I don’t think this works. If getting the edit summary wrong “does not affect the validity of the action”, then the player will not have “attempted to make an illegal modification to the Arena wiki page”, so isn’t eligible for a Foul.

An action can be valid but illegal.

coppro: How? My brain can’t wrap around that…

Is shooting someone in the face a valid action in real life? Yes. Is it legal? No.

Nomic isn’t real life, and the ruleset is based on the premise that “this is the Ruleset for BlogNomic; all Gladiators shall obey it”.

This kind of thing is exactly why I resisted unnecessary overspecification in logging by the way.

“Valid” and “legal” are very close synonyms in the context of playing a game by some rules. Making it so that unclear edit summaries are legal but Foul-worthy is clearly the correct direction to take this in, though.

per Kevan

Coppro: I’m not sure that’s right. ‘Valid’ means ‘legally binding’, and in the context of nomic, a ‘valid action’ is doing something according to the rules. Your example is confused because you are presenting two sets of laws, natural and social, as if they were the same thing, which they aren’t.

I agree with Kevan, but don’t quite get why he voted against, as I see his conclusion as an argument to vote

[Anduril] I’m voting against because the proposed fix will make any edit summary legal, with no Fouls possible for getting it wrong.

Under this proposed rule, a move with a blank edit summary would now be a valid/legal action, and so wouldn’t trigger the “attempted to make an illegal modification to the Arena wiki page” aspect of Fouling. If Coppro is trying to say “getting an edit summary wrong doesn’t make the move illegal, but it counts as a Foul”, then this doesn’t work.

Although I may as well CoV in light of the Technically Fowl proposal, which fixes my concern, but doesn’t fix the fact that Josh performed an illegal game action.