I’m planning on editing this with some way to give consideration to the Switch rule.

Edited.

I know that this will likely pass anyways, but I’m against any rule being enacted specifically to instantly make someone a winner. Although it probably is wrapping up anyways. So I’m basically voting on principle.

Better than nothing, seeing as how the switch dynasty seems unwilling to wrap up.

[Josh] That seems fair when we don’t know when the Wordpress site will be ready to go live. And there’s the ongoing thing that nobody can explain whether Wordpress players are playing to win their game (and maybe kill this dynasty in the process), or are just testing stuff.

This game certainly needs an Emperor, but yes, a straight “I win” proposal is unsatisfying, and I don’t want to endorse a strategy of (in Pokes’ own words) “trying to keep my lead by keeping the game stale”. If we’re ending the game on fool’s gold, Jumble and I potentially have 2 Winner Medallions each, to Pokes’ zero.

Make it “3 plaques or 3 medallions” and I’d take it.

Per Kevan

look if you’re stealing the win, just put that in the rules

@Tantusar: Is it “stealing”? Or more like “walking into a shop in broad daylight, and asking”?

“3 plaques or 3 medallions” is a loss for me, since plaques are now unavailable. More generally, any victory condition weighting plaques together with medallions becomes a negotiation between me and Jumble. What if we flipped for it, at the final table?

cov