Friday, August 27, 2021

Proposal: Enacting Nosy All Capital Timer Everything Diminishing

Self-killed. Josh

Adminned at 29 Aug 2021 14:27:43 UTC

Add the following to the end of the rule “Victory”

The time that the most recently Enacted Scoring Proposal was Enacted is publicly tracked.

Whenever a Scoring Proposal is Enacted, before updating the Current Leader to the author of the most recent Enacted Scoring Proposal, reduce the Current Leader’s Timer by one for every two hours (rounded up) they have been the Current Leader to a minimum value of 24.

Add the following to the end of the numbered list in the rule “The Veto List”:

It contains at least one instance of the capital letter “F”.

Reduce the Timer of all Legislators with more than 0 empathy by 1


Let’s get those timers ticking down! Importantly, not in a bribe-y manner.


Clucky: he/him

27-08-2021 16:33:59 UTC

Getting an hour shaved off your time seems probably too strong.

This also has a more fundamental problem of making proposals un-enactable if they would drop someone’s timer below 24.

Josh: he/they

27-08-2021 16:47:23 UTC

God, that rule’s bugged as well

If a set of valid values is not specified in their definition, game variables defined to hold numeric values can hold only non-negative integers. Any action that would set those values below zero is an illegal action unless explicitly otherwise stated in the Ruleset.

Does any part of the appendix work in the way that it’s supposed to?

Trapdoorspyder: he/him

27-08-2021 18:05:28 UTC

Made it less powerful, fixed the issue.


27-08-2021 18:27:01 UTC

I was planning to write something like this, but I was going to reduce the timer by a tenth of the time, not half or all of it. I think I’ll be AGAINST this unless the timer reduction is reduced further.

That Appendix rule is pretty worrying, though. I wrote a rule like that a while ago, but it was limited to dynastic actions whose effect was only on the gamestate (not the ruleset). As it is, you could write a rule “When a CFJ is enacted, reduce everyone’s Timer by 100” and lock out CFJs entirely – this is unlikely to pass intentionally but might get passed by mistake.


27-08-2021 18:28:22 UTC

Also, the sentence is ambiguous: you should probably add a comma before “to a minimum value of 24”, or else it looks like a 24-hour reduction is the smallest available reduction.

Trapdoorspyder: he/him

27-08-2021 19:49:37 UTC

Was busy in school, so missed all that valuable feedback. If this doesn’t pass I’ll work on another iteration


27-08-2021 21:39:50 UTC

against I think the timer reduction is too large, and there are some wording issues, but I like the idea.


27-08-2021 22:10:10 UTC

Thinking about it some more, a tenth is probably too small. Maybe somewhere around a quarter to a sixth is correct.

Clucky: he/him

28-08-2021 00:09:03 UTC


the timer reduction is still probably to big but at the same time its a nice forcing function.

It would still take six days for someone’s timer to get down to 24 hours. Plus its not like they can be the leader all the time. Probably more like 12 days. The idea of someone being at 24 hours two weeks form now doesn’t seem like that bad of an idea.

Raven1207: he/they

28-08-2021 06:04:11 UTC


Trapdoorspyder: he/him

29-08-2021 04:22:34 UTC

against oops