youre obligated to make a weekly proposal pool report, simply saying
that it contains a proposal you wish would be withdrawn doesn't count
On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 5:35 PM, Aris Merchant
<thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Here's a draft. I have a bad feeling that I'm missing something, but
> there's been a ton of traffic and I'm rather busy, so hopefully
> someone can point it out. Also, a warning: I'll be out of state next
> week, and, while I can hopefully still devote some time to the game,
> will be commenting at a reduced rate and will likely be unable to
> publish a report.
>
> -Aris
> ---
>
> I hereby distribute each listed proposal, initiating the Agoran
> Decision of whether to adopt it, and removing it from the proposal
> pool. For this decision, the vote collector is the Assessor, the
> quorum is 3.0, the voting method is AI-majority and the valid options
> are FOR and AGAINST (PRESENT is also a valid vote, as are conditional
> votes).
>
> ID Author(s) AI Title Pender
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 8053* G., Aris 1.0 patch patch patch G. [1]
> 8054+ Aris, [2] 3.0 Minimalist Contracts v2 Aris
> 8055+ Aris, G. 3.0 Distributed Assets v3 Aris
> 8056+ Aris, G. 3.0 Deregulation Act v2 Aris
>
> The Proposal Pool contains a proposal which V.J. Rada will hopefully
> withdraw soon, and no other proposals.
>
> [1] Ruberstamped official proposal
> [2] G., V.J. Rada
>
> Legend: <ID>* : Proposal is pending.
> <ID>+ : By publishing this report, I pay a paper to pend
> the marked proposal.
>
> //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
> ID: 8053
> Title: patch patch patch
> Adoption index: 1.0
> Author: G.
> Co-authors: Aris
>
>
> Amend the rule defining welcome packages by adding as a new item,
> appropriately numbered, at the end of the list "5 incense".
>
> Create 5 incense in the possession of each player who received a
> welcome package since April 28, 2018.
>
> //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
> ID: 8054
> Title: Minimalist Contracts v2
> Adoption index: 3.0
> Author: Aris
> Co-authors: G., V.J. Rada
>
>
> Lines beginning with hashmarks ("#") and comments in square brackets ("[]")
> have no effect on the behavior of this proposal. They are not part of any
> rules
> created or amended herein, and may be considered for all game purposes to
> have been removed before its resolution.
>
> [This proposal saves allowing contracts to control or auction assets until we
> decide to allow them to be persons, which is its own can of worms.]
>
> # 1 Repeal
>
> Destroy all contracts.
>
> Repeal rules 2524, 2526, 2520, 2525, 2522, 2523, 2521, 2527, and 2517, in
> that order.
>
> In rule 2545 "Auctions", delete the text "or contract"
>
> In rule 2547 "The Auctioneer", delete the text "or contracts",
> change the last comma in the last sentence of the second paragraph
> to a period, deleting the all parts of the sentence beyond it, and delete
> the last paragraph.
>
> In rule 2548 "The Auction Announcer" delete the text "or contract" and
> the last sentence.
>
> In rule 2549 "Auction Initiation", delete all instances of the text
> "or contract"
>
> In rule 2550 "Bidding", replace the last comma with a full stop and
> delete all text after it, and delete all instances of the text "or
> contract"
>
> In rule 2483 "Economics", delete the text "contracts,"
>
> In rule 1994 "Ownership of Land", delete the text "Land belonging to a
> contract is called Communal Land." and delete the text "Together,
> Communal Land and Private Land are called Proprietary Land." and
> replace the text "Land belonging to any other entity is called Private
> Land." with "Land belonging to any other entity is called Private Land
> (syn. Proprietary Land)
>
> In rule 2561 "Asset Generation with Facilities", delete the text "3.
> if the facility is built on Communal Land, e must be a party to that
> contract and the text of the contract must permit em to do so." and
> renumber the fourth bullet point 3.
>
> # 2 Replacement
>
> Reenact Rule 1742, "Contracts", at power 2.5, with the following text:
>
> Any group of two or more consenting persons (the parties) may
> make an agreement among themselves with the intention that it be
> binding upon them and be governed by the rules. Such an agreement
> is known as a contract. A contract may be modified, including
> by changing the set of parties, by agreement between all existing
> parties. A contract may also terminate by agreement between all
> parties. A contract automatically terminates if the number of
> parties to it falls below two. For the purposes of this rule,
> agreement includes both consent and agreement specified by
> contract.
>
> Parties to a contract governed by the rules SHALL act in
> accordance with that contract. This obligation is not impaired
> by contradiction between the contract and any other contract, or
> between the contract and the rules.
>
> A party to a contract may act on behalf of another party to
> it as allowed in the contract.
>
> //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
> ID: 8055
> Title: Distributed Assets v3
> Adoption index: 3.0
> Author: Aris
> Co-authors: G.
>
>
> Amend Rule 2166, "Assets", to read as follows:
>
> An asset is an entity defined as such by a document that has been
> granted Mint Authority by the Rules (hereafter the asset's backing
> document), and existing solely because its backing document defines
> its existence. An asset's backing document can generally specify when
> and how that asset is created, destroyed, and transferred.
>
> The rules collectively have Mint Authority. Contracts have Mint
> Authority. A rule defined asset is public; one defined by a contract
> is private.
>
> The recordkeepor of a class of assets is the entity (if any)
> defined as such by, and bound by, its backing document. That
> entity's report includes a list of all instances of that class and
> their owners. This portion of that entity's report is
> self-ratifying.
>
> Create a power 3.0 rule, entitled "Ownership", with the following text:
>
> Each asset has exactly one owner. If an asset's backing document
> restricts its ownership to a class of entities, then that asset
> CANNOT be gained by or transferred to an entity outside that
> class, and is destroyed if it is owned by an entity outside that
> class. The restrictions in the previous sentence are subject to
> modification by its backing document. By default, ownership of an
> asset is restricted to Agora, players, and contracts.
>
> If an asset would otherwise lack an owner, it is owned by the Lost
> and Found Department. Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, the
> Lost and Found Department can own assets of every type. Assets owned
> by the Lost and Found Department can be transferred or destroyed
> by any player without objection.
>
>
> Create a power 3.0 rule, entitled "Asset Actions", with the following text:
>
> An asset generally CAN be destroyed by its owner by announcement,
> subject to modification by its backing document. An indestructible
> asset is one defined as such by it backing document, and CANNOT be
> destroyed except by a proposal or rule, other than this one,
> specifically addressing the destruction of indestructible assets
> or that asset in particular; any other asset is destructible.
>
> To "lose" an asset is to have it destroyed from one's possession;
> to "revoke" an asset from an entity is to destroy it from that
> entity's possession.
>
> An asset generally CAN be transferred (syn. given) by
> announcement by its owner to another entity, subject to
> modification by its backing document. A fixed asset is one defined
> as such by its backing document, and CANNOT be transferred; any
> other asset is liquid.
>
> When a rule indicates transferring an amount that is not a natural
> number, the specified amount is rounded up to the nearest natural
> number.
>
> Create a power 3.0 rule, entitled "Currencies", with the following text:
> A currency is a class of asset defined as such by its backing
> document. Instances of a currency with the same owner are
> fungible.
>
> The "x balance of an entity", where x is a currency, is the number
> of x that entity possesses. Where it resolves ambiguity, the asset or
> currency being referred to is the currency designated as "Agora's
> official currency", if there is one.
>
>
> Create a power 3.0 rule, entitled "Fee-based Actions":
>
> If the Rules associate payment of a set of assets (hereafter
> the fee for the action; syns: cost, price, charge) with performing an
> action, that action is a fee-based action.
>
> If the fee is a non-integer quantity of a fungible asset, the actual
> fee is the next highest integer amount of that asset.
>
> To perform a fee-based action, an entity (the Actor) who is
> otherwise permitted to perform the action must announce that e
> is performing the action; the announcement must specify the
> correct set of assets for the fee and indicate intent
> to pay that fee for the sole purpose of performing the action.
>
> Upon such an announcement:
>
> - If the Rules specify a recipient for the fee, and the Actor
> CAN transfer that specified fee from emself to the recipient,
> then that fee is transferred from the Actor to the recipient
> and the action is performed simultaneously;
>
> - If the Rules do not specify a recipient, and the Actor CAN
> destroy the specified fee in eir possession, then that fee
> in eir possession is destroyed and the action is
> performed simultaneously.
>
> - Otherwise, no changes are made to asset holdings and the
> action is not performed.
>
> If the Rules define a fee-based action but the specified
> set of assets is the empty set, then the action can be performed by
> announcement, but the announcement must include that there
> is an (empty or 0) fee for the action.
>
> In Rule 2003, amend the text "Players CAN destroy:" to read "Players CAN
> pay the listed fee to take the associated action:"
>
> [I think that's the only rule that actually needs to be changed over.
> Most of the other phrasings in the ruleset seem as if they'll transfer
> over on there own. The only other case that I can see that won't is the
> last paragraph of Rule 2551, "Auction End", which isn't really designed
> to work in a fee-based way, and so actually shouldn't be switched over.]
>
> For the avoidance of doubt, all assets existing under the old system continue
> to so under the new system, and if they would not otherwise do so, new assets
> are created to replace them.
>
> //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
> ID: 8055
> Title: Deregulation Act v2
> Adoption index: 3.0
> Author: Aris
> Co-authors: G.
>
>
> Repeal Rule 2494, "The Regkeepor".
>
> Amend Rule 2493, "Regulations", to read in full:
>
> A regulation is an textual entity defined as such by this rule,
> and under the authority of an officer, known as its Promulgator.
> A regulation must be authorized by a rule (its parent rule) in
> order to exist. It has only the effect that rule explicitly
> gives it.
>
> A regulation CAN be enacted, amended, and repealed as specified
> by its parent rule. By default, a Promulgator can enact or amend
> a regulation with 2 Agoran Consent and repeal a regulation by
> announcement. Regulations are tracked in their Promulgator's
> weekly report.
>
>
> Change the power of Rule 2493 to 3.0.
>
> Amend Rule 2565, "Preserved Land", by changing the text
>
> "The preservation switch CAN be set in a regulation promulgated
> by the Cartographor without 2 objections"
>
> to read
>
> "The preservation switch CAN be set by the Cartographor without
> 2 objections".
>
> Amend Rule 2125 by changing all instances of the text "restricted" (case
> insensitive) to read "regulated", preserving the capitalization of the first
> letter.
>
> For the avoidance of doubt, all regulations existing under the old system
> continue to so under the new system, and if they would not otherwise do so,
> new regulations are created with as similar properties as possible
> to replace them.
>
> //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
--
>From V.J. Rada
