BlogNomic has moved!

The game is now running at blognomic.com

Thursday, December 30, 2004

Call for Sanity

Some of us read every rule seventeen times to try to find the tiniest loopholes to scam to our heart's content. Some of us want to shoot all the people who even think about exploiting a poorly-worded rule. Some of us are in between.

Please, can we all at least agree on the following?


  • There is a difference between legitimately exploiting extreme oversights in Rules, and using some obscure grammatic idiosyncrasy to wreak havoc on the Gamestate.

  • When a rule clearly allows unintended behavior, the rule should be amended as quickly as possible, but the behavior itself should not be reversed unless it is irreparably destructive to the game itself.

  • When someone uses an obscure grammatic idiosyncrasy, it is totally reasonable to amend the rule AND reverse the behavior in a proposal.

  • Since you can both amend Rules and reverse behavior in Proposals, CfJs should be reserved for cases where the reasonableness of the scam is in question.

  • CfJs should NOT be used for every scam, because the same argument just gets rehashed. Both the scammers and the non-scammers should honestly evaluate whether the scam is legit enough to stand, or illegit enough to protest.



Eh?