On Sat, Jun 6, 2020 at 2:40 PM Alex Smith via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> On Friday, 5 June 2020, 19:11:36 GMT+1, James Cook via agora-discussion < > agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > If a proposal does get enough votes, I think this makes the Assessor > > the one who violates the rule, when e resolves it. I guess Aris's "New > > Defenses" would protect em. Probably not a big deal. > > Gratuitous: in the unlikely event that a proposal that would ossify/end > Agora does end up being voted FOR, I would prefer the Assessor to not > resolve it. If resolving it were illegal, this would give em a good excuse > to violate the rules requiring em to resolve it. > > (For example, if we catch that a proposal has an ossifying effect at some > point after the voting period closes, the Assessor delaying the resolution > would likely be a necessary step in fixing the situation, buying time to, > e.g., pass a proposal to proactively negate the ossifying proposal's > effects.) > > Something similar has happened in other nomics: Wooble once "forfeited" > (effectively, deregistered from) B in order to avoid having to resolve a > proposal that would end the game. (It was eventually discovered that due to > some brokenness earlier, the proposal in question had never existed, > although B was dead anyway at that point.) > > -- > ais523 > Yes, it is a class 2 ( but really class 1) crime to be Tardy on resolving a proposal, and it is a class 4 crime to resolve it, ossifying agora. The correct course of action for an Assessor who is worried about an ossifying proposal is definitely to call a CFJ and not resolve the proposal, and the rules encouraging that is not such a bad thing. -- >From R. Lee
