Actually, I wonder whether or not we should just repeal the Public Forum rule? Because there are so many references to Public Fora in the rules, as well as Agora is a Nomic being a rule, it feels like the existence of the current Public Fora as Fora would still be implied. And having the whole game seemingly destructable without objection or at power 3 seems bad (with the "with objection" fiasco, for example, the registrar could have flipped every forum switch to non-public)
On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 1:07 PM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote: > > > Deregistering the players wouldn't destroy Agora. > > As long as the public forum exists (now *that's* worth protecting), > a person CAN still register when there's no players. This would allow > the Assessor to resolve the proposal and register and be the only player > in the game for the duration of a message. I doubt there's much e could > hurt because everything that this power might give em would take 4 days to > accomplish by which time others would register. > > It would reset a lot of stuff (i.e. shinies and other player-only > quantities) but that's about it. > > On Thu, 26 Oct 2017, Madeline wrote: > > Is this intended to influence the destroying-the-universe CFJ? This is > > literally exactly the thing the arguments there were talking about. > > > > > > On 2017-10-26 12:45, ATMunn wrote: > > > For fun, I create the below proposal: > > > > > > Title: Way More Controversial Version of the Above > > > Author: ATMunn > > > Co-Author(s): Telnaior, V.J. Rada > > > > > > Deregister all currently registered players. > > > > > > On 10/25/2017 9:38 PM, VJ Rada wrote: > > > > On the same note I create the below proposal and pend it with AP > > > > > > > > Title: More Controversial Version of the Above > > > > Co- Author:Telnaior > > > > AI: 3 > > > > Text: Deregister Murphy and omd. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 12:04 PM, Telnaior <j...@iinet.net.au > > > > <mailto:j...@iinet.net.au>> wrote: > > > > > > > > I create the following proposal and use an Action Point to flip > its > > > > Imminence switch to pending: > > > > > > > > Title: More Actions Should Use Agoran Consent > > > > Author: Telnaior > > > > AI: 3 > > > > { > > > > Flip the Citizenship switch of Ienpw III to Unregistered. > > > > Flip the Citizenship switch of Bayushi to Unregistered. > > > > Flip the Citizenship switch of ProofTechnique to Unregistered. > > > > } > > > > > > > > While I'm here, related things I've found that are on my mind: > > > > 1. Rule 649 "Patent Titles" requests stronger consent for > awarding a > > > > patent title than the action itself is secured with > > > > 2. Flipping Officeholder switches isn't secured anywhere > > > > > > > > (And yes, this proposal is more to prove a point than anything > else, > > > > though I would appreciate it if it actually passed) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > From V.J. Rada > > > -- >From V.J. Rada
