On 6/23/23 12:26, Kerim Aydin via agora-business wrote:
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 23, 2023 at 8:24 AM Janet Cobb via agora-business
> <agora-business@agoranomic.org> wrote:
>> On 6/23/23 11:07, 4st nomic via agora-business wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 2:49 PM Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion <
>>> agora-discuss...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I believe I won the rice game on 12 June - not sure though. Here are
>>>> my notes, wouldn't be at all surprised if I missed something critical.
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------
>>>> 5-22 harvested plan
>>>> Created: snail
>>>> Up: {4st, beokirby, blob, inalienableWright, nix, snail, Yachay},
>>>> Down: {Aspen, ais523, cuddlybanana, G., Janet, juan, Murphy}
>>>> Signatures: snail, Yachay, 4st, beokirby
>>>>
>>>> After 5-22 harvest
>>>> 4st 1
>>>> beokirby 1
>>>> blob 1
>>>> iWright* 1
>>>> nix 1
>>>> snail 1
>>>> Yachay 1
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------
>>>> 5-29 harvested plan
>>>> Created: 2023-05-22 by juan
>>>> Up: {Aspen, G., Janet, Murphy, ais523, cuddlybanana, juan}
>>>> Down: {4st, beokirby, blob, iWright, nix, snail, Yachay}
>>>> Signatures: ais523, juan, G., Janet
>>>>
>>>> After 5-29 harvest
>>>> Aspen 1
>>>> G. 1
>>>> Janet 1
>>>> Murphy 1
>>>> ais523 1
>>>> cuddlybanana 1
>>>> Juan 1
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------
>>>> Note: ais523 had 1 rice at the time of Proposal 8989's alleged adoption
>>>> (just before the 6-05 plans were harvested). So that proposal was
>>>> resolved incorrectly and the victory condition remains 2 rice.
>>>>
>>>> Proposal 8988 was adopted, but I'm assuming that plans and signatures
>>>> were continuous as the definitions didn't change over-much, and the
>>>> winning plan below was signed in a way (by announcement/announced
>>>> consent) that works under both rule versions. This, of course, is
>>>> arguable.
>>>> ---------------------------
>>>> 6-05 harvested plan
>>>> Created: 2023-06-04 by 4st
>>>> Up: {G.}
>>>> Down: {All active players with 1 or more rice at the time of creation,
>>>> except 4st}
>>>> Signatures: G., 4st
>>>> (note: G is on both up and down lists)
>>>>
>>>> After 6-05 harvest
>>>> G. 1
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------
>>>> 6-12 harvested plan
>>>> Created: 2023-06-05 by Beokirby
>>>> Up: {Beokirby, Aspen, G., Janet, Murphy, ais523, cuddlybanana, juan}
>>>> Down: {}
>>>> Signatures: beokirby, juan
>>>>
>>>> After 6-12 harvest
>>>> Beokirby 1
>>>> Aspen 1
>>>> G. 2
>>>> Janet 1
>>>> Murphy 1
>>>> ais523 1
>>>> cuddlybanana 1
>>>> juan 1
>>>> ---------------------------
>>>>
>>>> I did not track after this, due to not knowing if things were reset on 6-12
>>>>
>>> "I, THEREFORE, DO ALL THE THINGS!"
>>>
>>> Based on my last Ricemastor report, and the resolutions of the CFJs, I
>>> believe this to be correct as well.
>>> Given that this is in fact correct, I, as Herald, I award G. the patent
>>> title Champion (again), for "Rice".
>>> Given that this is in fact correct, and as it has been over a week since e
>>> won, it is overdue, and thus,
>>> I deputise as Prime Minister to appoint G to the office of Speaker.
>>>
>>> (I would now like to execute a dive order on G., however, there is
>>> currently no Referee to track it, and as to keep things smooth, I therefore
>>> do not do so.)
>>>
>> Oops, sorry.
>>
>> The deputisation fails. The time limit has not been expired for 14 days,
>> and no intent was announced.
>>
>> The Champion award succeeds or fails based on whether G. actually won.
>>
>> I intend (under the meaning in R2160) to deputize for Prime Minister for
>> the purpose of appointing G. to Speaker.
>>
>> I CFJ: "On or about 2023-06-12, G. won the game."
>>
>> Evidence:
>>
>> {
>>
>> //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
>> ID: 8988
>> Title: Rice rewrite
>> Adoption index: 1.0
>> Author: Janet
>> Co-authors: snail
>>
>>
>> Amend the rule entitled "The Rice Game" to read, in whole:
>> {
>> The Ricemastor is an office.
>>
>> Rice is a fixed asset tracked by the Ricemastor, with ownership wholly
>> restricted to players. If a rice would otherwise be in abeyance or is
>> owned by the Lost and Found Department, it is destroyed.
>>
>> An active player CAN create a rice plan by announcement once per week,
>> specifying two sets of players (the rice up set and the rice down set).
>> When a rice plan is harvested, each active player in the rice up set
>> gains one rice, then one rice is revoked from each player in the rice
>> down set (if e has any). The Ricemastor's weekly report includes a list
>> of rice plans. The creator of a rice plan CAN by announcement destroy
>> it, thereby causing it to cease to be a rice plan.
>>
>> An active player CAN by announcement sign a specified rice plan. An
>> active player's signature is on a rice plan if e has signed it or if a
>> contract e is party to clearly and unambiguously states that eir
>> signature is on it. The Ricemastor's weekly report includes, for each
>> rice plan, a list of players with signatures on it.
>>
>> A harvest occurs at the beginning of each week. When a harvest occurs,
>> the following happen in order:
>> * The rice plan with the most signatures (breaking ties in favor of the
>> earliest created), if any, is harvested.
>> * All rice plans are destroyed.
>>
>> Immediately after a harvest, if a single active player has at least 2
>> rice and more rice than any other player, e wins the game, then all rice
>> and rice plans are destroyed. If the game has been won in this manner
>> three times, this rule immediately repeals itself.
>> }
>>
>> [
>> Changes:
>> - Generally cleaned up wording
>> - Handle rice at Lost and Found
>> - Harvesting a plan now grants rice before revoking (handling the case
>> where a person is in both the up and down sets)
>> - Use "CAN" for enabling
>> - Use a by announcement action or contract for signatures, rather than
>> "consent"
>> - Added a clarity requirement for contract-based signatures
>> - Removed Fancy Caps
>> ]
>>
>> //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Rule 2682/0 (Power=1)
>> The Rice Game
>>
>> The Ricemastor is an office, in charge of tracking Rice, Rice
>> Plans and Signatures. Rice is a fixed asset, ownable only by
>> players. Any active player can create a Rice Plan by announcement,
>> if e hasn't done so yet in the current week. Rice Plans can have
>> Signatures, and each Signature must be of an active player. A Rice
>> Plan has an active player's Signature as long as that player is
>> consenting to it. An active player can destroy a Rice Plan that e
>> has created by announcement.
>>
>> A Harvest occurs at the beginning of each week. When this occurs:
>> - If there is only one Rice Plan with the most Signatures, that
>> Rice Plan is Harvested.
>> - If there is more than one Rice Plan with the most Signatures,
>> the one that was created earliest is Harvested.
>> - In all other cases, nothing happens.
>> And then all Rice Plans are destroyed and the Harvest ends.
>>
>> Rice Plans consist of two lists of players, with each list having
>> no repeated players, and the lists can be empty. One of these
>> lists is its Rice Up list, and the other is its Rice Down list.
>> When a Rice Plan is Harvested, for each player listed in its Rice
>> Up list, if that player is active, e gains 1 Rice; and for each
>> player listed in its Rice Down list, if e has at least 1 Rice then
>> e lose 1 Rice.
>>
>> If after a Harvest there is a single active player with at least 2
>> Rice and more Rice than any other player, then that player wins
>> the game, and all Rice is destroyed. When the game has been won in
>> this manner three times, this rule repeals itself.
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Rule 2682/1 (Power=1)
>> The Rice Game
>>
>> The Ricemastor is an office.
>>
>> Rice is a fixed asset tracked by the Ricemastor, with ownership
>> wholly restricted to players. If a rice would otherwise be in
>> abeyance or is owned by the Lost and Found Department, it is
>> destroyed.
>>
>> An active player CAN create a rice plan by announcement once per
>> week, specifying two sets of players (the rice up set and the rice
>> down set). When a rice plan is harvested, each active player in
>> the rice up set gains one rice, then one rice is revoked from each
>> player in the rice down set (if e has any). The Ricemastor's
>> weekly report includes a list of rice plans. The creator of a rice
>> plan CAN by announcement destroy it, thereby causing it to cease
>> to be a rice plan.
>>
>> An active player CAN by announcement sign a specified rice plan.
>> An active player's signature is on a rice plan if e has signed it
>> or if a contract e is party to clearly and unambiguously states
>> that eir signature is on it. The Ricemastor's weekly report
>> includes, for each rice plan, a list of players with signatures on
>> it.
>>
>> A harvest occurs at the beginning of each week. When a harvest
>> occurs, the following happen in order:
>> * The rice plan with the most signatures (breaking ties in favor
>> of the earliest created), if any, is harvested.
>> * All rice plans are destroyed.
>>
>> Immediately after a harvest, if a single active player has at
>> least 2 rice and more rice than any other player, e wins the game,
>> then all rice and rice plans are destroyed. If the game has been
>> won in this manner three times, this rule immediately repeals
>> itself.
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> [R2682/1 did not appear in any published ruleset. The purported R2682/2
>> did (under the incorrect belief that P8989 took effect), which differs
>> from R2682/1 only in saying "at least 5 rice" in the final paragraph.
>>
>> }
>>
>> Arguments:
>>
>> {
>>
>> This comes down to whether P8988 (adopted without dispute) affected the
>> continuity of previous "signatures". I argue that, after it took affect,
>> nobody had "signed" a rice plan. "Sign"ing, in the new text, is a
>> specific by action performed by announcement that necessarily could not
>> have been performed before the proposal was adopted. The condition of
>> "having signed" a rice plan is evaluated continuously, and must
>> therefore always use the current definition in force.
>>
>> Even if redefining the action could allow continuity with some previous
>> action, Judge ais523 found in CFJ 4032 that "consent" to Rice Plans was
>> not a specific action, but a continuous state to be evaluated using
>> either natural-language standards of consent or an adaptation of R2519,
>> yielding similar results, but in neither case requiring a regulated
>> action of any form.
>>
>> R1586 ("Definition and Continuity of Entities") is irrelevant. Rice
>> Plans are clearly continuous, but "signatures" are not entities under
>> either the current or former version of the rule.
>>
>> }
> Gratuitous arguments:
>
> "Sign" is not an arbitrary word, but a word with a common definition
> in the context of documents (or document-like things such as Rice
> Plans). A perfectly common and natural definition of "signing" a
> thing is to add one's signature to the thing. In adjudicating Rule
> 2682/0 in CFJ 4032, before "sign" was explicitly in that rule, Judge
> ais523 literally uses the term as a direct and specific synonym for
> adding a signature to a plan under the old rule:
>
>> "a Rice Plan has X's signature" is a synonym for "X is consenting to
>> {the Rice Plan / the Rice Plan being signed}"
> Signatures were added to the plans in question under R2682/0 and not
> removed, so the plans were "signed" by common and obvious definition
> at the time of the change from R2682/0 to R2682/1. So when this text
> came into effect:
>
>> An active player's signature is on a rice plan if e has signed it
> The fact that those plans had been signed remained true under the new
> rule as well as the old (there was never a moment when it wasn't true,
> during that transition).
Then what does (did?) "sign" mean under the new rule if not only and
exactly what it is defined to mean in the text? The prior version of the
rule shouldn't override the explicit definition in the new rule.
--
Janet Cobb
Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
