Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Proposal Pool (revised)

[Kerim Aydin]

CoE:  Missing my pended proposal "Appeals Procedure Fix".
https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-business/2017-October/036423.html


On Mon, 16 Oct 2017, Aris Merchant wrote:

> I'm probably going to deny this, as there is (I think) a custom that the 
> effective date of a revision is implied to be that of the original report.
> 
> -Aris
> 
> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 9:04 PM Alexis Hunt  wrote:
>   Oh, also, just in case, to stop self-ratification: CoE: there are more 
> proposals in the Proposal Pool than just these.
> 
> 
> On Sun, 15 Oct 2017 at 21:10 Alexis Hunt  wrote:
>   I spend an AP to CFJ: The below-quoted document contains a 
> self-ratifying list of proposals in the Proposal Pool. Arguments: does this 
> count as a portion of a purported Promotor's
>   report? There is no information in the report which isn't in the 
> document, and this is clearly published by the Promotor with the intent to 
> convey all of the report's information.
>   The subject further implies it was a report.
>   Evidence: rules 1607 and 2201
> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017, 17:38 Aris Merchant, 
>  wrote:
>   This following is a revision to the proposal pool from my last report.
> 
>   The proposal pool contains the following proposals:
> 
>   ID    Author(s)     AI   Title
>   
> ---
>   pp1  nichdel        3.0  Slower Promotion
>   pp2  nichdel        1.0  Guaranteed Stampage
>   pp3* Alexis         3.0  Clarity Act
>   pp4* Gaelan         1.0  Another Economy Fix Attempt
> 
>   Legend: * : Proposal is pending.
> 
>   The full text of the aforementioned proposals is included below.
> 
>   //
>   ID: pp1
>   Title: Slower Promotion
>   Adoption index: 3.0
>   Author: nichdel
>   Co-authors:
> 
> 
>   Amend R1607 (Distribution) by replacing:
> 
>     In a given Agoran week, the Promotor SHALL, as part of eir weekly 
> duties,
>     distribute all pending proposals.
> 
>   with
> 
>     In a given Agoran week, as part of eir weekly duties, the Promotor 
> SHALL:
> 
>        * distribute all pending proposals if there are no unresolved 
> Agoran
>        decisions to adopt a proposal.
> 
>        * list all unresolved Agoran decisions to adopt a proposal. The 
> Promotor
>        MAY still distribute all pending proposals.
> 
>   //
>   ID: pp2
>   Title: Guaranteed Stampage
>   Adoption index: 1.0
>   Author: nichdel
>   Co-authors:
> 
> 
>   Amend 2499 "Welcome Packages" to read in full:
> 
>     If a player has not received one since e most recently became a
>     player, any player CAN, by announcement, cause em to receive a
>     Welcome package. When a player receives a Welcome Package:
> 
>       * Agora transfers em 1/10th the FV in shinies and
> 
>       * a Stamp, with Agora as the Creater, is created in eir
>         possession.
> 
>   Amend R2498 to be titled "Stamps" and to read in full:
> 
>     Stamps are an asset. The Secretary is the recordkeepor of Stamps.
> 
>     Each Stamp has an associated Creater which SHOULD be noted whenever 
> the Stamp
>     is mentioned and MUST be noted whenever the Stamp is transfered. 
> Stamps with
>     the same creater are fungible.
> 
>     Once per month a player CAN, by announcement, create a Stamp with 
> themselves
>     as the Creater by transferring the Stamp Value, in shinies, to Agora.
> 
>     If Agora owns at least as many Shinies as the current Stamp Value, a 
> player
>     CAN, by announcement, destroy a Stamp e owns to cause Agora to 
> transfer the
>     Stamp Value, in shinies, to emself.
> 
>   Enact a Power 1 rule titled "Stamp Wins" with the following text:
> 
>     If a player owns 10 stamps with different Creaters, none of which 
> have Agora
>     as its Creater, e CAN win by announcement. Doing so destroys the 
> specified
>     stamps.
> 
>   Enact a Power 1 rule titled "Basic Stamp Income" with the following
>   text:
> 
>     When the Secretary publishes the first Weekly Report of an Agoran 
> Month, e
>     CAN and SHALL, by announcement, create Stamps with Agora as the 
> Creater and
>     transfer them to any player who has no stamps and less than the Stamp 
> Value
>     in shinies at the time of publication.
> 
>   //
>   ID: pp3
>   Title: Clarity Act
>   Adoption index: 3.0
>   Author: Alexis
>   Co-authors:
> 
>   Text in square brackets is not a part of this proposal's substance and
>   is ignored 

BUS: Nothing of interest

[Alexis Hunt]

I change my vote on proposal 6941 to AGAINST, and my vote on proposal 6942
to FOR.

(This does something.)

-Alexis

BUS: DIS: CFJ on another Campaigning mess (Re: OFF: [Assessor] Resolution of Proposals 7908-7921) (fwd)

[Ørjan Johansen]

TTttPF (Is this my first time?)

-- Forwarded message --
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2017 06:20:03 +0200 (CEST)
From: Ørjan Johansen 
Reply-To: "Agora Nomic discussions (DF)" 
To: agora-discuss...@agoranomic.org
Subject: DIS: CFJ on another Campaigning mess (Re: OFF: [Assessor] Resolution of
 Proposals 7908-7921)

I make two CFJ, and request that they be linked:

  There exists a Rule entitled "Campaign Proposals, with power 3",
  with power 1.

and

  The ADOP SHALL NOT distribute Campaign Proposals for ongoing
  elections.

My argument for the first one is that proposal 7912 contains an obvious typo:


Enact a new rule entitled (Campaign Proposals, with power 3), reading as
follows:


My argument for the second one (which I thought of first) applies only if the 
first one is FALSE.


In that case, the new rule entitled "Campaign Proposals" and having power ) 
states (possibly due to a missing "except"):



 A Campaign Proposal is an Official Proposal exempt from automatic
 distribution, and SHALL NOT be distributed as required by the rules.
 The election with which a Campaign Proposal is associated, as well as its
 Commitment, are essential parameters for an Agoran decision to adopt a
 Campaign Proposal.


That's a pretty strong prohibition, which seems to have no exemption for 
elections. Rule 2154 states the opposite, of course:



 When an election is initiated, it enters the nomination period,
 which lasts for 7 days. In a timely fashion after the nomination
 period ends, the ADoP CAN and SHALL, in the same message:
 1) If the election is contested, initiate an Agoran decision
to select the winner of the election (the poll). For this
decision, the Vote Collector is the Assessor, the valid
options are the candidates for that election (including
those who become candidates after its initiation), and the
voting method is instant runoff.
 2) Distribute all pending Campaign Proposals associated
with the election.
 3) If POSSIBLE per the following paragraph, end the election
immediately.


However, Rule 2154 only has power 2.

Greetings,
Ørjan.

On Sun, 15 Oct 2017, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:

[snip]

Enact a new rule entitled (Campaign Proposals, with power 3), reading as
follows:

 During the nomination period of an election, any candidate for that election
 CAN submit a Campaign Proposal for that election, provided e does not
 currently have a pending Campaign Proposal for that election, using the 
normal

 mechanism for proposal submission. Campaign Proposals SHOULD relate to the
 duties of the office up for election. Commitment is an untracked Campaign
 Proposal switch with values Committed (default) and Uncommitted. The author
 of a Committed proposal may flip it to Uncommitted by announcement.

[A Campaign Proposal is basically an extension of a candidate's platform,
allowing them to propose changes to any office that they wish to associate 
with

their election.

Commitment is basically stating whether a candidate wishes to be elected only
if their proposal passes. They can opt out of commitment, so that they can be
elected if it fails. This allows a player to encode "I will take this office
only if I can change it in this fashion." into the election system.]

 A Campaign Proposal is an Official Proposal exempt from automatic
 distribution, and SHALL NOT be distributed as required by the rules.
 The election with which a Campaign Proposal is associated, as well as its
 Commitment, are essential parameters for an Agoran decision to adopt a
 Campaign Proposal.

[The election procedure dictates when Campaign Proposals should be
distributed; they don't follow the normal distribution system. They also
have some additional essential parameters, although note that a player
can opt out of Commitment even after the proposal is distributed.]

 When a Campaign Proposal is adopted, it CANNOT take effect until
 the associated election ends. When the election ends, if the winner was the
 proposal's author, then any player CAN once make it take effect by
 announcement (with its power set as usual for an adopted proposal). If the
 conditions for a Campaign Proposal to take effect are met as a result of an
 action in a public message, the author of the message SHALL make it take
 effect in that message.

[Campaign Proposals need to meet two requirements in order to take effect:
their author must win the election and they must pass. The former is what 
ties

them to the election and allows candidates to safely submit conflicting
proposals. The latter is the safety guard (reinforced by rule 106 which
prevents non-adopted proposals from taking effect) to ensure that a
candidate can

This also means that voters can vote on the Campaign Proposals based on
whether or not they would be okay with the rule changes, knowing that
the actual choice of which one takes 

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Ratification (Quasi-Resolution of PM and ADoP Elections)

[VJ Rada]

I intend without objection to ratify the following document in curly
braces. It is not accurate, as neither of these players did win any
election, I wish to ratify it because of equity. {Just now, ATMunn won
an election for ADoP. Just now, Alexis won an
election for Prime Minister}.

On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 3:11 PM, Alexis Hunt  wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Oct 2017 at 00:06 VJ Rada  wrote:
>>
>> I intend to ratify the document contained in curly braces.
>> {Just now, ATMunn won an election for ADoP. Just now, Alexis won an
>> election for Prime Minister}.
>>
>> If anyone's interested, here's a vote-count.
>>
>> PM
>> Three first preference Alexis votes, one for VJ Rada, ATMunn and PSS.
>> I eliminate the vote for me which gives Alexis a majority.
>> Alexis: [Alexis, Murphy, o, 天火狐, Gaelan, Aris]
>> PSS: [PSS, G., and o]
>> o.: Alexis, then G., then nichdel.
>> G.: Alexis, then G., then nichdel.
>> VJ Rada: VJ Rada
>> ATMunn: ATMunn
>
>
> I believe you missed Aris's vote here, but it does not affect the outcome.
> Note that this intent is ineffective (you didn't specify the form of
> dependent action) and you should probably include the disclaimer about
> inaccuracy required for RWO.



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

BUS: Ratification (Quasi-Resolution of PM and ADoP Elections)

[VJ Rada]

I intend to ratify the document contained in curly braces.
{Just now, ATMunn won an election for ADoP. Just now, Alexis won an
election for Prime Minister}.

If anyone's interested, here's a vote-count.

PM
Three first preference Alexis votes, one for VJ Rada, ATMunn and PSS.
I eliminate the vote for me which gives Alexis a majority.
Alexis: [Alexis, Murphy, o, 天火狐, Gaelan, Aris]
PSS: [PSS, G., and o]
o.: Alexis, then G., then nichdel.
G.: Alexis, then G., then nichdel.
VJ Rada: VJ Rada
ATMunn: ATMunn

ADoP:
Three first-preference ATMunn votes, 2 VJ Rada votes and 1 Alexis
vote. After the Alexis vote goes, ATMunn wins.
ATMunn: ATMunn
VJ Rada: {ATMunn, VJ Rada}
G. {ATMunn, VJ Rada}
o.: VJ Rada
PSS: VJ Rada
Alexis: I vote conditionally as follows. If the proposal Campaign
Proposals has been distributed and, if the voting period for its
adoption were ended now and the quorum on that decision were 0, it
would be adopted, then I vote {myself, 天火狐, Gaelan, Quazie].
Otherwise, if any player's current valid ballot includes themselves, I
endorse the first such player to have submitted a ballot on this
decision. Otherwise, I vote for the empty list.
Resolved as: Alexis

-- 
>From V.J. Rada

BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Proposal Pool (revised)

[Alexis Hunt]

Oh, also, just in case, to stop self-ratification: CoE: there are more
proposals in the Proposal Pool than just these.

On Sun, 15 Oct 2017 at 21:10 Alexis Hunt  wrote:

> I spend an AP to CFJ: The below-quoted document contains a self-ratifying
> list of proposals in the Proposal Pool. Arguments: does this count as a
> portion of a purported Promotor's report? There is no information in the
> report which isn't in the document, and this is clearly published by the
> Promotor with the intent to convey all of the report's information. The
> subject further implies it was a report.
>
> Evidence: rules 1607 and 2201
>
> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017, 17:38 Aris Merchant, <
> thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> This following is a revision to the proposal pool from my last report.
>>
>> The proposal pool contains the following proposals:
>>
>> IDAuthor(s) AI   Title
>>
>> ---
>> pp1  nichdel3.0  Slower Promotion
>> pp2  nichdel1.0  Guaranteed Stampage
>> pp3* Alexis 3.0  Clarity Act
>> pp4* Gaelan 1.0  Another Economy Fix Attempt
>>
>> Legend: * : Proposal is pending.
>>
>> The full text of the aforementioned proposals is included below.
>>
>> //
>> ID: pp1
>> Title: Slower Promotion
>> Adoption index: 3.0
>> Author: nichdel
>> Co-authors:
>>
>>
>> Amend R1607 (Distribution) by replacing:
>>
>>   In a given Agoran week, the Promotor SHALL, as part of eir weekly
>> duties,
>>   distribute all pending proposals.
>>
>> with
>>
>>   In a given Agoran week, as part of eir weekly duties, the Promotor
>> SHALL:
>>
>>  * distribute all pending proposals if there are no unresolved Agoran
>>  decisions to adopt a proposal.
>>
>>  * list all unresolved Agoran decisions to adopt a proposal. The
>> Promotor
>>  MAY still distribute all pending proposals.
>>
>> //
>> ID: pp2
>> Title: Guaranteed Stampage
>> Adoption index: 1.0
>> Author: nichdel
>> Co-authors:
>>
>>
>> Amend 2499 "Welcome Packages" to read in full:
>>
>>   If a player has not received one since e most recently became a
>>   player, any player CAN, by announcement, cause em to receive a
>>   Welcome package. When a player receives a Welcome Package:
>>
>> * Agora transfers em 1/10th the FV in shinies and
>>
>> * a Stamp, with Agora as the Creater, is created in eir
>>   possession.
>>
>> Amend R2498 to be titled "Stamps" and to read in full:
>>
>>   Stamps are an asset. The Secretary is the recordkeepor of Stamps.
>>
>>   Each Stamp has an associated Creater which SHOULD be noted whenever the
>> Stamp
>>   is mentioned and MUST be noted whenever the Stamp is transfered. Stamps
>> with
>>   the same creater are fungible.
>>
>>   Once per month a player CAN, by announcement, create a Stamp with
>> themselves
>>   as the Creater by transferring the Stamp Value, in shinies, to Agora.
>>
>>   If Agora owns at least as many Shinies as the current Stamp Value, a
>> player
>>   CAN, by announcement, destroy a Stamp e owns to cause Agora to transfer
>> the
>>   Stamp Value, in shinies, to emself.
>>
>> Enact a Power 1 rule titled "Stamp Wins" with the following text:
>>
>>   If a player owns 10 stamps with different Creaters, none of which have
>> Agora
>>   as its Creater, e CAN win by announcement. Doing so destroys the
>> specified
>>   stamps.
>>
>> Enact a Power 1 rule titled "Basic Stamp Income" with the following
>> text:
>>
>>   When the Secretary publishes the first Weekly Report of an Agoran
>> Month, e
>>   CAN and SHALL, by announcement, create Stamps with Agora as the Creater
>> and
>>   transfer them to any player who has no stamps and less than the Stamp
>> Value
>>   in shinies at the time of publication.
>>
>> //
>> ID: pp3
>> Title: Clarity Act
>> Adoption index: 3.0
>> Author: Alexis
>> Co-authors:
>>
>> Text in square brackets is not a part of this proposal's substance and
>> is ignored when it takes effect.
>>
>> Enact a new power 3 rule entitled Voting Methods, reading as follows:
>>   Each Agoran decision has a voting method, which must be
>>   AI-majority, instant runoff, or first-past-the-post. The voting
>>   method is that specified by the authorizing authority, or
>>   first-past-the-post by default.
>>
>>   Each Agoran decision has a set of valid options (the choices that
>>   the voters are being asked to select from) and valid votes (the
>>   ways in which the voters can express their opinion or lack thereof.
>>   For AI-majority decisions, the valid options are FOR and AGAINST;
>>   for other decisions, the valid options are defined by other rules.
>>
>>   The valid votes on an Agoran decision are:
>>   1. PRESENT;
>>   2. The 

BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 7922-7929

[Alexis Hunt]

On Sun, 15 Oct 2017 at 23:21 Aris Merchant <
thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:

> 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 8.0 and the valid options are FOR and AGAINST (PRESENT is
> also a valid vote).
>
>
> ID Author(s) AI   Title Pender  Pend
> fee
> ---
> 7922*  Alexis 3.0  Clarity Act  Alexis  1 AP
>
FOR

> 7923*  Gaelan 1.0  Another Economy Fix Attempt  Gaelan  1 AP
>
ENDORSE the player who, within the next 48 hours, transfers me the most
shinies in a message containing the text "obvious bribe", or AGAINST if
there is no such player.

> 7924*  Aris, [1]  3.0  Contracts v8 Aris1 sh.
>
PRESENT; will likely change later when I read over the most revised
version.

> 7925*  Aris, Alexis   3.0  Safety Regulations v2Aris1 AP
>
FOR. I transfer 3 shinies to Aris for this proposal.

> 7926*  Alexis 3.0  Deregulation Alexis  1 AP
>
FOR. (I still think they're a bit unnecessary, but won't be unhappy at all
if this proposal fails).

> 7927*  V.J. Rada, G.  2.0  Estate Auction Fix   V.J. Rada   1 sh.
>
FOR

> 7928*  G. 3.0  no we can't  G.  1 AP
>
FOR

> 7929*  V.J. Rada  1.0  Consumerism  V.J. Rada   1 sh.
>
ENDORSE o.

-Alexis

BUS: Community Chest

[VJ Rada]

I intend to revoke ORP: that was a bad idea.

I transfer the Community Chest to myself.

-- 
>From V.J. Rada

BUS: [Proposal] Slightly More Responsible Zibabwean Style Economics

[VJ Rada]

I create the following proposal
Title: Print more bucks. Or if people deregister, less bucks.
AI 2
Author: VJ Rada
Text:
Amend rule 2487 "Shiny Supply Level" by replacing the number "1000"
with the text "equal to 70 times the number of players" and by
replacing "may" with "CAN and SHALL" and replacing "without 3
Objections" to "once per Agoran month, in the first Agoran week of
that month"

-- 
>From V.J. Rada

BUS: Re: DIS: Re: E•MO•TION

[Gaelan Steele]

Ah, forgot that cleanup time could do that. I intend without objection to cause 
Cleanup Time to amend the ruleset by replacing “registrar” in any places it 
appears with “Registrar”.

Gaelan

> On Oct 15, 2017, at 8:26 PM, VJ Rada  wrote:
> 
> I mean put it in your list for the next "Cleanup Time" haha. I should
> have noticed it earlier.
> 
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 2:24 PM, Gaelan Steele  wrote:
>> Is it capitalized in the proposal? If not, I don’t believe I’m allowed to do 
>> so.
>> 
>> Gaelan
>> 
>>> On Oct 15, 2017, at 7:18 PM, VJ Rada  wrote:
>>> 
>>> By the way, Hon. Rulekeepor: in the new emotions rule, "Registrar"
>>> should be capitalized.
>>> 
>>> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 12:43 PM, VJ Rada  wrote:
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qV5lzRHrGeg
 
 I change my emotion to melancholy because the enabling proposal, which
 I voted against, passed, and because I'm literally offering to pay
 people to hold my money with no other condition and nobody is
 accepting.
 
 --
 From V.J. Rada
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> From V.J. Rada
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> From V.J. Rada

BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 7922-7929

[VJ Rada]

I vote FOR on all.

On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 2:20 PM, Aris Merchant
 wrote:
> 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 8.0 and the valid options are FOR and AGAINST (PRESENT is
> also a valid vote).
>
>
> ID Author(s) AI   Title Pender  Pend fee
> ---
> 7922*  Alexis 3.0  Clarity Act  Alexis  1 AP
> 7923*  Gaelan 1.0  Another Economy Fix Attempt  Gaelan  1 AP
> 7924*  Aris, [1]  3.0  Contracts v8 Aris1 sh.
> 7925*  Aris, Alexis   3.0  Safety Regulations v2Aris1 AP
> 7926*  Alexis 3.0  Deregulation Alexis  1 AP
> 7927*  V.J. Rada, G.  2.0  Estate Auction Fix   V.J. Rada   1 sh.
> 7928*  G. 3.0  no we can't  G.  1 AP
> 7929*  V.J. Rada  1.0  Consumerism  V.J. Rada   1 sh.
>
> The proposal pool currently contains the following proposals:
>
> IDAuthor(s) AI   Title
> ---
> pp1   o 2.0  Faster Auctions
>
> Legend: * : Proposal is pending.
>
> [1] o, G., ais523, Gaelan, 天火狐, CuddleBeam, V.J Rada, Trigon, Alexis, P.S.S.
>
> A proposal may be pended for 1 AP, or for 1/20th the Floating Value
> in shines (see the Secretary's report).
>
> The full text of the aforementioned proposals is included below. Please note
> that, due to its length, Proposal 7924 is listed last.
>
> //
> ID: 7922
> Title: Clarity Act
> Adoption index: 3.0
> Author: Alexis
> Co-authors:
>
>
> Text in square brackets is not a part of this proposal's substance and
> is ignored when it takes effect.
>
> Enact a new power 3 rule entitled Voting Methods, reading as follows:
>
>   Each Agoran decision has a voting method, which must be
>   AI-majority, instant runoff, or first-past-the-post. The voting
>   method is that specified by the authorizing authority, or
>   first-past-the-post by default.
>
>   Each Agoran decision has a set of valid options (the choices that
>   the voters are being asked to select from) and valid votes (the
>   ways in which the voters can express their opinion or lack thereof.
>   For AI-majority decisions, the valid options are FOR and AGAINST;
>   for other decisions, the valid options are defined by other rules.
>
>   The valid votes on an Agoran decision are:
>   1. PRESENT;
>   2. The valid conditional votes, as defined by rules of power at
>  least that of this rule; and
>   3. For an instant runoff decision, the ordered lists of entities.
>   4. For any other decision, the valid options.
>
> [This splits off the portion of 955 that isn't actually related to
>  resolution. The definition of instant runoff is changed to evaluate
>  validity of options at the end of the voting period, and avoid
>  retroactively invalidating votes if an option drops out.]
>
> Amend Rule 955 by replacing the second paragraph and numbered list with
> the following and by deleting the second bullet in the unnumbered list.
>
>   1. For an AI-majority decision, let F be the total strength of all
>  valid ballots cast FOR a decision, A be the same for AGAINST,
>  and AI be the adoption index of the decision. The outcome is
>  ADOPTED if F/A >= AI and F/A > 1 (or F>0 and A=0), otherwise
>  REJECTED.
>
>   2. For an instant runoff decision, the outcome is whichever option
>  wins according to the standard definition of instant runoff.
>  For this purpose, a ballot of strength N is treated as if it
>  were N distinct ballots expressing the same preferences. In
>  case multiple valid options tie for the lowest number of votes
>  at any stage, the vote collector CAN and must, in the
>  announcement of the decision's resolution, select one such
>  option to eliminate; if, for M > 1, all eir possible choices in
>  the next M stages would result in the same set of options being
>  eliminated, e need not specify the order of elimination. If an
>  entity that is part of a valid vote is not a valid option at
>  the end of the voting period, or disqualified by the rule
>  providing for the decision, then that entity is eliminated
>  prior to the first round of counting.
>
>   3. For a first-past-the-post decision, the outcome is whichever
>  option received the highest total strength of valid ballots. In
>  case of a tie, the vote collector CAN and must, in the
>  announcement of the decision's resolution, select one of the
>  leaders as the outcome.
>
> [No change here, except for removing the valid votes, and clearly
>  

Re: BUS: Contracts v6

[Aris Merchant]

O for the love of the light why? I retract Contracts v7, submit the
following, and pend it for a shiny.

-Aris

---
Title: Contracts v8
Adoption index: 3.0
Author: Aris
Co-author(s): o, G., ais523, Gaelan, 天火狐, CuddleBeam, V.J Rada,
Trigon, Alexis, P.S.S.


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.

# 1 Cleanup & Miscellaneous
# 1.1 Gamestate Cleanup

Destroy each organization.

Destroy each agency.

For the purposes of this proposal, neither pledges nor rules are contracts.

Destroy each contract. [Just in case.]

# 1.2 Organization, Secretary, and Economic Cleanup
# 1.2.1 Repeal Organizations

Repeal rule 2459 ("Organizations").

Repeal rule 2461 ("Death and Birth of Organizations").

Repeal rule 2460 ("Organizational Restructuring").

Repeal rule 2457 ("Lockout").

Repeal rule 2458 ("Invoking Lockout").

Repeal rule 2462 ("Bankruptcy").

# 1.2.2 Change Secretary to Treasuror

Amend rule 2456 ("The Secretary") by

  * Changing its title to "The Treasuror", then by
  * Replacing its text, entirely, with:

{{{
The Treasuror is an office, and the recordkeepor of Shinies.

The Treasuror's weekly report also includes:

1. the current Floating Value, and all derived values
   defined by the Rules.
2. the list of all public classes of assets.

}}}

Make o the Treasuror.

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")

# 1.2.3 General Economy Fixes/Cleanup

Amend rule 2489 ("Estates") by replacing the first sentence with:

  {{{
  An Estate is a type of indestructible liquid asset.
  }}}

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 put one Estate that is owned by
  Agora up for auction by announcement. Each auction ends
  seven days after it begins.

  During an auction, any player or contract may bid a number of Shinies
  by announcement, provided that the bid is higher than all
  previously-placed bids in the same auction.

  If, at the end of the auction, there is a single highest bid,
  then the player or contract who placed that bid wins the auction.
  The winner CAN cause Agora to transfer the auctioned Estate to emself
  by announcement, if e pays Agora the amount of the bid for the explicit
  and sole purpose of fulfilling this requirement. The person who
  placed the bid SHALL see to it that this is done in a timely fashion.
  }}}

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. The Treasuror is the recordkeepor for shinies.

  }}}


# 1.3 Agency Cleanup

Repeal Rule 2467 ("Agencies")

Repeal Rule 2468 ("Superintendent")

# 1.4 Define Extricability

[Note that I do not believe this section makes any substantive changes on its
own. Because of the volume of concerns raised about restricting by announcement
conditionals, this section only contains definitions.]

Create a new power 3.0 rule entitled "Conditionals and Extricability", with the
following text:

  A conditional is any textual structure that attempts to make a statement (the
  substrate) affecting any part or aspect of the gamestate, or the
  permissibility, possibility, or effect of any action affecting such a part or
  aspect, dependent on the truth value or other state of a textual structure
  (the condition). The condition is said to be "affixed" to the substrate
  (inverse "to be conditional upon").

  A condition is inextricable if it is unclear, ambiguous, circular,
  inconsistent, paradoxical, depends on information that is indeterminate, or
  is impossible or unreasonably difficult to determine, or otherwise requires an
  unreasonable effort to resolve; otherwise it is extricable. A conditional is
  inextricable if its condition is inextricable; otherwise it is extricable. A
  player SHOULD NOT use an inextricable conditional for any purpose.

  An action is said to be "subject to" a conditional if its possibility,
  permissibility, or effect (depending on context) is determined by the
  conditional. A value is said to be subject to a conditional of the state
  of the value is determined by the conditional.

Create a new power 3.0 rule entitled "Determinacy", with the following text:

  If a value CANNOT be reasonably determined (without circularity or paradox)
  from information reasonably available, or if it alternates indefinitely
  between 

Re: BUS: Contracts v6

[Aris Merchant]

It seems all of my major proposals will have 7 revisions. I withdraw
Contract v6, submit the following, and pend it for 1 shiny. It
contains some minor fixes.

---
Title: Contracts v7
Adoption index: 3.0
Author: Aris
Co-author(s): o, G., ais523, Gaelan, 天火狐, CuddleBeam, V.J Rada,
Trigon, Alexis, P.S.S.


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.

# 1 Cleanup & Miscellaneous
# 1.1 Gamestate Cleanup

Destroy each organization.

Destroy each agency.

For the purposes of this proposal, neither pledges nor rules are contracts.

Destroy each contract. [Just in case.]

# 1.2 Organization, Secretary, and Economic Cleanup
# 1.2.1 Repeal Organizations

Repeal rule 2459 ("Organizations").

Repeal rule 2461 ("Death and Birth of Organizations").

Repeal rule 2460 ("Organizational Restructuring").

Repeal rule 2457 ("Lockout").

Repeal rule 2458 ("Invoking Lockout").

Repeal rule 2462 ("Bankruptcy").

# 1.2.2 Change Secretary to Treasuror

Amend rule 2456 ("The Secretary") by

  * Changing its title to "The Treasuror", then by
  * Replacing its text, entirely, with:

{{{
The Treasuror is an office, and the recordkeepor of Shinies.

The Treasuror's weekly report also includes:

1. the current Floating Value, and all derived values
   defined by the Rules.
2. the list of all public classes of assets.

}}}

Make o the Treasuror.

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")

# 1.2.3 General Economy Fixes/Cleanup

Amend rule 2489 ("Estates") by replacing the first sentence with:

  {{{
  An Estate is a type of indestructible liquid asset.
  }}}

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 put one Estate that is owned by
  Agora up for auction by announcement. Each auction ends
  seven days after it begins.

  During an auction, any player or contract may bid a number of Shinies
  by announcement, provided that the bid is higher than all
  previously-placed bids in the same auction.

  If, at the end of the auction, there is a single highest bid,
  then the player or contract who placed that bid wins the auction.
  The winner CAN cause Agora to transfer the auctioned Estate to emself
  by announcement, if e pays Agora the amount of the bid for the explicit
  and sole purpose of fulfilling this requirement. The person who
  placed the bid SHALL see to it that this is done in a timely fashion.
  }}}

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. The Treasuror is the recordkeepor for shinies.

  }}}


# 1.3 Agency Cleanup

Repeal Rule 2467 ("Agencies")

Repeal Rule 2468 ("Superintendent")

# 1.4 Define Extricability

[Note that I do not believe this section makes any substantive changes on its
own. Because of the volume of concerns raised about restricting by announcement
conditionals, this section only contains definitions.]

Create a new power 3.0 rule entitled "Conditionals and Extricability", with the
following text:

  A conditional is any textual structure that attempts to make a statement (the
  substrate) affecting any part or aspect of the gamestate, or the
  permissibility, possibility, or effect of any action affecting such a part or
  aspect, dependent on the truth value or other state of a textual structure
  (the condition). The condition is said to be "affixed" to the substrate
  (inverse "to be conditional upon").

  A condition is inextricable if it is unclear, ambiguous, circular,
  inconsistent, paradoxical, depends on information that is indeterminate, or
  is impossible or unreasonably difficult to determine, or otherwise requires an
  unreasonable effort to resolve; otherwise it is extricable. A conditional is
  inextricable if its condition is inextricable; otherwise it is extricable. A
  player SHOULD NOT use an inextricable conditional for any purpose.

  An action is said to be "subject to" a conditional if its possibility,
  permissibility, or effect (depending on context) is determined by the
  conditional. A value is said to be subject to a conditional of the state
  of the value is determined by the conditional.

Create a new power 3.0 rule entitled "Determinacy", with the following text:

  If a value CANNOT be reasonably determined (without circularity or paradox)
  from information reasonably 

BUS: E•MO•TION

[VJ Rada]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qV5lzRHrGeg

I change my emotion to melancholy because the enabling proposal, which
I voted against, passed, and because I'm literally offering to pay
people to hold my money with no other condition and nobody is
accepting.

-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Resolution of Proposals 7908-7921

[Alexis Hunt]

As do I.

On Sun, Oct 15, 2017, 18:26 ATMunn .,  wrote:

> Is this new or am I not aware of something?
>
> Well, either way, I guess I also claim a reward of two shinies for
> authoring and pending a passed proposal.
>
> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 4:16 PM, VJ Rada  wrote:
>
>> I claim the reward of two shinies for authoring and pending a passed
>> proposal.
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 7:08 AM, VJ Rada  wrote:
>> > Quorums of 8 again ugh.
>> >
>> > Stop voting y'all lmao.
>> >
>> > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 6:39 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
>> >  wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I resolve the decision(s) to adopt proposal(s) 7908-7921 below.
>> >>
>> >>
>> 
>> >>
>> >> [This notice resolves the Agoran decisions of whether to adopt the
>> >>  following proposals.  For each decision, the options available to
>> >>  Agora are ADOPTED (*), REJECTED (x), and FAILED QUORUM (!). If a
>> >>  decision's voting period is still ongoing, I end it immediately
>> >>  before resolving it and after resolving the previous decision.]
>> >>
>> >> ID Author(s) AI   TitlePender
>> Pend fee
>> >>
>> ---
>> >> 7908*  G.1.0  Silly season G.  OP
>> [1]
>> >> 7909*  G.1.2  No Lockout   G.  OP
>> [1]
>> >> 7910x  G.1.0  What is a rulekeepor G.  OP
>> [1]
>> >> 7911*  V.J. Rada 1.0  Infinite Money Fix   V.J. Rada   1
>> sh.
>> >> 7912*  Alexis3.0  Election Campaigns   Alexis  1
>> AP [2]
>> >> 7913*  ATMunn1.0  Cheer Up v7? ATMunn  1 AP
>> >> 7914*  o 1.0  SFDVP [3]o   1 AP
>> >> 7915x  CuddleBeam1.0  Terrifying Proposals Reward  CuddleBeam  1 AP
>> >> 7916*  Aris, o, G.   1.0  Pro Pace v2  Aris1 AP
>> >> 7917x  P.S.S. [4], o 3.0  Banking  P.S.S. [4]  1
>> sh.
>> >> 7918*  P.S.S. [4]3.0  Vacant Deputisation Fix  P.S.S. [4]  1 AP
>> >> 7919x  P.S.S. [4]2.0  YSUIII. [5]  P.S.S. [4]  1 AP
>> >> 7920x  Gaelan, Aris  1.0  The Lint Screen v2   Gaelan  1
>> sh.
>> >> 7921*  o, G. 2.0  Passive Income   o   1 AP
>> >> [1] Official Proposal, inherently pending
>> >> [2] There is some debate over whether this was actually pended twice,
>> each
>> >> attempt consuming 1 AP. This value is therefore provisional.
>> >>
>> >> || 7908 | 7909 | 7910 | 7911 | 7912 | 7913 | 7914 | 7915 |
>> 7916 |
>> >> 7917 | 7918 | 7919 | 7920 | 7921 |
>> >>
>> |+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
>> >> |Alexis  | F| F| A| F| F| A| F| A | F|
>> A
>> >> | F| A| A| A|
>> >> |Aris| F| F| A| F| A| F| F| A | F|
>> A
>> >> | F| A| F| F|
>> >> |ATMunn  | F| P| F| F| F| F| P| F | F|
>> F
>> >> | F| F| A| F|
>> >> |G.  | F| F| F| F| P| F| F| A | P|
>> P
>> >> | F| A| A| F|
>> >> |Gaelan  | F| P| A| F| F| F| F| P | F|
>> P
>> >> | F| A| F| F|
>> >> |nichdel | F| P| A| F| P| A| F| A | P|
>> P
>> >> | P| A| P| P|
>> >> |o   | F| F| A| F| F| F| F| A | F|
>> P
>> >> | F| A| P| F|
>> >> |PSS | F| F| A| F| F| F| F| A | F|
>> F
>> >> | F| F| A| F|
>> >> |Trigon  | F| F| A| F| P| F| A| A | F|
>> F
>> >> | F| F| F| F|
>> >> |VJ Rada | FF   | FF   | AA   | FF   | FF   | AA   | P| | P|
>> AA   |
>> >> FF   |  | AA   | FF   |
>> >>
>> |+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
>> >> |F/A | 11/0 | 8/0  | 2/9  | 11/0 | 7/1  | 7/4  | 7/1  | 1/7 | 7/0
>> | 3/4
>> >> | 10/0 | 3/6  | 3/6  | 9/1  |
>> >> |AI  | 1.0  | 1.2  | 1.0  | 1.0  | 3.0  | 1.0  | 1.0  | 1.0 | 1.0
>> | 3.0
>> >> | 3.0  | 2.0  | 1.0  | 2.0  |
>> >> |V   | 10   | 10   | 10   | 10   | 10   | 10   | 10   | 9 | 10   |
>> 10
>> >> | 10   | 9| 10   | 10   |
>> >> |Q   | 5| 5| 5| 5| 5| 5| 5| 5 | 5|
>> 5
>> >> | 5| 5| 5| 5|
>> >> |P   | T| T| F| T| T| T| T| F | T|
>> F
>> >> | T| F| F| T|
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> The full text of each adopted proposal is included below.
>> >>
>> >> //
>> 

BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Proposal Pool (revised)

[Alexis Hunt]

I spend an AP to CFJ: The below-quoted document contains a self-ratifying
list of proposals in the Proposal Pool. Arguments: does this count as a
portion of a purported Promotor's report? There is no information in the
report which isn't in the document, and this is clearly published by the
Promotor with the intent to convey all of the report's information. The
subject further implies it was a report.

Evidence: rules 1607 and 2201

On Sun, Oct 15, 2017, 17:38 Aris Merchant, <
thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:

> This following is a revision to the proposal pool from my last report.
>
> The proposal pool contains the following proposals:
>
> IDAuthor(s) AI   Title
> ---
> pp1  nichdel3.0  Slower Promotion
> pp2  nichdel1.0  Guaranteed Stampage
> pp3* Alexis 3.0  Clarity Act
> pp4* Gaelan 1.0  Another Economy Fix Attempt
>
> Legend: * : Proposal is pending.
>
> The full text of the aforementioned proposals is included below.
>
> //
> ID: pp1
> Title: Slower Promotion
> Adoption index: 3.0
> Author: nichdel
> Co-authors:
>
>
> Amend R1607 (Distribution) by replacing:
>
>   In a given Agoran week, the Promotor SHALL, as part of eir weekly duties,
>   distribute all pending proposals.
>
> with
>
>   In a given Agoran week, as part of eir weekly duties, the Promotor SHALL:
>
>  * distribute all pending proposals if there are no unresolved Agoran
>  decisions to adopt a proposal.
>
>  * list all unresolved Agoran decisions to adopt a proposal. The
> Promotor
>  MAY still distribute all pending proposals.
>
> //
> ID: pp2
> Title: Guaranteed Stampage
> Adoption index: 1.0
> Author: nichdel
> Co-authors:
>
>
> Amend 2499 "Welcome Packages" to read in full:
>
>   If a player has not received one since e most recently became a
>   player, any player CAN, by announcement, cause em to receive a
>   Welcome package. When a player receives a Welcome Package:
>
> * Agora transfers em 1/10th the FV in shinies and
>
> * a Stamp, with Agora as the Creater, is created in eir
>   possession.
>
> Amend R2498 to be titled "Stamps" and to read in full:
>
>   Stamps are an asset. The Secretary is the recordkeepor of Stamps.
>
>   Each Stamp has an associated Creater which SHOULD be noted whenever the
> Stamp
>   is mentioned and MUST be noted whenever the Stamp is transfered. Stamps
> with
>   the same creater are fungible.
>
>   Once per month a player CAN, by announcement, create a Stamp with
> themselves
>   as the Creater by transferring the Stamp Value, in shinies, to Agora.
>
>   If Agora owns at least as many Shinies as the current Stamp Value, a
> player
>   CAN, by announcement, destroy a Stamp e owns to cause Agora to transfer
> the
>   Stamp Value, in shinies, to emself.
>
> Enact a Power 1 rule titled "Stamp Wins" with the following text:
>
>   If a player owns 10 stamps with different Creaters, none of which have
> Agora
>   as its Creater, e CAN win by announcement. Doing so destroys the
> specified
>   stamps.
>
> Enact a Power 1 rule titled "Basic Stamp Income" with the following
> text:
>
>   When the Secretary publishes the first Weekly Report of an Agoran Month,
> e
>   CAN and SHALL, by announcement, create Stamps with Agora as the Creater
> and
>   transfer them to any player who has no stamps and less than the Stamp
> Value
>   in shinies at the time of publication.
>
> //
> ID: pp3
> Title: Clarity Act
> Adoption index: 3.0
> Author: Alexis
> Co-authors:
>
> Text in square brackets is not a part of this proposal's substance and
> is ignored when it takes effect.
>
> Enact a new power 3 rule entitled Voting Methods, reading as follows:
>   Each Agoran decision has a voting method, which must be
>   AI-majority, instant runoff, or first-past-the-post. The voting
>   method is that specified by the authorizing authority, or
>   first-past-the-post by default.
>
>   Each Agoran decision has a set of valid options (the choices that
>   the voters are being asked to select from) and valid votes (the
>   ways in which the voters can express their opinion or lack thereof.
>   For AI-majority decisions, the valid options are FOR and AGAINST;
>   for other decisions, the valid options are defined by other rules.
>
>   The valid votes on an Agoran decision are:
>   1. PRESENT;
>   2. The valid conditional votes, as defined by rules of power at
>  least that of this rule; and
>   3. For an instant runoff decision, the ordered lists of entities.
>   4. For any other decision, the valid options.
>
> [This splits off the portion of 955 that isn't actually related to
>  resolution. The definition of instant 

Re: BUS: A few cleanups

[Alexis Hunt]

I withdraw it; I had some revisions to do and it isn't ready.

On Sun, Oct 15, 2017, 18:27 Aris Merchant, <
thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I pend this for 1 shiny.
>
> -Aris
>
> On Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 3:55 PM, Alexis Hunt  wrote:
> > 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
>

Re: BUS: A few cleanups

[Aris Merchant]

I pend this for 1 shiny.

-Aris

On Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 3:55 PM, Alexis Hunt  wrote:
> 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

Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Resolution of Proposals 7908-7921

[ATMunn .]

TTttPF

On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 8:26 PM, ATMunn .  wrote:

> Is this new or am I not aware of something?
>
> Well, either way, I guess I also claim a reward of two shinies for
> authoring and pending a passed proposal.
>
> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 4:16 PM, VJ Rada  wrote:
>
>> I claim the reward of two shinies for authoring and pending a passed
>> proposal.
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 7:08 AM, VJ Rada  wrote:
>> > Quorums of 8 again ugh.
>> >
>> > Stop voting y'all lmao.
>> >
>> > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 6:39 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
>> >  wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I resolve the decision(s) to adopt proposal(s) 7908-7921 below.
>> >>
>> >> 
>> 
>> >>
>> >> [This notice resolves the Agoran decisions of whether to adopt the
>> >>  following proposals.  For each decision, the options available to
>> >>  Agora are ADOPTED (*), REJECTED (x), and FAILED QUORUM (!). If a
>> >>  decision's voting period is still ongoing, I end it immediately
>> >>  before resolving it and after resolving the previous decision.]
>> >>
>> >> ID Author(s) AI   TitlePender
>> Pend fee
>> >> 
>> ---
>> >> 7908*  G.1.0  Silly season G.  OP
>> [1]
>> >> 7909*  G.1.2  No Lockout   G.  OP
>> [1]
>> >> 7910x  G.1.0  What is a rulekeepor G.  OP
>> [1]
>> >> 7911*  V.J. Rada 1.0  Infinite Money Fix   V.J. Rada   1
>> sh.
>> >> 7912*  Alexis3.0  Election Campaigns   Alexis  1
>> AP [2]
>> >> 7913*  ATMunn1.0  Cheer Up v7? ATMunn  1 AP
>> >> 7914*  o 1.0  SFDVP [3]o   1 AP
>> >> 7915x  CuddleBeam1.0  Terrifying Proposals Reward  CuddleBeam  1 AP
>> >> 7916*  Aris, o, G.   1.0  Pro Pace v2  Aris1 AP
>> >> 7917x  P.S.S. [4], o 3.0  Banking  P.S.S. [4]  1
>> sh.
>> >> 7918*  P.S.S. [4]3.0  Vacant Deputisation Fix  P.S.S. [4]  1 AP
>> >> 7919x  P.S.S. [4]2.0  YSUIII. [5]  P.S.S. [4]  1 AP
>> >> 7920x  Gaelan, Aris  1.0  The Lint Screen v2   Gaelan  1
>> sh.
>> >> 7921*  o, G. 2.0  Passive Income   o   1 AP
>> >> [1] Official Proposal, inherently pending
>> >> [2] There is some debate over whether this was actually pended twice,
>> each
>> >> attempt consuming 1 AP. This value is therefore provisional.
>> >>
>> >> || 7908 | 7909 | 7910 | 7911 | 7912 | 7913 | 7914 | 7915 |
>> 7916 |
>> >> 7917 | 7918 | 7919 | 7920 | 7921 |
>> >> |+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+-
>> -+--+--+--+--+--+--+
>> >> |Alexis  | F| F| A| F| F| A| F| A | F|
>> A
>> >> | F| A| A| A|
>> >> |Aris| F| F| A| F| A| F| F| A | F|
>> A
>> >> | F| A| F| F|
>> >> |ATMunn  | F| P| F| F| F| F| P| F | F|
>> F
>> >> | F| F| A| F|
>> >> |G.  | F| F| F| F| P| F| F| A | P|
>> P
>> >> | F| A| A| F|
>> >> |Gaelan  | F| P| A| F| F| F| F| P | F|
>> P
>> >> | F| A| F| F|
>> >> |nichdel | F| P| A| F| P| A| F| A | P|
>> P
>> >> | P| A| P| P|
>> >> |o   | F| F| A| F| F| F| F| A | F|
>> P
>> >> | F| A| P| F|
>> >> |PSS | F| F| A| F| F| F| F| A | F|
>> F
>> >> | F| F| A| F|
>> >> |Trigon  | F| F| A| F| P| F| A| A | F|
>> F
>> >> | F| F| F| F|
>> >> |VJ Rada | FF   | FF   | AA   | FF   | FF   | AA   | P| | P|
>> AA   |
>> >> FF   |  | AA   | FF   |
>> >> |+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+-
>> -+--+--+--+--+--+--+
>> >> |F/A | 11/0 | 8/0  | 2/9  | 11/0 | 7/1  | 7/4  | 7/1  | 1/7 | 7/0
>> | 3/4
>> >> | 10/0 | 3/6  | 3/6  | 9/1  |
>> >> |AI  | 1.0  | 1.2  | 1.0  | 1.0  | 3.0  | 1.0  | 1.0  | 1.0 | 1.0
>> | 3.0
>> >> | 3.0  | 2.0  | 1.0  | 2.0  |
>> >> |V   | 10   | 10   | 10   | 10   | 10   | 10   | 10   | 9 | 10   |
>> 10
>> >> | 10   | 9| 10   | 10   |
>> >> |Q   | 5| 5| 5| 5| 5| 5| 5| 5 | 5|
>> 5
>> >> | 5| 5| 5| 5|
>> >> |P   | T| T| F| T| T| T| T| F | T|
>> F
>> >> | T| F| F| T|
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> The full text of each adopted proposal is included below.
>> >>
>> >> 

Re: BUS: Contracts v6

[Aris Merchant]

I spend 1 AP to pend this. I spend 1 AP to pend Safety Regulations v2.

-Aris

On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 3:38 PM, Aris Merchant
 wrote:
> I submit the following proposal.
>
> -Aris
>
> ---
>
> Title: Contracts v6
> Adoption index: 3.0
> Author: Aris
> Co-author(s): o, G., ais523, Gaelan, 天火狐, CuddleBeam, V.J Rada,
> Trigon, Alexis, P.S.S.
>
>
> 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.
>
> # 1 Cleanup & Miscellaneous
> # 1.1 Gamestate Cleanup
>
> Destroy each organization.
>
> Destroy each agency.
>
> For the purposes of this proposal, neither pledges nor rules are contracts.
>
> Destroy each contract. [Just in case.]
>
> # 1.2 Organization, Secretary, and Economic Cleanup
> # 1.2.1 Repeal Organizations
>
> Repeal rule 2459 ("Organizations").
>
> Repeal rule 2461 ("Death and Birth of Organizations").
>
> Repeal rule 2460 ("Organizational Restructuring").
>
> Repeal rule 2457 ("Lockout").
>
> Repeal rule 2458 ("Invoking Lockout").
>
> Repeal rule 2462 ("Bankruptcy").
>
> # 1.2.2 Change Secretary to Treasuror
>
> Amend rule 2456 ("The Secretary") by
>
>   * Changing its title to "The Treasuror", then by
>   * Replacing its text, entirely, with:
>
> {{{
> The Treasuror is an office, and the recordkeepor of Shinies.
>
> The Treasuror's weekly report also includes:
>
> 1. the current Floating Value, and all derived values
>defined by the Rules.
> 2. the list of all public classes of assets.
>
> }}}
>
> Make o the Treasuror.
>
> 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")
>
> # 1.2.3 General Economy Fixes/Cleanup
>
> Amend rule 2489 ("Estates") by replacing the first sentence with:
>
>   {{{
>   An Estate is a type of indestructible liquid asset.
>   }}}
>
> 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 put one Estate that is owned by
>   Agora up for auction by announcement. Each auction ends
>   seven days after it begins.
>
>   During an auction, any player or contract may bid a number of Shinies
>   by announcement, provided that the bid is higher than all
>   previously-placed bids in the same auction.
>
>   If, at the end of the auction, there is a single highest bid,
>   then the player or contract who placed that bid wins the auction.
>   The winner CAN cause Agora to transfer the auctioned Estate to emself
>   by announcement, if e pays Agora the amount of the bid for the explicit
>   and sole purpose of fulfilling this requirement. The person who
>   placed the bid SHALL see to it that this is done in a timely fashion.
>   }}}
>
> 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. The Treasuror is the recordkeepor for shinies.
>
>   }}}
>
>
> # 1.3 Agency Cleanup
>
> Repeal Rule 2467 ("Agencies")
>
> Repeal Rule 2468 ("Superintendent")
>
> # 1.4 Define Extricability
>
> [Note that I do not believe this section makes any substantive changes on its
> own. Because of the volume of concerns raised about restricting by 
> announcement
> conditionals, this section only contains definitions.]
>
> Create a new power 3.0 rule entitled "Conditionals and Extricability", with 
> the
> following text:
>
>   A conditional is any textual structure that attempts to make a statement 
> (the
>   substrate) affecting any part or aspect of the gamestate, or the
>   permissibility, possibility, or effect of any action affecting such a part 
> or
>   aspect, dependent on the truth value or other state of a textual structure
>   (the condition). The condition is said to be "affixed" to the substrate
>   (inverse "to be conditional upon").
>
>   A condition is inextricable if it is unclear, ambiguous, circular,
>   inconsistent, paradoxical, depends on information that is indeterminate, or
>   is impossible or unreasonably difficult to determine, or otherwise requires 
> an
>   unreasonable effort to resolve; otherwise it is extricable. A conditional is
>   inextricable if its condition is inextricable; otherwise it is extricable. A
>   player SHOULD NOT use an inextricable conditional for any purpose.
>
>   An action is said to be "subject to" a conditional if its possibility,
>   permissibility, or effect (depending on context) is determined by the
>   

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Resolution of Proposals 7908-7921

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

The decision was not initiated correctly, the initiation of the decision 
lacked a list of valid votes.



On 10/15/2017 06:09 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:



On Mon, 16 Oct 2017, VJ Rada wrote:

No it wasn't. The initiation of the Agoran Decision was illegal when
it happened and it's illegal now. I don't mean it's NEWLY illegal. I
messed up and made an illegal initiation at the time, which can be
remedied within 7 days, a period we are still in.

I now, to a-b, officially "identify" the lack of options noted in my initiation.

The ELECTIONS were still initiated (one by G. and one by me) but the
DECISIONS were not.


I CFJ, using AP, on the following, barring VJ Rada:
 An Agoran Decision to determine the new Prime Minister was initiated
 on October 9.


Arguments:

By the rules of the time, the Decision was initiated correctly.

Allowing retroactive setting of the truth without specifically stating
that it happens (e.g. through ratification) is dangerous.


Evidence:

Send Mon Oct 9 03:18:27 UTC 2017 by V.J. Rada:

I initiate an election for ADoP. I initiate the Agoran decisions for the
determination of the new ADoP and Prime Minister. The quorum is 3.0,
the vote collector is the ADoP (I will remain in office to count this,
obviously). It's instant-runoff.

BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Proposal Pool (revised)

[Alexis Hunt]

I Point a Finger at Aris, alleging that e failed to distribute the proposal
identified below as pp3 last week, thereby failing to distribute all
pending proposals.

On Sun, Oct 15, 2017, 17:38 Aris Merchant, <
thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:

> This following is a revision to the proposal pool from my last report.
>
> The proposal pool contains the following proposals:
>
> IDAuthor(s) AI   Title
> ---
> pp1  nichdel3.0  Slower Promotion
> pp2  nichdel1.0  Guaranteed Stampage
> pp3* Alexis 3.0  Clarity Act
> pp4* Gaelan 1.0  Another Economy Fix Attempt
>
> Legend: * : Proposal is pending.
>
> The full text of the aforementioned proposals is included below.
>
> //
> ID: pp1
> Title: Slower Promotion
> Adoption index: 3.0
> Author: nichdel
> Co-authors:
>
>
> Amend R1607 (Distribution) by replacing:
>
>   In a given Agoran week, the Promotor SHALL, as part of eir weekly duties,
>   distribute all pending proposals.
>
> with
>
>   In a given Agoran week, as part of eir weekly duties, the Promotor SHALL:
>
>  * distribute all pending proposals if there are no unresolved Agoran
>  decisions to adopt a proposal.
>
>  * list all unresolved Agoran decisions to adopt a proposal. The
> Promotor
>  MAY still distribute all pending proposals.
>
> //
> ID: pp2
> Title: Guaranteed Stampage
> Adoption index: 1.0
> Author: nichdel
> Co-authors:
>
>
> Amend 2499 "Welcome Packages" to read in full:
>
>   If a player has not received one since e most recently became a
>   player, any player CAN, by announcement, cause em to receive a
>   Welcome package. When a player receives a Welcome Package:
>
> * Agora transfers em 1/10th the FV in shinies and
>
> * a Stamp, with Agora as the Creater, is created in eir
>   possession.
>
> Amend R2498 to be titled "Stamps" and to read in full:
>
>   Stamps are an asset. The Secretary is the recordkeepor of Stamps.
>
>   Each Stamp has an associated Creater which SHOULD be noted whenever the
> Stamp
>   is mentioned and MUST be noted whenever the Stamp is transfered. Stamps
> with
>   the same creater are fungible.
>
>   Once per month a player CAN, by announcement, create a Stamp with
> themselves
>   as the Creater by transferring the Stamp Value, in shinies, to Agora.
>
>   If Agora owns at least as many Shinies as the current Stamp Value, a
> player
>   CAN, by announcement, destroy a Stamp e owns to cause Agora to transfer
> the
>   Stamp Value, in shinies, to emself.
>
> Enact a Power 1 rule titled "Stamp Wins" with the following text:
>
>   If a player owns 10 stamps with different Creaters, none of which have
> Agora
>   as its Creater, e CAN win by announcement. Doing so destroys the
> specified
>   stamps.
>
> Enact a Power 1 rule titled "Basic Stamp Income" with the following
> text:
>
>   When the Secretary publishes the first Weekly Report of an Agoran Month,
> e
>   CAN and SHALL, by announcement, create Stamps with Agora as the Creater
> and
>   transfer them to any player who has no stamps and less than the Stamp
> Value
>   in shinies at the time of publication.
>
> //
> ID: pp3
> Title: Clarity Act
> Adoption index: 3.0
> Author: Alexis
> Co-authors:
>
> Text in square brackets is not a part of this proposal's substance and
> is ignored when it takes effect.
>
> Enact a new power 3 rule entitled Voting Methods, reading as follows:
>   Each Agoran decision has a voting method, which must be
>   AI-majority, instant runoff, or first-past-the-post. The voting
>   method is that specified by the authorizing authority, or
>   first-past-the-post by default.
>
>   Each Agoran decision has a set of valid options (the choices that
>   the voters are being asked to select from) and valid votes (the
>   ways in which the voters can express their opinion or lack thereof.
>   For AI-majority decisions, the valid options are FOR and AGAINST;
>   for other decisions, the valid options are defined by other rules.
>
>   The valid votes on an Agoran decision are:
>   1. PRESENT;
>   2. The valid conditional votes, as defined by rules of power at
>  least that of this rule; and
>   3. For an instant runoff decision, the ordered lists of entities.
>   4. For any other decision, the valid options.
>
> [This splits off the portion of 955 that isn't actually related to
>  resolution. The definition of instant runoff is changed to evaluate
>  validity of options at the end of the voting period, and avoid
>  retroactively invalidating votes if an option drops out.]
>
> Amend Rule 955 by replacing the second paragraph and numbered list with
> the following and by deleting the second 

BUS: Proposal Pool Cleanup

[Aris Merchant]

As Promotor, I remove each of the following proposals from the proposal pool.


IDAuthor(s) AI   Title
---
r1   nichdel3.0  Slower Promotion
r2   nichdel1.0  Guaranteed Stampage

BUS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Resolution of Proposals 7908-7921

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

I claim a five shiny reward for this report. I claim a five shiny reward 
for publishing the Registrar's weekly report.



On 10/15/2017 03:39 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:


I resolve the decision(s) to adopt proposal(s) 7908-7921 below.



[This notice resolves the Agoran decisions of whether to adopt the
 following proposals.  For each decision, the options available to
 Agora are ADOPTED (*), REJECTED (x), and FAILED QUORUM (!). If a
 decision's voting period is still ongoing, I end it immediately
 before resolving it and after resolving the previous decision.]

ID Author(s) AI   Title    Pender Pend fee
--- 


7908*  G.    1.0  Silly season G. OP [1]
7909*  G.    1.2  No Lockout   G. OP [1]
7910x  G.    1.0  What is a rulekeepor G. OP [1]
7911*  V.J. Rada 1.0  Infinite Money Fix   V.J. Rada 1 sh.
7912*  Alexis    3.0  Election Campaigns   Alexis 1 AP [2]
7913*  ATMunn    1.0  Cheer Up v7? ATMunn 1 AP
7914*  o 1.0  SFDVP [3]    o 1 AP
7915x  CuddleBeam    1.0  Terrifying Proposals Reward  CuddleBeam 1 AP
7916*  Aris, o, G.   1.0  Pro Pace v2  Aris 1 AP
7917x  P.S.S. [4], o 3.0  Banking  P.S.S. [4] 1 sh.
7918*  P.S.S. [4]    3.0  Vacant Deputisation Fix  P.S.S. [4] 1 AP
7919x  P.S.S. [4]    2.0  YSUIII. [5]  P.S.S. [4] 1 AP
7920x  Gaelan, Aris  1.0  The Lint Screen v2   Gaelan 1 sh.
7921*  o, G. 2.0  Passive Income   o 1 AP
[1] Official Proposal, inherently pending
[2] There is some debate over whether this was actually pended twice, 
each

attempt consuming 1 AP. This value is therefore provisional.

|    | 7908 | 7909 | 7910 | 7911 | 7912 | 7913 | 7914 | 7915 | 
7916 | 7917 | 7918 | 7919 | 7920 | 7921 |
|+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+ 

|Alexis  | F    | F    | A    | F    | F    | A    | F    | A | F    | 
A    | F    | A    | A    | A    |
|Aris    | F    | F    | A    | F    | A    | F    | F    | A | F    | 
A    | F    | A    | F    | F    |
|ATMunn  | F    | P    | F    | F    | F    | F    | P    | F | F    | 
F    | F    | F    | A    | F    |
|G.  | F    | F    | F    | F    | P    | F    | F    | A | P    | 
P    | F    | A    | A    | F    |
|Gaelan  | F    | P    | A    | F    | F    | F    | F    | P | F    | 
P    | F    | A    | F    | F    |
|nichdel | F    | P    | A    | F    | P    | A    | F    | A | P    | 
P    | P    | A    | P    | P    |
|o   | F    | F    | A    | F    | F    | F    | F    | A | F    | 
P    | F    | A    | P    | F    |
|PSS | F    | F    | A    | F    | F    | F    | F    | A | F    | 
F    | F    | F    | A    | F    |
|Trigon  | F    | F    | A    | F    | P    | F    | A    | A | F    | 
F    | F    | F    | F    | F    |
|VJ Rada | FF   | FF   | AA   | FF   | FF   | AA   | P    | | P | AA   
| FF   |  | AA   | FF   |
|+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+ 

|F/A | 11/0 | 8/0  | 2/9  | 11/0 | 7/1  | 7/4  | 7/1  | 1/7 | 7/0  
| 3/4  | 10/0 | 3/6  | 3/6  | 9/1  |
|AI  | 1.0  | 1.2  | 1.0  | 1.0  | 3.0  | 1.0  | 1.0  | 1.0 | 1.0  
| 3.0  | 3.0  | 2.0  | 1.0  | 2.0  |
|V   | 10   | 10   | 10   | 10   | 10   | 10   | 10   | 9 | 10   | 
10   | 10   | 9    | 10   | 10   |
|Q   | 5    | 5    | 5    | 5    | 5    | 5    | 5    | 5 | 5    | 
5    | 5    | 5    | 5    | 5    |
|P   | T    | T    | F    | T    | T    | T    | T    | F | T    | 
F    | T    | F    | F    | T    |



The full text of each adopted proposal is included below.

//
ID: 7908
Title: Silly season
Adoption index: 1.0
Author: G.
Co-authors:
Official Proposal


Re-enact Rule 1650 (Silliness) with the following text:

  Each Nomic Week a Player is designated the Silly Person.  The Silly 
Person
  SHALL in that week, by announcement (1) designate another player, 
who has not
  been the Silly Person in the past two weeks, to be the next week's 
Silly
  Person; (2) submit a Silly Proposal.  If there is ever no Silly 
Person or the
  Silly Person is not a player, then the next week's Silly Person is 
the first
  player that any player publicly designates to be the next week's 
Silly Person.


  A Silly Proposal is a Proposal whose sole contents are one of
  the following:
    i) A limerick.
   ii) A rhymed poem no longer than fourteen lines. (No free
   verse!)
  iii) A joke of no more than a hundred words.
   iv) A truly hideous pun.

  The first Silly Proposal submitted by the week's Silly Person is an 
Official

  Proposal.


[I want to reward 

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Resolution of Proposals 7908-7921

[Kerim Aydin]

I object.

This would take 2 weeks + 4 day objection period + pauses in between.

If instead you ratify that a decision started back when you said it
did (but with the new vote collector and all previous options as
present nominees), it could all be wrapped up this week.

On Mon, 16 Oct 2017, VJ Rada wrote:
> I intend to ratify the following without objection. It is wrong as
> there are or may be ongoing elections. I wish to ratify it to allow
> new elections for the positions of ADoP and PM
> 
> {{There are no ongoing elections.}}
> 
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 9:24 AM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Mon, 16 Oct 2017, VJ Rada wrote:
> >> I was waiting because I noticed days later and I hoped nobody else did.
> >>
> >> Fun fact: Only one of the Decisions I've initiated was ever valid.
> >> Obviously ratified now but I can't seem to get all four conditions
> >> lmao. Only one person (Alexis) ever noticed, and e didn't this time.
> >>
> >> I now have a "checklist" google doc I plan to consult, if ADoP again haha.
> >
> > Yah it's a huge pain in the rear I have a copy of the boilerplate from
> > the Promotor that I know is right and I'm paranoid about following word-
> > for-word (with appropriate substitutions) whenever I initiate one.
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> From V.J. Rada
>

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Safety Regulations

[Aris Merchant]

TTttPF.

-Aris

On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 3:41 PM Aris Merchant <
thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Darn, typo. I retract Safety Regulations. I submit the following proposal.
>
> -Aris
>
> ---
> Title: Safety Regulations v2
> Adoption index: 3.0
> Author: Aris
> Co-author(s): Alexis
>
> Amend Rule 2493, "Regulations", by
>
>   * Replacing every instance of the word "instrument" with the words
> "textual
> entity"; and
>   * Amending the second paragraph to read in full "A regulation must be
> authorized by at least one rule in order for it to exist. A regulation
> has
> effect on the game (only) insofar as the rule or rules that authorized
> it
> permit it to have effect. If reasonably possible, a regulation should
> be
> interpreted so as to defer to other rules. The procedure for resolving
> conflict between regulations is the same as it is for rules (for the
> purposes of resolving conflicts only, a regulation is treated as if it
> had the power of its least powerful parent rule)."
>

BUS: Contracts v6

[Aris Merchant]

I submit the following proposal.

-Aris

---

Title: Contracts v6
Adoption index: 3.0
Author: Aris
Co-author(s): o, G., ais523, Gaelan, 天火狐, CuddleBeam, V.J Rada,
Trigon, Alexis, P.S.S.


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.

# 1 Cleanup & Miscellaneous
# 1.1 Gamestate Cleanup

Destroy each organization.

Destroy each agency.

For the purposes of this proposal, neither pledges nor rules are contracts.

Destroy each contract. [Just in case.]

# 1.2 Organization, Secretary, and Economic Cleanup
# 1.2.1 Repeal Organizations

Repeal rule 2459 ("Organizations").

Repeal rule 2461 ("Death and Birth of Organizations").

Repeal rule 2460 ("Organizational Restructuring").

Repeal rule 2457 ("Lockout").

Repeal rule 2458 ("Invoking Lockout").

Repeal rule 2462 ("Bankruptcy").

# 1.2.2 Change Secretary to Treasuror

Amend rule 2456 ("The Secretary") by

  * Changing its title to "The Treasuror", then by
  * Replacing its text, entirely, with:

{{{
The Treasuror is an office, and the recordkeepor of Shinies.

The Treasuror's weekly report also includes:

1. the current Floating Value, and all derived values
   defined by the Rules.
2. the list of all public classes of assets.

}}}

Make o the Treasuror.

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")

# 1.2.3 General Economy Fixes/Cleanup

Amend rule 2489 ("Estates") by replacing the first sentence with:

  {{{
  An Estate is a type of indestructible liquid asset.
  }}}

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 put one Estate that is owned by
  Agora up for auction by announcement. Each auction ends
  seven days after it begins.

  During an auction, any player or contract may bid a number of Shinies
  by announcement, provided that the bid is higher than all
  previously-placed bids in the same auction.

  If, at the end of the auction, there is a single highest bid,
  then the player or contract who placed that bid wins the auction.
  The winner CAN cause Agora to transfer the auctioned Estate to emself
  by announcement, if e pays Agora the amount of the bid for the explicit
  and sole purpose of fulfilling this requirement. The person who
  placed the bid SHALL see to it that this is done in a timely fashion.
  }}}

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. The Treasuror is the recordkeepor for shinies.

  }}}


# 1.3 Agency Cleanup

Repeal Rule 2467 ("Agencies")

Repeal Rule 2468 ("Superintendent")

# 1.4 Define Extricability

[Note that I do not believe this section makes any substantive changes on its
own. Because of the volume of concerns raised about restricting by announcement
conditionals, this section only contains definitions.]

Create a new power 3.0 rule entitled "Conditionals and Extricability", with the
following text:

  A conditional is any textual structure that attempts to make a statement (the
  substrate) affecting any part or aspect of the gamestate, or the
  permissibility, possibility, or effect of any action affecting such a part or
  aspect, dependent on the truth value or other state of a textual structure
  (the condition). The condition is said to be "affixed" to the substrate
  (inverse "to be conditional upon").

  A condition is inextricable if it is unclear, ambiguous, circular,
  inconsistent, paradoxical, depends on information that is indeterminate, or
  is impossible or unreasonably difficult to determine, or otherwise requires an
  unreasonable effort to resolve; otherwise it is extricable. A conditional is
  inextricable if its condition is inextricable; otherwise it is extricable. A
  player SHOULD NOT use an inextricable conditional for any purpose.

  An action is said to be "subject to" a conditional if its possibility,
  permissibility, or effect (depending on context) is determined by the
  conditional. A value is said to be subject to a conditional of the state
  of the value is determined by the conditional.

Create a new power 3.0 rule entitled "Determinacy", with the following text:

  If a value CANNOT be reasonably determined (without circularity or paradox)
  from information reasonably available, or if it alternates indefinitely
  between values, then the value is considered to be indeterminate, otherwise
  

BUS: Safety Regulations

[Aris Merchant]

I submit the following proposal.

-Aris

---
Title: Safety Regulations
Adoption index: 3.0
Author: Aris
Co-author(s): Alexis

Amend Rule 2493, "Regulations", by

  * Replacing every instance of the word "instrument" with the words "textual
entity"; and
  * Amending the second paragraph to read in full "A regulation must be
authorized by at least one rule in order for it to exist. A regulation has
effect on the game (only) insofar as the rule or rules that authorized it
permit it to have effect If reasonably possible, a regulation should be
interpreted so as to defer to other rules. The procedure for resolving
conflict between regulations is the same as it is for rules (for the
purposes of resolving conflicts only, a regulation is treated as if it
had the power of its least powerful parent rule)."

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Resolution of Proposals 7908-7921

[VJ Rada]

I intend to ratify the following without objection. It is wrong as
there are or may be ongoing elections. I wish to ratify it to allow
new elections for the positions of ADoP and PM

{{There are no ongoing elections.}}

On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 9:24 AM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 16 Oct 2017, VJ Rada wrote:
>> I was waiting because I noticed days later and I hoped nobody else did.
>>
>> Fun fact: Only one of the Decisions I've initiated was ever valid.
>> Obviously ratified now but I can't seem to get all four conditions
>> lmao. Only one person (Alexis) ever noticed, and e didn't this time.
>>
>> I now have a "checklist" google doc I plan to consult, if ADoP again haha.
>
> Yah it's a huge pain in the rear I have a copy of the boilerplate from
> the Promotor that I know is right and I'm paranoid about following word-
> for-word (with appropriate substitutions) whenever I initiate one.
>
>
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Resolution of Proposals 7908-7921

[Kerim Aydin]

On Mon, 16 Oct 2017, VJ Rada wrote:
> >By the rules of the time, the Decision was initiated correctly.
> 
> THIS IS NOT TRUE. By the rules of the time, they were initiated
> wrongly. By the UNAMENDED rules of today (Initiating Agoran Decisions,
> rule 107), not changed at all by new proposals) they were still wrong.
> I am taking a quibble with form UNRELATED to the new proposal. There's
> a reason every election initation before me inclued "and the valid
> options are PRESENT and the players" or something like it)
> 
> Please retract your CFJ.

Oh, I see - absolutely, reading too quickly.  I withdraw my CFJ.

You were waiting to see if you were winning, weren't you :P.

(But we're still stuck in getting things going...)

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Resolution of Proposals 7908-7921

[Kerim Aydin]

On Mon, 16 Oct 2017, VJ Rada wrote:
> No it wasn't. The initiation of the Agoran Decision was illegal when
> it happened and it's illegal now. I don't mean it's NEWLY illegal. I
> messed up and made an illegal initiation at the time, which can be
> remedied within 7 days, a period we are still in.
> 
> I now, to a-b, officially "identify" the lack of options noted in my 
> initiation.
> 
> The ELECTIONS were still initiated (one by G. and one by me) but the
> DECISIONS were not.


I CFJ, using AP, on the following, barring VJ Rada:
An Agoran Decision to determine the new Prime Minister was initiated
on October 9.


Arguments:

By the rules of the time, the Decision was initiated correctly.

Allowing retroactive setting of the truth without specifically stating
that it happens (e.g. through ratification) is dangerous.


Evidence:

Send Mon Oct 9 03:18:27 UTC 2017 by V.J. Rada:
> I initiate an election for ADoP. I initiate the Agoran decisions for the
> determination of the new ADoP and Prime Minister. The quorum is 3.0,
> the vote collector is the ADoP (I will remain in office to count this,
> obviously). It's instant-runoff.

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Resolution of Proposals 7908-7921

[VJ Rada]

No it wasn't. The initiation of the Agoran Decision was illegal when
it happened and it's illegal now. I don't mean it's NEWLY illegal. I
messed up and made an illegal initiation at the time, which can be
remedied within 7 days, a period we are still in.

I now, to a-b, officially "identify" the lack of options noted in my initiation.

The ELECTIONS were still initiated (one by G. and one by me) but the
DECISIONS were not.

On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 9:01 AM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, 15 Oct 2017, Alex Smith wrote:
>> On Mon, 2017-10-16 at 08:54 +1100, VJ Rada wrote:
>> > And the notice of initiation lacked any set of the valid votes, which
>> > I wasn't going to point out but now do. Therefore, the Agoran
>> > Decisions were never initiated.
>>
>> Does pointing it out to a-d count?
>>
>> I'd recommend an explicit "CoE" to a-b, as the simplest way to give
>> certainty about the gamestate. (That is, unless more uncertainty is
>> considered a good thing.)
>
> I'm really not sure you can retroactively reconstruct the gamestate like
> that, given that it was a perfectly valid announcement when it happened.
> If a CFJ is phrased past-tense:
> "Was a decision initiated on [date]"
> it would pretty clearly be true, to say otherwise is to ratify the
> past without actually doing so.
>
> Think of the consequences:  if we could do this, we could undo lots of
> things that don't self-ratify (e.g. we could change the Winning rules
> and say "because you can't Win that way by the rules now, you couldn't
> have won that way back then").
>
>
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

BUS: Judgments of 3570-3571. (Was Re: OFF: [Arbitor] CFJ 3571 assigned to Nichdel)

[Nic Evans]

I judge CFJ 3570 FALSE. I judge CFJ 3571 TRUE.

First there's little doubt that "G is Overlord of Dunce" is not an
agency, because the name is invalid. Thus, it didn't enable any
abilities. The Superintendent's report does not self-ratify, so GOD
wasn't ratified into existence until VJ Rada ratified a document
asserting the existence of an agency that could be called GOD.


On 10/06/17 14:14, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> [Sorry, I initially missed the second "linked" CFJ in the below message.]
>
>
>>> I also call a linked CFJ  (yes, I know those don't exist) with Shinies
>>> with the statement: "G: Overlord of Dunce is an Agency."
> This is CFJ 3571.  I assign it to Nichdel.
>
> Caller's arguments same as for 3570, below.
>
>
> On Fri, 6 Oct 2017, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>> On Thu, 5 Oct 2017, VJ Rada wrote:
>>> I use shinies to call a CFJ with the statement: "Ben Öyle Öneriyorum
>>> is an agency"
>>
>> This is CFJ 3570.  I assign it to Nichdel.
>>
>>
>> Caller's Arguments:
>>
>>> Ben Öyle Öneriyorum was established in May with the powers of another
>>> agency called GOD.  GOD's name was created and has always been listed
>>> as G is Overlord of Dunce, which is patently invalid as a name ("is"
>>> is a verb, so the agency's name is invalid, so the agency could not be
>>> an agency).
>>>
>>> I ratified the following document yesterday.
>>>
 {{There is an agency with the following text.
 "G: Overlord of Dunce  (GOD)
 Head: Quazie
 Agents:  G.
 Powers:   1 - The ability to give notice to establish Agencies with
  Quazie as the Director or Head and G. as the only agent
  2 - The ability to establish Agencies with Quazie as the Director or
  Head and G. as the only agent".
 That agency was established by a message sent by Quazie, purporting to
 establish a message called "G is Overlord of Dunce", but the name of
 the agency is, and has been since its establishment, "G: Overlord of
 Dunce"}}
>>> The question is this: what, if any effect does this ratification have,
>>> and if it has the effect of making G: Overlord of Dunce an agency,
>>> does it also ratify previous actions that purported to use "GOD" to do
>>> things (the one thing it was used for was the establishment of BOO)
>>>
>>> I also call a linked CFJ  (yes, I know those don't exist) with Shinies
>>> with the statement: "G: Overlord of Dunce is an Agency."
>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> From V.J. Rada
>>
>>




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

BUS: Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Resolution of Proposals 7908-7921

[VJ Rada]

If anyone else wants to contradict me on what I think happens, go for it.

On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 8:39 AM, VJ Rada  wrote:
> I nominate myself as a candidate for both ADoP and Prime Minister. I
> am uncommitted.
>
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 8:37 AM, VJ Rada  wrote:
>> The election was validly initiated. It looks like for four hours or so
>> that we're still in the Nomination Phase: and then if there is more
>> than one candidate we'll go in an election, with the Assessor counting
>> (hope you're ok with that added duty PSS)
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 7:24 AM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, 15 Oct 2017, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
 7912*  Alexis3.0  Election Campaigns   Alexis  1 AP [2]
>>>
>>> So, um ... anyone want to opine on the status of the PM or ADoP elections?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> From V.J. Rada
>
>
>
> --
> From V.J. Rada



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

BUS: Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Resolution of Proposals 7908-7921

[VJ Rada]

I nominate myself as a candidate for both ADoP and Prime Minister. I
am uncommitted.



On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 8:37 AM, VJ Rada  wrote:
> The election was validly initiated. It looks like for four hours or so
> that we're still in the Nomination Phase: and then if there is more
> than one candidate we'll go in an election, with the Assessor counting
> (hope you're ok with that added duty PSS)
>
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 7:24 AM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Sun, 15 Oct 2017, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
>>> 7912*  Alexis3.0  Election Campaigns   Alexis  1 AP [2]
>>
>> So, um ... anyone want to opine on the status of the PM or ADoP elections?
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> From V.J. Rada



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

BUS: appeals procedure fix

[Kerim Aydin]

I submit the following proposal, "Appeals improvements", AI-1.7, and
pend it with shinies:

--

Amend Rule 911 (Motions and Moots) by replacing its first 2 paragraphs
with:

  If a judgement has been in effect for less then seven days and
  has not been entered into Moot, then:

  - The judge of that CFJ CAN self-file a Motion to Reconsider
the case by announcement, if e has not already self-filed
a Motion to Reconsider that CFJ.
  - Any Player CAN group-file a Motion to Reconsider the case 
with 2 Support, if the CFJ has not had a Motion to 
Reconsider group-filed for it at any time while it has 
been assigned to its current judge.

  When a Motion to Reconsider is so filed, the case is rendered 
  open again.

  If a CFJ has a judgement assigned, a player CAN enter that
  judgement into Moot with N+2 support, where N is the number of
  weeks since that judgement has been assigned, rounded down. When
  this occurs, the CFJ is suspended, and the Arbitor is once
  authorized to initiate the Agoran decision to determine public
  confidence in the judgement, which e SHALL do in a timely 
  fashion.


[The judge gets one Motion by announcement, one Motion is allowed
w/2 support (judge can do that one, too).  Moot has a practical time
limit but not an absolute one as the difficulty of initiating a Moot
increases with time].

--

BUS: Re: can we can't we can we can't we

[Kerim Aydin]

I withdraw the proposal "Can or can't we?".

I submit the following proposal, "no we can't", AI-3, and AP-pend it:

--

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.  I just want to put this in place and absolutely
clarify the ruleset if it passes, and we can add the MMI change later
if desired].

--

BUS: 愚かな人

[Kerim Aydin]

I designate 天火狐 to be next week's Silly Person.

Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Resolution of Proposals 7908-7921

[Aris Merchant]

I do the same.

-Aris

On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 1:16 PM, VJ Rada  wrote:
> I claim the reward of two shinies for authoring and pending a passed proposal.
>
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 7:08 AM, VJ Rada  wrote:
>> Quorums of 8 again ugh.
>>
>> Stop voting y'all lmao.
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 6:39 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
>>  wrote:
>>>
>>> I resolve the decision(s) to adopt proposal(s) 7908-7921 below.
>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>> [This notice resolves the Agoran decisions of whether to adopt the
>>>  following proposals.  For each decision, the options available to
>>>  Agora are ADOPTED (*), REJECTED (x), and FAILED QUORUM (!). If a
>>>  decision's voting period is still ongoing, I end it immediately
>>>  before resolving it and after resolving the previous decision.]
>>>
>>> ID Author(s) AI   TitlePender  Pend fee
>>> ---
>>> 7908*  G.1.0  Silly season G.  OP [1]
>>> 7909*  G.1.2  No Lockout   G.  OP [1]
>>> 7910x  G.1.0  What is a rulekeepor G.  OP [1]
>>> 7911*  V.J. Rada 1.0  Infinite Money Fix   V.J. Rada   1 sh.
>>> 7912*  Alexis3.0  Election Campaigns   Alexis  1 AP [2]
>>> 7913*  ATMunn1.0  Cheer Up v7? ATMunn  1 AP
>>> 7914*  o 1.0  SFDVP [3]o   1 AP
>>> 7915x  CuddleBeam1.0  Terrifying Proposals Reward  CuddleBeam  1 AP
>>> 7916*  Aris, o, G.   1.0  Pro Pace v2  Aris1 AP
>>> 7917x  P.S.S. [4], o 3.0  Banking  P.S.S. [4]  1 sh.
>>> 7918*  P.S.S. [4]3.0  Vacant Deputisation Fix  P.S.S. [4]  1 AP
>>> 7919x  P.S.S. [4]2.0  YSUIII. [5]  P.S.S. [4]  1 AP
>>> 7920x  Gaelan, Aris  1.0  The Lint Screen v2   Gaelan  1 sh.
>>> 7921*  o, G. 2.0  Passive Income   o   1 AP
>>> [1] Official Proposal, inherently pending
>>> [2] There is some debate over whether this was actually pended twice, each
>>> attempt consuming 1 AP. This value is therefore provisional.
>>>
>>> || 7908 | 7909 | 7910 | 7911 | 7912 | 7913 | 7914 | 7915 | 7916 |
>>> 7917 | 7918 | 7919 | 7920 | 7921 |
>>> |+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
>>> |Alexis  | F| F| A| F| F| A| F| A | F| A
>>> | F| A| A| A|
>>> |Aris| F| F| A| F| A| F| F| A | F| A
>>> | F| A| F| F|
>>> |ATMunn  | F| P| F| F| F| F| P| F | F| F
>>> | F| F| A| F|
>>> |G.  | F| F| F| F| P| F| F| A | P| P
>>> | F| A| A| F|
>>> |Gaelan  | F| P| A| F| F| F| F| P | F| P
>>> | F| A| F| F|
>>> |nichdel | F| P| A| F| P| A| F| A | P| P
>>> | P| A| P| P|
>>> |o   | F| F| A| F| F| F| F| A | F| P
>>> | F| A| P| F|
>>> |PSS | F| F| A| F| F| F| F| A | F| F
>>> | F| F| A| F|
>>> |Trigon  | F| F| A| F| P| F| A| A | F| F
>>> | F| F| F| F|
>>> |VJ Rada | FF   | FF   | AA   | FF   | FF   | AA   | P| | P| AA   |
>>> FF   |  | AA   | FF   |
>>> |+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
>>> |F/A | 11/0 | 8/0  | 2/9  | 11/0 | 7/1  | 7/4  | 7/1  | 1/7 | 7/0  | 3/4
>>> | 10/0 | 3/6  | 3/6  | 9/1  |
>>> |AI  | 1.0  | 1.2  | 1.0  | 1.0  | 3.0  | 1.0  | 1.0  | 1.0 | 1.0  | 3.0
>>> | 3.0  | 2.0  | 1.0  | 2.0  |
>>> |V   | 10   | 10   | 10   | 10   | 10   | 10   | 10   | 9 | 10   | 10
>>> | 10   | 9| 10   | 10   |
>>> |Q   | 5| 5| 5| 5| 5| 5| 5| 5 | 5| 5
>>> | 5| 5| 5| 5|
>>> |P   | T| T| F| T| T| T| T| F | T| F
>>> | T| F| F| T|
>>>
>>>
>>> The full text of each adopted proposal is included below.
>>>
>>> //
>>> ID: 7908
>>> Title: Silly season
>>> Adoption index: 1.0
>>> Author: G.
>>> Co-authors:
>>> Official Proposal
>>>
>>>
>>> Re-enact Rule 1650 (Silliness) with the following text:
>>>
>>>   Each Nomic Week a Player is designated the Silly Person.  The Silly Person
>>>   SHALL in that week, by announcement (1) designate another player, who has
>>> not
>>>   been the Silly Person in the past two weeks, to be the next week's Silly
>>>   Person; (2) submit a Silly 

BUS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Resolution of Proposals 7908-7921

[VJ Rada]

I claim the reward of two shinies for authoring and pending a passed proposal.

On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 7:08 AM, VJ Rada  wrote:
> Quorums of 8 again ugh.
>
> Stop voting y'all lmao.
>
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 6:39 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
>  wrote:
>>
>> I resolve the decision(s) to adopt proposal(s) 7908-7921 below.
>>
>> 
>>
>> [This notice resolves the Agoran decisions of whether to adopt the
>>  following proposals.  For each decision, the options available to
>>  Agora are ADOPTED (*), REJECTED (x), and FAILED QUORUM (!). If a
>>  decision's voting period is still ongoing, I end it immediately
>>  before resolving it and after resolving the previous decision.]
>>
>> ID Author(s) AI   TitlePender  Pend fee
>> ---
>> 7908*  G.1.0  Silly season G.  OP [1]
>> 7909*  G.1.2  No Lockout   G.  OP [1]
>> 7910x  G.1.0  What is a rulekeepor G.  OP [1]
>> 7911*  V.J. Rada 1.0  Infinite Money Fix   V.J. Rada   1 sh.
>> 7912*  Alexis3.0  Election Campaigns   Alexis  1 AP [2]
>> 7913*  ATMunn1.0  Cheer Up v7? ATMunn  1 AP
>> 7914*  o 1.0  SFDVP [3]o   1 AP
>> 7915x  CuddleBeam1.0  Terrifying Proposals Reward  CuddleBeam  1 AP
>> 7916*  Aris, o, G.   1.0  Pro Pace v2  Aris1 AP
>> 7917x  P.S.S. [4], o 3.0  Banking  P.S.S. [4]  1 sh.
>> 7918*  P.S.S. [4]3.0  Vacant Deputisation Fix  P.S.S. [4]  1 AP
>> 7919x  P.S.S. [4]2.0  YSUIII. [5]  P.S.S. [4]  1 AP
>> 7920x  Gaelan, Aris  1.0  The Lint Screen v2   Gaelan  1 sh.
>> 7921*  o, G. 2.0  Passive Income   o   1 AP
>> [1] Official Proposal, inherently pending
>> [2] There is some debate over whether this was actually pended twice, each
>> attempt consuming 1 AP. This value is therefore provisional.
>>
>> || 7908 | 7909 | 7910 | 7911 | 7912 | 7913 | 7914 | 7915 | 7916 |
>> 7917 | 7918 | 7919 | 7920 | 7921 |
>> |+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
>> |Alexis  | F| F| A| F| F| A| F| A | F| A
>> | F| A| A| A|
>> |Aris| F| F| A| F| A| F| F| A | F| A
>> | F| A| F| F|
>> |ATMunn  | F| P| F| F| F| F| P| F | F| F
>> | F| F| A| F|
>> |G.  | F| F| F| F| P| F| F| A | P| P
>> | F| A| A| F|
>> |Gaelan  | F| P| A| F| F| F| F| P | F| P
>> | F| A| F| F|
>> |nichdel | F| P| A| F| P| A| F| A | P| P
>> | P| A| P| P|
>> |o   | F| F| A| F| F| F| F| A | F| P
>> | F| A| P| F|
>> |PSS | F| F| A| F| F| F| F| A | F| F
>> | F| F| A| F|
>> |Trigon  | F| F| A| F| P| F| A| A | F| F
>> | F| F| F| F|
>> |VJ Rada | FF   | FF   | AA   | FF   | FF   | AA   | P| | P| AA   |
>> FF   |  | AA   | FF   |
>> |+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
>> |F/A | 11/0 | 8/0  | 2/9  | 11/0 | 7/1  | 7/4  | 7/1  | 1/7 | 7/0  | 3/4
>> | 10/0 | 3/6  | 3/6  | 9/1  |
>> |AI  | 1.0  | 1.2  | 1.0  | 1.0  | 3.0  | 1.0  | 1.0  | 1.0 | 1.0  | 3.0
>> | 3.0  | 2.0  | 1.0  | 2.0  |
>> |V   | 10   | 10   | 10   | 10   | 10   | 10   | 10   | 9 | 10   | 10
>> | 10   | 9| 10   | 10   |
>> |Q   | 5| 5| 5| 5| 5| 5| 5| 5 | 5| 5
>> | 5| 5| 5| 5|
>> |P   | T| T| F| T| T| T| T| F | T| F
>> | T| F| F| T|
>>
>>
>> The full text of each adopted proposal is included below.
>>
>> //
>> ID: 7908
>> Title: Silly season
>> Adoption index: 1.0
>> Author: G.
>> Co-authors:
>> Official Proposal
>>
>>
>> Re-enact Rule 1650 (Silliness) with the following text:
>>
>>   Each Nomic Week a Player is designated the Silly Person.  The Silly Person
>>   SHALL in that week, by announcement (1) designate another player, who has
>> not
>>   been the Silly Person in the past two weeks, to be the next week's Silly
>>   Person; (2) submit a Silly Proposal.  If there is ever no Silly Person or
>> the
>>   Silly Person is not a player, then the next week's Silly Person is the
>> first
>>   player that any player publicly designates 

BUS: Re: OFF: CFJ 3575 judged TRUE

[VJ Rada]

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