Rule of the Fortnight

[hibiscus]

A month feels too long.
Yeah, sure, we get more time for searching the rule, and that's what we want, right? Of course... but we have to consider that some rules just aren't made for projects like these - yet the community may still vote for them! And you'll have to wait a month before a rule with at least some merit is nominated. If anyone remembers the thread in a month.

Let's say we did indeed make this the "Rule of the Month" thread. If someone decided nominated a rule and another person voted for it, and no one was active in the month the whole process for establishing the RotM took place, then great. That rule is the Rule of the Month!
But what if the person who nominated the rule only nominated the rule because of its aesthetic qualities? Let's assume that for this hypothetical, the other person assumed the rule had qualities beyond its appearance and voted the rule because of a perceived plentifulness. Then, when the other person starts booting up apgsearch expecting to hoard discoveries, they discover that the rule doesn't have much besides whatever phenomena was mentioned when the first person nominated the rule (if anything was mentioned).
"Well, that's just great! It's not like I expected it to be..."
And that's the thing. A whole month of searching without results wouldn't be too great. I'd like to err on the side of caution so situations like these don't happen, since if they do, we'd have useful hindsight to say that we could've directed a whole month towards a different rule. Yes, I based the entire hypothetical on the premise that no one did anything for the rest of the process, which feels kind of unlikely since there's a whole month to vote for rules, but it's likely that the thread could be buried deep in the Sandbox. I've had one of my own threads in OCA be buried for 3 months before rediscovery.

And this is of course without mentioning that some months have 30 days, others 31 or 28 (in a normal year). At least a week is always 7 days. It's brief, still enough time to actually explore but not long enough to regret your choices.

[confocaloid]

[...] If anyone remembers the thread in a month. [...]

If people like the idea, this thread could be pinned on the board (which would prevent it from getting buried deep in the Sandbox).

A month might feel like "too long" to some, however, a week feels like "too short" (not enough time to actually explore the nominations and think about them) and it devolves into "pure nominations/voting activity" with little CA exploration. At least this is more or less how I see the situation with "RotW".

[...]
Additionally, while I'm not entirely sure what exactly I would want to propose instead, I feel like one week is too short for anything sensible to happen.
Maybe it would work better to make it a monthly event.
Maybe it would work better to avoid tying it to any fixed schedule, and instead rely on consensus.

It's worth brainstorming what the situation is, and what could be done, at least in principle.

[Disaster16439]

[...] If anyone remembers the thread in a month. [...]

If people like the idea, this thread could be pinned on the board (which would prevent it from getting buried deep in the Sandbox).

A month might feel like "too long" to some, however, a week feels like "too short" (not enough time to actually explore the nominations and think about them) and it devolves into "pure nominations/voting activity" with little CA exploration. At least this is more or less how I see the situation with "RotW".

[...]
Additionally, while I'm not entirely sure what exactly I would want to propose instead, I feel like one week is too short for anything sensible to happen.
Maybe it would work better to make it a monthly event.
Maybe it would work better to avoid tying it to any fixed schedule, and instead rely on consensus.

It's worth brainstorming what the situation is, and what could be done, at least in principle.

I propose a new idea:
The previous rotw will be automatically nominated, and can be voted for. This means that the old rule will be explored again, but if it is boring, it will get replaced. If needed, an advantage may be given, e.g. a vote for the old rule could be given 1.2 points instead of 1. I agree with the pinning idea.

[CARuler]

i nominate photons10v0 again in hopes it will be agpsearched

Code: Select all

x = 163, y = 2, rule = photons10v0
A4.A4.A4.A4.A4.A4.A4.A4.A4.A4.A4.A4.A4.A4.A4.A4.A4.A4.A4.A4.A4.A4.A4.
A4.A4.A4.A4.A4.A4.A4.A4.A4.A$B.A2.C.A2.D.A2.F.A2.I.A2.L.A2.P.A2.T.A2.
pA.A2.pF.A2.pK.A2.pP.A2.pV.A2.qD.A2.qK.A2.qR.A2.rA.A2.rH.A2.rO.A2.rV.
A2.sF.A2.sN.A2.sV.A2.tF.A2.tO.A2.tX.A2.uI.A2.uR.A2.vC.A2.vL.A2.vV.A2.
wH.A2.wR.A!

i also nominate Star Life, one of my better rules

Code: Select all

x = 5, y = 1, rule = B3-qy4t6c7e/S2-n3-ky5iy
5o!

[LWSSONHWSSONLWSS]

Nominating "LoafShip Life"

Code: Select all

x = 64, y = 64, rule = B35-an/S2-c3
o3bobo7bobo2b2o2b2o5b2obo2bo4bobob2o2b2obo2b2ob4o$b3o2b4obob5o2bobob5o
4bob2o2b3ob6obo2bo4bobobo$6obo2b3ob3o3bobob5obo2b2o2bobo3b3obo4b2ob3o
b3obo$o8bob2ob2ob3o3b2o2b3o3bobo3bob2o2bobobo7b2o2b3o$o11bo2bobobo2b2o
bob2o2b5ob2o2b2ob5o2b2o2bobo2b3o$b3ob4o3b5o2b2o3bo2b4o2bo3bobobob2o2b
o2b2o2bob2o2bo2bo$4b2ob3obob2ob5o3b2o2bob3o4bo2bo2b2o3b3ob2obo2bob4o$
b2o4b4ob2o5bobob2o3bo4bobobob3obobo3b2obob2o5b3o$4obo4bo5b2ob2o2bo2bo
2b4obob2o2b4ob2o6b3obo3b2o$ob2o2bobo2b3ob2o2b3o2bo4b3o4b2o3bobo2bo2bo
2b4ob2obobo$2ob3ob3obo2b3ob2ob4obobob5ob4ob4o4b3obo2bobob2obo$4ob3ob2o
2bo2bo3bob2obo4b4o2b5ob3obo3b3obo2bobo2b2o$b2o2bo2b3ob3ob2obobobobobo
2bob2o2bobo2b2ob3ob2obob3o4bobo$3bob2o2b2o2bobo2bobobo2bob4o3bo2b5ob3o
bo2bo5bob3ob2o$2ob2o2b5obo2b8obob2obo3b3o2bo2b2o4b2obo2b2obo3bobo$o2b
2obo3bo3b2obobo2bobo2bob3obobo2bo5b2o2bobobob2ob3o2bo$ob2obo2bo2b2o3b
obo2bobobo2b3ob2ob2obobo3b3ob3o3bo2bob4o$o2b2o3bo3bo2b2o2b2ob2o2bo2b2o
bob3o2bob5o2b3ob2o3b3o$bo3bob2o4b7o3b2obobobo4bob9ob2o4bo2bobo2b3o$3o
bo3bob7o3bobo3b2o4bo3b3o3bo2b3o2b2obo5b2o$bo2bobo7bo2bo3bob2obobob2o2b
2o3b5ob4o2b4o2bobo2b2o$3o3bo4bo5b2o4b2obo3bo2bo2b2o3b3o3bo2b2o2b3o2bo
3bo$ob3obobo3bo2b2obo4b2obob2obob3o2bob2obobo2bobo2b6o2b2o$3o4bobo2b2o
8b2o2b3o3b3o2bobobobobob2ob3o2b3o2bo2bo$ob2o2bobobo3bobobob3obo3b2o4b
ob2o10b4obo2bob2ob2o$bob2o2b4o4b3o4b5o2bo2b3o5bobo4bo2b5obo2bobo$obo2b
o2bob4o2bob2o2bo2b2ob6o3b2obo2bob2ob2o3bo2bob3obo$obobo2bo5b2ob2o3b4o
2b2obo2bo4bo2bo2b2obob2o2b3ob6o$6o2b4ob3ob2o2b2ob3obo3bo3bob2obobo2bo
b2obo4b2obo3bo$3o2bob3obo2b2o2bo3bobobobob4obobo2bobo2bob2o7b2obobobo
$2ob5ob4obo3bo3bo5b3ob3o2b2obo6bo5bob2o3bo$bo5b3o2bo2b3o2bo6bobo3b2ob
4ob5ob2ob2obob2obobob2o$2b2ob2ob2o3b2o2b3ob3ob4ob3obob4o2b2o3bo3b5ob2o
2bo$2o4b4o8bob3o2b3o2b2ob2obob2o3bob2o2bo5bob4o2bo$bob2o5b2obob2o2b3o
2bob2obo3b2o2b2obob2o2b3ob4obobob4o$4ob2ob2obo2bo4b2ob3o2bo2bo3bobo5b
4obob3obo4bobobo$9b2obob4o2bo2bo3bob3o2bo5bobob3o2bob8obob2o$6bob2ob3o
bo2bob3ob4ob2ob2obob3ob2o2b2o3bo2b2obo2b2o2bo$ob3o5b3ob2o2bob3obo3b2o
bobob2o3bob2o4bob2o2bobob2obobo$2bob2o3b7obo2bob4obo2bo4b2o2b2o2bobo2b
2obo4bob5o$bob2o4b3o6b2o5b2o2bobo3bo4b2obo6b3obo2bo2b2obo$5o4bo2b4ob4o
b2obobo3b3o2b3o4bobo6b2o4bobob2o$obob3o6b2ob2ob3obob5obobob2o3bo3bob3o
b3obo2b2o3bo$bob6o4b5o3bo2bo2bobo4b2obobo2bobo2bo4bo2b4o$o3bobobo2bo2b
ob2ob6o6bo9bobobobo2b3obob8o$3obo2bo4b8o2b2obo4bo2b2obo4bob4o4bobo2bo
bo3bo$b2o2bobo2bob2o3bo5bo3b3ob3o2b3obobob5obobob2ob3o2b2o$o5bob5o3b5o
b2o2bo3bob2ob3o2bobobo4bo5b4o3b2o$b2o3b2ob2o3bobo2b2o5bo2b3o2b2obob2o
5b2o3bobob3ob3o$4b2o4b2o2b2o2b4obo3b4ob4o3b2obob2o2b2o3b2o3bobob2o$o4b
3obob4obo3b2obobobo3bobobo2bobo2bob5o3bobob3o3bo$2b2ob3ob2obobobobo2b
2o3bobo3b2o6b2o4bobo3bo2b2o3bob2o$3obo6b2ob7o4b3obo3b3o2b3o2b2o2b3o2b
ob2ob2ob2obo$3b2obo3bob3ob3o4b2obo2bobo2bo3bobo4bobo2bo2bobo2b2o$5bo2b
2o2b3o2b4obo2bo3b6ob3obo3bob3o2bo4bo5b2o$3o3bo3b3ob2ob3o8bo3b6obob4ob
2o2b3o2b2obob4o$b3o4b2o4b2o2bob2o6b2ob3o2b3ob2ob3obo2bo3b3obo2b3o$5bo
b2obobobo2b2o4bo2b5o6bo3b5obo2bob3ob2o4b2o$2ob2obobo3b2o4bobo2bo3b2ob
5o3bo6b3ob3obobobo5bo$8ob2o2bo2bob2ob2o4bo2bo3b2ob2o2b2o2b3ob3o2bobo2b
obo$o2bobo3bob9o2b2o2b2obo4bo3b2obo2bo2bo2b4obob3o3bo$2ob3o2bo7b2obob
o2b3ob2o2b5o2bobo3bo2bo2b8o2bo$3bob2o2bob2obo3bob5o6bo3bo3b2obob2o2bo
bo2b5obo$2o4bo6bobo3bobob2obo2b3obo2b3obobo3b4ob2o4b4ob2o!

[b-engine]

Nominate BPLogic, where making logics are super easy:

Code: Select all

x = 32, y = 17, rule = BPLogic
14.4C4.D$BA8.BA6.D3C$14.4C11.2D$BA3.BA11.D3C$14.4C4.D2$14.4C4.D$BA8.B
A6.4C7.C$14.3CD12.C$BA3.BA11.4C9.D$14.4C4.D2$14.3CD4.D$BA8.BA6.4C9.D$
14.4C12.C$BA3.BA11.4C7.C$14.3CD4.D!

[TigerCub414]

I nominate a rule I call Mini Snowflakes(B2-ak3i/S1e2ac3y), which might be a good rule for engineering.

Code: Select all

x = 42, y = 42, rule = B2-ak3i/S1e2ac3y
13bobo16bo$33bo$30bobo8$15b2o6b2o$6bo11bo2bo$7bo9bo4bo17bo$18bo2bo17b
obo$15b2o6b2o4$7bo2$7bobo2$15bobo$18bo21bo$15bo23bobo$16bobobo$21bo$18b
o$o6bo11bobo$o2bo3bo2$3bo8$13bo$13bo$11bobo!

I think that in order to avoid confusion, there should be a poll at the beginning of the thread so people can vote for a set amount of time every week.

[hibiscus]

Turns out today (2025-04-17) is when nominating & voting for RotW 4 starts.
RotW4 shall be decided on the 21st of April 2025. If anyone wants to re-nominate rules for RotW4, please tell me.
I'll go first. I re-nominate and vote for Primeria (B2n3-enqy4cijrwyz5cinqy6kn78/S01e2ein3eikry4-ciry5-aeky6ein7e8) and nominate and vote for B2ein3cijr4jy6i/S23-ky4citwyz. (Also, I can't stress this enough. Vote! If you nominate one of your own rules with the intent of giving it a shot at being RotW, please do vote!)

[TigerCub414]

I re-nominate Mini Snowflakes, but I vote for Primeria.

[get_Snacked]

i vote p rimeria
EDIT: NVM MY RULE IS ON THERE IM VOTING FOR B2ein3cijrblahblahblah
EDIT 2: selected patterns in b2ein3cijr4jy6is23-ky4citwyz:
five common spaceships:

Code: Select all

#C grin (G) c/2, P-pentomino (P) c/2, flipper (F) 2c/4, U-pentomino (U) c/3, hat (H) 2c/6
x = 27, y = 4, rule = B2ein3cijr4jy6i/S23-ky4citwyz
12b2o$11bo2bo8b3o$b2o3b3o8b3o3bobo$o2bo3b2o3bo4bobo2b2ob2o!

p16 U gun:

Code: Select all

x = 3, y = 3, rule = B2ein3cijr4jy6i/S23-ky4citwyz
3o$obo$3o!

p66 H gun by AbhpzTa:

Code: Select all

x = 29, y = 23, rule = B2ein3cijr4jy6i/S23-ky4citwyz
6bo15bo$5b2o15b2o$9b2o7b2o$bo3b3obo9bob3o3bo$b2o2bobo13bobo2b2o2$2o25b
2o$o27bo3$11b2o3b2o$12bo3bo$11b2o3b2o3$o27bo$2o25b2o2$b2o2bobo13bobo2b
2o$bo3b3obo9bob3o3bo$9b2o7b2o$5b2o15b2o$6bo15bo!

caber tosser by GUYTU6J and reduced by me:

Code: Select all

x = 79, y = 89, rule = B2ein3cijr4jy6i/S23-ky4citwyz
56bo$56b2o2$54b3o$53b2ob2o$53b5o$48bo2b2o5b2o$47b2ob3o2bo2b3o$50bobob
obobobo$50b3o2bo2b3ob2o$51b2o5b2o2bo$53b5o$53b2ob2o$54bobo$55bo$69bo$
68b2o$48bo$47b2o20b3o$68b2ob2o$68b5o$66b2o5b2o2bo$7bo10bo46b3o2bo2b3o
b2o$6b2o9b2o45bo2bobobobobo$65b3o2bo2b3o$7b3o56b2o5b2o$6b2ob2o57b5o$6b
5o6bo50b2ob2o$4b2o5b2o4b2o50b3o$3b3o2bo2b3o4bo$3bobobobobo2bo56b2o$2o
b3o2bo2b3o57bo$bo2b2o5b2o$6b5o$6b2ob2o$7b3o14b2o28b2o$25b2o27b2o$9b2o
44bo$9bo$23bo36b2o$22bobo25bo11bo$21b2ob2o24b2o8b2o$21b5o$16bo2b2o5b2o
20b3o$15b2ob3o2bo2b3o18b2ob2o$18bobobobobobo11bo6b5o$18b3o2bo2b3ob2o7b
2o4b2o5b2o$19b2o5b2o2bo8bo4b3o2bo2b3o$21b5o17bo2bobobobobo$21b2ob2o18b
3o2bo2b3ob2o$22b3o20b2o5b2o2bo$47b5o$21b2o24b2ob2o$22b2o8b2o14b3o$23b
o7b2o$47b2o$48bo$34bo$33bobo$32b2ob2o$32b5o$27bo2b2o5b2o$26b2ob3o2bo2b
3o$29bobobobobobo$29b3o2bo2b3ob2o$30b2o5b2o2bo$32b5o$32b2ob2o$33bobo$
34bo$60b2o$60b3o$18bo$18b2o13bobo27bo$33bobo26b2o$16b3o15b2o26b2o$15b
2ob2o15bo$15b5o14b2o$10bo2b2o5b2o38b2o$9b2ob3o2bo2b3o4b2o32bo$12bobob
obobo2bo5bobo$12b3o2bo2b3o4b5o$13b2o5b2o$15b5o$15b2ob2o$16b3o2$15b2o11b
2o$16bo12bo!

statorless p18 sparker:

Code: Select all

x = 3, y = 7, rule = B2ein3cijr4jy6i/S23-ky4citwyz
bo$obo$bo$bo$bo$obo$bo!
[[ AUTOIDENTIFY ]]

interesting p12 spaceship:

Code: Select all

x = 8, y = 5, rule = B2ein3cijr4jy6i/S23-ky4citwyz
5bo$2o3b3o$bo5bo$2o3b3o$5bo!

various pipsquirting reactions with a stairstep hexomino:

Code: Select all

x = 35, y = 14, rule = B2ein3cijr4jy6i/S23-ky4citwyz
32bo$31b2o$27bo$26b2o$26b2o$4bo9bo9bo2bo6bo$3b2o8b2o8b2o8b2o$2b2o8b2o
3bo4b2o8b2o$2bo9bo5bo3bo9bo$16b2o2$3o8bo$obo7bobo$12bo!
[[ T 12 PAUSE 1 ]]

proof of omniperiodicity for oscillators period 21 and above by hibiscus:

Code: Select all

x = 16, y = 34, rule = B2ein3cijr4jy6i/S23-ky4citwyzHistory
10.2A$11.2A$2C3.A6.2A2D$4.2A$3.2A$3.A$10.A$10.2A$11.2A$5.2A5.A$4.2A$3.
2A3$3B.B.B.3B.B2.B$.B2.B.B.B.B.2B.B$.B2.B.B.2B2.B.2B$.B2.B.B.B.B.B2.B
$.B2.3B.B.B.B2.B3$2C3.A$4.2A$3.2A$3.A4$5.2A5.A$4.2A5.2A$3.2A5.2A$10.A
$10.D$10.D!

if you're looking for a technical rule or one that has potential for construction challenges, this is a good one.

[hibiscus]

Since you edited the post rather quickly, I'll make an exception to the "no changing votes" rule... but this is the last time.

[R2INT]

Nomination of my new B0 rule:

New Rule: Giraffes0

Code: Select all

#R B012aci3ai4ijt5y6aek7/S1c3iy4yz5inq6ikn
!
# [[ RANDWIDTH 128 RANDHEIGHT 128 RANDOMIZE ]]

Pattern Collection, including 2 c/2o spaceships, a c/8o, and a (4,1)c/12:

Code: Select all

x = 49, y = 28, rule = B012aci3ai4ijt5y6aek7/S1c3iy4yz5inq6ikn
47bo$12b2o5bo10b3o15bo$11bo2bo3bobo10bo14b2o$27bo7bo8bo$28bo5bo9bo4$b
o2bo4bo$4bo8bo$o6bo6bo3$3bo3bobo$2b2o$9bo3$7bobo2$7bobo3$13bo2bo2bo$6b
2o7b3o$6b4o5b3o$7bo8bo$7bo8bo!

The reason why the large c/8o is unusually common is because of this reaction:

Code: Select all

x = 4, y = 3, rule = B012aci3ai4ijt5y6aek7/S1c3iy4yz5inq6ikn
4o$o2bo$4o!

My vote(s) are:

• Mini Snowflakes (B2-ak3i/S1e2ac3y)
• Girrafes0 (my nomination) (B012aci3ai4ijt5y6aek7/S1c3iy4yz5inq6ikn)
• Primeria (B2n3-enqy4cijrwyz5cinqy6kn78/S01e2ein3eikry4-ciry5-aeky6ein7e8)

(If there is a rule saying you can only vote for one rule, the first rule in the list will be the rule I vote for)

[CARuler]

My nominateions:

• photons10v1-1
• star life
• b3-r6i/s235i

My votes:

• photons10v1-2
• star life
• b3-r6i/s235i
• Giraffes0

[LuveelVoom]

So, the concept of this thread turned out to have two problems: voting spams the thread, and people just nominate and vote for their ruletables which usually are either too limited/specific or way too complex. My proposed solutions are these:
1. You have to edit your messages to change your vote.
2. All rules must be expressable in quicklife notation (for example, B3-e/S24/3) or HROT symmetric neigborhood.

[hibiscus]

So, the concept of this thread turned out to have two problems: voting spams the thread, and people just nominate and vote for their ruletables which usually are either too limited/specific or way too complex. My proposed solutions are these:
1. You have to edit your messages to change your vote.
2. All rules must be expressable in quicklife notation (for example, B3-e/S24/3) or HROT symmetric neigborhood.

1. I already made a promise that I wouldn't allow any vote changing, starting 17 April 2025, but if people really feel like changing their votes then I'll allow it...
2. Changed "Any rule which can be run in Golly and LifeViewer can be nominated" to "Any rule which is expressible in QuickLife notation or HROT notation (with a symmetric neighborhood) can be nominated"... what exactly is "QuickLife notation", though? I suppose it would mean "rules which are able to be run with the QuickLife algorithm in Golly", but your provided example (24/3-e/3) would actually be run in the Generations algorithm, not QuickLife.

[LuveelVoom]

2. Changed "Any rule which can be run in Golly and LifeViewer can be nominated" to "Any rule which is expressible in QuickLife notation or HROT notation (with a symmetric neighborhood) can be nominated"... what exactly is "QuickLife notation", though? I suppose it would mean "rules which are able to be run with the QuickLife algorithm in Golly", but your provided example (24/3-e/3) would actually be run in the Generations algorithm, not QuickLife.

Isotropic rules which have states which all behave in a predetermined way (for example, in generations the states block birth and remain there for a certain amount of time. Same with snoitareneg, for example. Rules like photons10 where all of the states were specifically made by hand to interact should not be nominated, as many of the interesting phenomena don’t need investigation becausethey were built into the rule.

[confocaloid]

It looks like there is some confusion between several different ideas.

• There are some notations and formats (e.g. rulestring notations, RuleLoader ruletables, RuleLoader ruletrees, ...) which can be used to specify cellular automata.
• There are several "algorithms" supported in Golly, which can be used to evolve patterns. Note that this is not the same as choosing a particular notation or format. For example, both QuickLife and HashLife support (mostly) the same notations; the differences between QuickLife and HashLife are algorithmic (the former often works better for "chaotic" evolutionary sequences, the latter often works better for "predictable, structured" evolutionary sequences).
• There is the idea of "putting something directly into the definition of a cellular automaton" (as opposed to e.g. finding an object in the ash after evolving a soup until it settles, or finding an object using a search program).
  This is not a matter of choosing a particular notation (one can intentionally "rulegolf" with restrictions on which tweaks are allowed, so that a certain set of already-known objects is guaranteed to exist in the resulting CA, and that can be seen as "putting something into the rules"; while e.g. RuleLoader ruletables can be used to implement multistate CA intended to be soup-searchable without "easter egg" objects hidden in the rules.)
  This is of course also different from choosing a particular "algorithm" in Golly.
• Just because some object or reaction can be considered an "easter egg" built directly into the rules of a cellular automaton, doesn't remove the possibility of further investigation of that object or reaction. For example, the "built-in" object might interact in interesting ways with other objects, and even if the object itself is known from the start, the interactions may be unknown until discovered.

I think it would help to distinguish between these ideas.

As for issues with "RotW", well, I don't consider either "limited/specific" or "complex" as a problem in itself.

Sometimes there is a simple idea behind some CA, even if the rules appear to be complicated. A cellular automaton can be designed and implemented for a single specific purpose. There's nothing wrong about that, and it would be misguided to exclude such single-purpose cellular automata. Soup searching is far from being the only way of exploration.

Sometimes there is no human-readable accessible explanation of what some cellular automaton is, what are noteworthy observations/things about it. This is a problem. The way to solve it is to provide an accessible documentation of the cellular automaton, to tell what is considered interesting about it. (That is, if you nominate something, tell/explain what it is.)

Another problem is likely to be the habit of some people to nominate their own stuff and vote for it, where sometimes it appears that other nominations weren't even considered. It can make sense to try to discourage such "self-promotion", and possibly discourage repeatedly nominating the same entry several times. (Which doesn't require putting any restrictions on kinds of nominated cellular automata)

[...] 2. All rules must be expressable in quicklife notation [...]

[...] what exactly is "QuickLife notation", though? I suppose it would mean "rules which are able to be run with the QuickLife algorithm in Golly", but your provided example (24/3-e/3) would actually be run in the Generations algorithm, not QuickLife.

[...] Isotropic rules which have states which all behave in a predetermined way [...] all of the states were specifically made by hand to interact should not be nominated, as many of the interesting phenomena don’t need investigation becausethey were built into the rule.

[LuveelVoom]

(Not going to quote because on mobile and it would be too hard to trim) Would restricting being able to nominate your own rule help solve the problem?

[confocaloid]

...and/or "do not nominate the same thing more than once in a row", and/or "do not nominate the same thing more than once".

[...] Would restricting being able to nominate your own rule help solve the problem?

[hibiscus]

I literally should not be awake right now but, B2n3-enqy4cijrwyz5cinqy6kn78/S01e2ein3eikry4-ciry5-aeky6ein7e8 (Primeria) has become Rule of the Week 4!

[Disaster16439]

This is dead.

I nominate B2-el578/S03e458

I don’t think anyone has seriously explored B2a rules. I’ll change that. B2-ek578/S03e458, while full of puffers, has interesting dynamics that might make sparky oscillators possible. There’s also this small c/7:

Code: Select all

x = 3, y = 4, rule = B2-ek578/S03e458
bo$3o$obo$obo!

It can barrel through dots, so much that it appeared in the middle of some dots and escaped:

Code: Select all

x = 7, y = 17, rule = B2-ek578/S03e458
6bo3$6bo2$3bo3$3bo5$bo$3o$obo$obo!

I just realized it has a 3 cell phase

Code: Select all

x = 1, y = 4, rule = B2-ek578/S03e458
o2$o$o!

Here are some reactions:

Code: Select all

x = 75, y = 52, rule = B2-ek578/S03e458
39bo2$39bo$39bo29bo2$69bo$69bo2$43b2o2$43bo$73b2o2$74bo24$o2$o$o27bo2$
28bo$28bo2$4b2o2$6bo$5bo26b2o2$31bo$32bo!

If we can get a mess, a c/7 puffer might be possible.
Growing spaceship:

Code: Select all

x = 6, y = 12, rule = B2-ek578/S03e458
b2o2$o2bo6$5bo2$5bo$5bo!

A rake should be possible.
Edit 1:
2c/14:

Code: Select all

 x = 11, y = 4, rule = B2-ek578/S03e458
o9bo2$o9bo$o4bo4bo!

oops im stupid the stuff is c/8 Not c/7 :
My 230th post!
230=2x5x23

Nominated stuff:
B2n3-enqy4cijrwyz5cinqy6kn78/S01e2ein3eikry4-ciry5-aeky6ein7e8 (Primeria), 1.5x bonus
B2-ek578/S03e458
Edit 1:
Re-nominating Mini snowflakes

[hibiscus]

We still need to sort some issues out.
Should prior RotW's...

• be eligible for re-nomination right after their term as RotW ends, or must a period of time pass to allow eligibility?
• Or should they not be eligible for re-nomination, ever, once their term as RotW ends?

Should rules attributed to the people who nominated them...

• not be allowed for nomination?
• Or should they be allowed for nomination?

Personally: I think that a RotW should wait at least a week before it can be re-nominated. As for self-nomination, I think that it should be allowed, but voting and nominating for rules other people have nominated/created should be encouraged [or, if necessary, mandated].
Anyway...
I vote for B2-ek578/S03e458 and B2-ak3i/S1e2ac3y (Mini Snowflakes).
It's getting pretty late.

[islptng]

I nominate CataMiniFlakes(B2i3-knqr4cikyz5cjkry6kn7/S1e2ci3-ekq4ijqwyz5-cei6ekn7) and vote for it.

Also, if "Rule of the Month" seems too long, try "Rule of the Fortnight"...

Edit: "Fortnight" means "2 weeks".

[LuveelVoom]

I feel like if your rule isn't chosen it can't ever be renominated is too harsh. Here's my proposal:
-Rule exploration period is increased to 2 weeks
-For 3 days after the exploration period ends, people can submit rules that meet the new criteria (tldr not ruletables), but can only submit ONE RULE. You can't change what rule you submit (tho you can submit a different rule each period)
-You can vote for up to 3 rules. You MUST vote for at least 1 rule that you didn't nominate (if you vote.)
-A rule, once selected, cannot be nominated again for 2 months. (four periods.)

[hibiscus]

I did the counting for RotW 5.
B2-ek578/S03e458 and B2-ak3i/S1e2ac3y (Mini Snowflakes) are tied, with one vote each.