e41103 No.10989
GET LAW (aka Check em’ law)
Definition of check em’ : To call out your own or other people’s post number having sequential last digits a.k.a GET (for example: repeated digits i.e. doubles/triples/quadruples etc, palindromes, ABABA… structures and spin numbers i.e. 60809 etc.)
Ammendment 1: The right to check other people’s post number is a human right. Volunteers cannot delete their post for simply checking other people’s numbers.
Ammendment 2: .When people are not successful in self checking (i.e. saying the post itself is a GET but isn’t) is counted as shitposting, and is not covered by Ammendment 1 (This law is built after the Quad 7 incident where an anon has failed to GET 7777, and shitposting on board)
Ammendment 3: All Risk-type boardgames and other games that needed dice or Random Number Gnerator (RNG) can only use the e-mail field dice function and/or post number generation to generate numbers, they cannot use methods that can be rigged (i.e. falsely reporting results without the ability for any non-rollers to detect) for the sake of fairness.
Ammendment 4: MafiaParty-type games (games that needs to give each person cards from a deck or assigning people different roles out of a set of role deck) has not yet have a standard for generating fair distribution. Therefore Ammendment 3 is not suitable for MafiaParty-type games.
Ammendment 5: A GET bomb is generated when somebody post the GET bomb pictures in a new thread. When doubles are generated their command of passing the bomb to anaother board is done while generating triples detonate the bomb on that board. Whichever gets bombed get to be shitposted as a punishment and they cannot delete the shitpost for that day (24 hours).
e41103 No.10993
HKLIP yes with 22 seats
62bc65 No.10994
No. Seven seats.
c6028e No.10996
This seems unnecessary, and detrimental the board and it's purpose. I'm gonna have to vote nay, 35 seats.
e41103 No.11014
>>10996>detrimental the board and it's purposeWhat do you mean? When people do board-game events around this place, these had to be made
11acfd No.11015
Nay, 31 seats
4fa512 No.11017
Firstly, you aren't accounting for genuinely accidental failures to get based off of, oh I don't know, sneaky sages. not that I hold that against you, Ju, it made me laugh
More importantly though, this isn't really an issue because it rarely happens. I don't see the point in any actions pertaining to this until it becomes a common occurrence. Sorry.
35 votes nay, ACP.
43be58 No.11023
>>11014We don't play any of these games in the senate, nor should we. This board is meant to serve as a political simulator.
e41103 No.11024
>>11023Then why can somebody bring in war simulators without hassle?
43be58 No.11026
>>11024We've never had a "war simulator". We discussed holding weekly war games, but that idea never took off. Also, could you come to the IRC? There's something I need to talk to you about.
e41103 No.11038
>>11026Never? then why is there a game event in /sen/ before?
9f68c8 No.11054
8 seats, nay
6a5898 No.11296
ACTION FAILED
Yes: 22 (Hong Kong Libertarian Independence Party)
No: 116 (Nation Party, Popular Front, Revolutionary Marxist Party, Advancement Coalition Party, Republican Justice Party)
Abstain: 0
8d1b1b No.11328
>>11038You are mistaken. We had talked about it, but never done so.