Saturday, February 21, 2009

Proposal: Fair Play

High Command doesn’t have the ability to metagame very well, so has little to say on the subject.

Reporting, Devenger.

(Reached quorum, 14-0.)

Adminned at 22 Feb 2009 14:40:42 UTC

[ Moving the spam/tampering/multi-account rules out into the glossary, and adding a couple more, in reaction to Darth Cliche blanking his own suggestion to Wakukee, and apparently editing Wakukee’s response. We already have some expected behaviour for blanking posts - even if it’s spam, we archive it on the wiki - so it wouldn’t hurt to write this down and make sure everyone plays by the same rules. ]

Replace the final three paragraphs of Rule 1.2 (Soldier) with:-

A Soldier must abide by the rules of fair play in Glossary section 3.6.

Add a new Glossary section 3.6, “Fair Play”:-

The following are BlogNomic’s rules of fair play. If any of the rules are found to have been broken, a proposal or CfJ may be made to remove the perpetrator from the game, and bar them from rejoining.

  • A single person should not control more than one Soldier within BlogNomic.
  • A Soldier should not “spam” the BlogNomic blog. What counts as spamming is subjective, but would typically include posting more than ten blog entries in a day, more than ten blog comments in a row, or posting a blog entry of more than 1000 words.
  • A Soldier should not deliberately exploit bugs or unexpected behaviours in the software running the game (ExpressionEngine, MediaWiki or the GNDT).
  • Instead of deleting content from a blog post which has at least one comment, the content should either be struck through with <strike> tags, or replaced with a link to a copy of the same content on the wiki.
  • A Soldier should not edit their own blog comments once posted, nor those of any other Soldier.

Comments

SingularByte:

02-21-2009 16:20:13 UTC

for

Klisz:

02-21-2009 16:35:55 UTC

for  Wak specifically asked me to delete his comments, however. (I only know how to edit comments, not delete them.)

Igthorn:

02-21-2009 17:00:34 UTC

for

Clucky:

02-21-2009 17:03:10 UTC

for  ( though remind me again how DC got made an adimn…)

ais523:

02-21-2009 18:03:20 UTC

for

Oze:

02-21-2009 19:34:03 UTC

for

Gnauga:

02-21-2009 19:58:51 UTC

for At any rate, there shall be no deleting of comments for any reason.

dogfish:

02-21-2009 20:19:48 UTC

for

Wakukee:

02-21-2009 20:41:47 UTC

for

Devenger:

02-21-2009 20:58:19 UTC

for ook

Klisz:

02-21-2009 21:42:01 UTC

Clucky & Gnauga: Apparently, that comment was made by Qwaz in Wak’s account. Intentionally in Wak’s account.

I sense a ban coming on…

Kevan:

02-21-2009 22:20:04 UTC

... Banning Qwazukee because Wakukee says one of his comments was made by Qwazukee?

Wakukee:

02-21-2009 22:43:01 UTC

I didn’t say that! What are you talking about?!? Maybe you misunderstood what I said???

arthexis:

02-21-2009 23:15:26 UTC

for

Rodlen:

02-22-2009 00:37:19 UTC

for

Darknight:

02-22-2009 00:49:06 UTC

for *rubs head* that crap again?

Klisz:

02-22-2009 01:30:28 UTC

Wak: Yes, I misunderstood.

Qwazukee:

02-22-2009 03:00:20 UTC

against I think the last rule prevents the fixing of typos.

Rodlen:

02-22-2009 05:42:15 UTC

Hey, Kevan, is there a way to find out who edited a comment?

Clucky:

02-22-2009 07:08:36 UTC

That is only comments Qwaz—you can still edit posts. If you make a typo in a comment, its better to just add another comment clarifying as comments are harder to trace.