proposal or CfJ; however, its contents are not rulestext.” with:-

That page’s contents are not rulestext.

To “Spelling and Formatting”, add:-

* A Seeker may change the layout or design of a gamestate wiki page if doing so would not change how any rules interpreted its content.

Per comments on Cooperative Emperor Style, all referenced wiki pages should probably default to being gamestate, rather than just the dynastically-referenced ones. If we think some of these pages should be freely editable, we can say that in the rule that mentions them.

If this enacts it will make the “Community Guidelines”, “Gamestate Modifications” and (if Cooperative Emperor Style passes) “Imperial Styles” pages gamestate. “Mentorships” is already considered gamestate by other means, because its alteration is regulated.

Thursday, April 11, 2024

Proposal: Follow-through

Withdrawn. Failed by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 13 Apr 2024 16:00:29 UTC

This proposal has no effect.

It used to be a rhetorical point but that point seems to no longer be needed.

Proposal: Cooperative Emperor Style

Timed out, 3-0 with 2 DEFs. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 13 Apr 2024 15:57:35 UTC

In the Core rule “Victory and Ascension”, in the bulleted list after the text “start a new dynasty by completing the following Atomic Action:”, add the following bullet point at the end of that list:

* Optionally specify their Imperial Style, which if specified is a set of nonbinding guidelines that the Observer is encouraged to follow, using the terms defined on the wiki page Imperial Styles.

 

I’ve added a section in the Imperial Styles wiki page for “Desired player cooperation level”. With this, and the reminder that an Emperor can optionally list their Imperial Style, it gives a way to set the level of player cooperation expected for the dynasty without requiring enforceable rules that may be too narrow or too vague.

This operates on the same way of thinking as dynastic themes: the Emperor sets the theme for a dynasty, and there’s no rules that enforce a dynastic theme, but it’s generally understood that the Emperor and players will all help keep the dynasty generally aligned with the theme and will vote against anti-theme proposals. Player cooperation can exist in the same way, with the Emperor and players actively helping to ensure the desired amount of player cooperation. Note that the wiki page Imperial Styles is being treated in a similar manner to the wiki page Community Guidelines, in that the editing of the page is not regulated and the content is treated as a guideline.

For this dynasty, there was no actual expectation set at the beginning for player cooperation. It was only after Brendan proposed adding the Building Block “No Cooperation” that it was considered, and even then it received a number of DEFs. With no private comms and no mantle passing in place, and no rules that invite idle Seekers to participate, I think we’d be safe to go back to a guideline of no cooperating rather than the attempts at a strict set of rules that we’ve been engaged in recently.

Wednesday, April 10, 2024

The More The Mentier

Juniper.ohyegods will be mentored by Kevan.

Proposal: This Is Not A Place Of Honour

Reached quorum 4 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 11 Apr 2024 10:28:08 UTC

Add an Upgrade Benchmark:

* A Snap where the Merriam Webster Word of the Day for the day on which the Shot was taken appears on a sign or other permanent outdoor structure in shot (where the word would also have been present on that object on the previous day)

Proposal: Mento Fresh

Reached quorum 5 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 11 Apr 2024 08:38:56 UTC

In the Building Block rule No Cooperations, and in the same text on the Building Block page, add the following after the clause “except through the use of co-operative mechanisms defined in the Dynastic rules,”:

any activities carried out as part of a Mentorship,

Registration and Joining

Hello to all players. I, of the playername Juniper.ohyegods (shorten it to juniper if you want), have thus applied for the chance to begin gameplay, and it has been granted to me. I would very much like to become a player, if it may be granted upon me for this possibility to occur.

Story Post: Snap 028: Underwing

Tuesday, April 09, 2024

Proposal: Great Snap

Withdrawn. Failed by Kevan.

Adminned at 10 Apr 2024 11:50:23 UTC

In the rule Upgrades, add the following to Upgrade Benchmarks:

A Snap in which the posting Seekers score is greater or equal to 21.

Need some more awards to keep moving.  I hope the score is challenging.

Story Post: Snap 027: Night Blossom

Criteria Change

snap does not contain a lion 4kdsv
80c405636219ac34b1983dd06dfb2bc08572d0f6aeb5bc2914012a112183a2b3

snap does not contain a tiger 0ujvd
cc6291cf64cc1c23ea2ac5dc44b5e068b1ed1d375ce6e2d042d128e72426a6d2

snap does not contain a bear t7kv3
8e713ed7fa3df18df7e0dace05f5d0d965a28ab5deb13ca81aa9e0514c4fd80f

snap does not contain a scarecrow 2sd4g
eb9939cb2c2d6098376595f3eb321c543f39ca3d7f46817d0690daeb6ccbaa27

snap does not contain a monkey 3hmap
9fc67ef9aa2de653f1cdccda88f105e27c3ff7a0de768173458fc489113731f6

Proposal: Shutter Speed

Reached quorum 6 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 10 Apr 2024 11:49:44 UTC

In the rule “Awards” replace the text “5 Awards” with “4 Awards”

The pace of earning Awards hasn’t been as fast as we anticipated it would be, it seems. Plus it’s been proposed before to lower the threshold to 4 Awards, but because that idea was lumped in with other changes, it got lost. Let’s see if it’s acceptable on its own merits.

Tuesday, April 09, 2024

Claiming Outstanding Composition Award

I have achieved the Standard for the Outstanding Composition award by having five private Criteria, each of which has an Unsatisfying score of 0 and a Satisfying score of 5

Criteria Change

I reset my Private Criteria. The previous ones were:

1: Doesn’t contain Bank tube station. 126
(7b777de27f7c227bf2699cb536954692ef27f8801e17986e52bc2e9386be0585)
2: Doesn’t contain Euston tube station. 361
(7aa144e6d2c72a9f74539c7583b7688ee9848f4a183931cf10af6f1f7462722d)
3: Doesn’t contain Morden tube station. 751
(e3dc6188d88bc38d3cdbaa65dc20399cb6356c70a9e29e038cfe7ea59712a4c7)
4: Doesn’t contain Chalk Farm tube station. 925
(93d1b6ab92567622526a3a45ea8028e18556095ab68eb5a5823f98822b104711)
5: Doesn’t contain Balham tube station. 651
(b2f2086d1e8c18d64b250201aedab178eab100d253d099b728826a7d854eed41)

55555 the Hard Way

I claim the Outstanding Composition score for having five private Criteria, each of which has an Unsatisfying score of 0 and a Satisfying score of 5.

Story Post: Snap 026: Bark

Monday, April 08, 2024

Story Post: Snap 025: Ajuga genevensis

Proposal: Run on and on and on and on

Timed out, 4-0. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 09 Apr 2024 22:21:37 UTC

In “Scoring” replace

Within 48 hours of such a Shot having been posted, each Seeker (including the poster) may at most once respond to it stating which of their own Private Criteria that Shot satisfies and does not satisfy, and whether they find the Shot aesthetically pleasing or not, about which they must be honest, provided that none of their Private Criteria has been changed since that Shot was posted and provided that there are no other Shots that were posted before the shot in question, within the last 48 hours, and which the Seeker in question has not already responded to in this manner. Upon doing so:

with

Within 48 hours of such a Shot having been posted, each Seeker (including the poster) may at most once respond to it stating:
* which of their own Private Criteria that Shot satisfies and does not satisfy and
* whether they find the Shot aesthetically pleasing or not, about which they must be honest
A seeker many only perform this action if all of the following are true
* none of their Private Criteria has been changed since that Shot was posted
* there are no other Shots that were posted before the shot in question, within the last 48 hours, and which the Seeker in question has not already responded to in this manner
Upon doing so:

Right now the run-on nature of that sentence makes it hard to parse and one might try to argue the “provided that none of their Private Criteria has been changed since that Shot was posted and provided that there are no other Shots that were posted before the shot in question, within the last 48 hours, and which the Seeker in question has not already responded to in this manner” clause applies to “about which they must be honest” and not the post as a whole

Proposal: The Table’s Edge [Building Blocks]

Reached quorum 4 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 09 Apr 2024 08:24:58 UTC

In the “No Cooperation” Building Block (both on the Building Blocks wiki page and in the ruleset), if it exists, replace “except through the use of co-operative mechanisms defined in the Dynastic rules” with:-

except through the use of co-operative mechanisms defined in the Dynastic rules, and the posting of votable matters and casting of votes

Making a clear call that do-over CfJs, DoV support, chop proposals, etc. are all outside of the scope of No Cooperation.

Call for Judgment: Double Exposure

Fewer than a quorum not voting AGAINST. Failed 1 vote to 3 by Kevan.

Adminned at 09 Apr 2024 08:25:36 UTC

Cause the Seeker named Kevan to claim the Outstanding Composition Award, incrementing his Awards by 1.

Enact a subrule to “Criteria” called “The Darkroom”:-

When the Seeker named Kevan changes his Private Criteria, instead of setting his Satisfying and Unsatisfying counts to zero he must roll DICEX for each of his Satisfying counts (where X is the number of Snaps posted since 00:01 on 2 April 2024) and set that count to that value, and set the corresponding Unsatisfying count to X minus that value. After doing so, this rule is repealed.

Back on April 1st I realised I’d neglected to follow a rule which would have been trivially easy for me to work around had I wanted to (that all Private Criteria had to be different). Because I was reading the No Cooperation rule as meaning that I couldn’t ask or haggle for a do-over on that, I stoically threw away four rounds of progress and revealed a good loophole in the process, and played on.

But from the discussion and voting on Clucky’s request for a do-over after he overlooked a rule which would have been trivial to work around if he’d seen it, it seems the group doesn’t regard requests and support for do-over CfJs as a form of co-operation after all.

So here’s mine. It’s a little trickier to unroll because it happened a week ago, but the intended effect is that had I not misread the rule, I would have hit Outstanding Composition on Snap 22, and spent the subsequent Snaps actually doing some scoring and trying to get Conceptual Balance. As a simple and not particularly flattering simulation of that, this proposes that my scoring for them be made at random, after I have chosen and reset my Criteria.

Saturday, April 06, 2024

The Real Criteria Change

Changing my Private Criteria (again), this time just the 4th since the 1st was blanked out by Clucky’s correct Guess:

The Shot contains at least one human finger
f86d4b20039e89dd8e36699ed02033322f98afd270cf129b421f8f71cd50ea81

Proposal: Co Op Cop Out

Timed out, 0-4. Failed by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 08 Apr 2024 19:34:05 UTC

Repeal the building block rule “No Cooperation”

add a new dynastic rule called “Cooperation Limits” with the following text

Seekers may not share their private criteria with other seekers or make requests about the contents of other Seekers shots (either directly or through an intermediary), unless in ways explicitly defined by the dynastic rules.

The loosey goosey nature of no-cooperations is a problem. Lets just ban what its supposed to ban.

Story Post: Guess: Jonathan Dark

I guess one of JonathanDark’s private criteria is The Shot contains something metal

Criteria Daylight Saving Time

I’m changing my 1st and 4th Private Criteria. They were:

The Shot contains something metal
5e594e13b5374ad564bb96544174a004c4ce9c41fd56b759afad2bc76e97cdb5

The Shot contains at least one human finger
f86d4b20039e89dd8e36699ed02033322f98afd270cf129b421f8f71cd50ea81

Story Post: GUESS: Nadnavillus

I guess that one of your private criteria is “Includes some synthetic, manufactured or man-made material”.

Story Post: Drops

Proposal: BlogNomic Idol

Timed out 1 vote to 1. Failed by Kevan.

Adminned at 08 Apr 2024 14:52:58 UTC

If the Proposal “Idle Cooperative” was not enacted, this Proposal has no effect.

In the rule “Scoring”, add a subrule named “Aesthetics” with the following text:

Each Seeker has a number named Aesthetics which defaults to 0.

Within 48 hours of an Authentic Shot being posted, any Idle Seeker may at most once respond to it with a icon in their response. If at least 3 different Idle Seekers have responded to an Authentic Shot in this manner, and the Authetic Shot has at least one response from a non-Idle Seeker regarding which of their Private Criteria the Shot satisfies, the author of the Authentic Shot may add 1 to their Aesthetics.

In the rule “Awards”, replace the text “5 Awards” with “4 Awards”, and add the following entry to the table:

|-
| Critic’s Circle Grand Medallion || Have an Aesthetics of at least 5

Similar to Josh’s proposal on idle Seekers voting for aesthetically-pleasing shots, but this one requires successes across multiple shots before you can get the Award. I’m open to tweaking the numbers.

The requirement of a non-Idle Seeker to respond to the Shot is just to make sure at least one active player is engaged with the Shot as well.

Friday, April 05, 2024

Call for Judgment: Aesthetically Out Of Order

Timed out and failed, 3-1. Josh

Adminned at 08 Apr 2024 07:42:58 UTC

Treat Clucky’s first reply to this snap

https://blognomic.com/archive/snap_023_what_that_world_will_be_like

as having been legally made and he had stated the snap to be aesthetically pleasing

Missed the new rule. But then I changed my criteria thinking they went to 5. But that prevents me from properly replying to the snap, while also derailing any shot I have at reaching Conceptual Balance any time soon. So would turn out to be a rather costly mistake.

More Resets

Resetting these two:

Contains a person other than the shot taker dc87a612b42666627ddb47b7534e2f12c1f417a073c37c9f2214c85b6e9b7b07 (debated if Kevan’s eye follows this but felt like a stretch to say yes plus it might have been Kevan’s eye…)

Contains something with wheels 4d21be30f172bcea244b2b3172ebf9cd000c776230c972c12a2810175d714fc7

Grassy Knoll

I’m changing my 2nd Private Criteria. It previously was:

The Shot contains grass
fe6a592362db286499cb87e1e6969e82cfba2f75e74f6dd58da338bd2781b482

Story Post: Snap 023: What That World Will Be Like

Hash Reveal

My 96666edb22e8817f44bc987386fa40f6dfabeab000b727f8a8b689c8ad36cebc hash was “It has a light that is on”

Proposal: Idle Cooperative

Timed out, 2-1 with 1 DEF and Observer voting FOR. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 07 Apr 2024 18:31:43 UTC

Rewrite the Building Block rule No Cooperation, and the same entry on the Building Blocks page, to read as follows:

In this dynasty, Seekers are expected to avoid co-operating to effect Victory, except through the use of co-operative mechanisms defined in the Dynastic rules.

Idle Seekers are considered to be Seekers for the purposes of this rule.

If a Seeker feels that another Seeker has gone against this expectation in some way during the current dynasty, then they are encouraged to vote against all DoVs from that Seeker during that dynasty. If a Seeker feels that a DoV has come about as a result of one or more other Seekers making a sincere attempt to ‘kingmake’ for the Declarant, even if the author of the DoV was not a party to that cooperation, then they are encouraged to vote against it. This overrules the encouragement to vote according to the perception of a victory in the rule “Victory in Ascension”.

Thursday, April 04, 2024

Proposal: That’s So Aesthetic

Timed out and failed, 1-3. Josh

Adminned at 06 Apr 2024 17:09:31 UTC

Add a new Award to the table in the rule Awards:

| Critic’s Circle Grand Medallion || Post a Snap on which at least 5 icons are cast in comments by idle Seekers (no more than one icon per Snap per idle Seeker).

In the same rule, in the sentence “Any Seeker who has claimed 5 Awards has achieved Victory.”, change the 5 to a 4.

Add the following to the end of the Building Block rule No Cooperation, and to the same entry on the Building Blocks page:

Idle Seekers are considered to be Seekers for the purposes of this rule.

A few loosely related things: bringing in a safer audience participation mechanic (the requirement for several responses makes it harder to cooperate or kingmake), lowering the victory threshhold, and looping idle players into No Coops.

Wednesday, April 03, 2024

Proposal: Beauty Bots

Timed out 1 vote to 3. Failed by Kevan.

Adminned at 05 Apr 2024 19:08:00 UTC

Add a subrule “Aesthetics” to scoring:-

The Aesthetic Score of a Snap can be determined by analysing the Snap with the “Rate My Photo” web site or mobile apps.  This will compute a score from 0-10 for each Snap. For each Snap posted after March 4, at most, once per Snap posted, the Seeker may post the Aesthetic Score of the Snap.  The Seeker can increase their Score by 10 for an Aesthetic Score greater than or equal to 7.

I have not used these apps much but they seem pretty easy to use.  I posted an example of scoring one of my snaps on Discord.  I believe we could all audit this by pulling the photo and running it through the web site.

Web site: https://rate-my-photo.com with access and links to Apple and Android Apps.

Proposal: Guessing Game

Withdrawn. Failed by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 04 Apr 2024 22:39:14 UTC

In the rule “Guesses” replace the entire text of that rule with the following text:

When posting an Authentic Shot, the Seeker authoring that post may optionally perform a Guess, which is an atomic action with the following steps:
* Reduce their Score by 3
* Privately track text that contains the full title, minus the text “Story Post: “, of that Authentic Shot post, the name of a Seeker other than the author of that Authentic Shot, and a number of Private Criteria that the named Authentic Shot will satisfy for the named Seeker. This is known as the Guess Contents.
* Add the text “Guess:” followed by the SHA256 hash of the Guess Contents from the preceding step to the body of that Authentic Shot. This is known as the Guess Hash.

If it has been at least 48 hours after an Authentic Shot has been posted, and that post contains a Guess Hash, the author of the post may reveal the Guess Contents associated with the Guess Hash of that post in a comment to that post. If the Guess Contents are valid and the named Seeker had responded to the named Authentic Shot with a number of satisfied Private Criteria that matches the number mentioned in the Guess Contents, this is considered a Successful Guess for the author of that post, and the author of that post may increase their Score by the Exposure of each Private Criteria that was satisfied in the named Authentic Shot for the named Seeker in the Guess Contents.

In the rule “Awards”, replace the text in the Standard for “Grand Prix in Advertising Photography” with the following text:

Have at least 1 Successful Guess

Something to replace the current Guess mechanics

Proposal: The Peanut Gallery

Unpopular, 1-3 with 1 DEF and Observer voting AGAINST. Failed by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 04 Apr 2024 22:38:00 UTC

If the proposal “It is a little bit about your feelings” failed, then to the rule “Scoring”, add a subrule “Aesthetics”:-

The last valid voting icon that an idle Seeker has used in any comment on a Snap is that idle Seeker’s View on the aesthetic appeal of that Snap: their View is Positive if the icon is FOR and Negative if it is AGAINST. (In all other cases the idle Seeker has no View of that Snap.)

If a Snap is between 48 and 96 hours old and more idle Seekers had a Positive View of it than had a Negative View, then the poster of that Shot may (if they have not already done so for that Snap) increase their Score by 5.

Taking a run at an aesthetic mechanic: letting any idle players vote on it, who want to.

Proposal: Aesthetics By Consensus

Withdrawn. Failed by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 04 Apr 2024 22:35:15 UTC

In the rule “Scoring” add this text:

48 hours after an Authentic Shot has been posted, if every Seeker who responded to that Shot, other than the one who posted the Shot, mentioned in their response at least one of their Private Criteria that was satisfied by that Shot, the poster of that Shot may increase their Score by 2.

Here’s an alternative way to encourage aesthetically-pleasing Shots. I realize that Private Criteria might not have anything to do with aesthetics, but it’s the mechanic we have for judging.

Proposal: It is a little bit about your feelings

Reached quorum, 4-1. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 04 Apr 2024 22:31:09 UTC

In the rule Scoring, after “stating which of their own Private Criteria that Shot satisfies and does not satisfy”, add:

, and whether they find the Shot aesthetically pleasing or not, about which they must be honest

To the bulleted list in the same rule, add the following as a final bullet point:

If they found the Shot aesthetically pleasing they should increment the Score of its poster by 2.

Take pretty photos.

Tuesday, April 02, 2024

Story Post: Snap 022 - In the middle of the road

Proposal: It’s not about your feelings.

Reached quorum, 4-0 with 1 DEF. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 03 Apr 2024 13:10:49 UTC

In Criteria, replace: “Private criteria may only refer to the contents of the shot, and may not refer to things such as the date, other criteria, or the contents of other documents.” with:

Private criteria may only refer to and be verified by the contents of the shot.  Private criteria may not refer to things such as the date, other criteria, the contents of other documents or the thoughts, opinions or feelings of any Seeker.

Still large enough loop holes to drive many trucks through.

Replacing All Criteria

Keeping up with the Jones -

snap contains a tree - ec86f794dc9196fe33348c2cd4627899506c5c0b2fca30e1de10dc0a98eb5e09 seed:nady6
snap contains a street - b6f20f401c1c93e80ee34fbdb371faf90b9a20a5fba01d53af72fd821d418785 seed:nady7
snap contains the sky - 0c50c36d7e676be32a644ebac854d3c69d77e8607e02bd3e9e6dc40b59eba955 seed:nady8
snap contains a line - 17f28745e83d9f0638213326fea04856359d6081e751536dac250c40bb105842 seed: xghrd
snap contains grass - f2067a99f360e52733096a2e3c360bc239cac43926a3dbbd1c27e347bf915cfd seed;nady9

Changing criteria on April 2

Changing my 3rd and 5th Private Criteria:

The Shot contains the letter “s”, salt=abc, hash=9c09a2bab26f9235325533284f1e821d9d6bb4a88eefe7f8d2357dbdba36eef5

The Shot contains the letter “e”, salt=, hash=f05ee8b1c60d155524764e6491c5625b9d7b430273215a308896e5728924b19f

My Summer Vacation by Jonathan Dark

The Shot contains lights that are trimming a roof, door, or fence while lit: c572256fbb7fb1b4f5ca4992e7aaca0b8e94f4fd2115302197990a5595179843
(while doing this, I realized that this criteria was made illegal for having too many characters per the rule “Reasonable Limits”. I have since reduced my Score by the points I had scored for this criteria.)

The Shot contains exactly three motorized vehicles: 1e5f7d8787444505de7c6b8586bbfe19308ed0e9dd67275784000f607db25a22

The Shot contains at least one trash bin: 88d5298d1f1940cf0c67fcd7d5674e04e120325b3c21ed4c57fb9819abc19f32

The Shot contains exactly one eye: 4884f8d472064cc83c9aaf165134797dfe35785d0a6b99a34b96c19846695883

The Shot contains at least one utility pole: a5783131fedd0965cb1cadaacac2d429c08f04b807b753279c780ac83ae6b0ab

The Shot contains at least two motorized vehicles: e65e9004d9d549ba56a6ca345d936a836abf595211a9300632583fa242aec977

The Shot contains the letter “e”: f05ee8b1c60d155524764e6491c5625b9d7b430273215a308896e5728924b19f

The Shot contains a crosswalk: 97765a42dcb0de92df2d4158c2404553989fa2c49e4e4b7b1709b37ba588a5a7

The Shot contains the letter “s”: 976fec9dd3825d4d6c995788bd8e70932ff99d26cf9efb3705bd7d0e7b8c5d6b

The Shot contains a paved road: 75e642abc6746c1e560bde54cded7d786a5ce73c56e2ce4a49a2de41b91d075c

All of the salts in the above hashes were 0 characters in length (meets requirements of “5 characters or less”)

Numbers Station

My past criteria were:

  • “Satisfies the text of my 1st secret key. 512” (1ea215bf02e5ab52d84d96fbbf3613fdddfab6523225199abd3bfdfa8d9beaf4)
  • “Satisfies the text of my 2nd secret key. 104” (1242c17d00981c1b0dda6a0057641ddc5e05b28caeb80344947d5f68f6765599)
  • “Satisfies the text of my 3rd secret key. 826” (87cd6b2d06353f6f51aa0ea460c0f5129b14d12d730d0b46939662d0a64f8636)
  • “Satisfies the text of my 4th secret key. 912” (04cdc91b436b3cd04efda5f85d9568f052c3b64ab407fc6b1f9184b135799a0f)
  • “Satisfies the text of my 5th secret key. 783” (8d2ef0544c43215a235004610390e3898a1e0372ffb88446d89fbefd5f55ff91)
  • “Satisfies the text of my 2nd secret key. 953” (7f1dfa8a85adfdc8881d2b0b7ec2737ea9f77df234e2cd25bbf9375642973cf7)
  • “Satisfies the text of my 5th secret key. 173” (a332a905c4eb5d76f2108d06f399864f7bb0e39d1aa20225b2b30f9d0ecdbc92)
  • “Satisfies the text of my 54th secret key. 511” (5693089c9529914653aaa9115331cf337c24014b3d2563e648909f14183e182d)
  • “Satisfies the text of my 29th secret key. 451” (6fd8222ea5cfd0a4002856b38b680fdb50c904b6ced58f7baaafa29f7d5549ca)
  • “Satisfies the text of my 386th secret key. 613” (5d52ea31c03208252ce9439ebb9a877745edb225471c59574ee810ae002f5699)
  • “Satisfies the text of my 853rd secret key. 271” (a3754e08a42b66a54dfa5f3882092e36259f2ee23c1f7247d55f3c78d2bbcb9e)

What I did last summer

snap contains a rock - 3ddb43ae4217266be8c5368257489c8a1818402cff9d2efcc9cdfef607439e44
snap contains a female person - a773f725a75f0a10645b49a5d53ed9d7a1dea5b17e4ab84d67ac9a538a31365d
snap contains something green - 53d689c3d5841fa08ccd6976656b4030348620508fb824694864d9950d48c2d7
snap contains numbers - 69bf1996b94a2bb3390f2a5d223deb3bfe645cb4de6a4bf81b3538a9cf64438d
snap contains a fence - ddc819c110a3e378f26bcd5c3798944dbcb70a9302ff4b49db227e6e2d88fd89

Clucky’s Past Snaps

“You can see a light source that is on” 620ce136303fa8ac164d1e8eb811831c574d8d8c5f2349f61e01251821d835a2
“Name Written In All Caps” 80d3fe788d21fe6a45a79d65a190b7eada8afdc52d6bdb7c1ede555d096778c1
“The Photo Contains a car” 4f529cf8d3ff5f01bddd12826fd298df061dba5d7afb24f846753e748d2be096
“It has multiple people in it” 386379c3854a90881922f4f7407192c85daad5d99d9073e86ec0598ed2cd2c15”
“Name Written In All Caps” 80d3fe788d21fe6a45a79d65a190b7eada8afdc52d6bdb7c1ede555d096778c1
“Photo was visibly taken at night” d309711c096f9bc7064fbbdeb6dcfdd980e103c352020e026756928683bd6f53
“A word (other than on the card) is legible” adfcfc7f0989f4ad098db548462d94cf2ffdda5f52c0b5db29682d5d8fe11c5f

“Does not contain the number 8520560272” 68bb2649f60cd0cd07f0983143785307cb658e51d8af0f43d1e2052ae498a1f2
“Does not contain the number 4383433845” 09c8eb554aeb2e17a915b09773615467428ea464dca8fdaa5b198c16e37f67a2
“Does not contain the number 1901578228” 8dbb330a4b86d45cb9d1bb027ef49183a141fa02de54c5533b3b2f2e70132f35
“Does not contain the number 3615924026” 6da5f9d19f7c1cddc498d2a844810888f1793f16e580d10b2e12663153286252
“Does not contain the number 5339328659” 0ea21445e1003ffc184c7742078cef166da4c8b928356e2282d180d42c7a20c3

Story Post: Disclosure

My previous private criteria were:

11/03
I find the photo aesthetically pleasing - 4b21f82e5a3df10ba87a9ee19ccd9c96d7cd6a5b736c8ae5d3fe9a3241af0078
There is a non-human mammal or bird in the picture - 4ea012401d0bdfa34b98ec2e69aa1df21538e773f051609e5b32ea7b4430e6a1

17/03
xzygr I find the photo aesthetically pleasing - aa723d205397f609ab984b3873785b18d541da727131b9e61b3de524dabeed8c
ysfnn There is a tree in the photo - 641ab2d60309895c525d26d299e594f75ac1cd2765ab00f4c9d590d1b6170b85
fpple There is a cat, dog or bird in the photo - d25d75faab92b3a4789d6a017965e9111bb9201cfda7461bd598a47e25ab0bb7
poopl The photo includes humans - 16679560310c2e5c6879e6bda4f7f9e286cd453f1cc9650176889b441f628b6c
trxxl The photo was taken at night - 55b16026dbc1838501cd21dde9266ee7cfef24e2e86d115f90eeee1ba9a8ba5f

Tuesday, April 02, 2024

Criteria Change

Swapping out my fourth Secret Criteria:

69bf1996b94a2bb3390f2a5d223deb3bfe645cb4de6a4bf81b3538a9cf64438d - snap contains numbers

Award: Conceptual Balance

This was in error and I have corrected the scoring page

————————————————————————————————-

I am claiming the Conceptual Balance Award:

Have at least one Private Criteria with a Satisfying score of 4 and an Unsatisfying score of 4, where those scores were obtained from the 8 most recent contiguous Authentic Shots

My fourth secret criteria currently has a Satisfying score of 4 and an Unsatisfying score of 4.

 

Proposal: I Know What You Did Last Summer

Reached quorum, 4-0 with 1 DEF. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 02 Apr 2024 15:27:19 UTC

Add the following to “Audit”

If they have not already done so this dynasty, and they have previously had any private criteria created prior to March 26th 2024, then a seeker must make a blog post containing the history of every Private Criteria they had which was created before March 26th 2024 and its corresponding salt. A Seeker who needs to perform this action may not post any Snaps, Guesses or respond to Snaps until they perform this action.

 

Seems only fair to go ahead and reveal all past private criteria now that people need to start revealing theirs.

Proposal: Looping the Holes

Reached quorum 4 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan. Any criteria that do not meet this are now automatically blanked.

Adminned at 02 Apr 2024 08:57:46 UTC

Add the following to “Criteria”

Private criteria may only refer to the contents of the shot, and may not refer to things such as the date, other criteria, or the contents of other documents.

Kevan’s “Satisfies the text of my 54th secret key” approach is a nice trick, but as there is nothing stopping him from changing his 54th secret key it would allow people to easily change their criteria without actually changing their criteria which I think is against the spirit of the dynasty.

Also think we should simply be able to look at the picture and not have to worry about things like what other criteria were at the time or when the shot was posted.

Criteria Change

I’ve realised that both of my last two criteria setting actions were invalid at the time they were performed, so I’ve rolled them back to their last legal values. This invalidates my Satisfaction claims on the last four photos but, I think, nothing else. It doesn’t change my response to Josh’s guess.

I now change my private criteria, revealing the five that were still legally in place at the time of posting:

  1. “Satisfies the text of my 54th secret key. 511” 5693089c9529914653aaa9115331cf337c24014b3d2563e648909f14183e182d
  2. “Satisfies the text of my 2nd secret key. 953” 7f1dfa8a85adfdc8881d2b0b7ec2737ea9f77df234e2cd25bbf9375642973cf7
  3. “Satisfies the text of my 29th secret key. 451” 6fd8222ea5cfd0a4002856b38b680fdb50c904b6ced58f7baaafa29f7d5549ca
  4. “Satisfies the text of my 4th secret key. 912” 04cdc91b436b3cd04efda5f85d9568f052c3b64ab407fc6b1f9184b135799a0f
  5. “Satisfies the text of my 853rd secret key. 271” a3754e08a42b66a54dfa5f3882092e36259f2ee23c1f7247d55f3c78d2bbcb9e

(The “secret keys” are numbered private notes that I have jotted down elsewhere, which I refer to when I need to determine whether or not a criterion has been met.)

Changing my Private Criteria

Here are the old ones:

rdeas The photo contains colours - 00c402246ac6cf039ccff349e3c946b34aa4fee1cf015289a25edba97cdd67b6
plohj The photo is an authentic Shot - 3c5e899467470d324a619ab839dbff82cfdf3aff5983ad175bdd21113515b89b
sgyra The photo is at least 1px by 1px - 8ea2133a7d67ace322ba7e2eaece3013fa8271f2b5858469d64bc30038b4ae54
lftrs The photo was posted between midnight and 23:59 - 78fa9c19feffce7fce8c693cf6a82754d1120766f2c9f2cc5b06af314ff33c8b
frtkp The shot Satisfies all my other criteria - 8d8d3977eeb1df4327001c2a096a38fd48ee32398f9a504c46b56c31eb6de877

Story Post: GUESS: Kevan

I guess that one of Kevan’s Private Criteria is “Was taken outside”.

Story Post: The Prestigious Guild of Awarded Outstanding Compositors

I gain 1 Award, for Outstanding Composition.

Story Post: Snap 021: Recycle, kids

Story Post: Snap 020: Trees