Saturday, July 17, 2021

Call for Judgment: [Pressing] Purity, untracked

Quorum against: failed 0 votes to 5, by Kevan.

Adminned at 17 Jul 2021 18:05:20 UTC

In “Purification”, amend

Purified rooms always Lit have a background color of

to

Purified rooms are always Lit. The purification status of each room is tracked by setting the background colour of Purified rooms (and only Purified rooms) on the Zahndorf Crypt map to

If the proposal “Wow, look, nothing!” is still pending, edit its text to

In “Purification”, change “background colour of Purified rooms (and only Purified rooms) on the Zahndorf Crypt map to #99F.” to “background colour of Purified rooms (and only Purified rooms) on the Zahndorf Crypt map to #2FF3E0.”

Change the first sentence of the second paragraph of “The Crypt of Dracula” to

The background colour of a room on the map can be specified by other rules. If it is not, it should be the colour associated with the first description in the following list that applies to the room: #444444 if Dark; #CCCC00 if a Sepulchre; #CC6666 if Daunting; #8888CC if Familiar; #888888 if Lit. Lit Rooms also have their name specified on the map.

In “Effects”, change

Whenever a room has the effect “Cursed”

to

Whenever a room other than a Ritual Chamber has the effect “Cursed”

Uphold the Offering of a Prayer to Penelopa that was performed at 21:35, 16 July 2021. Set the room named Broken Stage to be Purified. Set all other rooms to not be Purified (setting their background colour as appropriate for the type of room).

So it turns out that we have an untracked variable that makes Entering the Crypt impossible (because whether a room is Purified or not is an orphan variable, and that orphan variable affects Richardo’s Energy level changes).

This change gives it a tracking mechanism (via the background colour on the map; this makes Ritual Chambers unPurifiable so that there isn’t a contradiction of background colours), causing it to no longer be orphaned. The CFJ is worded to work regardless of whether “Wow, look, nothing!” is pending, enacted or failed.

It’s also not 100% obvious that you can perform an action that *changes* an orphan variable (in situations where the variable’s status otherwise doesn’t matter). This upholds the one Purification attempt we’ve had so far. (No further Purification is legal until this CFJ passes because no rooms have appropriate effects, so there’s no need to try to react to further Purifications.)

Comments

Clucky: he/him

17-07-2021 07:04:56 UTC

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

Clucky: he/him

17-07-2021 07:10:40 UTC

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.”

Clucky: he/him

17-07-2021 07:15:44 UTC

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

ais523:

17-07-2021 08:07:53 UTC

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.

Josh: he/him

17-07-2021 08:19:39 UTC

against 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.

Kevan: he/him

17-07-2021 10:59:45 UTC

against Cell colour does appear to be gamestate.

ais523:

17-07-2021 14:54:46 UTC

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.)

Kevan: he/him

17-07-2021 15:24:38 UTC

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?

Kevan: he/him

17-07-2021 15:30:45 UTC

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

ais523:

17-07-2021 16:23:25 UTC

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.

ais523:

17-07-2021 16:26:06 UTC

against 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.

Clucky: he/him

17-07-2021 16:35:40 UTC

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

ais523:

17-07-2021 16:54:21 UTC

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.

ais523:

17-07-2021 17:07:11 UTC

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.

Raven1207: he/him

17-07-2021 17:38:03 UTC

against