BUS: Re: OFF: CFJ 3575 judged TRUE
I claim the reward of 1 shiny for this report. I pledge to transfer
all shinies I receive before my next deregistration to the first
non-Alexis person who pledges that they will use 90% of the shinies I
transfer em in accordance with the instructions of myself acting from
the email address vijar...@gmail.com.
On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 11:16 AM, VJ Rada wrote:
> I start with this CFJ's facts. On October 4, o. initiated an auction
> for the Estate of Dawsburgen. On October 10, G. bid 1010 shinies on
> this auction. It is undisputed that e is the winner of the auction
> under rule 2491 (Estate Auctions) . Eir win of this auction therefore
> triggers the third paragraph of that rule, which states
>"The player who placed the winning bid CAN, and SHALL in a
> timely fashion, cause Agora to transfer the auctioned Estate to
> the winner by announcement, by paying Agora the amount of
> the bid, or by causing the winning Organization to pay Agora
> the amount of the bid.".
>
> The question here is did G. transfer emself the Estate of Dawsburgen
> by eir announcement on Oct 13, or must e pay the winning amount of
> Shinies to gain control of Dawsburgen?
>
> In CFJ 3533, Judge omd noted that "We don't usually write "A or B or
> C". When all the clauses start with "if", we do sometimes write "if A,
> or if B, or if C", but "if A, if B, or if C" is still grammatical and
> common.". This is a similar case. The list given here provides three
> methods of transferring an Estate to oneself: by announcement, by
> transferring one's own Shinies, or by transferring an organisation's
> Shinies. And it uses the "by A, by B, or by C" format. If someone
> asked you to transport their piano "by plane, by boat, or by train",
> it would be clear that you would not have to somehow put a train ON a
> plane. If someone told you "You have to win this game by brute force,
> by skill, or by luck", it would be clear that you could use any of the
> three methods.
>
> However, imagine you were asked to see a performance "at Seaworld, at
> 6am or at 8pm". It is similarly clear in such a case that their
> performance would occur only at Seaworld, and not in any other place.
> What if somebody asked you to win a fight "by any means necessary, by
> luck, by brute force, or by skill". It is clear that that person would
> always expect you to use any means necessary. The difference comes
> from the nature of the first clause. In the later two examples, the
> first clause is general and followed by a list of specific examples or
> limiting items. Is the list at issue in this CFJ similar to the later
> two examples? Arguably so, yes. Near every action in the Agoran
> ruleset must be done "by announcement". It seems quite reasonable to
> interpret the text at issue here the same as the two examples in this
> paragraph, with the transfer of Shinies limiting the general "by
> announcement". Does this trigger the game factors analysis?
>
> It does not. The inclusion of an Oxford comma makes this case quite
> clear. An Oxford comma, of course, is a comma "used after the
> penultimate item in a list of three or more items, before ‘and’ or
> ‘or’". In the text at issue here, there is a comma before the "or" in
> "by paying Agora the amount of the bid, or by causing the winning
> Organization to pay Agora the amount of the bid.". This comma is
> grammatical under G's interpretation because eir interpretation
> provides for a three-item list. Under the other interpretation, the
> list of the two methods would be two items, and the comma makes no
> sense. Under real-world legal traditions, it is certainly within a
> judge's power to detect and correct small punctuation errors that
> produce odd results. In the Agoran tradition, it is not. See rule 217
> ("the text of the rules takes precedence") and several CFJs (eg CFJ
> 3548, which refused to apply the obviously intended effects of the
> Dependent Actions rules because the text commanded otherwise). The
> text here clearly indicates that an auction winner may transfer an
> Estate to emself by announcement.
>
> For the above reasons, I rule CFJ 3575 is TRUE
>
> --
> From V.J. Rada
--
>From V.J. Rada
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Organization Repeal
TTttPF.
-o
> On Oct 14, 2017, at 9:39 PM, Owen Jacobson wrote:
>
> I withdraw the proposal “Organization Repeal” and submit the following
> proposal in its place. I pend it by paying Agora 1 sh..
>
> Changelog: some minor phraseology fixes in The Treasuror.
>
> -o
>
> Title: Organization Repeal
> Author: o
> AI: 3.0
>
> {{{
>If a proposal titled "Contracts", followed by a version number, authored by
>Aris and including o in the list of co-authors, has passed, remove every
>paragraph from this proposal other than this one before proceeding.
>
>Destroy each Organization.
>
>Repeal the following rules, in order:
>
>* Rule 2459 ("Organizations").
>* Rule 2461 ("Death and Birth of Organizations").
>* Rule 2460 ("Organizational Restructuring").
>* Rule 2457 ("Lockout").
>* Rule 2458 ("Invoking Lockout").
>* Rule 2462 ("Bankruptcy").
>
>Amend rule 2456 ("The Secretary") by changing its title to "The Treasuror",
>then by replacing its text, entirely, with:
>
>{{{
>The Treasuror is an office.
>
>The Treasuror's weekly report includes:
>
>1. the current Floating Value, and
>2. all Floating Derived Values defined by the Rules.
>
>The Treasuror CAN flip the floating value once a week by announcement.
>As part of eir weekly duties, e SHALL flip the Floating Value to the
>number of Shinies owned by Agora; e SHALL NOT ever set it to a
>different value. E SHOULD do this while publishing eir weekly report.
>If the Secretary discovers that e last flipped the floating value to an
>incorrect value and e would not otherwise be able to set it again yet,
>e CAN and SHALL set the value to what it should have been set to in the
>first place by announcement.
>}}}
>
>Make o the Treasuror.
>
>Amend rule 2166 ("Assets") by replacing the paragraph:
>
>{{{
>Unless modified by an asset's backing document, ownership of an asset
>is restricted to Agora, persons, and organizations.
>}}}
>
>with:
>
>{{{
>Unless modified by an asset's backing document, ownership of an asset
>is restricted to Agora and persons.
>}}}
>
>then by removing the paragraph beginning with "An organization's charter".
>
>Amend rule 2489 ("Estates") by replacing the first sentence with:
>
>{{{
>An Estate is a type of indestructible liquid asset. Ownership of
>Estates is restricted to Agora and to players.
>}}}
>
>Amend rule 2491 ("Estate Auctions") by replacing its text, entirely, with:
>
>{{{
>At the start of each month, if Agora owns at least one Estate, the
>Surveyor CAN, and SHALL in a timely fashion, put one Estate which is
>owned by Agora up for auction by announcement. Each auction ends seven
>days after it begins.
>
>During an auction, any player CAN bid a number of Shinies by
>announcement, provided the bid is higher than any previously-placed bid
>in the same auction.
>
>If, at the end of the auction, there is a single highest bid, then the
>player who placed that bid wins the auction. The player who placed the
>winning bid CAN, and SHALL in a timely fashion, cause Agora to transfer
>the auctioned Estate to the winner by announcement by paying Agora the
>amount of the bid.
>}}}
>
>Amend rule 2483 ("Economics") by replacing its text, entirely, with:
>
>{{{
>Shinies (singular "shiny", abbreviated "sh.") are an indestructible
>liquid currency, and the official currency of Agora. Shiny ownership is
>restricted to Agora, any player, or any entity explicitly defined by
>the Rules to be an Agoran Institution. The Secretary is the
>recordkeepor for Shinies.
>
>The Secretary CAN cause Agora to pay any player or organization by
>announcement if doing so is specified by a rule.
>}}}
>
>Amend the following rules, in order, by replacing the word
>"Secretary" with the word "Treasuror" wherever it appears:
>
>* Rule 2487 ("Shiny Supply Level")
>* Rule 2498 ("Economic Wins")
>* Rule 2497 ("Floating Value")
> }}}
>
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
BUS: [Proposal] Organization Repeal
I submit the following proposal, and pend it with AP.
-o
Title: Organization Repeal
Author: o
AI: 3.0
{{{
If a proposal titled "Contracts", followed by a version number, authored by
Aris and including o in the list of co-authors, has passed, remove every
paragraph from this proposal other than this one before proceeding.
Destroy each Organization.
Repeal the following rules, in order:
* Rule 2459 ("Organizations").
* Rule 2461 ("Death and Birth of Organizations").
* Rule 2460 ("Organizational Restructuring").
* Rule 2457 ("Lockout").
* Rule 2458 ("Invoking Lockout").
* Rule 2462 ("Bankruptcy").
Amend rule 2456 ("The Secretary") by changing its title to "The Treasuror",
then by replacing its text, entirely, with:
{{{
The Treasuror is an office.
The Treasuror's weekly report includes:
1. the current Floating Value, and all derived values defined by the
Rules.
The Treasuror CAN flip the floating value once a week by announcement.
As part of eir weekly duties, e SHALL flip the Floating Value to the
number of Shinies owned by Agora; e SHALL NOT ever set it to a
different value. E SHOULD do this while publishing eir weekly report.
If the Secretary discovers that e last flipped the floating value to an
incorrect value and e would not otherwise be able to set it again yet,
e CAN and SHALL set the value to what it should have been set to in the
first place by announcement.
}}}
Make o the Treasuror.
Amend rule 2166 ("Assets") by replacing the paragraph:
{{{
Unless modified by an asset's backing document, ownership of an asset
is restricted to Agora, persons, and organizations.
}}}
with:
{{{
Unless modified by an asset's backing document, ownership of an asset
is restricted to Agora and persons.
}}}
then by removing the paragraph beginning with "An organization's charter".
Amend rule 2489 ("Estates") by replacing the first sentence with:
{{{
An Estate is a type of indestructible liquid asset. Ownership of
Estates is restricted to Agora and to players.
}}}
Amend rule 2491 ("Estate Auctions") by replacing its text, entirely, with:
{{{
At the start of each month, if Agora owns at least one Estate, the
Surveyor CAN, and SHALL in a timely fashion, put one Estate which is
owned by Agora up for auction by announcement. Each auction ends seven
days after it begins.
During an auction, any player CAN bid a number of Shinies by
announcement, provided the bid is higher than any previously-placed bid
in the same auction.
If, at the end of the auction, there is a single highest bid, then the
player who placed that bid wins the auction. The player who placed the
winning bid CAN, and SHALL in a timely fashion, cause Agora to transfer
the auctioned Estate to the winner by announcement by paying Agora the
amount of the bid.
}}}
Amend rule 2483 ("Economics") by replacing its text, entirely, with:
{{{
Shinies (singular "shiny", abbreviated "sh.") are an indestructible
liquid currency, and the official currency of Agora. Shiny ownership is
restricted to Agora, any player, or any entity explicitly defined by
the Rules to be an Agoran Institution. The Secretary is the
recordkeepor for Shinies.
The Secretary CAN cause Agora to pay any player or organization by
announcement if doing so is specified by a rule.
}}}
Amend the following rules, in order, by replacing the word
"Secretary" with the word "Treasuror" wherever it appears:
* Rule 2487 ("Shiny Supply Level")
* Rule 2498 ("Economic Wins")
* Rule 2497 ("Floating Value")
}}}
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
BUS: Re: OFF: CFJ 3575 judged TRUE
On Sun, 15 Oct 2017, VJ Rada wrote: > It does not. The inclusion of an Oxford comma makes this case quite > clear. An Oxford comma, of course, is a comma "used after the > penultimate item in a list of three or more items, before ‘and’ or > ‘or’". Notice of Honour: +1 VJ Rada for bringing in the Oxford comma [I have a mug that says "Team Oxford Comma" and will fight to the death for it], -1 from me (because it was, you know, a scam). > Under real-world legal traditions, it is certainly within a > judge's power to detect and correct small punctuation errors that > produce odd results. In the Agoran tradition, it is not. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/16/us/oxford-comma-lawsuit.html
BUS: Proposal: Deregulation
Decided to put my money where my mouth is.
Proposal: Deregulation (AI=3)
{{{
Repeal Rule 2493 (Regulations).
Repeal Rule 2494 (The Regkeepor).
Amend Rule 2464 (Tournaments) to read as follows:
A Tournament is a sub-game of Agora specifically sanctioned
to be initiated as a tournament by the Rules. If a winner of a
tournament is determined within 4 weeks of its initiation, that
person or persons win the game, otherwise the tournament
concludes with no winner.
In a timely fashion after the start of June 1 of each year,
the Herald SHALL propose a set of Regulations governing a
Birthday Tournament for that year; the Herald CAN also
delegate the responsibility for creating or running the
tournament to another player, with that player's consent.
The Birthday Tournament's regulations SHOULD be such that all
persons who choose to participate have a fair chance of winning
the tournament (according to its regulations), and a winner
SHOULD be expected within 2-3 weeks following the tournament's
initiation.
After adequate time for discussion of the Birthday Tournament's
regulations, the Herald (or delegate) CAN initiate a sanctioned
tournament with a specified, finalized set of regulations,
Without 3 Objections. The initiation SHOULD be timed to
coincide with Agora's Birthday.
Repeal Rule 2495 (The Birthday Tournament).
}}}
This effectively just repeals regulations, which I think are very dangerous
and should not be used in place of things like contracts. Tournaments are
reverted to the pre-Regulations rules. I spend an AP to pend this proposal.
-Alexis
BUS: A few cleanups
This is just a miscellaneous fix proposal:
Proposal: High Power Cleanup (AI=3)
{{{
Text in square brackets is not a substantive part of this proposal and is
ignored when it takes effect.
Amend Rule 105, bullet 2 to read "When a rule
is repealed, it ceases to be a
rule, its power is set to 0, and the Rulekeepor
need no longer maintain a record
of it."
[There is a ruling that repealed rules have their power set to 0, but I'm
not sure I fully agree with that conclusion; this makes it explicit which
can't hurt anyway.]
Set the power of all entities other than Rules, Regulations, and this
Proposal to 0.
[This is a general cleanup that catches repealed rules and other entities.
I believe that this actuall depowers old proposals, but that's probably a
good thing to be quite honest.]
Amend Rule 105, bullet 3 by appending "Unless specified otherwise by the
re-enacting instrument, a re-enacted rule has power equal to the power it
had at the time of its repeal (or power 1, if power was not deifned at the
time of that rule's repeal). If the re-enacting instrument is incapable of
setting the re-enacted rule's power to that value, then the re-enactment is
null and void."
[Re-enactment currently doesn't have a specified power; this causes it to
work roughly the way you would expect it to.]
Amend Rule 1023 by appending "The same applies, mutatis mutandis, to for
determining whether two points in time are within N months of each other,
for N greater than or equal to 2." as a new paragraph in the fourth bullet
in the first list.
[This makes the logical extension to "within 6 months", which is used,
explicit.]
}}}
-Alexis
BUS: can we can't we can we can't we
I submit this Proposal, AI-3, "Can or can't we?" (pending to wait for comments): -- [The rules are unclear/silent on whether "CAN, SHALL, MAY" imply "by announcement" and game opinion is somewhat split. We should make it clear, but I'm not sure there's an AI-3 majority favoring either option. Rather than leave it unclear, this uses an AI-3 majority to approve that we want it clarified, but leaves it up to majority vote whether "by announcement" is implied. (even people voting AGAINST can have their preference counted on that part). Amend Rule 2125 (Regulated Actions) by replacing: Restricted Actions CAN only be performed as described by the Rules. with: A Restricted Action CAN only be performed as described by the Rules, and only using the methods explicitly specified in the Rules for performing the given action. [this over-arching protection means in general, "by announcement" is NOT implied]. If the majority of valid ballots (valid at the end of the voting period) cast in the decision to adopt this proposal specify "OPTION A" along with their vote, then amend Rule 2152 (Mother, May I?) by appending the following paragraph: If a Rule states that an entity CAN, MAY, or SHALL perform an action, but does not explicitly specify a method for performing it, then "CAN by announcement" is specified by that Rule as a method for performing that action (subject to any conditions included with the CAN, MAY, or SHALL). --
BUS: Stamps are cool
I just figured out what the purpose of stamps is. I hadn't realized it before; I must have just not looked very closely at that section of the rules. I buy a stamp by transferring 1 shiny to Agora.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Stamps are cool
Hm, yeah, I knew that. I don't know why I thought it was 1. I buy a stamp by transferring 2 shinies (not one, but two!) to Agora. On Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 11:39 AM, Alexis Hunt wrote: > On Sat, 14 Oct 2017 at 11:30 ATMunn . wrote: > >> I just figured out what the purpose of stamps is. I hadn't realized it >> before; I must have just not looked very closely at that section of the >> rules. >> >> I buy a stamp by transferring 1 shiny to Agora. >> > > Stamps cost 2 at the moment. >
Re: BUS: Creating and Revoking Agencies
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 at 16:10 Alexis Hunt wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 at 16:00 Alexis Hunt wrote:
>
>> Hmm, I did this wrong. On behalf of VJ Rada (via ORP), I intend, with 24
>> hours Notice, to amend ORP by appending " 1. Resign from any office. 2.
>> Object to, or support, or withdraw any objection to or support for, any
>> notice of intent. 3. Cast or withdraw any vote on any Agoran decision. 4.
>> Transfer shinies to Alexis. 5. Pend proposals, at a cost of either shinies
>> or AP. 6. Intend to create or revoke an agency, and create or revoke an
>> agency.", resulting in the powers being as follows:
>> {{{
>> IMMUTABLE POWERS===Agents of this agency have the power to intend to
>> amend and to amend this agency on behalf of VJ Rada. These amendments may
>> not give anyone the power to deregister VJ Rada, and they may not alter any
>> text in the Immutable Powers section of this agency, without VJ Rada's
>> explicit consent (acting as himself, from the email address
>> vijar...@gmail.com).
>> MUTABLE POWERS
>> 1. Resign from any office. 2. Object to, or support, or withdraw any
>> objection to or support for, any notice of intent. 3. Cast or withdraw any
>> vote on any Agoran decision. 4. Transfer shinies to Alexis. 5. Pend
>> proposals, at a cost of either shinies or AP. 6. Intend to create or revoke
>> an agency, and create or revoke an agency.
>> }}}
>>
>>
> -Alexis
>>
>
> *sigh*, missing whitespace. I do the above again, except that the powers
> resulting will be:
> {{{
> IMMUTABLE POWERS===
> Agents of this agency have the power to intend to amend and to amend this
> agency on behalf of VJ Rada. These amendments may not give anyone the power
> to deregister VJ Rada, and they may not alter any text in the Immutable
> Powers section of this agency, without VJ Rada's explicit consent (acting
> as himself, from the email address vijar...@gmail.com).
> MUTABLE POWERS
> 1. Resign from any office. 2. Object to, or support, or withdraw any
> objection to or support for, any notice of intent. 3. Cast or withdraw any
> vote on any Agoran decision. 4. Transfer shinies to Alexis. 5. Pend
> proposals, at a cost of either shinies or AP. 6. Intend to create or revoke
> an agency, and create or revoke an agency.
> }}}
>
> -Alexis
>
On behalf of VJ Rada (via ORP), I amend ORP as indicated above.
On behalf of VJ Rada (via ORP), I transfer all of eir shinies to myself.
-Alexis
Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [ADoP] ADoP and Prime Minister Elections
Oh, wow, thanks guys. I should have guessed that Agorans were friendly enough towards new players to do something like that. I retract my vote for ADoP and vote for myself. (Quick question that should be answered in a discussion thread: What exactly does it mean when people vote like "I vote for [person1, person2, person3, etc.]"?) On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 11:19 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > I retract my vote for ADoP and vote (ATMunn, V.J. Rada). > > > On Fri, 13 Oct 2017, Aris Merchant wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 7:01 PM, Kerim Aydin > wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Tue, 10 Oct 2017, Owen Jacobson wrote: > > >> In the decision to elect an associate director of personnel, I vote > for V.J Rada. > > >> > > >> In the decision to elect a prime minister, I vote for Alexis, then > G., then nichdel. > > > > > > I retract any previous votes in both elections, and vote as o does. > > > > > > (er, unconditionally). > > > > > > > > I vote (retracting my previous votes if there are any) ENDORSE o on > > the prime minister election, and [ATMunn, V.J. Rada] for ADoP. > > > > -Aris > > > >
BUS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] Moot begins for CFJ 3568
I vote REMAND. Publius Scribonius Scholasticus p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com > On Oct 13, 2017, at 4:58 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > > > I initiate an Agoran Decision to resolve the Moot on CFJ 3568. > For this decision, the vote collector is the Arbitor and the > valid options are AFFIRM, REMAND, and REMIT. Quorum is 5. > > > A result of AFFIRM or FAILED QUORUM will uphold the judgement 1, below. > > Judge o has (informally) promised that on a result of REMAND, e will > judge as in pseudo-judgement 2, below - this is the judge's request. > > On a result of REMIT, a new judge will be assigned. > > > > judgement 1 (AFFIRM) > >> I find this CFJ to be FALSE, following the caller’s arguments exactly. >> The alleged claim of error was >> >>> CoE this is bugging me. >> >> Sent in response to an attempt to collect a report award, and without >> any trivially obvious error in either the reward attempt or the report, >> this is insufficient for a claim of error. > > > > pseudo-judgement 2 (promised by judge if REMAND) > >> I find this CFJ to be FALSE, following the caller’s arguments exactly. >> The alleged claim of error was >> >>> CoE this is bugging me. >> >> Sent in response to an attempt to collect a report award, and without >> any trivially obvious error in either the reward attempt or the report, >> this is insufficient for a claim of error. >> >> CFJ 3551 found that a claim of error such as "I CoE my Reportor's >> report for no reason” could allow a revision of that report to be >> published such that it fulfils a duty. This is an incidental finding >> at best - it is neither relevant to the matter at issue in that CFJ, >> nor consistent with the text of rule 2201. It should therefore not be >> taken as binding precedent on what constitutes a valid claim of error. > > > > Case Statement and Caller's Arguments > > > CFJ Statement: V.J. Rada issued a claim of error. > > > > > Caller's Arguments (from Discussion): > > VJ's message does not explain the scope and nature of the perceived > error, as required by rule 2201 to make a claim of error. > > > > Caller's Evidence: > > On Sat, Sep 30, 2017, 08:41 VJ Rada, wrote: >> CoE this is bugging me. > > > On Sat, Sep 30, 2017 at 10:39 PM, VJ Rada wrote: >> I claim the reward of 5 shinies for this report. I transfer 2 shinies >> to agora and 2 to the community chest. >> >> On Sat, Sep 30, 2017 at 10:38 PM, VJ Rada wrote: >>> Coe the date of the last report was September 23. >>> >>> I accept my CoE and publish the following report of the ADoP. >>> =Metareport= This report is effective as of the time of its publishing. Date of Last Report: 2017-09-23 Consolidation (filled offices over officeholders): 2 Filled offices %: 94.44 Late reports %: 17.65 Please do not call elections for every office thank you OFFICES OfficeHolderSinceLast Election Can Elect[4] > > [Remainder of Report cut by Arbitor, it was a full report] > > > > signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
