Monday, July 22, 2013

Proposal: Let’s Explicitly Cramp Styles

Self-killed, failed by Kevan.

Adminned at 24 Jul 2013 03:25:32 UTC

Undo any changes made by “Let’s Cramp Styles” if it passes.

Enact a new rule entitled “o_O”:

Create a new GNDT column entitled “Clothing,” defaulting to “Covered”

A Player may, as a daily action, create a votable Story Post entitled “Exposing X” where X is the name of another Player. That post should contain the proposed name of X’s Style. X’s Clothing shall then be changed to “Half-Naked”. Any Half-Naked Player may only declare or achieve victory on the condition that they prove that their Style is not the Style guessed, either in their Declaration of Victory or in a comment on the Story Post “Exposing X”, and also that their DoV fulfills some victory condition set out in dynastic rules other than o_O. Such a proof is not itself a Declaration of Victory, and may not be used on its own to achieve victory, that is, though proof is a condition of victory, it is not enough to achieve or declare victory. If legitimate proof is provided, X is no longer Half-Naked and becomes Covered. If the guessed Style is indeed X’s Style, then X may not under any circumstances change their Style and shall become Exposed. Any Exposed player is unable to declare or achieve victory.

Proof shall take the following form: The Player doing the proving shall state their nonce, and perform the hash with the proposed Style and their declared nonce to show that it does not match with their Style+Nonce hash. That Player shall also explicitly state their current Style+Nonce hash in the post for purposes of record. The player may then change their nonce and put the corresponding new hash into the GNDT, with the comment “Nonce changed following Proof.”

As part of a Declaration of Victory, but not constituting a DoV itself, a Player must present a complete record of their Styles and Nonces, such that every Style and Nonce combination hash matched the stated value on the GNDT at the time of that Style and Nonce was that Player’s active Style and Nonce. This can then be checked against the record of Exposing Posts. Should dishonesty be revealed in this way, the Player’s DoV shall automatically fail and their Clothing set to Exposed.

Fully enforced honesty in o_O as thought of by Kevan, and closing the DoV loophole pointed out by Clucky. The statement on top was made just in case, even though this situation should never occur.

posted by Arlnoff at 22 Jul 2013 19:01:30 UTC Comments (5)

Comments

Skju:

22-07-2013 22:59:00 UTC

Nice idea, but I don’t like how it’s written. Primarily, the entire section “Any Half-Naked Player may only declare or achieve victory ... it is not enough to achieve or declare victory.” is unnecessarily cumbersome and confusing, especially when you have “Any Exposed player is unable to declare or achieve victory.” (Or, better yet, “Only Covered Players may achieve Victory.”) against

I would be happy to rewrite and resubmit this for you. Thoughts on having a dedicated wiki page for Style/Nonce history?

Arlnoff:

22-07-2013 23:10:47 UTC

The mess is to try to make it airtight. Simply changing the text to “Only Covered Players may achieve Victory” still does not explicitly state that simply being Covered is not enough to achieve Victory, which was the loophole in the first place. I also needed a way to achieve victory at the *same time* as a proof, since otherwise forcing players into a Half-Naked state could be used as a difficult but possible delaying tactic to their DoV. In the current structure, all nakedness can be covered in one fell swoop.

I’m not sure if the wiki page is a good idea; that information might be better kept secret until a DoV. It would probably work in the rules as they are, but exposing even a history of secret data does not seem like a good idea.

kikar:

22-07-2013 23:21:21 UTC

against Per Skju, this could be written more clearly. Also, I like the wiki page idea.

Skju:

23-07-2013 01:37:49 UTC

I would argue that an elegantly well-written proposal works better than a brute-force patchwork. Victory conditions must be more or less (subjectively) explicit, and I see no possibility of players thinking that Covered=Victory. You do raise an important point with delaying victory, which could, for example, be simply solved by allowing no more than one exposure of each Player daily.

The wiki page would track the hashes and nonces declared in a proof, no less secretly than having to “explicitly state their current Style+Nonce hash in the post for purposes of record.” It would just be easier to locate and view.

Why are exposures votable?

Arlnoff:

23-07-2013 01:47:40 UTC

No idea. Yeah, this has gotten too flawed. Go ahead on the rewrite, include the wiki idea. Just, for the love of God, make sure there are no loopholes so we don’t have to go through this again.  against Self-killed *again* (sigh)