Friday, April 25, 2008

Proposal: No Witch Hunts

Times out 6-2.
-Ornithopter

Adminned at 27 Apr 2008 12:08:21 UTC

Rewrite the core “Victory and Ascension” rule to read:

If a ‘’‘Henchman’‘’ (other than the ‘’‘Overlord’‘’) believes that he has achieved victory in the current Dynasty, he may make a post to the Blognomic weblog in the ‘’‘Declaration of Victory’‘’ category, detailing this.

Upon doing so, the game immediately goes into Hiatus, if it hasn’t already. During this time, the only game actions that may be taken are those covered by Rules “Henchmen”, “Calls for Judgment”, “Gamestate Tracking” and “Victory and Ascension”.

Every ‘’‘Henchman’‘’ may respond to an active DoV saying whether or not he believes the poster has achieved victory in the current Dynasty (using the FOR and AGAINST icons).

The Declaration of Victory may be resolved after 24 hours, or after 12 hours if the ‘’‘Overlord’‘’ has voted on it. Upon resolution, if a Quorum of ‘’‘Henchmen’‘’ have voted on the DoV and more than half of those votes were in favour, then the DoV passes - otherwise the DoV fails, and if no other DoVs are still pending, the Hiatus ends.

When a DoV passes, all other active DoVs are failed, and a new Dynasty begins with the ‘’‘Henchman’‘’ who made the DoV as its ‘’‘Overlord’‘’. (That ‘’‘Henchman’‘’ may pass this role to another ‘’‘Henchman’‘’ at this point, if he wishes.) The Hiatus continues until the new ‘’‘Overlord’‘’ posts an Ascension Address to the BlogNomic weblog - this shall specify the ‘’‘Overlord’s’‘’ chosen theme for the new Dynasty, and may optionally include a proclamation that any number of Dynastic Rules will be repealed, and that any keywords will be replaced with new theme-appropriate terms.

This reverts the rule to its state before Pirahna Tanks was enacted. I personally do not like the new rule, at least as a core rule, as it introduces a punitive stance which may not be appropriate to all dynasties, and may discourage someone from attempting a sneaky victory, which can be a fun surprise if not overdone.

Comments

Bucky:

25-04-2008 19:48:55 UTC

Unofficial FOR from an idle player.

arthexis: he/him

25-04-2008 20:01:16 UTC

for

Yoda:

25-04-2008 20:11:42 UTC

against The other proposal merely added the punishment in as an optional stance for those who think the person is abusing the DoV hiatus.

We have not abused the fact that nothing stops people from failing a perfectly legitimate DoV, so why should we be worried that we will abuse the punishment aspect.

Ornithopter:

25-04-2008 21:31:33 UTC

Explicit abstention.

jay:

25-04-2008 21:40:29 UTC

against

Kevan: he/him

26-04-2008 00:30:26 UTC

for  for  for  CfJs can be issued during a Hiatus, if someone’s being annoying and submitting abusive DoVs. That’s all we need.

Rodlen:

26-04-2008 17:22:23 UTC

for

Purplebeard:

26-04-2008 18:28:59 UTC

for

Beane:

26-04-2008 21:25:28 UTC

for