Friday, March 17, 2017

Call for Judgment: Third friggin time

Failed for not making any changes to game state or ruleset by Derrick

Adminned at 17 Mar 2017 17:56:03 UTC

So the Beak rules say “[...]an Organ belonging to that Creature that is in the Beak state may consume one Micronium to add 3 Nonium and 3 Blonium to the Statolith’s nutrients[...]”, and the current Ruleset says (erroneously) that “These nutrients are Blonium, Gonium, Nonium and Micronium.”

My original proposal said “These nutrients are Blonium, Gonium, Nonium and Miconium.”

Micro = / = Mico

It’s all a bit of a mess. There are likely more and it would be a pain in the ass to dredge though everything. So, with this proposal:

Retroactively, all instances of “Micronium” are synonymous to “Miconium”, and all instances of the term “Miconium” in the ruleset will be replaced to “Micronium”.

Yes its a copy of that same CfJ. Again. I know.

Last CfJ for this issue failed due to a timeout today (March 17th) despite having enough votes to pass two days ago (15th of March was the last vote, Viv’s vote: https://blognomic.com/archive/common_typo_fix_mico_micro_micro_preference#comments and the total should 8 votes, not 7 as admin’d, because my vote is FOR by default because “Additionally, if the author of a Votable Matter has not used a valid voting icon in a comment to the post, then the author’s Vote is FOR.”).

But oh well, it can be fixed. Let’s give it another go.

Comments

pokes:

03-17-2017 11:06:58 UTC

It looks to me like it was adminned as FOR.

Kevan:

03-17-2017 11:10:50 UTC

Yes, this was just me ticking the wrong box after enacting it. The CfJ was enacted into the ruleset a couple of hours ago.

“7 votes to 0” is correct as deferentials are only converted for proposals, and the proposal had a single DEF vote.

against

Kevan:

03-17-2017 11:14:10 UTC

...and the CfJ had a single DEF vote, rather.

If you think a mistake has been made and it’s such an obvious mistake that nobody would contest it (“a proposal was marked 7 votes to 0, and enacted into the ruleset, but the admin box says failed”), we don’t need a CfJ to fix it, you can just flag it informally somewhere.

Viv:

03-17-2017 12:33:06 UTC

This is an unusually amorphous and sprawling dynasty due to theme. Small mistakes will happen in rapidly evolving dna. Calmness.

Oracular rufio:

03-17-2017 13:53:11 UTC

against sigh

card:

03-17-2017 15:38:34 UTC

against

derrick:

03-17-2017 16:49:56 UTC

against

As ‘Miconium’ does not appear in the rule set, and the statement ‘Retroactively, all instances of “Micronium” are synonymous to “Miconium”’, would not change the game state nor be added to the text of the rules, this CfJ arguably can be failed by an admin, under the clause:

“Any CfJ that specifies neither changes to the Gamestate or Ruleset nor corrections to any gamestate tracking entities may be failed by any Admin.”

However, arguably it specifies a rule-set change of nothing, and I’d like not spawn a CfJ on this, so please self-kill this Cuddlebeam.

card:

03-17-2017 16:56:31 UTC

Self-killing and deferential votes only work on proposals.

derrick:

03-17-2017 17:52:44 UTC

Right you are. I’m going to fail this now. The reasoning is above. Also, because one CfJ in front of this puts the entire game in limbo until resolved.