Tuesday, November 22, 2022

Call for Judgment: T Minus One

Reached quorum 5 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 23 Nov 2022 18:44:24 UTC

In the rule “Well-timed Good Times”, change “have the Front Effect of a Queue applied to them” (if that text is present there) to “have Front Effects applied to them”.

Give a T Stamp to a random Visitor controlled by Kevan.

If a Queue Advance has occurred since this CfJ was raised, and if any Group would have received a T Stamp during it under the above amended wording, but did not gain such a Stamp from it, give a T Stamp to a random Visitor who does not already have a T stamp from each such Group.

If the proposal “Good Times Apart” has not yet been resolved, enact a new rule “Good Time Patch”:-

Whenever a proposal called “Good Times Apart” enacts, replace “have Front Effects applied to them” with “have the Front Effects of different Queues applied to them” in the dynastic ruleset immediately after its enactment, and then repeal this rule.

Whenever a proposal called “Good Times Apart” fails, repeal this rule.

The T-Stamp is awarded when “four or more Visitors from the same Group have the Front Effect of a Queue applied to them in the same Turn”.

I’d read this as meaning that if four Visitors reached the front of different Queues at the same time, one of them would get the Stamp. Bucky appears to disagree (or to at least consider it unresolvable), since they did not grant such a Stamp during the most recent Queue Advance and did not consider it a mistake to correct when it was pointed out.

To me the rule reads clearly as allowing a group spread across multiple Queues to receive the Stamp. Did Cornelius have the Front Effect of a Queue applied to him? Yes. Did Lucrezia? Yes. Etc.

Contextually, the rule in question is called “Well-timed Good Times” and praises a feat of “impressive coordination”, which reads as if the rule is intended to apply across multiple synchronised queues. T Stamps were proposed and enacted at a time when all Queues in the game had an Admission size of 3 or fewer, and the later addition of the long, fast Gift Shop queue was an unexpected alternative way to pick up the Stamp. If anyone was reading the initial proposal as “must all be in the same Queue”, it was unremarked upon during voting that the T-Stamp would - under the then-ruleset - be impossible to attain.

(This proposal is also tacking a patch onto the end so that it won’t undercut Good Times Apart if the CfJ resolves first.)


Bucky: Proprietor

22-11-2022 18:55:11 UTC


Kevan: he/him

22-11-2022 20:47:15 UTC

To clarify the CfJ outcome here, given a Discord comment on it: this CfJ is ruling that both single-Queue and multi-Queue T Stamps are valid (unless the pending proposal “Good Times Apart” passes, in which case it defers to that).

Josh: he/him

23-11-2022 09:31:34 UTC


JonathanDark: he/him

23-11-2022 16:06:29 UTC



23-11-2022 18:10:16 UTC