Friday, June 02, 2023

Proposal: Source Code

timeout, failed 4-5 with 3 unresolved def by chiiika.

Adminned at 04 Jun 2023 08:37:56 UTC

Add a new subrule to “Levels of Reality”, called “Cyphers”:

A Cypher is a string of eight alphanumeric characters, which is tracked secretly in Private Messages between the Cypher’s owner(s) and the Ascendant. When a Mindjacker Cracks a Cypher, they must perform the following Atomic Action to generate it:
* Use the tool at to generate a single string, 8 characters in length, with only numeric digits and uppercase letters enabled. If the Mindjacker already owns the resulting string, they may discard and re-generate it.
* Send a Private Message to the Ascendant containing the string that was generated in the previous step, an indication that they are gaining it as a Cypher, and the total number of Cyphers that they own (counting the newly-gained string). The Mindjacker then owns the generated Cypher.

A Mindjacker may transmit a Cypher to another Mindjacker by sending a Private Message to the Ascendant containing a single Cypher that they own, an indication that they are transmitting it, and the name of the intended recipient. After receiving one such Private Message, the Ascendant should, at their earliest opportunity, send a Private Message to the recipient Mindjacker containing the transmitted Cypher, an indication that the recipient now owns it, and the total number of Cyphers the recipient owns (counting the newly-transmitted Cypher). The recipient Mindjacker then owns that Cypher, if they didn’t already.

To Burn a Cypher, a Mindjacker sends a Private Message to the Ascendant containing that Cypher, an indication that they are Burning it, and the total number of Cyphers that they own (not counting the Cypher that is being Burned). That Mindjacker then no longer owns that Cypher.

A Mindjacker cannot Burn a Cypher that they do not own. If a Mindjacker Burns multiple Cyphers at once, each Cypher Burned should be communicated with a separate Private Message. The Private Message sent when Burning a Cypher is reffered to as a Burn Notice.

Add a new subrule to “Tier 1: Techno-Witch Reality”, called “Scrying”:

A Mindjacker can Scry if they have at least one Cypher to Burn and have made a Story Post no more than 10 minutes beforehand announcing that they are Scrying.

Scrying is an action in which a Mindjacker Burns a Cypher and, in the associated Burn Notice, states that they are Scrying and names a single Tier. After receiving one such Burn Notice, the Ascendant should, at their earliest opportunity, reply to it with a Private Message containing the following information:
* The number of Avatars, if any, whose Home Tier or Occupancy Tier was named in the Burn Notice and whose Name includes one or more characters that match any of those within the Burned Cypher (ignoring letter case differences).
* For each such Avatar, a distinct list of each character that is present in both their Name and the Burned Cypher (once again ignoring letter case), in the order in which they appear in that Avatar’s Name. If a character appears multiple times in an Avatar’s name, it must be present an equal number of times in that Avatar’s list.
* Below each list of characters, a number indicating the total quantity of characters in that Avatar’s Name that are not present in the Burned Cypher. Duplicate characters (i.e. characters that appear multiple times in the Avatar’s Name) are all counted toward the total.

so, this one’s a doozy. here’s a very wacky resource and something to do with it: an action that gives you extensive but incomplete data you can draw from to guess avatars’ names. if this passes, we may want to enact some way of narrowing down or restricting the names of avatars so that they’re guessable. i have an interesting idea involving a daily story post made by the ascendant, each one having lots of fake names and one actual avatar name in it (or perhaps weekly, with even more fake names and all 10 avatars).
this is another mechanic that isn’t plugged in yet, but i feel like this dynasty theme in particular is gonna skew things toward a long setup period before things really kick off :0


Lulu: she/her

02-06-2023 13:33:58 UTC

against in favor of A Symbol Idea


02-06-2023 16:42:11 UTC

against For some mind-boggling reason, it’s historically considered okay to modify the code an external HTML/javascript tool uses when using it, and so we can’t count on “Use” to actually mean that.

Trapdoorspyder: he/him

02-06-2023 16:49:04 UTC


JonathanDark: he/him

02-06-2023 16:51:46 UTC

It’s probably historically ok because it’s infeasible to enforce otherwise.

Kevan: he/him

02-06-2023 17:30:30 UTC

BlogNomic isn’t big on precedent and the code modification one looks a bit hazy regardless, in retrospect - the DoV seems to have been voted through with the method not being explicitly disclosed.


lemon: she/her

02-06-2023 17:36:50 UTC

perhaps it would be fixed if the wording was “randomly generate” instead of just “generate”, thus specifying that it has to be random as intended? if that’s the case, there’d be a safe window for a patch between this proposal’s enactment and the enactment of the first rule allowing mindjackers to crack cyphers.


02-06-2023 17:39:00 UTC

  imperial I like the idea and would vote FOR when more information about the possible javascript scam comes to light.

Kevan: he/him

02-06-2023 17:48:14 UTC

[Lemon] It’d need to be “secretly randomly” so that it didn’t default to the public dice roller. But is there a reason why the Mindjacker is generating the string and informing the Ascendant, rather than the other way around?

lemon: she/her

02-06-2023 18:00:08 UTC

@Kevan firstly, i think that generating every Cypher would be a lot of workload for the Ascendant; and secondly, if the owner of the Cypher doesn’t get to see it until Josh is around to generate it, it introduces a bit of latency to a pretty crucial resource. if we introduce more stuff that you can do with Cyphers, it’ll be increasingly important for players to know what characters are in their Cyphers before they can even plan about what to do next.


02-06-2023 18:29:43 UTC

Now that I think about it, why does it have to be randomly generated. Also I feel the mechanic of sharing Cyphers is unnecessarily complicated for an introductory rule.

Chiiika: she/her

02-06-2023 18:56:21 UTC

against for now, like this idea but don’t like hanging on javascript

Chiiika: she/her

02-06-2023 18:57:25 UTC

can we make a random generator inhouse, or use the existing one?
It would be tedious, but DICE 36 * 8 times can do the same thing without the scam


03-06-2023 02:51:59 UTC


Raven1207: he/they

03-06-2023 02:59:04 UTC


Josh: Bookie he/they

03-06-2023 09:03:52 UTC

I think we added a fix to the ruleset after the code modification scam?

Yeah, Rules and Votable Matters:

When the ruleset calls for the use of a specific tool (such as the dice roller, or an off-domain website, or a specific piece of downloadable software), Mindjackers may not deliberately interfere with the function of that tool except in ways explicitly permitted by the ruleset.


Trapdoorspyder: he/him

03-06-2023 17:16:19 UTC

CoV for because this does seem fun


03-06-2023 17:32:58 UTC

In the interests of not violating “No Collaboration”, I’m publicly disclosing the following communication from discord:

Lemon said: oi, a bunch of y’all voted against or imperial on Source Code on the basis of a scam that doesn’t exist! any chance we could see some switches to for and maybe get this processed before it burns down to the 48 hour deadline?

I said: That wasn’t why I voted imperial

lemon: she/her

03-06-2023 17:40:15 UTC

@Bucky “Discussion conducted in plain English on the BlogNomic wiki and blog, and Discord channels, are not considered to be private communication.”

anyway, that’s fine! i’m not strongarming you, just reminding people who may actually want to change their minds :0

(u should be aware that that imperial vote is null, though!)

JonathanDark: he/him

03-06-2023 17:53:01 UTC

against Not necessarily because it’s a bad idea but because I have an alternative.

Benbot: he/him

03-06-2023 18:36:01 UTC



03-06-2023 19:08:46 UTC

for CoV with the further knowledge that the scam has been fixed.

Chiiika: she/her

03-06-2023 19:28:30 UTC

for surprise CoV!
moreas i have time to recount the votes

Chiiika: she/her

03-06-2023 19:30:50 UTC

temp count 3-3, imp def = against

Chiiika: she/her

03-06-2023 19:45:33 UTC

** 4 - 4, imp def = against