BUS: Re: DIS: [Promotor] Draft Report

2020-05-25 Thread Kerim Aydin via agora-business


On 5/24/2020 1:42 PM, Aris Merchant via agora-discussion wrote:
> 8395#  G., R. Lee   1.7   Mooting moots
> 8396*  grok, nch3.0   a Proposed Contract

I withdraw the above proposals from the proposal pool (noting the error in
authorship of the second one).



BUS: Re: DIS: [Promotor] Draft Report

2019-06-11 Thread Aris Merchant
Thank you! I pay Jason Cobb 2 coins.

-Aris

On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 4:34 PM Jason Cobb  wrote:
>
> I am the author of "Not so indestructible now, eh?". This is correct in
> the table but not correct in the text of the proposal.
>
> Jason Cobb
>
> On 6/11/19 7:31 PM, Aris Merchant wrote:
> > Given how long it's been, and how many proposals there are, I'd like
> > to send out a draft rather than just getting everything wrong. Here's
> > that draft. There will be a small reward (plus my appreciation) for
> > any corrections!
> >
> > -Aris
> > ---
> > 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 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).
> >
> > IDAuthor(s) AITitle
> > ---
> > 8180  Trigon, D Margaux 1.0   Paying our Assessor
> > 8181  D Margaux, [1]1.7   Referee CAN Impose Fines (v1.1)
> > 8182  Jason Cobb3.0   Add value to zombies
> > 8183  V.J. Rada, Tiger  3.0   Regulated Actions Reform
> > 8184  G.3.0   power-limit precedence
> > 8185  Trigon3.0   OUGHT we?
> > 8186  Jason Cobb3.0   Minor currency fixes
> > 8187  Jason Cobb3.0   Not so indestructible now, eh?
> >
> > [1] Falsifian, twg
> >
> > The proposal pool is currently empty.
> >
> > The full text of the aforementioned proposal(s) is included below.
> >
> > //
> > ID: 8180
> > Title: Paying our Assessor
> > Adoption index: 1.0
> > Author: Trigon
> > Co-authors: D Margaux
> >
> >
> > [ Comment: This is something I didn't include from the version of
> > Rule 2496 that I didn't include for whatever reason. ]
> >
> > To Rule 2496 "Rewards" add the following bullet point after the third
> > one:
> >"Resolving an Agoran Decision on whether to adopt a proposal,
> >provided that no other Agoran Decision on whether to adopt that or any
> >other proposal had been resolved earlier in that Agoran week: 5 coins."
> >
> > //
> > ID: 8181
> > Title: Referee CAN Impose Fines (v1.1)
> > Adoption index: 1.7
> > Author: D Margaux
> > Co-authors: Falsifian, twg
> >
> >
> > Amend Rule 2478 to replace this text:
> >
> >“When a player Points a Finger, the investigator SHALL investigate the
> >allegation and, in a timely fashion, SHALL conclude the investigation 
> > by:”
> >
> > With this text:
> >
> >“When a player Points a Finger, the investigator SHALL investigate the
> >allegation and CAN, and in a timely fashion SHALL, conclude the 
> > investigation
> >by:”
> >
> > //
> > ID: 8182
> > Title: Add value to zombies
> > Adoption index: 3.0
> > Author: Jason Cobb
> > Co-authors:
> >
> >
> > Amend Rule 2574 as follows:
> >
> >Replace the text
> >  "Resale is a secured natural switch for zombies"
> >with the text
> >  "Resale value is a secured natural switch for zombies".
> >
> >Replace the text "Resale value" in the third item of the only list
> >with the text "resale value".
> >
> > //
> > ID: 8183
> > Title: Regulated Actions Reform
> > Adoption index: 3.0
> > Author: V.J. Rada
> > Co-authors: Tiger
> >
> >
> > Amend Rule 2125 "Regulated Actions" by replacing the text
> >"The Rules SHALL NOT be interpreted so as to proscribe unregulated 
> > actions."
> >
> > with the text
> >
> >"Nothing in the Rules and no other Entity nor any other thing under these
> >rules proscribes unregulated actions, and this sentence takes precedence
> >over any Rule or Entity that could be interpreted as proscribing such an
> >action"
> >
> > //
> > ID: 8184
> > Title: power-limit precedence
> > Adoption index: 3.0
> > Author: G.
> > Co-authors:
> >
> >
> > Amend Rule 2140 (Power Controls Mutability) by replacing:
> >No entity with power below
> > with:
> >Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, no entity with power below
> >
> > //
> > ID: 8185
> > Title: OUGHT we?
> > Adoption index: 3.0
> > Author: Trigon
> > Co-authors:
> >
> > In Rule 2152:
> >replace "SHOULD NOT, DISCOURAGED, DEPRECATED"
> >with "SHOULD NOT, OUGHT NOT, DISCOURAGED, DEPRECATED",
> >
> >and replace "SHOULD, ENCOURAGED, RECOMMENDED"
> >with "SHOULD, OUGHT, ENCOURAGED, RECOMMENDED"
> >
> > //
> > ID: 

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Promotor draft report

2017-09-01 Thread Nicholas Evans
TTttPF

On Sep 1, 2017 7:32 AM, wrote:

> I withdraw the proposal titled Debts.
>
> On Sep 1, 2017 1:21 AM, "Aris Merchant"  gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> nichdel, is debts being pulled? I should be releasing fairly soonish (as
>> in the next day or two).
>>
>> -Aris
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 3:30 PM Nic Evans  wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 08/31/17 16:50, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>>> >
>>> > On Thu, 31 Aug 2017, Nic Evans wrote:
>>> >>> I'm opposed to anything that doesn't scale with need. A regular
>>> payday
>>> >>> would mostly benefit the already successful players.
>>> > This is where I disagree, primarily.  We've never had a system that
>>> didn't
>>> > allow a base level of activity on a weekly or monthly level (proposals
>>> & CFJs)
>>> > just for being a player.
>>>
>>> I'm not sure I see the complaint here. Under AP there is a minimum, and
>>> in Debts you can just keep making CFJs and proposals indefinitely - you
>>> just can't buy stamps or estates until you settle debts.
>>>
>>> What I mean here is that giving X shinies to each player is a
>>> compounding advantage for players that are really good with shinies.
>>> They don't need that advantage. Thus, any free shinies should be given
>>> out based on need, and when a player reaches a point where they can
>>> efficiently use their shinies, they don't receive the bonus anymore.
>>>
>>> >
>>> > And officer-work, volunteer as it is, has always granted perks within
>>> the
>>> > system, and I think it's important to reward work.  I'm not sure why a
>>> regular
>>> > payday is a bad thing - if accumulation is an issue, I'd suggest
>>> dealing with
>>> > it on the other side with taxes.
>>> >
>>> > I'm willing to try various systems, but don't like moving away from the
>>> > two principles of "everyone's allowed to have a base activity level"
>>> and
>>> > "officers get some rewards above that".
>>> >
>>> >> Actually, on this note maybe we should consider a monthly set of shiny
>>> >> rewards for minor achivements. Things like:
>>> >>
>>> >> *Authoring the most passed proposals in the last month
>>> >> *Judging the most CFJs in the last month
>>> >> *Being the director of the most used agency in the last month
>>> >> *Etc
>>> >>
>>> >> Ideally, things that any player could accomplish at any time.
>>> > An old system we had:
>>> >
>>> > You could be awarded Boons for doing good things and Albatrosses for
>>> doing
>>> > bad things.  Everything from standard office-keeping to random
>>> occasional
>>> > things (like Birthday recognition) granted boons.  Monthly activity
>>> level
>>> > each month was Base + Boons - Albatrosses (as earned in previous
>>> month).
>>> >
>>> > Glance through following randomly-selected ruleset for Boon to see
>>> range of
>>> > things we awarded:
>>> > https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora
>>> -official/2004-September/001691.html
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>


BUS: Re: DIS: Promotor draft report

2017-08-29 Thread Owen Jacobson
> IDAuthor(s)   AI   Title
> ---
> pp1   nichdel, o, grok, Aris  3.0  Debts
> pp2   nichdel 1.0  Better Accounting

I pend each of these proposals, using AP to do so.

-o




signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP


BUS: Re: DIS: Promotor draft report

2017-08-29 Thread Kerim Aydin



On Mon, 28 Aug 2017, Aris Merchant wrote:
> pp3   G.  1.0  The Return of Fear
> pp4   G.  1.0  Pay the Arbitor

I remove these two proposals from the pool.  -G.