BlogNomic: The First Dynasty of Desertfrog

It is now clear to me that pie-is-square is trolling and doesn’t actually care much about this dynasty. Pie-is-square, if you actually do care, please stop. Hix/Elias/anyone else who has been here longer than I have, has anything like this happened before? And if so, what did you do about it?

In my 13 months here, I haven’t really seen anything like this.

There are many ways to go about this, however. What do you think?

how ironic that pie-is-square posted this.

I don’t think that there has ever been a troll in BlogNomic, at least not since Anthony the Mad, who was a couple of months before my time. The only way to deal with one, ironically, is to pass a proposal expelling them.

That’s not the only way.  There’s no reason the admins, who have a responsibility to keep the game running, can’t deal with the troll outright (although there should be a consensus among admins, or very obvious evidence such as advertising spam).  If this affects the Gamestate somehow (and it probably would), the specifics of those effects can still be determined in-game via Proposal or CfJ if anyone feels it is necessary.

“James Mullard” was a troll back in the Monastic Murder Mystery Dynasty.  E made a few usesless regular posts, and repeatedly messed up the GNDT.  Then, after we started complaining, e made a useless DoV throwing the game into Hiatus.  Then, I believe, e anonymously and uselessly accused emself of trolling.  Ultimately, we CfJ’d em into idleness.  I won’t ever be honoring any requests to unidle em.

That’s all well and good, but it’s not strictly speaking legal; the rulestate is pretty clear on the fact that the Gamestate cannot be altered except as defined by the Rulestate, which carries no provision for the expulsion of problematic players. While I accept that the precedent is there for a unilateral expulsion - and, incidentally, I am aware that the coup against Mad Anthony was technically illegal as well - it does seem to me slightly odd that you’d even bother with the CfJ. Once you’ve resolved to get rid of a player by fiat, after all, you might as well not bother pretending that you’re doing so as a game action. I’m not saying that that’s a bad thing, necessarily, but there is some value to doing things by the book; and if you want to be legal about it, then yes, strictly speaking, a player can only be removed by proposal, as CfJs can only be used to arbitrate a dispute in existing laws.

In any case, I remain idle, and only really poked my nose in because this is a constitutionally interesting issue.

I agree, things should be done “by the book” whenever possible.  In an emergency, though, the admins might just have to do something technically “illegal” and hope for in-game retroactive justification.

Oh, and it’s not really the case the “CfJs can only be used to arbitrate a dispute in existing laws” anymore.  A player only needs to believe that an aspect of the game needs urgent attention; functionally, there’s no difference in what a CfJ or Proposal can do to the Gamestate.  CfJs are routinely used for such important issues, since they do not get clogged up in a queue, nor is the voting shut down by a Hiatus.

If pie seems to care about the dynasty and starts posting useful proposals, then fine. If e keeps being a troll, then I myself will take responsibility for a proposal expelling em.

Theres no reason why it cant be a proposal in this case, lets keep things legal if we can.

This is fascinating.  I missed the first troll apparently (and Anthony was no troll, just crazy).

*popcorn*

Josh,

CfV has been changed a bit to care about some issues that popped up some time ago, relative to illegal DoV’s clogging the game.

In the event, Bucky has enlightened us, in a rather unpopular manner, about how one could f**k the game using DoV’s.

Now, CfJ’s can be used for almost anything.