After reading Rule #6 and Rule #10 umpteen times, This Court cannot
believe that BlogNomic in particular (and named nomics in general)
don't have required honorifics. As tempted as This Court may be to
claim that Nomics are persons and subject to the general decorum
requirements of Rule #6, instead This Court notes the absence of
other Nomics in Rule #10: exceptio probat regulam. VALID.
Style bonus for bringing a new Nomic to the table: Style 2.0.
On Wed, 11 Jul 2018, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
> I submit the following argument on the second docket to the court:
>
> Your Honor, I believe that an example of a Nomic that has clearly
> defined goals is BlogNomic. In BlogNomic, the goal seems to be to have
> fun, as denn0nstrated by the varied topics that are discussed.
> However, I believe that an individual goal is to win and thus get the
> privilege of setting the topic for the next dynasty. As evidence that
> this is something that people care about and is sought after, I
> present the following discussion, in which people practice for when
> they have won:
> https://wiki.blognomic.com/index.php?title=Discussion:_Dynasty_Ideas
>
> I hope that this example may contribute to the discussion initiated by
> My Fellow Counsellor Aris.
>
