Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Elections

[Owen Jacobson]

> On Jun 27, 2017, at 3:00 AM, Ørjan Johansen  wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 27 Jun 2017, Quazie wrote:
> 
>> You aren't the ADOP, so you would need instead 4 support, but I'll get to
>> those elections shortly - don't worry
> 
> Hum, it's not clear from the text of Rule 2154 that e cannot do that:
> 
>  1. by announcement, if e is the ADoP, if the office has been
> deputised for within the past two weeks, or if no election
> has been initiated for the office either since the last time
> a player won the game or within the past 90 days;
> 
> In my opinion, there is no grammar or punctuation to indicate whether "if e 
> is the ADoP" scopes over the other two "ifs" or whether it is an equal level 
> third option.  Also I have no idea which reading is the _intended_ one.  The 
> writer may even have made it ambiguous on purpose to trip people up.  
> However, I think the three equal option parsing is the _simplest_ one.

I believe that’s the historical interpretation.

At least, when I tried it for the office of Surveyor using the 90 days clause 
of that rule, nobody objected and the election proceeded without incident.

-o



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

DIS: Re: BUS: 蘭亭社簿記

[Gaelan Steele]

I’m pretty sure there was something about a “gentleman” in the Japanese 
organization; maybe that could be related?

Gaelan
> On Jun 27, 2017, at 2:48 PM, omd  wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 8:53 PM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> I knew CFJ 3492 was a slippery slope.  Silly judge.
>> 
>> This, though, pretty clearly fails the "sufficiently clear" test of
>> CFJs 3471-3472 (and ultimately 1460).
> 
> For reference: https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/?1460
> 
> FWIW, as a Japanese learner, I'm pretty sure the message is mostly gibberish.
> 
> First line: The Google translation seems reasonable, but Japanese
> doesn't distinguish present and future so it was probably intended in
> the present.  'Fukudokko' is Google's translation of '福德公', which is
> not in the dictionary as either a word or a name (the three kanji mean
> 'luck', 'virtue', and 'public', but you can't combine arbitrary kanji
> to make a word).  Note that unlike Chinese, Japanese doesn't generally
> represent foreign words with kanji picked phonetically - it uses
> katakana for foreign words instead - so it couldn't really be that.
> The last bit combines an object marker with a passive verb (to be
> acquired/won), so it would have to be the so-called 'suffering
> passive', where the object (gentleman of 福德公) is the one hurt by the
> action being done, not necessarily its direct subject or object.  But
> then, *what* is being acquired?  Are you acquiring the gentleman who
> is also suffering from it?
> 
> Second line: "Official bulletin time: " … I think the rest is an
> attempt to specify a date and maybe time, but it's way off.
> ('Mizukazuki' is really 'minazuki' and it's an archaic name for June,
> but it doesn't seem to be an archaic date either).
> 
> Third line: "'A' treasure of 蘭亭社 [another non-word] and estate: none".
> 'A' is actually the katakana for the vowel sound 'a', which is not
> generally found by itself; theoretically it could be okurigana, meant
> to spell a word together with 宝 (treasure), but that would be a weird
> combination and definitely isn't in the dictionary.
> 
> Fourth line: "The above"
> 
> Fifth line: [his signature]



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

DIS: Re: BUS: 蘭亭社簿記

[Josh T]

I'd like to point out that the charter of 蘭亭社 was updated last month, which
includes additional definitions.

天火狐

On 27 June 2017 at 17:48, omd  wrote:

> On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 8:53 PM, Kerim Aydin 
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > I knew CFJ 3492 was a slippery slope.  Silly judge.
> >
> > This, though, pretty clearly fails the "sufficiently clear" test of
> > CFJs 3471-3472 (and ultimately 1460).
>
> For reference: https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/?1460
>
> FWIW, as a Japanese learner, I'm pretty sure the message is mostly
> gibberish.
>
> First line: The Google translation seems reasonable, but Japanese
> doesn't distinguish present and future so it was probably intended in
> the present.  'Fukudokko' is Google's translation of '福德公', which is
> not in the dictionary as either a word or a name (the three kanji mean
> 'luck', 'virtue', and 'public', but you can't combine arbitrary kanji
> to make a word).  Note that unlike Chinese, Japanese doesn't generally
> represent foreign words with kanji picked phonetically - it uses
> katakana for foreign words instead - so it couldn't really be that.
> The last bit combines an object marker with a passive verb (to be
> acquired/won), so it would have to be the so-called 'suffering
> passive', where the object (gentleman of 福德公) is the one hurt by the
> action being done, not necessarily its direct subject or object.  But
> then, *what* is being acquired?  Are you acquiring the gentleman who
> is also suffering from it?
>
> Second line: "Official bulletin time: " … I think the rest is an
> attempt to specify a date and maybe time, but it's way off.
> ('Mizukazuki' is really 'minazuki' and it's an archaic name for June,
> but it doesn't seem to be an archaic date either).
>
> Third line: "'A' treasure of 蘭亭社 [another non-word] and estate: none".
> 'A' is actually the katakana for the vowel sound 'a', which is not
> generally found by itself; theoretically it could be okurigana, meant
> to spell a word together with 宝 (treasure), but that would be a weird
> combination and definitely isn't in the dictionary.
>
> Fourth line: "The above"
>
> Fifth line: [his signature]
>

DIS: Re: BUS: 蘭亭社簿記

[omd]

On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 8:53 PM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
>
>
> I knew CFJ 3492 was a slippery slope.  Silly judge.
>
> This, though, pretty clearly fails the "sufficiently clear" test of
> CFJs 3471-3472 (and ultimately 1460).

For reference: https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/?1460

FWIW, as a Japanese learner, I'm pretty sure the message is mostly gibberish.

First line: The Google translation seems reasonable, but Japanese
doesn't distinguish present and future so it was probably intended in
the present.  'Fukudokko' is Google's translation of '福德公', which is
not in the dictionary as either a word or a name (the three kanji mean
'luck', 'virtue', and 'public', but you can't combine arbitrary kanji
to make a word).  Note that unlike Chinese, Japanese doesn't generally
represent foreign words with kanji picked phonetically - it uses
katakana for foreign words instead - so it couldn't really be that.
The last bit combines an object marker with a passive verb (to be
acquired/won), so it would have to be the so-called 'suffering
passive', where the object (gentleman of 福德公) is the one hurt by the
action being done, not necessarily its direct subject or object.  But
then, *what* is being acquired?  Are you acquiring the gentleman who
is also suffering from it?

Second line: "Official bulletin time: " … I think the rest is an
attempt to specify a date and maybe time, but it's way off.
('Mizukazuki' is really 'minazuki' and it's an archaic name for June,
but it doesn't seem to be an archaic date either).

Third line: "'A' treasure of 蘭亭社 [another non-word] and estate: none".
'A' is actually the katakana for the vowel sound 'a', which is not
generally found by itself; theoretically it could be okurigana, meant
to spell a word together with 宝 (treasure), but that would be a weird
combination and definitely isn't in the dictionary.

Fourth line: "The above"

Fifth line: [his signature]

DIS: Re: OFF: [Referee] Weekly Report

[V.J Rada]

COE, I also pointed a finger at G last week (for making a fake report,
ruled Shenanigans)

On Wednesday, June 28, 2017, Owen Jacobson  wrote:

> As Referee, I believe there are no outstanding rules violations in the
> preceding Agoran week, for which a Card has not already been issued. I
> publish the following report:
>
> Referee's Weekly Report
>
> Date of this report: Sun, 25 Jun 2017
> Date of last report: Sun, 18 Jun 2017
>
>
> Recent events (all times UTC)
>
> - previous report -
> Tue, 13 Jun 2017 08:38:01  V.J Rada Pointed the Finger at CuddleBeam
> Wed, 14 Jun 2017 06:42:59  o issued two Yellow Cards for Tardiness
> Thu, 15 Jun 2017 06:16:42  CuddleBeam issued a Yellow Card for
> Tardiness
> Fri, 16 Jun 2017 05:02:37  o apologized for Tardiness
> Fri, 16 Jun 2017 06:37:38  o apologized for Tardiness
> - time of last report -
> Tue, 20 Jun 2017 12:36:40  P.S.S.[1] Pointed the Finger at Murphy
> Tue, 20 Jun 2017 12:51:40  P.S.S.[1] Pointed the Finger at omd
> Wed, 21 Jun 2017 03:50:43  V.J Rada Pointed the Finger at gaelan
> Wed, 21 Jun 2017 06:15:02  Finger Pointed at omd found to be Shenanigans
> Thu, 22 Jun 2017 05:22:51  Murphy issued a Green Card for Faking
> Fri, 23 Jun 2017 20:52:09  Gaelan issued two Green Cards for Tardiness
>
>
> Green Cards:
>
> Player  On Reason
> 
> P.S.S.[1]   May 16, 2017   Tardiness
> P.S.S.[1]   May 20, 2017   Ambiguity
> Murphy  Jun 22, 2017   Faking
> Gaelan  Jun 23, 2017   Tardiness
> Gaelan  Jun 23, 2017   Tardiness
>
> [1] Named, in full, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus.
>
>
> Yellow Cards:
>
> PlayerUntil  Reason   Apology Words
> ---
> Quazie   (Apr 26, 2017)  Bankruptcy
> o(Apr 22, 2017)  Tardiness
> o(Jul 15, 2017)  Tardiness
> o(Jul 15, 2017)  Tardiness
> CuddleBeamJul 16, 2017   TardinessI
>   Judge
>   CFJ
>   3509
>   To
>   Be
>   TRUE
>
> Dates in (parentheses) indicate a completed apology.
>
>
> Red Cards: None
>
>
> Pink Slips:
>
> Player   On Office   Reason
> 
> Gaelan   May 22, 2017   Rulekeepor   Forgery
>
>

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Mess in CFJ 3509 (attn: Cuddlebeam)

[V.J Rada]

The other assignable ones are sproklems CFJ on whether or not I barred ais
in a previous CFJ. And Gael an has 2 linked ones outstanding

On Wednesday, June 28, 2017, V.J Rada  wrote:

> Yes, PSS made the motion. However, a recent CFJ explicitly ruled that this
> case could be reassigned. O was the judge. Youre good.
>
> On Wednesday, June 28, 2017, Kerim Aydin  > wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, 27 Jun 2017, Alex Smith wrote:
>> > On Sat, 2017-06-10 at 13:48 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>> > > First, CuddleBeam clearly delivered a judgement in 3509, then filed a
>> > > Motion to Reconsider it.  That first part worked fine.
>> >
>> > Can someone point me to the Motion to Reconsider? Looking back through
>> > the lists, I've found two attempts to resolve one and no intent.
>> > Obviously, if the CFJ wasn't Reconsidered, I can't reassign it.
>>
>> Ok, re-reading everything I can find, I agree, there's nothing I can find
>> actually worded as an Intent (and CuddleBeam supported a supposed intent
>> but didn't actually file).  I must have misread something when I posted
>> the above.  Sorry about the confusion.
>>
>> > (Sorry for not catching up on this earlier. I've been short on time,
>> > especially for Agora, and handling tardy judges and
>> > recusals/reassignments/reconsiderations is much more timeconsuming than
>> > the initial assignment, in addition to not currently having a rules-
>> > mandated deadline, so I keep postponing it.)
>>
>> I intended to do a weekly update to the archives including a "these
>> judgements
>> are late" informational post, but I, too, have fallen behind in the time-
>> consuming stuff these past couple weeks.  Sorry.
>>
>>
>>

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Mess in CFJ 3509 (attn: Cuddlebeam)

[V.J Rada]

Yes, PSS made the motion. However, a recent CFJ explicitly ruled that this
case could be reassigned. O was the judge. Youre good.

On Wednesday, June 28, 2017, Kerim Aydin  wrote:

>
>
> On Tue, 27 Jun 2017, Alex Smith wrote:
> > On Sat, 2017-06-10 at 13:48 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> > > First, CuddleBeam clearly delivered a judgement in 3509, then filed a
> > > Motion to Reconsider it.  That first part worked fine.
> >
> > Can someone point me to the Motion to Reconsider? Looking back through
> > the lists, I've found two attempts to resolve one and no intent.
> > Obviously, if the CFJ wasn't Reconsidered, I can't reassign it.
>
> Ok, re-reading everything I can find, I agree, there's nothing I can find
> actually worded as an Intent (and CuddleBeam supported a supposed intent
> but didn't actually file).  I must have misread something when I posted
> the above.  Sorry about the confusion.
>
> > (Sorry for not catching up on this earlier. I've been short on time,
> > especially for Agora, and handling tardy judges and
> > recusals/reassignments/reconsiderations is much more timeconsuming than
> > the initial assignment, in addition to not currently having a rules-
> > mandated deadline, so I keep postponing it.)
>
> I intended to do a weekly update to the archives including a "these
> judgements
> are late" informational post, but I, too, have fallen behind in the time-
> consuming stuff these past couple weeks.  Sorry.
>
>
>

DIS: Re: BUS: 蘭亭社簿記

[V.J Rada]

I think e's deputizing for reportor

On Wednesday, June 28, 2017, Kerim Aydin  wrote:

>
>
> Oh, here's a slightly different translation from the google one, from:
> http://www.systranet.com/translate/
>
> Because luck of holding office 德 public is negligent, I publishing the
> article below,
> luck 德 am acquired the public gentleman. Communique time: a treasure and
> land of
> four orchid cottage corporations of water non month new moon day child: It
> is not the
> or more oven fox
>
> On Tue, 27 Jun 2017, Quazie wrote:
>
> > Can anyone get a good translation?
> > I've got
> >
> > Because Fukudokko in office is negligent, I will publish the following
> article and win the gentleman of Fukuokko.
> >
> > Bulletin time: Four of Mizukazuki Sakoko
> > A treasure and the locality of Orchidori company: None
> > that's all
> >
> > The sky fox
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 10:50 AM Josh T  > wrote:
> >   There is like no good quiet time where I am free to do this, so
> here it is.
> > 在職の福德公が怠慢なので、私は以下の記事を公表して、福德公の紳士を獲得されます。
> >
> > 公報時間：水無月朔日子の四つ
> > 蘭亭社のア宝や地所：なし
> > 以上
> >
> > 天火狐
> >
> >
> >
>

DIS: Re: OFF: OFF [Arbitor]: CFJ 3529 assigned to Quazie

[Quazie]

On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 9:51 AM Alex Smith  wrote:

> On Tue, 2017-06-27 at 11:18 +0200, CuddleBeam wrote:
> > I forgot to clarify a thing, sorry. I retract my lastest CFJ of
> "Cuddlebeam
> > has earned a Platinum Ribbon" (the one posted in that message before this
> > one).
> >
> > Via the Town Fountain Rule ("Any rule may allow special deputisation" as
> > ""Any rule allows special deputisation", depending on your choice of the
> > meaning of "may") for special deputisation for the Speaker, I award
> myself
> > a Platinum Ribbon.
> >
> > I now CFJ (again) "Cuddlebeam has earned a Platinum Ribbon", I bar
> nobody.
>
> This is CFJ 3529. I assign it to Quazie.
>
> See also discussion in this thread:
>  >
>
> [note: Quazie's message favouring this CFJ appears in the a-d mail
> archive but I never received it, so possibly something is going weird
> with email beyond all of PSS's and Cuddlebeam's messages immediately
> going to my spam folder; if I appear to be ignoring messages long-term,
> please let me know in case I'm not receiving them at all]
>
> --
> ais523
> Arbitor
>

Proto Judgement:

1 - It's a bummer that the may isn't capitalized in R2160, though on
further examination that wouldn't help much.

2 - Regardless, the interpretation that 'may' means 'does without
indicating it does' is pretty bunk - R991 notes that a CFJ caller may bar
someone from judging, but that doesn't mean that someone is barred without
them indicating as such.

3 - R2160 states:
{{{

  A rule which purports to allow a person (a deputy) to perform an
  action via normal deputisation or special deputisation for an
  office thereby allows them to perform the action as if e held
  the office, as long as

1. it would be POSSIBLE for the deputy to perform the action,
   other than by deputisation, if e held the office, and

2. the deputy, when performing the action, announces that e
   is doing so by the appropriate form of deputisation.

  Only this rule may allow normal deputisation. Any rule may allow
  special deputisation.

}}}

Platinum Ribbons are defined as:

{{{

 Platinum (P): The Speaker qualifies for a Platinum Ribbon.

}}}


So if somehow 2 was valid - if there was a way to just special deputize for
any office for any thing, then we are closer to making things work.

But e never was the speaker, so e never qualifies for the Platinum Ribbon.
The awarding of a qualified ribbon is the action e is attempting to
perform, but that action is generally allowed without deputization.
Deputizing doesn't make you hold the office, and qualifying isn't an action
that someone performs - if e tried to object to something via special
deputizing for the speaker, and attempted to note that Agora isn't
satisfied with the intent for 48 hours, he'd be closer to right (But that's
only if e somehow had the power to special deputize, which i've noted above
and below I don't think e has)

BUT, even if the flippant usage of may in 2 was true "Any rule allows
special deputization" - it doesn't allow for special deputization for an
office. I believe that because no office is indicated in the `any` rule,
that no deputization can be performed.

So in conclusion:
1 - The may should be interpreted as 'Rules are allowed to allow people to
specially deputize, but they have to define what a player is allowed to
specially deputize for'
2 - Special deputization doesn't allow you to perform the action of
qualifying, so even if a player could specially deputize willy nilly, they
couldn't award emself a platinum ribbon for special deputizing for the
speaker
3 - In order to specially deputize, the rules must indicate which office
you get to specially deputize for, or they doesn't actually allow for
special deputization.

I judge this CFJ False - Cuddlebeam hasn't earned a Platinum Ribbon.

Re: DIS: Most Welcome

[Quazie]

On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 1:15 PM Kerim Aydin  wrote:

>
>
> On Tue, 27 Jun 2017, Quazie wrote:
> > I mean, there's no scam here - The parade merely gives future permission
> to add to it -
> > it's a standard convention to not burn down people's scam monuments if
> they aren't
> > disruptive - but the parade notes that you may add to it and that's
> legit.
>
> A perfectly cromulent interpretation is that the definition of "most
> welcome" is whether
> a change is welcomed through the proposal process.
>
> The prototype of this kind of things is the Map of Agora, created by a
> sort-of
> scam (I think) but later graffitied with our names whenever we felt like
> proposing it.
>
> It started out looking like this:
>
> --
>
> Rule 2105/0 (Power=1)
> The Map of Agora
>
>   _/|
>  DARWIN ->  \_  |/ |  / \
>__//  |  |
>  <- DSV  /  /|  \
>  _   \  \_   |   \
>MORNINGTON CRESCENT ->/|  <- GREAT BARRIER
> REEF
>   _ _/   | \_/\_/ \
>  / \\ <- SHARK BAY  | |
> /|  |  \ <- TOWNSVILLE
>  ___/|  |   \_
>   __/|  | |
>  /   |  | \
> /   O <- L. DISAPPOINTMENT|/\
>| |  |   |_
>| |  |  EMERALD -> \
>\ |__=_, \
> /|| | <- BRISBANE
> \  O <- LT. ANNE MOORE|__  _\
>  \   ||___/  \/ |
>   |__/\  <- TARCOOLA   /   LORD HOWE ->
>   \ __/\_ /   /
>   PERTH -> |  _  __/ |   /| IVANHOE ->   | <- WOLLONGONG
>/_/ \/ \ / /   | /
>   |_   / <- ESPERANTO  v /__ |_/ <- CANBERRA
> \_/ \| \__|
> ||   \__/
>  \___=_  ___|
>   MELBOURNE -> \/
>
>  /\__
>  |   |
>   |  /
>   \_/ <- HOBART
>
> --
>
>
> And ended up looking like this, just before repeal:
>
> --
>
> Rule 2105/5 (Power=1)
> The Map of Agora
>
>   _/|
>  DARWIN ->  \_  |/ |  / \
>__//  |  |
>  <- DSV  /  /|  \
>  _   \  \_   |   \
>MORNINGTON CRESCENT ->/|  <- GOETHE BARRIER
>   _ _/   | \_/\_/ \ REEF
>  / \\ <- SHARK BAY  | |
> /|  |  \ <- TOWNSVILLE
>  ___/|  |   \_
>   __/|  |  .___o  )   |
>  /   |  | ~~vv ===~~~ <-OSCAR'S MIRE
> /   O <- SHERLOCK NESS  | |/\
>| |  |   |_
>| |  |  EMERALD -> \
>\ |__=_, \ BRISBANE
> /|| | <-'
> \  O <- LT. ANNE MOORE|__  _\
>  \   ||___/  \/ |  LORD
>   |__/\  <- TARACOOLA  /   HOWE ->
>   \  PERTH  __/\_ /   /
>| <-'  _  __/ |   /| IVANHOE ->   | <-.
>/_/ \/ \ / /   | /  WOLLONGONG
>   |_   / <- ESPERANTO  v /__ |_/ <- CANBERRA
> \_/ \| \__|
>__   __  ||   \__/   \_
>   __ \ / __  \___=_  ___|\_
>  /  \ | /  \ MANUBOURNE -> \/  NEW C.LAND \}
>  \|/   \)
> _,.---v---._ /\__   )`-']
>/\__/\  /  

Re: DIS: Most Welcome

[Kerim Aydin]

On Tue, 27 Jun 2017, Quazie wrote:
> I mean, there's no scam here - The parade merely gives future permission to 
> add to it - 
> it's a standard convention to not burn down people's scam monuments if they 
> aren't 
> disruptive - but the parade notes that you may add to it and that's legit.

A perfectly cromulent interpretation is that the definition of "most welcome" 
is whether
a change is welcomed through the proposal process.

The prototype of this kind of things is the Map of Agora, created by a sort-of
scam (I think) but later graffitied with our names whenever we felt like 
proposing it.

It started out looking like this:

--

Rule 2105/0 (Power=1)
The Map of Agora

  _/|
 DARWIN ->  \_  |/ |  / \
   __//  |  |
 <- DSV  /  /|  \
 _   \  \_   |   \
   MORNINGTON CRESCENT ->/|  <- GREAT BARRIER REEF
  _ _/   | \_/\_/ \
 / \\ <- SHARK BAY  | |
/|  |  \ <- TOWNSVILLE
 ___/|  |   \_
  __/|  | |
 /   |  | \
/   O <- L. DISAPPOINTMENT|/\
   | |  |   |_
   | |  |  EMERALD -> \
   \ |__=_, \
/|| | <- BRISBANE
\  O <- LT. ANNE MOORE|__  _\
 \   ||___/  \/ |
  |__/\  <- TARCOOLA   /   LORD HOWE ->
  \ __/\_ /   /
  PERTH -> |  _  __/ |   /| IVANHOE ->   | <- WOLLONGONG
   /_/ \/ \ / /   | /
  |_   / <- ESPERANTO  v /__ |_/ <- CANBERRA
\_/ \| \__|
||   \__/
 \___=_  ___|
  MELBOURNE -> \/

 /\__
 |   |
  |  /
  \_/ <- HOBART

--


And ended up looking like this, just before repeal:

--

Rule 2105/5 (Power=1)
The Map of Agora

  _/|
 DARWIN ->  \_  |/ |  / \
   __//  |  |
 <- DSV  /  /|  \
 _   \  \_   |   \
   MORNINGTON CRESCENT ->/|  <- GOETHE BARRIER
  _ _/   | \_/\_/ \ REEF
 / \\ <- SHARK BAY  | |
/|  |  \ <- TOWNSVILLE
 ___/|  |   \_
  __/|  |  .___o  )   |
 /   |  | ~~vv ===~~~ <-OSCAR'S MIRE
/   O <- SHERLOCK NESS  | |/\
   | |  |   |_
   | |  |  EMERALD -> \
   \ |__=_, \ BRISBANE
/|| | <-'
\  O <- LT. ANNE MOORE|__  _\
 \   ||___/  \/ |  LORD
  |__/\  <- TARACOOLA  /   HOWE ->
  \  PERTH  __/\_ /   /
   | <-'  _  __/ |   /| IVANHOE ->   | <-.
   /_/ \/ \ / /   | /  WOLLONGONG
  |_   / <- ESPERANTO  v /__ |_/ <- CANBERRA
\_/ \| \__|
   __   __  ||   \__/   \_
  __ \ / __  \___=_  ___|\_
 /  \ | /  \ MANUBOURNE -> \/  NEW C.LAND \}
 \|/   \)
_,.---v---._ /\__   )`-']
   /\__/\  /\|   |  COOK SCSTRAIGHT(!
   \_  _/ /  \|  /  MICHAELTON->)  /
 \ \_|   @ __|\_/ <- HOBART|^\  (_/
  \\_  

Re: DIS: Most Welcome

[Quazie]

I mean, there's no scam here - The parade merely gives future permission to
add to it - it's a standard convention to not burn down people's scam
monuments if they aren't disruptive - but the parade notes that you may add
to it and that's legit.

Most welcome isn't defined, and thus disrespecting that can't be cardable.



On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 12:22 PM CuddleBeam 
wrote:

> Could be a bit silly but here I go:
>
> We got "AND FURTHERMORE, additions to this Parade are most welcome when
> Events suiting the honour should occur."
>
> We don't have an explicit definition for "Events" (or at least, I haven't
> found one), so I believe that just making it up as an unregulated action
> would be the way to go. And if so, you could just make up whatever
> convenient amount and scheduled for a would-be event and never actually do
> it to satisfy the "when Events suiting the honour should occur." condition,
> because it's when they *should* occur, not necessarily when they actually
> do or something.
>
> With that, we can engineer to have this "additions to this Parade are most
> welcome" be true for a convenient period of time. And with that, we can
> make a proposal that adds some game-winning or other arbitrary content to
> that Rule.
>
> If people vote against it - and this is the scam (but it's weak, much like
> how using "Treat Agora Good Forever" as a way to accuse people can be
> considered wishy-washy) - you can just threaten them with carding up their
> ass, since they're preventing the entry of something that is MOST welcome!
> That's really really welcome! It should totally get in, according to those
> codified ethics! Are you against them, hrm? Are you that much of a bad
> sport?
>
> Anyway, that's the silly scam lol.
>
>
>

DIS: Most Welcome

[CuddleBeam]

Could be a bit silly but here I go:

We got "AND FURTHERMORE, additions to this Parade are most welcome when
Events suiting the honour should occur."

We don't have an explicit definition for "Events" (or at least, I haven't
found one), so I believe that just making it up as an unregulated action
would be the way to go. And if so, you could just make up whatever
convenient amount and scheduled for a would-be event and never actually do
it to satisfy the "when Events suiting the honour should occur." condition,
because it's when they *should* occur, not necessarily when they actually
do or something.

With that, we can engineer to have this "additions to this Parade are most
welcome" be true for a convenient period of time. And with that, we can
make a proposal that adds some game-winning or other arbitrary content to
that Rule.

If people vote against it - and this is the scam (but it's weak, much like
how using "Treat Agora Good Forever" as a way to accuse people can be
considered wishy-washy) - you can just threaten them with carding up their
ass, since they're preventing the entry of something that is MOST welcome!
That's really really welcome! It should totally get in, according to those
codified ethics! Are you against them, hrm? Are you that much of a bad
sport?

Anyway, that's the silly scam lol.

DIS: Re: BUS: 蘭亭社簿記

[Kerim Aydin]

Oh, here's a slightly different translation from the google one, from:
http://www.systranet.com/translate/

Because luck of holding office 德 public is negligent, I publishing the article 
below, 
luck 德 am acquired the public gentleman. Communique time: a treasure and land 
of 
four orchid cottage corporations of water non month new moon day child: It is 
not the 
or more oven fox

On Tue, 27 Jun 2017, Quazie wrote:

> Can anyone get a good translation?
> I've got
> 
> Because Fukudokko in office is negligent, I will publish the following 
> article and win the gentleman of Fukuokko.
> 
> Bulletin time: Four of Mizukazuki Sakoko
> A treasure and the locality of Orchidori company: None
> that's all
> 
> The sky fox
> 
> 
> On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 10:50 AM Josh T  wrote:
>   There is like no good quiet time where I am free to do this, so here it 
> is.
> 在��の福德公が怠慢なので、私は以下の��事を公表して、福德公の��士を�@得されます。
> 
> 公���r�g：水�o月朔日子の四つ
> �m亭社のア宝や地所：なし
> 以上
> 
> 天火狐
> 
> 
>

DIS: Re: BUS: 蘭亭社簿記

[Kerim Aydin]

I knew CFJ 3492 was a slippery slope.  Silly judge.

This, though, pretty clearly fails the "sufficiently clear" test of 
CFJs 3471-3472 (and ultimately 1460).

To be safe, I'd issue a Claim of Error that the document is generally
inaccurate, and also maybe object to it... :P

On Tue, 27 Jun 2017, Quazie wrote:
> Can anyone get a good translation?
> I've got
> 
> Because Fukudokko in office is negligent, I will publish the following 
> article and win the gentleman of Fukuokko.
> 
> Bulletin time: Four of Mizukazuki Sakoko
> A treasure and the locality of Orchidori company: None
> that's all
> 
> The sky fox
> 
> 
> On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 10:50 AM Josh T  wrote:
>   There is like no good quiet time where I am free to do this, so here it 
> is.
> 在��の福德公が怠慢なので、私は以下の��事を公表して、福德公の��士を�@得されます。
> 
> 公���r�g：水�o月朔日子の四つ
> �m亭社のア宝や地所：なし
> 以上
> 
> 天火狐

DIS: Re: BUS: 蘭亭社簿記

[Quazie]

Can anyone get a good translation?

I've got

Because Fukudokko in office is negligent, I will publish the following
article and win the gentleman of Fukuokko.

Bulletin time: Four of Mizukazuki Sakoko
A treasure and the locality of Orchidori company: None
that's all

The sky fox



On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 10:50 AM Josh T  wrote:

> There is like no good quiet time where I am free to do this, so here it is.
>
> 在職の福德公が怠慢なので、私は以下の記事を公表して、福德公*の*紳士を獲得されます。
>
> 公報時間：水無月朔日子の四つ
> 蘭亭社のア宝や地所：なし
> 以上
>
> 天火狐
>

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Mess in CFJ 3509 (attn: Cuddlebeam)

[Kerim Aydin]

On Tue, 27 Jun 2017, Alex Smith wrote:
> On Sat, 2017-06-10 at 13:48 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> > First, CuddleBeam clearly delivered a judgement in 3509, then filed a
> > Motion to Reconsider it.  That first part worked fine.
> 
> Can someone point me to the Motion to Reconsider? Looking back through
> the lists, I've found two attempts to resolve one and no intent.
> Obviously, if the CFJ wasn't Reconsidered, I can't reassign it.

Ok, re-reading everything I can find, I agree, there's nothing I can find
actually worded as an Intent (and CuddleBeam supported a supposed intent
but didn't actually file).  I must have misread something when I posted
the above.  Sorry about the confusion.

> (Sorry for not catching up on this earlier. I've been short on time,
> especially for Agora, and handling tardy judges and 
> recusals/reassignments/reconsiderations is much more timeconsuming than
> the initial assignment, in addition to not currently having a rules-
> mandated deadline, so I keep postponing it.)

I intended to do a weekly update to the archives including a "these judgements
are late" informational post, but I, too, have fallen behind in the time-
consuming stuff these past couple weeks.  Sorry.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: humble agoran farmer is the officer of everything

[Alex Smith]

On Tue, 2017-06-27 at 16:43 +, Quazie wrote:
> I would like this CFJ

OK, so I /am/ getting Quazie's messages, it's just slow. Messages
appearing out of order is a typical occupational hazard with email…

-- 
ais523

DIS: Re: BUS: Mess in CFJ 3509 (attn: Cuddlebeam)

[Alex Smith]

On Sat, 2017-06-10 at 13:48 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> First, CuddleBeam clearly delivered a judgement in 3509, then filed a
> Motion to Reconsider it.  That first part worked fine.

Can someone point me to the Motion to Reconsider? Looking back through
the lists, I've found two attempts to resolve one and no intent.
Obviously, if the CFJ wasn't Reconsidered, I can't reassign it.

(Sorry for not catching up on this earlier. I've been short on time,
especially for Agora, and handling tardy judges and 
recusals/reassignments/reconsiderations is much more timeconsuming than
the initial assignment, in addition to not currently having a rules-
mandated deadline, so I keep postponing it.)

-- 
ais523
Arbitor

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: humble agoran farmer is the officer of everything

[Quazie]

I would like this CFJ

On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 02:18 CuddleBeam  wrote:

> I forgot to clarify a thing, sorry. I retract my lastest CFJ of "Cuddlebeam
> has earned a Platinum Ribbon" (the one posted in that message before this
> one).
>
> Via the Town Fountain Rule ("Any rule may allow special deputisation" as
> ""Any rule allows special deputisation", depending on your choice of the
> meaning of "may") for special deputisation for the Speaker, I award
> myself a Platinum Ribbon.
>
> I now CFJ (again) "Cuddlebeam has earned a Platinum Ribbon", I bar nobody.
>

Re: DIS: Proto: Track it on the wiki

[Alex Smith]

On Sun, 2017-06-25 at 17:31 -0400, omd wrote:
> Do you object to systems that require (or at least strongly encourage)
> actions to be entered externally, but send automated messages to the
> lists reflecting them?  Requiring players to manually send messages in
> a parseable format is definitely also viable, but I like it somewhat
> less for various reasons, including the confusion caused if they get
> the format wrong.

I've been thinking about this, and I think my personal cutoff is, oddly
enough, the use of email (but not necessarily to the Agoran lists). I'd
be OK with this only if the external interface was used, or at least
usable, entirely via emailing messages to it and getting emailed
responses.

I'm not quite sure why this is, and not sure I want to rationalise it
by guessing at the reason.

-- 
ais523

Re: DIS: Proto: Track it on the wiki

[Alex Smith]

On Sun, 2017-06-25 at 12:29 -0700, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
wrote:
> I concur with ais523's thoughts, but would appreciate if e could
> describe the reasoning for his dislike of GitHub.

Part of it (some particularly objectionable terms in a much older
version of the Terms of Service) has since been fixed. (There's some
inclarity related to licensing that caused something of an uproar
recently and could really do with being less ambiguous / easily
misinterpreted, but that wouldn't be a problem from Agora's point of
view. Apart from that, their current Terms of Service are actually
really good, so I'm glad they've put effort into improving them.)

I still have a number of issues with Github outstanding, though. For
example, one bad sign is that their homepage is mostly a Sign Up page,
and it doesn't even have a box to retype the password to confirm it,
implying that they care more about gaining new users than anything
else. Likewise, many of the site's features are aimed at trying to
persuade people to use the site even when other methods would work
better. I also get the distinct impression (from their documentation
and released software tools) that Github doesn't actually understand
Git, which is problematic for a business primarily based around it.

Finally, the UI is really unintuitive, although I guess that tends to
become less of a problem over time. (For people wondering, I've been
forced to use Github for my job on occasion. I don't use it for my own
projects; some are in git repositories but I self-host them.)

-- 
ais523

DIS: Re: BUS: Elections

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

I endorse the current officer holder for all offices I do not hold. For offices 
I do hold, I vote for myself.

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com



> On Jun 26, 2017, at 11:09 PM, V.J Rada  wrote:
> 
> Because I am rather bored, I initiate elections for Prime Minister, Herald 
> and Report or by announcement.



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: humble agoran farmer is the officer of everything

[Nic Evans]

Also, special deputisation doesn't make you the officer. Only normal
deputisation does. And only for elected offices.


On 06/27/17 06:52, Nic Evans wrote:
> On 06/27/17 04:18, CuddleBeam wrote:
>> I forgot to clarify a thing, sorry. I retract my lastest CFJ
>> of "Cuddlebeam has earned a Platinum Ribbon" (the one posted in that
>> message before this one).
>>
>> Via the Town Fountain Rule ("Any rule may allow special deputisation"
>> as ""Any rule allows special deputisation", depending on your choice
>> of the meaning of "may") for special deputisation for the Speaker, I
>> award myself a Platinum Ribbon.
>
> So your interpretation of the word 'may' is that it means nothing at
> all? How does permission or possibility become certainty in this line
> of reasoning?
>
> Also, you still need to perform an action that's appropriate to the
> Speaker to special deputise, per R2160.
>
>> I now CFJ (again) "Cuddlebeam has earned a Platinum Ribbon", I bar
>> nobody.
>



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: humble agoran farmer is the officer of everything

[Nic Evans]

On 06/27/17 04:18, CuddleBeam wrote:
> I forgot to clarify a thing, sorry. I retract my lastest CFJ
> of "Cuddlebeam has earned a Platinum Ribbon" (the one posted in that
> message before this one).
>
> Via the Town Fountain Rule ("Any rule may allow special deputisation"
> as ""Any rule allows special deputisation", depending on your choice
> of the meaning of "may") for special deputisation for the Speaker, I
> award myself a Platinum Ribbon.

So your interpretation of the word 'may' is that it means nothing at
all? How does permission or possibility become certainty in this line of
reasoning?

Also, you still need to perform an action that's appropriate to the
Speaker to special deputise, per R2160.

> I now CFJ (again) "Cuddlebeam has earned a Platinum Ribbon", I bar nobody.



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Elections

[V.J Rada]

Yeah lmao that's how I read it. The natural reading of the plain text seems
to allow the ADOP to initiate one at any time and me to do so under the
conditions.

On Tuesday, June 27, 2017, Ørjan Johansen  wrote:

> On Tue, 27 Jun 2017, Quazie wrote:
>
> You aren't the ADOP, so you would need instead 4 support, but I'll get to
>> those elections shortly - don't worry
>>
>
> Hum, it's not clear from the text of Rule 2154 that e cannot do that:
>
>   1. by announcement, if e is the ADoP, if the office has been
>  deputised for within the past two weeks, or if no election
>  has been initiated for the office either since the last time
>  a player won the game or within the past 90 days;
>
> In my opinion, there is no grammar or punctuation to indicate whether "if
> e is the ADoP" scopes over the other two "ifs" or whether it is an equal
> level third option.  Also I have no idea which reading is the _intended_
> one.  The writer may even have made it ambiguous on purpose to trip people
> up.  However, I think the three equal option parsing is the _simplest_ one.
>
> Greetings,
> Ørjan.

DIS: Re: BUS: Elections

[CuddleBeam]

>Because I am rather bored, I initiate elections for Prime Minister, Herald

>and Report or by announcement.


Hi rather bored, it's me dad.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Resolving proposals 7859-7864

[Kerim Aydin]

On Mon, 26 Jun 2017, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Jun 2017, Aris Merchant wrote:
> > This rule last
> > appeared in the FLR here [1] and was repealed by proposal 7629,
> > distributed here [2]. I'd give you the date it was assessed, but I
> > can't find the assessment, even after much searching. I could be in
> > error, or it could be that the proposal only took effect because of
> > the ratification of the SLR (which I think was published on the
> > supposed date of its assessment)? I would appreciate some help in
> > understanding this, as it's really freaking me out.
> 
> Assessment was sent to business, not official, and had a misleading 
> subject line and was adopted out-of-order:
> 
> https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-business/2014-April/032776.html

Oh, for completeness, the SLR published two hours after that assessment
(and containing the 7629 changes) was ratified on 1-May-14 by proposal 7638
with the following text:

> Ratify the body of the message published on 2014-04-07 titled "OFF:
> [Rulekeepor] Short Logical Ruleset".
>
> [Last one was about 8 months ago.]

So that's just coincidence.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Elections

[Ørjan Johansen]

On Tue, 27 Jun 2017, Quazie wrote:


You aren't the ADOP, so you would need instead 4 support, but I'll get to
those elections shortly - don't worry


Hum, it's not clear from the text of Rule 2154 that e cannot do that:

  1. by announcement, if e is the ADoP, if the office has been
 deputised for within the past two weeks, or if no election
 has been initiated for the office either since the last time
 a player won the game or within the past 90 days;

In my opinion, there is no grammar or punctuation to indicate whether "if 
e is the ADoP" scopes over the other two "ifs" or whether it is an equal 
level third option.  Also I have no idea which reading is the _intended_ 
one.  The writer may even have made it ambiguous on purpose to trip people 
up.  However, I think the three equal option parsing is the _simplest_ 
one.


Greetings,
Ørjan.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Resolving proposals 7859-7864

[Kerim Aydin]

On Mon, 26 Jun 2017, Aris Merchant wrote:
> This rule last
> appeared in the FLR here [1] and was repealed by proposal 7629,
> distributed here [2]. I'd give you the date it was assessed, but I
> can't find the assessment, even after much searching. I could be in
> error, or it could be that the proposal only took effect because of
> the ratification of the SLR (which I think was published on the
> supposed date of its assessment)? I would appreciate some help in
> understanding this, as it's really freaking me out.

Assessment was sent to business, not official, and had a misleading 
subject line and was adopted out-of-order:

https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-business/2014-April/032776.html

DIS: Re: BUS: Elections

[Quazie]

You aren't the ADOP, so you would need instead 4 support, but I'll get to
those elections shortly - don't worry

On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 23:09 V.J Rada  wrote:

> Because I am rather bored, I initiate elections for Prime Minister, Herald
> and Report or by announcement.