Round 9/History: Difference between revisions

Line 645:

On 18 April 2021, Wotton wrote a proposal that would replace the voting emojis with the aforementioned Trungle edit emojis (Proposal :gatorTrung: :updownTrung:). According to legislation enacted in response to {{Heading|The Simultaneous Proposal Scare}}, if Proposal :gatorTrung: :updownTrung: passed, all proposals that were submitted after it, even those in the same batch, would require the new emotes for the votes to take effect. So for a while we voted using ducks, breads, and Trungles, just to be safe.

Soon enough, the time to check the results came due. There were five votes for and five votes against. In such cases, the group with the most communal quacks at the time of resolution is determined to be the outcome. This takes a lot of effort to calculate, however, and a couple of scams were dependent on the outcome of this proposal. As it turned out, the voters for had more quacks than the voters against. ~~But~~ this ~~hardly mattered~~ in ~~light~~ of what would ~~come next~~.

Soon enough, the time to check the results came due. There were five votes for and five votes against. In such cases, the group with the most communal quacks at the time of resolution is determined to be the outcome. This takes a lot of effort to calculate, however, and a couple of scams were dependent on the outcome of this proposal (see {{Heading|The Smoothie Style Scam}}. As it turned out, the voters for had more quacks than the voters against. Although

=== The Smoothie Style Scam ===

If you were concerned that Smoothies weren't going to come back to confuse us yet again, fear not. They did indeed do that exact thing. A proposal had been passed to add another attribute to the smoothies: style (Jumble, Proposal Does anyone stir a smoothie?, 20 April 2021).

{{Proposal Box

|name=Does anyone stir a smoothie?

|text=

In "Fruits", change

:Upon creation, the resulting Smoothie is named using an unambiguous combination of the names of the Fruits used to make it.

to

:Upon creation, the resulting Smoothie is named using an unambiguous combination of the names of the Fruits used to make it, and an optional name of a Style. The effects that Styles can have when a Smoothie is used are listed in this table:

:Icy: The fed duck gains 3 additional quacks, but cannot scout or be retrieved this turn. Cannot be used on a duck that is currently scouting.

:Light: No Quacks are gained from this Smoothie, but you can still use this fruit when you have already fed a Duck.

}}

On 25 April 2021, Wotton sent a couple of smoothie creation intents to #game-actions<ref>https://discord.com/channels/515560801394753537/795369457340907561/835666509761871872</ref><ref>https://discord.com/channels/515560801394753537/795369457340907561/835666652807954442</ref>, the second of which is featured here:

I perform the quacktion Make Smoothie through Smullyan, paying 5 quacks, combining a Mango Slice and a Grape, with the name Graporange Smoothie, and the following name of style: {{Mono|"Infinite Ducks, (Anything not in parentheses in the description of this fruit has no effect. Wotton owns an infinite number of ducks. Amend the ruleset by adding a rule with the following sentence as its text: "All other rules notwithstanding, Players may not under any circumstances give smoothies a name of style.")""}}

</blockquote>

This scam centers around a couple of strange properties of smoothies. First, the new bits about style were somewhat weakly-worded. Though two specific styles (Icy and Light) were given effects, players could arguably assign a smoothie's style to be any string. Second, the name of a smoothie is actually substituted into the descriptions of smoothies when evaluating their effects, and these descriptions are considered to be rules text. Put that all together and you have a smoothie that might be able to evaluate arbitrary text. That is to say, if the scam worked. Some rulings were requested on the effectiveness of Wotton's actions, but as it turned out, we were a little bit ahead of ourselves.

Proposal Does anyone stir a smoothie? was set to be resolved at the end of Wednesday the 23rd, but the result ended up not being that clear-cut due to the effects of another proposal set to be resolved at that same time: Proposal :gatorTrung: :updownTrung: (see {{Heading|The Second Vote Emoji Switch}}). See, if that proposal hadn't passed, then voting on Proposal Does anyone stir a smoothie? would have been done with the normal voting reactions: 🦆 and 🍞. But if that proposal had passed, then voting would have had to been done with :updownTrung: and :gatorTrung: instead. The reactions on Proposal Does anyone stir a smoothie? at the time of adoption were three 🍞, one 🦆, one :gatorTrung: and one :updownTrung:<ref>https://discord.com/channels/515560801394753537/518856008605499402/835672038206734376</ref>. Long story short, it was determined that both proposals had passed, much to the relief of the scamsters. The only thing left to do was figure out what happened with Wotton's actions, right? Well, it would have been if we hadn't discovered an altogether more severe breakage within a matter of minutes.

== References ==

@@ Line 645: / Line 645: @@
 On 18 April 2021, Wotton wrote a proposal that would replace the voting emojis with the aforementioned Trungle edit emojis (Proposal :gatorTrung: :updownTrung:). According to legislation enacted in response to {{Heading|The Simultaneous Proposal Scare}}, if Proposal :gatorTrung: :updownTrung: passed, all proposals that were submitted after it, even those in the same batch, would require the new emotes for the votes to take effect. So for a while we voted using ducks, breads, and Trungles, just to be safe.
-Soon enough, the time to check the results came due. There were five votes for and five votes against. In such cases, the group with the most communal quacks at the time of resolution is determined to be the outcome. This takes a lot of effort to calculate, however, and a couple of scams were dependent on the outcome of this proposal. As it turned out, the voters for had more quacks than the voters against. But this hardly mattered in light of what would come next.
+Soon enough, the time to check the results came due. There were five votes for and five votes against. In such cases, the group with the most communal quacks at the time of resolution is determined to be the outcome. This takes a lot of effort to calculate, however, and a couple of scams were dependent on the outcome of this proposal (see {{Heading|The Smoothie Style Scam}}. As it turned out, the voters for had more quacks than the voters against. Although
+=== The Smoothie Style Scam ===
+If you were concerned that Smoothies weren't going to come back to confuse us yet again, fear not. They did indeed do that exact thing. A proposal had been passed to add another attribute to the smoothies: style (Jumble, Proposal Does anyone stir a smoothie?, 20 April 2021).
+{{Proposal Box
+ |name=Does anyone stir a smoothie?
+ |text=
+In "Fruits", change
+:Upon creation, the resulting Smoothie is named using an unambiguous combination of the names of the Fruits used to make it.
+to
+:Upon creation, the resulting Smoothie is named using an unambiguous combination of the names of the Fruits used to make it, and an optional name of a Style.  The effects that Styles can have when a Smoothie is used are listed in this table:
+:Icy: The fed duck gains 3 additional quacks, but cannot scout or be retrieved this turn.  Cannot be used on a duck that is currently scouting.
+:Light: No Quacks are gained from this Smoothie, but you can still use this fruit when you have already fed a Duck.
+}}
+On 25 April 2021, Wotton sent a couple of smoothie creation intents to #game-actions<ref>https://discord.com/channels/515560801394753537/795369457340907561/835666509761871872</ref><ref>https://discord.com/channels/515560801394753537/795369457340907561/835666652807954442</ref>, the second of which is featured here:
+<blockquote>
+I perform the quacktion Make Smoothie through Smullyan, paying 5 quacks, combining a Mango Slice and a Grape, with the name Graporange Smoothie, and the following name of style: {{Mono|"Infinite Ducks, (Anything not in parentheses in the description of this fruit has no effect. Wotton owns an infinite number of ducks. Amend the ruleset by adding a rule with the following sentence as its text: "All other rules notwithstanding, Players may not under any circumstances give smoothies a name of style.")""}}
+</blockquote>
+This scam centers around a couple of strange properties of smoothies. First, the new bits about style were somewhat weakly-worded. Though two specific styles (Icy and Light) were given effects, players could arguably assign a smoothie's style to be any string. Second, the name of a smoothie is actually substituted into the descriptions of smoothies when evaluating their effects, and these descriptions are considered to be rules text. Put that all together and you have a smoothie that might be able to evaluate arbitrary text. That is to say, if the scam worked. Some rulings were requested on the effectiveness of Wotton's actions, but as it turned out, we were a little bit ahead of ourselves.
+Proposal Does anyone stir a smoothie? was set to be resolved at the end of Wednesday the 23rd, but the result ended up not being that clear-cut due to the effects of another proposal set to be resolved at that same time: Proposal :gatorTrung: :updownTrung: (see {{Heading|The Second Vote Emoji Switch}}). See, if that proposal hadn't passed, then voting on Proposal Does anyone stir a smoothie? would have been done with the normal voting reactions: 🦆 and 🍞. But if that proposal had passed, then voting would have had to been done with :updownTrung: and :gatorTrung: instead. The reactions on Proposal Does anyone stir a smoothie? at the time of adoption were three 🍞, one 🦆, one :gatorTrung: and one :updownTrung:<ref>https://discord.com/channels/515560801394753537/518856008605499402/835672038206734376</ref>. Long story short, it was determined that both proposals had passed, much to the relief of the scamsters. The only thing left to do was figure out what happened with Wotton's actions, right? Well, it would have been if we hadn't discovered an altogether more severe breakage within a matter of minutes.
 == References ==
 <references />