MeFiNo | The MetaFilter Nomic Game

From the rules:

212. If players disagree about the legality of a move or the interpretation or application of a rule, then the player preceding the one moving is to be the Judge and decide the question... Unless a Judge is overruled, one Judge settles all questions arising from the game until the next turn is begun...

Jay says he can't judge his own invocations, contrary to ongoing game custom, and lack of any evidence in the rules to support his opinion.

Not only that, but he does it with such a lack of flair and lack of attention to style that it isn't even vaguely entertaining.

If this were really the case, why did jay go to such effort to see that the rules for the side game, Spork, contain specific language to the effect that judges cannot rule on their own invocations.

Let's take a stand against jay's bullying now.

#

Jay says he can't judge his own invocations, contrary to ongoing game custom

But that's the custom now, see?

We definitely need to pass the no-self-judging thing by rule, not custom.

Whatevers, jay. With your flippant and totally bland robotic approach to judging you will find much less than 1/3 of the player base ready to support your tyranny, I assure you.

#

And AAA knows that because he personally controls at least 2/3 of the other sockpu...er, players.

We definitely need to pass the no-self-judging thing by rule, not custom.

If we make you the permanent judge this problem becomes much less pressing.

#

Jay, this is really beyond the pale.

Anyway, if you can't judge your own invocations, then how did you just judge your invocation? Maybe you're just being silly.

I cannot countenance overruling this judgment, as that would merely make gerryblog judge. And given that gerryblog makes an outright false statement in this thread, I cannot condone someone who seems to lack the most basic fact-checking skills becoming judge, if it can at all be helped.

Of course, if jay's judgment stands, then paradoxically gerryblog is the judge. So I also cannot vote to submit to jay's fantasy-based tyranny.

The solution, of course, is simply to ignore jay's illegal ruling without a formal override. However, this is not an option in the current poll.

Get on board, Chuck, I am confident that even gerryblog will see the insanity here and lead us out of this darkness.

#

He's talking about the fact that he edited his profile page to include his MeFi name without telling anybody. Zing, he got me.

Goldfish in a bathtub, swimming in fishtank sized circles.

I withdraw my most recent invocation.

Wow, seems like you are just jerking us around - not taking this thing seriously at all.

#

If you're trying to bait me, I already closed photoshop.

Making some more friends? I'm honestly having a hard time seeing through the rhetoric and hyperbole. It's rather annoying and I'm having a hard time giving your points fair consideration.

I hate to ask, but, who are you talking to?

In fairness that might be a general and true statement about the lot of us.

Aaron. I know it's not a serious game, but it feels like he's trolling... constantly.

Pretty much.

And it doesn't feel like I'm trolling constantly? Dammit, I'm not trying hard enough.

Objection! No abstain option. I do that.

And it doesn't feel like I'm trolling constantly?

I don't see a star next to your name. Maybe you should throw a tantrum. Demand a bigger star.

I take it back. I just figured out that this isn't about what I thought it was about.
Clearly, having gerryblog rule on judgments during jeblis' turn is contrary to Rule 212.

Objection for abstention to motion to overrule the self-invocation regarding self-invocation denied.

contrary to Rule 212.

Desireable, maybe, but still contrary to the rule.

Nevermind, I see the overruled objection for abstention to the motion to overrule the withdrawn self-invocation regarding self-invocation now withdrawn.

I demand formation of a commission for investigation of the objection to omission of the presentation of an abstention option.

Or, you know, not so much demand, as make a motion.

There's no rule that says there needs to be an abstention option on these, or that these even exist outside of a method of collecting consent.

Forming a commission is not against the rules. You can even draft your own writ of subpoena.

Unfortunately, 'subpoena' does not end in -ion. I'm going to have to stick with 'abduction'.

So let me get this straight, your motion abstention objection exploration commission's action needs abduction to function?