Yet another error: "Clearer Resolutions" is democratic. Gosh that's a
lot for the first 10 minutes.
-Aris
On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 8:16 PM Aris Merchant
<thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Another error: The title of the proposal "Sergeant-at-Arms" was not in
> the full text section.
>
> -Aris
>
> On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 8:13 PM Aris Merchant
> <thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I caught an error: Rewards Patch & Equitable Remedy is AI 1.0.
> >
> > -Aris
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 8:08 PM Aris Merchant via agora-discussion
> > <agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > Here's a draft report. Comments are, as always, highly appreciated.
> > >
> > > -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 7, 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
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > 8308* Falsifian 3.0 Imposing order on the order
> > > 8309* Alexis 3.0 A Degree of Inefficiency
> > > 8310* Jason, Alexis 3.0 Deputisation timeliness
> > > 8311e twg, omd 3.0 Rewards Patch & Equitable Remedy
> > > 8312# Alexis 1.0 On Possibility
> > > 8313* Alexis, G. 3.0 Support of the Person
> > > 8314e Aris 1.0 Finite Gifting
> > > 8315# Alexis 3.0 Clearer Resolutions
> > > 8316* Alexis 3.0 Zombie voting package
> > > 8317# Alexis 2.0 Zombie trade
> > > 8318f Aris 1.0 Notorial Economy
> > > 8319l Aris 2.0 Sergeant-at-Arms
> > > 8320l Aris 2.0 Promotorial Assignment
> > > 8321l Aris 2.0 Untying Quorum
> > >
> > > The proposal pool is currently empty.
> > >
> > > Legend: <ID>* : Democratic proposal.
> > > <ID># : Ordinary proposal, unset chamber.
> > > <ID>e : Economy ministry proposal.
> > > <ID>f : Efficiency ministry proposal.
> > > <ID>j : Justice ministry proposal.
> > > <ID>l : Legislation ministry proposal.
> > > <ID>p : Participation ministry proposal.
> > >
> > >
> > > The full text of the aforementioned proposal(s) is included below.
> > >
> > >
> > > //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
> > > ID: 8308
> > > Title: Imposing order on the order
> > > Adoption index: 3.0
> > > Author: Falsifian
> > > Co-authors:
> > >
> > >
> > > If Proposal 8291 has been passed, and Rule 2350 does not have the list
> > > item "* A chamber to which the proposal shall be assigned upon it
> > > creation.", add that list item to the end of the list. If the list
> > > item is present, but it is not at the end of the list, or it is
> > > unclear or otherwise difficult or impossible to determine where in the
> > > list it is, put it at the end of the list.
> > >
> > > //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
> > > ID: 8309
> > > Title: A Degree of Inefficiency
> > > Adoption index: 3.0
> > > Author: Alexis
> > > Co-authors:
> > >
> > >
> > > Amend Rule 2595 (Performing a Dependent Action) by inserting ", and did
> > > not
> > > subsequently withdraw, " immediately after "published" in the first
> > > paragraph.
> > >
> > > //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
> > > ID: 8310
> > > Title: Deputisation timeliness
> > > Adoption index: 3.0
> > > Author: Jason
> > > Co-authors: Alexis
> > >
> > >
> > > Amend Rule 2160 to read, in whole:
> > >
> > > {
> > >
> > > A player acting as emself (the deputy) CAN perform an action ordinarily
> > > reserved for an office-holder as if e held the office if
> > >
> > > 1. the player does not hold that office;
> > >
> > > 2. it would be POSSIBLE for the deputy to perform the action, other than
> > > by deputisation, if e held the office;
> > >
> > > 3. either (i) there exists an obligation on the holder of that office,
> > > by virtue of holding that office, to perform the action, or (ii) the
> > > office is vacant;
> > >
> > > 4. either (i) a time limit applicable to that obligation has been
> > > violated, and the end of that time limit was fewer than 90 days ago, or
> > > (ii) the office is vacant;
> > >
> > > 5. if the office is not interim, the deputy announced between two and
> > > fourteen days earlier that e intended to deputise for that office for
> > > the purposes of the particular action; and
> > >
> > > 6. the deputy, when performing the action, announces that e is doing so
> > > by deputisation or by temporary deputisation.
> > >
> > >
> > > When a player deputises for an elected office, e becomes the holder of
> > > that office, unless the action being performed would already install
> > > someone into that office, and/or unless the deputisation is temporary.
> > >
> > > }
> > >
> > > [
> > >
> > > Added a prohibition on someone for deputising for an office that e
> > > already holds (this was something I thought of, but then I realized it
> > > violate all of the exacerbating factors in R2557.
> > >
> > > Rephrased the time limit checks based on Alexis's suggested wording,
> > > also adding a 90-day statute of limitations.
> > >
> > > Removed the requirement for prior announcement for most deputisations,
> > > only kept it for non-interim holders (also per Alexis's suggestion).
> > >
> > > ]
> > >
> > > //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
> > > ID: 8311
> > > Title: Rewards Patch & Equitable Remedy
> > > Adoption index: 1.0
> > > Author: twg
> > > Co-authors:
> > >
> > >
> > > Amend Rule 2496, "Rewards", by replacing "CAN once" with "CAN once by
> > > announcement".
> > >
> > > Amend Rule 2602, "Glitter", by replacing "CAN once" with "CAN once by
> > > announcement".
> > >
> > > For the purposes of this proposal, the "recession" is defined as the
> > > period of time starting at 03:00 am UTC on 29th January 2020 and ending
> > > the instant before the adoption of this proposal.
> > >
> > > For each time a player met a reward condition during the recession,
> > > grant that player the assets associated with the reward condition, or
> > > if e is no longer a player, grant the same assets to the Lost and Found
> > > Department.
> > >
> > > For each time a player was awarded Glitter during the recession, grant
> > > that player a quantity of coins determined in the manner specified by
> > > Rule 2602, or if e is no longer a player, grant the same quantity to the
> > > Lost and Found Department.
> > >
> > > [This ensures no loss of coins, but shifts the responsibility for
> > > evaluating the missed rewards onto the Treasuror. Which is fair enough
> > > because it's mostly my fault. I say "mostly" because nobody else caught
> > > it in drafting either.]
> > >
> > > //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
> > > ID: 8312
> > > Title: On Possibility
> > > Adoption index: 1.0
> > > Author: Alexis
> > > Co-authors:
> > >
> > >
> > > Enact a new power-1 rule entitled "Default Mechanisms" reading as follows:
> > > {
> > > If the Rules other than this one, as a whole, provide that a person CAN
> > > perform an action, but do not state the mechanism by which e can do so,
> > > e
> > > CAN perform it by announcement.
> > >
> > > If the Rules other than this one, as a whole, provide that a non-person
> > > entity CAN perform an action, but do not state the mechanism by which e
> > > can
> > > do so, any person CAN cause that entity to perform that action with
> > > Agoran
> > > Consent.
> > >
> > > If the Rules other than this one, as a whole, provide that an action
> > > CAN be
> > > performed but do not specify any entities as being capable of performing
> > > that action, any person CAN perform that action with Agoran Consent.
> > >
> > > For the purposes of this Rule, the Rules provide a mechanism for an
> > > action
> > > to be performed even if they specify a mechanism with a precondition
> > > which
> > > is not currently met, and they specify that an entity can perform that
> > > action even if no appropriate entity currently exists. This Rule defers
> > > to
> > > all Rules which permit actions to be performed by specific mechanisms.
> > > }
> > >
> > > //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
> > > ID: 8313
> > > Title: Support of the Person
> > > Adoption index: 3.0
> > > Author: Alexis
> > > Co-authors: G.
> > >
> > >
> > > Amend Rule 2124 (Agoran Satisfaction) by:
> > >
> > > 1. Replacing "However, the previous sentence notwithstanding, the
> > > initiator
> > > of the intent is not eligible to support it." with "Announcing
> > > intent to
> > > perform an action implicitly announces support for that action; such
> > > support may be withdrawn as per usual."
> > > 2. Replacing "The action is to be performed With N support, and there
> > > are
> > > fewer than than N Supporters of that intent." with "The action is to
> > > be
> > > performed With N support, and there equal to or fewer than than N
> > > Supporters of that intent."
> > > 3. Replacing "The action is to be performed with N Agoran consent, and
> > > the number of Supporters of the intent is less than or equal to N
> > > times the
> > > number of Objectors to the intent." with "The action is to be
> > > performed
> > > with N Agoran consent, and the number of Supporters of the intent is
> > > less
> > > than or equal to O or less than N * O, where O is the number of
> > > Objectors
> > > to the intent."
> > >
> > > //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
> > > ID: 8314
> > > Title: Finite Gifting
> > > Adoption index: 1.0
> > > Author: Aris
> > > Co-authors:
> > >
> > >
> > > Amend Rule 2585, Birthday Gifts, by changing the text
> > >
> > > "Every time it is a player's Agoran Birthday, each of the other players
> > > CAN grant em 3 coins by announcement."
> > >
> > > to read
> > >
> > > "Every time it is a player's Agoran Birthday, each of the other players
> > > CAN once grant em 3 coins by announcement."
> > >
> > > //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
> > > ID: 8315
> > > Title: Clearer Resolutions
> > > Adoption index: 3.0
> > > Author: Alexis
> > > Co-authors:
> > >
> > >
> > > Amend Rule 208 (Resolving Agoran Decisions) by replacing the third and
> > > fourth items in the list with the following:
> > > {
> > > 3. It specifies the quorum of the decision.
> > >
> > > 4. It specifies all the valid ballots, and no invalid ballots, on that
> > > decision, as of the end of the voting period, including each ballot's
> > > author, eir voting strength, its vote, and, if the vote is a conditional
> > > one, the unconditional vote to which it is evaluated.
> > >
> > > 5. The total strength of all ballots cast for each non-PRESENT option.
> > >
> > > 6. It specifies the outcome, as defined by other rules.
> > > }
> > >
> > > [Note that the existing "more than one option" text is basically
> > > tautologically true and practically useless anyway. PRESENT is an option,
> > > so only a decision with no other options would only have one. And even if
> > > we changed it, we short-circuit single-candidate elections so we might as
> > > well just drop that text.
> > >
> > > This is the main point of the proposal; I apologize to the Assessor that e
> > > does perhaps not wish to do the additional work here, but it was a
> > > longstanding Assessor practice and, as we are getting into the space of
> > > highly variable voting power again, quite necessary.]
> > >
> > > Amend Rule 683 (Voting on Agoran Decisions) by appending the following
> > > paragraph to the end of the rule:
> > > {
> > > When used in reference to a person who has cast a vote on an Agoran
> > > decision, rather than to a person who is eligible to or otherwise might
> > > cast a vote, the term "voter" refers only to a person who has a valid
> > > ballot on that decision.
> > > }
> > >
> > > [This is slightly different from the existing definition, as it includes
> > > people whose votes were not valid but became valid, but such a scenario
> > > shouldn't happen and in any case, this lines up with existing language so
> > > as to prevent a weird situation where a person's vote counts towards the
> > > result but not quorum.]
> > >
> > > Amend Rule 955 (Determining the Will of Agora) by replacing the text "The
> > > outcome of a decision is determined when it is resolved, and cannot change
> > > thereafter." with "The outcome of a decision is fixed at the end of its
> > > voting period, after evaluating all votes whose values are determined only
> > > at the end of the voting period, and cannot change thereafter."
> > >
> > > [This prevents manipulation of voting strength post-decision from
> > > affecting
> > > the result because that's an absurd amount of power to offer an Assessor,
> > > to be able to delay or otherwise manipulate the timing of resolutions so
> > > as
> > > to modify voting strength after a resolution. It also simplifies eir job
> > > considerably by not requiring em to take into account the effects of
> > > proposals on voting strength as e resolves them, especially if a CoE
> > > results in different ordering of proposals.]
> > >
> > > //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
> > > ID: 8316
> > > Title: Zombie voting package
> > > Adoption index: 3.0
> > > Author: Alexis
> > > Co-authors:
> > >
> > >
> > > Amend Rule 683 (Voting on Agoran Decisions) by appending the following
> > > paragraph:
> > > {{
> > > The above notwithstanding, at the end of the voting period for an Agoran
> > > decision, prior to the evaluation of conditionals, each entity who has
> > > never submitted a valid ballot for that decision, and for whom the Rules
> > > provide a default vote for that decision, automatically submits a valid
> > > vote on that decision for eir default vote and becomes quorum-ineligible
> > > for that decision. Providing an entity with a default vote on an Agoran
> > > decision is secured with power threshold 2.
> > > }}
> > >
> > > [We do not think that the "never submitted" condition is too onerous on
> > > the
> > > Assessor as e will be going through all the votes anyway.
> > >
> > > We would even go with "never attempted to", but we suspect that might lead
> > > to too much litigation, particularly because the easiest way to try and
> > > fail is a NttPF.]
> > >
> > > Amend Rule 955 (Determining the Will of Agora) by inserting: {
> > > Designating a voter as quorum-ineligible on an Agoran decision is
> > > secured
> > > with Power Threshold 2; all voters are otherwise quorum-eligible.
> > > }
> > > and by replacing: {
> > > If there is more than one option, and the number of voters is less than
> > > the
> > > quorum of that decision, the outcome is instead FAILED QUORUM.
> > > } with {
> > > If there is more than one option on an Agoran decision, and the number
> > > of
> > > quorum-eligible voters on it is less than its quorum, its outcome is
> > > instead FAILED QUORUM.
> > > }
> > >
> > > [Cleaned up this language because there's already a definition of a voter
> > > applicable to R955 here in R208 (possibly moved as a result of my other
> > > proposal). While I don't think Gaelan's suggestion of clearing up the
> > > possibility of a ballot identical to a default ballot was necessary, this
> > > is cleaner IMO.]
> > >
> > > Amend Rule 879 (Quorum) by replacing {
> > > If no other rule defines the quorum of an Agoran Decision, the quorum
> > > for
> > > that decision is equal to 2/3 of the number of voters on the Agoran
> > > Decision to adopt a proposal that had been most recently resolved at the
> > > time of that decision's initiation, the whole rounded to the nearest
> > > integer (breaking ties upward).
> > > } with {
> > > The Activity Level is equal to 2/3, rounded to the nearest integer and
> > > breaking ties upward, of the number of quorum-eligible voters on the
> > > most
> > > recently-resolved Agoran decision to adopt a proposal. If no other rules
> > > define the quorum of an Agoran decision, then the quorum of that
> > > decision
> > > is equal to the Activity Level at the time if its initiation.
> > > }
> > >
> > > Enact a new power-2 rule entitled "Zombie Voting" reading as follows:
> > > {{
> > > A zombie has its voting strength halved.
> > >
> > > The default vote of a zombie is to endorse eir master.
> > >
> > > Zombies are not quorum-eligible for any Agoran decision.
> > > }}
> > > [Rounding is already provided by R2422.]
> > >
> > > //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
> > > ID: 8317
> > > Title: Zombie trade
> > > Adoption index: 1.0
> > > Author: Aris
> > > Co-authors:
> > >
> > >
> > > [This proposal allows zombies to collect the fruits of their zombie
> > > auctions, and to allow players to voluntarily enter servitude. Yes, it
> > > does
> > > make buying a zombie a risky business!]
> > >
> > > Amend Rule 2483 (Economics) by replacing "Agora, players, and contracts"
> > > with "Agora, players, zombie trusts, and contracts".
> > >
> > > Amend Rule 2532 (Zombies) by:
> > > - appending "A player CAN, without 3 objections, flip eir own master
> > > switch
> > > to any other player. Other players SHOULD NOT object unless they
> > > believe
> > > that the intent is part of an attempt to flood Agora with the undead."
> > > - inserting "- flip eir master switch;" in the list after the first item
> > > - replacing "A zombie's master CAN flip that zombie's master switch to
> > > Agora by announcement." with "A zombie's master CAN flip that zombie's
> > > master switch to Agora or to any player who does not own any zombies
> > > by
> > > announcement."; and
> > > - replacing "resale value" with "integrity".
> > >
> > > Amend Rule 2574 (Zombie Life Cycle) by:
> > > - replacing the first two paragraphs with: {
> > > Any player CAN, with notice, putrefy player who has not made a public
> > > announcement in the past 60 days. When a player is putrefied:
> > > - if e is not a zombie, eir master switch is flipped to Agora; and
> > > then
> > > - eir integrity is set to 2.
> > >
> > > Integrity is a secured switch for zombies, tracked by the Registrar,
> > > with
> > > possible values of the natural numbers and "well-maintained" (default).
> > > If
> > > an integrity switch would be modified in a manner that assumes it is
> > > already a number, such as to increase or decrease it, such a
> > > modification
> > > leaves "well-maintained" as-is. Whenever a zombie's master switch is
> > > flipped from Agora to a player other than emself, eir integrity is
> > > decreased by 1. At the end of a zombie auction, every zombie that is an
> > > excess lot in that auction has eir integrity decreased by 1.
> > > };
> > > - inserting "- if a zombie is master to another zombie, flipping the
> > > second
> > > zombie's master switch to Agora;" after the second item in the list;
> > > and
> > > - replacing "resale value" with "integrity" throughout the rule.
> > >
> > > Amend Rule 1885 (Zombie Auctions) by:
> > > - replacing "resale value" with "integrity";
> > > - appending "When the winner of a zombie auction pays Agora to fulfill eir
> > > obligation to satisfy eir bid, the coins so transferred are
> > > immediately
> > > transferred into trust for the zombie."
> > >
> > > Create a new power-2 Rule entitled "Zombie Trusts":
> > > {
> > > Each zombie has a zombie trust, an entity referred to as the "<zombie
> > > name>
> > > Trust". To place assets "in trust" to a zombie is to transfer those
> > > assets
> > > to that zombie's trust, and similarly for other similar language.
> > >
> > > When an active player becomes a zombie, all of eir coins are transferred
> > > into eir zombie trust unless e flipped eir master switch emself and
> > > specified otherwise in the same message. Whenever a zombie becomes
> > > active,
> > > all coins held in trust for em are transferred to em immediately before
> > > eir
> > > trust ceases to exist.
> > > }
> > >
> > > //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
> > > ID: 8318
> > > Title: Notorial Economy
> > > Adoption index: 1.0
> > > Author: Aris
> > > Co-author(s):
> > >
> > >
> > > If the Notary's Interest is the empty set, change it to [Economy].
> > >
> > > //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
> > > ID: 8319
> > > Title: Sergeant-at-Arms
> > > Adoption index: 2.0
> > > Author: Aris
> > > Co-author(s):
> > >
> > > Amend the rule entitled "Ministries" by changing the text
> > > "Interest is an office switch" to read "Interest is secured office
> > > switch".
> > >
> > > Amend the rule entitled "Proposal Classes" by changing the text
> > > "an untracked Class switch" to read "a secured untracked Class switch".
> > >
> > > Amend the rule entitled "Proposal Chambers" by changing the text
> > > "Chamber is an untracked ordinary proposal switch" to read
> > > "Chamber is a secured untracked ordinary proposal switch".
> > >
> > > [As is, a power 1 proposal can flip interest, giving a certain officer
> > > infinite votes. This potentially allows for escalation of a power 1
> > > dictatorship. The others are secured out of an abundance of caution.]
> > >
> > > //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
> > > ID: 8320
> > > Title: Promotorial Assignment
> > > Adoption index: 2.0
> > > Author: Aris
> > > Co-author(s):
> > >
> > >
> > > Amend the rule entitled "Proposal Chambers" by adding the text
> > > "If a proposal in the Proposal Pool has its chamber unset, the Promotor
> > > CAN set the chamber to a specified ministry by announcement." at the
> > > beginning
> > > of the last paragraph.
> > >
> > > //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
> > > ID: 8321
> > > Title: Untying Quorum
> > > Adoption index: 2.0
> > > Author: Aris
> > > Co-author(s):
> > >
> > >
> > > Amend Rule 879, "Quorum", by deleting the text "(breaking ties upward)".
> > >
> > > [This has been bothering me for ages; I added this, but ties are
> > > impossible
> > > with a 2/3, so this is just confusing (and has lead to confusion on at
> > > least one proposal).]
> > >
> > > //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
