Unpopular, 0-5 with reduced quorum due to Puzzler voting DEF. Failed by JonathanDark.
Adminned at 23 Jul 2025 19:46:50 UTC
In the rule “Scoring”, add a subrule named “Corrections” with the following text:
If the Puzzler has not done so since the begnning of this dynasty, at their earliest convenience, the Puzzler should perform Corrections, which is an atomic action where, for each Closed Backronym that was resolved on or after 23 Jun 2025 13:53:20, the following steps are performed for that Backronym:
* Record that Backronym and its author
* For each word in the title of that Backronym that includes all the letters of a Buzzword (where any positive number of instances of that letter count as being included), record a gain of 1 Point for that author
* Compare the Point gain calculated in the original Resolving of that Backronym due to Buzzword letter matching to the Point gain recorded from the step above. If there is a difference, record the difference in Point gain.As soon as possible after the Puzzler has completed Corrections, they should make a Story Post with the title “Points Corrections” and in the body, for each Closed Backronym where a non-zero difference in Point gain was recorded during Corrections, add text to the body with the title of that Backronym, it’s author, and the difference in Point gain.
23 Jun 2025 13:53:20 was when the rule changes were enacted to set the Point gain for including all of the letters of a Buzzword at 1, so that’s the point at which it would start to matter. I’m adding this as a rule so that the enacting admin of this CfJ doesn’t have to be me, and then the rule itself compels me to make the recalculations.
Once we have an official list of all of the changes in Points, we can then decide what to do next. I intend to hold off on resolving any further Backronyms until we resolve this one way or another.
I’d say, play it as it lies.
Clucky: he/him
I’m kinda torn on this
There are really two ways this could play out:
1) There is no significant change to points that’ll effect the final standings. No harm no foul
2) We do note a reasonably significant change in points. People then need to decide on how to proceed in a vote that basically amounts to who will win. This’ll likely result in hard feelings by someone
To that end, I think I still feel what I said in the other thread—while I personally interpreted the rules differently from how JD ran them, I also didn’t really heavily invest much time in the buzzword system. I think for anyone who did, the wording is ambiguous enough the proper think to do would’ve been to clarify with JonathanDark much earlier. Doing it now just feels far too late