On 2/3/23 01:09, Janet Cobb via agora-discussion wrote: > Here's a draft. Sorry for the late notice. > > # Ruleset Annotations Contest > > ## Purpose > > This is a contest for RTRW 2023. The goal is to update the languishing > ruleset annotations on the FLR.
Revised according to feedback: # Ruleset Annotations Contest ## Purpose This is a contest for RTRW 2023. The goal is to update the languishing ruleset annotations on the FLR. ## Participants Any eligilble person CAN become a participant by announcement. If an eligible non-participant attempts to take an action that would succeed but for them not being a participant, e is deemed to have become a participant immediately before attempting to take the action. The Rulekeepor CAN by announcement cause a participant to cease to be a participant. Such a former participant CANNOT become a participant. The Rulekeepor SHOULD NOT do so unless the participant is creating excessive submissions, creating frivolous submissions, or otherwise making the contest unplayable. The Rulekeepor CANNOT become a participant. ## Submissions A participant CAN by announcement create a submission. A participant MAY create submissions as e sees fit (for example, e may submit work as e produces it, or e may batch all of eir work into one submission). A submission consists of one or more of the following (including potentially multiple instances of the same type): 1. A recommendation to delete a ruleset annotation. 2. A recommendation to amend an existing ruleset annotation. 3. A recommendation to add a new ruleset annotation. The Rulekeepor CAN by announcement invalidate a submission, thereby causing it to cease to be a submission. The Rulekeepor SHOULD do this if e believes that a submission contains one or more inaccurate or harmful recommendations. ### Please Help Me Participants are ENCOURAGED to create GitHub Pull Requests to the agoranomic/ruleset repository that update the appropriate files to reflect their recommendations. ## Scoring The Rulekeepor CAN by announcement assign each submission an integral score. Such a score SHOULD be based on the size, quality, and significance of the recommendations within the submission. The Rulekeepor CAN by announcement alter the score of a specified submission. The Rulekeepor SHOULD award points as follows: 1. One point for each inaccurate annotation recommended to be removed. 2. Between zero and two points for each accurate recommendation to amend an existing annotation, depending on the amount and significance of the proposed change. Such a recommendation should be presumed to be deserving of one point by default. 2. Between zero and five points for each accurate recommendation to add a new annotation, depending on the level of detail, historical significance, significance to current gameplay, and general quality of the annotation. Such a recommendation should be presumed to be deserving of one point by default. Scores above three for a recommendation should be extremely rare and reserved for recommendations of extraordinary significance and quality. ## Awards After the conclusion of RTRW, the Rulekeepor SHOULD publish a leaderboard showing all persons who have submissions, along with the sum of the scores of their submissions. After the publishing of such leaderboard, the Rulekeepor SHOULD petition the Herald to award the patent title [TBD] to zero or more participants, based on eir subjective consideration of the contribution to the state of ruleset annotations. Such consideration SHOULD be include the scores of participants. -- Janet Cobb Assessor, Mad Engineer, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
