Call for Judgment: Time travel SHOULDN’T change the past
CfJ is illegal because it does not “describe the issue” per Rule 1.7. -Ornithopter
Adminned at 22 Oct 2011 14:29:39 UTC
If the term “Artist†in the ruleset is replaced by another term before this CfJ passes, use that term in place of “Artist†wherever it appears in this CfJ, including the change to be made to Rule 1.2.
Change the section of the first paragraph of Rule 1.2 that reads “announcing their arrival†to instead read “making clear their wish to be an Artistâ€.
Retroactively alter every action in BlogNomic history since the phrase “announcing their arrival” first appeared in Rule 1.2 to have happened as if, at the time, that section of Rule 1.2 had instead read “making clear their wish to be a [Player]”, where “[Player]” is the singular of the noun used at that time as the title of Rule 1.2.
If the admin who enacts this CfJ feels that any part of BlogNomic history should differ from the way it is currently recorded due to this CfJ’s effects, that admin must make a CfJ that would make those changes, explaining what changes are to be made and why. None of the listed changes to BlogNomic history take effect until that CfJ passes.
Criticisms of the previous version of this CfJ and my responses to them:
1. It has a horrible, game-breaking error.
I believe I’ve fixed that.
2. Massive retroactive change is extremely dangerous.
Undoubtedly true, but I believe it’s necessary because of a long-existing difference between the wording of 1.2 and the way it’s been interpreted. I’ve added a paragraph to reduce the danger of unforeseen consequences of the retcon.
3. This gives enormous power to enacting admin.
The paragraph added to address criticism #2 also address this concern.
4. It makes the core ruleset more vague.
I think it maintains an existing level of vagueness, and I don’t think this particular vagueness holds any danger. Worst case is someone makes an account just to make a post commenting on something and an admin makes them a player. Quorum may or may not rise by one, they never vote on anything, and seven days later they idle, never to return.
5. There are better ways to handle this.
I cannot think of any, or I would have used them instead. This is not to say better ways don’t exist. I have overlooked the obvious before and may be doing it now. If a better way does exist, propose it, and you’ll have my vote.
Hix:
WTF is with all the “Retroactively alter every action in BlogNomic history” lately?