Evoking Rule 12: A Proposal of Amendment to Rules 4(a),(b),(f),5(c), and 8

[John L]

In light of recent low-participation and in an effort to increase the interaction within rounds, I propose rules 4,5, and 8 be amended as follows: (changes highlighted in yellow)

From: 

• 4.(a) The Judge is not eligible.
• 4.(b) At the start of the round, all members except the judge become eligible for 14 days, and all authorship caps are revoked.
• 4.(f) If two or more persons are eligible to play, and they all become ineligible simultaneously, then each of them becomes eligible for one more day (excluding those without authorship caps, unless this would exclude all of them).
• 5.(c) the sole remaining player is declared winner of the just ended round and becomes Judge.
• 8.Style Points. For each fantasy rule posted, the Judge shall award X points, where -3<=X<=3. The Judge may use any criteria e sees fit for such awards. After the end of a Round, the Judge of that Round can still during the following week award Style Points to Fantasy Rules of that Round for which e has not done so. The Wizard can award Style Points as the Judge can, except e is limited to -1<=X<=1 and cannot award Style Points for eir own rules.

To:

• 4.(a) All members are eligible.
• 4.(b) At the start of the round, all members remain eligible for 14 days, and all authorship caps are revoked.
• 4.(f) If two or more persons other than the judge are eligible to play, and they all become ineligible simultaneously, then each of them becomes eligible for one more day (excluding those without authorship caps, unless this would exclude all of them). 

• 5.(c) the sole remaining player, if e is not the judge, is declared winner of the just ended round and becomes Judge. If the current judge is the sole remaining player, whichever player was most recently made ineligible other than the judge shall be declared winner and becomes Judge.

• 8.Style Points. For each fantasy rule posted other than eir own, the Judge shall award X points, where -3<=X<=3. For each of eir own fantasy rules posted, the Judge shall receive -3 style points. The Judge may use any criteria e sees fit for such awards. After the end of a Round, the Judge of that Round can still during the following week award Style Points to Fantasy Rules of that Round for which e has not done so. The Wizard can award Style Points as the Judge can, except e is limited to -1<=X<=1 and cannot award Style Points for eir own rules. 

Discussion: these modifications allow the judge to technically participate in rounds without introducing the potential for a perpetual judge or being able to manipulate style points for self appointment to wizard.  The overall impact is limited, but now allows for another player to participate who was previously excluded from every round.

[Jason Cobb]

I vote in the affirmative.

-- 
Jason Cobb

[Trigon]

El 08/02/2022 a las 19:16, Jason Cobb escribió:
> On 2/8/22 11:44, John L wrote:
>> In light of recent low-participation and in an effort to increase the
>> interaction within rounds, I propose rules 4,5, and 8 be amended as
>> follows: (changes highlighted in yellow)
>>

>> [snip]

>
> I vote in the affirmative.
>

As do I.

--
Trigon

¸¸.•*¨*• Play AGORA QUEST

<https://agoranomic.org/AgoraQuest>
<https://agoranomic.org/AgoraQuest>
<https://agoranomic.org/AgoraQuest>

I’m always happy to become a party to contracts.
I LOVE SPAGHETTI
transfer Jason one coin
nch was here
I hereby
don't... trust... the dragon...
don't... trust... the dragon...
Do not Construe Jason's message with subject TRIGON as extending this

[John L]

Not seeing any immediate opposition to my proposal I will also vote in the affirmative.

[Jamie Ahloy Dallaire]

Don't know if I'm too late, but I also vote in the affirmative.

Jamie

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Fantasy Rules Committee" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to frc-play+u...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/frc-play/CADhhRijguCtwmyz4bhXsQ%3Dm2-%3DBqwM9FP%2BM%2BWiRtiODJKJFyJA%40mail.gmail.com.

[JKBenbot]

I Current Judge JKBenbot vote in the affirmative. 

[John L]

Not too late. Voting lasts for 7 days, so actually continues until the 15th.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/frc-play/CAKHvu%3D24FBicmYS3feahUa8zvzG_VJwqvK-o-184Rx1h0tLKAA%40mail.gmail.com.

[David Nicol]

Huh. I'd like to empower the wizard to invalidate play by the judge.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/frc-play/CADhhRig00w9ff4gJk1nLV38D6skVFHZ4wDcgsZYQr7gdu%2B0kiQ%40mail.gmail.com.

--

"Lay off that whiskey, and let that cocaine be!" -- Johnny Cash

[John L]

You mean enable them to rule that an entry by the judge is invalid due to not following rules, etc?

I'm not opposed to the possibility of such a proposal, but I need to see the wording to better understand its impacts.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/frc-play/CAFwScO8YLYeoZMVrOVoRtF3CgzSF2XFEOoGirhN60nJOvAHZyw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Erin Kelly]

Just noticing this thread now. I think this change is game breaking, as 4a makes all players eligible without restriction, and 4b stipulates players are eligible for 14 days but doesn't explicitly make them ineligible upon expiration.

On Sat, Nov 19, 2022, 9:50 AM David Nicol <david...@gmail.com> wrote:

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/frc-play/CAFwScO8YLYeoZMVrOVoRtF3CgzSF2XFEOoGirhN60nJOvAHZyw%40mail.gmail.com.

[John L]

I'm not sure I see an issue related to indefinite eligibility being created by the proposed change. Some things to clarify/discuss:

1. This modification lists excerpts from the original rules to highlight what is changed. The rest of the rules not modified by the proposed change remained the same.

2. Even the original rules as written depended on an understanding that the eligibility expired after 14 days, as it was not explicit that eligibility was revoked after the 14 day period, only assumed that eligibility expired. If wording needs to shift to clarify this expiration of eligibility we can discuss options.

3. I do agree with David's assertion that an additional change should be made to make the wizard empowered/responsible for declaring the Judge's entries as invalid/understood to prevent a slew of otherwise ineligible entries being submitted by the judge.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/frc-play/CALrSrLYd36ZuvYNke0FaSXBUpz6h5JJ20DbzMBrC3_y_fX7Gqw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Erin Kelly]

We do have a means of reversing the judge's decision by 2/3 vote
enshrined in the Regular Ordinances already, so while I think
empowering the Wizard is a good idea I don't think it's strictly
necessary. However we should make sure the Wizard's decisions can
likewise be overturned by a 2/3 vote.

> 1. This modification lists excerpts from the original rules to highlight what is changed. The rest of the rules not modified by the proposed change remained the same.
> 2. Even the original rules as written depended on an understanding that the eligibility expired after 14 days, as it was not explicit that eligibility was revoked after the 14 day period, only assumed that eligibility expired. If wording needs to shift to clarify this expiration of eligibility we can discuss options.

I'm primarily concerned with the change to 4a, which went from being a
negative statement that did not make anybody eligible but served to
enforce that the judge is ineligible, to a positive statement that
actively makes everybody eligible, with no restriction, including no
timing restriction. Taken by itself, a strict reading of 4a would
indicate that all members are *always* eligible.

The original 4b was clear on when members become eligible, and when
based on that timing they become ineligible again. The new 4b just
says that they remain eligible for 14 days at the start of the round
but doesn't make it clear when that eligibility period begins.

> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/frc-play/CADhhRii%2Bz-xsEeYtsLj-q%3DfbrT93vVg3PcFYfg3WyxULrba28g%40mail.gmail.com.

[David Nicol]

On Sat, Nov 19, 2022 at 1:10 PM John L <allo...@gmail.com> wrote:

2. Even the original rules as written depended on an understanding that the eligibility expired after 14 days

Actually it was originally seven, or possibly even three, days. the "current" rules, lol.

 

[David Nicol]

there's also confusion between "eligibility" and "holding an authorship cap"

• 4.(a) All members are eligible.
• 4.(b) At the start of the round, all members remain eligible for 14 days, and all authorship caps are revoked.

4(a) At the start of the round, all members receive authorship caps.

4(b) 14 days into the round, all authorship caps that have not been renewed are revoked.

given game custom, the word "remain" carries enough nuance to imply end of eligibility when the "remain" period ends in my opinion

I honestly haven't reviewed the currently published rule set for quite some time either

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/frc-play/CALrSrLb7qFLZasmnY8-0gNM6%3DLuCSAJ%2By1U6%2BZAo-DgpCnJytQ%40mail.gmail.com.