Saturday, April 05, 2025

Call for Judgment: Killing Joke

Unpopular with 6 against votes—Clucky

Adminned at 06 Apr 2025 08:25:26 UTC

Give each Nomicer 3 Jokers, including the idle Nomicer SingularByte.

In “Equity” replace “Add any way to gain or remove Chips or Jokers, outside of Nomicers spending them to perform game actions.” with “Add any way to gain or remove Disks or Jokers, outside of Nomicers spending them to perform game actions.”

Not sure I can give out Jokers in a proposal, hence the CfJ. But as everyone has spent their jokers lets just give everyone their jokers back and play on.

Comments

ais523:

05-04-2025 20:52:29 UTC

I’m not sure that this CFJ is legal – there needs to be a matter that needs urgent attention or an active ruleset disagreement. Did you have one in mind?

Clucky: he/him

05-04-2025 20:58:31 UTC

yes, I think we should give each Nomicer 3 Jokers, including the idle Nomicer SingularByte.

Also in “Equity” we should replace “Add any way to gain or remove Chips or Jokers, outside of Nomicers spending them to perform game actions.” with “Add any way to gain or remove Disks or Jokers, outside of Nomicers spending them to perform game actions.”

Josh: Imperator he/they

05-04-2025 21:18:55 UTC

against I don’t think that this is a valid CfJ.

JonathanDark: he/him

05-04-2025 21:45:37 UTC

Whether it is a valid CfJ or not, I have a preference for “Reverse Equity” over this, starting values of Equity nonwithstanding.

against

ais523:

05-04-2025 21:46:19 UTC

against a) in case the CFJ isn’t valid, and b) because I think “Reverse Equity” is a better fix for the same underlying problem. (It’s going to be very hard to determine whether the CFJ is valid or not – there are 10 players, and it’s quite possible that at least one of them thought that something needs urgent attention at the time the CFJ was posted, but we have no way to tell.)

Clucky: he/him

05-04-2025 21:56:09 UTC

I mean I made the CfJ so that clearly makes it valid, as I can only make the CfJ if I feel there is an urgent matter worth attending too

JonathanDark: he/him

05-04-2025 21:59:26 UTC

For my part, I’m not making a judgement on whether or not it’s a CfJ. I’m making a judgement on whether or not it’s urgent enough to bypass the Proposal queue as a CfJ. Clucky so far has not convinced me that it is that urgent.

Clucky: he/him

05-04-2025 22:05:49 UTC

its not that its urgent enough to bypass the proposal queue, more that my interpretation of the rules indicated we couldn’t update jokers in a standard proposal hence the need for a CfJ

DoomedIdeas: he/him

05-04-2025 22:17:26 UTC

against

ais523:

05-04-2025 22:20:55 UTC

@Clucky: there are rules on when you can make a CFJ, and “this doesn’t work as a proposal” is not one of them.

I personally think that these rules are silly and should be changed, but all my attempts to do so have been voted down (and I have tried multiple times). It is possible that each time, the vote-down was based on other parts of the proposal, but there’s a limit to how often you can reasonably try the same thing.

Darknight: he/him

05-04-2025 22:27:21 UTC

against

Clucky: he/him

05-04-2025 22:51:15 UTC

@ais I’ve been playing this game for 15 years. I know the rules about how CfJs work. I don’t need you to lecture me on them

Kevan: he/him

06-04-2025 07:48:27 UTC

against