Wednesday, October 12, 2011

Call for Judgment: Glossary says proposals aren’t art

Timed out 2 votes to 5. Failed by Kevan.

Adminned at 16 Oct 2011 12:59:50 UTC

Rule 3.2:

A proposal, call for judgment, or declaration of victory cannot simultaneously be any other type of official post unless otherwise specified by dynastic rules

Given the phrasing involved - it doesn’t apply to posts that aren’t proposals, CfJs or DoVs - I interpret this as “If another rule tries to make a post that is a proposal etc. also another type of official post, it fails to do so unless overruled by a Dynastic Rule”.  As a glossary rule, the bias in this statement overrules dynastic rules that don’t explicitly overrule it.

Therefore, all Proposals since the start of the dynasty are not actually Works of Art.  Remove all Acclaim resulting from exhibiting and critiquing Works of Art that are proposals - 2 from Bucky, and 1 from Kevan.  Also, since this supplied 1 of the Acclaim that ais523 used to create a Faux Pas error, remove that error from the Faux Pas document and refund 2 Acclaim to ais523.

This CfJ also indirectly contests the alleged illegality of making CfJs for a similar reason, and upholds its own legality.

Comments

Bucky:

12-10-2011 20:01:53 UTC

for

ais523:

12-10-2011 20:05:33 UTC

This is not a CfJ. Dynastic overrides core, so your argument implies that Works of Art cannot be proposals/CfJs/DoVs.

Bucky:

12-10-2011 20:09:04 UTC

Glossary overrides dynastic rules and (as I said in the CfJ body) says it’s a CfJ and not a Work of Art.

bateleur:

12-10-2011 20:29:12 UTC

against Quite apart from the reason I outlined in a comment of ais523’s DoV (concerning use of the word “other” above) it’s not clear to me that Works of Art should be considered to be official posts in the first place.

Josh: Observer he/they

12-10-2011 20:37:38 UTC

for

ais523:

12-10-2011 21:00:04 UTC

Hmm, this also says a lot for the tradition of CFJs that don’t change gamestate (like in Agora); there’s no reason to try to affect them with a scam, as it wouldn’t accomplish anything, so they can be a pretty fair arbiter of whether scams worked or not.

Anyway, against (if this CFJ is even valid in the first place) because the remedy proposed isn’t in line with the reasoning proposed; given that you believe, say, your Acclaim is actually currently 0, reducing it by 2 isn’t what you mean to do; you should set it to 0 instead. There’s no rule forcing the GNDT to always be correct…

redtara: they/them

12-10-2011 22:39:51 UTC

This CfJ also indirectly contests the alleged illegality of making CfJs for a similar reason, and upholds its own legality.

Note that if this CFJ is invalid in the first place, this line has no effect.

omd:

12-10-2011 23:42:14 UTC

against He deserves more than a refund for finding this issue.  Perhaps even a win, although, as someone who wants the next dynasty to be ais523’s, I am biased in saying this…

Anyway, I don’t think Works of Art defines a format.

bateleur:

13-10-2011 06:26:42 UTC

A quick note about a vaguely-related issue: I notice that posts containing Votable Matters in BlogNomic tend to become locked after the matter is concluded. I don’t see anything in the rules which says that this can occur and since it may have game effects in some Dynasties (such as this one), it occurs to me that the rules should be modified to include this practice or it should stop happening.

...but I thought I’d mention it here first before I make a proposal to fix it, just in case I’ve overlooked something.

Josh: Observer he/they

13-10-2011 06:55:04 UTC

Votable matters can’t be resolved and not locked - setting the post to “enacted” or “failed” automatically locks it. Someone with Expression Engine fu could probably change that.

Needless to say, votable matters tend to be resolved as soon as they can be for reasons of queue management.

ais523:

13-10-2011 09:24:51 UTC

It might be nice if you could continue commenting on a proposal, etc, after it was locked, but that a notice was added saying “the proposal was closed at this point, further comments were not counted” or something like that. That’d be quite a lot of programming work, though, I imagine.

Prince Anduril:

13-10-2011 12:58:00 UTC

Hold on. Surely Proposals, CfJ’s and DoV’s *can* be works of art, if you consider that

“A proposal, call for judgment, or declaration of victory cannot simultaneously be any other type of official post *unless otherwise specified by dynastic rules*.”

So since a Work of Art is defined as any “entry” which is posted by an Artist - (so Proposal, CfJ or DoV), this implies that Works of Art *are* both. Since it is explicitly stated in the glossary that in this case dynastic trumps glossary, this is indeed a CfJ *and* a Work of Art.

So if this CfJ is legal, then it is making the assumption that it is illegal, which makes no sense. If it is illegal, then it should be ignored. Simple as that.

against

Prince Anduril:

13-10-2011 13:00:18 UTC

And a Work of Art is an official post because of 3.2:

“Posts following the format specified by a rule are considered official posts”

It follows the format of being ‘posted by an Artist’, and is capitalised, indicating a keyword.

scshunt:

13-10-2011 16:35:23 UTC

against

Soviet Brendon:

15-10-2011 16:51:55 UTC

arrow