Honourable judge jay,
There is finally light at the end of the tunnel, and it is within your power to lead us to the promised land.
These questions effect completion of the current turn in that, by showing bold and decisive leadership as a judge, other players will flock to you and follow your wise lead in upcoming votes.
1) Who are the players of this game?
2) Should people be allowed to lurk here? Don't you think it would be best to just close all non-player accounts?
Poll: Consent to Move on to 312 has not received its 8th vote to achieve majority, I don't think the wig is mine yet.
Well, it's not the 8th vote that's required so much as the 7th-vote-not-counting-jeblis's. But in any case, it hadn't when you posted that comment, and it has now.
I have to look up whether jeblis has to post a proposal first.
It's jeblis' turn, you are the judge jay. Carpe diem, he who hesitates... Do you really think that wavering at this key moment is wise? This is a ticking timebomb, jay, a matter of the utmost urgency.
I posted a discussion on 312.
I applaud the judge's care in verifying that he is, in fact, the judge. Once he has done so, I am confident he will show equal diligence in delivering the judgment itself. Judgments of this importance are not to be made lightly nor hastily.
Unless a Judge is overruled, one Judge settles all questions arising from the game until the next turn is begun, including questions as to his or her own legitimacy and jurisdiction as Judge.
When Judgment has been invoked, the next player may not begin his or her turn without the consent of a majority of the other players.
One turn consists of two parts in this order: (1) proposing one rule-change and having it voted on, and (2) ... adding the number of points ... to one's score.
Until jeblis proposes, I believe we're between turns/I'm not the "previous player" yet, making gerryblog still judge for lack of another, in which case we'll need yet another consent vote.
Since discussions can be posted before one's turn, I don't count that.
I'm not even entirely comfortable claiming the latest Move On poll is still valid, since "Who are the players of this game?" was invoked afterward. It depends on whether people voted or left their vote in place with knowledge of that judgment being settled.
Yeah we're in a bit of a fuzzy place. Looks like we need the consent to move on before I can post a proposal.
OK, then, I am posting this retroactively as a pre-invocation discussion, with invocation to be made once jay summons the strength of will to take the reigns.
I'm not sure I see the rationale for this. While I agree that non-players should not be allowed to vote in game polls, I don't see any harm to allowing them to participate in discussions.
We've got the consent now, thanks to Chuck.
And 111 suggests that the act of proposing in 202 begins when the discussion begins, not with the vote:
111. If a rule-change as proposed is unclear, ambiguous, paradoxical, or destructive of play, or if it arguably consists of two or more rule-changes compounded or is an amendment that makes no difference, or if it is otherwise of questionable value, then the other players may suggest amendments or argue against the proposal before the vote. A reasonable time must be allowed for this debate. The proponent decides the final form in which the proposal is to be voted on and, unless the Judge has been asked to do so, also decides the time to end debate and vote.
These two together suggest that it is in fact jeblis's turn, and jay is in fact the judge, at which we can all be relieved.
I judge this invocation thusly:
Q: 1) Who are the players of this game?
311: A player is one free-willed human Metafilter member voluntarily playing the game of MeFiNo Nomic.
1a) Any human with a Metafilter account may play one MeFiNo account.
1b) The current list of 14 players is recognized as "game-custom", providing them perpetual exemption from exclusion via 1a.
1c) I order the List of Players be administratively unlocked so that 1a may be implemented real-time.
Q: 2) Should people be allowed to lurk here? Don't you think it would be best to just close all non-player accounts?
2a) Lurking is outside the scope of the game to dictate.
2b) This section is pertinent only if Aaron declares it is an pertinent answer to his question: Since no non-player may perform a game action (else they would be a player) any proposals, votes or judgment invocations posted by non-players may be ignored and/or removed. Repeated willful violations of this concept may be construed by administration as breach of terms of service.
The rules override any judgment I make, so if any of the 14 turn out to be non-unique later they're poofed.
OK, as you have declared it out of the scope of the game, I ask you in the role of site admin - do you think it would be good to purge all the lurker accounts? Or at least some of the ones that obviously don't meet the 311 standard, and will thus never be able to play? If not, why not?
jay, I don't want to kick 1 or Chuck out of the game, but I don't understand on what basis you allow them to continue playing. The rule that you yourself proposed requires players to be MetaFilter members. 1 is not a member and Chuck will provide no evidence that he is a member. AAA claims not to be a member, so I'm not even sure he is a member by 311. Game custom is all nice and good, but game custom cannot change the rules.
When I judged this, I wrote:
JUDGMENT
312 states: A player is one free-willed human Metafilter member voluntarily playing the game of MeFiNo Nomic...
All players are known to have a MetaFilter account but Chuck. Given that this game was only ever advertised on MetaFilter, and given that Chuck arrived at the game almost instantly after the posting of the suggestion on MetaTalk, I can only conclude that Chuck's claim that he has a MetaFilter account he would prefer not to disclose is true.
Except then, as now, I should have said 311.
AAA claims not to be a member, so I'm not even sure he is a member by 311.
I do however claim to be the sockpuppet Abron, both here and at MetaFilter. And everyone knows that Aaron was Abron's puppetmaster. Therefore, Socrates is a man, no, wait...
gerryblog, you are no longer the judge. I ask this of jay, the current judge.
Well, perhaps we should kick out Aaron and allow Abron in then. Pity, because I don't think he would have a shiny golden star beside his name.
I find wisdom in gerryblog's earlier dissection of the player list and I support its conclusions. This was a large factor in my 1b.
gerryblog says nothing in his judgement about 1 or Aaron/Abron.
For the pedants among us, I have updated my profile here and at MetaFilter.
In the 311 thread we talked about a "once a MeFi member, always a MeFi member" policy...
I am filled with joy, AAA.
In the 311 thread we talked about a "once a MeFi member, always a MeFi member" policy...
Sure, but in the light of day, we have to admit that MeFi does not have such a policy and that's what counts.
I greatly appreciate ssg and gerryblog demonstrating their unobservantness for the rest of the players, so we know what we are dealing with.
What am I missing here, Chuck?
The fact that I edited my profile about 12 hours ago.
Ah, I dig. Well, whether that changed before or after I initially judged that question 12 hours ago, I congratulate you on your new openness.
It was changed before your ruling, in anticipation that you might rule otherwise. Had your judgment already been up at that point, I would not have changed my profile.
Chuck had already let his sekrit identity leak here weeks ago.
I'm not the "previous player" yet
I'd say you are. It's no longer your turn, making you the previous player. Doesn't matter if there is a new current player or no current player (in-between turns).