Monday, March 02, 2020

Call for Judgment: Band-Aid for the Hole in the Band-Aid

Popular 7-0. Enacted by Brendan.

Adminned at 03 Mar 2020 14:41:29 UTC

For each Proposal that was enacted during this Dynasty before this Call for Judgment was published, if the status of its implied or explicit Tags would have rendered that Proposal Unstable, accept it as legally enacted anyway.

The last line of “Oh. Oh that’s a problem actually” refers to Passed Proposals, which is a) a meaningless term per the ruleset and b) a loophole I should have driven a truck through, had I been less sleepy.

Comments

Josh: Observer he/they

02-03-2020 15:26:35 UTC

Isn’t this exploitable in the same way? Can’t I just post a proposal saying “Add Josh has achieved victory” to the para ruleset, note it as unstable, enact it illegally, and then pass this CfJ to retroactively clense it?

Josh: Observer he/they

02-03-2020 15:27:28 UTC

(Commenting rather than exploiting as this scam has already been made public on Slack, so I’m not confident that I can exploit it before anyone else.)

Brendan: he/him

02-03-2020 15:56:40 UTC

“Enacted during this Dynasty before this Call for Judgment was published.” This Call for Judgment was published at 14:42 UTC on March 02 2020. I don’t think you can enact anything before then, illegally or otherwise.

Josh: Observer he/they

02-03-2020 16:01:44 UTC

Ah, yes, very good.  for

naught:

02-03-2020 16:09:52 UTC

for

Madrid:

02-03-2020 16:34:21 UTC

An illegal Enactment is a non-Enactment, there is no scam in that.  for

Darknight: he/him

02-03-2020 18:10:31 UTC

for

The Duke of Waltham: he/him

02-03-2020 19:30:45 UTC

for

Farsight:

03-03-2020 13:20:28 UTC

for