Friday, July 14, 2017

Call for Judgment: Quicker Bureaucracy

Times out 1-5. Failed by pokes.

Adminned at 16 Jul 2017 12:24:06 UTC

I believe that there will be cases where the same Promises might be broken repeatedly (for example, I possibly might trigger a Backlash with every Proposal and that might bog down things). So this Call for Proposal aims to remove redundant Backlashes (and add some extra useful info too).

Add to “Pact Magic”:

The Date of the latest Extreme Seizure a Pactmaker has been was given is tracked on “Seizure Date” in the GNDT.

A Pactmaker can voluntarily publicly state that they Crack a Promise along an action - this breaks that Promise (regardless of if that action breaks that Promise’s text content or not). Then, such an action then cannot be a target of a Magic Backlash due to that Promise, and the the appropriate GNDT/Wiki/other game values are changed as per the consequences a Magic Backlash, if it was applied at the time of performing that action and towards the action with the Promise Cracking.

Avoiding repeated Magic Backlash bureaucracy for the same thing, but keeping the same effects as if such a Backlash had happened (Scorn rewards, etc, are kept).


Kevan: HE/HIM

07-14-2017 09:06:49 UTC

Agreed on the bureaucracy, but it seems wrong to make this an objective “game values are changed”, when Backlashes are normally a subjective vote. The “same kind of infraction” seems broad enough that it could cover angles which would have failed a vote.


07-14-2017 09:59:19 UTC

Hrm. Maybe a post with “if at least quorum of quorum does not object in 24 hours, this (Re-)Backlash happens again”


07-14-2017 10:03:57 UTC

(But, ugh, thats more posts lol. Maybe just have it always around as a sticky, hrm. This mini judicial system is so cool, but man, the paperwork lol)


07-14-2017 10:25:25 UTC

OK. This might not be the best solution, but it works.

For example, I can go “I crack promise #4. That proposal could make Apples turn into Potatoes.”


07-14-2017 13:05:26 UTC

This could be made much more simple by stating that either the Promise is broken, or it isn’t, and removing the moral clause “Pactmakers should not break their own Promise/s”.

This way, Pactmakers can break their Promises; but by doing so they will incur Magic Backlashes. Once a Promise is broken, it is no longer binding, because there is no additional punishment incurred for “breaking it a second time”.


07-14-2017 15:54:35 UTC

against CfP


07-14-2017 16:38:14 UTC

Also against due to being a CfP

Kevan: HE/HIM

07-14-2017 17:23:44 UTC


A useful shortcut might be to say that if somebody admits they broke a promise, we don’t have to vote on it.


07-14-2017 22:27:42 UTC


Publius Scribonius Scholasticus: HE/THEY

07-15-2017 12:53:56 UTC