Tuesday, April 12, 2011

Call for Judgment: I thought I had four green fields

Reaches quorum and Fails 0-12. ~lilomar

Adminned at 13 Apr 2011 12:39:13 UTC

“Proposal: I had four green fields” was killed by Josh on the basis of it being an illegal third proposal.  But it wasn’t, at the time it was made.

I request that the adminning of the proposal be undone, so that the proposal is restored to the queue where it was (with all votes cast, to date, intact).

Come on, Josh—you knew this was going to happen.

Comments

lilomar:

12-04-2011 22:00:31 UTC

against It was illegal, as the admining of “the black sheep of the family” was illegal.
The Gamestate was different from the Gamestate documentation, but it was still illegal.

spikebrennan:

12-04-2011 22:31:04 UTC

Rule 1.3:
“Any Sheep may submit a Proposal to change the Ruleset or Gamestate, by posting an entry in the “Proposal” category that describes those changes (unless the Sheep already has 2 Proposals pending…”

I submit that since the other CfJ failed, this shows that I did not have 2 proposals “pending” even in a metaphysical sense when I proposed four green fields.

lilomar:

12-04-2011 22:35:32 UTC

two points:
1) The other CfJ has not yet failed.
2) Even if it does fail, all that means is that Black Sheep did not re-enter the queue, due to the CfJ. It actually never left the queue, because of a misadminning.

Winner:

12-04-2011 22:44:04 UTC

imperial We need to get our act together.

lilomar:

12-04-2011 23:43:02 UTC

@Winner: just to make sure you know imperial Is a vote of abstention, it doesn’t turn into the Chairsheep’s vote on a CfJ.

against RoV

Roujo: he/him

13-04-2011 01:03:16 UTC

against Per lilomar and the difference between Gamestate and the representation of Gamestate. Writing in an Atlas doesn’t - usually - change the world as we know it, even if you rename a country. In the same way, even if I were to illegally change the Ruleset to a single rule reading “Roujo pwns!!11”, the actual Ruleset wouldn’t change because my move was illegal.

In BlogNomic, ILLEGAL is the same as IMPOSSIBLE. Illegal actions are simply reverted as they cannot have taken place. There are other ways of handling this kind of problem (self-ratification, anyone?), but the custom in this Nomic is to simply revert illegal actions as if they never happened - and according to the Gamestate, they didn’t.

Chivalrybean:

13-04-2011 02:28:58 UTC

against Baa.

William:

13-04-2011 03:25:09 UTC

against retroactive continuity. Just re-propose.

ais523:

13-04-2011 05:36:23 UTC

against Just go repropose it; that’s a lot simpler than trying to work out what happened retroactively.

Josh: he/they

13-04-2011 05:41:24 UTC

against It was totally my fault and a genuine cock-up, but sadly you do get knock-on illegality. Mea culpa.

Purplebeard:

13-04-2011 07:28:55 UTC

against

Kevan: City he/him

13-04-2011 07:37:18 UTC

against

Subrincinator:

13-04-2011 09:43:57 UTC

against

scshunt:

13-04-2011 14:43:18 UTC

against

spikebrennan:

13-04-2011 16:51:49 UTC

against
just for the sake of helping get this out of the cue

Winner:

13-04-2011 19:28:36 UTC

against