Are we happy that “gamestate” will catch the imaginary floating “this accrual is not effective until” effects?

I think so, yes; if those aren’t gamestate then they aren’t anything and we have bigger problems than what they’re called.

True enough.

This is a nice compromise

The scope of this ought to be limited to the current dynasty; otherwise, adminning this involves vandalizing some old blog posts such as https://blognomic.com/archive/better_call_saul as part of the “the gamestate”.

Further, as written it also modifies blog comments, which means some admins can’t admin it without violating Fair Play.

and recommend a self-kill.

Good catch. Maybe we should consider a core rule exempting past dynasties from the gamestate by default, in some way or other.

This proposal has been amended by the enactment of Call for Judgment: If I do this quickly enough, no-one will notice

CoV

CoV again, as “The historical fact of the occurrence of a defined game action is itself considered to be gamestate” meaning we need to somehow change the wiki edit logs for the ruleset.

I’m less sure about that one - there’s a distinction between a historical fact of an occurrence and a log of that occurrence, and the ruleset does not explicitly regulate the creation or editing of edit logs. (Otherwise the server logs of access to the blog, for example, would be gamestate, which I don’t think they are.)