Subject: SocialNomic II in a Wiki??

From: Gallivanting Tripper <s3036845@s...>
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 15:47:18 +0100

I've been lurking around the foundations of WikiNomic (www.nomic.net/~g5)
for a while, and I've been mulling through the properties of Wiki and how
it might become a better UnmoderatedNomic engine.

The desired properties are:
1) Unmoderatedness
2) Ease of searching
3) Ease of editing
4) Auditability.

The first is easily done - provided the admins don't crash the site of
course, anyone can edit anything
The second would also not be too bad - I understand the Wiki has a search
function that will bring up a list of pages by page name and text word
search
The third is that wiki pages are probably a little quicker to navigate and
edit than egroups messages, but the linking ability of Wiki means that it
would no longer be neccessary to post redundant messages, simply cross-link
to the various gamestate pages.
The fourth is the sticking point - anyone can edit anything anonymously.
However, the Wiki does track the last change(s?) and can tell if a page has
not been altered. The latter function means that actions could be posted
as individual pages, and voided if edited. The same could go for proposals
or even rules - although it would be more convenient to have votes and
adoption/rejection tallied at the base of each proposal (although this
could allow proposals to be edited by stealth)

I'll mull over a more precise ruleset over the weekend

Cheers

GT

---

From: rsholmes@m...
Date: 22 Feb 2001 13:32:25 -0500

> could allow proposals to be edited by stealth)

Right, auditability is a problem. You have a good point with regard
to non-editing of pages. However...

(1) To apply this to voting, you'd have to create a new page for
every vote on every proposal. Each with its own WikiName!
Messy. 

(2) The fact that a page has not been edited does mean an action
hasn't been revised ex post facto. But there remains the
question of whether the action was taken by the person who claims
credit for it in the first place. To some degree there's
auditability for this, in the sense that the IP address of the
page author is stored. That, maybe, is sufficient for Nomic
purposes. 

(3) And if you adopt a "nullify if edited" policy, that means anyone
(player or not) can nullify any action, quasi-anonymously, simply
by editing it. That could be nearly as havoc-inducing as being
able to modify or forge actions.

I also point out that while PhpWiki does track the number of times a
page has been edited, apparently only two versions (max) are preserved
-- the current version and the archived version, which is *not*
necessarily the one before the current version; i.e. it doesn't
archive every time a page is edited. So not only can you not track
multiple modifications, you can't even necessarily see what the last
modification was. Perhaps you wouldn't have to, if you used the
"create pages but don't edit them" approach. I just point this out in
case anyone *is* harboring ideas based on this kind of auditability.

On the whole, the auditability issues strike me as potentially deadly.
I'd say a Yahoo Group (or two) (but not four) (but you've heard that
diatribe) beats a Wiki by a wide margin for running a Nomic, if it
weren't for the fact that the search facility is so piss-poor.

At least you can now traverse threads in a Yahoo Groups archive
(within a *single* group, of course).

Incidentally, have you looked at the membership list of
Socialnomic-DML lately? (Yahoo ID / email / profile info / joined):

/ abou@c... / Zutroi Zatatakowsky / 6/20/00 
driley7 / adistius@y... / David (M) / 1/21/01 
/ chris.ciesliga@h... / / 1/15/01 
/ hrholmes@m... / Doctroid / 7/17/00 
kevandavis / kevan@s... / Kevan Davis / 7/6/00
/ kingjawa@h... / / 12/11/00 
/ mctupper@h... / Xylen / 6/16/00 
ottisa / oairhart@i... / (M) / 12/11/00 
oloros_luin / oloros@l... / (M) / 6/16/00 
/ pulp@W... / / 10/30/00 
rsholmes / rsholmes@m... / (M) / 8/25/00 
/ s3036845@s... / Gallivanting Tripper / 6/16/00 
topheavyyah / topheavy@s... / (M) / 6/16/00 
/ unmoderatednomic@y... / / 6/16/00 

There appear to be at least four members who joined after Socialnomic
I ended. I don't know how many are really reading this, though...
(Ottis Airhart is a player in Docnomic, though apparently kinda busy
with the Real World these days.)

-- 
Doctroid

---

From: Gallivanting Tripper <s3036845@s...>
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 10:11:49 +0100

> every vote on every proposal. Each with its own WikiName!

Big problem yes. But otherwise there's nothing to stop an unscrupulous
player from voting and then changing another vote on the same page. It
would perhaps be practical to create empty pages titled
"313TripperVotesFOR" with just a link back to the original proposal or
something. It would then be easy to search for "313 Votes" and see who's
voted what (you could even put a search button on the bottom of the
proposal page. How easy would that be?). Also, the title ?can't? be
edited, which might solve _some_ security problems

> page author is stored. That, maybe, is sufficient for Nomic

Indeed - new Players could specify an IP address or addresses to prevent
such skulduggery

> able to modify or forge actions.

Yes, but just about any PBEM Nomic is trashable by someone, player or no,
who wants to spam/delete messages/post misinformation/whatever. For
example in a Yahoo Group, players could edit or delete their own posts, and
the other players as well if they signed in as a moderator. So SocialNomic
actually had some fairly byzantine leglislation to deal with those sort of
actions.

In a Wiki things could be much simpler - if a page is edited, it is
considered corrupted and the poster can re-post a duplicate page, putting
the link to the new page into the corrupted page (which is already
corrupted so e can edit as much as he likes). Mind you, editing a page
could also be a good way of *contesting* an action.

I've been thinking of ways to track actions. Every action could be a page
with the text of the action, a link to the previous action, an empty link
to the next action, and perhaps also to the GameData page. And when the
GameData page is updated, its link (to the most recent action at the time
of the update) can also be updated.

>case anyone *is* harboring ideas based on this kind of auditability.

Thinks - is it possible to edit the editability status of pages in PHPWiki?

>weren't for the fact that the search facility is so piss-poor.

Yes, Wiki wins for the searchability. The only extra paperwork required
for threadability in Wiki would be appending "PreviousAction NextAction
GameData" to each action page, which is a small price to pay IMHO

>I ended. I don't know how many are really reading this, though...

So many Nomics, so little time. I wonder who would appear if we
broadbanded a "resurrection of SocialNomic" post?

>with the Real World these days.)
\
Later

GT

---

From: Gallivanting Tripper <s3036845@s...>
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 10:22:32 +0100

Ho hum

You could apply the threading thing to Votes as well. Just put the vote
itself in the text of the message (it'll still come up in the search
function) and append "PreviousVote NextVote ProposalN" (well obviously
these will have to be different for every page but there you go)

---

From: rsholmes@m...
Date: 23 Feb 2001 13:01:05 -0500

Gallivanting Tripper <s3036845@s...> writes:

> (you could even put a search button on the bottom of the
> proposal page. How easy would that be?). 

If you literally mean a button, you can't, using PhpWiki in its
default configuration -- if I understand what you're talking about,
it'd require putting arbitrary HTML on a Wiki page, and while PhpWiki
can be set to allow that, the default is not (for security reasons).

But you could put a search link, if you can remember the syntax...

[http://www.nomic.net/~nomicwiki/index.php?full=eus]

(or search= for a title-only search.)

You can't do anything fancy in the search, like boolean operators.
Hmm, comparing Yahoo Groups and PhpWiki searches:

YG PW
-- --
searches Message body and ALL headers Message body OR title
for all words in query phrase in query

I think that's correct. PhpWiki wins, but not by a lot.

> Also, the title ?can't? be

True.

> Indeed - new Players could specify an IP address or addresses to prevent

Except, of course, there is not a 1-1 mapping between IP addresses and
players. In particular, someone using a dialup connection will
generally have a different IP address each time.

> actually had some fairly byzantine leglislation to deal with those sort of

Of course, but it's worse with a Wiki -- suggesting a WikiSocialnomic
would require even more byzantine remedies. Hmm, can you actually
edit posts in a Yahoo Group? Hang on. Nope. You can delete, but not
edit. And, as you say, only your own posts, or others' if you sign in
as moderator. And it's tough to forge an action in another player's
name. With a Wiki *anyone* -- player or observer or 14 year old
"hacker" -- can delete *or edit* any action, and can forge an action
on the part of any other player, with nothing but the IP address to
finger them. Of course you can do any of the above in any PBEM Nomic
if you're willing to do enough hacking. With a Wiki, it's not even
hacking -- it's using the system as intended.

OK, so you nullify any edited actions -- that still means anyone,
anywhere, anytime can nullify any action. 

Hmm, I guess you don't have to nullify an action if it can be
restored, i.e. if the original action is archived. And as I pointed
out before, archiving doesn't happen as soon as a page is edited. I'm
not sure when it happens, but if it's long enough, it gives you a
window of opportunity to fix the damage.

> of the update) can also be updated.

Hmm -- so the GameData page is editable, which means it's corruptable
by anyone; in principle you can decorrupt from the unedited action
pages ... in practice that could get hairy.

> Thinks - is it possible to edit the editability status of pages in PHPWiki?

I don't think a user can. The Wiki owner can. So if all players know
the Wiki owner password, they can make their actions uneditable. Of
course, they can still make *each other*'s actions editable...

> GameData" to each action page, which is a small price to pay IMHO

And presumably you'd want an editable ActionsTableOfContents page so
you can find an action without traversing the thread all the way from
one end or the other... No, no! You just have to put a link to
"Actions" at the end of each action, and then you can search for pages
that link to "Actions" to get an actions ToC.

Still, it's sounding to me like the measures required to get it to
work end up making it tedious to use, defeating the purpose. Maybe
not, but that's how it looks from here. Anyway, setting up things on
a Wiki and then requiring that nearly all pages never be edited kind
of strikes me as trying to have a system *not* do exactly what it was
designed *to* do.

-- 
Doctroid

---

From: Gallivanting Tripper <s3036845@s...>
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 10:36:43 +0100

>(or search= for a title-only search.)

I meant /search/ or /fullsearch/ (whatever the actual syntax is) There's
one in the RiceTable

>You can't do anything fancy in the search, like boolean operators.

You can do a NOT, but I don't see any need for more than that

>I think that's correct. PhpWiki wins, but not by a lot.

Wiki is Quicki (for me, anyway)

>generally have a different IP address each time.

Good point - but wouldn't those IP addresses be related? Enough to give a
negative/positive ID?

>Of course you can do any of the above in any PBEM Nomic

Which is why it is interesting to see if it could runa Nomic in this way.
Ultimately a (young) Nomic game survives on the will of its players - if
they aren't interested or a few players are being dicks, it would kill the
game off anyway.

>anywhere, anytime can nullify any action.

In SocialNomic, this would have been done by CFJing it and putting an
Injunction on...

>window of opportunity to fix the damage.

Thing is, _who_ would fix the damage? A SocialNomic shouldn't have to rely
on admin for life support. I imagine that nullified actions would just be
treated as a CFJ and then re-posted. The actions pages would leave an
audit trail, so long as some-one doesn't trash every single one of them

>pages ... in practice that could get hairy.

Exactly as in the case of SN 1. If just the points differentials were
tracked on actions pages, it would actually be _easier_ to recalculate, as
cumulative errors wouldn't creep in as much
>that link to "Actions" to get an actions ToC.

Yep, and exactly the same thing for Proposals and Votes. RecentChanges
would also allow action tracking. The only editable page you need (apart
from the gamedata one) is somewhere to create proposals and votes. To save
that, it might even be easier to have each proposal nominate a list of
empty WikiNames for player's votes with the format 301TrippersVote etc.
But that is probably more open to abuse as any player could use any (or
all) of the votes.

>of strikes me as trying to have a system *not* do exactly what it was

Well I had a bit of a muckaround on WikiNomic through a page called
ProPosal - the mechanics didn't work out exactly as I hoped (because the
search function is not case sensitive, creating a ProPosal TOC also hits
the discussion board quite a lot!)

See what you think

---

From: rsholmes@m...
Date: 26 Feb 2001 10:22:37 -0500

> they aren't interested or a few players are being dicks, it would kill the

Sure, but in the case of a Wiki, it's not just dickheaded players you
have to worry about -- it's dickheaded *anyone*.

> In SocialNomic, this would have been done by CFJing it and putting an

Again, that could be done only by a player. And the Judgment can
proceed knowing what the action was. On a Wiki where actions are
CFJ'ed if edited, anyone including a non-player could do that, and the
Judgment has to proceed on a basis of not knowing what the action was
before editing took place (unless it was archived).

> Thing is, _who_ would fix the damage? 

Anyone could, as long as the old page is in the archive.

> A SocialNomic shouldn't have to rely

I don't see this. Yes, if the original action is still in the archive
then you can audit a reposting of the action. But if an action is
edited before it can be archived -- or if it's edited twice and the
first edit is the one in the archive -- then there's no way to audit a
repost. 

> Exactly as in the case of SN 1. 

No, because in SN 1 only a player can post incorrect gamedata, and no
one can (without some serious hacking) modify or erase correct
gamedata. (Anyone with moderator privileges could remove correct
gamedata *from the archive* -- but by then it's been emailed to those
who choose to receive that list as email.) Again, on a Wiki, *anyone*
-- player or not -- can post incorrect gamedata or modify or erase
correct gamedata.

> from the gamedata one) is somewhere to create proposals and votes.

I was thinking you'd need one or more editable pages for the ruleset,
but I guess not -- at some cost. Each rule could be on a non-editable
page... non-editable, that is, except when the rule is amended or
repealed, in which case the page would be edited to say the rule is no
longer in effect (and in the case of an amendment, a new page would be
created for the amended version). A link to RuleSetPage, edited out
when a rule is amended or repealed, would enable one to find all valid
rules. Still, assembling a ruleset from all those disparate pages
would be a pain in the butt. Much easier to read if all
rules are on the same page (that was one of the problems with SN 1,
remember? No easy way for non-subscribers to obtain a current
complete ruleset.), but then the page has to be editable.

> To save

Or any non-player...

-- 
Doctroid

---

From: Gallivanting Tripper <s3036845@s...>
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 10:59:49 +0100

[player/non-player issues]

In a similar manner to SN1, anyone who edits the Wiki becomes a Player (or
at least a Person) If they don't leave their name, they become a Force of
Nature! I contemplated an idea for a minimal Wiki nomic-esqe game where
users are omnipotent agents (effectively gods), but can be knocked out by
having their home page deleted. Although this could be very nasty at
first, presumably some sort of conventions/(un)written rules would arise to
control the _behaviour_ of users. Suspicion of a crime leaves one liable
to punishment! Maybe this could be a SN2 subgame, where all users (not
neccessarily Players) can play

[ruleset issues]

This is indeed a sticking point. (Really the ultimate sticking point for a
non-moderated nomic in general) The system you discussed is a good one, and
similar to what was used in SN1. A central ruleset page could be
maintained, but since it would be editable it would be open to
mistakes/corruption. So the unedited RuleSetPage pages would be the stone
tablets, if you like.

>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>[email-masked]
>
>
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/