Cycle 17/Ruleset: Difference between revisions

Line 21:

A player is 'reputable' if they have continuously been a player for the previous seven days or if they have continuously been a player from a time that was within 3 days of the round starting. If two reputable players publicly declare that an unreputable player (i.e. a player who has not yet become reputable) is reputable then that unreputable player becomes reputable immediately.

=== Activity ===

An player is active if they have performed any action in the current or the previous phase, including voting on the results of other actions (elections, proposals, etc.). If an inactive player performs an action for the first time in a phase, they are considered having been active as the action is performed (in that conditions that depend on a player being active consider them active when considering the result of that action, not only after it resolves).

== Proposals ==

Line 121:

Line 124:

An overturned ruling shall have no bearing on the interpretation of the rules or of the gamestate.

== Napkin Math ==

For any calculation or algorithm - other than single-operation addition, subtraction, multiplication, or division - a player may declare that they have arrived at an answer using Napkin Math. To do so, they must send a message to #⁠game-actions or a game channel more relevant to the calculation or algorithm in question, beginning with the phrase "So I've done some napkin math" or phrase of equivalent sense. The player then describes their logic for how they came to a particular answer. This logic does not need to be sound or logically accurate to the truth, but does need to follow a path that seems like it could be true.

A different player than the one that proposed the Napkin Math may reply in the same channel with the phrase "Yeah that makes sense to me" or phrase of equivalent sense. If both of these conditions are met, the second message is voted on by 👍 or 👎 reaction. When a 2/3rds quorum of the active players is reached on this vote and it has more 👍 than 👎 reactions, the conclusion reached by the Napkin Math is considered the truth for this instance of the calculation or algorithm in question.

Similarly, a different player than the one that proposed the Napkin Math may reply in the same channel with the phrase, "Come on, that doesn't make any sense" or phrase of equivalent sense. The player may then elaborate with their own Napkin Math, or they may leave the message as is to be voted on by 👍 or 👎 reaction. When a 2/3rds quorum of the active players is reached on this vote and it has more 👍 than 👎 reactions, the conclusion reached by the Napkin Math is discarded as nonsense.

== Randomness ==

When randomisation is concerned in this ruleset, it must be resolved by a generally trusted and fair method accessible to all players in the game, and as soon as possible.

@@ Line 21: / Line 21: @@
 A player is 'reputable' if they have continuously been a player for the previous seven days or if they have continuously been a player from a time that was within 3 days of the round starting. If two reputable players publicly declare that an unreputable player (i.e. a player who has not yet become reputable) is reputable then that unreputable player becomes reputable immediately.
+=== Activity ===
+An player is active if they have performed any action in the current or the previous phase, including voting on the results of other actions (elections, proposals, etc.). If an inactive player performs an action for the first time in a phase, they are considered having been active as the action is performed (in that conditions that depend on a player being active consider them active when considering the result of that action, not only after it resolves).
 == Proposals ==
@@ Line 121: / Line 124: @@
 An overturned ruling shall have no bearing on the interpretation of the rules or of the gamestate.
+== Napkin Math ==
+For any calculation or algorithm - other than single-operation addition, subtraction, multiplication, or division - a player may declare that they have arrived at an answer using Napkin Math. To do so, they must send a message to #⁠game-actions or a game channel more relevant to the calculation or algorithm in question, beginning with the phrase "So I've done some napkin math" or phrase of equivalent sense. The player then describes their logic for how they came to a particular answer. This logic does not need to be sound or logically accurate to the truth, but does need to follow a path that seems like it could be true.
+A different player than the one that proposed the Napkin Math may reply in the same channel with the phrase "Yeah that makes sense to me" or phrase of equivalent sense. If both of these conditions are met, the second message is voted on by 👍 or 👎 reaction. When a 2/3rds quorum of the active players is reached on this vote and it has more 👍 than 👎 reactions, the conclusion reached by the Napkin Math is considered the truth for this instance of the calculation or algorithm in question.
+Similarly, a different player than the one that proposed the Napkin Math may reply in the same channel with the phrase, "Come on, that doesn't make any sense" or phrase of equivalent sense. The player may then elaborate with their own Napkin Math, or they may leave the message as is to be voted on by 👍 or 👎 reaction. When a 2/3rds quorum of the active players is reached on this vote and it has more 👍 than 👎 reactions, the conclusion reached by the Napkin Math is discarded as nonsense.
 == Randomness ==
 When randomisation is concerned in this ruleset, it must be resolved by a generally trusted and fair method accessible to all players in the game, and as soon as possible.