Wednesday, October 19, 2011

Call for Judgment: Drawing the Line Somewhere

failed by CfJ “http://blognomic.com/archive/compromise_mark_4_again” -Bucky
unfailed by coppro - the enactment was illegal

Timed out 14 votes to 7. Enacted by Kevan. It’s now legal to post proposals again, and the ones currently in the queue were legal. Also, all the other gamestate is what it would have been had it received the same stimuli under this wording. *waves fingers*

Adminned at 21 Oct 2011 06:23:29 UTC

The issue remains that we cannot make Proposals, DoVs or Ascension Addresses, because they would be considered Works of Art, and would be multiple types of Official Post (and thus illegal) as a result. In addition, every game action taken since the first Proposal has had no effect, because none of the subsequent Proposals were legal. I think this needs urgent attention.

To resolve this, in the rule “Works of Art”, replace “Whenever an Artist posts an entry, that entry is considered a Work of Art.” with:-

Whenever an Artist posts a blog entry which is not a Proposal, Call for Judgment, Declaration of Victory or Ascension Address, that entry is considered a Work of Art.

And update the gamestate such that it is in the state it would have been had the above replacement been made immediately after the “Works of Art” rule was enacted.

I suspect this is the easiest and least controversial way to get the game up and running again. We still need to improve the wording of official post regulation, but we can do that afterwards.

Comments

ais523:

10-19-2011 14:44:03 UTC

for

southpointingchariot:

10-19-2011 15:20:35 UTC

for

bateleur:

10-19-2011 16:20:05 UTC

for

scshunt:

10-19-2011 16:58:23 UTC

against as this doesn’t solve the Faux Pas.

scshunt:

10-19-2011 17:02:59 UTC

Wait, yes it does, due to the gamestate reset clause. Missed that.  for

Soviet Brendon:

10-19-2011 17:21:23 UTC

against

I might have voted differntly on some proposals had this been the case from the start. I believe we need to vote again on all proposals since the ‘work of art’ proposal passed.

Soviet Brendon:

10-19-2011 17:23:11 UTC

for  cov just to get the game going again. But i stand by my point

bateleur:

10-19-2011 17:24:10 UTC

Erm… it has been the case from the start. This proposal is just removing the doubt cast on the validity of proposals by ais523’s observations.

Unless you’re perhaps trying to claim you spotted that whole issue before ais523 did and elected to say nothing?

Soviet Brendon:

10-19-2011 17:33:50 UTC

Bateleur i am not saying i did. Im a believer of the idea that if you change one little thing everything else changes. So if i read the new line in the first place and not the old line i might have won the lottery last night.

Bucky:

10-19-2011 19:17:07 UTC

for

omd:

10-19-2011 22:36:31 UTC

against

Darknight:

10-20-2011 04:23:22 UTC

for

scshunt:

10-20-2011 05:37:04 UTC

wait no this is still borken against

Kevan:

10-20-2011 07:07:39 UTC

[coppro] Care to explain why?

Soviet Brendon:

10-20-2011 08:30:51 UTC

against cov

Prince Anduril:

10-20-2011 12:50:54 UTC

against

Kevan:

10-20-2011 14:18:33 UTC

If you’re collaborating on somebody’s scam that needs this fix delayed, then fair enough, but if there’s a reason why people think this doesn’t fix the problems that are stopping us playing the game right now, it’d be good to know what they think is missing, so that we can address it.

Prince Anduril:

10-20-2011 15:24:01 UTC

CoV to imperial I guess.

My reason for voting differently before was because I feel that we should have something along the lines of “Work of Art isn’t a post category”.

Then we don’t have any of the problems, but still get to vote good proposals up to give acclaim. It seems a shame to remove that aspect of the game without a good reason. It may be that this will still leave us in an illegal gamestate for reasons I can’t quite see yet though, in which case, I think this is the best alternative solution.

Kevan:

10-20-2011 15:53:33 UTC

Fair point, and I’ll be happy to propose such an amendment if this passes and lets us get back to actually making proposals. “Being able to make proposals but not being able to arrow them” seems a step up from “not being able to make proposals”, at least.

Your DEFERENTIAL vote is ignored (and you’re still counted as voting against), by the way - you can only cast a vote of DEF “if the Votable Matter is a Proposal”, so this isn’t a way to abstain on CfJs.

bateleur:

10-20-2011 15:57:47 UTC

...and in any case, since I am the Critic and have already voted for, changing it to a For vote will have the desired effect. :-)

Prince Anduril:

10-20-2011 19:10:40 UTC

Of right.  for  then

Seventy-Fifth Trombone:

10-20-2011 23:53:11 UTC

for

Ienpw III:

10-20-2011 23:55:21 UTC

for

Pavitra:

10-21-2011 00:00:10 UTC

for

Shadowclaw:

10-21-2011 00:01:24 UTC

for

Ornithopter:

10-21-2011 00:44:34 UTC

for

digibomber:

10-21-2011 01:06:16 UTC

for

Brendan:

10-21-2011 03:10:13 UTC

for

Roujo:

10-21-2011 04:50:16 UTC

for

flurie:

10-21-2011 06:05:43 UTC

for

scshunt:

10-21-2011 06:35:23 UTC

against again because enacting this would retroactively make ais’ scam succeed, and leave us in a worse state than at present.

zuff:

10-21-2011 09:15:56 UTC

against per coppro

ais523:

10-21-2011 09:16:29 UTC

against just in case, although Kevan and comex have convinced me that it wouldn’t.

Qwazukee:

10-21-2011 09:31:57 UTC

for

Wooble:

10-21-2011 11:18:30 UTC

against

Prince Anduril:

10-21-2011 13:06:13 UTC

against CoV then