Saturday, December 09, 2023

Call for Judgment: [Core] [Appendix] The Act of Enacting

Timed out 3 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 11 Dec 2023 20:38:17 UTC

In “Core Rules”, in the subrule “Resolution of Proposals”, replace the text “immediately applied in full; the Admin Enacting it shall update the Gamestate and Ruleset, and correct any gamestate-tracking entities, as specified in the Proposal.” with this text:

applied by treating the text in the Proposal as a series of steps starting from the beginning of that Proposal’s text and performing each step until reaching the end of that Proposal’s text, except that if the Admin Enacting it reaches a step which cannot be applied immediately (e.g. “two days after this Votable Matter enacts, Heir A gains 1 point”) or at all (e.g. applying to a rule which does not exist), that step is ignored for the purposes of Enactment; the Admin Enacting the Proposal shall update the Gamestate and Ruleset, and correct any gamestate-tracking entities, as specified in each step that was performed.

In “Appendix”, in the subrule “Rules and Votable Matters”, remove the text “If the Admin enacting a Votable Matter reaches a step which cannot be applied immediately (e.g. “two days after this Votable Matter enacts, Heir A gains 1 point”), that step is ignored for the purposes of enactment.”

Uphold the combination of actions performed on the ruleset and resulting in the ruleset at the revision timestamp of 20:20, December 9, 2023‎ UTC as being the result of valid enactments of Proposals and CfJs.

Trying to address Josh’s point about the “immediately applied in full” phrase from the Discord discussion in #blognomic-general. Other points were raised as well, but I’m focusing only on this part. I’m moving the clarification of skipping un-enactable steps from the Appendix to Core because I think it’s important enough that the instructions should be side-by-side rather than separated at long distances from each other in the ruleset.

Comments

JonathanDark: he/him

09-12-2023 21:27:17 UTC

Modified after some feedback in Discord. Please check for wording.

Kevan: City he/him

09-12-2023 22:40:32 UTC

Would note that upholding is only defined as a thing that can be done to actions, not to rulesets.

JonathanDark: he/him

09-12-2023 22:46:29 UTC

Changed it to uphold the actions that resulted in the current ruleset and specified the exact date and time per Josh in Discord comment. Also specified “combination of actions” to account for edits that were then later reverted, so as not to treat the reverted edits as upheld, but rather the combination of edit and reversion of edit.

SingularByte: he/him

10-12-2023 09:04:18 UTC

This looks reasonable to me.  for

Kevan: City he/him

10-12-2023 10:19:22 UTC

for

Desertfrog:

11-12-2023 07:23:43 UTC

for