PROMOTOR'S REPORT AS OF RIGHT NOW If you vote on a proposal, please edit this spreadsheet with your votes:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1F39OHtBlZlQ8XVccqKCFtP-DPuHz4wPnujxbxkCN3LI/edit?usp=sharing I hereby distribute each listed proposal, initiating a referendum on it, and removing it from the proposal pool. For each decision, the vote collector is the Assessor, the quorum is 5, the voting method is AI-majority, the adoption index is the adoption index of the associated proposal, and the valid options are FOR and AGAINST (PRESENT is also a valid vote, as are conditional votes). ID Author(s) AI Title --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9073~ Kate, Gaelan 1.0 In case of unexpected nonplayerhood 9074* Janet 3.0 Close enough 9075* nix, Janet, kiako 3.0 No Hidden Ownership Restrictions 9076* nix 3.0 FUNgibility 9077~ snail 1.0 Less Fragile Crystals 9078~ Janet 1.0 Empire fixes 9079~ nix, Janet, kiako 2.0 Spendies v1.1 9080~ Gaelan, Kate 1.0 One from the archives 9081~ Gaelan 2.0 Don't humiliate the recently departed 9082~ Gaelan 1.7 yes, yes, I got the memo 9083* Janet 3.0 SLR ratification 2023-12-31 9084~ kiako 2.0 Oneironauts in the Ocean 9085~ ais523 1.0 Fix truthfulness loophole 9086~ R. Lee 1.0 Trimming the most useless rule in the ruleset [1] The proposal pool contains the following proposals: ID Author(s) AI Title --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Legend: <ID>* : Democratic proposal. <ID>~ : Ordinary proposal. The full text of the aforementioned proposal(s) is included below. Where the information shown below differs from the information shown above, the information shown above shall control. ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// ID: 9073 Title: In case of unexpected nonplayerhood Adoption Index: 1.0 Author: Kate Co-authors: Gaelan In Rule 2492 (Recusal), s/deregistered/unregistered [Allows a judge to be removed if, through some mishap, the CFJ has been assigned to someone who has never been a player or who ceased to be a player through some means other than deregistration. Composition fully intended to annoy Janet, but I think completely effective under the new standard of "clear to a reasonable player".] ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// ID: 9074 Title: Close enough Adoption Index: 3.0 Author: Janet Co-authors: Amend Rule 105 by deleting the text " and the next change identifier". [Remove the reference to "change identifiers" (presumably just revision numbers) for reenactment.] Amend Rule 1681 by, as a single amendment, deleting the text ", revision number, " and inserting the following paragraph after the paragraph beginning "The listing of each rule in the SLR": { The listing of each rule in the SLR must additionally include a reasonably accurate approximation of the number of changes made to the rule (the rule's revision number). The Rulekeepor may exercise reasonable discretion in calculating revision numbers. } [Define what a rule's "revision number" is and explicitly grant the Rulekeepor discretion in calculating it (e.g. not counting certain amendments (back when we used Suber-style proposals that re-numbered rules) or skipping revision numbers (for historical reasons).] ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// ID: 9075 Title: No Hidden Ownership Restrictions Adoption Index: 3.0 Author: nix Co-authors: Janet, kiako [Right now, sentences like "Blank are an asset ownable by..." is interpreted to adding to a default within R2576. This seems unintuitive. This proposal makes that default only apply if there's no mention of ownership.] Amend R2576 (Ownership) by replacing: If ownership of an asset is restricted to a class of entities, then that asset CANNOT be gained by or transferred to an entity outside that class. By default, ownership of an asset is restricted to Agora, players, and contracts, but an asset's backing document may modify this. with: An asset CANNOT be gained by or transferred to an entity unless its backing document specifies that entity can own it. If an asset's backing document is otherwise silent on which entities can own it, then it can be owned by Agora, players, and contracts. Amend R2659 (Stamps) by replacing: Stamps are a category of asset ownable by players . with: Stamps are a category of asset ownable by players and Agora. ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// ID: 9076 Title: FUNgibility Adoption Index: 3.0 Author: nix Co-authors: [Right now, sentences like "Blank are an asset ownable by..." is interpreted to adding to a default within R2576. This seems unintuitive. This proposal makes that default only apply if there's no mention of ownership.] Retitle R2578 (Currencies) to "Fungibility" Amend R2578 to read in full: A fungible asset is one where two instances of it are considered equivalent if they have the same owner, for the purposes of specification, granting, and transferring. The total amount of a fungible asset that an entity owns is also know as that entities "balance" of that asset. Amend R2659 (Stamps) by replacing: Stamps of a given type are a currency. with: Stamps of a given type are fungible. Amend R2555 (Blots) by replacing: Blots are an indestructible fixed currency with: Blots are an indestructible fixed fungible asset ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// ID: 9077 Title: Less Fragile Crystals Adoption Index: 1.0 Author: snail Co-authors: [Makes it so crystals can't be destroyed by the player that owns them, which doesn't seem fun. Also gets rid of the "repeal this rule once someone wins" part since we can just do that by proposal if we want. I'd rather it stay around by default.] Amend Rule 2685 (Crystals) by replacing { A crystal is an asset with secured integer switches identity, size (default 0), and instability (default 0). } with { A crystal is an indestructible asset with secured integer switches identity, size (default 0), and instability (default 0). } and by replacing { Any player CAN, by announcement, Shatter the System, specifying each crystallized player, and provided that no player has done so in the past 30 days. When a player does so, each crystallized player wins the game. If at least 4 days have passed since any player won the game in this manner, any player CAN repeal this rule by announcement. } with { Any player CAN, by announcement, Shatter the System, specifying at least 1 crystallized player, and provided that no person has done so in the past 30 days. When a player does so, each crystallized player wins the game. If a player won the game in this manner 4 days ago, then all existing crystals are destroyed. } ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// ID: 9078 Title: Empire fixes Adoption Index: 1.0 Author: Janet Co-authors: Amend the Rule entitled "Agora of Empires" by, as a single amendment (using the following steps, as if they were applied in order, to compute the final text): * Replacing the text "There exists a document known as the Empireworld" with "There exists a document, initially empty, known as the Empireworld". * Replacing each instance of the text "CfJ" with the text "CFJ". * Replacing the text "when ey believe it to be appropriate" with "when they believe it to be appropriate". [The antecedent is "Imperials", which is plural.] * Replacing the final paragraph with the following: { An Imperial CAN, without 2 objections, Dominate the World provided that (1) the Empireworld shows that e has accomplished at least 3 extraordinary feats in the fictional world that the Empireworld describes since e last won the game as a result of this Rule and that (2) no person has won the game as a result of this Rule in the past 30 days. When a player Dominates the World, e wins the game. This Rule does not describe what qualifies as an extraordinary feat. } Set the Empireworld to what it would be had it been empty initially after the enactment of the Rule entitled "Agora of Empires". [Fixes the uninitialized state, fixes minor grammar issues, does the standard win indirection, and removes the double "by announcement" and "without 2 objections" method for winning (which *shouldn't* allow by announcement wins by precedent, but should be fixed in any case).] ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// ID: 9079 Title: Spendies v1.1 Adoption Index: 2.0 Author: nix Co-authors: Janet, kiako [Spendies are simple. We all start with the same amount every month, and if you don't use them you lose them. You can transfer them, put them in contracts, etc. But they will go away. What's important is what you do with them in that month.] Enact a new (Power=1) rule titled Spendies with the text: Spendies are a currency ownable by players and contracts. Spendies are tracked by the Spendor in eir weekly report. At the end of each month, all Spendies are destroyed. At the beginning of each month, every player is granted 20 Spendies. [Quick compatibility with another proposal] If a proposal titled "FUNgibility" and authored by nix has been adopted within the last 90 days, amend the rule titled "Spendies" to replace "currency" with "fungible liquid asset". [Delete dream of wandering.] Repeal R2675 (Dream of Wandering). [Below stones are simplified, similarly to the stamp specialization proposal I made previously. You simply buy them for a cost that decreases every month while the stone has the same owner.] Amend R2640 (Stones) by replacing: A stone is a unique indestructible liquid asset with: A stone is a unique indestructible fixed asset and deleting its last two paragraphs. Amend R2641 (Wielding Stones) by replacing: While a stone is hot, it is IMPOSSIBLE to wield it or to transfer it by announcement. with: While a stone is hot, it is IMPOSSIBLE to wield it. Retitle R2642 (Gathering Stones) to "Stone Cost" and then amend R2642 to read in full: Stone Cost is a Stone switch with values of non-negative integers and a default of 10. Stone Cost is tracked by the Stonemason. Any player CAN pay a fee of X Spendies to transfer a specified stone to emself, where X is the current Stone Cost of the specified stone. When a stone is transferred, its Stone Cost is set to the default. At the beginning of every week, the Stone Cost for each stone is reduced by 1, to a minimum of 0. Repeal R2642 (Gathering Stones). [Similarly, let's include stamps. Remember Dreams are gone, so this is now the primary way to get new stamps. Use Spendies to get stamps from L&FD, or mint more of your own. There's some modifications to the cost to account for scale, which also discourages timing scams somewhat.] Amend R2659 (Stamps) by appending the following paragraphs: Any player CAN pay a fee of 5 Spendies to grant emself X stamps of eir own type. When less than 8 Stamps of eir type exist, X is 2. When 8 to 15 Stamps of eir type exist, X is 1. When 16 or more stamps of eir type exist, X is 0. Any player CAN pay a fee of 5 + (X) Spendies to transfer a specified stamp from the L&FD to emself. X is equal to the number of times e has already done so in the current month. [Finally, you can buy some radiance, tho the cost is fairly high. Might push you across the finish line tho, or at least give a use for some spare Spendies.] Amend R2656 (Radiance) by appending the following paragraph: Any player CAN increase eir radiance by 1 by paying a fee of 2 Spendies. ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// ID: 9080 Title: One from the archives Adoption Index: 1.0 Author: Gaelan Co-authors: Kate Re-enact rule 417, with the following text: { The Archivist is an office; its holder is responsible for ensuring the continued availability of documents of historical interest. The archivist’s monthly report contains: * Instructions for accessing collections of: * Texts of each historic rule revision. * Texts of each proposal. * Judicial cases. * Public messages. * Messages to discussion fora. * Theses for which a person was awarded a degree. * Optionally, any other documents the Archivist deems worthy of archival. * A description of the completeness of each of the above collections. The referenced collections NEED NOT be perfectly complete or accurate, but the Archivist SHOULD work towards improving their completeness and accuracy. } Re-title rule 417 to “The Archivist”. Amend Rule 2581 by appending the following item to the list: { - Archaeologist, awardable by the Archivist to any player who makes a significant contribution to filling in missing historical records. } Make Gaelan the Archivist. [History for the Rulekeepor’s benefit, copied from Zefram’s rule archive: ??? by Proposal 417 [presumably enacted - Gaelan] Amended(1) by Proposal 1302, 4 November 1994 Amended(2) by Proposal 1700, 1 September 1995 Amended(3) by Proposal 1735, 15 October 1995 Amended(4) by Proposal 1741, 15 October 1995 Amended(5) by Proposal 2029, 28 November 1995 Infected and Amended(6) by Rule 1454, 23 January 1996 Amended(7) by Proposal 2662, 12 September 1996 Amended(8) by Proposal 2696, 10 October 1996 Null-Amended(9) by Proposal 2710, 12 October 1996 Repealed as Power=1 Rule 417 by Proposal 3787 (Steve), 8 September 1998 ] [This is intentionally written loosely to allow the Archivist to defer to existing archives - for example that maintained by the CotC - where appropriate.] ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// ID: 9081 Title: Don't humiliate the recently departed Adoption Index: 2.0 Author: Gaelan Co-authors: Amend rule 2168 ("Extending the Voting Period”) by replacing "despite being eligible” with "despite being eligible players”. ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// ID: 9082 Title: yes, yes, I got the memo Adoption Index: 1.7 Author: Gaelan Co-authors: Amend rule 2478 (“Justice”) by replacing: { A player CAN, by announcement, "note" an unforgiven infraction committed by any other player in the last 14 days, specifying the incident and the rule it violates (or name of the Infraction if it has one). } with { A player CAN, by announcement, "note" an unforgiven infraction committed by any other player in the last 14 days, specifying the incident and the rule it violates (or name of the Infraction if it has one); but a player CANNOT note an infraction that has already been investigated. } [Currently, if an infraction is noted after it is investigated, the Investigator SHALL but CANNOT investigate it. This would be automatically forgiven by 2531, so it’s not an issue in practice, but let’s fix it properly.] ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// ID: 9083 Title: SLR ratification 2023-12-31 Adoption Index: 3.0 Author: Janet Co-authors: Ratify the Short Logical Ruleset published by Janet on or about December 31, 2023 at 21:12:14 UTC, available at [0]. [0] https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-official/2023-December/017538.html [I was required to submit such a proposal for Ratify the Ruleset Week but forgot to. Sorry.] ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// ID: 9084 Title: Oneironauts in the Ocean Adoption Index: 2.0 Author: kiako Coauthors: Amend Rule 2675 ("Dream of Wandering") so that the list of Dreams reads in its entirety: { - Wandering: This dream has no effect. - Charity: Immediately after a wandering, one stamp (chosen by most-to-least owned by the L&FD at time of transfer, tie-broken alphabetically) is transferred to each Charity Dreamer (in order from least-to-most stamps owned, tie-broken alphabetically) from the L&FD. If the number of Wealth Dreamers is more than the number of Charity Dreamers, this process happens a second time. If it is more than twice the number of Charity Dreamers, this happens a third time. - Justice: Immediately after a wandering, a number of blots are expunged from each Justice Dreamer equal to one-half the number of Power Dreamers, rounded up. If a Justice Dreamer had no blots immediately after a wandering, e CAN once expunge one blot, by announcement, from a specified player before the next wandering. - Sharing: Immediately after a wandering, each Sharing Dreamer has eir Radiance increased by X/Y, rounded down, where X is the number of non-Wandering, non-Sharing Dreamers, and Y is the number of Sharing Dreamers. - Wealth: Immediately after a wandering, X stamps of eir own type are granted to each Wealth Dreamer, where X is the minimum of the following: - One more than the number of true statements among the following: - Fewer than 8 stamps of eir own type exist. - There are at least 3 Wealth Dreamers. - There are at most 2 Charity Dreamers. - 16 minus the number of stamps of eir own type that exist, to a minimum of 0. - Gardens: Immediately after a wandering, the Base Rockiness of each Gardens Dreamer is increased by the number of Gardens Dreamers, and the Base Rockiness of each non-Gardens Dreamer is decreased by 1 to a minimum of 0. - Power: Let Y be the number of Dreamers of the non-Wandering, non-Power Dream with the most Dreamers. Each Power Dreamer has eir voting strength increased by X for referenda on ordinary proposals, where X is - 1 if Y is at most 2, - 2 if Y is between 3 and 5 (inclusive), - 3 if Y is between 6 and 9 (inclusive), and - 4 if Y is at least 10. - Revolution: A revolution is happening if the majority of active players are Revolution Dreamers. Immediately after a wandering, if a revolution is not happening, then all Revolution Dreamers have eir radiance decreased by 1 to a minimum of 0. Immediately after a wandering, if a revolution is happening, then all players have eir radiance set to 100-X, where X was eir radiance when the wandering occurred, and all player's Dreams are set to Wandering. } ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// ID: 9085 Title: Fix truthfulness loophole Adoption Index: 1.0 Author: ais523 Coauthors: In rule 2471, replace "The author believed the statement to be not true." with "The author did not believe the statement to be true." [Under the existing rules, it's possible to legally make a statement under penalty of No Faking, when you have no idea whether or not the statement is true – neither of the existing clauses apply, because you neither believe it to be not true, nor should have known that it was false. This makes the "penalty of No Faking" ineffective for one of its primary purposes, of allowing people to introduce new facts into the judicial record based on their own personal knowledge.] ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// ID: 9086 Title: Trimming the most useless rule in the ruleset Adoption Index: 1.0 Author: R. Lee Coauthors: Repeal rule 2683 'The Boulder' ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// -- snail
