Too slippery. The dynasty didn’t exist this time last year, won’t exist this time next year, so for our purposes we all know what it means.

Knowing what something is intended to mean is not good policy for Rules . . . it seems like each Dynasty, our Ruleset gets looser and looser.

I’ve been around for a while. Trust me, we’ve had bigger ambiguities than this slip through unexploited.

Also, I’m unclear as to why you’re repealling the rule rather than amending it.

  It can clearly and unambiguously be interpreted as “25th of September of any year”.

It doesn’t matter becuase the rule, if acurate, would mean that anyone unidling now would be infected, as it stands, without any clarification, it means that anyone that unidled, ever, would be infected.

CoV   per Amni.

That’s an extreme interpretation.

But… okay. 

in favour of a fix

per Amni

Haha.

So if this fails, Arthexis has a legit claim to victory, right?

ouch, to get a better-known gamestate than the one we have atm.

I love that I gave an explanation, and half the people vote FOR because of it and half vote AGAINST.

Here’s the deal.  If it were clarified, i.e. stated the year….everyone that unidled now would be infected.  Because it’s after the 25th of this year.

Without clarification, it means after a date which is every year, so it’s always after the date, so everyone that unidle now would be infected.

Ergo, the rule wording doesn’t make a difference because it should apply to everyone even if you put in the year restriction.

Oh, I see

S/k