BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8837-8848
I vote FOR Proposal 8837
I then vote FOR on all other Proposals
On Sun, Aug 21, 2022 at 7:13 AM secretsnail9 via agora-official <
agora-offic...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> PROMOTOR'S REPORT AS OF RIGHT NOW
>
> If you vote on a proposal, please edit this spreadsheet with your votes:
>
>
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1jzzyipV-YFQwzRC-WxkOrOnjVLee-xH9NWC2ixf5K-8/edit?usp=sharing
>
> 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 7, 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
> ---
> 8837~ 4st 1.0 Is this a hard decision?
> 8838~ Murphy 1.0 Kickstarter
> 8839* 4st 3.0 Not so hard decision
> 8840* Jason 3.0 Cleanliness security
> 8841* Jason, Aspen, Gaelan3.0 Spivak Standardization Act v2
> 8842~ Pilgore . . . [1] 2.0 Losing Focus
> 8843* G., Jason, Murphy 4.0 Time B Safe
> 8844~ 4st, Jason 2.0 Fix dreams
> 8845~ secretsnail 1.0 Onicers
> 8846~ secretsnail 1.0 The Cheepening
> 8847~ secretsnail, 4st2.0 Bird Powerup
> 8848~ 4st 1.0 Goals
>
>
>
> [1] Pilgore, nix, Jason, Madrid
>
>
>
> The proposal pool contains the following proposals:
>
> ID Author(s) AITitle
> ---
> Currently empty.
>
>
>
> Legend: * : Democratic proposal.
> ~ : Ordinary 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: 8837
> Title: Is this a hard decision?
> Adoption Index: 1.0
> Author: 4st
> Co-author(s):
>
> When this proposal is adopted, each of the following occur in order,
> separately, if possible:
> 1. All players who voted AGAINST or conditionally on this proposal have
> their score set to 0
> 2. All players who voted AGAINST or conditionally on this proposal have
> their coins set to 0
> 3. All players who voted AGAINST or conditionally on this proposal have all
> stamps they own destroyed. 4. All players who voted AGAINST this proposal
> have any stones they own are transferred to Agora.
> 5. All players who voted AGAINST or conditionally on this proposal have any
> birds they own transferred to Agora.
> 6. Grant 4st 200 points.
> 7. Enact the following rule, title 'Voter protection' with power=1.0:
> {
> Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, proposals cannot affect players or
> their assets based on the way they have voted.
> Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, rules that affect players or their
> assets based on the way a player has voted cannot affect the proposal in
> which that rule is enacted.
> }
>
> //
> ID: 8838
> Title: Kickstarter
> Adoption Index: 1.0
> Author: Murphy
> Co-author(s):
>
>
> Each person who was a player when Rule 2668 (Horses) was enacted gains
> 10 dollaries.
>
>
> [Another thing tied to "when the race starts anew", but the enactment of
> these rules doesn't clearly qualify. The Registrar's report of August 14
> should be sufficient to identify who gains dollaries, as there were no
> registrations or deregistrations in between.]
>
>
> //
> ID: 8839
> Title: Not so hard decision
> Adoption Index: 3.0
> Author: 4st
> Co-author(s):
>
>
> Create the following rule if it doesn't exist, with Title "Voter
> Protection" and power=3.0
> {
> Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, proposals cannot affect
> players' assets or players' scores based on the way they have voted.
> Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, rules that affect players' assets or
> players' scores based on the way a player has voted cannot affect the
> proposal in
> which that rule is enacted.
> }
> If a rule with the title "Voter Protection" already exists, amend it so
> that it matches the above rule, and set its power to 3.
>
> //
> ID: 8840
> Title: Cleanliness security
> Adoption Index: 3.0
> Author: Jason
> Co-author(s):
>
>
> Amend Rule 2221 by appending the following paragraph:
>
> {
>
> Cleaning rules is secured. Refiling rules is secured.
>
> }
>
>
> [This is maybe arguably not necessary based on the exact wording of
> R2221, but better safe than sorry.]
>
> //
> ID:
Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8837-8848
I vote AGAINST proposal 8841. I think not every social norm needs to be in the rules and frankly it limits our ability to evolve new norms. On Sun, 28 Aug 2022, 10:22 Kerim Aydin via agora-business, < agora-business@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > I vote: > > On 8/20/2022 10:12 PM, secretsnail9 via agora-official wrote: > > 8838~ Murphy 1.0 Kickstarter > PRESENT > > > 8839* 4st 3.0 Not so hard decision > AGAINST > > > 8840* Jason 3.0 Cleanliness security > FOR > > > 8841* Jason, Aspen, Gaelan3.0 Spivak Standardization Act v2 > AGAINST. I was very much in favor of this and think it should be > standard, but just now realized that encoding this may "unofficially" > sanction English as a preferred language, when it isn't currently. Not > sure if this is a problem per se, but I think it merits a little more > discussion on that basis? > > > 8842~ Pilgore . . . [1] 2.0 Losing Focus > FOR > > > 8843* G., Jason, Murphy 4.0 Time B Safe > FOR > > > 8844~ 4st, Jason 2.0 Fix dreams > PRESENT > > > 8845~ secretsnail 1.0 Onicers > FOR > > > 8846~ secretsnail 1.0 The Cheepening > PRESENT > > > 8847~ secretsnail, 4st2.0 Bird Powerup > PRESENT > > > 8848~ 4st 1.0 Goals > FOR > > -G. > >
BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8837-8848
I vote: On 8/20/2022 10:12 PM, secretsnail9 via agora-official wrote: > 8838~ Murphy 1.0 Kickstarter PRESENT > 8839* 4st 3.0 Not so hard decision AGAINST > 8840* Jason 3.0 Cleanliness security FOR > 8841* Jason, Aspen, Gaelan3.0 Spivak Standardization Act v2 AGAINST. I was very much in favor of this and think it should be standard, but just now realized that encoding this may "unofficially" sanction English as a preferred language, when it isn't currently. Not sure if this is a problem per se, but I think it merits a little more discussion on that basis? > 8842~ Pilgore . . . [1] 2.0 Losing Focus FOR > 8843* G., Jason, Murphy 4.0 Time B Safe FOR > 8844~ 4st, Jason 2.0 Fix dreams PRESENT > 8845~ secretsnail 1.0 Onicers FOR > 8846~ secretsnail 1.0 The Cheepening PRESENT > 8847~ secretsnail, 4st2.0 Bird Powerup PRESENT > 8848~ 4st 1.0 Goals FOR -G.
BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8837-8848
I vote as follows:
8837 (Is this a hard decision?): AGAINST
8838 (Kickstarter): AGAINST
8839 (Not so hard decision): AGAINST
8840 (Cleanliness security): PRESENT
8841 (Spivak Standardization Act v2): PRESENT
8842 (Losing Focus): FOR
8843 (Time B Safe): AGAINST
8844 (Fix dreams): FOR
8845 (Onicers): AGAINST
8846 (The Cheepening): FOR
8847 (Bird Powerup): PRESENT
8848 (Goals): AGAINST
On Sun, Aug 21, 2022 at 1:13 AM secretsnail9 via agora-official <
agora-offic...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> PROMOTOR'S REPORT AS OF RIGHT NOW
>
> If you vote on a proposal, please edit this spreadsheet with your votes:
>
>
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1jzzyipV-YFQwzRC-WxkOrOnjVLee-xH9NWC2ixf5K-8/edit?usp=sharing
>
> 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 7, 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
> ---
> 8837~ 4st 1.0 Is this a hard decision?
> 8838~ Murphy 1.0 Kickstarter
> 8839* 4st 3.0 Not so hard decision
> 8840* Jason 3.0 Cleanliness security
> 8841* Jason, Aspen, Gaelan3.0 Spivak Standardization Act v2
> 8842~ Pilgore . . . [1] 2.0 Losing Focus
> 8843* G., Jason, Murphy 4.0 Time B Safe
> 8844~ 4st, Jason 2.0 Fix dreams
> 8845~ secretsnail 1.0 Onicers
> 8846~ secretsnail 1.0 The Cheepening
> 8847~ secretsnail, 4st2.0 Bird Powerup
> 8848~ 4st 1.0 Goals
>
>
>
> [1] Pilgore, nix, Jason, Madrid
>
>
>
> The proposal pool contains the following proposals:
>
> ID Author(s) AITitle
> ---
> Currently empty.
>
>
>
> Legend: * : Democratic proposal.
> ~ : Ordinary 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: 8837
> Title: Is this a hard decision?
> Adoption Index: 1.0
> Author: 4st
> Co-author(s):
>
> When this proposal is adopted, each of the following occur in order,
> separately, if possible:
> 1. All players who voted AGAINST or conditionally on this proposal have
> their score set to 0
> 2. All players who voted AGAINST or conditionally on this proposal have
> their coins set to 0
> 3. All players who voted AGAINST or conditionally on this proposal have all
> stamps they own destroyed. 4. All players who voted AGAINST this proposal
> have any stones they own are transferred to Agora.
> 5. All players who voted AGAINST or conditionally on this proposal have any
> birds they own transferred to Agora.
> 6. Grant 4st 200 points.
> 7. Enact the following rule, title 'Voter protection' with power=1.0:
> {
> Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, proposals cannot affect players or
> their assets based on the way they have voted.
> Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, rules that affect players or their
> assets based on the way a player has voted cannot affect the proposal in
> which that rule is enacted.
> }
>
> //
> ID: 8838
> Title: Kickstarter
> Adoption Index: 1.0
> Author: Murphy
> Co-author(s):
>
>
> Each person who was a player when Rule 2668 (Horses) was enacted gains
> 10 dollaries.
>
>
> [Another thing tied to "when the race starts anew", but the enactment of
> these rules doesn't clearly qualify. The Registrar's report of August 14
> should be sufficient to identify who gains dollaries, as there were no
> registrations or deregistrations in between.]
>
>
> //
> ID: 8839
> Title: Not so hard decision
> Adoption Index: 3.0
> Author: 4st
> Co-author(s):
>
>
> Create the following rule if it doesn't exist, with Title "Voter
> Protection" and power=3.0
> {
> Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, proposals cannot affect
> players' assets or players' scores based on the way they have voted.
> Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, rules that affect players' assets or
> players' scores based on the way a player has voted cannot affect the
> proposal in
> which that rule is enacted.
> }
> If a rule with the title "Voter Protection" already exists, amend it so
> that it matches the above rule, and set its power to 3.
>
> //
> ID: 8840
> Title: Cleanliness security
> Adoption Index: 3.0
> Author: Jason
> Co-author(s):
BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8837-8848
On 8/21/22 01:12, secretsnail9 via agora-official wrote: > 8837~ 4st 1.0 Is this a hard decision? Abstention. > 8838~ Murphy 1.0 Kickstarter PRESENT > 8839* 4st 3.0 Not so hard decision AGAINST > 8840* Jason 3.0 Cleanliness security FOR > 8841* Jason, Aspen, Gaelan3.0 Spivak Standardization Act v2 FOR > 8842~ Pilgore . . . [1] 2.0 Losing Focus FOR > 8843* G., Jason, Murphy 4.0 Time B Safe FOR > 8844~ 4st, Jason 2.0 Fix dreams AGAINST > 8845~ secretsnail 1.0 Onicers AGAINST > 8846~ secretsnail 1.0 The Cheepening AGAINST > 8847~ secretsnail, 4st2.0 Bird Powerup AGAINST > 8848~ 4st 1.0 Goals AGAINST -- Jason Cobb Arbitor, Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8837-8848
On Mon, Aug 22, 2022 at 9:51 AM Forest Sweeney wrote: > On Sat, Aug 20, 2022 at 11:29 PM Forest Sweeney via agora-business < > agora-business@agoranomic.org> wrote: > >> 8837: FOR >> 8838: FOR >> 8839: FOR >> 8840: FOR >> 8841: FOR >> 8842: Endorse Jason (uh, there's no scams here, yes?) >> 8843: PRESENT (I am against mucking about with time and powerful rules, >> but >> this is a powerful rule, so I don't want to stop anything if it is >> necessary.) >> 8844: FOR >> 8845: Endorse nix (is this sufficiently chaotic to improve gameplay?) >> 8846: Endorse G. (you don't play birds, is this worthwhile?) >> 8847: Endorse G. (you don't play birds, is this worthwhile?) >> 8848: FOR >> -- >> 4st >> Referee >> > > 8838: I withdraw my vote. > 8839: I withdraw my vote. > 8840: I withdraw my vote. > 8841: I withdraw my vote. > 8842: I withdraw my vote. > 8843: I withdraw my vote. > 8844: I withdraw my vote. > 8845: I withdraw my vote. > 8846: I withdraw my vote. > 8847: I withdraw my vote. > 8848: I withdraw my vote. > > -- > 4st > Referee > TTttPF. -- 4st Referee
BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8837-8848
I vote as follows (and have updated the spreadsheet to match): 8837~ 4st 1.0 Is this a hard decision? no vote 8838~ Murphy 1.0 Kickstarter FOR 8839* 4st 3.0 Not so hard decision FOR 8840* Jason 3.0 Cleanliness security PRESENT 8841* Jason, Aspen, Gaelan3.0 Spivak Standardization Act v2 PRESENT 8842~ Pilgore . . . [1] 2.0 Losing Focus PRESENT 8843* G., Jason, Murphy 4.0 Time B Safe FOR 8844~ 4st, Jason 2.0 Fix dreams FOR 8845~ secretsnail 1.0 Onicers FOR 8846~ secretsnail 1.0 The Cheepening PRESENT 8847~ secretsnail, 4st2.0 Bird Powerup PRESENT 8848~ 4st 1.0 Goals FOR
BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8837-8848
I vote as follows. > On Aug 21, 2022, at 6:12 AM, secretsnail9 via agora-official > wrote: > > ID Author(s) AITitle > --- > 8837~ 4st 1.0 Is this a hard decision? AGAINST. Such tricks are a fun part of nomic, and I don’t see them causing any major issues. > 8838~ Murphy 1.0 Kickstarter ENDORSE the Horsened, else FOR > 8839* 4st 3.0 Not so hard decision AGAINST, as above > 8840* Jason 3.0 Cleanliness security FOR > 8841* Jason, Aspen, Gaelan3.0 Spivak Standardization Act v2 FOR > 8842~ Pilgore . . . [1] 2.0 Losing Focus FOR > 8843* G., Jason, Murphy 4.0 Time B Safe ENDORSE G. > 8844~ 4st, Jason 2.0 Fix dreams FOR > 8845~ secretsnail 1.0 Onicers AGAINST > 8846~ secretsnail 1.0 The Cheepening FOR > 8847~ secretsnail, 4st2.0 Bird Powerup FOR > 8848~ 4st 1.0 Goals PRESENT Gaelan
BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8837-8848
8837: FOR 8838: FOR 8839: FOR 8840: FOR 8841: FOR 8842: Endorse Jason (uh, there's no scams here, yes?) 8843: PRESENT (I am against mucking about with time and powerful rules, but this is a powerful rule, so I don't want to stop anything if it is necessary.) 8844: FOR 8845: Endorse nix (is this sufficiently chaotic to improve gameplay?) 8846: Endorse G. (you don't play birds, is this worthwhile?) 8847: Endorse G. (you don't play birds, is this worthwhile?) 8848: FOR -- 4st Referee
BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8837-8848
I vote as follows. On Sun, Aug 21, 2022 at 12:13 AM secretsnail9 via agora-official < agora-offic...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1jzzyipV-YFQwzRC-WxkOrOnjVLee-xH9NWC2ixf5K-8/edit?usp=sharing > 8838~ Murphy 1.0 Kickstarter > AGAINST (this is basically covered just by waiting, putting it all in now could lead to imbalance) 8839* 4st 3.0 Not so hard decision > Endorse Jason > 8840* Jason 3.0 Cleanliness security > Endorse G. > 8841* Jason, Aspen, Gaelan3.0 Spivak Standardization Act v2 > Endorse Murphy > 8842~ Pilgore . . . [1] 2.0 Losing Focus > FOR > 8843* G., Jason, Murphy 4.0 Time B Safe > Endorse nix > 8844~ 4st, Jason 2.0 Fix dreams > FOR > 8845~ secretsnail 1.0 Onicers > FOR > 8846~ secretsnail 1.0 The Cheepening > FOR > 8847~ secretsnail, 4st2.0 Bird Powerup > FOR > 8848~ 4st 1.0 Goals > AGAINST (This doesn't seem worth having a rule for when we can just say our goals.) -- secretsnail
