This seems like a reasonable enough compromise – and it isn’t like Equity has any meaning any more after all the Reinitialisations.

yeah no but nice try

@ais523 I wouldn’t exactly call this a compromise. Also I’m surprised you don’t take issue with this mechanism of winning because informing a player they have achieved victory technically doesn’t, in fact, mean they have achieved victory.

@Zack: I agree that this wording might not work (the second line doesn’t allocate a victory, but the first line might). In general I’m still not convinced that proposals can directly award a victory, without creating a rule for it.

By “compromise” I meant a compromise among the previously active players, rather than the players who recently unidled in an attempt to take advantage of a buggy proposal; the discussion had largely been about which precise Equity values to use for the roll-off, not about what set of players gets to participate in the vote.

cov let someone else win too if ais doesn’t want to post a dov!

@Clucky: it isn’t “doesn’t want to”, it’s “legally can’t” – there is a rule against posting two DoVs in quick succession.

CoV in the hopes of delaying the queue until the CFJ is decided.

okay, so you tried a scam and it didn’t work and now maybe there are consequences.

I’m holding my vote on this until the situation is a little clearer but I’m leaning towards FOR.

CoV given that I think that this also doesn’t work, and don’t want yet another set of arguments about whether a win is valid or not (especially if the dice pick me again).

  Withdrawn. The whole purpose of this propsoal was more to say *how* we should pick a winner while the main roll-off proposal was illegal, and favoured speed over precise language.

If my cfj passes (or looks sure to pass), I’m happy for this to be replaced with something more airtight.

dude at least be honest about the fact that you just don’t want someone else to win

(sorry that may have been over the line I’m off to bed)

Would have voted against this for giving Raven1207 (who made one small Mill action early doors, then effectively stopped playing the dynasty entirely) equal winshare with the five people who were actively trying to get their Equity up and play the game.

It doesn’t seem a good message to send that sometimes you can win a dynasty by joining it at the start and doing nothing, or almost nothing. The next dynasty would not be improved by having more people doing that.