Thursday, July 14, 2016

Proposal: Historian 2

Times out and fails 1-5. -Bucky

Adminned at 16 Jul 2016 22:58:34 UTC

Add this Offical Position, the historian, with the following powers, to the bulleted list in Offical Positions.

Historian - The historian may have two countable votes on any votable matter that alters or repeals a rule over one week old (excluding Core rules) ( the age of the rule is the days that have passed since the addition of a rule, or the last edit of the rule, whichever is smallest), alters or repeals an Apocryphal rule, or an Objection. They may additionally create an extra map per week, adding up to a total of two maps per week. The historian is decided (by the editor) on a weekly basis by the greatest number of new Apocryphal rules that they have mapped without objection. Ties are broken randomly by roll of DICE. The Scribe that has the greatest amount of these is the new Historian. The Historian shall not remain the Historian for more than one week.

This preposal also undoes the effects of ” Respect for History” and “Historian” should they be enacted. The number of Apocryphal Rules is counted from the day of the enactment of this preposal.



14-07-2016 16:52:02 UTC

Note: this is not an illegal preposal, because the last preposal is actually not a preposal.

Brendan: he/him

14-07-2016 18:14:56 UTC

Note: the first sentence of this is unclear—how does one alter or repeal on Objection? How does one determine the age of a rule—the day it was created in the Ruleset, or proposed, or last edited? Does the Historian get one or two extra Maps per week? The Historian “is decided”—by whom? During what time period should the number of “new Apocryphal rules that they have mapped” be counted?

In addition to the clarifications, this potentially gives one Scribe a double vote on altering the Core Rules, which I am strongly against.


14-07-2016 18:25:55 UTC

Note: The number of rules is the number of rules TOTAL since the beginning.


14-07-2016 18:26:27 UTC

Note:Wait, never mind


14-07-2016 18:33:54 UTC

Note: Information about who mapped to what rule is secret.  Also, the Historian’s extra Map slot gives them an unfair advantage w.r.t. keeping their office.


14-07-2016 18:38:03 UTC

Note: fixed. Also, that is why the editor chooses them.


14-07-2016 19:08:42 UTC

Note: Ties broken randomly?


14-07-2016 19:11:34 UTC

Note:Yes, thanks


14-07-2016 21:26:39 UTC

Note: I am surprised no one has voted by now.


14-07-2016 22:02:28 UTC



14-07-2016 22:05:13 UTC

Also, right now, it looks like I posted this in the future. Wth?

RaichuKFM: she/her

14-07-2016 22:26:34 UTC

against Time zones.

Also, I just, don’t like this mechanic. The nature of the dynasty is one such that older rules should be tweaked with relatively often, to play nice with newer rules, as well as vice versa.


14-07-2016 22:29:54 UTC

against Same as raichu honestly. And yeah, no one voteing seems to be a theme of this dynasty. It sucks having to wait for everything to time out all the time.

RaichuKFM: she/her

14-07-2016 22:45:22 UTC

I’ve been kind of low activity at all, lately; I’m going to try to bounce back. As for the lack of votes, I think the Notes: are partly to blame? Definitely, in this case.

There are also times I’ve avoided being the first to vote just in case I feel there might be a hole in a Proposal, and don’t want to block a possible spot-and-fix with an early vote. Which, is a habit I should try to break.


14-07-2016 23:11:25 UTC

I do have to say, no one here has a problem with the cellermaster.

RaichuKFM: she/her

14-07-2016 23:20:04 UTC

And the Cellarmaster doesn’t have anything to do with affecting old rules or voting? Unless I missed something.


14-07-2016 23:20:51 UTC



14-07-2016 23:21:40 UTC

I was…. Nevermind


15-07-2016 02:41:57 UTC

against per RaichuKFM.  I would support a version that got an extra vote on proposals that only modify Provisional rules.

Brendan: he/him

15-07-2016 16:47:51 UTC

against Valiant effort.


16-07-2016 22:04:57 UTC