Wednesday, May 17, 2017

Call for Judgment: Hands Off Our Bears!

Reaches quorum 4-0. Enacted by pokes. This enaction:
- Moved Colette from PSS to card
- Returned Evan to Matt
- Returned Micjo to PSS
- Returned Bruno to Sphinx

I may have missed something in undoing the actions. I deducted no cash, since Cuddlebeam doesn’t have a well-defined amount of money; it’s unclear what actions PSS took other than auctioning what were, at the time of the auction, his own players. Please CfJ (or edit the gamestate) if this is an issue.

Adminned at 18 May 2017 10:41:44 UTC

Create a rule titled “Ownership” with the following text:

Actions, besides playing/overseeing a match, enacting a votable matter or the enaction of an ascension address, that affect a Manager’s Blogger or Bloggers cannot be taken unless one or more of the following is true:
*The affected Blogger is employed by the Manager who is doing the action
*The Manager taking the action has permission from the Manager that employs that Blogger

Then undo the actions taken by Cuddlebeam and Publius Scribonius Scholasticus that took place between 16 May 2017 20:35:00 UTC and 16 May 2017 21:00 UTC
Undo any actions which violates the Ownership rule during the time that this CfJ was pending
Deduct 10% of a Manager’s cash for each action which violates the Ownership rule that they took while this CfJ was pending.



17-05-2017 06:39:59 UTC


Although in my opinion, maybe no action that would be illegal under this rule happened, all that happened was that PSS started his first killauction (never closed it).

Cuddle offered PSS money for Bruno, but Cuddle had a full team. Managers may employ up to three bloggers. What happens when a blogger is moved to Cuddlebeam’s full team? Does it vanish? Is an action possible that creates invalid gamestate?

Maybe cuddle has a pretty large team now.


17-05-2017 11:17:28 UTC

I thought PSS offered Cuddlebeam the money, PSS took the player, then auctioned, at which point (even before the auction is closed) the player is effectively off the team, via “That Blogger then does not count as employed by the auctioning Manager for the purposes of all rules.”


17-05-2017 11:26:41 UTC

Yes, pretty much.


17-05-2017 11:27:05 UTC

Although we messed up and switched what PSS had to post versus what I had to post.


17-05-2017 11:28:56 UTC

Although, knowing that, we can still just do it again, correctly and it would be good, before this CfJ Enacts.


17-05-2017 15:06:51 UTC

And it would be undone after the CfJ enacts.


17-05-2017 15:06:58 UTC

“Undo any actions which violates the Ownership rule during the time that this CfJ was pending”


17-05-2017 15:14:03 UTC

Yes, but there would’ve been a timeframe where I would’ve been the winner.


17-05-2017 15:41:20 UTC

You wouldn’t actually have won until the closing ceremony. This is really messy.


17-05-2017 15:49:14 UTC

Exactly, CfJs with retroactive effects have that. (This one is retroactive because its range of effect is earlier than its actual enactment time.)


17-05-2017 15:59:44 UTC



18-05-2017 10:21:18 UTC

for to speed this up.