Saturday, April 24, 2010

Dynasty not over

Despite the BS DoV rallying 5 for votes, it fails as Roujo’s Def serves to cancel out his for vote, though it is not counted as a Def. The DEF symbol is a voting icon, and thus counts as Roujo’s latest vote, meaning that he cast no vote, making it 5-5 and failing. Good game.



24-04-2010 22:04:37 UTC

Nothing says that DEF cancels out FOR, unless it’s a proposal and you’re the Emperor.


24-04-2010 22:05:57 UTC

You are wrong: please read the rules on DoVs: “Every Colonist may respond to an active DoV saying whether or not he believes the poster has achieved victory in the current Dynasty (using the FOR and AGAINST icons).” The voting rules are different from the normal ones, and say nothing about DEF icons cancelling out votes, like the rules for voting on proposals do.


24-04-2010 22:08:27 UTC

However, we passed a rule about proposals saying that a colonist’s vote is the last voting icon which he cast. This does not, however, apply to DoV’s. So unless we accept that rule, which would mean that the voting icon DEF replaces the voting icon FOR, or No vote replaces for vote, than DC’s votes ALL counted, making it pass at, like, 50 for to 6 against.


24-04-2010 22:12:08 UTC

We should clarify it; the core rules define voting for proposals, CFJs, and DoVs separately (until recently, voting while a DoV was active was actually illegal, after all, so it had to be called something else…) and the rules are very short on detail on the issue.

Kevan: City he/him

24-04-2010 22:23:17 UTC

The DoV rule still uses the verb “vote”, though, and goes on to say that a DoV only enacts “if a Quorum of Colonists have voted on the DoV and more than half of those votes were in favour”. If Roujo’s vote is “the last voting icon he uses”, then his vote is a DEF and the DoV doesn’t meet the criteria that “more than half of those votes were in favour”. He may well still be saying that “he believes the poster has achieved victory” when looking at the flow of comments from a purely FOR/AGAINST perspective, but his vote is the last voting icon he uses.


24-04-2010 22:27:53 UTC



24-04-2010 22:31:42 UTC

@Kevan: in that case, we’re still in a really old dynasty; voting used to be illegal during a DoV, so most of the DoVs in BlogNomic’s history actually failed. (Either that, or Roujo’s attempted CoV was actually illegal, and should be disregarded as a result.)

“Every Colonist may respond to an active DoV saying whether or not he believes the poster has achieved victory in the current Dynasty (using the FOR and AGAINST icons).”

“Any Colonist may cast his Vote on a Pending Proposal by making a comment on that entry using a voting icon of FOR, AGAINST or DEFERENTIAL.”

Note how the second excerpt specifically only aplies to proposals? As a result, it doesn’t apply to DoVs. (Nor could it, historically speaking; game actions under that rule used to be banned, although the rules were recently changed to allow them.)

Kevan: City he/him

24-04-2010 22:40:20 UTC

Although, sorry, no, I missed Wakukee’s point that “last voting icon” only applies to pending Proposals. It’s a grey area, and I think the truest reading does seem to be that Roujo still “believes the poster has achieved victory”, because he used a FOR icon but not an AGAINST one (the same way that we’d probably count a “[FOR] I don’t believe ais523 has achieved victory!” typo as a vote in favour, because it’s only the FOR/AGAINST icon that’s counted).

Kevan: City he/him

24-04-2010 22:42:41 UTC

Simulposted, there, I must have taken ten minutes to write it.


24-04-2010 22:45:50 UTC

Alright… I can accept that the DoV passed by these terms, but the voting rules need a re-write. I can give the re-writing a go once we start the new dynasty.

redtara: they/them

24-04-2010 23:02:39 UTC

The entire core needs to be rewritten.

Roujo: he/him

25-04-2010 14:28:02 UTC

For the record, I didn’t know what to think of the situation, so I didn’t believe that ais had achieved victory. Not that it matters now, mind you =P