Saturday, February 13, 2016

Proposal: Pure Blood

Fails with quorum against, 1-4. -RaichuKFM

Adminned at 15 Feb 2016 08:31:37 UTC

Add a new Rule, “Pure Blood”, containing the following text:

Each Orc has a numerical amount of “Purity”, ranging from 0-100, defaulting to the average of active Orcs, and tracked in the GNDT.

All Orcs claiming victory must have 100 purity.

If this rule is enacted, all active Orcs start with 100% Purity.

Say what you will about Orcs, they are racist…


quirck: he/him

13-02-2016 20:22:23 UTC

Average of active Orcs? Of number of players?

Shouldn’t the final clause be unconditional and not in a rule, like “set Purity of all Orcs to 100”?



13-02-2016 23:15:24 UTC

Seems a bit too complicated to me…



13-02-2016 23:30:31 UTC

against Per quirck. I unidle, quorum doesn’t change.

RaichuKFM: she/her

13-02-2016 23:44:55 UTC

Broken phrases aside, I think, considering the victory eligibility bit, it should default to 100 period? I’m also not sure if the scale should be so large.

This seems easy enough to either pass and then patch, or just repropose entirely, if people like the mechanic. ...Which, doesn’t seem to be the case.

For the record, “defaulting to the average of active Orcs,” should have been “defaulting to the average Purity of all Orcs”. (You don’t need to specify active, because of Rule 1.2.1 Idle Orcs: “For the purposes of all Gamestate and the Ruleset, excluding Rules “Ruleset and Gamestate”, “Orcs”, “Dynasties”, “Fair Play” and any of those Rules’ subrules, Idle Orcs are not counted as Orcs”)


14-02-2016 11:35:11 UTC

Yes, it should have read “defaulting to the average Purity of all Orcs”.

The defaulting to an average was intended on stopping unidling players from swooping in and claiming victory :)

I don’t think the last clause is unclear; how should initial states be specified if different than the default? If it’s not in a rule how does it have any force?

quirck: he/him

14-02-2016 12:23:04 UTC

Proposals specify changes to not only ruleset but also gamestate, so it is ok to say “Set Purity of all Orcs to 100” (like here). Rules are needed for something more permanent, or for something that should be done not immediately (like here or here).


14-02-2016 13:43:39 UTC

Ah. I understand.

Is there a reason to not post your first comment as a Note:? I’m happy to make clarifying changes such as these…

quirck: he/him

14-02-2016 14:30:41 UTC

Not really. At the time there was only one proposal, so you could immediately SK/repropose it, so I didn’t see any harm in beginning the vote. Besides, the proposal was already 8 hours old, add time to edit it, and the time for actual voting would be reduced by quarter?

As RaichuKFM said, there is always an option to vote FOR the proposal and later put up a fix, but it seems noone chose this way (including RaichuKFM himself)

RaichuKFM: she/her

15-02-2016 08:29:22 UTC

You can, of course, make a new Proposal with a reworked version of the rule, though the reaction to the idea itself didn’t seem the best. against