I vote as follows on these Proposals: > 9058* Aris, G. 3.0 Things Mean What They're Meant to Mean FOR
> 9059~ Maloney 1.0 Ambiguity Amendment AGAINST, I don't see any bold/underlined/etc text. > 9060~ Maloney 1.0 Ambiguity Amendment AGAINST, I don't see any bold/underlined/etc text. > 9061~ snail 2.0 Wake Up Call AGAINST, because this enables timing-based shenanigans which I would prefer to have not happen. It also punishes being unattentive for generous periods of time, which I've been tending to do lately. On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 12:27 AM secretsnail9 via agora-official < agora-offic...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > PROMOTOR'S REPORT AS OF RIGHT NOW > > If you vote on a proposal, please edit this spreadsheet with your votes: > > > https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1F39OHtBlZlQ8XVccqKCFtP-DPuHz4wPnujxbxkCN3LI/edit?usp=sharing > > I hereby distribute each listed proposal, initiating a referendum on it, > and removing it from the proposal pool. For each decision, the vote > collector is the Assessor, the quorum is 5, the voting method is > AI-majority, the adoption index is the adoption index of the associated > proposal, and the valid options are FOR and AGAINST (PRESENT is also a > valid vote, as are conditional votes). > > > ID Author(s) AI Title > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > 9058* Aris, G. 3.0 Things Mean What They're Meant to > Mean > 9059~ Maloney 1.0 Ambiguity Amendment > 9060~ Maloney 1.0 Ambiguity Amendment > 9061~ snail 2.0 Wake Up Call > > > > > > > The proposal pool contains the following proposals: > > ID Author(s) AI Title > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > Legend: <ID>* : Democratic proposal. > <ID>~ : Ordinary proposal. > > The full text of the aforementioned proposal(s) is included below. Where > the information shown below differs from the information shown above, > the information shown above shall control. > > > ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// > ID: 9058 > Title: Things Mean What They're Meant to Mean > Adoption Index: 3.0 > Author: Aris > Co-authors: G. > > > Amend Rule 105, "Rule Changes", by adding at the end of the paragraph: > > A rule change is any effect that falls into the above classes. > Rule changes always occur sequentially, never simultaneously. > > the text: > > If a specification would ever be interpreted as causing multiple changes > to > happen at once, it is instead interpreted as attempting to cause them to > occur separately, in the order they are listed in the specification. > > and by replacing the paragraph: > > Any ambiguity in the specification of a rule change causes that > change to be void and without effect. An inconsequential variation > in the quotation of an existing rule does not constitute ambiguity > for the purposes of this rule, but any other variation does. > > with: > > Any ambiguity in the specification of a rule change causes that > change to be void and without effect. An inconsequential variation > in the quotation of an existing rule does not constitute ambiguity > for the purposes of this rule. Furthermore, if the change being specified > would be clear to any reasonable player, the specification is not > ambiguous, > even if it is incorrect or unclear on its face. This provision does not > prevent the specification of undesirable changes; for instance, an > amendment > which adds a typo is not corrected to remove the typo. > > and by replacing the text: > > 5. retitle (syn. amend the title of) a rule. > > with: > > 5. retitle a rule. > > [Removing the synonym, since it should now be unneeded.] > > At 4st's request, it is publicly noted that e is very silly for calling > this proposal an unneeded bug fix. > > [Some further examples of what should now work: > > 1. An amendment to the power of a rule is read as a change in the rule's > power. > 2. A repeal of a section of a rule is read as an amendment which removes > that > section. > 3. Ellipses are read sensibly in rule quotations. > 4. "Enact the following:" enacts the rule, unless it could sensibly be read > as enacting a regulation. > 5. "Append the following paragraph" works even if two paragraphs are > clearly > specified. (It still fails if it's unclear whether the text means one > or > two paragraphs though.) > > You get the point.] > > ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// > ID: 9059 > Title: Ambiguity Amendment > Adoption Index: 1.0 > Author: Maloney > Co-authors: > > Amend the following text of rule 105/23, Rule Changes, as delineated by the > first set quotation marks within this proposal by replacing the entirety of > the bolded, italicised, and underlined portion of the text with the text > delineated by the second set of quotation marks within this proposal: > > "*Any ambiguity in the specification of a rule change causes that change to > be void and without effect.* An inconsequential variation in the quotation > of an existing rule does not constitute ambiguity for the purposes of this > rule, but any other variation does." > > "Ambiguity which would reasonably alter the function of a rule change or > cause reasonable doubt that a rule change is being made causes that change > to be void and without effect." > > All text in this proposal between the given ID of this proposal (which > terminates at the first character 3 within this proposal) and the start of > this sentence (which begins with the phrase "All text" after a line break) > are part of the rule change proposed within this proposal. The text within > this paragraph is not a part of the proposed rule change. This proposal is > proposed as an attempt to make a change in the rules, specifically an > amendment to the rule 105/23, which is titled Rule Changes. The text to be > amended is located within rule 105/23 within the ninth (9th) body of text > within that rule. This proposal is being sent to a public forum, as per the > necessary publicity of a rule announcement. Should the formatting of this > proposal be lost, it should be noted that the bolded, italicised, and > underlined text reads as "*Any ambiguity in the specification of a rule > change causes that change to be void and without effect.*" and that the > amendment proposed in this proposal replaces that text entirely, removing > it from the rule, and applying the replacement text ("Ambiguity which would > reasonably alter the function of a rule change or cause reasonable doubt > that a rule change is being made causes that change to be void and without > effect.") within the same place as the replaced text. > > ##This is a clearly marked comment clarifying that there are no other > comments within this message not a part of this proposal other than the one > preceding the proposal. The proposal begins with the title of the proposal > (the text "Name: Ambiguity Amendment"). > > ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// > ID: 9060 > Title: Ambiguity Amendment > Adoption Index: 1.0 > Author: Maloney > Co-authors: > > Amend the following text of rule 105, Rule Changes, as delineated by the > first set quotation marks within this proposal by replacing the entirety of > the bolded, italicised, and underlined portion of the text with the text > delineated by the second set of quotation marks within this proposal: > > "*Any ambiguity in the specification of a rule change causes that change to > be void and without effect.* An inconsequential variation in the quotation > of an existing rule does not constitute ambiguity for the purposes of this > rule, but any other variation does." > > "Ambiguity which would reasonably alter the function of a rule change or > cause reasonable doubt that a rule change is being made causes that change > to be void and without effect." > > All text in this proposal between the given ID of this proposal (which > terminates at the first character 3 within this proposal) and the start of > this sentence (which begins with the phrase "All text" after a line break) > are part of the rule change proposed within this proposal. The text within > this paragraph is not a part of the proposed rule change. This proposal is > proposed as an attempt to make a change in the rules, specifically an > amendment to the rule 105, which is titled Rule Changes. The text to be > amended is located within rule 105 within the ninth (9th) body of text > within that rule. This proposal is being sent to a public forum, as per the > necessary publicity of a rule announcement. Should the formatting of this > proposal be lost, it should be noted that the bolded, italicised, and > underlined text reads as "*Any ambiguity in the specification of a rule > change causes that change to be void and without effect.*" and that the > amendment proposed in this proposal replaces that text entirely, removing > it from the rule, and applying the replacement text ("Ambiguity which would > reasonably alter the function of a rule change or cause reasonable doubt > that a rule change is being made causes that change to be void and without > effect.") within the same place as the replaced text. > > ##This is a clearly marked comment clarifying that there are no other > comments within this message not a part of this proposal other than the one > preceding the proposal. The proposal begins with the title of the proposal > (the text "Name: Ambiguity Amendment"). > > ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// > ID: 9061 > Title: Wake Up Call > Adoption Index: 2.0 > Author: snail > Co-authors: > > > Amend Rule 2675 (Dream of Wandering) by replacing "Dream is a secured > active player switch" with "Dream is an active player switch". > > Enact a new Rule with Power 1 and title "Clapping" and the following text: > { > Each player CAN, with 3 support, Clap. When a player Claps, each active > player's Dream is set to Wandering. A player CANNOT Clap if any person has > Clapped in the past 2 weeks. > } > > ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// > -- > snail >
