Thursday, December 31, 2020

Proposal: Loopholes aren’t always made for breaking[Core]

Vetoed by the Poindexter, who has two pending CfJs. -Bucky

Adminned at 02 Jan 2021 05:34:33 UTC

In Rule 1.6, change

If two or more Pilots actively disagree as to the interpretation of the Ruleset, or if a Pilot feels that an aspect of the game needs urgent attention, then any Pilot may raise a ‘’‘Call for Judgement’‘’ (abbreviated “CfJ”) by posting an entry in the “Call for Judgement” category.

A Pending CfJ may be Enacted by any Admin if all of the following are true:

* It is Popular.

A Pending CfJ may be Failed by any Admin if any of the following are true:

* It is Unpopular.
* It specifies neither changes to the Gamestate or Ruleset nor corrections to any gamestate-tracking entities.

When a CfJ is Enacted, the Admin Enacting it shall update the Gamestate and Ruleset, and correct any gamestate-tracking entities, as specified in the CfJ.

This Rule may not be overruled by Dynastic Rules.

To

If two or more Pilots actively disagree as to the interpretation of the Ruleset, or if a Pilot feels that an aspect of the game needs urgent attention, then any Pilot may raise a ‘’‘Call for Judgement’‘’ (abbreviated “CfJ”) by posting an entry in the “Call for Judgement” category.

When a Pilot raises a CfJ, it must be raised at least 18 hours after the last CfJ was raised or when there are no CfJ raised at that given time.

A Pending CfJ may be Enacted by any Admin if all of the following are true:

* It is Popular.

A Pending CfJ may be Failed by any Admin if any of the following are true:

* It is Unpopular.
* It specifies neither changes to the Gamestate or Ruleset nor corrections to any gamestate-tracking entities.

When a CfJ is Enacted, the Admin Enacting it shall update the Gamestate and Ruleset, and correct any gamestate-tracking entities, as specified in the CfJ.

This Rule may not be overruled by Dynastic Rules.

Idk how else to word this but I just thought that there should be a handicap on CfJs before someone in the future spams blognomic with countless(and possibly pointless) CfJs

posted by Raven1207 at 31 Dec 2020 04:11:00 UTC Comments (7)

Comments

Bucky:

31-12-2020 05:34:45 UTC

against  against  against

You want loophole abuses? Chaining together useless CfJs so that the other players can’t CfJ you seems to be a good way to get them.

Raven1207: he/they

31-12-2020 05:53:19 UTC

No. I’m trying to put a cooldown on it

Raven1207: he/they

31-12-2020 05:56:24 UTC

I was thinking similar to how we can’t make too many proposals pending at once(the limit being 2)

Josh: Observer he/they

31-12-2020 07:57:36 UTC

veto

Josh: Observer he/they

31-12-2020 08:01:35 UTC

Terrible solution to a non-problem

Bucky:

01-01-2021 18:40:19 UTC

To expand on Josh’s explanation, from time to time there’s a rules crisis where one misread rule has cascading consequences; these are typically but not always triggered by a DoV under a previously unseen interpretation of a rule. Whenever that happens, there are not only CfJs over the root disagreement - perhaps several if there are three or more interpretations of the disputed rule - but also another batch of CfJs to clean up the consequences of other disagreements that only became relevant because people changed how they were interpreting the first rule.

In order to quickly resolve these situations, which is essential since any dynastic actions cause further confusion, it’s necessary to have those CfJs all running at once.

Furthermore, there’s a technique where a single player will note a disagreement where the tracked gamestate is wrong either way, and submit one CfJ for each interpretation with the intent that only one will pass. This is beneficial to have as an option because, again, it minimizes the amount of time during which people are taking dynastic actions whose inputs are disputed.

Finally, CfJs are the recovery option for when bugs in the ruleset accidentally prevent most actions. Pilots should therefore be able to submit them under any circumstances whatsoever, or else we risk locking up the gamestate completely.

In summary, we do sometimes have a large number of CfJs submitted in a short period of time. This does have severe consequences for all Pilots. But since the complications come from disagreements rather than the CfJs themselves, throttling the CfJ rate would only make the problems worse.

Bucky:

01-01-2021 18:46:27 UTC

For an example of several of these in action, see the lockout during the First Dynasty of Bateleur; read https://blognomic.com/2011/10/ starting from the bottommost DoV.