Just in case.

yeah no discussion is an important part of nomic and this limits discussion by punishing players who don’t vote for your stuff right away

Clever clever clever.

Sure,  Why not.

This won’t do anything: “If the Admin enacting a Proposal reaches a step which cannot be applied immediately (e.g. “two days after this Proposal enacts, Citizen A gains 1 point”), that step is ignored for the purposes of enactment.”

Otherwise you could make an effect like this “within a year” and “may achieve victory”.

Hrm. I feel like we’ve done stuff like this before.

Also its interesting that step only applies to proposals.

Does this mean that if I somehow pass a CfJ saying “Clucky may achieve victory” then five years later I can be like “I’m finally exercising this”?

I don’t think we have, I think people just tried to do it a lot until we eventually wrote the rule to spare us having the discussion every time. It really falls down on enactment being about the admin being explicitly asked to “update the gamestate and ruleset” - an untracked floating pseudo-rule like this is neither.

And huh, we really do say “proposal” when we mean “proposal or CfJ (or other mechanism that could plausibly create rules)” a lot in the Appendix. We should sweep that up some time.

Ah I missed that. I think back when I was playing regularly this wasn’t a thing.

s/k

@Kevan Please don’t, I have an incredible scam waiting for when the prohibition on core rule scams finally ends

I just realised that the proposal to ban core rule scams passed… 2-1. Hardly a resounding community decision.

What defines a core rules scam anyway? Or a scam in general?

idk what to feel about this

[Supernova] It’s undefined: Fair Play is generally quite subjective and know-it-when-we-see-it (how “unexpected” does a software bug have to be, how can we tell if a DoV was “primarily” for a particular reason, what makes a delay “unreasonable”, etc).