I ask all Vegetables to leave comments on whether they think that Anarchists cannot influence other Vegetables. I assume this conclusion is based on “These Vegetables are considered to be Rotten for the purposes of this Rule”, which appears in Rule 2.3.1 and thus should not restrict attempts to influence. Maybe by discussing it here, we can aviod a CfJ, or at least figure out exactly what issue needs to be CfJ’d.
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.
Comments
Purplebeard:
Strangely enough, the ruleset never defines what ‘rules’ are, and I think this is the main issue here.
I considered ‘rule 2.3.1’ to be merely a subrule to (and part of) rule 2.3, but you may have a point there.
Bucky:
When I wrote it, I had intended it to refer only to text in Rule 2.3.1 and not to text in Rule 2.3
Elias IX:
Arrr… I thought it referred to the entire text of Rule 2.3, which would make for an interesting “Civil Disorder” mechanic.
Bucky:
If it refers to the entire text of Rule 2.3 then there is a paradox because by def. of Rotten no Rotten vegetable has an Inclination. Therefore if you are an Anarchist, you have no inclination and cannot be an Anarchist.