Wednesday, January 29, 2020

Proposal: Bolting the Amnestic Airlock

Reached quorum 6 votes to 2. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 30 Jan 2020 09:33:37 UTC

In the rule “Containment”, replace “A Researcher may not pick up an Artefact in the Containment Facility, unless they are carrying the Security Pass.” with:-

An Individual may not pick up an Artefact in the Containment Facility, unless they are carrying the Security Pass.

Closing a loophole used by Card last night: entering the Facility as a Researcher, then using the Tiepin to become a Collector, who would not be bound by the rule about removing Artefacts from containment.

Although part of this heist may have failed, as Card’s edit of ‘becoming a collector’ neglected to include an actual change to the Pursuit column, meaning that they were still technically a Researcher when taking the Gin moments later. But this possibly needs no action, as they could take it again before this fix enacted - I guess if Card makes a comment before a secure-access Researcher can, it’s fair enough to say they’re alert enough to repeat the theft.

posted by Kevan at 29 Jan 2020 19:51:00 UTC Comments (9)

Comments

Darknight: he/him

29-01-2020 20:26:39 UTC

for

Madrid:

29-01-2020 20:32:46 UTC

against

Josh: Observer he/they

29-01-2020 20:50:56 UTC

for

Brendan: he/him

29-01-2020 21:17:10 UTC

for

Lulu: she/her

29-01-2020 21:47:46 UTC

for

card:

29-01-2020 22:42:39 UTC

for I suppose this part makes sense thematically.
I could have taken an extra edit to make it more clear but it was a difference of a second, not sure that it matters since nobody intervened for hours

Madrid:

29-01-2020 23:48:49 UTC

You actually dont have to because you can do multiple actions (in sequence, because actions cant be formally simultaneous) in one edit. In fact you could have just editted in the final result if you wanted to.

card:

30-01-2020 00:25:42 UTC

I felt like doing all this in one or give edits would push the limits of what would be acceptable. At any rate I believe that I’m still covered in this instance by the gamestate tracking rule.
“The wiki merely represents the Gamestate tracked there, and is not the same thing. In the event that the Gamestate and its representations are different, any Individual may correct the representations to comply with the Gamestate.”
It’s quite obvious that I changed my pursuit with the comment in the edit Kevan pointed out. However I only corrected the place where it was tracked in the next edit to that page https://wiki.blognomic.com/index.php?title=Individuals&diff=next&oldid=8644

Kevan: he/him

30-01-2020 09:14:48 UTC

Multiple actions in a single edit are encouraged by the ruleset (“One wiki update may contain one or more alterations, or one alteration may be split over multiple updates, as long as it is clear what is happening and the alterations are otherwise legal.”) - that doesn’t quite work when two different pages need to be edited to apply all the actions, but the spirit is there.

The clause you’re quoting about wiki content is to establish that if someone alters the wiki page in error (or blanks it), the gamestate doesn’t change to match. The more relevant bit here is that “For gamestate which is tracked in a specific place (such as a wiki page), any alteration of that gamestate as a result of an Individual’s action is (and can only be) applied by editing that data in that place.” - if you want to change Collector to Researcher, you can only do that by editing the wiki page to that effect. If it was acceptable to make an edit summary of “I become a Researcher” or “I do some stuff” without updating the wiki content, we’d have no idea what was going on.

Cuddlebeam’s point about just editing the final result isn’t quite true - if you took legal actions along the way, if you burned before pillaging and then realisd your mistake, you don’t always have the option to undo and replace them to put everything right. But it looks like you could have gone back and grabbed the Gin again, at the cost of 2 more Soul Damage.