Saturday, December 15, 2012

Proposal: Code of Conduct

Reached quorum. Final vote 9-0. Enacted by Klisz.

Adminned at 16 Dec 2012 19:33:37 UTC

Enact a new rule, “Honour Among Thieves, Or Something Like That”:

The Auspex shall evaluate all secret actions with good faith, and in particular should follow the following guidelines where unusual or exceptional conditions do not apply:
* The Auspex should not decline to allow an optional action except where the action is clearly an abuse of process (such as a scam related to the timing of multiple actions sent to the Auspex at once), beyond a simple scam or loophole in the rules.
* The Auspex should evaluate all secret actions in the order in which they are received. Where more than one Private Message is required for a single secret action, it should be considered to be received when the last message required is received.
* If confronted with a Private Message which contains multiple secret actions which are mutually exclusive (due to deleting the message, for instance), the Auspex should evaluate them in a top-down manner.
* The Auspex should evaluate all secret actions within 48 hours of receiving them, and should make a blog post if he anticipates that he will be unable to do so at any point.
* If the Auspex believes that a secret action cannot be performed due to a clerical error on the part of the Believer attempting to perform it (such as including two mutually exclusive actions in a single Private Message), the Auspex should inform the Believer of this fact.
* If the Auspex does not perform a secret action, including by choice or due to it being illegal, but not because it requires multiple Private Messages which have not all been received, the Auspex should delete the Private Message containing it and inform the Believer of the decision not to perform the action, but (except as otherwise indicated in these guidelines) should not inform the Believer the reason why it was not performed.

The Auspex may delete any of his Private Messages at any time.

Proposals authored by the Auspex whose effects would be limited to amending this rule do not count towards the Auspex’s usual limit of 2 proposals pending at once, and such proposals may be Enacted notwithstanding that they are not the oldest proposal in the queue (but all other requirements must still be met).

In the rule “Cults”, remove the text ” - within 48 hours of receiving the request -”.

Substitute for the following for the second paragraph of the rule “Secret Orders” except, if the proposal “Watch Your Back” was enacted, for the last sentence:

If the Auspex has a Private Message from the Leader of the Cult indicating that the Leader wishes to add, remove, or modify a Secret Requirement, and no such message from that Leader was received in the 48 hours prior, the Auspex may perform the desired change to the Secret Requirements of the Cult. If he does so, he shall delete that Private Messages and inform each Member of the Cult of the change to the Secret Requirements by Private Message.

The 48 hour rule could randomly screw people over if Kevan happens to not be around (I don’t know, it could happen). I think that this is a better approach; establishing expectations on Kevan. Most of them are common sense, and none of them are binding so he’s free to ignore them.

Comments

Sphinx:

15-12-2012 21:56:38 UTC

for

Josh: Observer he/they

15-12-2012 22:24:51 UTC

for

Kevan: he/him

15-12-2012 22:39:47 UTC

for “Clerical error” feels potentially scammable if used to sound out mysteries that might exist in the future (performing a repeated action at various locations to see which ones trigger an error response), but given that it’s all just things I “should” do rather than “must”, it should be okay.

Note that I have already turned down one Cult creation application for having a silly name, although in fairness I should have written a rule warning players that I might do that.

quirck: he/him

15-12-2012 23:06:44 UTC

for

Klisz:

15-12-2012 23:07:19 UTC

for

Cpt_Koen:

16-12-2012 01:30:00 UTC

imperial

RaichuKFM: she/her

16-12-2012 13:29:09 UTC

for

Argon14:

16-12-2012 18:33:08 UTC

for