I've enabled the Blogger comments

This is a non-ideal solution to back-blog being down, but it's all i could think of to allow the game to continue.

Votes :FOR: and :AGAINST: will not turn into fancy pictures, but will do...

Fair point...

... but similarly, and even more nefariously, Rule 7 states that "If nobody else has commented on it, an official post may be altered or removed; otherwise this can only be done as allowed by the ruleset." It doesn't specify that the person doing this has to be the original poster; even if BackBlog doesn't come back online soon, the post can just be deleted before it is enacted.

The vote doesn't work.

The vote on Gadderdammerung is illegal. Take a look at this Glossary entry: ""Posts" and "comments" refer only to those made to the BlogNomic weblog at blognomic.blogspot.com.".

Notice:

Rule 4 states that "Any Disciple may cast eir vote on a Pending Proposal by declaring it in the comments of the entry." It does not specify that the comment must be through BackBlog or on the Blogger iteration of the entry; therefore my AGAINST vote on Proposal: Gadderdammerung, registered in the Livejournal Blognomic feed, should be valid.

That may need fixing by proposal after this is over, by the way.

Declaration of Victory

This is to freeze the game for the next 24 hours (when Aaron gets to optionally decide the legality of this), or until we get our comment system back.

I'm just doing this so we don't get overrun by silly proposals designed to take advantage of the comment system's failure.

This DoV fails 2-7. Hiatus ends, gaming continues as of 02:11 on the 26th July. (Typo Corrected)--Excalabur

Proposal: Gadderdammerung

I humbly submit that the Gadfly has won. As BackBlog is malfunctioning, there is no way to vote AGAINST this proposal. CFJs won't work either and proposals proposed after this one won't have pass before this one does.

Add a new rule with the following text:

The Gadfly may declare victory. Blognomic is currently in Hiatus.

Failed 2-3, timed out at 16:16 on the 27th of July. -- Excalabur

Proposal: Geometry

I humbly submit that geometry is a mystical property that can be observed in all things, including our souls. Add a rule called The Pythagoreans:-

In this rule only, let c equal the value of a Disciple's Significant Aspect and let a and b equal the values of the Disciple's two non-Significant Aspects.

If c^2 < a^2+b^2, the Disciple's Soul is Acute.

If c^2 = a^2+b^2 and c is not zero, the Disciple's Soul is Pythagorean.

If c^2 > a^2+b^2, the Disciple's Soul is Obtuse.

Often, a Disciple with a Pythagorean Soul may add or subtract 50 from a single Aspect of a target Disciple.

Passed 6-0 (timed out). Enacted by smith, 27th of July at 3:58.

Proposal: The Spartans are Coming

I humbly submit that the Delian League is in its waning days, and the Spartans will soon march on Athens. There is not much time left to embezzle money from the vaults of Delos.

Create a rule named "The Spartans Are Coming" which reads:

On July 30, 2005, the Disciple with the most gold may declare victory.

Failed 2-5. Timed out, I think. Failed by Excalabur, 02:45 on 27 July.

Thesis: Antithesis, Version 10

This rule can be changed by anybody who can spell better then God at dinner time by posting to the front page of Blognomic.

More idles.

I just want to adminerize some proposals..

So KnightKing and Chronos Phaenon get idled--sorry guys!
Quorum drops to 7

Also, Shadowclaw, you might want to change "Stare of the Republic" before someone comments on the proposal, though that might get through on the 'obvious typos' clause because you specified the number..

Thesis: Antithesis, Version 10

This rule can be changed by anybody who can spell better then Aaron at dinner time by posting to the front page of Blognomic.

Proposal: The End

I humbly submit that change is good, and a new Dynasty is even better.

To this end, the number 200 in rule 18 "State of the Republic" should be changed to 170.

However, if Proposal: Ragnarok passes, this proposal fails.

Failed 1-2. Failed by Excalabur, 26th July at 16:16.

Thesis: Antithesis, Version 9

This rule can be changed by anybody at dinner time by posting to the front page of Blognomic.

Thesis: Antithesis, Version 8

Yes, another version 8. The last one was missing a comma in the title.

This rule can be changed by anybody at any time by posting to the front page of Blognomic.

Thesis: Antithesis, Version 10

This rule can be changed by anybody on walkabout whose role is degenerate at any time by posting to the front page of Blognomic, and all rules previous to it in the ruleset have no style. Anyone changing this rule may not make a Declaration of Victory during this dynasty, even if this sentence is deleted or changed.

Proposal: Ragnarok

It's taking to long for this dynasty to end. Therefore, for each Disiple the Philosopher-King shall roll DICE2. If the roll is a 1, then all of that Disiple's Aspects will be set to 200. If it is a 2 however, all the Disiple's Aspects will be set to 0.

Failed 3-7. Cannot be Enacted without CoV, failed by Excalabur 21st July at 15:50.

Thesis: Antithesis, Version 9

This rule can be changed by anybody on walkabout whose role is degenerate at any time by posting to the front page of Blognomic, and all rules previous to it in the ruleset have no style.

Thesis: Antithesis Version 8

This rule can be changed by anybody on walkabout at any time by posting to the front page of Blognomic, and all rules previous to it in the ruleset have no style.

Reason we're all innocent

Rather than post the same comment four times, here's why I think we're all innocent.

The relevant sentence, which is enforced under the Honour System, is:

Within 24 hours of a Stocks Are Up post, all Disciples may once increase each of eir own aspects by 1, citing the stock market somehow in the comment field of their GNDT change.

Now, I argue that since the Stocks Are Up post was not actually legally made (and in fact doesn't count at all as same, since I screwed up..), then this sentence does not apply. We did incorrectly increase our aspects' values, but did not violate this rule, as the conditional was not in force.

Thus rests the defence..

Stock Update

Stocks Are Up

(This is a legal stock update).

Show Trial: Noah, The Stock Market

Noah raised his 3 aspects by 1 (citing the stock market) in spite of there being no legal Stocks Are Up post in the preceeding 24 hours. See GNDT, 19/07 21:50 (BST).

Note that Excalabur's post with the subject "Stocks Are Up" was not a valid Stocks Are Up post, as per rule 22.

Show Trial: Paladin, The Stock Market

Paladin raised his 3 aspects by 1 (citing the stock market) in spite of there being no legal Stocks Are Up post in the preceeding 24 hours. See GNDT, 19/07 20:28 (BST).

Note that Excalabur's post with the subject "Stocks Are Up" was not a valid Stocks Are Up post, as per rule 22.

Show Trial: Shadowclaw, The Stock Market

Shadowclaw raised his 3 aspects by 1 (citing the stock market) in spite of there being no legal Stocks Are Up post in the preceeding 24 hours. See GNDT, 19/07 20:04 (BST).

Note that Excalabur's post with the subject "Stocks Are Up" was not a valid Stocks Are Up post, as per rule 22.

Show Trial: Excalabur, The Stock Market

Excalabur raised his 3 aspects by 1 (citing the stock market) in spite of there being no legal Stocks Are Up post in the preceeding 24 hours. See GNDT, 19/07 17:18 (BST).

Note that Excalabur's post with the subject "Stocks Are Up" was not a valid Stocks Are Up post, as per rule 22.

Version 8 is not legal

Version 7 reads:

This rule can be changed by anybody at any time by posting to the front page of Blognomic, and all rules previous to it in the ruleset have no style.

and 8 reads:

Any rule can be changed by anybody whose name is Quasie at any time by posting to the front page of Blognomic, and all rules previous to it in the ruleset have no style.

Two seperate changes have been made: The first word has been changed by replacement, and the clause in bold has been inserted.

So, we're back to version 7, which was posted at 5:09AM on the 19th.

Sorry I didn't notice this five versions ago, folks.

Thesis: Antithesis Version 12

Any rule can be changed by anybody whose name is Quasie at any time by posting to the front page of Amazon, and all rules previous to it in the ruleset have no style. Everyone knows that things with no style should be avoided, so anyone using anything with no style immediately sets eir knowledge to zero.

Version 11 is not legal legal

The initial text

This rule can not be changed by proposal, and all rules subsequent to it in the ruleset have no effect.

has twenty words, but the insertion

Everyone knows that things with no style should be avoided, so anyone using anything with no style immediately sets eir knowledge to zero.

has twenty-three, which is not permitted under Rule 23, clause "Insertions".

Ahem. The text in question reads "initial wordcount limit", not "initial wordcount". Excalabur is in the clear. Sorry folks. AG 18:01 7/19/05

Stocks are Up

Thesis: Antithesis, Version 11

Any rule can be changed by anybody whose name is Quasie at any time by posting to the front page of Amazon, and all rules previous to it in the ruleset have no style. The ruleset changes allowed by this rule are limited to assigning a style to any rule subsequent to this one. Everyone knows that things with no style should be avoided, so anyone using anything with no style immediately sets eir knowledge to zero.

Proposal: Two at Once

Strike "This can only be done if there is not another Hot Potato in play" from the first paragraph of rule 23 and replace with "This can only be done if there is not another Hot Potato in play which was created by that Disciple"

I See no problem with having more than one Potato in play..

I abjectly apologise for failing to be sufficiently humble. Failed for lack of humility by Excalabur, at 15:36 on the 21st of July

Thesis: Antithesis, Version 10

Any rule can be changed by anybody whose name is Quasie at any time by posting to the front page of Amazon, and all rules previous to it in the ruleset have no style. The ruleset changes allowed by this rule are limited to assigning a style to any rule subsequent to this one.

Proposal: Moussaka

I humbly submit that more freedom in potato preparation will make for a tastier dish. Add to rule 23 - Hot Potato, after the list of modification methods :-

Punctuation and capitalization may be changed freely with any modification, except that a question may not be turned into a statement and vice versa.

Passed 8-2, reached quorum. Enacted by Excalabur, 21st July at 15:34.

Thesis: Antithesis, Version 9

Any rule can be changed by anybody whose name is Quasie at any time by posting to the front page of Blognomic, and all rules previous to it in the ruleset have no style. The ruleset changes allowed by this rule are limited to assigning a style to any rule subsequent to this one.

Proposal: Return of the Socratic Method

I humbly submit that the following should be added to Rule 23:

A Hot Potato may be phrased as a question. Any Hot Potato phrased as a question may never cease to be a question in any version. When passing a questioning Hot Potato, the Disciple posting the new version must respond to the previous version with an answer; when the Hot Potato is enacted, the new rule consists of the newest available answer (i.e. the answer to the second-to-most-recent version) rather than the most recent version of the Potato itself.

Timed out 1-5, failed by Excalabur at 15:31 on the 21st of July.

Thesis: Antithesis, Version 8

Any rule can be changed by anybody whose name is Quasie at any time by posting to the front page of Blognomic, and all rules previous to it in the ruleset have no style.

Thesis: Antithesis, Version 9

Any rule can be changed by anybody who has more than 60 Gold at any time by posting to the front page of Blognomic, and all rules previous to it in the ruleset have no style.

Proposal: Potato Hole

I humbly submit that the rule 23 - Hot Potato, contains a potentially worrying loophole.

The loophole involves the regulation of "official posts". According to the rules, a Hot Potato post is an "official post". Rule 7 - Gamestate Tracking states that an official post can be edited after it is posted, as long as there are no comments attached to it. This is a sensible "commit" mechanism for most of our official posts, which involve voting or other types of commenting to have an affect.

However, there is no such comment mechanism in place for Hot Potatoes. Technically, any of the previous "versions" of an active Hot Potato may be altered, even if they have already been "passed" several times since, as long as the old version of the Hot Potato post has no comments. This has the potential to cause calamitous confusion, if wielded for nefarious purposes.

If this proposal passes, the following text will be appended to rule 23:

A Hot Potato post may not be edited if there is a newer version of that Hot Potato in play. This paragraph of this rule is enforced under The Honor System.

While we're at it, I realize that the stock market rule also has this slight problem. So of this proposal passes, the following text will be appended to rule 22:

A Stock Update post may not be edited after it is posted. This paragraph of this rule is enforced under The Honor System.

Passed 10-0, reached quorum. Enacted by Excalabur, 20th July at 21:19.

Too many potatoes

Rule 23 states that a Disciple may only create a hot potato if there isn't another one already in play. Thus, the hot potato with the thesis Euthyphro is illegal.

Thesis: Antithesis, Version 7

This rule can be changed by anybody at any time by posting to the front page of Blognomic, and all rules previous to it in the ruleset have no style.

Thesis: Euthyphro, Version 2

The gods love that which (or those whom) is Good. Everyone is Good. Any Disciple whom the gods love may cast five additional votes daily.

Not a legal Potato as Antithesis is still in play. 'Failed' by Angry Grasshopper at 05:26.

Thesis: Euthyphro, Version 1

The gods love that which (or those whom) is Good. TheExcalibur is Good. Any Disciple whom the gods love may cast five additional votes daily.

Not a legal Potato as Antithesis is still in play. 'Failed' by Angry Grasshopper at 05:26.

Idling again

75th Trombone and Royce haven't voted in a week, and are thus idle.

Quorum is 8.

---

Somebody else post a hot potato, would ya?

Thesis: Antithesis, Version 6

This rule can be changed by Rodney at any time by posting to the front page of Blognomic, and all rules previous to it in the ruleset have no style.

Thesis: Antithesis, Version 5

This rule can be changed by Rodney, and all rules previous to it in the ruleset have no style.

Thesis: Antithesis, Version 4

This rule can not be changed by Rodney, and all rules previous to it in the ruleset have no style.

Thesis: Antithesis, Version 3

This rule can not be changed by Rodney, and all rules previous to it in the ruleset have no effect.

Thesis: Antithesis, Version 2

This rule can not be changed by proposal, and all rules previous to it in the ruleset have no effect.

Proposal: Everything in its Place

I humbly submit that "Least significant aspect" in rule 18 could indicate either of the two non-significant aspects, or the aspect(s) with the smallest value. I'd like to clarify how it works.

Add to rule 11 - The Republic:

A Disciple's Primary, Secondary and Ternary Aspects are that Disciple's Aspects ordered from highest to lowest in value. Aspects of equal value share a designation, so the legal distributions are: 1 Primary,1 Secondary and 1 Ternary; 1 Primary and 2 Secondary; 2 Primary and 1 Secondary; or 3 Primary.

Replace the second paragraph in rule 18 - State of the Republic with:

Any Disciple whose Primary Aspect matches that of the Republic may often raise that Aspect by 2. If a Disciple’s Ternary Aspect matches the Primary aspect of the Republic, then they may occasionally raise that Aspect by 5. If at any time one of the Republic’s Aspects has a value greater than or equal to the sum of its other two Aspects, all Disciples must reduce their value (or have their value reduced) in that Aspect by 10.

Passed 4-2 with 2 abstentions. Timed out, enacted by Excalabur the 20th of July at 21:18.

Thesis: Antithesis, Version 1

This rule can not be changed by proposal, and all rules subsequent to it in the ruleset have no effect.

I took the Encrypter out of the sidebar

It's now saved for future use in the Wiki, seeing as we weren't using it anyway.

Unidling

I'm back. Now to figure out what's going on in this dynasty....

edict #1 - gone

I removed edict #1. I'm sure no one will miss it.

Proposal: You can only walk so far

I humbly submit that some of our Disciples are amassing an intimidating number of Walkvotes, and their power will soon be un-checked. As such, if this proposal passes, the following text will be added to the end of rule 17 - Walkabout.

No Disciple may have a Walkvotes value greater than 3.

Also, the following text will be added to the end of the 4th paragraph of rule 17.

The extra-vote mechanism described in this paragraph may not be used more than twice on any given proposal.

Note that, by rule 17, walkvotes may not be used in voting on this proposal.

Passed 8-0, reached Quorum. Enacted by Excalabur, 19th July at 16:30.