Saturday, February 03, 2018

Call for Judgment: Packing Peanuts

yawned by card 5-0
this cfj got 3 yawns

Adminned at 04 Feb 2018 06:15:21 UTC

Set Cuddlebeam’s Inventory to “Binoculars! Hard-Hat* Backpack Sewing Kit”, their Alertness to 5, their Health to 7 and their Hangover to zero.

Set Samzeman’s Alertness to 4.

To the end of “Atomic Actions”, add:-

A Resident may not take more than one Atomic Action at the same time.

Add a new rule, “Redelivery”:-

When choosing randomly-chosen non-Structural items for a Crate, the Government may instead choose Wood, Blueprints, Nails, Blueprints, Kindling and Energy Drink, and repeal this rule.

Replace “Randomly choose a Supply that isn’t in a Resident’s Inventory already with the text Blueprints in its name and add it to your Inventory.” with:-

Randomly choose a type of Supply from those with the text Blueprints in their name, excluding those which are in a Resident’s Inventory already, and add it to your Inventory.

If a quorum of Residents included the word “yawn” in a comment on this CfJ, set Cuddlebeam’s Alertness to 1 and Hangover to 10.

Rider added as a reminder that these pointless, easy-to-fix mid-game scams are quite boring for everyone else, who have to tidy up afterwards or stand around waiting for the game to be repaired.



03-02-2018 20:40:35 UTC

Could we even say “A Resident may not take more than one action at the same time” ?

Kevan: City he/him

03-02-2018 20:41:06 UTC

Not endorsing any reading of the Blueprints rule, but may as well reword it now in case a consensus emerges. Also: a yawn for having had to write this fix instead of doing something else.


03-02-2018 20:43:32 UTC

I don’t see the difference, there have been counter-CFJs to try to anul my would-be wins and DoVs even if I do attempt scams at the end the game, with my DoV up.


Kevan: City he/him

03-02-2018 20:52:09 UTC

[Diabecko] Certainly worth discussing, but I wouldn’t want to risk the vote being split on a CfJ to get the game back up, if it turns out there are some arguments against saying it that broadly. Let’s just get the game running again.


03-02-2018 21:00:58 UTC

Ok I understand, but I just want to point out that if we don’t generalise this to all actions then the same “scam” can be attempted elsewhere, any time a first action renders the second illegal (like daily actions for example). You could post two (or more) simultaneous daily actions and bypass the limitation. In fact, with the ruleset explicitely stating that atomic actions cannot be simultaneous, it give more weight to someone stating non-atomic actions can.
(but it would be useless to attempt such a scam I suppose since a similar CfJ would be used there ;-)


03-02-2018 21:02:35 UTC

(the daily actions example was a bad example since it’s not really written in way that says “if this action has already been done blah blah” but you get the point)


03-02-2018 21:03:25 UTC

Anyways for


03-02-2018 21:05:08 UTC

(and I’m not up to the point where I would y*** on this but maybe in the future yes ;-D)


03-02-2018 21:09:48 UTC


It’s just correct for me to be sleepy, but I also don’t want to be a dick, so hmm.


03-02-2018 21:13:44 UTC


I’m conflicted, due to this being the first time I’ve experienced this, so I’ll be deferential about it.

Kevan: City he/him

03-02-2018 21:20:51 UTC

[Cuddlebeam] Have there? If your scam gets you to a DoV, then that’s where it rises or falls. I don’t think we’ve ever seen a “fail that active and legal DoV because we don’t like it” CfJ.

If you’d used these scams to win, we’d now be voting on what just happened, and if enough people agreed with your reading of the rules, you’d win. Burning them all midgame to do something short of winning just means that even if people agree with your reading, they can and will clean things up, and (depending on how much advantage you grabbed from the scam) bring you back down to the level that they’d all been playing at.

I appreciate there’s a viable strategy in doubling-down with every attempted scam and hoping that the CfJs don’t quite catch up with you in time, hoping that a window emerges to grab 3 more Money before this CfJ can enact, and all that. But if there’s no potential for that and you’re just messing with the gamestate for mess’s sake, it’s not much fun from the other side, it’s just about deciding who’s going to go and get the mop.


03-02-2018 21:50:25 UTC


DoV failed via CfJ, and “If Cuddlebeam is The Director, remove that title from Cuddlebeam and make Diabecko The Director.”

So, even if I did succeed, this would remove my dynasty if I had won it legitimately.
“Set the gamestate to the values it had at March 20th 2017 08:46:00 UTC”

Which, would’ve meant that the gamestate of having “achieved victory” wouldn’t be there, and the DoV would stop being such, because its a gamestate item.

Also, there are times when people let the result of my scams be, and others where they revert them. It’s arbitrary.

Here, my players with obscene stats was allowed

And at other times, like here, complete reversion is proposed.

So, I don’t have a good reason time my scams at the beginning or the end of anything. Heck, even while I have all of the Money and waiting for the discard to get victory, it could’ve been cancelled as well with a CFJ during the wait.

Much like how this one went:

So yeah. I don’t have much of a reason to time my scams at any particular moment, aside from doing them first and hope that it slips through the CFJ cracks or that the arbitrariness allows part of it through.


03-02-2018 22:06:42 UTC

(Hrm, that first one is a CFJ but not a usual CFJ to be voted on actually, but anyways, we have those other cases)


03-02-2018 22:23:16 UTC

for Yawn. Mid-game, end-game, whatever, I don’t like these scams at any point.

Kevan: City he/him

03-02-2018 22:23:37 UTC

Yes, the first one seems to be Card repeating your scam to undo the effects of your scam.

The second one is an invocation of Fair Play, a rule which explicitly calls for “a proposal or CfJ [to] be made to reprimand or punish the perpetrator”. Which seems fair enough: if someone DoVs and thanks their quorum of legal-but-discouraged sockpuppet accounts, we would strip them of the win.

The final two look like they’re players using CfJs to undo massive stat boosts which you hadn’t made a DoV about, presumably because the rules were such that you hadn’t yet achieved victory, merely achieved a very big number? Which is the thing.


03-02-2018 22:29:56 UTC

@Kevan: I had an amount of victories due to those massive numbers (I won all matches) and then I got to keep the numbers, yes.

If you need more arbitrarily scam-favorable CFJs, here another:

Where, I should’ve done the rolls before the Combo, but instead of cancelling the attempted scam or whatever, it was handed a sort of pass.


03-02-2018 22:30:50 UTC

(An amount of Bloggball match victories, not victory of the game itself)


04-02-2018 06:13:36 UTC

yawn although it’s impossible for quorum now so I’ll just enact this for