Re: BUS: [Secretary] Basic income distribution revision 2 (attn ais523)

[VJ Rada]

Oh that's an obligation! Technically you missed making payments in a
timely way for a large variety of payments. However, due to your
good-faith attempt to make the payments in a timely way, I issue you a
Green Card.

On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 11:31 AM, Owen Jacobson  wrote:
> To close the loop on this, per CFJ 3583, ais523 was _not_ a player at this 
> time.
>
> Therefore, I believe that the following payments from the below-quoted 
> message succeeded:
>
>> On Oct 25, 2017, at 2:14 AM, Owen Jacobson  wrote:
>>
>>
>> #  Recipient   Gaelan   PT[1] (registration order, earliest-to-latest)
>> -
>>  0  4 sh.   0 sh.
>>  1 PT[1]4 sh.   1 sh.
>>  3 PT[1]4 sh.   2 sh.
>>  5 PT[1]4 sh.   3 sh.
>>  7 PT[1]4 sh.   4 sh.
>>  9 Gaelen   5 sh.   4 sh.
>> 10 PT[1]5 sh.   5 sh.
>> 12 Gaelan   6 sh.   5 sh.
>> 13 PT[1]6 sh.   6 sh.
>> 15 Gaelan   7 sh.   6 sh.
>> 16 PT[1]7 sh.   7 sh.
>> 18 Gaelan   8 sh.   7 sh.
>> 19 PT[1]8 sh.   8 sh.
>>
>> [1] ProofTechnique
>
> This leaves a number of payments to Agora un-distributed. I’ll address them 
> today.
>
> -o
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: BUS: [Secretary] Basic income distribution revision 2 (attn ais523)

[Owen Jacobson]

To close the loop on this, per CFJ 3583, ais523 was _not_ a player at this time.

Therefore, I believe that the following payments from the below-quoted message 
succeeded:

> On Oct 25, 2017, at 2:14 AM, Owen Jacobson  wrote:
> 
> 
> #  Recipient   Gaelan   PT[1] (registration order, earliest-to-latest)
> -
>  0  4 sh.   0 sh.
>  1 PT[1]4 sh.   1 sh.
>  3 PT[1]4 sh.   2 sh.
>  5 PT[1]4 sh.   3 sh.
>  7 PT[1]4 sh.   4 sh.
>  9 Gaelen   5 sh.   4 sh.
> 10 PT[1]5 sh.   5 sh.
> 12 Gaelan   6 sh.   5 sh.
> 13 PT[1]6 sh.   6 sh.
> 15 Gaelan   7 sh.   6 sh.
> 16 PT[1]7 sh.   7 sh.
> 18 Gaelan   8 sh.   7 sh.
> 19 PT[1]8 sh.   8 sh.
> 
> [1] ProofTechnique

This leaves a number of payments to Agora un-distributed. I’ll address them 
today.

-o



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: BUS: [Secretary] Basic income distribution revision 2 (attn ais523)

[Nic Evans]

On 10/25/17 02:18, VJ Rada wrote:
> By the way, I'm pretty sure that ais523 isn't a player? E was only
> made a player by ratification, and CFJ 3455 specifies quite clearly
> that a report ratifying cannot make anyone a player who did not
> consent to being one.
>
> So, I'm pretty sure this also didn't work. This is also a CoE on the
> Secretary report: ais523 is no player.
>
> For the avoidance of doubt, I CFJ on "ais523 is a player", with
> shinies. I direct the judge to CFJ 3455. It is undisputed that ais523
> never consented to becoming a player and if e is so, e is only so by
> ratification.

I favor this case.

>
> On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 5:14 PM, Owen Jacobson  > wrote:
>
> On Oct 25, 2017, at 12:30 AM, Owen Jacobson  > wrote:
>
> > I cause Agora to make the following payments, which I believe
> can be uniquely decomposed into the individual payments required
> by “Passive Income”:
> >
> > * 8 sh. to ProofTechnique
> > * 8 sh. to ais523
> > * 4 sh. to G.
>
> The payments to G. were ineffective, as e was not eligible to
> receive them. This means I need to decompose the distribution to
> debug it and fix it, which is - I think - what G. specifically
> warned me about. I spent some effort trying to work out what
> actually happened, but as there is no unique distribution of sh.
> for which the previous attempt could be successful, I believe it
> failed outright due to ambiguity.
>
> Because this failed, I believe ais523’s attempt to buy a stamp
> also failed.
>
> The following chart shows the correct distribution of shinies, and
> I cause Agora to pay 1 sh. to each recipient listed below, in
> order. In total, this will cause Agora to pay:
>
> * ProofTechnique: 8 sh.
> * ais523: 8 sh.
> * Gaelan: 4 sh.
>
> #  Recipient   Gaelan   PT[1]   ais523 (registration order,
> earliest-to-latest)
> --
>  0              4 sh.   0 sh.    0 sh.
>  1 PT[1]        4 sh.   1 sh.    0 sh.
>  2 ais523       4 sh.   1 sh.    1 sh.
>  3 PT[1]        4 sh.   2 sh.    1 sh.
>  4 ais523       4 sh.   2 sh.    2 sh.
>  5 PT[1]        4 sh.   3 sh.    2 sh.
>  6 ais523       4 sh.   3 sh.    3 sh.
>  7 PT[1]        4 sh.   4 sh.    3 sh.
>  8 ais523       4 sh.   4 sh.    4 sh.
>  9 Gaelen       5 sh.   4 sh.    4 sh.
> 10 PT[1]        5 sh.   5 sh.    4 sh.
> 11 ais523       5 sh.   5 sh.    5 sh.
> 12 Gaelan       6 sh.   5 sh.    5 sh.
> 13 PT[1]        6 sh.   6 sh.    5 sh.
> 14 ais523       6 sh.   6 sh.    6 sh.
> 15 Gaelan       7 sh.   6 sh.    6 sh.
> 16 PT[1]        7 sh.   7 sh.    6 sh.
> 17 ais523       7 sh.   7 sh.    7 sh.
> 18 Gaelan       8 sh.   7 sh.    7 sh.
> 19 PT[1]        8 sh.   8 sh.    7 sh.
> 20 ais523       8 sh.   8 sh.    8 sh.
>
> [1] ProofTechnique
>
> -o
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> From V.J. Rada



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: BUS: [Secretary] Basic income distribution revision 2 (attn ais523)

[Alex Smith]

On Wed, 2017-10-25 at 02:14 -0400, Owen Jacobson wrote:
> Because this failed, I believe ais523’s attempt to buy a stamp also
> failed.
> 
> The following chart shows the correct distribution of shinies, and I
> cause Agora to pay 1 sh. to each recipient listed below, in order. In
> total, this will cause Agora to pay:
> 
> * ProofTechnique: 8 sh.
> * ais523: 8 sh.
> * Gaelan: 4 sh.

I buy a Stamp.

I now have 8sh. minus whatever the stamp value is.

-- 
ais523

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Secretary] Basic income distribution revision 2 (attn ais523)

[VJ Rada]

It was a statement to a-d. And it was certainly made not when e was
ratified a player but well after, which means that e was still invalidly a
player for quite a while.

Oh by the way, I bar PSS from the below CFJ.

On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 9:27 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus <
p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Actually, when this came up, e made a statement that could have been
> consent and I believe G. may have mentioned that he thought it could count.
>
>
> On 10/25/2017 03:18 AM, VJ Rada wrote:
> > By the way, I'm pretty sure that ais523 isn't a player? E was only
> > made a player by ratification, and CFJ 3455 specifies quite clearly
> > that a report ratifying cannot make anyone a player who did not
> > consent to being one.
> >
> > So, I'm pretty sure this also didn't work. This is also a CoE on the
> > Secretary report: ais523 is no player.
> >
> > For the avoidance of doubt, I CFJ on "ais523 is a player", with
> > shinies. I direct the judge to CFJ 3455. It is undisputed that ais523
> > never consented to becoming a player and if e is so, e is only so by
> > ratification.
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 5:14 PM, Owen Jacobson  > > wrote:
> >
> > On Oct 25, 2017, at 12:30 AM, Owen Jacobson  > > wrote:
> >
> > > I cause Agora to make the following payments, which I believe
> > can be uniquely decomposed into the individual payments required
> > by “Passive Income”:
> > >
> > > * 8 sh. to ProofTechnique
> > > * 8 sh. to ais523
> > > * 4 sh. to G.
> >
> > The payments to G. were ineffective, as e was not eligible to
> > receive them. This means I need to decompose the distribution to
> > debug it and fix it, which is - I think - what G. specifically
> > warned me about. I spent some effort trying to work out what
> > actually happened, but as there is no unique distribution of sh.
> > for which the previous attempt could be successful, I believe it
> > failed outright due to ambiguity.
> >
> > Because this failed, I believe ais523’s attempt to buy a stamp
> > also failed.
> >
> > The following chart shows the correct distribution of shinies, and
> > I cause Agora to pay 1 sh. to each recipient listed below, in
> > order. In total, this will cause Agora to pay:
> >
> > * ProofTechnique: 8 sh.
> > * ais523: 8 sh.
> > * Gaelan: 4 sh.
> >
> > #  Recipient   Gaelan   PT[1]   ais523 (registration order,
> > earliest-to-latest)
> > --
> >  0  4 sh.   0 sh.0 sh.
> >  1 PT[1]4 sh.   1 sh.0 sh.
> >  2 ais523   4 sh.   1 sh.1 sh.
> >  3 PT[1]4 sh.   2 sh.1 sh.
> >  4 ais523   4 sh.   2 sh.2 sh.
> >  5 PT[1]4 sh.   3 sh.2 sh.
> >  6 ais523   4 sh.   3 sh.3 sh.
> >  7 PT[1]4 sh.   4 sh.3 sh.
> >  8 ais523   4 sh.   4 sh.4 sh.
> >  9 Gaelen   5 sh.   4 sh.4 sh.
> > 10 PT[1]5 sh.   5 sh.4 sh.
> > 11 ais523   5 sh.   5 sh.5 sh.
> > 12 Gaelan   6 sh.   5 sh.5 sh.
> > 13 PT[1]6 sh.   6 sh.5 sh.
> > 14 ais523   6 sh.   6 sh.6 sh.
> > 15 Gaelan   7 sh.   6 sh.6 sh.
> > 16 PT[1]7 sh.   7 sh.6 sh.
> > 17 ais523   7 sh.   7 sh.7 sh.
> > 18 Gaelan   8 sh.   7 sh.7 sh.
> > 19 PT[1]8 sh.   8 sh.7 sh.
> > 20 ais523   8 sh.   8 sh.8 sh.
> >
> > [1] ProofTechnique
> >
> > -o
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > From V.J. Rada
>
>


-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: BUS: [Secretary] Basic income distribution revision 2 (attn ais523)

[VJ Rada]

By the way, I'm pretty sure that ais523 isn't a player? E was only made a
player by ratification, and CFJ 3455 specifies quite clearly that a report
ratifying cannot make anyone a player who did not consent to being one.

So, I'm pretty sure this also didn't work. This is also a CoE on the
Secretary report: ais523 is no player.

For the avoidance of doubt, I CFJ on "ais523 is a player", with shinies. I
direct the judge to CFJ 3455. It is undisputed that ais523 never consented
to becoming a player and if e is so, e is only so by ratification.

On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 5:14 PM, Owen Jacobson  wrote:

> On Oct 25, 2017, at 12:30 AM, Owen Jacobson  wrote:
>
> > I cause Agora to make the following payments, which I believe can be
> uniquely decomposed into the individual payments required by “Passive
> Income”:
> >
> > * 8 sh. to ProofTechnique
> > * 8 sh. to ais523
> > * 4 sh. to G.
>
> The payments to G. were ineffective, as e was not eligible to receive
> them. This means I need to decompose the distribution to debug it and fix
> it, which is - I think - what G. specifically warned me about. I spent some
> effort trying to work out what actually happened, but as there is no unique
> distribution of sh. for which the previous attempt could be successful, I
> believe it failed outright due to ambiguity.
>
> Because this failed, I believe ais523’s attempt to buy a stamp also failed.
>
> The following chart shows the correct distribution of shinies, and I cause
> Agora to pay 1 sh. to each recipient listed below, in order. In total, this
> will cause Agora to pay:
>
> * ProofTechnique: 8 sh.
> * ais523: 8 sh.
> * Gaelan: 4 sh.
>
> #  Recipient   Gaelan   PT[1]   ais523 (registration order,
> earliest-to-latest)
> --
>  0  4 sh.   0 sh.0 sh.
>  1 PT[1]4 sh.   1 sh.0 sh.
>  2 ais523   4 sh.   1 sh.1 sh.
>  3 PT[1]4 sh.   2 sh.1 sh.
>  4 ais523   4 sh.   2 sh.2 sh.
>  5 PT[1]4 sh.   3 sh.2 sh.
>  6 ais523   4 sh.   3 sh.3 sh.
>  7 PT[1]4 sh.   4 sh.3 sh.
>  8 ais523   4 sh.   4 sh.4 sh.
>  9 Gaelen   5 sh.   4 sh.4 sh.
> 10 PT[1]5 sh.   5 sh.4 sh.
> 11 ais523   5 sh.   5 sh.5 sh.
> 12 Gaelan   6 sh.   5 sh.5 sh.
> 13 PT[1]6 sh.   6 sh.5 sh.
> 14 ais523   6 sh.   6 sh.6 sh.
> 15 Gaelan   7 sh.   6 sh.6 sh.
> 16 PT[1]7 sh.   7 sh.6 sh.
> 17 ais523   7 sh.   7 sh.7 sh.
> 18 Gaelan   8 sh.   7 sh.7 sh.
> 19 PT[1]8 sh.   8 sh.7 sh.
> 20 ais523   8 sh.   8 sh.8 sh.
>
> [1] ProofTechnique
>
> -o
>
>


-- 
>From V.J. Rada

BUS: [Secretary] Basic income distribution revision 2 (attn ais523)

[Owen Jacobson]

On Oct 25, 2017, at 12:30 AM, Owen Jacobson  wrote:

> I cause Agora to make the following payments, which I believe can be uniquely 
> decomposed into the individual payments required by “Passive Income”:
> 
> * 8 sh. to ProofTechnique
> * 8 sh. to ais523
> * 4 sh. to G.

The payments to G. were ineffective, as e was not eligible to receive them. 
This means I need to decompose the distribution to debug it and fix it, which 
is - I think - what G. specifically warned me about. I spent some effort trying 
to work out what actually happened, but as there is no unique distribution of 
sh. for which the previous attempt could be successful, I believe it failed 
outright due to ambiguity.

Because this failed, I believe ais523’s attempt to buy a stamp also failed.

The following chart shows the correct distribution of shinies, and I cause 
Agora to pay 1 sh. to each recipient listed below, in order. In total, this 
will cause Agora to pay:

* ProofTechnique: 8 sh.
* ais523: 8 sh.
* Gaelan: 4 sh.

#  Recipient   Gaelan   PT[1]   ais523 (registration order, earliest-to-latest)
--
 0  4 sh.   0 sh.0 sh.
 1 PT[1]4 sh.   1 sh.0 sh.
 2 ais523   4 sh.   1 sh.1 sh.
 3 PT[1]4 sh.   2 sh.1 sh.
 4 ais523   4 sh.   2 sh.2 sh.
 5 PT[1]4 sh.   3 sh.2 sh.
 6 ais523   4 sh.   3 sh.3 sh.
 7 PT[1]4 sh.   4 sh.3 sh.
 8 ais523   4 sh.   4 sh.4 sh.
 9 Gaelen   5 sh.   4 sh.4 sh.
10 PT[1]5 sh.   5 sh.4 sh.
11 ais523   5 sh.   5 sh.5 sh.
12 Gaelan   6 sh.   5 sh.5 sh.
13 PT[1]6 sh.   6 sh.5 sh.
14 ais523   6 sh.   6 sh.6 sh.
15 Gaelan   7 sh.   6 sh.6 sh.
16 PT[1]7 sh.   7 sh.6 sh.
17 ais523   7 sh.   7 sh.7 sh.
18 Gaelan   8 sh.   7 sh.7 sh.
19 PT[1]8 sh.   8 sh.7 sh.
20 ais523   8 sh.   8 sh.8 sh.

[1] ProofTechnique

-o



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: BUS: [Secretary] Basic income distribution

[Owen Jacobson]

On Oct 25, 2017, at 1:06 AM, Alex Smith  wrote:

> On Wed, 2017-10-25 at 00:30 -0400, Owen Jacobson wrote:
>> I cause Agora to make the following payments, which I believe can be
>> uniquely decomposed into the individual payments required by “Passive
>> Income”:
>> 
>> * 8 sh. to ProofTechnique
>> * 8 sh. to ais523
>> * 4 sh. to G.
> 
> I create a Stamp.

I cause Agora to distribute 3 sh. paid as follows:

* 2 sh. to ais523 (initial balance 2, registered 24 Sep 17)
* 1 sh. to Gaelan (initial balance 4, registered 25 Aug 17)

-o


signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: BUS: [Secretary] Basic income distribution

[Alex Smith]

On Wed, 2017-10-25 at 00:30 -0400, Owen Jacobson wrote:
> I cause Agora to make the following payments, which I believe can be
> uniquely decomposed into the individual payments required by “Passive
> Income”:
> 
> * 8 sh. to ProofTechnique
> * 8 sh. to ais523
> * 4 sh. to G.

I create a Stamp.

-- 
ais523

BUS: [Secretary] Basic income distribution

[Owen Jacobson]

I’m going to do this longhand, to make sure that I get it right. As I read the 
rules, if any of the following is incorrect, only the affected distributions 
fail.

Per the rule titled “Passive Income”, the tax rate is presently 50. As no 
income distribution has previously occurred, all payments to Agora made since 
the enactment of proposal 7921 are eligible for distribution. These are as 
follows:

Mon, 16 Oct 2017 00:27:13  Aris paid Agora 1 sh.
Mon, 16 Oct 2017 03:03:06  Aris paid Agora 1 sh.
Mon, 16 Oct 2017 03:17:51  Aris paid Agora 1 sh.
Tue, 17 Oct 2017 13:14:21  ATMunn paid Agora 1 sh.
Fri, 20 Oct 2017 20:22:56  Alexis paid Agora 1 sh.
Fri, 20 Oct 2017 22:10:24  ATMunn paid Agora 1 sh.
Sat, 21 Oct 2017 01:52:53  Aris paid Agora 1 sh.
Sun, 22 Oct 2017 18:26:44  Proposal 7924 ("Contracts v8") enacted
[Agora received 1 sh. from the defunct Organization “ASaAA”.]
Sun, 22 Oct 2017 21:52:16  V.J Rada paid Agora 1 sh.
Mon, 23 Oct 2017 00:30:10  G. paid Agora 1 sh.
Mon, 23 Oct 2017 06:02:31  天火狐 paid Agora 1 sh.
Mon, 23 Oct 2017 13:19:56  ATMunn paid Agora 1 sh.
Wed, 25 Oct 2017 02:18:37  Aris paid Agora 1 sh.
Wed, 25 Oct 2017 02:38:09  o paid Agora 1 sh.
Wed, 25 Oct 2017 02:38:41  o paid Agora 1 sh.
Wed, 25 Oct 2017 03:22:59  V.J Rada paid Agora 1 sh.

The tax rate is applied to each payment separately; 50% of 1 sh., rounded up, 
is 1 shiny. Therefore, Agora stands to distribute 16 shinies. Since Agora has 
only 12 Shinies at this time, I pay Agora 8 shinies - which also means that an 
additional 4 sh. are eligible to be distributed, bringing the total to be 
distributed - and Agora’s balance - to 20 shinies.

The following players are presently registered (listed with balances):

Name  Balance
-
ProofTechnique  0
ais523  0
Gaelan  4
nichdel17
Trigon 20
Aris   32
G. 33
V.J. Rada  39
ATMunn 50
Ienpw III  50
omd50
Bayushi50
Murphy 50
Quazie 50
Telnaior   55
Cuddle Beam65
o  70
天火狐  75
Alexis103
P. Scholasticus [1]   165

[1] In full, "Publius Scribonius Scholasticus”

Fortunately, there aren’t enough shinies to distribute to make the massive tie 
at 50 sh. relevant, so I haven’t had to sort by registration date as well as by 
balance. However, that’ll eventually become relevant; I’ll take care of that 
when it becomes necessary (which I suspect will be next week).

I cause Agora to make the following payments, which I believe can be uniquely 
decomposed into the individual payments required by “Passive Income”:

* 8 sh. to ProofTechnique
* 8 sh. to ais523
* 4 sh. to G.

-o



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP