Monday, December 13, 2021

Call for Judgment: Perdurability Haplurability

Reached quorum, 7-0. Enacted by TyGuy6. (No visible changes to ruleset/gamestate tracking.)

Adminned at 13 Dec 2021 10:32:22 UTC

Uphold the Ascension Address here: https://blognomic.com/archive/rooooad_triiiiip as being legally performed

Once the DOV was enacted, we ceased to be in the 8th Dynasty of Brendan and instead entered an Interregnum

Due to that, the clause ” it is the Eighth Dynasty of Brendan and the player named Brendan is the Emperor,” became false. Thus the paragraph

“Only the enactment of a Votable Matter can change the text of Perdurable Rules, except as specified in a Perdurable Rule; if a Votable Matter would modify a Perdurable Rule, and that Votable Matter is not Unanimous, then that Votable Matter is not Popular.”

ceased to be flavor text and became binding rule text.

This made making any ascension address that changed the term for “soul” illegal, as it changed the text of Perdurable Rules but was not the enactment of a voteable matter.

posted by Clucky at 13 Dec 2021 06:23:00 UTC Comments (9)

Comments

Janet: she/her

13-12-2021 06:36:57 UTC

for I suppose

lemon: she/her

13-12-2021 06:46:03 UTC

for will this cfj fail if it isn’t unanimous? is there a difference between changing the perdurable rules & upholding a change to them?

Janet: she/her

13-12-2021 06:57:29 UTC

I believe it does fail if not unanimous.

Raven1207: he/they

13-12-2021 07:10:26 UTC

for

Clucky: he/him

13-12-2021 07:59:25 UTC

@lemon its a bit of a philosophical question as to when the ruleset actually changes if this were to pass.

one could argue that this doesn’t actually change the rules. it just says that the rules as they currently appear are the rules, and that the AA even though it was legally performed is what changed the rules. In which case, it doesn’t need to be unanimous

one could also argue that the rules don’t actually change until this passes. in which case it would need to be unanimous, and in which case we might need Brendan to get rid of “Unanimity and Perdurability” under “Irreparability”

Josh: Observer he/they

13-12-2021 09:00:47 UTC

I’m not completely convinced that this is necessary but it doesn’t hurt.  for

I also don’t think it needs to be unanimous as it does not directly change the perdurable rules.

TyGuy6:

13-12-2021 09:15:56 UTC

I think legally performing an AA isn’t the right step to uphold. It’s the second step where you actually “Update the Ruleset to reflect any changed terms…”

Kevan: he/him

13-12-2021 09:49:27 UTC

for

TyGuy6:

13-12-2021 10:27:14 UTC

for Maybe it works, anyway.