Wednesday, February 24, 2021

Proposal: Slacktavism [Appendix]

self killed—Clucky

Adminned at 26 Feb 2021 03:27:50 UTC

Add a section to the “Appendix” between “Atomic Actions” and “Clarifications” called “Accounts” with the following text

Electors, including Idle Electors, may operate accounts on services other than the blog. Those accounts, if listed here, are known as Related Accounts. Each related Account has an Identifier for that account. The possible Related Accounts and their identifiers are:
* An account on the Wiki. Identifier is the wiki account’s user name.
* An account on the Slack. Identifier is the slack account’s display name.
Electors, including Idle Electors, are highly encouraged to have the Identifier for their related Accounts be the same as their name, or be one which it is easy to infer what their name is. If an Elector has a Related Account whose Identifier does not match their name, they must update the “Account Names” wiki page to list their blog name, the type of related account, and the identifier for that account. An Elector or Idle Elector may not operate a Related Account whose identifier is designed to mislead other Electors into thinking they are someone else.

Comments

Lulu: she/her

24-02-2021 20:43:50 UTC

Grammar issue: “other than blog” isn’t right.

Josh: Observer he/they

25-02-2021 09:57:26 UTC

against I don’t think that this needs to be formalised.

Kevan: he/him

25-02-2021 10:10:38 UTC

Imperative thing: “they must update the “Account Names” wiki page to list their blog name” - what if they don’t?

I’m not sure if we need this, or how far it needs to go. Really, it should probably go further and say that Related Accounts aren’t recognised by the game until the holotype blog player has said something to that effect - it’s odd that the wiki account gets to do the Account Names confirmation. (A “User:Kevan2” wiki account could update Account Names to claim that they’re me, and start taking game actions. Which I could CfJ, but why not cover it in advance?)

It might be enough to just add a more general “may not mislead other Electors into thinking they are someone else” into Fair Play, which would cover other contact methods whenever we have a dynasty with a vague “take an action by informing the Emperor” rule.

Clucky: he/him

25-02-2021 15:45:42 UTC

>  “User:Kevan2” wiki account could update Account Names to claim that they’re me, and start taking game actions

This would be in violation of “An Elector or Idle Elector may not operate a Related Account whose identifier is designed to mislead other Electors into thinking they are someone else.”

I think the “may not mislead other Electors into thinking they are someone else” is a good start, but I’m worried its insufficient. It does not enable rules which formally allow communication via the slack.

There is also the case where instead of taking wiki actions as Kevan2, designed to make people think its Kevan performing the actions when its really me, I take my wiki actions as “BlognomicUser252350”, designed to make people simply not sure who performed the actions. This, I feel, should also be a violation of fair play. But then you run into this issue where there isn’t a clear line between “Username which is okay because its close enough” and “username which isn’t okay”. Which I guess we just can just cfj if it comes up? Nice thing about fair play violations is they aren’t a binary state. Anything in the grey area we can probably just go “okay lets change this wiki username to be clearer”. Formalizing stuff just removes much of the potential risk.

pokes:

25-02-2021 16:23:51 UTC

against

Brendan: he/him

25-02-2021 19:53:46 UTC

against

Clucky: he/him

26-02-2021 03:25:46 UTC

against

freeing up myself a proposal spot