If this CFJ is valid, the lit/unlit status of a room is also orphaned so there are far bigger upholding problems this CfJ doesn’t fix

Fortunately, I think room colors mean this stuff isn’t actually orphaned

yeah we’re good

“An Orphan Variable is a dynastic gamestate variable which has neither a location in which it’s tracked, *nor a reasonable manner in which it can be determined from other gamestate variables*, specified in the Ruleset.”

as there isn’t actually an issue that needs to be pressingly fixed because “Purified” is not a untracked variable

Litness is tracked: “There is a list of Lit rooms which is publicly tracked”, so you can determine if a room is Lit by whether it’s on the list.

Purifiedness is not tracked. There isn’t anything that states how to determine it from tracked variables. (The background colour of the map is not a tracked variable unless something says that it is.)

In any case, voting down a CFJ without offering a counter-CFJ is a bad idea – it leaves people disagreeing as to what the gamestate is.

per Clucky - the background colour of the map is defined by gamestate and changed based on the status of the room, so it’s a tracked variable. No issue here.

Cell colour does appear to be gamestate.

I don’t understand why you’d vote AGAINST this CFJ if you think there isn’t a problem.

This CFJ is trying to fix things in the direction that says there isn’t a problem. If you vote against it, that effectively means that you’re deciding that there is a problem, and is effectively giving me a license to revert any actions taken on the basis that Purifiedness is tracked.

Like, this CFJ is literally trying to uphold an action, and you’re saying “no”, so that means you think the action is invalid. I’m therefore going to revert it. The CFJ to undo my revert would look identical to this one.

Note that even if you think it’s tracked whether or not most map cells are Purified, it’s definitely undefined whether or not Ritual Chambers are Purified; they have background colour overrides, and nothing in the ruleset specifies whether they’re untracked or not. (In fact, I don’t think it’s certain that they aren’t Purified right now; the rule that defined Purification didn’t state that rooms should be unPurified by default.)

The back and forth at this point would be you either saying “I now see that cell colour is gamestate and there is no problem” or “I now see that cell colour is gamestate, but there’s still a problem”.

Is there still a problem?

(Or “You’re wrong! Cell colour isn’t gamestate, because”, of course.)

I think there may be a problem with respect to Ritual Chambers, under the current ruleset; the rules don’t specify any way to resolve the contradiction in background colour overrides where a room is simultaneously Ritual and Purified. However, that’s a case of “this is ambiguous” rather than “this is unambiguously wrong”, so I’m willing to just go with it until someone complains.

“United Colors” (currently pending) seems to introduce a tracking problem, even if there isn’t one currently, but I’ve put a proposal just after it in the queue in order to fix that.

So I think “Ritual Chambers are never Purified” would be a sufficient fix to the remaining issues, and I have a proposal in place to fix that at the moment.

A) there is already a “Ritual Chambers can never be Purified” rule

B) “voting down a CFJ without offering a counter-CFJ is a bad idea” shows a profound misunderstanding of how CFJs work

The rule says “Ritual chambers can never become Purified”, which doesn’t discount the possibility that they were Purified to start with.

I think they aren’t, but purely by coincidence of their background colours all happening to be darker than #99F.

Hmm, thinking about it… suppose that “Penolpa’s Purification Project” had said “Set all rooms to Unpurified, except the Yellow Bile Chamber which is Purified” (that would work, because proposals don’t affect their own enactment so the proposal could set an otherwise unPurifiable room to be Purified). It seems reasonable that the admin might choose not to update the background colour on the map (because there’s a rule that explicitly sets the background colour of that square), so the square might still be yellow-bile-coloured on the map. In that case, we’d have no evidence on the dynastic tracking page that the room actually was Purified.

In order to determine that that hasn’t happened, we need to look at the text of the original proposal. Isn’t that the entire purpose behind the orphaned variable rule?

However, I think you can probably get away with saying “this contradiction between rules would create an untracked variable if we resolved it one way, so we should resolve it the other way”, and the contradiction is only a contradiction in a hypothetical situation that didn’t actually occur (so knowing how the contradiction would be resolved is only important in determining that that situation in fact didn’t occur). So the remaining issues with orphaned variables are very minor and might not exist, and I’m happy to let things slide unless someone else decides to CFJ over them.