BlogNomic: The First Dynasty of Desertfrog

We also had two new players join during that last DoV, which I think could have waited until the new dynasty.

Good point - have added that in, thanks.

This has some bad interactions with Dormancy. If Blognomic ever goes into Dormancy due to a lack of players, this change would prevent it from recovering normally.

Similarly, I don’t see any reason to keep people from joining the dynasty during seasonal downtime.

If this is a problem with DoV voting, the fix should be specific to DoVs.

  See what Buckey said. The Alien does not agree with this proposal. (Why am I saying for the Alien Right Now?)

CoV per Bucky.

Agree with Bucky, plus the FAQ on the Wiki is somewhat of a meta-rule (how do the outside-the-rules Wiki affect the actual game rules, if at all?)

https://wiki.blognomic.com/index.php?title=FAQ#Can_I_join_in.3F

“Yes, the game is always open to new players. You don’t have to wait for a new round to start, you can jump in halfway through one”

Halfway probably doesn’t mean literally “halfway” as that would be hard to measure, so ignoring that part, players currently don’t have to wait for a new round to start.

[Jonathan] The FAQ isn’t binding at all, and it’s not defined as gamestate, so editing it is completely unregulated: players can (and should) bring it up to date to reflect the reality of the ruleset.

Fair enough re Dormancy; withdrawn

I think Dormancy needs some proposal attention in general, that’s why I have it temporarily off. Being in Hiatus makes it a bit harder to stay non-idle, cuts off many options for making official posts, and makes it impossible to edit the gamestate tracking page as part of a defined dynastic action. Ideally increased activity would naturally deactivate Dormancy when it’s no longer needed. Instead, Dormancy under the second criterion prevents the increased activity from triggering the metrics it looks at to end Dormancy and requires a concerted and specific effort to end.

The second Dormancy criteria, where the game has had only one player apart from the Emperor doing anything for a full week, seems a clear enough fail state that I’d say it was fine for it to require a full CfJ to resolve. Really it’s such a ridiculous extreme (it’s possibly only happened once in the game’s history?) that we should either set it to a more meaningful number, or repeal it.

But the first criteria should definitely go back to being automatic. It was a shame that the recent monster city dynasty hit the four-player mark without its admins wanting to activate Dormancy, leading the dynasty to drift on for another full week before ending with a simple, single die-roll.