Saturday, June 09, 2012

Call for Judgment: A loopholes’s a loopholes no matter how unfair

Has been open for more than 48 hours, and cannot be passed. Josh

Adminned at 11 Jun 2012 09:43:39 UTC

Whereas:

I used a loophole in the fact that wikipages do not get reset to use the contents of the toybox wikipage from dynasty 85 to win the dynasty. Some people didn’t take too kindly to this and reverted my unblocking.

From rule 2.8 Protected documents

Any non-Ruleset document on the Blognomic wiki that would qualify as gamestate under the final Ruleset of a dynasty before dynasty 100 may not be modified except by Proposal or CfJ. If a rule from a past Dynasty would reference or modify such a document, it instead references or modifies the subpage of that document found by adding “/dynasty100” to the end of its URL. Such a subpage is a Surrogate Wiki Page. Surrogate Wiki Pages are considered gamestate and do not have their own Surrogate Wiki Pages. If a wiki page contains non-Ruleset gamestate and does not have a Surrogate Wiki Page, any Time Monk may create its Surrogate Wiki Page with the same content.

Same content implies the wikipage is not reset.

Ruleset 86 says nothing about a Mini Figures toybox getting reset when they join the dynasty. It does say

A mini figure may buy a brick by reducing their funds by the value of the brick that they wish to purchase. There is a wiki page entitled Toybox. The Toybox page is split into two section for each Mini Figure - The Bucket and The Workbench. The bricks owned by each Mini Figure are tracked in the Bucket section of the Toybox page.

and

Mini Figures may combine three or more of their bricks to form a Construction. Bricks that have been used to form a construction are removed from the Bucket section of the Toybox page and the construction is added to the Workbench section of the same page.

So the section marked “Clucky” still applies to me, my dung pile still exists, and I can still win. Josh’s assertion that I should use a “Clucky II” section is completely unfounded because my name isn’t Clucky II. So yes, by clean slate I enter dynasty 85 as a new player, I happen to enter as a new player who already had a toybox filled out for him.

Therefore:

Clucky may unblock Dynasty 85. If a Time Monk other than Clucky has already unblocked Dynasty 85, that action is reversed before Clucky unblocks it. If Clucky has not unblocked Dynasty 85 within 24 hours of this passing, any other Time Monk may unblock Dynasty 85 for Clucky on his behalf.

Stopping anyone from winning the dynasty out from under me as I should’ve already won. If Josh’s proposal passes, I’ll want to be able to choose my Chakra, but I also shouldn’t be able to wait however long I want and then once I get six Chakra be like “hey guys remember this? bam! Unblocking dynasty 85”.

Also I totally agree this is unfair to new players and should be fixed. But loopholes are loopholes

Comments

Spice:

09-06-2012 17:12:13 UTC

against Per “Clean Slate”.

Clucky: he/him

09-06-2012 17:28:50 UTC

The whole point is that clean slate doesn’t reset wikipages. You can just claim “there is a rule called clean slate that is intended to give everyone a clean slate, therefore everyone gets a clean slate”. The rule was poorly written and I took advantage of it.

moonroof:

09-06-2012 17:59:47 UTC

against Clean Slate is poorly written and ambiguous, and needs to be firmed up. But, as it stands right now, I am interpreting “previous accomplishments” to encompass any player-specific data on a wiki page.

Clucky: he/him

09-06-2012 19:08:44 UTC

The wikipage has the same content. It is not a “previous accomplishment”. A “previous accomplishment” would be something like “I sold this dungpile and the rule said whoever sells a giant dung pile wins, so I win”. This is just reading off a piece of gamestate.

In the past, we’ve had issues with people editing a wikipage before it becomes gamestate and abusing it that way, which is now we clear wikipages before creating them. This is no different. The rule was just poorly worded.

Josh: Observer he/they

09-06-2012 19:57:42 UTC

against I basically just don’t agree with your interpretation.

Clucky: he/him

09-06-2012 20:10:30 UTC

What is there to not agree with? The section of the toybox under my name belongs to me. It was prefilled out for me. It wasn’t a ‘previous achievement’. Write better rules, don’t retroactively changes the rules just because you failed at writing them the first time.

Josh: Observer he/they

09-06-2012 20:13:56 UTC

I didn’twrite this rule, although your attempt at charm is noted.

Clucky: he/him

09-06-2012 20:21:47 UTC

That statement was directed at the nomic as a whole, not you in general. No one has provided any explanation of how the “Clucky” section of the Toybox can refer to anyone but me other than “the spirit of clean state was supposed to stop this”

Josh: Observer he/they

09-06-2012 20:24:34 UTC

If two players join the game with the same (or typographically identical) name then this would result in the same problem. Fortunately the Toybox page is split into sections by player but does not necessarily need to strictly use those players’ names as their title headings, so title headings in the toybox page don’t strictly need to refer to players by name.

Clucky: he/him

09-06-2012 20:38:24 UTC

EE wouldn’t two players with the same name.

I still don’t get how that section could belong to a different clucky. The way clean slate is worded, the clucky from dynasty 86 is not a different player than the one now, his accomplishes just don’t count. The toybox doesn’t track “accomplishes” though, its just a piece of gamestate with a section belonging to clucky, i.e. me.

Josh: Observer he/they

09-06-2012 20:58:17 UTC

“EE wouldn’t allow” is not a ruleset argument.

The section marked Clucky is not required to refer to anyone specifically. Clucky could be an unrelated signifier. The ruleset does not require that section to belong to you just because it bears your name.

Sloppily worded rules, loopholes being unfair, etc etc

Clucky: he/him

09-06-2012 21:14:32 UTC

So what would have stopped someone else that dynasty from just being like “oh, clucky’s section is actually mine. yay” the your section belongs to you seems fairly obvious to me. And because I’m the same Clucky, it still belongs to me.

Spice:

09-06-2012 21:24:31 UTC

But you’re entering that Dynasty as a new player, so how can you be the same Clucky?

Clucky: he/him

09-06-2012 22:39:37 UTC

I’m entering as a new player, just as a special new player that already had an entry in the gamestate document. Nothing says “new players entries get cleared when they join”.

scshunt:

10-06-2012 00:48:46 UTC

for after careful consideration as the other result makes no sense.

Soviet Brendon:

10-06-2012 01:15:01 UTC

for

Klisz:

10-06-2012 01:21:48 UTC

for

Bucky:

10-06-2012 17:14:03 UTC

for .  This was the intended interpretation of the surrogate wiki pages.

Bucky:

10-06-2012 17:18:32 UTC

Uh, CoV against .  This would work as described, except that you forgot to create the Surrogate Wiki Page so it’s still blank.

Josh: Observer he/they

10-06-2012 17:19:54 UTC

Crap, I completely forgot about surrogate wiki pages. ” If a rule from a past Dynasty would reference or modify such a document, it instead references or modifies the subpage of that document found by adding “/dynasty100” to the end of its URL.”

Rodney:

10-06-2012 17:59:59 UTC

for

Kevan: he/him

11-06-2012 09:17:58 UTC

against Per Bucky.

Purplebeard:

11-06-2012 10:11:02 UTC

against

Clucky: he/him

11-06-2012 15:59:01 UTC

So you want to delay everything on a technicality? The /dynasty100 page is exactly the same, no changes have happened to it. My understanding is it only needed to be created if changes were to happen.

Josh: Observer he/they

11-06-2012 16:21:59 UTC

Actually Clucky there’s nothing to say that Surrogate pages have the same content as the originals.

Josh: Observer he/they

11-06-2012 16:39:55 UTC

Apologies, I misread that. Nevermind.