Glotmorf on Tue, 27 Apr 2004 07:03:39 -0500 (CDT)

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

[spoon-discuss] Re: [Spoon-business] Writ of Delay, and a not-CFI

On 26 Apr 2004 at 21:11, David E. Smith wrote:

> I request that any player other than Glotmorf issue the following CFI:
> Statement: As of Wed, 21 Apr 2004 21:12:45, Central Daylight Time, the
> Clock read nweek 62, nday 8.
> Defendant: Glotmorf
> (Whoever does this should take some portion of the below rant and
> paraphrase it into an official document.)
> I claim that, as the Ruleset does not clearly define what should and
> should not be contained within a Recognizer, and do not in fact really
> define what is required for me to "Recognize" anything, as the word is
> never clearly defined, that Glotmorf's previous query does not count
> as "something I need to Recognize in any official capacity".
> The word 'Recognize' only appears in a few rules:
> * Rule 0 (which explicitly refers only to the Emergency Management
>   procedure)
> * Rule 16 (stating that actions taken in Private Fora may, but are not
>   required to, be recognized)
> * Rule 260 (stating that the Admin may but is not required to
> recognize
>   Kicks in the Ass)
> * Rule 625.C.2 (Ministry of Gremlins)
> * Rule 1272 (only in a comment)
> * Rule 1583.D.1 (used in an informal context, refering to the "Duty
> Duty") * Rule 1586 (stating that actions not recognized during a
> Checking Period
>   cause the Clock to stop)
> The original sequence of events is roughly as follows:
> * I post the nweek 61 results.
> * Glotmorf points out an apparent discrepancy.
> * Nothing happens for several days. * I issue an 'end of nday 7'
> recognizer. * Glotmorf disagrees with my
> interpretation.
> I issue a three-day Writ of Delay. If the Clock is Off (because I'm
> right, and it's the end of nweek 62 already), this will be mostly
> harmless. If the Clock is Off because it's nweek 61, nday 7, this will
> still be mostly harmless. In fact, I'm not really sure why I'm
> bothering to do this, but what the heck. (The above Writ is why this
> is being posted to -business.)
> I request the above CFI because this is a point that needs
> clarification before I post the nweek 62 results, a somewhat
> irreversible action.
> I'm not entirely sure it's legal for any of this to happen, but I
> intend to interpret it thusly: As the rules regarding Admin
> Recognition of anything, really, are impressively nonexistent, there's
> not really any requirement for me to recognize *everything* all at
> once... Thus, I can recognize the CFI, randomly assign a judge (and I
> do promise it'll be random, even though I'm not obliged to do so),
> wait for that Judge to issue a ruling, and recognize the ruling, all
> without interfering with the Clock any more than it's already been
> interfered with.
> Actually, this may really be more of an Emergency-grade situation, but
> I'll leave that decision to all'y'all.
> I also claim that as Societies have annoyed me (and just about
> everyone else) more than substantially any other part of the game, it
> really is time for Glotmorf to just shut up about it and let them go.
> But my claims are clearly rarely listened to anyway. :-)

There's a couple problems with this...

The first is that Rule 1586 requires actions to be officially 
recognized if the game is going to continue.  Do they have to 
be recognized in order?  Well, they occur in order, according 
to Rules 17, and therefore are going to mess with causality if 
not taken into account in order.

Does my action of pointing out a discrepancy in vote-tallying 
count as an action requiring official recognizing?  My guess 
is yes, based on the fact that my action did in fact get 
recognized and responded to with an official Administrator 
action -- the vetoing of my proposal, in order to avoid taking 
the other official Administrator action of changing the 
gamestate.  Either way, the fact that some action was required 
of the Administrator in response to my action indicates my 
action required official recognition.

Does the Administrator have to recognize something within a 
specific period of time?  Not as far as I'm concerned, 
long as the clock stops for the period in which he's not 
recognizing stuff.  If the Administrator, for whatever reason, 
needed two weeks to recognize something, I'm cool with that, 
as long as, once those two weeks have passed, I still have 
sufficient game time to do what I need to do.

See...that's my problem with the skip-the-Nday-3-recognizer 
thang: I didn't know whether or not my proposal had actually 
passed, therefore I didn't know whether or not I needed to do 
something to change it to make it more vote-worthy, therefore 
I was rather put-out that game time went straight from 
officially deciding my proposal was still on the ballot to 
officially issuing the ballot.

This is the point of the checkpoint recognition system, and 
the clock stoppages, and everything else: we need to know the 
current gamestate at such a time as allows us to react to it.

In this particular case, the difference between whether it was 
an Nday 3 recognizer or an Nday 7 recognizer is the proposal 
change I posted to spoon-business after the most recent 
recognizer we got.  If it was an Nday 3 recognizer, my change 
needs to be recognized prior to ballot release.  If it was an 
Nday 7 recognizer, I never got any time to make my change.

I want my three ndays.

And I don't see why that's a problem.


The Ivory Mini-Tower: a blog study in Social Technology.

spoon-discuss mailing list