Thursday, March 28, 2024

Proposal: Square Eyes

In “Shots”, replace “A Shot is confirmed as Authentic if it includes an appearance” with:-

A Shot is confirmed as Authentic if it was taken outside and includes an appearance

Remove “The Shot was taken in an outside location.” from the list of Public Criteria.

Let’s move on from photos of laptops.

Proposal: And the Best Picture Award goes to…...

New Award:  Best Picture Award


Update Criteria to include:

An Authentic Shot’s Quality Score is equal to the total Satisfying Count of all satisfied criteria by all Seekers that respond and score a Snap.

Update Scoring to include:

When a Seeker posts an Authentic Shot, the Seeker may reduce the Quality Score of the publicly tracked Best Picture Award by 0.5 points.

After 48 hours of a Shot having been posted, any Seeker may at most once respond to it stating the Shot’s Quality Score by totaling all satisfied criteria from all Seekers that responded to score a Snap.


In the rule Awards replace the second paragraph with:

At any time, if a Seeker has met the Standard for a General Award then they may claim it by making a blog post announcing as such and then incrementing their Awards by 1. A Seeker may only claim each General Award once in the dynasty.

At any time, if a Seeker has met the Standard for a Singular Award then they may claim it by making a blog post announcing as such and then incrementing their Awards by 1, and decrementing the current Awards of the Seeker holding that award by 1. Only a single Seeker can hold a Singular Award in the dynasty.

Each Singular Awards ownership will be publicly tracked with its associated owner and any Award criteria.

Add a default Best Picture Award to the Photo Gallery with a default score of 0 and the date and time of this rules adoption.

Update the rule Awards, to rename Award table to General Award table and to include:

{| class="wikitable sortable"
|-
! Singular Award !! Standard
|-
| Best Picture || Post a Snap, after the last recorded date of the current Best Picture Award, that has a Quality Score greater than the Quality Score of the current Best Picture Award. Update the public tracked Best Picture Award to include the Seekers username, Snap Name, Snap Date and Time, and Quality Score.
}


This creates an award type that isn’t shared that only one person can hold. The decay in the Quality Score for Best Picture is to ensure that it isn’t just a simple high score but creates an award that can change hands.  There’s always something new coming…..

Proposal: Philosophical Opposites

In the rule “Awards”, add the following entry to the table:

|-
| Conceptual Balance || Have at least one Private Criteria with a Satisfying score of 4 and an Unsatisfying score of 4, where those scores were obtained from the 8 most recent contiguous Authentic Shots

The last part of the clause is to prevent someone from simply gaining the required Satisfying and Unsatisfying scores on specific Shots while ignoring others.

Wednesday, March 27, 2024

Outstanding Composition Award

I have met the standard for the Outstanding Composition Award, so am claiming it

Proposal: Don’t Just Google It

Reached quorum 4 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 28 Mar 2024 16:11:17 UTC

In the rule “Upgrades”, after the text “A Snap which includes a found instance of the BlogNomic username of another Seeker”, add the following text:

, where the found instance cannot be from a screen capture taken from, or a photo of, a computer monitor, laptop screen, phone, tablet, television, or smart watch

Removing the ability to claim the upgrade simply from finding a username on blognomic.com, kevan.org, Google search, making a comment on a social media site, or finding someone’s profile in some other app

Story Post: Upgrade Request for Snap 17

Cannot be enacted with 4 against. Josh

Adminned at 28 Mar 2024 17:43:52 UTC

Snap 17 is taken in the same place (32 seconds in) in the song “So You Can Sleep Enter” by “Ned Navillus” as Snap 16 which was made by another seeker.

Therefore I think I have satisfied the clause “A Snap that was taken in the same place as another Snap taken by a different Seeker.” and so fulfill that Upgrade Benchmark

Story Post: Snap 17: Déjà vu

Story Post: GUESS: Clucky

I guess that one of Clucky’s Private Criteria is “Satisfies all of my other Private Criteria”.

Story Post: Upgrade Request: Snap 016

Cannot be enacted with 3 votes AGAINST. Josh

Adminned at 28 Mar 2024 18:20:14 UTC

Snap 016 contains a found instance of the BlogNomic name of another Seeker (Nadnavillus).

Your tidal cheque will be 0.01c heavier this month and that’s all down to me. Don’t allow it to affect your voting though, that would violate the rule No Cooperation

Story Post: Snap 016: Man, what is this, the invasion of privacy dynasty of something

Proposal: The Public Realm

Withdrawn. Failed by Kevan.

Adminned at 27 Mar 2024 19:54:03 UTC

Remove all but the first Public Criteria from the list in “Criteria”.

To the top of the list in “Scoring”, add a new bullet point:-

* If it is the responder’s own Snap, then for each Public Criteria that the Shot satisfies, the responder’s Score is increased by 3

In Upgrades, replace “A Snap which meets every Public Criteria” with:-

A Snap which includes a specific named entity that had its own Wikipedia page at Mon 18/03/24—09:00 UTC, in which at least one article of clothing worn by the posting Seeker at the time that the Snap was taken is visible, and which contains a message to the viewer

The concepts of Public and Private Criteria seem a bit disconnected. This makes Public into something that, like Private Criteria, you score - specifically, something you can score for each photo and are rewarded for following when composing it, rather than something you can entirely ignore once you’ve unlocked the everything-in-shot achievement.

This also cuts (for now) the list back down to just “photo taken outside”, as I’m not sure whether the group would want to see the entity/clothing/message aspects in every single photo that gets posted.

Tuesday, March 26, 2024

Proposal: The Dying of the Trite

Popular, 4-0 with 1 DEF and Observer voting FOR. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 27 Mar 2024 16:24:16 UTC

Repeal the rule “Trite”.

In the rule “Scoring”, remove “and the Trite at the time that the post is made” and the bullet point beginning “For each Private Criteria in the response that contains any of the nouns listed in the Trite”.

This rule doesn’t really seem to have taken off.

Story Post: Upgrade Request for Snap 015

Reached quorum 4 votes to 0. Processed by Kevan.

Adminned at 27 Mar 2024 09:24:04 UTC

I believe Snap 015 meets every Public Criteria:

Taken outside.
Includes a specific named entity Plymouth Rock
Includes one article of seeker: blue glove
Includes a message: “It’s a rock!”

Story Post: Snap 015: A Rock

Trite: sky, pole

Story Post: Upgrade Request for Snap 014

Reached quorum 5 votes to 0. Processed by Kevan.

Adminned at 27 Mar 2024 09:22:39 UTC

I believe Snap 014 contains a found instance of the BlogNomic username of another Seeker, namely Josh.

Story Post: Snap 014: If Josh Wins

The Trite is currently “sky, pole”.

Monday, March 25, 2024

Mentorship announcement

I will be mentoring Nadnavillus.

Joining Blognomic

Hey Everyone, 

I would like to join the current Dynasty.  I understand that I’m probably far behind but I thought I could at least start to understand the game play process.

Sunday, March 24, 2024

Story Post: Upgrade Request for Snap 013

Timed out, 2-2. Failed by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 26 Mar 2024 19:34:54 UTC

I believe that Snap 013 meets the Upgrade Benchmark “A Snap which meets every Public Criteria”

Story Post: Snap 013: A Bit of Gardening

Friday, March 22, 2024

Proposal: What’s the point of Points?

Reached quorum 5 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 24 Mar 2024 12:48:58 UTC

In the rule “Scoring”, replace the text “they gain a number of Points” with “they gain an amount of Score”.

In the rule “Awards”, replace the text “Have more than 200 Points” with “Have more than 200 Score”.

Correcting places where the term “Points” is used instead of “Score”.

If we keep doing this, I suppose we could add a clause that says that Points and Score are interchangeable terms. However, being a named tracked variable, I’d prefer just to keep it Score, or rename all of it to Points, rather than having two different terms referring to the same thing.

Snisgo

Snisbo idles out after seven days without a post or comment. Quorum drops to 3.

Story Post: Upgrade Request for Snap 012

Reached quorum 3 votes to 0, applied by Kevan.

Adminned at 23 Mar 2024 10:33:47 UTC

I believe Snap #12 meets the Upgrade Criteria of “A Snap which meets every Public Criteria”, and that it do so in the following manner:

  • It was taken in an outside location
  • It includes a specific named entity that has a Wikipedia page (it’s a park near where I live which has a name; I’d rather not publicly identify it, but can do so privately if required) (Sciurus carolinensis is perhaps also a “specific, named entity”)
  • It features a boot that I was wearing at the time
  • It conveys the message “Hello World” to the viewer (this is more clearly legible at full size)

Poked

Pokes is idled after seven days of inactivity. Quorum remains 4.

Story Post: Snap 012: Squirrel

The Trite is currently “sky, pole”.

Proposal: Hidden in Plain Sight

Timed out 1 vote to 2. Failed by Kevan.

Adminned at 24 Mar 2024 12:47:09 UTC

Add a new rule called “Tokens”

Each Seeker may have a Token, which is an concrete noun. Each Token is privately tracked by its seeker, and publicly tracked by its sha256 hash which includes the Token plus a salt of 10 characters or less. A Seeker may change their Token at any time.

As a weekly action, if a Seeker has posted three different Snaps since they last changed their Token, each of those Snaps contains an instance of their Token, and their Token (or any of its synonyms) is not in the trite list, they may make a post to the blog with links to those three Snaps.

Each other Seeker may make one response to the post mentioning the one noun which they think matches the Token of the Seeker who posted the Snap

After 48 hours of making such a post, if no Seeker has accurately guessed their Token (or guessed any of its synonyms) in reply to the post, the Seeker who made the post may claim the Mastery in Subtle Product Placement Award

Add an Award called “Mastery in Subtle Product Placement” with a Standard of “May only be claimed as allowed by the rule “Tokens”“

Wednesday, March 20, 2024

Proposal: Expecting the Unexpected [Building Blocks]

Reached quorum, 4-0. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 21 Mar 2024 17:01:30 UTC

If the proposal “Co-op No-op” failed, then to the Building Block “No Cooperation” (both in the ruleset and the Building Blocks wiki page), add a paragraph:-

If a Seeker feels that another Seeker has gone against this expectation in some way during the current dynasty, then they are encouraged to vote against all DoVs from that Seeker during that dynasty. This overrules the encouragement to vote according to the perception of a victory in the rule “Victory in Ascension”.

Per Jonathan’s question on Co-op No-op about whether a DoV can be reasonably voted down for going against the “loose definition” of the spirit of the rule.

Under the current ruleset, if a team cooperates their way to victory, the rules say that a player’s vote on that DoV is “encouraged to reflect whether or not they agree with the proposition that the poster has achieved victory in the current Dynasty”. Although No Cooperation says that the victor was “expected” not to do that, the ruleset is still encouraging each voter to vote on the proposition rather than the expectation.

So let’s make clear that it’s fine to vote against a DoV if you feel that this expectation has not been met.

Call for Judgment: uh-oh; I had an oopsie

Timed out and enacted, 3-0. Josh

Adminned at 22 Mar 2024 16:09:36 UTC

Uphold the action where Chiiika set her Private Criteria to include 30daf7b3b83f87396258e7c30211f0a23367f33f57d1c3055b5f62949f6a46b3 and 3600b793e6c5f658028f482626b551e3c49c605f294e591fe2e3b2ffbc6c6b94 performed at 09:31, 15 March 2024 as legal.

When I was generating new criterias I found that two of my old criteria is over 50 characters (thought it was 50 words) but can be expressed under 50 characters, namely
- Secret Criteria: there is a kind of public transport stop in the picture, Hash: 30daf7b3b83f87396258e7c30211f0a23367f33f57d1c3055b5f62949f6a46b3, Salt: n983L, Created at: 2024-03-15 17:25:11 HKT
-> can be simplified to “there is a public transport stop in the picture”
- Secret Criteria: characters from two or more kinds of language exist in the picture, Hash: 3600b793e6c5f658028f482626b551e3c49c605f294e591fe2e3b2ffbc6c6b94, Salt: b0RFW, Created at: 2024-03-15 17:30:00 HKT
-> can be simplified to “two or more kinds of language exist in the picture”