BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8530-8531

2021-01-24 Thread nix via agora-business



On 1/19/21 1:34 AM, Aris Merchant via agora-official wrote:
> ID  Author(s) AITitle
> ---
> 8530g^  nix, Jason1.0   No Honour
FOR
> 8531g^  Jason 1.5   Patent Title Restoration v2
FOR; but I considered present or against because it I think broad 
statements like "restore all that..." are bad form. Enumeration is 
preferable IMO.


-- 
nix Webmastor, Ministor, Herald



Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8530-8531 (attn Assessor)

2021-01-24 Thread Edward Murphy via agora-business

I wrote:


I vote as follows:


8530g^  nix, Jason    1.0   No Honour

endorse Herald


8531g^  Jason 1.5   Patent Title Restoration v2FOR


Note, that was intended to be a vote FOR 8531. Not sure if I mucked up
the line breaks or my client did.


BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8530-8531

2021-01-24 Thread Edward Murphy via agora-business

I vote as follows:


8530g^  nix, Jason1.0   No Honour

endorse Herald


8531g^  Jason 1.5   Patent Title Restoration v2FOR


BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8530-8531

2021-01-20 Thread Noah Noah via agora-business



On 1/19/21 2:34 AM, Aris Merchant via agora-official wrote:

ID  Author(s) AITitle
---
8530g^  nix, Jason1.0   No Honour

_/*P R E S E N T*/__//_

8531g^  Jason 1.5   Patent Title Restoration v2

FOR


BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8530-8531

2021-01-20 Thread ATMunn via agora-business

I vote FOR proposals 8530 and 8531.

On 1/19/2021 2:34 AM, 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 2, 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
---
8530g^  nix, Jason1.0   No Honour
8531g^  Jason 1.5   Patent Title Restoration v2


The proposal pool contains the following proposals:

Author(s)AITitle
---
nix, Gaelan, Aris3.0   Personhood Revisited
JTAC, Jason, G.  2.0   Extension to Blot Expungement Definitions [1]


[1] Chamber: Compliance

Legend: * : Democratic proposal.
 # : Ordinary proposal, unset chamber.
 c : Compliance ministry proposal (ordinary).
 e : Economy ministry proposal (ordinary).
 g : Legacy ministry proposal (ordinary).
 l : Legislation ministry proposal (ordinary).
 p : Participation ministry proposal (ordinary).
 ^ : Sponsored proposal.

The full text of the aforementioned proposal(s) is included below. Where
the information shown below differs from the information shown above,
the information shown above shall control.

//
ID: 8530
Title: No Honour
Adoption index: 1.0
Author: nix
Co-authors: Jason


Repeal R2510, "Such is Karma".

[Karma gets rare, sporadic usage and I'd prefer not to maintain it if
it's not going to be used. I'm also open to supporting efforts to revive
it, but I don't have the time/interest to write such proposals myself
right now.]

//
ID: 8531
Title: Patent Title Restoration v2
Adoption index: 1.5
Author: Jason
Co-author(s):


Amend Rule 649 by replacing "A Patent Title is a legal title given to a
person in recognition of the person's distinction" with "A Patent Title
is a legal title held by an entity in recognition of eir distinction".

[The current version could plausibly be read to strip patent titles when
an entity ceases to be a person. This makes it so that patent titles can
be held by all entities, but can only be awarded to persons. The
requirement on personhood/citizenship is explicit for most awarding
methods (including the Herald's general method), while the other methods
require 2 Agoran consent, which should be enough to prevent them going
to non-persons if we don't want them to as a group. There's not really
an easy place to put an explicit restriction, because some of the 2
Agoran consent methods are at Power 3, while the patent titles rule is
at Power 1.5.]

Award all Patent Titles to eir former holders that were lost solely due
to the entity not being a person (under any current or former definition
of "person"), other than Hero of Agora Nomic or Grand Hero of Agora Nomic.

[Don't try to award HAN/GHAN because it seems unlikely they were ever
stripped and because this proposal doesn't have high enough AI to do so.]

//
Title: Personhood Revisited
Adoption index: 3.0
Author: nix
Co-author(s): Gaelan, Aris


Amend R869 by replacing:

   Any entity that is or ever was an organism generally capable of
   freely originating and communicating independent thoughts and
   ideas is a person. Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, no other
   entities are persons.

with:

   Every intelligence is a person. A group of persons can elect to
   create a composite person, which is in eirself a person for all
   Agoran purposes. A person cannot become a player if e is part of a
   composite person that is already a player. A composite person
   cannot become a player if any part of em is already a player. A
   person does not ever cease to be a person for the purposes of
   Agora.

[This reworks and combines versions put forth by both Aris and Gaelan.]

//
Title: Extension to Blot Expungement Definitions
Adoption index: 2.0
Author: JTAC
Co-author(s): Jason, G.


Amend Rule 2555 by adding "If expungement would destroy N blots, but the
target has P


--
ATMunn
friendly neighborhood notary and Prime Minister of Agora :)


Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8530-8531

2021-01-19 Thread Falsifian via agora-business
On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 01:52:06AM +, Falsifian via agora-business wrote:
> I vote as follows.
> 
> > ID  Author(s) AITitle
> > ---
> > 8530g^  nix, Jason1.0   No Honour
> 
> Conditional: if the current Horald's vote evaluates to AGAINST, then
> AGAINST, otherwise FOR.
> 
> (I like Karma, but if the Herald doesn't think it's worth the effort, I
> don't want to force em.)

Er, I got it backward and also mispelled Herald. I vote on Proposal 8530 as
follows:

Conditional: if the current Herald's vote evaluates to FOR, then
FOR, otherwise AGAINST.

(My default vote is to keep karma.)

-- 
Falsifian


BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8530-8531

2021-01-19 Thread Falsifian via agora-business
I vote as follows.

> ID  Author(s) AITitle
> ---
> 8530g^  nix, Jason1.0   No Honour

Conditional: if the current Horald's vote evaluates to AGAINST, then
AGAINST, otherwise FOR.

(I like Karma, but if the Herald doesn't think it's worth the effort, I
don't want to force em.)

> 8531g^  Jason 1.5   Patent Title Restoration v2

FOR

-- 
Falsifian


BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8530-8531

2021-01-19 Thread JTAC via agora-business
On 19/1/2021 3:34 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 2, 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
> ---
> 8530g^  nix, Jason1.0   No Honour
FOR. Reducing the administrative workload of officers is good for
participation.

> 8531g^  Jason 1.5   Patent Title Restoration v2

ENDORSE nix. I trust the herald's opinion on the feasibility of the matter.

-- 
JTAC
Interim Referee


BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8530-8531

2021-01-19 Thread Jason Cobb via agora-business
I vote as follows:
> 8530g^  nix, Jason1.0   No Honour

PRESENT


> 8531g^  Jason 1.5   Patent Title Restoration v2

FOR

-- 
Jason Cobb

Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason



BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8530-8531

2021-01-18 Thread Aris Merchant via agora-business
I vote as follows:

> ID  Author(s) AITitle
> ---
> 8530g^  nix, Jason1.0   No Honour
FOR
> 8531g^  Jason 1.5   Patent Title Restoration v2
FOR. I'm a bit iffy on the idea of allowing new patent titles to be
granted to non-persons, but it doesn't seem like there's a mechanism
for that at present. Even if this would allow patent titles to be
granted to non-persons, that doesn't seem holding up the fix over.

-Aris