Thursday, January 05, 2012

Unidlings ahoy!

I request to be unidled.

I’ve unidled the backlog of unidle requests, along with myself. Quorum is now 8.

Comments

Josh: Observer he/they

05-01-2012 22:40:14 UTC

Sadly you have to “announce the change in a comment on the relevant blog post”, because rule 1.2 is apparently now stupid. Would you mind going back and adding those comments to prevent future irregularities?

Josh: Observer he/they

05-01-2012 22:41:50 UTC

Oh, you yourself also have to separately request your unidling and announce it. Because rule 1.2 is now stupid.

Job #1 for the next dynasty: fix rule 1.2.

Klisz:

05-01-2012 22:55:08 UTC

Done. I also added my “request” in my post.

Cpt_Koen:

06-01-2012 00:31:29 UTC

From rule 3.2 Gamestate Tracking:
“If no Driver has commented on it, an official post may be altered or removed by its author; otherwise this can only be done as allowed by the Ruleset.”

Now I’m not sure whether your post was official or not, since it was not an Idling Post before the edit; but if it wasn’t, it’s still be illegal per rule 3.2:
“A non-official post may not, through editing of the blog or otherwise, be changed into an official post, with the following exception: Whilst a non-official post has been posted for less than fifteen minutes and has no comments, the author may change the categories as they wish.”

Klisz:

06-01-2012 00:32:37 UTC

Damn, it hadn’t occured to me that unidling posts counted as official.

ChronosPhaenon:

06-01-2012 15:00:08 UTC

1.2 was changed this way in the context of the Agoran Invasion. It made sense, back then, but sure needs to be fixed.

Kevan: he/him

06-01-2012 18:23:02 UTC

The only reasons for the changes were, I think, that one of the Agorans was shocked at our lack of historical bookkeeping (a player could request unidling on IRC, and be unidled by an admin without any permanent comment being made recording this), and concerned that the lack of time window on an idle request was abusable (in retrospect, we should be ashamed that we never spotted the scam potential of “render a Player Idle if that Player has asked to become Idle”).

It’s good we fixed the second, but I don’t think we really gained anything by meticulously over-formalising the idling process. And when we fix it, we should really include a retroactive handwave to ensure that any less-than-scrupulous idling and deidling was legal after all.

Bucky:

07-01-2012 15:30:01 UTC

The time window on idle requests is unrelated and from the dynasty before the invasion.

Kevan: he/him

07-01-2012 16:38:13 UTC

Ah, you’re right, it was the lack of a time window on unidling, looking back. And even then, only in the obscure case of someone saying “unidle me in several years’ time, whenever you feel it useful” to a cooperating admin.

ais523:

07-01-2012 22:47:14 UTC

@Kevan: Would it surprise you at all that I’d made exactly that request to at least two admins?