Wednesday, July 28, 2010

Proposal: Crime and Treason

12 hours. Quorum at 16-1. Enacting. 2 Arrows - no PP. - lilomar

This friendly IntSec guard would like to remind all Citizens that in order to maintain harmony, The Computer has decreed that Arrows should be placed before Vote Icons.

Adminned at 28 Jul 2010 14:14:43 UTC

Enact a new VIOLET Dynastic Rule called “Treason”:-

Each Citizen has a Treason score, tracked in the GNDT and starting at zero. A Citizen’s Treason may go negative, indicating that the Computer may have some temporary reason to foster the appearance of trust in that Citizen. Whenever a Citizen’s Clearance Level or Clone-Number changes, that Citizen’s Treason score is reset to zero.

Whenever the High-Programmer makes a blog post, he may assign any number of Commendations and Treason Points to Citizens (with a maximum of one Commendation and one Treason Point per Citizen), in the flavour text of that blog post. A Citizen who earns a Commendation has their Treason score reduced by one; the Citizen who earns a Treason Point has their Treason score increased by one - these modifications may be made by the High-Programmer within one hour of the post.

If a blog post is Treasonous and no Citizen has made an Accusation in its comments, any Citizen may make an Accusation by posting a comment to that post with the word “TREASON” in capital letters, and increasing the Treason score of the blog post’s author by one.

If a Citizen’s Treason score is -6 or lower, they may increase their Clearance Level by one level. If a Citizen’s Treason score is 6 or more, any Citizen with a higher Clearance Level may Terminate them by posting a blog post announcing such an action.

To the Rule “Clones”, add:-

Termination causes the Terminated Citizen to die in an efficient and hygienic manner.

In the Rule “Information Clearance”, replace “No Citizen may Author a Proposal that Creates, Modifies, or Repeals a Dynastic Rule with a clearance higher than their own.” with:-

If there is a way in which a pending Proposal could - if enacted - create, modify or repeal a Dynastic Rule whose Clearance Level is higher than the Clearance Level of the Citizen who submitted the Proposal, then that Proposal is Treasonous.

Defining and classifying the nature of the High-Programmer’s generous and thoughtful Commendations and Treason Points, spelling out their ultimate consequences, and clarifying for internal security purposes that the authoring of an out-of-clearance proposal is theoretically possible, yet clearly treasonous.

Comments

Josh: Observer he/they

28-07-2010 09:25:44 UTC

for

Purplebeard:

28-07-2010 09:43:50 UTC

for

Put:

28-07-2010 09:52:04 UTC

for

Keba:

28-07-2010 11:30:46 UTC

What does “If a blog post is Treasonous” mean?

Kevan: he/him

28-07-2010 11:41:33 UTC

The third section of this proposal defines how a Proposal can be Treasonous.

ais523:

28-07-2010 11:58:36 UTC

for Looks like this will become the main mechanic.

spikebrennan:

28-07-2010 12:23:38 UTC

for

Qwazukee:

28-07-2010 12:25:47 UTC

imperial But I wanted to sneak in a few high-level Proposals before that became treason… *sniffle*

lilomar:

28-07-2010 12:45:06 UTC

arrow  for

h2g2guy:

28-07-2010 13:48:16 UTC

for

90000:

28-07-2010 13:51:02 UTC

for

glopso:

28-07-2010 14:30:39 UTC

for  arrow

redtara: they/them

28-07-2010 14:52:29 UTC

for

Kyre:

28-07-2010 15:10:20 UTC

for  arrow

Put:

28-07-2010 15:18:09 UTC

I’m going to repeat this here and say that it’s probably best to put the arrow before the for vote so you wouldn’t confuse the IRC votecounter or something.

Galdyn:

28-07-2010 15:30:23 UTC

arrow  for

lilomar:

28-07-2010 15:31:22 UTC

Actually, for it to count for PP, it must be before the vote.

Hix:

28-07-2010 16:23:06 UTC

against turns me off even more than the arrows do.

Bucky:

28-07-2010 18:34:20 UTC

for .  I do not think that the second paragraph of “Treason” has any effect, due to flavor text not being part of a post.

Darknight: he/him

28-07-2010 19:09:15 UTC

for

Qwazukee:

28-07-2010 20:03:15 UTC

The Glossary says Bucky is correct.

lilomar:

28-07-2010 20:12:03 UTC

Flavor text is not part of a post, but a post does have flavor text, as I understand it.

Kevan: he/him

28-07-2010 20:15:23 UTC

No, fair call - the glossary says that “[flavour] text is not considered to be part of the post”, so there is no such thing as “the flavour text of that blog post” that this rule refers to. The rule works okay otherwise, though.