Hi all. There were a lot of backed up proposals, so I went ahead and adminned them.
Two of the Enacted ones were tricky, since they referenced rules that didn’t exist. I just wanted to draw peoples attention to the Admin text of http://blognomic.com/archive/swots_and_troublemakers/ and http://blognomic.com/archive/it_tolls_not_for_you/.
Thanks. Hopefully I’ll have time during this dynasty to re-activate and join in.
You should probably just ban quoting rules by number, to avoid a potential scam. (Or fix the number of rules rather than numbering them automatically, like some nomics do.)
We tried banning quoting rules by number before. It just got confusing as people kept accidentally quoting a rule by number and we found out just a bit too late that we aren’t allowed to do that.
BlogNomic is an online Nomic: a self-modifying game where changing the rules is part of the game. Players make blog posts proposing additions or alterations to the ruleset, discussing and casting votes in the comments: if enough vote in favour, the rules are changed and play continues.
The game has been running since 2003 and resets every month or so. Have a look around the wiki for more information and history. New players are always welcome and can join in the game at any time.
BlogNomic is powered by pMachine ExpressionEngine.
Kevan: he/him
Thanks for being scrupulous. Maybe we should explicitly allow some leeway where the title matches but the rule number doesn’t, to cover numbering changes when a rule is repealed and later proposals forgot to take it into account.
We’ve only lost “If a Student is the subject of a Grudge by every Teacher, then that student is put on Detention.” and the repeal of Rule 2.2, so no great loss.