Saturday, July 04, 2020

Proposal: Swish Switch Bish

Timed out 1 vote to 2 with one DEF. Failed by Kevan.

Adminned at 06 Jul 2020 12:29:29 UTC

Add a new role to the ruleset, called Switch Supremacy:

No Gambler my post an ascension address.

There exists a trial game of BlogNomic, which is found at This rule of the BlogNomic ruleset has precise over any rule in the trial game’s ruleset; in all other instances the trial game’s own ruleset has priority over the trial game’s gamestate.

Proposals made at may affect the trial game as if the trial game were part of the gamestate governed by this ruleset. In no other way is the trial game considered to be gamestate for the proposes of this ruleset, other than those outlined in this rule.

BlogNomic may be in a state of Switch. BlogNomic is currently not in a state of Switch. If a gambler has successfully achieved victory in this game and a Designer has successfully achieved victory in the trial game then BlogNomic has entered a state of Switch, and any admin may undertake the following atomic action:

  • Take all instances of BlogNomic out of hiatus.

  • Use a text comparison tool to elicit the differences between the non-dynastic sections of each of the main and trial rulesets.

  • Make a proposal on the main blog at for each difference, proposing that this ruleset adopt the version in the trial ruleset, omitting any difference that amounts to a change in dynasty-specific terminology

I don’t know what happens after that yet… But I hope that this is a starting point that we can tinker with.


Tantusar: he/they

04-07-2020 12:25:14 UTC

“Add a new rule

“This rule of the BlogNomic ruleset has precedence over”

“No Gambler may

I’m going to need to have a long hard think about the substance of this Proposal.

Tantusar: he/they

04-07-2020 12:25:49 UTC

“for the purposes of this ruleset”

Kevan: Oracle he/him

04-07-2020 13:28:43 UTC

Unless I’m overthinking this, it seems very tricky to actually confirm from here that something has legally happened in another game, when any of that game’s documents could be faked or mistaken. Saying “if a player has won game 987654 at” would only leave us open to inside-job manipulation from an admin of that site; for a blog game where we all have write access to its gamestate and rules pages, it’s a lot more like nailing jelly to a wall.

Josh: he/him

04-07-2020 15:58:12 UTC

@Tantusar we’re all going to have to have a long hard think; this hasn’t been posted in the serious expectation of passing

Josh: he/him

04-07-2020 23:04:21 UTC

@Kevan The assumption of player goodwill is doing a lot here, I accept.

One issue: the second bullet point has to include an exemption from proposal limits.

Kevan: Oracle he/him

05-07-2020 09:58:47 UTC

Nomic is a game of scams, though. The easy one here is that “There exists a trial game of BlogNomic, which is found at” - I can challenge you to a game of noughts and crosses in blog comments there, and we agree to call it “a trial game of BlogNomic”. If we pin things down more carefully and refer to “the game whose rules are on the wiki page Second Switch Ruleset”, a player could still edit that page (illegally) to define a new game, and the EE ruleset wouldn’t be able to tell the difference. I’m not sure any level of accuracy solves the problem, when we’re always looking in to the other game from the outside.

Josh: he/him

05-07-2020 10:29:55 UTC

Nomic is a game of scams, but some scams are more worthy than others. There’s about fifty different players, over the years, who had the opportunity to (legally) repeal the whole ruleset and annoint themselves the Forever Emperor of BlogNomic; many of the current players are on that list. It hasn’t happened because even BlogNomic has standards. While we expect scams in regular gameplay, it’s not completely unreasonable to expect that the existential meta-context of the game would preclude egregious fuckery.

Kevan: Oracle he/him

05-07-2020 10:38:29 UTC

I’m not following the Wordpress game at all - if it’s a light tire-kicking exercise with a lot of overlap, then perhaps none of its players would object to an EE-dynastic scam to end it? But you’re probably right.

I’ve just been toying with rules like this already and finding it interesting how you can’t determine “the winner of Wordpress dynasty” from here, in a manner that’s anywhere near bulletproof. The best I could come up with would be to say that 75th Trombone may declare here who the winner of the Wordpress dynasty is (if they’re the Emperor over there?), and whatever they say goes.


06-07-2020 06:15:40 UTC


Tantusar: he/they

06-07-2020 06:41:24 UTC


Kevan: Oracle he/him

06-07-2020 09:15:24 UTC

against Appreciate this being a straw poll to clarify what’s actually happening with the switch games, but there are some grey areas. (The biggest one is maybe “Proposals made at may affect the trial game as if the trial game were part of the gamestate governed by this ruleset.”, where the may is flapping around as either “have permission to” or “have the possibility to” - if I’m an admin enacting “replace X with Y” here at EE, am I also expected to check the Wordpress ruleset and replace it there?)