Tuesday, March 16, 2021

Declaration of Victory: I Won Right Before Kevan Ascended

Failed 1 vote to 8 by Kevan.

Adminned at 17 Mar 2021 08:41:51 UTC

The dynasty started when Kevan’s Declaration of Victory enacted.

Sometime later, Kevan posted an Ascension Address repealing all the dynastic rules.

In the meantime, the rules contained the following:

The Electors, as a singular collective entity, have achieved Victory.

and I was an Elector.

Therefore, I have achieved victory in the current dynasty.

As this was entirely due to the action of dynastic rules, I don’t think it counts as a core rule scam for Fair Play purposes.

If this passes, it will make that victory no longer part of the current dynasty, at which point I can pass the mantle back to Kevan.

Comments

Clucky: he/him

16-03-2021 21:50:35 UTC

You are not the Electors, as a single collective entity, so you have not achieved victory.

against

Lulu: she/her

16-03-2021 21:51:22 UTC

against

Josh: he/they

16-03-2021 21:52:27 UTC

@Clucky nah, not sold on that. The meaning of the word was clear, as evidenced by the fact that Kevan successfully used it to win.

Bucky:

16-03-2021 21:55:13 UTC

Kevan didn’t declare victory because of achieving victory, he declared it because Rule 2.1 authorized him to do so without that requirement.

Brendan: he/him

16-03-2021 21:55:44 UTC

against Time exists.

Zack: he/him

16-03-2021 21:55:44 UTC

against Per Clucky.

Josh: he/they

16-03-2021 21:58:02 UTC

@Brendan what do you mean, time exists?

The rules and precedent seem clear enough on this: if you’ve achieved victory in a dynasty then you’ve achieved victory, and the passage of time doesn’t erase that.

Kevan: he/him

16-03-2021 22:00:11 UTC

against Per Clucky, I don’t think this sentence means the same thing as “each Elector has achieved victory”.

Brendan: he/him

16-03-2021 22:01:21 UTC

If this DoV had been posted while the ruleset still said that, then sure, I’d go with that. But it doesn’t. Because the rules changed. Because this is Nomic.

Bucky:

16-03-2021 22:02:56 UTC

A victory already achieved doesn’t go away just because the conditions that granted it have ended.

Josh: he/they

16-03-2021 22:03:43 UTC

From Slack:

But V&A straightforwardly says “If you believe you have achieved victory in this dynasty”

And Representations of the Gamestate says that the fact of the occurance of past actions are gamestate

And Operant Conditioning established that achieving victory is an action

We have a fair bodyweight of precedent that establishes that “achieved victory” is a status that doesn’t go away just because the rule that authorised it is repealed - it may have occurred in the past but the past is still gamestate, and other actions don’t cease to be valid once the rule that permitted them is repealed.

Lulu: she/her

16-03-2021 22:06:15 UTC

for

Darknight: he/him

16-03-2021 22:10:38 UTC

against

Bucky:

16-03-2021 22:13:03 UTC

Clucky: he/him

16-03-2021 22:28:48 UTC

the point remains, that the singular entity of Bucky did not achieve victory. Neither did Kevan. The ruleset was very clear that the electors, as a singular collective entity, achieved victory. But the “singular collective entity” bit makes it clear to me that individual electors did not achieve victory, only the collective group did.

Raven1207: he/they

16-03-2021 22:29:40 UTC

imperial

pokes:

16-03-2021 22:45:34 UTC

against

Lulu: she/her

16-03-2021 22:49:35 UTC

against cov