Sunday, December 31, 2023

Proposal: Just In Case

Timed out, 5-0. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 02 Jan 2024 13:53:43 UTC

If Proposal: Casing the Joint was not enacted then this proposal has no effect.

1. Recommended Blocks
In the Building Blocks section, replace the string ‘The current Recommended Building Blocks rules are: Dormancy, Dynastic Distance and Mantle Limitations’ with ‘There are currently no Recommended Building Blocks’.

1a. Mantle Passing
In the Other section of the Keywords rule in the Appendix, add the following:

Pass the Mantle: Passing the Mantle is a mechanism by which, during an Interregnum, a Grim Reaper may nominate another Necromancer to become the Grim Reaper in the upcoming dynasty. Unless a Core, Dynastic or Building Block rule explicitly states otherwise, Passing the Mantle is currently prohibited.

In the Building Blocks section of the ruleset, repeal the rule Mantle Limitations. In the Building Blocks page of the wiki, change Mantle Limitations to be titled Mantle Passing, and change its text to read as follows:

During an Interregnum, the new Grim Reaper may Pass the Mantle by making a post naming a Necromancer who was not the last dynasty’s Grim Reaper; the passing Necromancer then ceases to be the Grim Reaper and the Necromancer so named becomes the Grim Reaper.

1b. Dormancy
Add the following as a subrule to the rule Necromancers, called Dormancy:

If there are fewer than four Necromancers (not including the Grim Reaper), then BlogNomic is on Hiatus.

In the Building Blocks section of the ruleset, repeal the rule Dormancy. In the Building Blocks page of the wiki, change Dormancy to be titled Low-Player Mode, and give it the following text:

The Core Rule Dormancy is flavour text.

2. Tidy-up
Add the following to the end of the second paragraph of the rule Votes:

When the Grim Reaper themselves casts a vote of DEFERENTIAL, it indicates an indication of confidence in the votes of the other players; please see the Rules and Votable Matters section of the Appendix for more information on how this is resolved.

Move the paragraph that starts ‘On the 24th, 25th and 26th of December’ to an entry in the Other section of the Keywords rule in the Appendix, titled Seasonal Downtime.

In the text of the top-level Building Blocks section, change “and any rules not so named must be removed” to “and any Building Blocks rules not so named must be removed from the Building Blocks section”.

If there is a potential rule on the Building Blocks page called Malign Emperors, change “If the Special Case rule “No Private Communication” is Active, any Necromancer may set it to Inactive. (The combo is too strong.)” to “If there is a Building Block rule called No Private Communication then any Necromancer may remove this rule from the ruleset.

Comments

lendunistus: he/him

31-12-2023 11:14:17 UTC

the new title of Mantle Limitations is a bit misleading, pooling can still happen without mantle passes

I know it’s boring, but maybe just change it to “Mantle Passing” or something?

Clucky: he/him

31-12-2023 12:37:12 UTC

Please note that the proposal Casing the Joint: https://blognomic.com/archive/casing_the_joint was not enacted, so in the current form this proposal does nothing

Josh: Observer he/they

31-12-2023 12:40:37 UTC

Not sure I buy that - if there are two Proposals: Casing the Joint, and one passes and the other fails, then I would say that the condition has still been met - but I’ve added a link just in case.

Kevan: he/him

31-12-2023 14:14:13 UTC

It’s also covered by “Where a Votable Matter refers to a second Votable Matter by name, it is assumed to refer to the most recently posted Votable Matter of that name which pre-dates the first Votable Matter.”

for

Looks like this still needs a patch for the Building Blocks page being blank (per the “reverted to whatever state it was in at the time of that Votable Matter’s submission” rule on created gamestate), and the Player/Emperor terms not being updated on the Building Blocks page upon ascension?

Clucky: he/him

31-12-2023 14:15:05 UTC

so if there are no special case rules we actually want on by default, can we switch to turning on special case rules requiring a vote?

might need to flag a couple that can auto turn on if the dynasty concept would break without it on, but putting everything up to a vote would stay far better within the spirit of nomic

also this still doesn’t fix all the issues in the original proposal (dynastic distance is completely gone despite being one of the more popular special case rules to toggle on and off. player and emperor terms in building blocks are still not properly updated)

Clucky: he/him

31-12-2023 14:17:53 UTC

against

to encourage voting against the original proposal, as it feels like it runs the risk of important patches not getting through

JonathanDark: he/him

31-12-2023 17:31:16 UTC

for

Josh: Observer he/they

31-12-2023 18:27:16 UTC

Okay, my next slot will be sorting out the Building Blocks page and sorting out the player term updates.

Desertfrog:

31-12-2023 20:01:18 UTC

for

Raven1207: he/they

01-01-2024 09:16:25 UTC

for

Clucky: he/him

01-01-2024 22:07:29 UTC

for as other proposal passed better to fix half the things than fix nothing I guess