Thursday, August 13, 2015

Proposal: Extreme Prejudice

Times out and is enacted, 7-0. Josh

Adminned at 16 Aug 2015 15:47:31 UTC

In “Corporate Defence”, replace the sentence beginning “They may then remove the Codename from the GNDT” with:-

They may then Terminate that Codename by blanking its Tool and Secrets and setting its Hacker field to “TERMINATED”. A Terminated Codename is not considered to be a Codename for any other dynastic rule unless explicitly stated.

If “Corps Need More Tool” passed, add “When a Hacker terminates a Codename, it may increase its Corp Name’s Secrets by 1.” to the end of that paragraph.

In “Ensuring Access”, replace “Any admin should create the requested Codename at their earliest opportunity” with:-

Any admin should create the requested Codename at their earliest opportunity, with a GNDT comment that repeats the Sign Hash of the creation request and contains no other Hashes

Replacing “remove the Codename” with “mark it as terminated”, so that anyone can do it. Also fixing the problem that if an admin creates a requested Codename, anybody can then jump in and claim it.


Kevan: HE/HIM

08-13-2015 11:32:27 UTC

Incidentally, shouldn’t :Enthalpy have been removed from the GNDT when the ShareDVI-Corp investigation closed? It looks like they just had their Tool blanked.

Josh: HE/HIM

08-13-2015 11:36:06 UTC


Re. :Enthalpy, not necessarily - the Hacker may remove the Codename, but is not compelled to. As Purplebeard closed the investigation instead of ShareDVI, they may have simply chosen not to. Blanking the Tool is interesting, though.

Darknight: HE/HIM

08-13-2015 14:44:03 UTC



08-13-2015 14:55:18 UTC

for Josh: Right, I explicitly chose not to remove the Codename, as indicated by the corresponding comment in the gndt. I did clear Enthalpy’s Tool, since that seems to be a separate clause from the ‘may’ action.


08-13-2015 16:45:22 UTC



08-13-2015 20:26:56 UTC



08-14-2015 22:06:05 UTC