For context, I wasn’t aware of the loophole until it its ruletext had already been enacted, and it was pointed out for me that the ruleset now said that I should perform an action. I didn’t discuss or plan anything ahead of time.

per my comment on Chiiika’s CfJ that I should have notified the group of the loophole, under my Imperial Style.

As noted in the discord, I think also the “will oppose mechanics which reward or punish players for being online or offline at particular times - which may include daily and weekly actions - or which incentivise rapid responses to game event” part of your imperial style also means even in a scam-friendly world, I’m not sure assisting with this would’ve been in line with imperial styles

It was worth a try.

Quite unfortunate given how clean of a scam it was - don’t see how this won’t pass though

I do feel that we were scammed fair and square. Reverting it doesn’t seem like the correct move to me- making it benefit us, like with “Poppy Trimming”, is how I’d prefer to deal with it.

CoV, might as well at least try to dig my feet in

The scam itself was clean, but the argument here is that Kevan’s reaction to the scam wasn’t, based on his declaration of Imperial Style. He set up an expectation with the rest of the players that wasn’t followed through completely.

I don’t feel like there’s any reason to be pushy about it, even if it means rolling back a successful scam, which ordinarily I wouldn’t support. I don’t want to approach this dynasty with a “win-at-all-costs” attitude that winds up discouraging a lot of players from continuing to play.

CoV temporarily

I do think there is maybe a missing element of imperial style here that gives Kevan a bit of grace

Scam-Averse says “will only assist a scam if the rules require them to”

Timekeeper says “will oppose mechanics”

Is the “should” enough of a “requirement” that even following those, once the scam was in place, Kevan needed to help execute it? Or does a “should” give him leeway to avoid doing the action?

Likewise, does being a timekeeper only apply to what rules you allow in, and not to how you conduct actions?

[JonathanDark] This wasn’t really a successful scam, though, because step 2 of it was “and then the ten Closed Trucks all take a Closed Action so we can progress to Night”. The Open Trucks only get their loophole advantage if the larger group agrees to advance the game without changing the ruleset in their favour first. That was the likely outcome irrespective of any Imperial Style questions.

[Clucky] Oh, I’m not considering the “oppose mechanics” of Timekeeper as extending to how those mechanics are used once they’re in the ruleset, just my attitude to them when they’re proposed or I consider amending them.

If the group enacts something that I think goes against Timekeeping and the ruleset says that I should do it, then I’ll do it, I won’t impose some lengthy artificial delay of my own invention to make it fairer to all timezones. In the same way being a Timekeeper won’t affect how quickly I close or vote on a CfJ, even if I think that a currently sleeping player might be able to persuasively change some votes if I held back.

“Should” is still defined in the Appendix as “is recommended that”, despite the fact that we often treat it as a “must” conceptually.

The funny thing is that there are more times that “should” is interpreted as “I can do the opposite”; looking back last dynasty.

* can be interpreted

TBH I have continually seen the concept of “should” create more problems than it solves

@Trapdoorspyder Feel free to take up the mantle if you wish https://wiki.blognomic.com/index.php?title=Imperative_Rework

@Kevan yeah I think that is where some of the friction is coming from. In my mind, timekeeper shouldn’t be doing things that punish players for not being online in a certain window.

I stabbed it once way earlier when I’m not that fluent around here, it’s kinda like the old bug nobody dare to stab.

[Clucky] A Timekeeper could cover some of that with a blanket approach along the lines of “don’t perform any game action where any of the relevant ruletext has changed in the previous 24 hours”, so that everyone always had enough time to react, but that feels like it could slow things down a lot.