Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8473-8476
On July 12, 2020 11:24:19 p.m. EDT, "N. S. via agora-business" wrote: >I vote like this and have tcbapo vote the same, except where indicated Tcbapo is no longer registered. E stopped being your zombie when you were exiled. Falsifian
BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8473-8476
I vote like this and have tcbapo vote the same, except where indicated 8473p Jason, G.1.0 Plain Old Bribery I vote AGAINST but I have tcbapo vote FOR 8474p G., omd 1.0 Agora the karma bank AGAINST 8475p Aris 1.0 Saving Sponsorship FOR 8476e^ ATMunn, [1] 1.0 Contract charities AGAINST On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 6:36 AM Reuben Staley via agora-official < agora-offic...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > On 2020-07-12 14:10, Aris Merchant via agora-official wrote: > > ID Author(s)AITitle > > > --- > > 8473p Jason, G.1.0 Plain Old Bribery > FOR, obviously. I already have the ribbon but glitter's always good. > > 8474p G., omd 1.0 Agora the karma bank > FOR > > 8475p Aris 1.0 Saving Sponsorship > FOR > > 8476e^ ATMunn, [1] 1.0 Contract charities > FOR > > -- > Trigon > > I LOVE SPAGHETTI > transfer Jason one coin > nch was here > I hereby > don't... trust... the dragon... > don't... trust... the dragon... > Do not Construe Jason's message with subject TRIGON as extending this > -- >From R. Lee
BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8473-8476
I vote as follows: ID Author(s)AITitle --- 8473p Jason, G.1.0 Plain Old Bribery FOR 8474p G., omd 1.0 Agora the karma bank FOR 8475p Aris 1.0 Saving Sponsorship FOR 8476e^ ATMunn, [1] 1.0 Contract charities FOR -- Falsifian
Re: BUS: Contract: A Rival Ship Appears
I too consent On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 11:40 AM omd via agora-business < agora-business@agoranomic.org> wrote: > at 5:22 PM, Nch via agora-business wrote: > > > I consent to the following contract: > > Me too. > -- >From R. Lee
BUS: Re: OFF: [ADoP] Voting for Coopor
On 2020-07-12 4:17 p.m., Edward Murphy via agora-official wrote: I initiate an Agoran decision to select the winner of the Coopor election. The Vote Collector is the ADoP (me), the valid options are the candidates (G. and R. Lee and anyone else who becomes one), and the voting method is instant runoff. I vote [R. Lee, ATMunn, G.]. -- Falsifian
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Diplonomic 2020] Disagreeable Proposal
On 2020-07-12 4:25 p.m., ais523 via agora-business wrote:
On Sun, 2020-07-12 at 16:02 +, Falsifian via agora-business wrote:
I submit the following Diplonomic Proposal, titled "Judicial Veto":
{
To the end of Rule 8, append: "If enacting a proposal would
interfere
with the Judge's ability to ensure the smooth running of the game in
accordance with these rules, then e NEED NOT enact that proposal, so
long as e publishes an explanation of the problem, and this
exception
overrides any requirement for em to enact that proposal."
}
(This also gives the Judge a way out if a proposal would make eir
job very difficult.)
CFJ: The above-quoted message created an Agoran proposal.
Evidence: The above-quoted message.
Arguments: The quoted body of text appears to satisfy the requirements
to be a proposal in the Agoran sense, and its author has stated that e
is submitting it as a proposal; it was sent to a public forum, thus
appears to meet the requirements for acting by announcement (the
standard for creating a proposal). It is stated to be a Diplonomic
Proposal; however, I don't see any reason why a Diplonomic Proposal
can't also be an Agoran proposal, as this proposal appears to match
both sets of requirements.
Weighing against this is the fact that it obviously wasn't intended to
create an Agoran proposal. Is that relevant, when establishing whether
an action by announcement has occurred?
To reduce uncertainty: I withdraw the above Agoran proposal (if I indeed
submitted one), but I don't withdraw the Diplonomic proposal.
--
Falsifian
Re: BUS: Contract: A Rival Ship Appears
at 5:22 PM, Nch via agora-business wrote: I consent to the following contract: Me too.
BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8473-8476
at 1:10 PM, Aris Merchant via agora-official wrote: 8473p Jason, G.1.0 Plain Old Bribery AGAINST 8474p G., omd 1.0 Agora the karma bank FOR 8475p Aris 1.0 Saving Sponsorship PRESENT 8476e^ ATMunn, [1] 1.0 Contract charities PRESENT
Re: BUS: Contract: A Rival Ship Appears
On 7/12/2020 8:30 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote:
On 7/12/20 8:29 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-business
wrote:
On 7/12/20 8:22 PM, Nch via agora-business wrote:
I consent to the following contract:
{
The Platonic Parrot
I see no prohibition on dual citirateship, so I join The Platonic Parrot.
As do I.
I join the Platonic Parrot, and cease to be a Pirate. (i.e., leave the
Plundership)
--
ATMunn
friendly neighborhood notary and Czar of Russia :)
Re: BUS: Contract: A Rival Ship Appears
On 7/12/20 8:29 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-business
wrote:
> On 7/12/20 8:22 PM, Nch via agora-business wrote:
>> I consent to the following contract:
>>
>> {
>>
>> The Platonic Parrot
> I see no prohibition on dual citirateship, so I join The Platonic Parrot.
>
As do I.
--
Jason Cobb
Re: BUS: Contract: A Rival Ship Appears
On 7/12/20 8:22 PM, Nch via agora-business wrote:
> I consent to the following contract:
>
> {
>
> The Platonic Parrot
I see no prohibition on dual citirateship, so I join The Platonic Parrot.
--
Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Contract: A Rival Ship Appears
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On Sunday, July 12, 2020 7:23 PM, Nch via agora-discussion wrote: > I leave the Pirate Plundership. This wasn't to the public fora. I also almost forgot my doubloons. I transfer 12 coins to myself from the Plunder Partnership, destroying my 12 doubloons. Then I leave the Plunder Partnership.
BUS: Contract: A Rival Ship Appears
I consent to the following contract:
{
The Platonic Parrot
A party to this contract is also known as a Platonic Pirate. Any player
who is not currently Marked can join this contract by announcement. Any
player can leave this contract by announcement. When someone is
deregistered, e automatically leaves the contract.
If a Platonic Pirate objects to an intent to transfer assets to this
contract, e ceases to be a party to the contract. If a player has
objected to an intent to transfer assets to this contract in the last 7
days, e is Marked.
When the Platonic Parrot has assets, any Platonic Pirate CAN by
announcement divy them in the following way:
* Where X is the total number of coins owned by the Platonic Parrot and
Y is the number of Platonic Pirates, e transfers each Platonic Pirate
X/Y (rounded down) coins from the Platonic Parrot.
* If there are still coins owned by the Platonic Parrot, e transfer
emself all the remaining coins.
* If there are any other assets owned by the Platonic Parrot, e
transfers emself one of them of eir own choice.
* If there are still assets owned by the Platonic Parrot, e transfers
them to other Platonic Pirates such that no Platonic Pirate receives
more than 1 more asset than any other Platonic Pirate (excluding the
coins e gave emself in the earlier step). As long as this constraint
is met, e may choose who gets what assets.
This contract may be amended by a Platonic Pirate with the consent of
2/3rds (rounded up) of all Platonic Pirates.
}
---
Nch
BUS: [Diplonomic] anonymous proposal
I submit the following Diplonomic Proposal: "anonymous": -- Replace Rule 8 with the following: During the negotiation or order-submission periods, any Contestant CAN submit a proposal to change these rules privately to the Judge. Before the beginning of each turn, the Judge SHALL publish the texts of all proposals submitted during the previous turn. The Judge SHALL NOT reveal the identity of the submitter. Players CAN vote a proposal so published, or withdraw/change their votes, by submitting their votes privately to the judge, only during the turn immediately following that proposal's publication by the judge. The judge CAN and SHALL resolve all proposals on which voting closed at the end of the previous turn, before the next turn, but only after resolving moves and unit adjustments for that turn. E resolves the proposal by publishing the number of votes in favor of it; if the proposal has received a number of non-withdrawn votes in favor greater than half the number of Contestants, it is enacted, otherwise it fails. The Judge SHALL NOT reveal the votes of specific Contestants. If the text of the rules changes, the Judge SHALL publish the new rules text before the start of the next turn. All proposals submitted before this sentence took effect, that have not yet been resolved in some manner, CAN and SHALL be resolved as described above, before the next turn (after this sentence takes effect) begins; after doing so, the Judge CAN remove this sentence by announcement. --- -G.
BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8473-8476
> ID Author(s)AITitle > --- > 8473p Jason, G.1.0 Plain Old Bribery > 8474p G., omd 1.0 Agora the karma bank > 8475p Aris 1.0 Saving Sponsorship > 8476e^ ATMunn, [1] 1.0 Contract charities I vote FOR all of the above proposals. I act on behalf of twg to vote FOR all the above proposals. -G.
Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8473-8476
On 7/12/20 5:36 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-business wrote: > I vote as follows: > > On 7/12/20 4:10 PM, Aris Merchant via agora-official wrote: >> PROMOTOR'S REPORT AS OF RIGHT NOW >> >> I hereby distribute each listed proposal, initiating a referendum on it, >> and removing it from the proposal pool. For this decision, the vote collector >> is the Assessor, the quorum is 9, the voting method is AI-majority, and the >> valid options are FOR and AGAINST (PRESENT is also a valid vote, as are >> conditional votes). >> >> ID Author(s)AITitle >> --- >> 8473p Jason, G.1.0 Plain Old Bribery > FOR >> 8474p G., omd 1.0 Agora the karma bank > AGAINST >> 8475p Aris 1.0 Saving Sponsorship > FOR >> 8476e^ ATMunn, [1] 1.0 Contract charitiesFOR If I have not already, I vote FOR Proposal 8476. -- Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth
BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8473-8476
I vote as follows: On 7/12/20 4:10 PM, Aris Merchant via agora-official wrote: > PROMOTOR'S REPORT AS OF RIGHT NOW > > I hereby distribute each listed proposal, initiating a referendum on it, > and removing it from the proposal pool. For this decision, the vote collector > is the Assessor, the quorum is 9, the voting method is AI-majority, and the > valid options are FOR and AGAINST (PRESENT is also a valid vote, as are > conditional votes). > > ID Author(s)AITitle > --- > 8473p Jason, G.1.0 Plain Old Bribery FOR > 8474p G., omd 1.0 Agora the karma bank AGAINST > 8475p Aris 1.0 Saving Sponsorship FOR > 8476e^ ATMunn, [1] 1.0 Contract charitiesFOR
BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8473-8476
I vote as follows: 8473p Jason, G.1.0 Plain Old Bribery FOR, might as well get the glitter 8474p G., omd 1.0 Agora the karma bank FOR 8475p Aris 1.0 Saving Sponsorship FOR 8476e^ ATMunn, [1] 1.0 Contract charities FOR -- ATMunn friendly neighborhood notary and Czar of Russia :)
BUS: [Promotor & Dragon President] Document Rerouting
This message contains no game actions. OFF is generally used for reports on the state of the game. BUS is generally used for game actions. My routing of documents has not reflected this distinction. The Dragon President's State of the Dragon reports reflect the state of the Dragon Corporation. They will now be sent to OFF unless there are objections. The Promotor's Ministerial Referrals contain only game actions; their results are reported in Promotor's reports and distributions. Accordingly, they will now be sent to BUS.
BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8473-8476
I vote as follows: > ID Author(s)AITitle > --- > 8473p Jason, G.1.0 Plain Old Bribery FOR. Consider this a protest vote against there being no legitimate way to gain black ribbons. > 8474p G., omd 1.0 Agora the karma bank FOR > 8475p Aris 1.0 Saving Sponsorship FOR > 8476e^ ATMunn, [1] 1.0 Contract charities FOR -Aris
BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8473-8476
I vote as follows: > ID Author(s)AITitle > --- > 8473p Jason, G.1.0 Plain Old Bribery FOR, of course. > 8474p G., omd 1.0 Agora the karma bank FOR > 8475p Aris 1.0 Saving Sponsorship FOR > 8476e^ ATMunn, [1] 1.0 Contract charities FOR -- Jason Cobb
BUS: [Promotor] Ministerial Referrals
The Promotor hereby refers proposals as follows: The proposal "Plain Old Bribery" is referred to the Ministry of Participation. The proposal "Agora the karma bank" is referred to the Ministry of Participation. The proposal "Saving Sponsorship" is referred to the Ministry of Participation. The proposal "Contract charities" is referred to the Ministry of Economy.
BUS: Re: OFF: [ADoP] Voting for Coopor
On 7/12/2020 9:17 AM, Edward Murphy via agora-official wrote:
> I initiate an Agoran decision to select the winner of the Coopor
> election. The Vote Collector is the ADoP (me), the valid options
> are the candidates (G. and R. Lee and anyone else who becomes
> one), and the voting method is instant runoff.
I vote {R. Lee, ATMunn, G.} and act on behalf of of twg to vote in the
same way. -G.
BUS: Re: OFF: [ADoP] Voting for Coopor
On 7/12/20 12:17 PM, Edward Murphy via agora-official wrote: > I initiate an Agoran decision to select the winner of the Coopor > election. The Vote Collector is the ADoP (me), the valid options > are the candidates (G. and R. Lee and anyone else who becomes > one), and the voting method is instant runoff. I vote ENDORSE G.. -- Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth
BUS: Re: OFF: [ADoP] Voting for Coopor
On 7/12/2020 12:17 PM, Edward Murphy via agora-official wrote: I initiate an Agoran decision to select the winner of the Coopor election. The Vote Collector is the ADoP (me), the valid options are the candidates (G. and R. Lee and anyone else who becomes one), and the voting method is instant runoff. I become a candidate, and vote [ATMunn, R. Lee, G.]. -- ATMunn friendly neighborhood notary, also Czar of Russia :)
BUS: Re: OFF: [ADoP] Voting for Coopor
On 7/12/20 12:17 PM, Edward Murphy via agora-official wrote: > I initiate an Agoran decision to select the winner of the Coopor > election. The Vote Collector is the ADoP (me), the valid options > are the candidates (G. and R. Lee and anyone else who becomes > one), and the voting method is instant runoff. I vote ENDORSE G. [E created the office, so I think e should have a chance to take it if e wants it.] -- Jason Cobb
Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [ADoP] Voting for Coopor
I vote for myself On Mon., 13 Jul. 2020, 2:24 am Edward Murphy via agora-business, < agora-business@agoranomic.org> wrote: > I wrote: > > > I initiate an Agoran decision to select the winner of the Coopor > > election. The Vote Collector is the ADoP (me), the valid options > > are the candidates (G. and R. Lee and anyone else who becomes > > one), and the voting method is instant runoff. > > I cast a vote endorsing R. Lee. >
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Diplonomic 2020] Disagreeable Proposal
On Sun, 2020-07-12 at 16:02 +, Falsifian via agora-business wrote:
> I submit the following Diplonomic Proposal, titled "Judicial Veto":
>
> {
> To the end of Rule 8, append: "If enacting a proposal would
> interfere
> with the Judge's ability to ensure the smooth running of the game in
> accordance with these rules, then e NEED NOT enact that proposal, so
> long as e publishes an explanation of the problem, and this
> exception
> overrides any requirement for em to enact that proposal."
> }
>
> (This also gives the Judge a way out if a proposal would make eir
> job very difficult.)
CFJ: The above-quoted message created an Agoran proposal.
Evidence: The above-quoted message.
Arguments: The quoted body of text appears to satisfy the requirements
to be a proposal in the Agoran sense, and its author has stated that e
is submitting it as a proposal; it was sent to a public forum, thus
appears to meet the requirements for acting by announcement (the
standard for creating a proposal). It is stated to be a Diplonomic
Proposal; however, I don't see any reason why a Diplonomic Proposal
can't also be an Agoran proposal, as this proposal appears to match
both sets of requirements.
Weighing against this is the fact that it obviously wasn't intended to
create an Agoran proposal. Is that relevant, when establishing whether
an action by announcement has occurred?
--
ais523
BUS: Re: OFF: [ADoP] Voting for Coopor
I wrote: I initiate an Agoran decision to select the winner of the Coopor election. The Vote Collector is the ADoP (me), the valid options are the candidates (G. and R. Lee and anyone else who becomes one), and the voting method is instant runoff. I cast a vote endorsing R. Lee.
Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] CFJ 3863 Assigned to Murphy [attn Treasuror]
I wrote: === CFJ 3863 === FALSE. I award myself Blue Glitter for this judgement (10 coins according to latest Tailor's weekly report).
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Diplonomic 2020] Disagreeable Proposal
On 2020-07-12 4:02 p.m., Falsifian via agora-business wrote:
On 2020-07-12 2:05 p.m., Jason Cobb via agora-discussion wrote:
On 7/11/20 11:59 PM, omd via agora-business wrote:
at 8:42 PM, Falsifian via agora-discussion
wrote:
I think this is missing 'replacing "more supply centers than units"
with
"more Supply than its number of units"'.
I'm not sure what the proposal does in the case that a player has more
Supply than units, but not more supply centres than units.
Whoops. Thanks for pointing that out.
I retract “Disagreeable Proposal”.
I submit the following Diplonomic Proposal, titled “Disagreeable
Proposal
v2":
{{
Create a new Diplonomic rule:
{
All Contestants who submitted a non-withdrawn vote in favor of the
Proposal
that created this rule, before that Proposal was enacted, have one
greater
Supply than they otherwise would.
}
Amend Diplonomic rule 23 by replacing “the number of supply centers it
controls” with “its Supply”, by replacing “fewer supply centers than
units”
with “less Supply than its number of units”, by replacing “more supply
centers than units” with “more Supply than its number of units”, and by
appending as a new paragraph:
{
A country’s Supply is by default the number of supply centers it
controls,
subject to modification by other rules.
}
}}
This proposal would require the Judge to reveal the votes on this
proposal, which e is specifically prohibited from doing.
I submit the following Diplonomic Proposal, titled "Judicial Veto":
{
To the end of Rule 8, append: "If enacting a proposal would interfere
with the Judge's ability to ensure the smooth running of the game in
accordance with these rules, then e NEED NOT enact that proposal, so
long as e publishes an explanation of the problem, and this exception
overrides any requirement for em to enact that proposal."
}
(This also gives the Judge a way out if a proposal would make eir job
very difficult.)
I retract that and in its place submit the following Diplonomic
Proposal, titled "Judicial Veto 1.1":
{
To the end of Rule 8, append: "If enacting a proposal would interfere
with the Judge's ability to ensure the smooth running of the game in
accordance with these rules, then other rules notwithstanding, e NEED
NOT enact that proposal, so long as e publishes an explanation of the
problem."
}
(the ", and ..." seemed gramatically a little ambiguous in the first
version)
--
Falsifian
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Diplonomic 2020] Disagreeable Proposal
On 2020-07-12 2:05 p.m., Jason Cobb via agora-discussion wrote:
On 7/11/20 11:59 PM, omd via agora-business wrote:
at 8:42 PM, Falsifian via agora-discussion
wrote:
I think this is missing 'replacing "more supply centers than units" with
"more Supply than its number of units"'.
I'm not sure what the proposal does in the case that a player has more
Supply than units, but not more supply centres than units.
Whoops. Thanks for pointing that out.
I retract “Disagreeable Proposal”.
I submit the following Diplonomic Proposal, titled “Disagreeable Proposal
v2":
{{
Create a new Diplonomic rule:
{
All Contestants who submitted a non-withdrawn vote in favor of the Proposal
that created this rule, before that Proposal was enacted, have one greater
Supply than they otherwise would.
}
Amend Diplonomic rule 23 by replacing “the number of supply centers it
controls” with “its Supply”, by replacing “fewer supply centers than units”
with “less Supply than its number of units”, by replacing “more supply
centers than units” with “more Supply than its number of units”, and by
appending as a new paragraph:
{
A country’s Supply is by default the number of supply centers it controls,
subject to modification by other rules.
}
}}
This proposal would require the Judge to reveal the votes on this
proposal, which e is specifically prohibited from doing.
I submit the following Diplonomic Proposal, titled "Judicial Veto":
{
To the end of Rule 8, append: "If enacting a proposal would interfere
with the Judge's ability to ensure the smooth running of the game in
accordance with these rules, then e NEED NOT enact that proposal, so
long as e publishes an explanation of the problem, and this exception
overrides any requirement for em to enact that proposal."
}
(This also gives the Judge a way out if a proposal would make eir job
very difficult.)
--
Falsifian
Re: BUS: @Treasuror Weekly Doubloon Report
On 7/12/2020 8:34 AM, Falsifian via agora-business wrote: > On 2020-07-12 10:11 a.m., Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote: >> On 7/12/20 1:49 AM, N. S. via agora-business wrote: >>> I destroy my 12 doubloons in exchange for the plundership coins. >>> >> >> As do I. > > I take 12 Coins from the Plundership. > As do I. -G.
BUS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] CFJ 3863 Assigned to Murphy
G. wrote:
The below CFJ is 3863. I assign it to Murphy.
status: https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/#3863
=== CFJ 3863 ===
Aris MAY Call Destruction Down Upon the contract Amusing Test
Case.
==
Caller:Aris
Judge: Murphy
==
History:
Called by Aris: 01 Jul 2020 04:32:11
Assigned to Murphy: [now]
==
Caller's Arguments:
This case is very simple. Rule 2162, "Switches", defines flipping
switches. This contract attempts to override the definition for its
own purposes. The question is whether the definition in the Rule has
preclusive effect. Definitions ordinarily don't, at least in ordinary
language (i.e. texts regularly redefine special terms). However, Rule
2162 doesn't say it's defining anything, it just does so. It arguably
overrides the definition in the contract. I request the judge also
rule on whether things would differ if Rule 2162 used the word
"define", rather than simply stating the meaning of the term.
Caller's Evidence:
On 6/30/2020 9:32 PM, Aris Merchant via agora-business wrote:
I create, consent to, and become a member of the following contract.
{
Amusing Test Case
Any player CAN become a party to this contract by announcement.
Amusement is an untracked singleton negative boolean switch.
Destructibility is an untracked singleton negative boolean switch.
Any other definition notwithstanding, "to flip the amusement switch to
true" (and similar variations thereof) means to change the value of
the destructibility switch to true, and has no effect on the amusement
switch.
Aris CAN flip the amusement switch to true by announcement.
Aris CAN Call Destruction Down Upon this contract by announcement.
This instant after e does so, this contract is destroyed. Aris SHALL
NOT Call Destruction Down Upon this contract unless the value of the
destructibility switch is true.
One week after this contract comes into existence, the value of
destructibility switch is set to true.
}
I flip the amusement switch to true (under the definition specified by
the contract).
Rule 2162/13 (Power=3)
Switches
A type of switch is a property that the rules define as a switch,
and specify the following:
1. The type(s) of entity possessing an instance of that switch. No
other entity possesses an instance of that switch.
2. One or more possible values for instances of that switch,
exactly one of which should be designated as the default. No
values other than those listed are possible for instances of
that switch, except that, if no default is specified, then
rules to the contrary notwithstanding, the "null" value is a
possible value for that switch, and is the default.
3. Optionally, exactly one office whose holder tracks instances of
that switch. That officer's (weekly, if not specified
otherwise) report includes the value of each instance of that
switch whose value is not its default value; a public document
purporting to be this portion of that officer's report is
self-ratifying, and implies that other instances are at their
default value.
At any given time, each instance of a switch has exactly one
possible value for that type of switch. If an instance of a switch
comes to have a value, it ceases to have any other value. If an
instance of a switch would otherwise fail to have a possible
value, it comes to have its default value. A Rule that designates
a switch as "secured" (at a given power level) designates changes
to the properties of that type of switch as secured (at that power
level) and designates changes to the value of each instance of the
switch as secured (at that power level).
"To flip an instance of a switch" is to make it come to have a
given value. "To become X" (where X is a possible value of
exactly one of the subject's switches) is to flip that switch to
X.
If a type of switch is not explicitly designated as
possibly-indeterminate by the rule that defines it, and if an
action or set of actions would cause the value of an instance of
that type of switch to become indeterminate, that instance instead
takes on its last determinate and possible value, if any,
otherwise it takes on its default value.
A singleton switch is a switch for which Agora Nomic is the only
entity possessing an instance of that switch.
A boolean switch is a switch with values True and False. A
Re: BUS: @Treasuror Weekly Doubloon Report
On 7/12/20 1:49 AM, N. S. via agora-business wrote:
> Cuddlebeam, nch, R. Lee, P.S.S., G., Bögtil, Jason, Falsifian,
>
> Aris, ATMunn
>
>
> Each of the above listed players has 125/10=12 doubloons.
Let N be the number of doubloons in my possession (12, if the above is
correct or self-ratifies). I perform the following action N times:
{
I transfer one coin from the Plunder Partnership to myself, thus causing
one doubloon in my possession to be destroyed.
}
--
Jason Cobb
Re: BUS: @Treasuror Weekly Doubloon Report
On 7/12/2020 6:11 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-business wrote: On 7/12/20 1:49 AM, N. S. via agora-business wrote: I destroy my 12 doubloons in exchange for the plundership coins. As do I. I do so as well. -- ATMunn friendly neighborhood notary, also Czar of Russia :)
Re: BUS: @Treasuror Weekly Doubloon Report
On 2020-07-12 10:11 a.m., Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-business wrote: On 7/12/20 1:49 AM, N. S. via agora-business wrote: I destroy my 12 doubloons in exchange for the plundership coins. As do I. I take 12 Coins from the Plundership. -- Falsifian
BUS: [Arbitor] A Venetian holiday
I intend to make full use of the holiday and not produce a report until next week, but if there's an unassigned CFJ you think is urgent, please let me know and I'll assign (won't delay more than a few days). -G. the Arbitor and Emperor of Rome
BUS: CFJ 3862 Recusal and Thoughts
On 7/5/20 2:22 PM, Kerim Aydin via agora-official wrote: > The below CFJ is 3862. I assign it to Publius Scribonius Scholasticus. > > status: https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/#3862 > > === CFJ 3862 === > > Facts (for example, 2 + 2 = 4), for the purposes of Agoran play, > rely on some function of the collective Agoran opinion and not > necessarily some objective reality. For example, if enough Agorans > believe that 2 + 2 = 5 is true, it is then so for Agora. > > == I recuse myself from CFJ 3862. I was considering DISMISSing this because I think that the statement isn't appropriate for a CFJ, so it is malformed, but I'm not sure that's an appropriate use of it, so I'd like to give someone else an opportunity to address this. I don't think that a CFJ is the best venue for answering this sort of question given that its not really a question that could impact any internal aspect of the gamestate and there are different positions that could all be equally valid, therefore I encourage Cuddlebeam and others interested in expressing themselves on this question to instead write a thesis. -- Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth
BUS: Deputisation Intent
Murphy missed eir report last week, I'll give him 2 days from now. I intend to deputise for ADoP to publish eir weekly report. -- >From R. Lee
BUS: [Proposal] Re: DIS: [Promotor] Draft
On 7/12/20 3:48 AM, Aris Merchant via agora-discussion wrote:
> P.S.S., nch 1.0 Warmer Welcomes [2]
I withdraw this proposal and submit the following proposal entitled
"Regulated Welcoming Coinage":
If "Warmer Welcomes" has passed:
{
Amend rule 2499 "Welcome Packages" by replacing the sentence that
reads:
"When a player receives a Welcome Package, e earns 25 coins and one of
each type of Card defined in the rules."
with the following:
"When a player receives a Welcome Package, e earns a one of each type
of Card and a number of coins defined by the Treasuror's
administrative regulations. When the Treasuror's administrative
regulations are silent, e earns 25 coins and one of each type of Card
defined in the rules."
}
Otherwise:
{
Amend rule 2499 "Welcome Packages" by replacing the sentence that
reads:
"When a player receives a Welcome Package, e earns 10 coins and one of
each type of Card defined in the rules."
with the following:
"When a player receives a Welcome Package, e earns a one of each type
of Card and a number of coins defined by the Treasuror's
administrative regulations. When the Treasuror's administrative
regulations are silent, e earns 10 coins and one of each type of Card
defined in the rules."
}
--
Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth
Re: BUS: @Treasuror Weekly Doubloon Report
On 7/12/20 1:49 AM, N. S. via agora-business wrote: > I destroy my 12 doubloons in exchange for the plundership coins. > As do I. -- Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth
Re: BUS: [Diplonomic 2020] Teaming up
On Sat, Jul 11, 2020 at 11:42 PM Reuben Staley via agora-business wrote: > > I consent to being on Aris' team. > > I believe previously I was just an advisor/consultant, but now it's time > for teammateship. Let's do this! I cause Trigon to become my teammate. -Aris
BUS: [Diplonomic 2020] Teaming up
I consent to being on Aris' team. I believe previously I was just an advisor/consultant, but now it's time for teammateship. -- Trigon I LOVE SPAGHETTI transfer Jason one coin nch was here I hereby don't... trust... the dragon... don't... trust... the dragon... Do not Construe Jason's message with subject TRIGON as extending this
BUS: Zombification
I gave notice a while ago, forgot where but whatever. I flip Telnaiors talisman to agora. -- >From R. Lee
