Saturday, April 24, 2010

Call for Judgment: Blocking all similar scams

Passes, 11-0. This CfJ “causes all open blog posts older than this… to cease to be open” - there isn’t really a way of marking that, so consider all posts older than this one to be explicitly closed.

Aside: “fail all proposals”. If I could be bothered I would assert that this means that I should fail every proposal ever posted, even the ones that have already passed. Josh

Adminned at 26 Apr 2010 01:46:06 UTC

Fail all proposals, and cause all open blog posts older than this CFJ to cease to be open.

In rule 1.5 “Enactment”, replace

It has been open for voting for at least 48 hours, it has more than 1 valid vote, more than half of its votes are FOR, and it has not been vetoed or self-killed.


It has been open for voting for at least 48 hours, it has continuously been a proposal for that time, it has more than 1 valid vote, more than half of its votes are FOR, and it has not been vetoed or self-killed.

In rule 1.7 “Gamestate Tracking”, after

If no Colonist has commented on it, an official post may be altered or removed by its author; otherwise this can only be done as allowed by the Ruleset.


However, despite this, official posts can never be changed from one category to another, or changed to be a different sort of official post, if they have been posted for more than fifteen minutes.

The first paragraph closes down anyone trying a repeat of the same scam right now (if they can find a really old post, say from another dynasty, which is technically still open for voting); the second and third each independently prevent a similar scam happening due to a future dynastic rule slipup, although both are probably positive fixes.



24-04-2010 18:22:44 UTC

I notice that Clucky just edited an unidling post to be unambiguously open for voting (<>), which is rather ingenious (it wasn’t before, but is now); I’ve just commented in order to prevent him editing it into a proposal that actually does something.

redtara: they/them

24-04-2010 18:26:18 UTC



24-04-2010 18:26:21 UTC

Also, note that failing all proposals doesn’t require any actual admin work; we can still leave old passed proposals with the “enacted” icon, because they were. Failing a proposal doesn’t cause it to retroactively cease to be enacted, after all; just to cease to be pending.


24-04-2010 18:29:04 UTC



24-04-2010 18:29:17 UTC


Josh: he/they

24-04-2010 18:42:01 UTC

for , but I still think that DoV was decidedly shady, and enacting it at the first possible moment when it was still clearly controversial was somewhat less than sporting.


24-04-2010 18:47:33 UTC

for explicit author FOR.

Kevan: City he/him

24-04-2010 19:11:46 UTC

for And yes, we clearly need to take a look at that 12-hour shortcut on DoV enactment - I completely missed all this, being offline during the daytime on Saturday.


24-04-2010 19:13:25 UTC



24-04-2010 20:04:15 UTC


Darknight: he/him

24-04-2010 21:50:21 UTC



24-04-2010 22:02:53 UTC

Idle against. I say that it would be better to say that the catergory of official posts cannot be changed after it as been open for 5 or more minutes or commented on.


24-04-2010 22:09:03 UTC

@Wak: it does already say that (see the last change…)


24-04-2010 23:53:33 UTC


Roujo: he/him

25-04-2010 14:20:11 UTC