My most recent deregistration was with my consent? It was back in august. On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 8:35 AM, Aris Merchant <thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 11:15 AM Alexis Hunt <aler...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> As PSS said, the favour award succeeds. There is no requirement that >> fingers be pointed to award favours. That said, this is an enormous abuse >> of official power; V.J. Rada has shown emself unfit to be entrusted with >> the power of an office. Moreover, e deserves to have the profits of this >> scam taken from em. >> >> As e points out, an attainder cannot act fast enough to deny em a win. As >> far as I can tell, there are three ways to defeat eir scam. First, another >> officer authorized to issue favours violates the rules as well, in order to >> award sufficient countervailing favours to prevent V.J. Rada from >> sufficiently disrupting the game state (in particular by amassing balloons >> to gain significant voting power). Second, we could ratify it out of >> existence by proposal. >> >> I have strong distate for ratification, so that is a last resort to me. >> Thus, I think the correct solution here is to have another officer issue >> illegal favours to a number of people, each of whom influences politicians >> sufficiently such that V.J. Rada cannot become an advisor, and agrees not >> to use eir power. Then we pass a proposal absolving the officer of >> responsibility. This, however, requires more officers to break the law, >> which I am also loathe to do. >> >> There is one alternate approach, however, that avoids doing anything >> outright illegal. It is incredibly harsh---I'm using it as a last >> resort---and if we go this route then it should absolutely be undone >> quickly by proposal, but I'm going to set it in motion now so that it can >> be finalized in time to prevent V.J. Rada from winning. If Agora does not >> agree on implementing it, then we can go with the other approach. >> >> First off, an error in the FLR (which I will correct afterward). PSS >> mis-applied the effects of Proposal 7918, so the correct text of Rule 2160 >> is as follows: >> {{{ >> A rule which purports to allow a person (a deputy) to perform an >> action via normal deputisation or special deputisation for an >> office thereby allows them to perform the action as if e held the >> office, as long as >> >> 1. it would be POSSIBLE for the deputy to perform the action, >> other than by deputisation, if e held the office, and >> >> 2. the deputy, when performing the action, announces that e >> is doing so by the appropriate form of deputisation. >> >> Only this rule may allow normal deputisation. Any rule may allow >> special deputisation. >> >> A player CAN perform an action as if e held a particular office, >> via normal deputisation, if all of the following are true: >> >> 1. The rules require the holder of that office, by virtue of >> holding that office, to perform the action. This requirement is >> fulfilled by the deputy performing the action. >> >> 2. Either (i) A time limit by which the rules require the action >> to be performed has expired or (ii) the office is vacant. >> >> 3. Either (i) the office is vacant; or (ii) the aforementioned >> time limit expired more than fourteen days ago; or (iii) the >> deputy announced between two and fourteen days earlier that e >> intended to deputise for that office for the purposes of the >> particular action. >> >> When a player deputises via normal deputisation for an elected >> office, e becomes the holder of that office. >> }}} >> >> Thus, although the FLR does not indicate this, it is in fact possible to >> deputise for a vacant office before any time limits have expired. I Point >> my Finger at myself, alleging that I violated the rules by sending this >> message (even though I didn't). I deputise for Referee to declare this >> Finger-Pointing to be Shenanigans. >> >> Now that I hold the office of Referee (and preventing it from being >> reclaimed by someone who can abuse it), I issue a Dive Cabinet Order, >> issuing a Black Card to V.J. Rada for betraying the good faith placed in em >> as an officer by Agora. Agora deliberately voted to give officers >> significant, game-disrupting power in maintenance of a complex mechanical >> system, and so this abuse is one of the greatest contempts of the rules >> that can possibly be committed. In particular, V.J. Rada is set to win as a >> result of these violations, which would be horrifically unjust, and a Black >> Card is the only available punishment which will deny em eir victory. >> >> Now, the above may seem IMPOSSIBLE, as Rule 2507 says that Black Cards >> cannot be issued to players. However, it does not contain a claim of >> precedence over other rules in this regard, and Rule 2451 authorizes me to >> award any card to any player, using Dive. Given the lack of relevant >> precedence claims in either rule, by Rule 1030, the rule with the lowest ID >> number prevails. Thus, it is POSSIBLE for me to award a Black Card and the >> precedence clause in Rule 2451 makes it LEGAL for me to do so. >> >> I intend, with Agoran Consent, to Slam the Door on V.J. Rada. As far as I >> can tell, this will prevent em from taking actions defined by rules of >> power 2 or less, including winning the game by Balloons. I don't think it >> affects higher-powered rules, so I am confident e can still vote. >> >> If V.J. Rada is willing to destroy all of eir Favours rather than use them, >> then I will object to and not resolve the above intent, and I will >> personally consider the matter closed. >> >> Proposal: Re-opening the Door (AI=2, pend=shinies) >> {{{ >> Amend Rule "2507" by inserting "unless a proposal terminates this effect >> sooner, " after "After the Door is Slammed at a person, ". >> >> Unless V.J. Rada destroyed all favours e owned at the time of this >> proposal's submission, without spending them for any action or game effect: >> Destroy all of V.J. Rada's Favour and Balloons. Set all of V.J. Rada's >> Influence switches to 0. For each Politician whose Advisor is V.J. Rada, >> set eir Advisor to none. >> >> For every player to whom V.J. Rada has transferred a Favour, or in whose >> possession V.J. Rada created a Favour since this proposal was submitted, >> unless that player destroyed those Favours without spending them for any >> action or game effect: >> Destroy all of eir Favour and Balloons. Set all of eir Influence switches >> to 0. For each Politician whose Advisor is that player, set eir Advisor to >> none. >> >> Terminate the effect of the Door being Slammed at V.J. Rada. >> }}} >> >> H. Promotor, I request expedited distribution of this proposal so that we >> can rescind any punishments as soon as possible. >> >> -Alexis > > > You're forgetting something. I wrote the black card rule. And I'm paranoid. > "Any attempt to Slam the Door on a player > <https://agoranomic.org/ruleset/#Rule869> or a person > <https://agoranomic.org/ruleset/#Rule869> whose most recent deregistration > took place without eir consent <https://agoranomic.org/ruleset/#Rule2124> is > INEFFECTIVE, rules to the contrary notwithstanding." > > You're free to award the card, but you can't slam the door. > > -Aris
-- >From V.J. Rada