Wednesday, May 18, 2011

Proposal: Spring Cleaning, Now With Properly-Labeled Brooms

Reached quorum, 17-0. Josh

Adminned at 20 May 2011 04:05:44 UTC

Perform the following changes, in order:

1) In “Ruleset and Gamestate”, change “Section Three contains the glossary” to “Section Three contains the Appendix”, and rename the glossary to “Appendix”.

2) Move the entire rule “Dynasties” to be immediately below the rule “Farmers”.

3) From “Proposals”, remove “A Proposal may not also be a Call for Judgment.”

4) From “Victory and Ascension”, remove the paragraph that starts with “A Declaration of Victory may not also be…”

5) Move the entire rule “Gamestate Tracking” to the newly renamed Appendix, immediately below the Keywords section.

6) In “Farmers”, change ‘Rules 1.1, 1.2, 1.8 and 1.10’ to ‘Rules “Ruleset and Gamestate”, “Farmers” , “Dynasties” and “Fair Play”’.

7) In “Voting”, change ‘for the purposes of rule 1.5’ to ‘for the purposes of rule “Resolution of Proposals”’.

8) In the newly renamed Appendix, change both instances of ‘rule 1.4’ to ‘rule “Voting”’.

That should cover Kevan’s concerns from my earlier proposal. With these changes, all references to rule numbers in the ruleset are replaced by the title of the corresponding rule.

On a completely unrelated note, it turns out that idle Landlords can still use their veto due to an interesting interaction between “Farmers” and “Dynasties” (they still count as Farmers for the second rule).

Comments

Yoda:

05-18-2011 13:25:04 UTC

for

Keba:

05-18-2011 13:28:37 UTC

for

Kevan:

05-18-2011 13:47:08 UTC

for

Josh:

05-18-2011 14:02:56 UTC

for

SingularByte:

05-18-2011 14:05:57 UTC

for

spikebrennan:

05-18-2011 15:18:56 UTC

for

Bucky:

05-18-2011 15:31:11 UTC

for

Travis:

05-18-2011 15:37:20 UTC

for

ais523:

05-18-2011 16:41:40 UTC

for I’m not even sure if idle Landlords being able to veto is a bug. (If it caused a problem, they’d just be replaced by CFJ anyway, and if the Landlord idles, a dynasty is typically either in trouble or already has a contingency to deal with the circumstance.)

Florw:

05-18-2011 17:55:54 UTC

for

Winner:

05-18-2011 19:31:00 UTC

for

Ely:

05-18-2011 21:41:34 UTC

for

scshunt:

05-18-2011 22:32:06 UTC

for

Darknight:

05-19-2011 00:01:41 UTC

for @ais: IE, when Wak had to idle in his and put me in charge yes?

Galtori:

05-19-2011 03:41:25 UTC

for

ais523:

05-19-2011 16:10:09 UTC

@Darknight: it’s happened more than once, but the Wak->you transition was probably the cleanest. (It happened in my third dynasty too, but it was set up in advance to survive without an Emperor for a few days and then end.)

Oze:

05-19-2011 21:21:51 UTC

for