Wednesday, December 16, 2009

Proposal: Fiat Lux

s/k—alethiophile

Adminned at 16 Dec 2009 18:41:05 UTC

Add a dynastic rule, called “Universe”, with text as follows:

The Universe exists, and is gamestate.  The initial state of the Universe consists of all locations, tangible objects, concepts and other subject matters about which an English-language Wikipedia article exists as of 00:00 GMT on December 15, 2009 (the “Reference Time”), as described in English-language Wikipedia at the Reference Time.  Changes to English-language Wikipedia after the Reference Time shall be disregarded.  For example, if English-language Wikipedia provided, as of the Reference Time, that the Cullinan Diamond (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cullinan_Diamond) is located in the Tower of London, in the city of London, in the United Kingdom, in Europe, on Earth, in the Milky Way Galaxy, then the same shall be true in the Universe for the purposes of gamestate unless these circumstances change as gamestate or the ruleset permits.

Each Adventurer has a location, which is tracked in the GNDT.  Each Adventurer shall select his initial location which shall be a location with its own English-language Wikipedia article.

posted by spikebrennan at 16 Dec 2009 02:52:04 UTC Comments (23)

Comments

Wakukee:

16-12-2009 03:09:05 UTC

Uh… this is pretty big for gamestate there, bud…  imperial

Klisz:

16-12-2009 03:25:58 UTC

for  for  for  for  for  But we’ll need to make it so that you can wish to change the Universe.

redtara: they/them

16-12-2009 03:26:00 UTC

for <Bucky> Unfortunately Wikipedia is not gamestate, so we cannot change it by proposal.

Klisz:

16-12-2009 03:32:47 UTC

@Ienpw: Yes, but only the initial state is caused by Wikipedia.

I’ll need to search for vandalism that was around at the Reference Time… mua ha ha. (It would be hilarious if it was a solid fact in our universe that “bush is gay lol”.)

redtara: they/them

16-12-2009 03:33:41 UTC

Lol

Scaramouche:

16-12-2009 03:40:12 UTC

for

Darknight: he/him

16-12-2009 05:55:18 UTC

for

digibomber:

16-12-2009 05:59:33 UTC

imperial

Bucky:

16-12-2009 07:24:04 UTC

for .  Note that certain fictional locations also have Wikipedia articles.

NoOneImportant:

16-12-2009 08:47:58 UTC

for

There is no possible way this could go awry. ;)

Josh: he/they

16-12-2009 09:22:37 UTC

for Although I’m looking forward to Wak having to fulfil wishes that are a bit beyond his means. “Wak! I wish for the Koh-I-Nor diamond. Get on it.”

SingularByte: he/him

16-12-2009 10:32:00 UTC

for

Kevan: he/him

16-12-2009 11:07:41 UTC

for

spikebrennan:

16-12-2009 11:53:57 UTC

Bucky- this occurred to me right after I posted the proposal.  I guess that sinking continents into the sea wouldn’t be as dramatic if everybody’s Location is Narnia or the Dagobah System anyway.  I’ll leave it alone for now, but it may be worth considering limiting the initial state of the Universe to real-life, non-fictional, non-merely-historic locations on the planet Earth (so nobody can set their location to Narnia or the Holy Roman Empire).

Oze:

16-12-2009 15:57:04 UTC

for !

ais523:

16-12-2009 16:10:37 UTC

for Amazingly, I can’t think of an obvious way in which this will go wrong. That’s worth a FOR by itself.

Hix:

16-12-2009 17:56:26 UTC

against You can’t force me to choose an initial location!!!

Boo! for “shall” without consequences.

Klisz:

16-12-2009 18:14:43 UTC

CoV against  per Hix in IRC. He plans to win using this rule somehow.

NoOneImportant:

16-12-2009 18:33:49 UTC

Somehow I think it’s a bit early for Hix to have a successful winning scheme. ;)

ais523:

16-12-2009 19:14:55 UTC

against per Hix on IRC. As far as I can tell, via Hix’s argument, it’s illegal for an admin to admin this proposal as passed, but arguing that will be worse than the Midnight Crisis, so I’m trying to fail this before it causes too much damage. (Basically: the idea is fine, but contradictions in Wikipedia lead to contradictions in gamestate, which lead to a mess. And there’s almost certainly a contradiction in Wikipedia somewhere.)

spikebrennan:

16-12-2009 19:25:39 UTC

against
s/k; watch this space for a re-proposal

Ornithopter:

16-12-2009 20:13:27 UTC

BlogNomic doesn’t have a win-by-paradox rule, though…

Hix:

16-12-2009 20:38:46 UTC

There’s no win-by-paradox rule, so actually achieving victory out of it is something I would have had to argue on my own.  I’m sure not everyone would buy into the argument I might have made.  And actually getting a DoV to pass is something I consider very unlikely even if enough of you believe the argument, given that if my argument is correct, so are a bunch of other game-breaking things.