Monday, April 30, 2012

Proposal: Enaction Sequence

Timed out 4 votes to 1 with the Net abstaining. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 02 May 2012 08:12:11 UTC

In Rule 1.4.2, replace “enacted by any Admin (and the Ruleset and/or Gamestate updated to include the specified effects of that Proposal)” with:-

enacted by any Admin (by updating the Ruleset and/or Gamestate to include the specified effects of that Proposal, and then setting that Proposal’s status to Enacted)

Per discussion in It’s Still a Good Idea, the current “enact and update gamestate” wording may be readable as “mark as enacted, then update gamestate at leisure”, which means that as soon as the box is ticked, the admin can move onto the next proposal (even if they haven’t updated all of the first one’s effects yet). At best it allows floaty “wait 7 days and then make this change” ruleset modifiers (which we can still do with a simple self-repealing “on date X, make this change” rule); at worst, an unscrupulous admin can manipulate the order in which proposals take effect.

This new wording will require a proposal’s changes to be made in full before it is considered to have been “enacted”.


Josh: HE/HIM

04-30-2012 14:16:41 UTC

I’m a bit dubious, for the simple reason that what It’s Still A Good Idea is trying to do should actually be possible - a proposal should be able to delay its impact to a specified future point. It cannot be beyond our wit to devise a rule that unambiguously permits that while still not being vulnerable to wilful misinterpretation.



04-30-2012 14:20:51 UTC


Kevan: HE/HIM

04-30-2012 14:33:41 UTC

[Josh] I think it definitely shouldn’t be possible. The game only needs to be the ruleset and the visible gamestate, and shouldn’t be anything more. There’s no need to have any invisible pseudo-rules floating around in the background, as it’s trivial (and much clearer) to delay a proposal’s impact with an “after date X, any player may repeal this sentence and change Y” rule.

Worst case, the floaty-non-rule interpretation would allow a quiet dynasty to propose an invisible “player X may declare victory at any time in 2013” effect and spring it on a bunch of players who never even knew it was there. Not fun.


04-30-2012 14:35:38 UTC

for As Kevan said, delayed proposals can be handled in the form “Create a new rule titled [title] which reads ‘on [date], [rule changes] occur and the gamestate shall be updated accordingly. After this this rule ceases to be in effect and may be removed from the ruleset.’”

Clucky: HE/HIM

05-01-2012 00:31:47 UTC



05-01-2012 01:03:45 UTC