Saturday, March 09, 2024

Proposal: Snap Happy

Popular, 6-0. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 10 Mar 2024 06:12:15 UTC

Add a new dynastic rule to the ruleset, called Shots:

Seekers may create Shots by taking photographs (or having photographs taken on their behalf) and hosting them through the image hosting functionality offered by the BlogNomic wiki.

A Shot is confirmed as Authentic if it includes an appearance of a hand-written note (as part of the Shot) which includes the name of an active Seeker and the Merriam Webster Word of the Day for the day on which the Shot was taken, or the preceding day (per

Add a new dynastic rule to the ruleset, called Criteria:

There exist a number of Public Criteria, which are a type of Criteria, and which are listed in this rule. Each Seeker has a set of up to five Private Criteria, which are a type of Criteria - defaulting to blank - which are privately tracked by themselves, and which are publicly tracked through the use of an sha256 hash which includes those criteria as well as a reasonable (no more than 5 character) salt. A Seeker may set or amend their Private Criteria as a weekly action.

An Authentic Shot’s Criteria Score is equal to the number of Criteria it meets.

The following Public Criteria exist:
* The Shot was taken in an outside location.


Brendan: he/him

09-03-2024 17:29:07 UTC

Not voting yet, but I am unidling myself; quorum rises to 4.

I see that the opening sentence of “Photos” is based on the same rule from Kevan XVIII, but reading it now makes it seem vulnerable to someone waiting until we’re well into the dynasty and announcing that taking and hosting are separate actions that invalidate all the etc etc etc. Maybe something like “Seekers may create Shots by hosting photos they took themselves via the image upload functionality of the BlogNomic wiki?”

Josh: he/they

09-03-2024 17:33:11 UTC

Have updated as suggested.


09-03-2024 17:47:36 UTC

Possible private criteria should probably be restricted to avoid things like “The photo doesn’t contain a hippopotamus, nor a crocodile, nor a beaver, nor a sloth, nor a dancing pink toaster”

JonathanDark: he/him

09-03-2024 18:18:28 UTC

Criteria should be positively-stated, if that’s an acceptable way to define it.

Clucky: he/him

09-03-2024 19:27:10 UTC

Even positive feels dangerous if people can just define whatever they want. “This photo contains the color blue” would be pretty easy to hit

Do we know how the word of the day site works? I know with Wordle, people figured out how to get the word list and inspect future words. Probably a good idea to make it clear such behavior violates fair play (though maybe need an exception if Aussie folks can see the new word of the day prior to 0:00:00 UTC)

JonathanDark: he/him

09-03-2024 19:49:11 UTC

Sounds like we need to narrow down Private Criteria as “describing a person, place, or object” with some other limit that prevents something as generic as “sky” but could include “clouds” or “stars”

Clucky: he/him

09-03-2024 23:55:00 UTC

I unidle for real

Clucky: he/him

10-03-2024 00:17:01 UTC



10-03-2024 00:57:59 UTC

for  I don’t know that we can write such a rule that isn’t overly restrictive. Is it necessary? Can we trust each other to not be knobheads?

Brendan: he/him

10-03-2024 03:50:13 UTC

naught: no.


Snisbo: she/they

10-03-2024 04:07:48 UTC

@naught: scam wins are a large subset of wins here, and those are basically nothing *but* being knobheads :p


JonathanDark: he/him

10-03-2024 04:30:00 UTC