Proposal: Permission to conceal
Fewer than a quorum not voting AGAINST. Failed 1-6 by Kevan.
Adminned at 11 Apr 2025 08:11:38 UTC
Append as a new paragraph at the end of “Routes”:
The Concierge may publicly reveal the number of Agents who have blank Routes as a daily action, either via a blog post or comment or via placing the value on the gamestate tracking page. The Concierge is encouraged to do so in cases where they believe that gameplay is stalled due to a lack of Route submissions, and may do so at other times.
In the Appendix, in Appendix rule “Numbers and Variables”, remove
If a piece of information is described as being tracked secretly or privately by the Concierge (including secretly random selections), then that information may only be revealed by the Concierge when the ruleset allows it. If an Agent should already know such a piece of information (in that the Concierge has already told them it, or vice versa, and there is no way that the information could have been changed since then), the Concierge may repeat it to them.
In the Appendix, after “Numbers and Variables”, add a new Appendix rule “Privately tracked information”:
“Secretly tracked” and “privately tracked” are considered to be synonyms. Selections that are made secretly randomly are also considered to be privately tracked, as is the history of a privately tracked gamestate variable.
If a piece of information was described as being privately tracked at the point in time when it most recently changed, then the person tracking it may only reveal it in situations where the Ruleset permits doing so, or when an enacted proposal specifies that it should be revealed, or when performing an action that is explicitly permitted by the ruleset and that requires the information to be revealed. If a rule describes such information as being tracked by the Concierge, the reference to the Concierge refers to the person who was Concierge at the time the information most recently changed (even if there is now a different Concierge, e.g. due to an enacted Declaration of Victory).
Agents and idle Agents who are privately tracking information may reveal it if both of the following requirements are met:
* Prior to the point at which the information was most recently changed, but during the same dynasty, the player who was Concierge at the time had stated an Imperial Style that indicates circumstances under which the information may or should be disclosed, and those circumstances currently hold.
* The information is revealed in a blog post or comment (and not, e.g., in a private message).If an Agent should already know such a piece of privately tracked information (in that the person tracking it has already told them it, or vice versa, and there is no way that the information could have been changed since then), the person tracking it may repeat it to the Agent who should already know it.
Add a new section to the Imperial Styles wiki page, with title “Disclosure of privately tracked information”, and text:
* Undisclosed (specifies that privately tracked information generated during the dynasty will not be revealed even after the dynasty, except via dynastic mechanics that would reveal it)
* Disclosed (specifies that privately tracked information generated during the dynasty should be disclosed after the dynasty or during Interregnum, unless it has already become revealed earlier)
* Open (specifies that no privately tracked information is expected to be used in the dynasty, and any privately tracked information that does come into existence may be revealed immediately)
A revised version of “Permission to reveal”.
In terms of dynastic changes, this changes the rate of route-setting reveal to daily (and gives the Concierge discretion to omit updates if the pace of gameplay is fine even without them).
As for the Appendix changes, many Agents expressed the sentiment that the Appendix should place more restrictions on revealing information than it currently does (at present, it allows unrestricted revealing of information after the dynasty’s DoV is enacted or if the rule defining the information is repealed, may also allow disclosing the history of privately tracked information even while the current value is publicly tracked, and might potentially force the reveal of all the information to the new Emperor once the DoV is enacted, so that they can track it). As such, this creates a more lasting requirement to protect the information rather than making it depend on the current dynastic rules (in an Appendix rule so that the requirement persists through dynasties rather than being repealed every dynasty), but allows the use of Imperial Styles to allow disclosure earlier (and I would very much encourage Emperors to choose Disclosed or Open as their style – I believe that it leads to a better game).
In order to prevent abuses of privately tracked information, the player tracking it (typically the Emperor at the time, who might be different from the current Emperor) has to reveal it to everyone at once (using a blog post or comment), not privately. This prevents Emperors from, e.g., trading private information from previous dynasties for favours in a future dynasty, which is a sort of abuse that’s apparently legal under the current rules.
per Kevan
Kevan: Concierge he/him
“many Agents expressed the sentiment that the Appendix should place more restrictions on revealing information than it currently does” - I don’t think they did. The sentiment seemed more that the group had been playing the current rule under its intended spirit since 2021 and most wanted to continue doing that, but you thought it should be rewritten in a more watertight manner.
Which may be a fool’s errand. Your proposal doesn’t seem to cover idle Emperors, and ultimately simply couldn’t cover a situation where an Emperor ceased to be a player and then shared the information. A simpler statement of expectation seems enough, perhaps moved to Fair Play.