Monday, March 31, 2025

Proposal: Set Your Watch

Withdrawn. Failed by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 01 Apr 2025 03:18:26 UTC

If “Trouble at Mill” was not enacted, the rest of this Proposal has no effect.

In “Discs and Jokers”, before the text “the Imperator may set every Nomicer’s Discs to 3”, replace “As a weekly action” with “As an action named Disc Refresh”.

In the same rule, add the following text:

There is a Refresh Time which is a number privately tracked by the Imperator that defaults to 168. As a Weekly Action, the Imperator should privately roll DICE48, subtract the result of that roll from 168, set the Refresh Time to that roll. If Disc Refresh has never been performed by the Imperator, or it has been at least Refresh Time hours since the Imperator has last done so, the Imperator should perform Disc Refresh, subject to any other restrictions already mentioned.

I like Kevan’s idea, and this adds some randomness to the Imperator’s refresh of the Discs, to avoid Nomicers simply guessing the pattern of when the refresh will happen.

Comments

JonathanDark: he/him

31-03-2025 15:18:29 UTC

I claim “action” as the target of my Ladder Combo. It has a value of 3 from this Proposal, “Trouble at Mill”, and “No Self-Laddering”.

SingularByte: he/him

31-03-2025 16:11:52 UTC

I’m going to leave it up to Josh whether he feels like this is worth the additional effort.

As for the Ladder Combo, sorry but you need to spend a disc ahead of time for the claim to be valid. Given that I’m not in a position to claim it myself, I might as well block it so nobody tries to snipe it with a proposal of their own.

SingularByte: he/him

31-03-2025 16:12:04 UTC

imperial action

Josh: Imperator he/they

31-03-2025 16:20:52 UTC

against I think that this will actually mae the timings less random, as it will cut down the pool of available hours in the week for me to select from.

JonathanDark: he/him

31-03-2025 16:27:18 UTC

Oops on me for forgetting to spend a Disc.

DoomedIdeas: he/him

31-03-2025 17:22:03 UTC

against
@SingularByte I don’t believe the rule text allows any EVC on any proposal to create a sin? In the discord, you previously noted that the proposed allowance for sin-creation via EVC did not work on the original proposal. Could you clarify why it should work here?

Raven1207: he/they

31-03-2025 17:23:44 UTC

against

SingularByte: he/him

31-03-2025 17:29:40 UTC

@DoomedIdeas That’s because the original proposal wasn’t claiming a combo ladder. The reference to “this proposal” was in the rule itself rather than just part of the proposal so it’s referring to the proposals created in the claiming of a combo ladder.

ais523:

31-03-2025 17:47:25 UTC

against Trying to randomize this has the issue that if it hits a time where Josh is asleep, it’ll likely be performed when Josh wakes up, which is a fairly predictable timing.

JonathanDark: he/him

31-03-2025 18:27:55 UTC

against Withdrawn

DoomedIdeas: he/him

31-03-2025 18:42:29 UTC

@SingularByte Oh, okay! Thank you for the clarification.