Thursday, February 20, 2020

Proposal: [Appendix] Poacher turned gamekeeper

Self killed. Dk

Adminned at 20 Feb 2020 15:45:05 UTC

Change the text of the appendix rule Rules and Proposals from “If a wiki page becomes gamestate as a result of a Proposal enacting, that page shall – unless otherwise specified – be reverted to whatever state it was in at the time of that Proposal’s submission (and if the page did not exist at that time, it shall be blanked)” to “Any page on the BlogNomic wiki that is linked to or cited in a pending votable matter is gamestate, although it should be considered to have no properties or content for the purposes of all other existing rules.”

Comments

Cuddlebeam:

02-20-2020 10:02:24 UTC

This has way broader effects than I think is intended.

You can make a Pending Votable matter at any moment, and link or cite something in it.

Basically, you can turn any wikipage into formal, game-legal Gamestate at any time. I’m not too sure how comfortable I am with that.

Josh: LOUIS XIV HE/HIM

02-20-2020 10:18:19 UTC

It’s very hard to see how that could be weaponised.

Josh: LOUIS XIV HE/HIM

02-20-2020 10:19:47 UTC

Hm, actually, not that hard. Hang on.

Josh: LOUIS XIV HE/HIM

02-20-2020 10:21:30 UTC

Better?

Cuddlebeam:

02-20-2020 13:02:39 UTC

This would actually introduce a paradox into the Ruleset which it has no way to resolve (because §Prioritisation doesn’t cover it).

The definition of Gamestate itself is not part of the §Rules and Proposals rule this would be in. And the definition (in §Keywords) says that Gamestate is “Any information which the Ruleset regulates the alteration of.”, which the linked wikipages would qualify for, because they would be regulated now.

But then, §Rules and Proposals it would say that for the purposes of all other rules, it isn’t Gamestate.

So, for a Dynastic Rule, what is it? Is it Gamestate via Keywords? Is it not because Rules and Proposals says it isn’t?

§Prioritisation doesn’t cover Appendix Rules for cases like this.

Tantusar: HE/THEY

02-20-2020 13:03:36 UTC

against We can do better. Probably by just calling the entire page flavour text.

Cuddlebeam:

02-20-2020 13:05:52 UTC

against (Also, no, they wouldn’t have the “same scope”, because one of them is for solely the linked pages, and the other is for stuff in general)

Josh: LOUIS XIV HE/HIM

02-20-2020 13:38:44 UTC

@Cuddlebeam - how is “not having properties or content” for the purposes of Keywords the same as not being gamestate?

I don’t see the problem - probably I’m just being dense.

Cuddlebeam:

02-20-2020 13:59:30 UTC

Sorry, I missed that gap in my explanation.

Pages are gamestate or not gamestate. Being gamestate or not is a property of things.

Cuddlebeam:

02-20-2020 14:14:40 UTC

(Im getting a bit confused now too actually lol)

Josh: LOUIS XIV HE/HIM

02-20-2020 15:05:39 UTC

Oh, yeah, that’s not a bad argument.

against Eh, someone else can have a go