BlogNomic: The First Dynasty of Desertfrog

Brendan has completed the Atomic so this no longer has any effect. 

> “Brendan has completed the Atomic so this no longer has any effect.”

seems to clearly still be an effect to this CfJ given your making a play on C3, which if this CfJ were to pass would confirm still has my symbol (or at least had my symbol as of the time you moved on C3)

I’m not sure that it does confirm that; “if Brendan has otherwise completed that action since the posting of this CfJ, then carry out no further action as in this enactment” comes before anything is said about your move.

> Uphold Brendan’s reset action performed at 03:23, 20 February 2022, and assert that that action has been correctly completed

The action is performed when it is completed. So if it was performed at 03:23 then it was completed at 03:23.

Then this CfJ does nothing about the legality of your move, pass or fail; it retains the exact same legality on the basis that Brendan corrected his incorrect step of his otherwise completed atomic action.

Of course, you having then subsequently re-blanked the board obliviates the discussion either way.

It does, however, confirm that Brendan made his move at 03:23, 20 February 2022

If it passes, I can safely say my symbol is at C3. If it fails, we probably need another CfJ to resolve the issue.

Hence why I just blanked the board not worth the energy trying to throw up another CfJ

That doesn’t need confirming; the wiki logs confirm that Brendan made his move at 03:23, 20 February 2022. And you can’t say that your symbol is at C3 if this passes, as you put it there at 07:44 and then reset the board at 17:14, which sets each cell on the board to blank; this CfJ does nothing to affect that.

I feel like I’m missing something here…

Right. Board is reset, that way it doesn’t actually matter what symbol was in C3 when I reset the board. I can just be like “lol board is empty again” rather than needing to throw up another CfJ.

But then why even change your vote on this? None of it matters!

That is an excellent question Josh.

If none of it matters, why *did* you change your vote on this?

Ah, you’re just being antagonistic, okay.

How am I the one being antagonist when you’re accusing me of doing shit that a) I didn’t do and b) you did do?

I’m not accusing of anything, Clucky, I’m trying to work out what’s going on. The reason why you’re being antagonistic is the aggro response to what is, in this thread, mild questioning. I genuinely don’t know what I’m missing, so I’m asking questions to figure it out.

Josh: you’re just being antagonistic

Me: How am I the one being antagonist?

Josh: I’m not accusing of anything

lol

Ah, so by “doing shit that a) [you] didn’t do and b) did do” you’re referring to being antagonistic?

Oh, oops:

That is a square-brackets I after the b) in the comment above, for the record.

No. I’m referring to changing votes on this CfJ

I did not change my vote on this CfJ. Yet you said you said “why even change your vote on this?”. Meanwhile, you *did* change your vote on this.

So shouldn’t you be asking yourself why you changed your vote? And aren’t you implying that you had something meaningful to gain by changing your vote (otherwise why change it)?

Oh, I think it’s good practice to vote against votable matters that are apparently inert, just in case.

I am confused, though, as you seem to be bipping around; when you say I’m “accusing [you] of doing shit”, which thing are you referring to, exactly?  Because I didn’t really ‘accuse’ you of changing your vote; I assumed that you had without checking, for which, again, I apologise, but I don’t think it came with any real heat or venom, so I’m surprised that it’s provoked this intense of a reaction from you.

But I don’t see that this conversation is going anywhere useful, so I suppose I’ll close it on the grounds that it “specifies neither changes to the Gamestate or Ruleset nor corrections to any gamestate-tracking entities,” under the status quo.