Monday, August 27, 2018

Call for Judgment: bringing it back

Unpopular, 0-5. Failed by pokes.

Adminned at 27 Aug 2018 23:17:01 UTC

Append to “Tags”

Calls For Judgment default to having the tags [Core], [Appendix] and [Victory].

Seems rather odd to have an emergency form for when “an aspect of the game needs urgent attention” that could be present in any portion of the gamestate including all sections of the ruleset, yet the author still needs to manually add tags to them.
Tags were added to bring the voter’s attention to the fact that an important section of the ruleset was being changed. CfJs are in a separate category so they should bring this attention already.
CfJ since we’re in Hiatus



08-27-2018 18:32:57 UTC


CfJ’s don’t necessarily make big rule set changes. They often make rather small tweaks to the game state. I like being able to see if a votable matter is making big changes or not.


08-27-2018 18:34:04 UTC

I think it’d be a great mistake to make [Core] automatic, here. The [Core] tag is as much to prevent the accidental overwriting of Core rules, as anything. It’s reassuring to know that if a CfJ lacks the Core tag, we don’t need to scrutinise it’s possible effect on the Core ruleset.

I’d say the same goes to a lesser extent for [Victory] tags. There’d still be room for sly scams along the lines of “reapply all changes of type X to the gamestate” that looked like simple gamestate cleanups but unintuitively snagged and reused the historical fact that some player or other had once achieved victory.



08-27-2018 19:57:36 UTC



08-27-2018 21:52:25 UTC



08-27-2018 23:11:43 UTC