Thursday, October 20, 2011

Call for Judgment: too many?

failed by CfJ “http://blognomic.com/archive/compromise_mark_4_again” -Bucky
unfailed by coppro - the enactment was illegal
Marked illegal by coppro - this post fails to explain what requires urgent attention
CfJ is illegal because it does not “describe the issue” per Rule 1.7. -Ornithopter

Adminned at 22 Oct 2011 14:38:25 UTC

Add a new core rule titled “Soviet Brendon” with the rule text

Soviet Brendon can never become idle. This rule cannot be repealed by any core rule or dynastic rule action.

posted by Soviet Brendon at 20 Oct 2011 23:10:24 UTC Comments (25)

Comments

Bucky:

20-10-2011 23:17:03 UTC

against

Klisz:

20-10-2011 23:18:56 UTC

against  This is getting rather spammy.

Soviet Brendon:

20-10-2011 23:20:30 UTC

No rule exist for number of allowed CFJs. Im just filling my quota…

zuff:

20-10-2011 23:21:57 UTC

Is spam defined by the rules?

Klisz:

20-10-2011 23:26:38 UTC

What counts as spamming is subjective, but would typically include posting more than ten blog entries in a day, more than ten blog comments in a row, or posting a blog entry of more than 1000 words.

- Rule 1.9, “Fair Play”.

zuff:

20-10-2011 23:27:52 UTC

That’s more of a refusal to define than a definition.

Kevan: he/him

20-10-2011 23:27:52 UTC

against

Amnistar: he/him

20-10-2011 23:29:13 UTC

against

Kevan: he/him

20-10-2011 23:31:43 UTC

[zuff] I occasionally try to give it a set limit so that I know exactly what I can and can’t get away with when a scam involves being a bit noisy, but it never seems to take. At least the current wording has some numbers in it.

Murphy:

20-10-2011 23:54:14 UTC

against

How many ways would this rule be broken, anyway?  Off the top of my head:

1. doesn’t explicitly state that it intends to refer to a player by name
2. doesn’t guard against being amended
3. doesn’t guard against players changing names
4. doesn’t guard against creation of a rule like “From Monday to Friday, Soviet Brendon can become idle, and this rule can be repealed.”

Pavitra:

20-10-2011 23:56:24 UTC

against

redtara: they/them

21-10-2011 00:02:28 UTC

against

scshunt:

21-10-2011 00:09:28 UTC

against

Shadowclaw:

21-10-2011 00:15:59 UTC

I’ve been kind of spamming against for these CfJs.  My bad.

Ornithopter:

21-10-2011 00:54:41 UTC

Is it still spamming against if they deserve it?

Brendan: he/him

21-10-2011 02:57:09 UTC

against

Qwazukee:

21-10-2011 09:27:44 UTC

against

ais523:

21-10-2011 09:43:17 UTC

against Buggy. (I won’t point out the bug, though, just in case something like this passes.)

Wooble:

21-10-2011 11:24:04 UTC

against

Prince Anduril:

21-10-2011 12:11:36 UTC

against

CWW:

21-10-2011 12:12:34 UTC

against

Rodney:

21-10-2011 13:45:04 UTC

against

ChronosPhaenon:

21-10-2011 14:12:42 UTC

against

Josh: Imperator he/they

22-10-2011 10:32:18 UTC

against

Brendan: he/him

22-10-2011 18:25:07 UTC

1-19 by my count.