I agree that having something like this available is desirable. This implementation is slightly more difficult to pull off than I expected it to be, but that might not be a bad thing.

The prohibition on actions should probably allow proposal voting and enactment too; “More security” prevents mutable rules from prohibiting that, and it seems like a useful restriction? (Or if you think it’s important, “More security” is still in its edit window, and I could change that.) Note that idle admins can enact proposals (and won’t be on a team); you might want to explain what happens in that case.

Maybe I should walk it back to dynastic actions only. My reasoning there was that preventing everything except for the bare minimum needed to keep the game freezing up would be thematically appropriate with having time itself stolen, but if you think it might cause too many problems I’m willing to change that.

Mind you, we’re already playing in very dangerous territory with the potential for arbitrary text injection to get around all the prohibitions in the security rule, so I really think we’re relying more or less on the fair play “a Participant should not take any action meant to make the game unplayable” to keep us afloat here.

I anticipate the debates on what “unplayable” means coming up…

Actually, I wonder whether this does violate the restriction “a mutable rule cannot modify the way in which proposals […] are voted on or enacted”. I should probably make it clearer in “More Security” that CFJs can’t be interfered with at all.

It definitely does “prevent or limit the ability of Participants to create proposals”, but I’d think it doesn’t modify the voting or enactment methods.

If you’d like me to reduce the scope of the time theft just say the word, I’d be more than happy to!

For what it’s worth, I think this rule is fine as is, and the debate is more about to what extent the security rules allow it to have an effect. The most important use-case for this rule (preventing direct interference with mutable ruletext) will work fine regardless.

That said, I think it would be a good idea to limit it to dynastic actions primarily because otherwise it would be easy for participants to miss that they were currently locked out from taking actions; not everyone checks the blog and dice roller immediately before every proposal vote, for example.

I’ve reduced the scope, and I’ve also tracked the last time it happened so you can see at a glance whether you’re allowed to do stuff.

This looks good now! I’m planning to vote for it after the edit window expires.

I’d consider requiring a sticky post to be up the moment it fires. We want it to be obvious that a given team is locked down, otherwise I could see someone missing it.

I’ve just realized that this is an illegal third proposal, could someone mark it as such? I’ll repurpose when I have a slot free

Ah wait, you don’t need to be an admin to correct that, I’ll just mark it myself