Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Language Trophies

[Ørjan Johansen]

On Thu, 29 Jun 2017, Alex Smith wrote:


A long time back there was a tradition of using -keepor for an office
that kept records about something (e.g. Rulekeepor). I don't know all
the details of the history there; it's possible that Ørjan does, or
perhaps some other player from that era.


I don't have the original proposals establishing the first (non-Speaker) 
officers, but at least already in November 1993 Ordinancekeepor was in 
use.  The original ruleset had only the Speaker as distinct from Voters. 
(And that + Rule 104 may be the reason why that word is exempt from 
turning into Speakor.)  I assume that either Rulekeepor or Scorekeepor (or 
maybe both?) was the first one, and started as a typo that caught on.


Greetings,
Ørjan.

DIS: What's the Power of a cultural touchstone?

[Owen Jacobson]

One of Suber’s remarks is interesting, at this juncture:

> If appropriate qualifications are made for the informality of custom and 
> etiquette, a case could be made that normal social life is just a system of 
> indefinite tiers. Near the top of the "difficult" end of the series, below 
> entrenched cultural norms, are actual laws, rising through case precedents, 
> regulations and statutes, to constitutional rules.

I propose that the use of Spivak pronouns, and the use of English, are cultural 
norms entrenched so deeply that, in a conflict between the rules of Agora and 
these norms, players will defer to those norms. That suggests that _changing_ 
those norms - formalizing the role of various languages, changing pronoun 
conventions, and so on - can be done, but not through the Agora rule-making 
process. Furthermore, it also suggests that the rules can _at most_ recognize 
those norms, but not enshrine or override them.

-o



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: DIS: PROTO: Criminal Justice Reform

[Owen Jacobson]

> On Jun 30, 2017, at 12:18 AM, Ørjan Johansen  wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 29 Jun 2017, Owen Jacobson wrote:
> 
>>   Each player who, on the date this proposal is enacted, owes an
>>   Apology on a Yellow Card shall be assumed, for all purposes, to have
>>   Apologized correctly and completely, on the date this proposal is
>>   enacted.
> 
> I suspect this will not work, because it seems to describe a fiction of law 
> without making any actual change to either rules or other relevant gamestate.
> 
> My interpretation of Rule 106 is that Proposals take effect by making changes 
> to game state, but once they have done so, stop having any further effect.

I wondered about that.

I can’t think of a way to phrase “pardon them what needs pardons” that would be 
more effective, sadly, but that’s the intent. At least repealing Pink Slips 
will cause the ability to recuse an officer who has received a Pink Slip to 
vanish.

This proposal is, at least, semi-serious. I have two aims, here:

1. To determine consensus on the philosophical question of whether rules need 
consequences, in light of that comic about actions, rules, and 
consequentiality, and

2. To clear the way to reconsider how we hold one another to the rules we 
agreed to play by, from first principles.

It’s fairly clear to me that the card system isn’t working very well. 
Ratification provides part of an answer, by allowing the game state to be 
determined through consensus (or at least through silence) rather than by 
enforcement; it’s possible that cards are entirely superfluous, or that they 
could be scoped to things which actually require enforcement.

(It hasn’t escaped my notice that the only cards I’ve actually issued recently 
have to do with lateness fulfilling some duty.)

-o



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: DIS: PROTO: Criminal Justice Reform

[Ørjan Johansen]

On Thu, 29 Jun 2017, Owen Jacobson wrote:


   Each player who, on the date this proposal is enacted, owes an
   Apology on a Yellow Card shall be assumed, for all purposes, to have
   Apologized correctly and completely, on the date this proposal is
   enacted.


I suspect this will not work, because it seems to describe a fiction of 
law without making any actual change to either rules or other relevant 
gamestate.


My interpretation of Rule 106 is that Proposals take effect by making 
changes to game state, but once they have done so, stop having any further 
effect.


Greetings,
Ørjan.

DIS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] Appeal of CFJ 3534; go vote!

[Owen Jacobson]

> On Jun 29, 2017, at 12:57 PM, Alex Smith  wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 2017-06-29 at 09:47 -0700, Aris Merchant wrote:
>> You're misconstruing what e said. E said that eir assignments _did_
>> give everyone a "reasonably equal" opportunity to judge.  I any case,
>> I object to the finger pointing (not that objecting does anything). I
>> further support the intent to enter the judgment into Moot, and do
>> so.
> 
> Aris + Cuddlebeam + Publius Scribonius Scholasticus = 3, that's enough.
> I was going to say "with all these new players, people have forgotten
> that Moots are broken", but it turns out that we fixed them at some
> point, so perhaps this will actually work.
> 
> I initiate the Agoran Decision to determine public confidence in the
> judgement of CFJ 3534.
> 
> For this decision, the vote collector is the Arbitor, and the valid
> options are AFFIRM, REMAND, and REMIT (PRESENT is also a valid vote).
> Quorum for this decision is 6.

I vote REMAND.

Relying on purely technical artefacts, such as line wrapping, quirks of 
specific character encodings, and the byte order of the underlying RFC 2822 
message, to evaluate a text written in a human language is a deeply worrying 
precedent to set. Further, CFJ 1460 contains some guidance

> I therefore hold that an Agoran player need not regard, nor be required
> to act upon, a message written in a language e does not understand,
> whether or not it is sent to a public forum.

that does not appear to have been applied, nor overturned.

-o




signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: DIS: Decoding attempt

[Ørjan Johansen]

On Thu, 29 Jun 2017, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:


How many languages do you speak?

More generally for everyone, what languages do you speak?


Norwegian (native), English (reasonably fluent, I hope), Swedish (as well 
as any Norwegian can fake it), Danish (ditto, which is slightly worse than 
Swedish for pronunciation but better for reading), German (pretty lapsed 
since high school, but at least well enough to read some content), French 
(pretty badly), and anything else I'm dabbling in requires looking things 
up, but I've recently tried learning to sing in Russian and Greek.


Greetings,
Ørjan.

DIS: Re: BUS: Language Trophies

[Owen Jacobson]

On Jun 29, 2017, at 12:43 PM, CuddleBeam  wrote:

> I'll keep on using him/she/they as I find most enjoyable, and as a variant of 
> English (one that doesn't have Spivak), and given our broad language 
> acceptance, I believe it should be all acceptable.

It’s acceptable, formally, but you’re being rude.

-o



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

DIS: PROTO: Criminal Justice Reform

[Owen Jacobson]

Title: Criminal Justice Reform
AI: 2

{{{
The office of Referee becomes empty.

Each player who, on the date this proposal is enacted, owes an Apology on a 
Yellow Card shall be assumed, for all purposes, to have Apologized correctly 
and completely, on the date this proposal is enacted.

Repeal rules 2450, 2426, 2477, 2478, 2479, 2474, 2427, 2475, 2476.

Amend rule 2472 (“Office Incompatibilities”) by removing the item "Referee 
and Arbitor” from the contained list of incompatible offices.

Amend rule 2451 ("Executive Orders”) by removing the item beginning with 
“Dive” from the contained list of executive orders.
}}}

-o



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

DIS: Re: BUS: Either way you look at it... [also contains a CFJ ID number assignment]

[Owen Jacobson]

> On Jun 29, 2017, at 12:05 PM, Quazie  wrote:
> 
> 1 - you can't assign pink slips - only the Referee can

And the Prime Minister. The PM has much broader apparent discretion as to who 
to issue a card to, as well.

-o




signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: DIS: Decoding attempt

[Owen Jacobson]

On Jun 29, 2017, at 9:51 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus 
 wrote:

> How many languages do you speak?
> 
> More generally for everyone, what languages do you speak?

English (well), French (very, very badly), and Bad Machine Translation (well 
enough to get by on).

-o




signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Draft: Promotor report

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

Thank you!

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



> On Jun 29, 2017, at 7:19 PM, Owen Jacobson  wrote:
> 
> Note that you’re responding to a draft report, which did not actually 
> distribute anything.
> 
> -o
> 
>> On Jun 29, 2017, at 9:48 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus 
>>  wrote:
>> 
>> Ego, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, assumptionem lationis primae in tabula 
>> adiungo.
>> Ego, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, assumptionem lationis secundae in 
>> tabula adiungo.
>> 
>> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
>> p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Jun 28, 2017, at 11:27 PM, Aris Merchant 
>>>  wrote:
>>> 
>>> 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 5.0 and the valid options are FOR and AGAINST (PRESENT is
>>> also a valid vote).
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ID  Author(s)AI   Title   Pender Pend fee 
>>> (sh.)
>>> ---
>>> 7865*   Aris, o, [1] 3.1  Regulations v4  Aris   6
>>> 7866*   o, Quazie, [2]   1.7  More Betterer Pledges   o  6
>>> 
>>> 
>>> The proposal pool is currently empty.
>>> 
>>> Legend: * : Proposal is pending.
>>> 
>>> [1] nichdel, ais523
>>> [2] G., Gaelan, Aris, 天火狐
>>> 
>>> The Pending List Price (PLP) is 6 shinies.
>>> 
>>> The full text of the aforementioned proposals is included below.
>>> 
>>> //
>>> ID: 7865
>>> Title: Regulations v4
>>> Adoption index: 3.1
>>> Author: Aris
>>> Co-authors: o, nichdel, ais523
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Change the title of Rule 2125, "Regulation Regulations", to "Regulated 
>>> Actions".
>>> 
>>> Amend Rules 2125 and 1023 by changing all instances of the word "regulated" 
>>> to
>>> "restricted", and all instances of the word "unregulated" to "unrestricted".
>>> 
>>> Amend Rule 2143, "Official Reports and Duties," by changing all instances 
>>> of the
>>> word "regulations" to "restrictions".
>>> 
>>> Create a new power 3.1 rule entitled "Regulations", with the flowing text:
>>> 
>>> A Regulation is an instrument defined as such by this rule. A regulation
>>> allows an officer (known as the Promulgator) to exercise rule defined 
>>> powers.
>>> A regulation is in effect continuously from the time of its creation to the
>>> time of either its revocation or the repeal of the rule that allowed for its
>>> creation. When recommending a regulation, its Promulgator must specify by
>>> number the rule(s) upon which it is based (the parent rules), the list of
>>> which becomes an integral part of the regulation. The list of rules can
>>> generally be modified by the Promulgator according to the procedure for text
>>> changes.
>>> 
>>> A regulation must be authorized by at least one rule in order for it to 
>>> exist.
>>> A regulation has effect on the game (only) insofar as the rule or rules that
>>> authorized it permit it to have effect, and a regulation generally inherits
>>> the power of its least powerful parent rule, unless its Promulgator defines
>>> a lower power. If reasonably possible, a regulation should be
>>> interpreted so as to defer to other rules. The procedure for resolving
>>> conflict between regulations is the same as it is for rules.
>>> 
>>> Regulations are generally issued according to the following procedures,
>>> and they can be repealed by the announcement of their Promulgator. Alternate
>>> procedures may be used if provided for by all of the regulations's parent
>>> rules. If one parent rule specifies procedures that are more stringent than
>>> those that the other(s) specifies, those apply. Creating, modifying, 
>>> revoking,
>>> or allowing for a regulation is secured at power 1.
>>> 
>>> A regulation (or set of regulations), authorized by another rule, may
>>> generally be enacted or modified by its promulgator without 2 objections,
>>> or with Agoran consent. A notice pursuant to the previous sentence is
>>> known as a "recommendation", and the regulation(s) are said to be
>>> "recommended" to Agora.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Create a new power 1 rule, entitled "The Regkeepor", with the following 
>>> text:
>>> 
>>> The Regkeepor is an office, responsible for the maintenance of the
>>> Regulations. The Regulations are contained in the Regkeepor's weekly report,
>>> know as the Agora Nomic Code of Regulations (ACORN). E MAY publish multiple
>>> versions or editions of the ACORN.
>>> 
>>> The ACORN is divided into titles, assigned by the Regkeepor, which are
>>> each given an integer.  Generally, each office with the power to create
>>> regulations SHOULD be assigned the next successive natural number. Title 0 
>>> of
>>> the ACORN is reserved 

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Draft: Promotor report

[Owen Jacobson]

Note that you’re responding to a draft report, which did not actually 
distribute anything.

-o

> On Jun 29, 2017, at 9:48 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus 
>  wrote:
> 
> Ego, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, assumptionem lationis primae in tabula 
> adiungo.
> Ego, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, assumptionem lationis secundae in 
> tabula adiungo.
> 
> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com
> 
> 
> 
>> On Jun 28, 2017, at 11:27 PM, Aris Merchant 
>>  wrote:
>> 
>> 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 5.0 and the valid options are FOR and AGAINST (PRESENT is
>> also a valid vote).
>> 
>> 
>> ID  Author(s)AI   Title   Pender Pend fee 
>> (sh.)
>> ---
>> 7865*   Aris, o, [1] 3.1  Regulations v4  Aris   6
>> 7866*   o, Quazie, [2]   1.7  More Betterer Pledges   o  6
>> 
>> 
>> The proposal pool is currently empty.
>> 
>> Legend: * : Proposal is pending.
>> 
>> [1] nichdel, ais523
>> [2] G., Gaelan, Aris, 天火狐
>> 
>> The Pending List Price (PLP) is 6 shinies.
>> 
>> The full text of the aforementioned proposals is included below.
>> 
>> //
>> ID: 7865
>> Title: Regulations v4
>> Adoption index: 3.1
>> Author: Aris
>> Co-authors: o, nichdel, ais523
>> 
>> 
>> Change the title of Rule 2125, "Regulation Regulations", to "Regulated 
>> Actions".
>> 
>> Amend Rules 2125 and 1023 by changing all instances of the word "regulated" 
>> to
>> "restricted", and all instances of the word "unregulated" to "unrestricted".
>> 
>> Amend Rule 2143, "Official Reports and Duties," by changing all instances of 
>> the
>> word "regulations" to "restrictions".
>> 
>> Create a new power 3.1 rule entitled "Regulations", with the flowing text:
>> 
>> A Regulation is an instrument defined as such by this rule. A regulation
>> allows an officer (known as the Promulgator) to exercise rule defined powers.
>> A regulation is in effect continuously from the time of its creation to the
>> time of either its revocation or the repeal of the rule that allowed for its
>> creation. When recommending a regulation, its Promulgator must specify by
>> number the rule(s) upon which it is based (the parent rules), the list of
>> which becomes an integral part of the regulation. The list of rules can
>> generally be modified by the Promulgator according to the procedure for text
>> changes.
>> 
>> A regulation must be authorized by at least one rule in order for it to 
>> exist.
>> A regulation has effect on the game (only) insofar as the rule or rules that
>> authorized it permit it to have effect, and a regulation generally inherits
>> the power of its least powerful parent rule, unless its Promulgator defines
>> a lower power. If reasonably possible, a regulation should be
>> interpreted so as to defer to other rules. The procedure for resolving
>> conflict between regulations is the same as it is for rules.
>> 
>> Regulations are generally issued according to the following procedures,
>> and they can be repealed by the announcement of their Promulgator. Alternate
>> procedures may be used if provided for by all of the regulations's parent
>> rules. If one parent rule specifies procedures that are more stringent than
>> those that the other(s) specifies, those apply. Creating, modifying, 
>> revoking,
>> or allowing for a regulation is secured at power 1.
>> 
>> A regulation (or set of regulations), authorized by another rule, may
>> generally be enacted or modified by its promulgator without 2 objections,
>> or with Agoran consent. A notice pursuant to the previous sentence is
>> known as a "recommendation", and the regulation(s) are said to be
>> "recommended" to Agora.
>> 
>> 
>> Create a new power 1 rule, entitled "The Regkeepor", with the following text:
>> 
>> The Regkeepor is an office, responsible for the maintenance of the
>> Regulations. The Regulations are contained in the Regkeepor's weekly report,
>> know as the Agora Nomic Code of Regulations (ACORN). E MAY publish multiple
>> versions or editions of the ACORN.
>> 
>> The ACORN is divided into titles, assigned by the Regkeepor, which are
>> each given an integer.  Generally, each office with the power to create
>> regulations SHOULD be assigned the next successive natural number. Title 0 of
>> the ACORN is reserved for use by the Regkeepor, and nothing in that title
>> need be a regulation. Non-regulations printed in the ACORN
>> have no binding effect, and SHALL clearly be marked by the Regkeepor.
>> 
>> Each regulation SHALL be assigned an ID number by the Regkeepor, consisting
>> of a string of the 

DIS: Re: BUS: Complete Shiny Economy Overhaul

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

What about have an AP level that can be changed by announcement.

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



> On Jun 29, 2017, at 6:56 PM, Nic Evans  wrote:
> 
> I anticipate the low AP level to be an objection here. Instead of
> deciding on one myself, I figured it'd be easier for anyone who objects
> to just introduce a proposal to change it immediately after adoption.
> 
> 
> On 06/29/17 20:42, Nic Evans wrote:
>> Features:
>> 
>>   - CFJs and Proposals can be made by spending shinies OR by using AP.
>>   AP works like SP, each player getting 2 non-accruing AP a week.
>>   Actions taken using AP can't award shinies, so there's reasons to not
>>   use your AP.
>> 
>>   - Shinies can be used to buy Stamps. Possessing Stamps made by 10
>>   different players allows you to win.
>> 
>>   - Players claim shinies for meeting conditions, rather than being
>>   given them by Secretary. This stops inactive players from accruing
>>   them and eases the Secretary's load.
>> 
>>   - Costs and Payouts for several things are based on Floating Value.
>>   FV changes weekly and is based on Agora's balance. This allows both
>>   price speculation and manipulation, but indirectly and distributed
>>   enough to not be completely controllable.
>> 
>>   - Welcome Packages, which right now just get players started in the
>>   economy but could eventually be used to give other assets as well.
>> 
>> 
>> I submit the following proposal:
>> 
>> -
>> 
>> Title: Economics Overhaul
>> AI: 2.0
>> Author: nichdel
>> Co-authors: o, grok, Aris
>> 
>> Repeal R2484 "Payday".
>> 
>> Amend the rule titled "Assets" by, after the paragraph that starts with
>> "An asset generally CAN be transferred", adding:
>> 
>>   When a rule indicates transfering an amount that is not a natural
>>   number, the specified amount is rounded up to the nearest natural
>>   number.
>> 
>> And by, after the paragraph that starts "The "x balance of an entity"",
>> adding:
>> 
>>   When a player causes one or more balances to change, e is ENCOURAGED
>>   to specify the resulting balance(s). Players SHOULD NOT specify
>>   inaccurate balances.
>> 
>> {Just intended to make balance tracking easier inbetween Secretary
>> reports}
>> 
>> Enact a Power 1 rule titled "Rewards" with the following text:
>> 
>>   A Reward is a specified amount of shinies associated with a Reward
>>   Condition. For each time a player meets a Reward Condition, e MAY
>>   claim the specified award exactly once within 24 hours of meeting the
>>   Reward Condition.
>> 
>>   When a player 'claims' a Reward, Agora transfers the specified number
>>   of shinies to the player.
>> 
>>   Below is an exhaustive list of Reward Conditions and eir rewards:
>> 
>>  * The following two only apply to proposals that were pended via
>>  spending shinies:
>> 
>> - Being the author of an adopted proposal: 1/40th the current
>> Floating Value.
>> 
>> - Being the pender of an adopted proposal: 1/40th the current
>> Floating Value.
>> 
>>  * Judging a CFJ, that was created via spending shinies, that e was
>>  assigned to: 1/20th the current Floating Value.
>> 
>>  * Publishing a duty-fulfilling report: 5 shinies.
>> 
>>  * Resolving an Agoran Decision for the first time this week: 5
>>  shinies.
>> 
>> Enact a Power 1 rule titled "Floating Value" with the following text:
>> 
>>   Floating Value is a natural switch. When e publishes eir Weekly
>>   Report, the Secretary SHALL flip the Floating Value to Agora's shiny
>>   balance.
>> 
>> Set the Floating Value to 200.
>> 
>> Enact a Power 1 rule titled "Economic Wins" with the following text:
>> 
>>   Stamps are an asset, identified by eir creator and tracked by the
>>   Secretary.
>> 
>>   The Stamp Value is always 1/5th the current Floating Value.
>> 
>>   Once per month, a player MAY, by announcement, transfer to Agora the
>>   Stamp Value, in shinies, to create a Stamp.
>> 
>>   Players MAY, by announcement, destroy a Stamp and cause Agora to
>>   transfer the Stamp Value, in shinies, to em.
>> 
>>   While a player has Stamps made by at least 10 different players e MAY
>>   destroy 10 stamps made by 10 different players by announcement to win
>>   the game.
>> 
>> Enact a Power 1 rule titled "Welcome Packages" with the following text:
>> 
>>   If a player has not received a Welcome Package since e most recently
>>   registered, any player MAY cause em to receive one by announcement.
>> 
>>   When a player receives a Welcome Package, Agora transfers 50 shinies
>>   to em.
>> 
>> Enact a Power 1 rule titled "Action Points" with the following text:
>> 
>>   At the beginning of every Agoran Week, every player has 2 Action
>>   Points. When a player 'spends' an Action Point, e has one less
>>   Action Point. If a player has 0 Action Points, e may not spend any
>>   more Action Points, rules to the contrary notwithstanding.

DIS: Re: BUS: humble agoran farmer aka robin hood

[Owen Jacobson]

> On Jun 29, 2017, at 5:38 AM, CuddleBeam  wrote:
> 
> I create the following pledge "The player (at the moment of creation of this 
> pledge) with the most Shinies (tiebreaking towards the player with the 
> alphabetically earliest name) shall pay Cuddlebeam 3 shiny within 168 hours 
> since the creation of this pledge."
> 
> Yes I know "Betterer Pledges" is up. Here's its text and why I think my scam 
> would work:
> 
> ---*---
> 
> Breaking a publicly-made pledge is a cardable offense.
> 
> If a publicly-made pledge says that the creator of a pledge will do
> something, without providing a time limit, then e SHALL in a timely manner
>   in order to not break said pledge.
> 
> A player CANNOT make any pledge that would create new obligations for
> any other person or office, without the other party's explicit consent.
> 
> ---*---
> 
> Note that I will use multiple possible interpretations here, each endorsing 
> the scam from a different view. I have no objective measure to use to decide 
> which interpretation is betterer.
> 
> ▪ "Obligations" aren't explicitly defined, but given that "Pledges" are 
> within the Category of "Obligations" in the ruleset, I believe its heavily 
> implied that a "Pledge" is a type of "Obligation": Betterer Pledges says that 
> "A player CANNOT make any pledge that would create new obligations for any 
> other person or office, without the other party's explicit consent.". Which, 
> in the context of this scam can be read as "A player CANNOT make any pledge 
> that would create NEW PLEDGES for any other person or office, without the 
> other party's explicit consent.". Since my pledge isn't creating any new 
> pledges itself, it's not violating that requirement.

I suspect this interpretation misses the mark entirely, as ruleset categories 
are an artefact of the Rulekeepor’s personal discretion to format the report, 
and not a ludic structure of any meaning. The category could as well be titled 
“Finely Aged Cheeses” for all the meaning it carries.

There’s extensive precedent that undefined terms in the rules should be 
interpreted using their common definition. See r. 217 (“Interpreting the 
Rules”) for an oblique starting point:

> Definitions in lower-powered Rules do not overrule common-sense 
> interpretations or common definitions of terms in higher-powered rules.

I’d look up historical CFJs that support that, but it seems they’re offline.

In common usage, a pledge is a particular kind of obligation, and it makes no 
sense to interpret the word “obligation” to only mean “pledge” when the term 
also includes other kinds of obligations: contracts, deeds, obligations created 
by the rules, and so on, none of which are obviously equivalent to pledges.

> ▪ On the other hand, it can be taken that people aren't actually _obligated_ 
> to follow pledges in the first place. Breaking pledges in itself isn't a 
> violation of anything formal, it would just be not doing what a non-binding 
> arbitrary string says, and then likely getting a card tossed at you. There is 
> no "obligation" - just a punishment if you don't do it. So, since there is no 
> "obligation" anyone in the pledge I've made, I'm not violating the 
> requirement of that last sentence in Betterer Pledges, so its a valid pledge.

I tend to favour this interpretation, which is why my proposal on the matter 
reworks the phrasing to use SHALL - which historical interpretation has treated 
as a formal obligation.

-o



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Language Trophies

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

Actually on this issue, I think, if any Agoran once greater inclusion without 
excluding others, then we must abide by that wish and try our best to be 
inclusive to the degree requested.

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



> On Jun 29, 2017, at 12:29 PM, Nic Evans  wrote:
> 
> On 06/29/2017 12:49 PM, CuddleBeam wrote:
>> >Spivak is personally important to me. I don't think I've overstated my 
>> >feelings on this matter in the least.
>> 
>> OK. It's alright to have that.
> I don't need your approval.
>> I'm just curious how that is compatible with what you've stated here: 
>> http://www.mail-archive.com/agora-discussion@agoranomic.org/msg36544.html
>> 
>> >Inclusivity: Language is part of culture and identity, and I'm not 
>> >comfortable codifying Agora's
>> >culture to be so exclusive. We already have measures against ambiguity that 
>> >don't disavow entire
>> >tongues.
>> 
>> Wouldn't enforcing Spivak be making it "exclusive"? Aren't there other 
>> (potentially culturally-influenced) ways to express yourself? Or are those 
>> not alright if they don't include Spivak?
> 
> I wasn't speaking in absolute terms, at some point between 'these words are 
> prefered' and 'this entire class of communication is the prestige system' you 
> cross from a difference of degree to a difference of quality (of course, the 
> line is impossible to really suss out).
> 
> We already have prefered words to some degree. 'Reportor' is defined, but 
> it's not prohibited to use synonyms, translations, circumlocutions, or 
> encipherments if other players deem them not ambiguous. But if you constantly 
> avoided keywords, other players might lobby you to stop. In the same vein, I 
> don't support punishments for not using Spivak, but I'm still going to lobby 
> for its usage.
> 
> Broader terms: Culture and individuality is negotiated between individuals. 
> When communicating with others, especially when communiating _about_ them, 
> there needs to be compromise to please both sides. Speak only how you prefer, 
> and you risk hurting them. Speak only how they prefer, and you risk hurting 
> yourself.
> 
> And the personal note: I'm a single Agoran, so my opinion is ultimately my 
> own. But Spivak represents inclusivity to me, by circumventing English's need 
> to either pre-categorize people, or have them explicitly categorize 
> themselves. Symbolically, losing that system feels like a loss of an ideal.



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Language Trophies

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

If you have a non-Spivak, gender-neutral, identity-neutral form of pronouns, I 
would be happy to take you up on learning it. Inclusivity is making everyone 
feel included and we can do that by using language that makes them feel 
comfortable.

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



> On Jun 29, 2017, at 10:49 AM, CuddleBeam  wrote:
> 
> >Spivak is personally important to me. I don't think I've overstated my 
> >feelings on this matter in the least.
> 
> OK. It's alright to have that. I'm just curious how that is compatible with 
> what you've stated here: 
> http://www.mail-archive.com/agora-discussion@agoranomic.org/msg36544.html
> 
> >Inclusivity: Language is part of culture and identity, and I'm not 
> >comfortable codifying Agora's
> >culture to be so exclusive. We already have measures against ambiguity that 
> >don't disavow entire
> >tongues.
> 
> Wouldn't enforcing Spivak be making it "exclusive"? Aren't there other 
> (potentially culturally-influenced) ways to express yourself? Or are those 
> not alright if they don't include Spivak?



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

Re: DIS: We actually have no Officeholders.

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

It uses an implied default of empty and given that it takes precedence per Rule 
1030, I believe that is fine.

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



> On Jun 29, 2017, at 12:59 PM, CuddleBeam  wrote:
> 
> R2162 states that:
> 
> "A type of switch is a property that the rules define as a switch, and 
> specify the following:
> (...)
> 2. One or more possible values for instances of that switch, exactly one of 
> which is designated as the default. "
> 
> So stating a default is required for a Switch to be a Switch.
> 
> R1006 doesn't specify a default value for the its Officeholder Switch, 
> therefore its not a Switch.
> 
> Dun dun dn.



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Jump In While The Water's Tepid

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

No, I think he is pointing out that I later pointed my finger.

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



> On Jun 29, 2017, at 12:12 PM, CuddleBeam  wrote:
> 
> >I primarily meant the pink slip attempt, but pointing your finger is a
> >CAN not a MUST. Piling on finger points for something not intentionally
> >bad form seems like needless antagonism.
> 
> I agree. I was mostly correcting PSS's action of trying to give a Pink Slip 
> when he can't with my own Point a Finger, emulating what he should've done 
> with his intent. I didn't realize they stacked lol.



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Birthday celebration thread

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

NttPF

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



> On Jun 29, 2017, at 11:51 AM, V.J Rada  wrote:
> 
> I wish Agora a happy birthday.
> I award myself a magenta ribbon.
> 
> On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 5:04 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus 
>  wrote:
> I wish Agora a happy birthday.
> I award myself a magenta ribbon.
> 
> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com
> 
> 
> 
> > On Jun 29, 2017, at 8:15 AM, CuddleBeam  wrote:
> >
> > Today, Agoran Birthday, is.
> >
> > Myself a Magenta Ribbon, I grant.
> 
> 



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

Re: Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Language Trophies

[CuddleBeam]

> Unrelated mostly but does anyone have any idea why Agora's offices
> mostly end with "or" instead of "er"?


Proto:


Rename Herald to Heraldor, ADoP to ADoPor lol

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Language Trophies

[Alex Smith]

On Thu, 2017-06-29 at 20:39 +0100, V.J Rada wrote:
> Unrelated mostly but does anyone have any idea why Agora's offices
> mostly end with "or" instead of "er"?

A long time back there was a tradition of using -keepor for an office
that kept records about something (e.g. Rulekeepor). I don't know all
the details of the history there; it's possible that Ørjan does, or
perhaps some other player from that era.

This started generalizing into other offices after a while. The
construction was pretty much "append -or to a verb to form a name of an
office that does that verb". For example, a Promotor is someone who
promotes.

To add to the confusion, some office names have been chosen to
naturally end in -or, e.g. Tailor (which does not mean "someone who
tails", even though that'd be a valid retroconstruction of the word in
Agoran English). I think that's partly coincidence and partly people
having fun with the theme.

(There are also offices that fall into both of the above categories: an
Assessor assesses proposals, and the word also means "someone who
assesses things" in regular English.)

-- 
ais523

DIS: We actually have no Officeholders.

[CuddleBeam]

R2162 states that:

"A type of switch is a property that the rules define as a switch, and
specify the following:
(...)
2. One or more possible values for instances of that switch, exactly one of
which is designated as the default. "

So stating a default is required for a Switch to be a Switch.

R1006 doesn't specify a default value for the its Officeholder Switch,
therefore its not a Switch.

Dun dun dn.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Either way you look at it... [also contains a CFJ ID number assignment]

[Alex Smith]

On Thu, 2017-06-29 at 10:51 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> ais523 wrote:
> > Saying "A byte stream containing Arabic text must be interpreted as
> > though it were laid out left to right" would be in its own right
> > disrespectful to the language, because that's not how Arabic is written
> > in practice. 
> 
> So, the crux of it.  A couple thoughts.  I am a very rudimentary Arabic 
> speaker,
> learning from a couple books and reading street signs.  I've never typed it.
> I cut and paste it from Google translate.  Now, when I did the cut/paste, I
> wondered "would it paste into my editor in the opposite direction, or what?"
> 
> Imagine my surprise, when pasted, that, WHEN MY CURSOR WAS IN THE ARABIC TEXT,
> MY CONTROL KEYS WORKED BACKWARDS.  Backspace deleted to the right, and typing
> spaces and language-neutral punctuation moved the cursor right to left.  When
> I moved the cursor into the Latin text, it went back to what I was used to.  
> I thought "what wizardry is this??"  And I thought "these computer programmers
> (like you) who do these things are $%$%&$* brilliant!"  
> 
> But my other thought was, "hey, it just works".  It truly meant, that for an
> "Arabic writer", both the entry and the reading could naturally start from the
> right (then end in a gobbledigook reversed latin set of characters) just as 
> the
> English starts out correctly, then ends in reversed Arabic.  I don't know if
> this works for all email clients, but it was even preserved through emailing -
> I could reply to my Arabic message and get the same thing.  It's not perfect,
> e.g. line breaks, but for a single sentence on a single line - it just works,
> naturally, regardless of which language you thought you were typing.
> 
> So while I don't have any native Arabic speakers handy today, and line breaks
> are still a problem, I can look at that single line of text and think:  each
> part was entered/typed in the "correct" order for each language, as it truly
> was, and would be read that way by respective speakers of the languages.
> 
> So I wonder, as brilliant as the computer programming is that does this, is
> taking the programming view and breaking it down into the underlying bytes
> missing the forest for the trees?  You, or someone like you, created something
> that works for someone like me... why decompile?

Well, the point is that the text contains information about the full
order of all the text in it. If you press Home, you go to the logical
"start" of the line, regardless of whether that's in English or Arabic
(thus it might be the left or the right end). If you press End, you go
to the logical "end" of the line. In this particular line, the start is
in the English, and the end is in the Arabic; it could easily have been
written the other way round and look the same. This information isn't
preserved by accident, either; it's necessary to make the editing work
(i.e. where backspace deletes "back" whether that happens to be right
or left in this particular language), and it's needed to render the
text correctly. As a concrete example, the information is needed to
know whether the colon in the middle is after the English and before
the Arabic (in which case backspace when the cursor is near the colon
should delete it to the left), or whether it's before the English and
after the Arabic (in which case backspace when the cursor is near the
colon should delete it to the right). Each of these two cursor
behaviours gives a particular unambiguous meaning to the sentence in
question.

I admit to somewhat missing the forest for the trees in my judgement. I
(perhaps incorrectly) assumed that all this was common knowledge,
especially for people who used both Arabic and a left-to-right language
on computers, and looked at the bytes underlying the email to see what
they said about the logical order of the text they represented; it was
a fairly interesting legal point because the standards defining the
encoding in question are unclear, and thus I had to run through the
possibilities. I don't think I was as clear as I could have been about
why I was doing that, though.

-- 
ais523

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Language Trophies

[V.J Rada]

Unrelated mostly but does anyone have any idea why Agora's offices mostly
end with "or" instead of "er"?

On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 8:29 PM, Nic Evans  wrote:

> On 06/29/2017 12:49 PM, CuddleBeam wrote:
>
>> >Spivak is personally important to me. I don't think I've overstated my
>> feelings on this matter in the least.
>>
>> OK. It's alright to have that.
>>
> I don't need your approval.
>
>> I'm just curious how that is compatible with what you've stated here:
>> http://www.mail-archive.com/agora-discussion@agoranomic.org/msg36544.html
>>
>> >Inclusivity: Language is part of culture and identity, and I'm not
>> comfortable codifying Agora's
>> >culture to be so exclusive. We already have measures against ambiguity
>> that don't disavow entire
>> >tongues.
>>
>> Wouldn't enforcing Spivak be making it "exclusive"? Aren't there other
>> (potentially culturally-influenced) ways to express yourself? Or are those
>> not alright if they don't include Spivak?
>>
>
> I wasn't speaking in absolute terms, at some point between 'these words
> are prefered' and 'this entire class of communication is the prestige
> system' you cross from a difference of degree to a difference of quality
> (of course, the line is impossible to really suss out).
>
> We already have prefered words to some degree. 'Reportor' is defined, but
> it's not prohibited to use synonyms, translations, circumlocutions, or
> encipherments if other players deem them not ambiguous. But if you
> constantly avoided keywords, other players might lobby you to stop. In the
> same vein, I don't support punishments for not using Spivak, but I'm still
> going to lobby for its usage.
>
> Broader terms: Culture and individuality is negotiated between
> individuals. When communicating with others, especially when communiating
> _about_ them, there needs to be compromise to please both sides. Speak only
> how you prefer, and you risk hurting them. Speak only how they prefer, and
> you risk hurting yourself.
>
> And the personal note: I'm a single Agoran, so my opinion is ultimately my
> own. But Spivak represents inclusivity to me, by circumventing English's
> need to either pre-categorize people, or have them explicitly categorize
> themselves. Symbolically, losing that system feels like a loss of an ideal.
>

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Language Trophies

[Nic Evans]

On 06/29/2017 12:49 PM, CuddleBeam wrote:
>Spivak is personally important to me. I don't think I've overstated 
my feelings on this matter in the least.


OK. It's alright to have that.

I don't need your approval.
I'm just curious how that is compatible with what you've stated here: 
http://www.mail-archive.com/agora-discussion@agoranomic.org/msg36544.html


>Inclusivity: Language is part of culture and identity, and I'm not 
comfortable codifying Agora's
>culture to be so exclusive. We already have measures against 
ambiguity that don't disavow entire

>tongues.

Wouldn't enforcing Spivak be making it "exclusive"? Aren't there other 
(potentially culturally-influenced) ways to express yourself? Or are 
those not alright if they don't include Spivak?


I wasn't speaking in absolute terms, at some point between 'these words 
are prefered' and 'this entire class of communication is the prestige 
system' you cross from a difference of degree to a difference of quality 
(of course, the line is impossible to really suss out).


We already have prefered words to some degree. 'Reportor' is defined, 
but it's not prohibited to use synonyms, translations, circumlocutions, 
or encipherments if other players deem them not ambiguous. But if you 
constantly avoided keywords, other players might lobby you to stop. In 
the same vein, I don't support punishments for not using Spivak, but I'm 
still going to lobby for its usage.


Broader terms: Culture and individuality is negotiated between 
individuals. When communicating with others, especially when 
communiating _about_ them, there needs to be compromise to please both 
sides. Speak only how you prefer, and you risk hurting them. Speak only 
how they prefer, and you risk hurting yourself.


And the personal note: I'm a single Agoran, so my opinion is ultimately 
my own. But Spivak represents inclusivity to me, by circumventing 
English's need to either pre-categorize people, or have them explicitly 
categorize themselves. Symbolically, losing that system feels like a 
loss of an ideal.

Re: Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Jump In While The Water's Tepid

[CuddleBeam]

>I primarily meant the pink slip attempt, but pointing your finger is a

>CAN not a MUST. Piling on finger points for something not intentionally

>bad form seems like needless antagonism.


I agree. I was mostly correcting PSS's action of trying to give a Pink
Slip when he can't with my own Point a Finger, emulating what he
should've done with his intent. I didn't realize they stacked lol.

DIS: Re: BUS: Birthday celebration thread

[V.J Rada]

I wish Agora a happy birthday.
I award myself a magenta ribbon.

On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 5:04 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus <
p.scribonius.scholasti...@googlemail.com> wrote:

> I wish Agora a happy birthday.
> I award myself a magenta ribbon.
> 
> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com
>
>
>
> > On Jun 29, 2017, at 8:15 AM, CuddleBeam 
> wrote:
> >
> > Today, Agoran Birthday, is.
> >
> > Myself a Magenta Ribbon, I grant.
>
>

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Jump In While The Water's Tepid

[Nicholas Evans]

On Jun 29, 2017 13:05, "CuddleBeam"  wrote:

> database. Antagonizing another old, respected player who is currently making

> up for that deficit seems to me to be the definition of shooting yourself in
> the foot.


No amount of respect or other positive feelings I have for a person will
put them above the word of law.

That said, I agree with you entirely that Ais doesn't informally deserve it
at all. I'd support removing cards from him once granted, because I can do
anything I arbitrarily want via proposals, voting freedoms, etc


I primarily meant the pink slip attempt, but pointing your finger is a CAN
not a MUST. Piling on finger points for something not intentionally bad
form seems like needless antagonism.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Jump In While The Water's Tepid

[CuddleBeam]

> database. Antagonizing another old, respected player who is currently making

> up for that deficit seems to me to be the definition of shooting yourself in
> the foot.


No amount of respect or other positive feelings I have for a person will
put them above the word of law.

That said, I agree with you entirely that Ais doesn't informally deserve it
at all. I'd support removing cards from him once granted, because I can do
anything I arbitrarily want via proposals, voting freedoms, etc

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Either way you look at it... [also contains a CFJ ID number assignment]

[Kerim Aydin]

天火狐 wrote:
> I do apologize that it has come to this. For what it's worth, I sympathize 
> with
> your point of view and I do think that your CFJ was brilliant, even if I 
> didn't
> exactly have time to submit a gratuitous argument to support you. 
> 天火狐
> (Apparently, that Japanese character guy)

I *think* I've learned to recognize your signature, and I've tried to associate
it with how google pronounces it - not quite a reflex yet though, and if there
were similar-looking characters I probably wouldn't notice the substitution :)

And I haven't minded your experiments - if nothing else, made me remember and
reflect on Douglas Hofstadter's chapter in Metamagical Themas on cross-language
fonts and font recognition, never a bad thing.


omd wrote:
> (btw, it's unfortunate that your CFJ database is now down :/).

That was a silly fit of pique.  And 3/4 is still your work, not mine!  It should
be up again now, let me know if not.


ais523 wrote:
> Saying "A byte stream containing Arabic text must be interpreted as
> though it were laid out left to right" would be in its own right
> disrespectful to the language, because that's not how Arabic is written
> in practice. 

So, the crux of it.  A couple thoughts.  I am a very rudimentary Arabic speaker,
learning from a couple books and reading street signs.  I've never typed it.
I cut and paste it from Google translate.  Now, when I did the cut/paste, I
wondered "would it paste into my editor in the opposite direction, or what?"

Imagine my surprise, when pasted, that, WHEN MY CURSOR WAS IN THE ARABIC TEXT,
MY CONTROL KEYS WORKED BACKWARDS.  Backspace deleted to the right, and typing
spaces and language-neutral punctuation moved the cursor right to left.  When
I moved the cursor into the Latin text, it went back to what I was used to.  
I thought "what wizardry is this??"  And I thought "these computer programmers
(like you) who do these things are $%$%&$* brilliant!"  

But my other thought was, "hey, it just works".  It truly meant, that for an
"Arabic writer", both the entry and the reading could naturally start from the
right (then end in a gobbledigook reversed latin set of characters) just as the
English starts out correctly, then ends in reversed Arabic.  I don't know if
this works for all email clients, but it was even preserved through emailing -
I could reply to my Arabic message and get the same thing.  It's not perfect,
e.g. line breaks, but for a single sentence on a single line - it just works,
naturally, regardless of which language you thought you were typing.

So while I don't have any native Arabic speakers handy today, and line breaks
are still a problem, I can look at that single line of text and think:  each
part was entered/typed in the "correct" order for each language, as it truly
was, and would be read that way by respective speakers of the languages.

So I wonder, as brilliant as the computer programming is that does this, is
taking the programming view and breaking it down into the underlying bytes
missing the forest for the trees?  You, or someone like you, created something
that works for someone like me... why decompile?

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Language Trophies

[Aris Merchant]

On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 10:39 AM, Nic Evans  wrote:
> On 06/29/2017 12:32 PM, CuddleBeam wrote:
>
>>Your argument is that the comfort of one person, you, outweighs
>>the comfort of any other persons? And that 'needing to think of
>>pronouns' is an issue singular to you, and not also everyone else?
>
> Possibly. I could be a Utility Monster, which could be curious to explore.
>
> I don't think that strict use of Spivak or not should that much of a
> concern, really. BlogNomic uses no Spivak at all just fine.
>
> I don't play BlogNomic and don't really care what they do.
>
>
> I think we might be blowing this thing up out of proportion too much lol. If
> I've escalated too hard, I apologize.
>
>
> Spivak is personally important to me. I don't think I've overstated my
> feelings on this matter in the least.
>

Whoa there, calm down. I get that everyone has strong emotions here,
but we need not to get into a fight. We have enough players leaving
the game already. I request that everyone be civil, kind, and
otherwise nice to each other. This is how we can best treat Agora
Right Good Forever.

-Aris

Re: Re: Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Language Trophies

[CuddleBeam]

Not really "enforcing" it lol, but more like, pushing for it to be
dominant/widely assumed by many.

Re: Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Language Trophies

[CuddleBeam]

>Spivak is personally important to me. I don't think I've overstated my
feelings on this matter in the least.

OK. It's alright to have that. I'm just curious how that is compatible with
what you've stated here:
http://www.mail-archive.com/agora-discussion@agoranomic.org/msg36544.html

>Inclusivity: Language is part of culture and identity, and I'm not
comfortable codifying Agora's
>culture to be so exclusive. We already have measures against ambiguity
that don't disavow entire
>tongues.

Wouldn't enforcing Spivak be making it "exclusive"? Aren't there other
(potentially culturally-influenced) ways to express yourself? Or are those
not alright if they don't include Spivak?

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Language Trophies

[Nic Evans]

On 06/29/2017 12:32 PM, CuddleBeam wrote:

>Your argument is that the comfort of one person, you, outweighs
>the comfort of any other persons? And that 'needing to think of
>pronouns' is an issue singular to you, and not also everyone else?

Possibly. I could be a Utility Monster, which could be curious to explore.

I don't think that strict use of Spivak or not should that much of a 
concern, really. BlogNomic uses no Spivak at all just fine.

I don't play BlogNomic and don't really care what they do.


I think we might be blowing this thing up out of proportion too much 
lol. If I've escalated too hard, I apologize.


Spivak is personally important to me. I don't think I've overstated my 
feelings on this matter in the least.

Re: Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Language Trophies

[CuddleBeam]

>Your argument is that the comfort of one person, you, outweighs
>the comfort of any other persons? And that 'needing to think of
>pronouns' is an issue singular to you, and not also everyone else?

Possibly. I could be a Utility Monster, which could be curious to explore.

I don't think that strict use of Spivak or not should that much of a
concern, really. BlogNomic uses no Spivak at all just fine.

I think we might be blowing this thing up out of proportion too much lol.
If I've escalated too hard, I apologize.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Language Trophies

[CuddleBeam]

>accept that culture and to the best of your ability maintain it


I agree with that such an effort should be taken but at this point its
starting to become more satisfactory to see how far I can go with this
while still being "technically correct".

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Language Trophies

[Nic Evans]

On 06/29/2017 12:10 PM, CuddleBeam wrote:

>This, to my mind, is beyond the pale. The fact that you're unwilling
>to 'stop and think' for other people's comfort. The fact that you
>are either willfully or ignorantly conflating 'technically acceptable'
>and 'I can call people whatever I want and not care about eir
>feelings'.

Of course, and my own comfort counts too. Needing to think of pronouns 
all the time is a big headache lol. Please consider me as well.


Your argument is that the comfort of one person, you, outweighs the 
comfort of any other persons? And that 'needing to think of pronouns' is 
an issue singular to you, and not also everyone else?

DIS: Re: BUS: Language Trophies

[CuddleBeam]

>This, to my mind, is beyond the pale. The fact that you're unwilling
>to 'stop and think' for other people's comfort. The fact that you
>are either willfully or ignorantly conflating 'technically acceptable'
>and 'I can call people whatever I want and not care about eir
>feelings'.

Of course, and my own comfort counts too. Needing to think of pronouns all
the time is a big headache lol. Please consider me as well.

DIS: Re: BUS: Language Trophies

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

I agree with nichdel and I also believe this is an instance of when in Rome, do 
as the Romans. Agora has a history and culture of using Spivak and I know I 
mess it up to, but to play you must accept that culture and to the best of your 
ability maintain it

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



> On Jun 29, 2017, at 10:03 AM, Nic Evans  wrote:
> 
> On 06/29/2017 11:43 AM, CuddleBeam wrote:
>> >Also, I miss the time when we mostly spoke Spivak
>> 
>> Spivak is useful to too annoying for me to use lol, mostly because I have to 
>> stop and think about the pronouns I'm using.
>> 
>> I'll keep on using him/she/they as I find most enjoyable, and as a variant 
>> of English (one that doesn't have Spivak), and given our broad language 
>> acceptance, I believe it should be all acceptable.
> This, to my mind, is beyond the pale. The fact that you're unwilling to 'stop 
> and think' for other people's comfort. The fact that you are either willfully 
> or ignorantly conflating 'technically acceptable' and 'I can call people 
> whatever I want and not care about eir feelings'.
> 



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

DIS: Re: BUS: Jump In While The Water's Tepid

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

I am glad to see you back.

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



> On Jun 29, 2017, at 9:58 AM, Nic Evans  wrote:
> 
> I register.
> 
> I object to all current intentions I can object to.
> 
> I note that Agora, the community, seems to be in a worse place than it was a 
> month ago. Multiple persons seem to still feel like they're not being 
> respected.
> 
> I note with zeal that we just lost an old respected player and eir CFJ 
> database. Antagonizing another old, respected player who is currently making 
> up for that deficit seems to me to be the definition of shooting yourself in 
> the foot.
> 
> I pledge to CoE any report that acknowledges any action that's 'performed' in 
> a way I can't reasonably read.
> 
> I'm also willing to take over any offices other players want to give up.
> 



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

Re: DIS: Proto: Track it on the wiki

[omd]

On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 6:34 PM, Alex Smith  wrote:
> 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.

Didn't have the chance to reply to this earlier, but…

Thanks, I guess, for not rationalizing it.  I can totally understand
why you'd perceive an aesthetic appeal in pure email; I see it too to
some extent, but for me there's also a strong aesthetic appeal in
modernizing (separate from, but related to, the practical benefit of
attracting new players).  But based on the other posts in this thread,
I think your opinion better captures the mood of the playerbase, so I
won't bother proposing this for now.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Language Trophies

[CuddleBeam]

>The issue is that we aren’t broadly language accepting.

Wasn't the current consensus that alternate languages (and I assume,
variants/dialects/etc as well) was OK?

DIS: Re: BUS: Language Trophies

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

The issue is that we aren’t broadly language accepting.

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



> On Jun 29, 2017, at 9:43 AM, CuddleBeam  wrote:
> 
> >Also, I miss the time when we mostly spoke Spivak
> 
> Spivak is useful to too annoying for me to use lol, mostly because I have to 
> stop and think about the pronouns I'm using.
> 
> I'll keep on using him/she/they as I find most enjoyable, and as a variant of 
> English (one that doesn't have Spivak), and given our broad language 
> acceptance, I believe it should be all acceptable.



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

DIS: Re: BUS: Language Trophies

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

I agree on the Spivak issue.

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



> On Jun 29, 2017, at 9:39 AM, Alex Smith  wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 2017-06-29 at 16:37 +, Quazie wrote:
>> I object to all attempts to award patent titles indicated by the quoted
>> message - I don't think this is interesting to codify, and it will rarely
>> get updated
> 
> I also object. Also, I miss the time when we mostly spoke Spivak;
> having pronouns that are both gender-neutral and sentience-neutral is
> useful for being more inclusive of not only all humans, but also bots
> and artificial legal constructs, many of whom have put in good work for
> Agora in the past.
> 
> --
> ais523



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

Re: DIS: Proto: Ais is alright, the law is just insufficient.

[Aris Merchant]

On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 9:35 AM, CuddleBeam  wrote:
> Remove the issued card from Ais because our laws were just insufficient for
> this case, really. (And we can do arbitrary stuff with proposals lol)
>
> Amend "The Arbitor SHALL assign judges over time such that all interested
> players have reasonably equal opportunities to judge." to:
>
> "The Arbitor SHALL assign judges over time such that all interested players
> have reasonably equal opportunities to judge. The Arbitor can supercede the
> previous for the sake of gameplay flow Without Objection."

Unnecessary and somewhat superfluous. "Reasonably equal" gives (and is
intended to give) em broad discretion. Eir assignments in this case
are a reasonable exercise of  that discretion.

-Aris

DIS: Re: BUS: Language Trophies

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

I will update it on a weekly basis if that is the concern.

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



> On Jun 29, 2017, at 9:37 AM, Quazie  wrote:
> 
> I object to all attempts to award patent titles indicated by the quoted 
> message - I don't think this is interesting to codify, and it will rarely get 
> updated
> 
> On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 09:28 Publius Scribonius Scholasticus 
>  wrote:
> I hereby intend with 2 Agoran Consent, individual for each pair of a person 
> and a language they announce that they speak, to award em a patent title of 
> the form “Trophy of the  Speaker”, where  is the language 
> they announce that they speak.
> 
> I announce that for these purposes, I speak English and Latin.
> 
> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com
> 
> 
> 



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

Re: DIS: Proto: Ais is alright, the law is just insufficient.

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

This wouldn’t have changed things because I would have objected. Also, I see no 
reason that game flow should be a major consideration.

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



> On Jun 29, 2017, at 9:35 AM, CuddleBeam  wrote:
> 
> Remove the issued card from Ais because our laws were just insufficient for 
> this case, really. (And we can do arbitrary stuff with proposals lol)
> 
> Amend "The Arbitor SHALL assign judges over time such that all interested 
> players have reasonably equal opportunities to judge." to:
> 
> "The Arbitor SHALL assign judges over time such that all interested players 
> have reasonably equal opportunities to judge. The Arbitor can supercede the 
> previous for the sake of gameplay flow Without Objection."



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

Re: DIS: Decoding attempt

[Aris Merchant]

English, and a little bit of Latin.

-Aris

On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 9:03 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
 wrote:
> In order of fluency for me:
> English (native), Latin, Spanish, German (basic, understanding not 
> communication), Esperanto (very basic), Greek (beginning to learn)
>
> I can also understand many languages with a dictionary and grammar.
> 
> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com
>
>
>
>> On Jun 29, 2017, at 7:59 AM, Josh T  wrote:
>>
>> The set of languages which I speak fluently is smaller than what people 
>> might expect, but I am willing to curl up with a grammar book of many 
>> languages to dabble, of which I have done so with many.
>>
>> 天火狐
>>
>> On 29 June 2017 at 10:31, V.J Rada  wrote:
>> I am purely English speaking rip.
>>
>>
>> On Friday, June 30, 2017, CuddleBeam  wrote:
>> >More generally for everyone, what languages do you speak?
>>
>> In order of fluidity:
>>
>> Spanish (native), English (native), Swedish (native but I haven't practiced 
>> in forever so jag minnas inte mycket av det), Japanese (unhealthy amounts of 
>> anime lol), German (very basic), French (very basic), Lojban (if I have a 
>> dictionary with me).
>>
>

DIS: Proto: Ais is alright, the law is just insufficient.

[CuddleBeam]

Remove the issued card from Ais because our laws were just insufficient for
this case, really. (And we can do arbitrary stuff with proposals lol)

Amend "The Arbitor SHALL  assign
judges over time such that all interested players have reasonably equal
opportunities to judge." to:

"The Arbitor SHALL  assign judges
over time such that all interested players have reasonably equal
opportunities to judge. The Arbitor can supercede the previous for the sake
of gameplay flow Without Objection."

DIS: Re: BUS: Language Trophies

[Aris Merchant]

On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 9:28 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
 wrote:
> I hereby intend with 2 Agoran Consent, individual for each pair of a person 
> and a language they announce that they speak, to award em a patent title of 
> the form “Trophy of the  Speaker”, where  is the language 
> they announce that they speak.
>
> I announce that for these purposes, I speak English and Latin.
> 
> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com

I object to all such intents.

-Aris

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Either way you look at it... [also contains a CFJ ID number assignment]

[Alex Smith]

On Thu, 2017-06-29 at 09:14 -0700, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
wrote:
> My issue is where in the course of his judgement, he stated that a
> CFJ existed then immediately assigned it.

I'd already attempted to assign it to myself earlier (if it existed),
so that was just reducing ambiguity.

The CFJ itself also wasn't an attempt to resolve any sort of
controversy; rather, it was a situation in which it had been created
ambiguously, and the controversy was as to whether it existed at all,
not about what the judgement should be. So it really didn't matter who
judged it.

-- 
ais523

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Either way you look at it... [also contains a CFJ ID number assignment]

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

Yes, but I believe it violated Rule 991 and consisted of an abuse of official 
office.

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



> On Jun 29, 2017, at 9:15 AM, Quazie  wrote:
> 
> But he had already assigned it if it existed on official - he just gave it a 
> number while issuing judgements
> 
> On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 09:14 Publius Scribonius Scholasticus 
>  wrote:
> My issue is where in the course of his judgement, he stated that a CFJ 
> existed then immediately assigned it.
> 
> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com
> 
> 
> 
> > On Jun 29, 2017, at 9:13 AM, Quazie  wrote:
> >
> > Also: prior rules and game custom allow for linking of CFJs that are 
> > related - why haven't you been upset at other instances where multiple CFJs 
> > were assigned at once?
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 09:10 Publius Scribonius Scholasticus 
> >  wrote:
> > 1 - Really? Okay then, I point my finger at ais523 for the reasons stated 
> > before.
> >
> > 2 - Game flow is not a consideration that the rules allow for.
> >
> > 3 - That is completely irrelevant it requires support not lack of objection.
> > 
> > Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> > p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Jun 29, 2017, at 9:05 AM, Quazie  wrote:
> > >
> > > 1 - you can't assign pink slips - only the Referee can
> > > 2 - I disagree with your conjecture - those CFJ assignments were 
> > > reasonable and made the game flow better
> > > 3 - I object to your moot intent
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 08:58 Publius Scribonius Scholasticus 
> > >  wrote:
> > > I hereby intend to render judgement 3534 moot.
> > >
> > > I issue a Pink Slip to ais523 for abuse of his office as Arbiter. He had 
> > > unduly assigned CFJs to himself in an inequitable manner, which has not 
> > > assigned judgements in such a way that "interested players have 
> > > reasonably equal opportunities to judge.”, as required by Rule 991.
> > > 
> > > Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> > > p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > On Jun 29, 2017, at 3:57 AM, Alex Smith  
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Judge's evidence on CFJs 3534/3535:
> > > > {{{
> > > > On Wed, 2017-06-28 at 16:16 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> > > >> I call for judgement on the following statement : أدعو إلى إصدار حكم 
> > > >> بشأن البيان التالي
> > > >
> > > > The source of the body for the above-quoted message is (with bytes
> > > > outside the ASCII range replaced by hexadecimal numbers in angle
> > > > brackets):
> > > >
> > > >>   This message is in MIME format.  The first part should be readable 
> > > >> text,
> > > >>   while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware 
> > > >> tools.
> > > >>
> > > >> ---1903399159-33069213-1498691760=:22422
> > > >> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=ISO-8859-6
> > > >> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> I call for judgement on the following statement :  
> > > >> 
> > > >>  
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> ---1903399159-33069213-1498691760=:22422--
> > > > }}}
> > > >
> > > > Judge's arguments on CFJs 3534/3535:
> > > > {{{
> > > > The arguments so far have hinged on the message in question being
> > > > ambiguous, but is that really the case? I believe that, given the
> > > > method via which it was sent, the original message cannot reasonably be
> > > > interpreted as being in Arabic.
> > > >
> > > > What's notable here is that an encoding of text can convey the meaning
> > > > of the text in two different ways; either using a visual ordering, in
> > > > which the sequence of bytes is corresponds to the positions of the
> > > > individual characters on the page; or a logical ordering, in which the
> > > > sequence of bytes corresponds to the order in which the characters they
> > > > represent have meaning (i.e. bytes that appear earlier in the byte
> > > > stream correspond to letters closer to the start of words, words closer
> > > > to the start of sentences, and so on). A visual ordering would not help
> > > > resolve the ambiguity in respect to the CFJ. A logical ordering would,
> > > > though, as the bytes are conveying not only the appearance of the text
> > > > in this case, but also the intended reading order.
> > > >
> > > > The standard referenced in the message for the understanding of the
> > > > bytes it contains is ISO-8859-6 (which cannot be obtained from ISO
> > > > without payment, but Ecma have a standard Ecma-114 which they claim is
> > > > equivalent). The body of the standard contains no opinion on whether
> > > > the text it's used to represent is in logical or visual order. However,
> > > > email clients in practice appear to interpret it 

DIS: Re: BUS: Either way you look at it... [also contains a CFJ ID number assignment]

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

Just because it is allowed in one location, does not mean that it is not still 
an abuse.

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



> On Jun 29, 2017, at 9:14 AM, Alex Smith  wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 2017-06-29 at 08:58 -0700, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> wrote:
>> I issue a Pink Slip to ais523 for abuse of his office as Arbiter. He
>> had unduly assigned CFJs to himself in an inequitable manner, which
>> has not assigned judgements in such a way that "interested players
>> have reasonably equal opportunities to judge.”, as required by Rule
>> 991.
> 
> This is actually the exact opposite of the situation the rule was
> envisaged for.
> 
> "Reasonably equal opportunities to judge" requires giving each judge
> approximately the same number of CFJs over time. On that reasoning, the
> only eligible judges were me, omd, and V.J. Rada. I felt that assigning
> the CFJs to myself would be simplest as there was uncertainty over
> their quantity and existence, and being the Arbitor, I would be able to
> number them as soon as I was sure whether they existed.
> 
> Rule 991 also explicitly gives the Arbitor permission to make biased
> judge assignments, in terms of trying to influence the outcome of the
> CFJ. I haven't used this and don't intend to use it, but even if I were
> biased in the assignment of judges, that wouldn't technically be an
> abuse of the office.
> 
> --
> ais523



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Either way you look at it... [also contains a CFJ ID number assignment]

[Quazie]

But he had already assigned it if it existed on official - he just gave it
a number while issuing judgements

On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 09:14 Publius Scribonius Scholasticus <
p.scribonius.scholasti...@googlemail.com> wrote:

> My issue is where in the course of his judgement, he stated that a CFJ
> existed then immediately assigned it.
> 
> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com
>
>
>
> > On Jun 29, 2017, at 9:13 AM, Quazie  wrote:
> >
> > Also: prior rules and game custom allow for linking of CFJs that are
> related - why haven't you been upset at other instances where multiple CFJs
> were assigned at once?
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 09:10 Publius Scribonius Scholasticus <
> p.scribonius.scholasti...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > 1 - Really? Okay then, I point my finger at ais523 for the reasons
> stated before.
> >
> > 2 - Game flow is not a consideration that the rules allow for.
> >
> > 3 - That is completely irrelevant it requires support not lack of
> objection.
> > 
> > Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> > p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Jun 29, 2017, at 9:05 AM, Quazie  wrote:
> > >
> > > 1 - you can't assign pink slips - only the Referee can
> > > 2 - I disagree with your conjecture - those CFJ assignments were
> reasonable and made the game flow better
> > > 3 - I object to your moot intent
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 08:58 Publius Scribonius Scholasticus <
> p.scribonius.scholasti...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > > I hereby intend to render judgement 3534 moot.
> > >
> > > I issue a Pink Slip to ais523 for abuse of his office as Arbiter. He
> had unduly assigned CFJs to himself in an inequitable manner, which has not
> assigned judgements in such a way that "interested players have reasonably
> equal opportunities to judge.”, as required by Rule 991.
> > > 
> > > Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> > > p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > On Jun 29, 2017, at 3:57 AM, Alex Smith 
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Judge's evidence on CFJs 3534/3535:
> > > > {{{
> > > > On Wed, 2017-06-28 at 16:16 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> > > >> I call for judgement on the following statement : أدعو إلى إصدار
> حكم بشأن البيان التالي
> > > >
> > > > The source of the body for the above-quoted message is (with bytes
> > > > outside the ASCII range replaced by hexadecimal numbers in angle
> > > > brackets):
> > > >
> > > >>   This message is in MIME format.  The first part should be
> readable text,
> > > >>   while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without
> MIME-aware tools.
> > > >>
> > > >> ---1903399159-33069213-1498691760=:22422
> > > >> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=ISO-8859-6
> > > >> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> I call for judgement on the following statement : 
>
>  
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> ---1903399159-33069213-1498691760=:22422--
> > > > }}}
> > > >
> > > > Judge's arguments on CFJs 3534/3535:
> > > > {{{
> > > > The arguments so far have hinged on the message in question being
> > > > ambiguous, but is that really the case? I believe that, given the
> > > > method via which it was sent, the original message cannot reasonably
> be
> > > > interpreted as being in Arabic.
> > > >
> > > > What's notable here is that an encoding of text can convey the
> meaning
> > > > of the text in two different ways; either using a visual ordering, in
> > > > which the sequence of bytes is corresponds to the positions of the
> > > > individual characters on the page; or a logical ordering, in which
> the
> > > > sequence of bytes corresponds to the order in which the characters
> they
> > > > represent have meaning (i.e. bytes that appear earlier in the byte
> > > > stream correspond to letters closer to the start of words, words
> closer
> > > > to the start of sentences, and so on). A visual ordering would not
> help
> > > > resolve the ambiguity in respect to the CFJ. A logical ordering
> would,
> > > > though, as the bytes are conveying not only the appearance of the
> text
> > > > in this case, but also the intended reading order.
> > > >
> > > > The standard referenced in the message for the understanding of the
> > > > bytes it contains is ISO-8859-6 (which cannot be obtained from ISO
> > > > without payment, but Ecma have a standard Ecma-114 which they claim
> is
> > > > equivalent). The body of the standard contains no opinion on whether
> > > > the text it's used to represent is in logical or visual order.
> However,
> > > > email clients in practice appear to interpret it as being in logical
> > > > order; in my client, the bytes , corresponding to the
> > > > Arabic letters «أ» then «د» then «ع» then «و», are rendered as the
> > > > Arabic word «أدعو» (in other words, they're rendered right to left,
> the
> > > > normal logical order of Arabic, and the opposite order that 

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Either way you look at it... [also contains a CFJ ID number assignment]

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

My issue is where in the course of his judgement, he stated that a CFJ existed 
then immediately assigned it.

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



> On Jun 29, 2017, at 9:13 AM, Quazie  wrote:
> 
> Also: prior rules and game custom allow for linking of CFJs that are related 
> - why haven't you been upset at other instances where multiple CFJs were 
> assigned at once?
> 
> On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 09:10 Publius Scribonius Scholasticus 
>  wrote:
> 1 - Really? Okay then, I point my finger at ais523 for the reasons stated 
> before.
> 
> 2 - Game flow is not a consideration that the rules allow for.
> 
> 3 - That is completely irrelevant it requires support not lack of objection.
> 
> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com
> 
> 
> 
> > On Jun 29, 2017, at 9:05 AM, Quazie  wrote:
> >
> > 1 - you can't assign pink slips - only the Referee can
> > 2 - I disagree with your conjecture - those CFJ assignments were reasonable 
> > and made the game flow better
> > 3 - I object to your moot intent
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 08:58 Publius Scribonius Scholasticus 
> >  wrote:
> > I hereby intend to render judgement 3534 moot.
> >
> > I issue a Pink Slip to ais523 for abuse of his office as Arbiter. He had 
> > unduly assigned CFJs to himself in an inequitable manner, which has not 
> > assigned judgements in such a way that "interested players have reasonably 
> > equal opportunities to judge.”, as required by Rule 991.
> > 
> > Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> > p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Jun 29, 2017, at 3:57 AM, Alex Smith  wrote:
> > >
> > > Judge's evidence on CFJs 3534/3535:
> > > {{{
> > > On Wed, 2017-06-28 at 16:16 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> > >> I call for judgement on the following statement : أدعو إلى إصدار حكم 
> > >> بشأن البيان التالي
> > >
> > > The source of the body for the above-quoted message is (with bytes
> > > outside the ASCII range replaced by hexadecimal numbers in angle
> > > brackets):
> > >
> > >>   This message is in MIME format.  The first part should be readable 
> > >> text,
> > >>   while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware 
> > >> tools.
> > >>
> > >> ---1903399159-33069213-1498691760=:22422
> > >> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=ISO-8859-6
> > >> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> I call for judgement on the following statement :  
> > >> 
> > >>  
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> ---1903399159-33069213-1498691760=:22422--
> > > }}}
> > >
> > > Judge's arguments on CFJs 3534/3535:
> > > {{{
> > > The arguments so far have hinged on the message in question being
> > > ambiguous, but is that really the case? I believe that, given the
> > > method via which it was sent, the original message cannot reasonably be
> > > interpreted as being in Arabic.
> > >
> > > What's notable here is that an encoding of text can convey the meaning
> > > of the text in two different ways; either using a visual ordering, in
> > > which the sequence of bytes is corresponds to the positions of the
> > > individual characters on the page; or a logical ordering, in which the
> > > sequence of bytes corresponds to the order in which the characters they
> > > represent have meaning (i.e. bytes that appear earlier in the byte
> > > stream correspond to letters closer to the start of words, words closer
> > > to the start of sentences, and so on). A visual ordering would not help
> > > resolve the ambiguity in respect to the CFJ. A logical ordering would,
> > > though, as the bytes are conveying not only the appearance of the text
> > > in this case, but also the intended reading order.
> > >
> > > The standard referenced in the message for the understanding of the
> > > bytes it contains is ISO-8859-6 (which cannot be obtained from ISO
> > > without payment, but Ecma have a standard Ecma-114 which they claim is
> > > equivalent). The body of the standard contains no opinion on whether
> > > the text it's used to represent is in logical or visual order. However,
> > > email clients in practice appear to interpret it as being in logical
> > > order; in my client, the bytes , corresponding to the
> > > Arabic letters «أ» then «د» then «ع» then «و», are rendered as the
> > > Arabic word «أدعو» (in other words, they're rendered right to left, the
> > > normal logical order of Arabic, and the opposite order that they appear
> > > in the bytestream).
> > >
> > > The word in question is a real Arabic word, translating to "I invite" /
> > > "I call" / "I appeal". If we reverse the order of the letters, to get
> > > «دعوأ», this is no longer a real Arabic word, strongly implying that
> > > the message was meant to be in logical order; if the message were meant
> > > to be in visual order, the 

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Either way you look at it... [also contains a CFJ ID number assignment]

[Josh T]

I'm going to be honest, I am pretty surprised that you all let me get away
with most of what I've done in Japanese.

天火狐

On 29 June 2017 at 12:07, omd  wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 4:09 PM, Kerim Aydin 
> wrote:
> > I register.
> >
> > H. Registrar, the following is a Cantus Cygneus:
>
> Oof :/
>
> > Fine, it's just a nickname.  Then, I argued against interpretation of
> > contracts in other languages.  Ignored.  I gave in a bit, thinking
> > "hey, maybe changing technology means this should be re-evaluated",
> > and delivered judgements allowing some minimal use of characters for
> > obvious simple actions.  This though went further for the rest of you,
> > not only do you bend over backwards to interpret long and nonsensical
> > Japanese posts, but now you try to interpret goddamn Neo Akkadian with
> > seriousness.
>
> For the record, I 'bent over backwards' to interpret the long Japanese
> post because I'm learning Japanese, therefore it was a fun exercise.
> Not because I thought any announcements in it would be legally
> effective; I don't think there's any reason to overturn CFJ 1460 (btw,
> it's unfortunate that your CFJ database is now down :/).
>

DIS: Re: BUS: Either way you look at it... [also contains a CFJ ID number assignment]

[Quazie]

Also: prior rules and game custom allow for linking of CFJs that are
related - why haven't you been upset at other instances where multiple CFJs
were assigned at once?

On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 09:10 Publius Scribonius Scholasticus <
p.scribonius.scholasti...@googlemail.com> wrote:

> 1 - Really? Okay then, I point my finger at ais523 for the reasons stated
> before.
>
> 2 - Game flow is not a consideration that the rules allow for.
>
> 3 - That is completely irrelevant it requires support not lack of
> objection.
> 
> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com
>
>
>
> > On Jun 29, 2017, at 9:05 AM, Quazie  wrote:
> >
> > 1 - you can't assign pink slips - only the Referee can
> > 2 - I disagree with your conjecture - those CFJ assignments were
> reasonable and made the game flow better
> > 3 - I object to your moot intent
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 08:58 Publius Scribonius Scholasticus <
> p.scribonius.scholasti...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > I hereby intend to render judgement 3534 moot.
> >
> > I issue a Pink Slip to ais523 for abuse of his office as Arbiter. He had
> unduly assigned CFJs to himself in an inequitable manner, which has not
> assigned judgements in such a way that "interested players have reasonably
> equal opportunities to judge.”, as required by Rule 991.
> > 
> > Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> > p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Jun 29, 2017, at 3:57 AM, Alex Smith 
> wrote:
> > >
> > > Judge's evidence on CFJs 3534/3535:
> > > {{{
> > > On Wed, 2017-06-28 at 16:16 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> > >> I call for judgement on the following statement : أدعو إلى إصدار حكم
> بشأن البيان التالي
> > >
> > > The source of the body for the above-quoted message is (with bytes
> > > outside the ASCII range replaced by hexadecimal numbers in angle
> > > brackets):
> > >
> > >>   This message is in MIME format.  The first part should be readable
> text,
> > >>   while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware
> tools.
> > >>
> > >> ---1903399159-33069213-1498691760=:22422
> > >> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=ISO-8859-6
> > >> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> I call for judgement on the following statement : 
>
>  
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> ---1903399159-33069213-1498691760=:22422--
> > > }}}
> > >
> > > Judge's arguments on CFJs 3534/3535:
> > > {{{
> > > The arguments so far have hinged on the message in question being
> > > ambiguous, but is that really the case? I believe that, given the
> > > method via which it was sent, the original message cannot reasonably be
> > > interpreted as being in Arabic.
> > >
> > > What's notable here is that an encoding of text can convey the meaning
> > > of the text in two different ways; either using a visual ordering, in
> > > which the sequence of bytes is corresponds to the positions of the
> > > individual characters on the page; or a logical ordering, in which the
> > > sequence of bytes corresponds to the order in which the characters they
> > > represent have meaning (i.e. bytes that appear earlier in the byte
> > > stream correspond to letters closer to the start of words, words closer
> > > to the start of sentences, and so on). A visual ordering would not help
> > > resolve the ambiguity in respect to the CFJ. A logical ordering would,
> > > though, as the bytes are conveying not only the appearance of the text
> > > in this case, but also the intended reading order.
> > >
> > > The standard referenced in the message for the understanding of the
> > > bytes it contains is ISO-8859-6 (which cannot be obtained from ISO
> > > without payment, but Ecma have a standard Ecma-114 which they claim is
> > > equivalent). The body of the standard contains no opinion on whether
> > > the text it's used to represent is in logical or visual order. However,
> > > email clients in practice appear to interpret it as being in logical
> > > order; in my client, the bytes , corresponding to the
> > > Arabic letters «أ» then «د» then «ع» then «و», are rendered as the
> > > Arabic word «أدعو» (in other words, they're rendered right to left, the
> > > normal logical order of Arabic, and the opposite order that they appear
> > > in the bytestream).
> > >
> > > The word in question is a real Arabic word, translating to "I invite" /
> > > "I call" / "I appeal". If we reverse the order of the letters, to get
> > > «دعوأ», this is no longer a real Arabic word, strongly implying that
> > > the message was meant to be in logical order; if the message were meant
> > > to be in visual order, the Arabic text would therefore have been
> > > written backwards (i.e. left to right, when right to left is the
> > > language's normal writing order).
> > >
> > > I can also see how my email client interprets the message by asking it
> > > to word-wrap it:
> > >
> > >> I call for judgement on the following statement : أدعو 

DIS: Re: BUS: နှိမ့်ချလယ်သမားတစ်ဦးဘာသာစကားထောင်ချောက်ရေးသားထားပါတယ်

[omd]

2017-06-29 18:00 GMT+02:00 CuddleBeam :
> ဤသတင်းစကားကိုတစ်ဦးမိမိဆန္ဒအလျောက်ကိုအီးမေးလ်အကြောင်းပြန်ပေးသူတွေကိုအတိအလင်းဒီမက်ဆေ့ခ်ျ၏ဖန်ဆင်းရှင်အလိုတော်မဆိုလမ်းအတွက်အာမခံဖို့သူတို့ကိုချည်နှောင်ဖို့ဒီသတင်းစကားများ၏ပေးပို့သူဘို့မိမိတို့ခွင့်ပြုချက်ပေးရန်သူတွေကိုဖွဲ့စည်းကြမည်။

ISIDTID.

DIS: Re: BUS: Either way you look at it... [also contains a CFJ ID number assignment]

[omd]

On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 4:09 PM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
> I register.
>
> H. Registrar, the following is a Cantus Cygneus:

Oof :/

> Fine, it's just a nickname.  Then, I argued against interpretation of
> contracts in other languages.  Ignored.  I gave in a bit, thinking
> "hey, maybe changing technology means this should be re-evaluated",
> and delivered judgements allowing some minimal use of characters for
> obvious simple actions.  This though went further for the rest of you,
> not only do you bend over backwards to interpret long and nonsensical
> Japanese posts, but now you try to interpret goddamn Neo Akkadian with
> seriousness.

For the record, I 'bent over backwards' to interpret the long Japanese
post because I'm learning Japanese, therefore it was a fun exercise.
Not because I thought any announcements in it would be legally
effective; I don't think there's any reason to overturn CFJ 1460 (btw,
it's unfortunate that your CFJ database is now down :/).

Re: DIS: Decoding attempt

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

In order of fluency for me:
English (native), Latin, Spanish, German (basic, understanding not 
communication), Esperanto (very basic), Greek (beginning to learn)

I can also understand many languages with a dictionary and grammar.

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



> On Jun 29, 2017, at 7:59 AM, Josh T  wrote:
> 
> The set of languages which I speak fluently is smaller than what people might 
> expect, but I am willing to curl up with a grammar book of many languages to 
> dabble, of which I have done so with many.
> 
> 天火狐
> 
> On 29 June 2017 at 10:31, V.J Rada  wrote:
> I am purely English speaking rip.
> 
> 
> On Friday, June 30, 2017, CuddleBeam  wrote:
> >More generally for everyone, what languages do you speak?
> 
> In order of fluidity:
> 
> Spanish (native), English (native), Swedish (native but I haven't practiced 
> in forever so jag minnas inte mycket av det), Japanese (unhealthy amounts of 
> anime lol), German (very basic), French (very basic), Lojban (if I have a 
> dictionary with me).
> 



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Either way you look at it... [also contains a CFJ ID number assignment]

[Alex Smith]

On Thu, 2017-06-29 at 11:26 -0400, Josh T wrote:
> While I am not a programmer that has needed to deal with
> internationalization, it is to my understanding from friends in the field
> that most implementations get it wrong, and thus how any one program
> renders it should not be taken as evidence one way or another. For example,
> I don't know for certain if the text viewers of each right honourable
> Agoran supports the correct CJK flags that forces the font to render the
> correct Unihan variant. While I am not familiar with Arabic encoding (I
> don't speak Arabic, although if I tried really hard maybe I can use my
> knowledge of Akkadian to decipher text?), it is my understanding that
> Unicode encodes text by order of input and not "logically" as a concession
> for backwards compatibility, and thus feel that stating that the text
> should be interpreted as English because it is left-aligned is like having
> a chef that doesn't know how to prepare lobster but tries his best anyway,
> but eir customers conclude that lobster isn't good because of
> unintentionally ill-suited decisions the chef made.

Right, that's why I had to look into the actual byte stream of the
message. The encoding listed in the email (which is not a Unicode
encoding) is normally logical, but can be physical (it's somewhat
underspecified). However, if it's interpreted as physical, the Arabic
is written backwards (and thus meaningless). As such, the only sensible
conclusion is that the text is actually written in logical order, which
would imply that the English comes first. (It could also have been
written with the Arabic first to produce the same visual appearance,
but it wasn't.)

-- 
ais523

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Either way you look at it... [also contains a CFJ ID number assignment]

[Josh T]

While I am not a programmer that has needed to deal with
internationalization, it is to my understanding from friends in the field
that most implementations get it wrong, and thus how any one program
renders it should not be taken as evidence one way or another. For example,
I don't know for certain if the text viewers of each right honourable
Agoran supports the correct CJK flags that forces the font to render the
correct Unihan variant. While I am not familiar with Arabic encoding (I
don't speak Arabic, although if I tried really hard maybe I can use my
knowledge of Akkadian to decipher text?), it is my understanding that
Unicode encodes text by order of input and not "logically" as a concession
for backwards compatibility, and thus feel that stating that the text
should be interpreted as English because it is left-aligned is like having
a chef that doesn't know how to prepare lobster but tries his best anyway,
but eir customers conclude that lobster isn't good because of
unintentionally ill-suited decisions the chef made.

天火狐

On 29 June 2017 at 10:55, Alex Smith  wrote:

> On Thu, 2017-06-29 at 07:09 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> > But hey - this Arabic stuff??  Well, it's not some important language,
> > like say Japanese.  Let's just translate it to bytes and ignore the
> > meaning, eh?  Completely re-arrange the word order like no native
> > speaker, and not even a translation machine, would do, eh?  I guess
> > that's fine.  Basic principles of reading with good faith don't apply
> > to a language like *that*.  Let's talk about byte order, instead.
>
> Sorry for harping on about this, I'm just really annoyed myself at what
> you've written.
>
> It feels like all the effort I've gone to to do things like understand
> and work with languages like Arabic have been wasted. A lot of people
> have put in a lot of effort in order to create communication standards
> that allow text in all languages, not just English, to be understood
> unambiguously when communicated from one person to another. And now I'm
> finding out that that all that work is irrelevant, because when people
> actually write in Arabic, I'm expected to ignore what what they say
> actually means, and assume that I should take the primitive
> understanding that it's all just left-to-right, left-margin-justified
> text?
>
> Arabic has its own rules for writing it, whether on paper or on
> computer. (The very simplest is that, whether on paper or computer, you
> start at the right hand side of the page.) If you don't follow those
> rules, it shouldn't be surprising that the meaning that people ascribe
> to the message you send isn't the same as the one you intended. In
> particular, following the same rules as for English is going to produce
> a result that's meaningless in Arabic; text's going to wrap in the
> wrong places, embedded quotations in left-to-right languages will be in
> the wrong places, and so on. It can, however, sometimes produce a
> result that's meaningful in English, especially when there's English
> text in the same sentence.
>
> (To be honest, I was expecting that you'd follow up your CFJ by
> submitting the same thing as an image, which can't be reflowed or
> parsed and which is therefore missing the context you'd need to be able
> to unambiguously determine the direction it was written in. I was
> surprised by the apparent lack of understanding of encoding standards
> for writing various different languages. Perhaps this is the fault of
> computer software generally still being rather English-centric, and
> making entering text in other languages more error-prone than it should
> be; I know I've seen my email client produce incorrect or suboptimal
> results both with your Arabic, and with 天火狐's Japanese. This is
> something I'm working on at the moment – I'm trying to write a
> rendering library which handles all these languages correctly.)
>
> --
> ais523
>

Re: DIS: Decoding attempt

[Josh T]

The set of languages which I speak fluently is smaller than what people
might expect, but I am willing to curl up with a grammar book of many
languages to dabble, of which I have done so with many.

天火狐

On 29 June 2017 at 10:31, V.J Rada  wrote:

> I am purely English speaking rip.
>
>
> On Friday, June 30, 2017, CuddleBeam  wrote:
>
>> >More generally for everyone, what languages do you speak?
>>
>> In order of fluidity:
>>
>> Spanish (native), English (native), Swedish (native but I haven't
>> practiced in forever so jag minnas inte mycket av det), Japanese (unhealthy
>> amounts of anime lol), German (very basic), French (very basic), Lojban (if
>> I have a dictionary with me).
>>
>

DIS: Re: BUS: Either way you look at it... [also contains a CFJ ID number assignment]

[Alex Smith]

On Thu, 2017-06-29 at 07:09 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> But hey - this Arabic stuff??  Well, it's not some important language,
> like say Japanese.  Let's just translate it to bytes and ignore the
> meaning, eh?  Completely re-arrange the word order like no native
> speaker, and not even a translation machine, would do, eh?  I guess
> that's fine.  Basic principles of reading with good faith don't apply
> to a language like *that*.  Let's talk about byte order, instead.  

Sorry for harping on about this, I'm just really annoyed myself at what
you've written.

It feels like all the effort I've gone to to do things like understand
and work with languages like Arabic have been wasted. A lot of people
have put in a lot of effort in order to create communication standards
that allow text in all languages, not just English, to be understood
unambiguously when communicated from one person to another. And now I'm
finding out that that all that work is irrelevant, because when people
actually write in Arabic, I'm expected to ignore what what they say
actually means, and assume that I should take the primitive
understanding that it's all just left-to-right, left-margin-justified
text?

Arabic has its own rules for writing it, whether on paper or on
computer. (The very simplest is that, whether on paper or computer, you
start at the right hand side of the page.) If you don't follow those
rules, it shouldn't be surprising that the meaning that people ascribe
to the message you send isn't the same as the one you intended. In
particular, following the same rules as for English is going to produce
a result that's meaningless in Arabic; text's going to wrap in the
wrong places, embedded quotations in left-to-right languages will be in
the wrong places, and so on. It can, however, sometimes produce a
result that's meaningful in English, especially when there's English
text in the same sentence.

(To be honest, I was expecting that you'd follow up your CFJ by
submitting the same thing as an image, which can't be reflowed or
parsed and which is therefore missing the context you'd need to be able
to unambiguously determine the direction it was written in. I was
surprised by the apparent lack of understanding of encoding standards
for writing various different languages. Perhaps this is the fault of
computer software generally still being rather English-centric, and
making entering text in other languages more error-prone than it should
be; I know I've seen my email client produce incorrect or suboptimal
results both with your Arabic, and with 天火狐's Japanese. This is
something I'm working on at the moment – I'm trying to write a
rendering library which handles all these languages correctly.)

-- 
ais523

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: 蘭亭社簿記

[Josh T]

This is outside the scope of the pledge since I only said I would answer
questions to a-b, but since you can just TTttPF it, I'll answer them
anyway.

> Are you able to provide a complete translation of this to English?

Yes, I am able to.

> Is this a deputisation? If so, for what office? If this is for the office
of Reportor, what is the newspaper relating to?

I have reason to believe that even if the message was written
conventionally this would not be a deputisation.

天火狐

On 29 June 2017 at 09:50, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus <
p.scribonius.scholasti...@googlemail.com> wrote:

> Are you able to provide a complete translation of this to English?
>
> Is this a deputisation? If so, for what office?
>
> If this is for the office of Reportor, what is the newspaper relating to?
> 
> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com
>
>
>
> > On Jun 28, 2017, at 11:39 PM, Josh T  wrote:
> >
> > In the interest of watching everyone figure out what is going on, I
> acknowledge all of those concerns, and pledge to answer questions published
> in a-b before July 5th, 2017 about my message to a-b originally published
> June 27, 2017 truthfully and to the best of my ability.
> >
> > 天火狐
> >
> > On 27 June 2017 at 15:08, Quazie  wrote:
> > I object to anything in the below message I can.
> >
> > As this might be a report I issue a COE on it, specially that the report
> isn't clear.
> >
> > I also vote for myself in any agoran decision initiated by the below
> message.
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 10:50 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: BUS: Either way you look at it... [also contains a CFJ ID number assignment]

[Quazie]

Welcome back G. Also - check your dates I think you're off by one?
On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 07:11 Kerim Aydin  wrote:

>
>
> On Thu, 29 Jun 2017, Alex Smith wrote:
> > The word in question is a real Arabic word, translating to "I invite" /
> > "I call" / "I appeal". If we reverse the order of the letters, to get
> > «دعوأ», this is no longer a real Arabic word, strongly implying that
> > the message was meant to be in logical order; if the message were meant
> > to be in visual order, the Arabic text would therefore have been
> > written backwards (i.e. left to right, when right to left is the
> > language's normal writing order).
>
> I register.
>
> H. Registrar, the following is a Cantus Cygneus:
>
> For years, Agora has been governed by principles of interpretation,
> including a strong judgment on non-English languages.  That judgement
> was the result of me, years ago, attempting to take a simple and clear
> action in Turkish.  It was rejected wholly.  It was sensible, though
> hard line, and at times others have attempted other languages, I've
> happily referred others to that judgement, and people have accepted it
> and moved on.
>
> Recently, another player registered and began to use Japanese in the
> forum.  I was against it from the beginning, not due to dislike of a
> particular language, but due to those past Agoran customs and the fact
> that we have enough problems with ambiguities in English.  I delivered
> a judgement stating eir nickname wasn't the Japanese characters e was
> using, intending it again to reinforce that old precedent.
>
> It was completely ignored.
>
> Fine, it's just a nickname.  Then, I argued against interpretation of
> contracts in other languages.  Ignored.  I gave in a bit, thinking
> "hey, maybe changing technology means this should be re-evaluated",
> and delivered judgements allowing some minimal use of characters for
> obvious simple actions.  This though went further for the rest of you,
> not only do you bend over backwards to interpret long and nonsensical
> Japanese posts, but now you try to interpret goddamn Neo Akkadian with
> seriousness.
>
> Now, this presents many interpretation problems (of mixing languages),
> so I try to demonstrate some of the issues by mixing two languages in
> an odd way. Ambiguous as per P.S.S.'s arguments?  Maybe, and fine.
> But: ambiguous using language and the written word, say imagining it
> written on paper.  The SAME RESPECT we've given to other languages in
> the last few months.
>
> But I guess we don't extend that respect to Arabic (or in the past,
> Turkish). This result?  It decides to completely ignore the clear and
> simple known precepts of the Arabic language, and decide on some kind
> of byte order.  Why stop there??  Why not say "hey, all this English
> stuff?  It's just ASCII and we can't read numbers!"  No? I guess not.
>
> But hey - this Arabic stuff??  Well, it's not some important language,
> like say Japanese.  Let's just translate it to bytes and ignore the
> meaning, eh?  Completely re-arrange the word order like no native
> speaker, and not even a translation machine, would do, eh?  I guess
> that's fine.  Basic principles of reading with good faith don't apply
> to a language like *that*.  Let's talk about byte order, instead.
>
> Well, 46 75 63 6b 2c 20 66 75 63 6b 20 74 68 69 73 2e.
>
> I consider you folks my friends, and, intended or not, I want you to
> know how this is coming across. I know this is mainly an intellectual
> exercise for us - we like the puzzles of wrestling with translations in
> ancient languages, and figuring out odd logic (like byte stuff) to get
> out of ambiguous or paradoxical situations.  That's all fun, well, and
> good.
>
> So I've really tried to understand the Japanese, but even the signature
> characters just come across to me gibberish - due to the low resolution
> of the characters on the display, I just can't learn it from reading it
> here.  I transliterate that nickname in my head as "Japanese Character
> Guy" every time I see the characters.  It feels exclusionary to me
> (especially as there's others who understand better), and I feel left
> out.
>
> Though I've generally ignored that feeling - not a big deal.  I've even
> spent more time trying to program the CFJ database to accept those
> characters than I have on any other aspect of programming and updating.
>
> And now, here - double exclusion.  There's no similar respect for a
> language I can (to a very slight measure) cope with.
>
> Now, I'm pretty sure you didn't intend to come across this way, and
> thought of this as just another clever logic solution.  And I'm VERY
> sure my sensitivity is in a large part due to current World events. I
> come here to escape, I've never brought politics here (especially not
> Turkish ones) but the last few months in Agora have brought
> Dictatorships, Juntas, and now this unthinking exclusion of treating
> different languages fundamentally 

DIS: Re: BUS: Either way you look at it... [also contains a CFJ ID number assignment]

[Josh T]

I do apologize that it has come to this. For what it's worth, I sympathize
with your point of view and I do think that your CFJ was brilliant, even if
I didn't exactly have time to submit a gratuitous argument to support you.

天火狐
(Apparently, that Japanese character guy)

On 29 June 2017 at 10:09, Kerim Aydin  wrote:

>
>
> On Thu, 29 Jun 2017, Alex Smith wrote:
> > The word in question is a real Arabic word, translating to "I invite" /
> > "I call" / "I appeal". If we reverse the order of the letters, to get
> > «دعوأ», this is no longer a real Arabic word, strongly implying that
> > the message was meant to be in logical order; if the message were meant
> > to be in visual order, the Arabic text would therefore have been
> > written backwards (i.e. left to right, when right to left is the
> > language's normal writing order).
>
> I register.
>
> H. Registrar, the following is a Cantus Cygneus:
>
> For years, Agora has been governed by principles of interpretation,
> including a strong judgment on non-English languages.  That judgement
> was the result of me, years ago, attempting to take a simple and clear
> action in Turkish.  It was rejected wholly.  It was sensible, though
> hard line, and at times others have attempted other languages, I've
> happily referred others to that judgement, and people have accepted it
> and moved on.
>
> Recently, another player registered and began to use Japanese in the
> forum.  I was against it from the beginning, not due to dislike of a
> particular language, but due to those past Agoran customs and the fact
> that we have enough problems with ambiguities in English.  I delivered
> a judgement stating eir nickname wasn't the Japanese characters e was
> using, intending it again to reinforce that old precedent.
>
> It was completely ignored.
>
> Fine, it's just a nickname.  Then, I argued against interpretation of
> contracts in other languages.  Ignored.  I gave in a bit, thinking
> "hey, maybe changing technology means this should be re-evaluated",
> and delivered judgements allowing some minimal use of characters for
> obvious simple actions.  This though went further for the rest of you,
> not only do you bend over backwards to interpret long and nonsensical
> Japanese posts, but now you try to interpret goddamn Neo Akkadian with
> seriousness.
>
> Now, this presents many interpretation problems (of mixing languages),
> so I try to demonstrate some of the issues by mixing two languages in
> an odd way. Ambiguous as per P.S.S.'s arguments?  Maybe, and fine.
> But: ambiguous using language and the written word, say imagining it
> written on paper.  The SAME RESPECT we've given to other languages in
> the last few months.
>
> But I guess we don't extend that respect to Arabic (or in the past,
> Turkish). This result?  It decides to completely ignore the clear and
> simple known precepts of the Arabic language, and decide on some kind
> of byte order.  Why stop there??  Why not say "hey, all this English
> stuff?  It's just ASCII and we can't read numbers!"  No? I guess not.
>
> But hey - this Arabic stuff??  Well, it's not some important language,
> like say Japanese.  Let's just translate it to bytes and ignore the
> meaning, eh?  Completely re-arrange the word order like no native
> speaker, and not even a translation machine, would do, eh?  I guess
> that's fine.  Basic principles of reading with good faith don't apply
> to a language like *that*.  Let's talk about byte order, instead.
>
> Well, 46 75 63 6b 2c 20 66 75 63 6b 20 74 68 69 73 2e.
>
> I consider you folks my friends, and, intended or not, I want you to
> know how this is coming across. I know this is mainly an intellectual
> exercise for us - we like the puzzles of wrestling with translations in
> ancient languages, and figuring out odd logic (like byte stuff) to get
> out of ambiguous or paradoxical situations.  That's all fun, well, and
> good.
>
> So I've really tried to understand the Japanese, but even the signature
> characters just come across to me gibberish - due to the low resolution
> of the characters on the display, I just can't learn it from reading it
> here.  I transliterate that nickname in my head as "Japanese Character
> Guy" every time I see the characters.  It feels exclusionary to me
> (especially as there's others who understand better), and I feel left
> out.
>
> Though I've generally ignored that feeling - not a big deal.  I've even
> spent more time trying to program the CFJ database to accept those
> characters than I have on any other aspect of programming and updating.
>
> And now, here - double exclusion.  There's no similar respect for a
> language I can (to a very slight measure) cope with.
>
> Now, I'm pretty sure you didn't intend to come across this way, and
> thought of this as just another clever logic solution.  And I'm VERY
> sure my sensitivity is in a large part due to current World events. I
> come here to escape, I've never brought 

DIS: Re: BUS: Either way you look at it... [also contains a CFJ ID number assignment]

[Alex Smith]

On Thu, 2017-06-29 at 07:09 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> But I guess we don't extend that respect to Arabic (or in the past,
> Turkish). This result?  It decides to completely ignore the clear and
> simple known precepts of the Arabic language, and decide on some kind
> of byte order.  Why stop there??  Why not say "hey, all this English
> stuff?  It's just ASCII and we can't read numbers!"  No? I guess not. 

Your message could have been written in such a way that it would be
unambiguously correct Arabic and incorrect English, but it wasn't.

The purpose of communication is to communicate. As a result, the
standards we use for communication in email are designed to allow
conversations to be communicated unambiguously, regardless of whether
they're written in Arabic or English. Such unambiguity is needed for
things like line wrapping algorithms to work correctly.

Compare:

> I call for judgement on the following statement : أدعو إلى إصدار حكم بشأن 
> البيان التالي

> دعو إلى إصدار حكم بشأن البيان التالي : I call for judgement on the following 
> statement

In my text editor, these two lines look identical, except that the
former is left-justified and the latter is right-justified. (Your email
client may vary; some email clients I'm aware of aren't capable of
processing bidirectional text correctly. See the attached pictures at
two different window widths.)

I've put a lot of effort into learning how computers support various
texts, whether it's the variable width of Japanese or the right-to-left 
behaviour of Arabic. Communication is about saying what you mean; and
computers actually give you the tools to say what you mean. As such,
the intentionally ambiguous reading doesn't exist; there's one way to
write the text so that it's clearly an English sentence, and another to
write it so that it's clearly an Arabic sentence. Your message
contained the former, but it could easily have contained the latter,
and then it would have been interpreted as Arabic.

Saying "A byte stream containing Arabic text must be interpreted as
though it were laid out left to right" would be in its own right
disrespectful to the language, because that's not how Arabic is written
in practice. If you observed someone writing the sentence in question
in real life, you could determine whether it was written in English or
Arabic via whether it was written left to right or right to left. Now,
it turns out that that's an observable property over email too; and
that's as it should be. The alternative would be much worse.

-- 
ais523

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: humble agoran farmer aka robin hood

[Nic Evans]

On 06/29/2017 08:51 AM, CuddleBeam wrote:
> The only way you can be carded is by 'breaking' a pledge, and the 
>only definition of 'breaking' in the rules specifies the *creator* of 
>the pledge.


No? It just says:

"Breaking a publicly-made pledge is a cardable offense."

Without specifying the creator. If I'm wrong, please provide a quote 
with proves me incorrect, because I might be missing something.
That sentence defines what happens when you break a pledge. This is the 
sentence I'm refering to:


If a publicly-made pledge says that the creator of a pledge will do 
something, without providing a time limit, then e SHALL in a timely 
manner in order to not break said pledge.Without this sentence, I'd agree with your common-language definition of "whoever doesn't do the thing breaks it". But that sentence specifies a way that pledges can be broken, and explicitly mentions the creator. Usually when the rules define something like this, it's taken to completely override the common-language meaning. There's no rules to that effect, IIRC, so a CFJ is reasonable but IMO unlikely to fall in your favor.

Re: DIS: Decoding attempt

[V.J Rada]

I am purely English speaking rip.

On Friday, June 30, 2017, CuddleBeam  wrote:

> >More generally for everyone, what languages do you speak?
>
> In order of fluidity:
>
> Spanish (native), English (native), Swedish (native but I haven't
> practiced in forever so jag minnas inte mycket av det), Japanese (unhealthy
> amounts of anime lol), German (very basic), French (very basic), Lojban (if
> I have a dictionary with me).
>

Re: Re: DIS: Decoding attempt

[CuddleBeam]

>More generally for everyone, what languages do you speak?

In order of fluidity:

Spanish (native), English (native), Swedish (native but I haven't practiced
in forever so jag minnas inte mycket av det), Japanese (unhealthy amounts
of anime lol), German (very basic), French (very basic), Lojban (if I have
a dictionary with me).

Re: DIS: Aesthetic Theme?

[Kerim Aydin]

On Thu, 29 Jun 2017, V.J Rada wrote:
> Yeah I like the judicial aspect more than anything but I support making this 
> game 
> more of a game as well. Its very bare bones right now

Let me be clear:  I *like* having strong themes.  But they're more like 
boardgame
themes than RPGs - people don't play-act like Middle Ages Architects while they 
play
Carcassonne, but the theme sure helps keep the move choices and actions 
straight.

DIS: Re: BUS: humble agoran farmer aka robin hood

[CuddleBeam]

>Rule 'categories' aren't a thing with any influence over
>rule interpretation. They're arbtirarily decided by the Rulekeepor >for
convenience.

Ah, OK. Good to know, thank you.

>It is a violation of something formal. It's a Cardable Offense.

Yes, I agree to that. But it's not an "obligation" in itself - there is no
SHOULD or MUST or some other *imperative*. You just trigger a card against
you.

> The only way you can be carded is by 'breaking' a pledge, and the >only
definition of 'breaking' in the rules specifies the *creator* of >the
pledge.

No? It just says:

"Breaking a publicly-made pledge is a cardable offense."

Without specifying the creator. If I'm wrong, please provide a quote with
proves me incorrect, because I might be missing something.

Re: DIS: Decoding attempt

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

How many languages do you speak?

More generally for everyone, what languages do you speak?

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



> On Jun 28, 2017, at 11:50 PM, Josh T  wrote:
> 
> That's pretty good, actually. It's transliterated Neo-Akkadian for "If I were 
> to send meaningless messages, would it do anything?"
> 
> I have an interpretation of the rules. Instead of debating about it, I think 
> it is much more interesting to do things that test it and see what Agora 
> decides. I feel my stance on the issue as worded is quite clear given the 
> translation of the moon language, although I would like to see what o comes 
> up with.
> 
> 天火狐
> 
> On 29 June 2017 at 02:47, Ørjan Johansen  wrote:
> After googling a bit, here's my attempt using 
> http://www.assyrianlanguages.org/akkadian/search.php and 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akkadian:
> 
> Orig. transcription
> Dictionary lookup
> Suggested translation
> 
> šumma  našpartamrāqtam
> szumma naszparturaqu
> If message-acc  void,meaningless-fem-acc
> 
> ašpur, mimma epēšū?
> szaparumimma epeszu
> i sent/wrote,  anything  do/act?
> 
> Greetings,
> Ørjan.
> 



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: 蘭亭社簿記

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

Are you able to provide a complete translation of this to English?

Is this a deputisation? If so, for what office?

If this is for the office of Reportor, what is the newspaper relating to?

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



> On Jun 28, 2017, at 11:39 PM, Josh T  wrote:
> 
> In the interest of watching everyone figure out what is going on, I 
> acknowledge all of those concerns, and pledge to answer questions published 
> in a-b before July 5th, 2017 about my message to a-b originally published 
> June 27, 2017 truthfully and to the best of my ability.
> 
> 天火狐
> 
> On 27 June 2017 at 15:08, Quazie  wrote:
> I object to anything in the below message I can.
> 
> As this might be a report I issue a COE on it, specially that the report 
> isn't clear.
> 
> I also vote for myself in any agoran decision initiated by the below message.
> 
> On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 10:50 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
> 



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: huh, I thought I sent this already

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

I favor Aris being assigned this case.

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



> On Jun 28, 2017, at 10:39 PM, Aris Merchant 
>  wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 3:02 PM, omd  wrote:
>> CFJ: Shinies are assets.
>> 
>> Arguments: The recently resurrected rule 2166 says:
>> 
>>  An asset is an entity defined as such by a rule (hereafter its
>>  backing document), and existing solely because its backing
>>  document defines its existence.
>> 
>> The latest version of Rule 2483 (Economics) purports to define shinies
>> as assets, but does it satisfy the second condition?  The meaning of
>> "because" here is somewhat ambiguous, but I suggest a useful test is
>> whether an entity would cease to exist if, hypothetically, its backing
>> document (rule) were repealed.  In this case, shinies are primarily
>> defined by Rule 2483, but are also explicitly mentioned in Rule 2491
>> (Estate Auctions) and Rule 2484 (Payday).  For example:
>> 
>>  At the start of each month, if Agora's Balance is not 0 or less,
>>  Agora SHALL pay each player 10 shinies.
>> 
>> (There are also references to “Balance” in Rules 2485 and 2487.)
>> 
>> If Rule 2483 were repealed, it seems likely that the mentions of
>> “shinies” (perhaps "Balance" as well) in those rules would still be
>> interpreted as referring to game-defined objects, given the lack of
>> any obvious alternative referent.  That would probably be sufficient
>> to establish shinies as a part of the gamestate, and (given the lack
>> of any intermediate period in which they’re not defined) preserve the
>> existence of shinies existing prior to the repeal.  Thus shinies fail
>> the test: they wouldn’t cease to exist if Rule 2483 were repealed.
>> Does that mean they don’t exist “solely because” of Rule 2483, and
>> hence are not assets?
>> 
>> See also: CFJs 1922 and 2309, which addressed that clause but wrt
>> assets defined by contracts, not rules.
> 
> I have looked briefly at each of the 125ish CFJs containing the word
> "asset" (as reported by cfj.qoid.us) and can find no actual
> precedent, although one case does seem to be vaguely related. I have
> gratuitous arguments, but I'll save them until after I find out
> whether people are willing to have me judge a case about a rule that I
> re-enatcted. I do point out, however, that there is some precedent for
> such assignments (cf. CFJ 1910, one of the ones I just looked
> through).
> 
> -Aris



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

DIS: Re: BUS: humble agoran farmer aka robin hood

[CuddleBeam]

Gah

Nevermind, I'm stupid and didn't realize that distributing=/=enacting and
such. Betterer Pledges actually isn't in the rules yet.

But oh well. Maybe what I've pointed out helps.

Re: DIS: Proto: Adding fun and flavor

[Alex Smith]

On Wed, 2017-06-28 at 11:39 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Jun 2017, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
> > What other things could be re-added?
> 
> You could re-add my favorite re-adding mechanism.
> 
> IIRC, we used to have an office that was required to, each month,
> both:
> 
> (1) select a past repealed rule, modify it to current definitions,
> and submit a proposal to re-enact it;
> 
> (2) select a current rule at random and submit a proposal to repeal
> it.
> 
> (I was thinking of doing this unofficially via Agency, but the
> distribution fees are an obstacle there).

I think this was more interesting when it was nonrandom (we've done it
both ways IIRC). Sometimes people identified a rule that actually
wasn't worth keeping around.

-- 
ais523

Re: DIS: Aesthetic Theme?

[V.J Rada]

Yeah I like the judicial aspect more than anything but I support making
this game more of a game as well. Its very bare bones right now

On Thursday, June 29, 2017, Aris Merchant <
thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 10:09 PM, Owen Jacobson  > wrote:
> >
> >> On Jun 28, 2017, at 4:09 PM, Kerim Aydin  > wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, 28 Jun 2017, CuddleBeam wrote:
> >>> I personally would prefer to avoid all of the already-done themes and
> I'm interested in
> >>> having "fantastical" themes/societies like perhaps something like the
> Fallout videogames,
> >>> or perhaps even an emulation of our own version of Hell...
> >>
> >> I was thinking the other day (when we were accusing each other of not
> treating Agora
> >> Right Good Forever) about an traitor/accusation inspired theme (for
> those of you who
> >> know the old RPG Paranoia, like that).
> >>
> >> Players would accuse each other for being Traitorous Scum for not
> treating Agora Right
> >> Good Forever with colorful accusations and convoluted reasoning.  This
> could either be
> >> some kind of reverse karma system, or an officer might choose the best
> accusations
> >> to "execute" traitors and award good (for "good", read "evil") play.
> >>
> >> Though the fact is, we've never sustained any RPG-themes for very long,
> we cloak things
> >> in a theme but then spend more time debating the mechanics than
> actually playing in
> >> character.
> >
> > While I like the theme (and painting Cards as the loss of Clones would
> amuse me no end), I tend to agree with G., here. In fact, that’s why I
> play: I’m less interested in the games Agora can be bent into emulating and
> more interested in the process of bending Agora.
> >
> > -o
>
> I play Agora because it's fun. I'm not really sure why it's fun, and I
> think both possibilities have some validity, but either way this would
> make it more fun. FOR.
>
> -Aris
>

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] CFJ 3531 assigned to omd

[V.J Rada]

I CFJ on "V.J. Rada initiated three elections on 27 June"

On Thursday, June 29, 2017, omd  wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 8:57 AM, Alex Smith  > wrote:
> > On Wed, 2017-06-28 at 07:48 +0100, V.J Rada wrote:
> >> I retract the 2nd CFJ I filed. I CFJ on the statement
> >> "A player other than the ADoP may initiate elections
> >> for an office by announcement if that office has been
> >> deputized for within the last 2 weeks or no election
> >> has occured for that office within the last 90 days. V.J.
> >> Rada initiated 3 such elections on 27 June"
> >
> > This is CFJ 3531. I assign it to omd.
>
> Since I feel like being a stickler, DISMISS for malformed statement
> (which is actually two different statements with no logical
> connective).
>

Re: DIS: Decoding attempt

[Josh T]

That's pretty good, actually. It's transliterated Neo-Akkadian for "If I
were to send meaningless messages, would it do anything?"

I have an interpretation of the rules. Instead of debating about it, I
think it is much more interesting to do things that test it and see what
Agora decides. I feel my stance on the issue as worded is quite clear given
the translation of the moon language, although I would like to see what o
comes up with.

天火狐

On 29 June 2017 at 02:47, Ørjan Johansen  wrote:

> After googling a bit, here's my attempt using
> http://www.assyrianlanguages.org/akkadian/search.php and
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akkadian:
>
> Orig. transcription
> Dictionary lookup
> Suggested translation
>
> šumma  našpartamrāqtam
> szumma naszparturaqu
> If message-acc  void,meaningless-fem-acc
>
> ašpur, mimma epēšū?
> szaparumimma epeszu
> i sent/wrote,  anything  do/act?
>
> Greetings,
> Ørjan.

DIS: Decoding attempt

[Ørjan Johansen]

After googling a bit, here's my attempt using 
http://www.assyrianlanguages.org/akkadian/search.php and 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akkadian:


Orig. transcription
Dictionary lookup
Suggested translation

šumma  našpartamrāqtam
szumma naszparturaqu
If message-acc  void,meaningless-fem-acc

ašpur, mimma epēšū?
szaparumimma epeszu
i sent/wrote,  anything  do/act?

Greetings,
Ørjan.

Re: DIS: testing mailman 3

[Aris Merchant]

Big question that determines my opinion on all of this: would our
current style of web interface still be available? My mailer doesn't
like to give me plain text input, so when I need to see it I use the
site. I'm also just used to the way things are, and don't want change.
:)

-Aris

On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 8:20 PM, omd  wrote:
> So, almost exactly a year ago I said I wanted to transition the lists
> to either GroupServer or Mailman 3, mainly for the sake of a better
> web interface that includes the ability to post online (to reduce
> friction for new users who might not want to sign up for 3 mailing
> lists just to dip their toes in).  ...And then I got anxious and
> disappeared from Agora altogether.
>
> Well, I'm back and I thought it time to look into that again.
>
> First I tried setting up GroupServer.  The code felt kind of bloated -
> took like 10 minutes to install, mostly just to deal with the massive
> number of Python packages it's split into.  (And since I was trying to
> use Docker, I had to wait for that install over and over.  I gave up
> on Docker.)  Still, I eventually got it to work, and, yep, the web
> interface is reasonably pretty…
>
> But then I tried sending a test email, and noticed that the email I
> got had been wrapped in a garish HTML header/footer.  Then I tried
> sending a long message, and noticed that the email was cut off - very
> early, in fact, after only 10 lines of text.  Combining those two, the
> impression I got was more of a forum notification than a real mailing
> list post.  I didn't see any option to change either behavior, in
> either the (minimal) per-user settings or the administration settings.
>
> I could have tried to hack the code to just send mail
> plaintext+unmolested, but the aforementioned bloatedness and confusing
> setup made me leery of messing with the code, and I still had an
> alternative.
>
> So today I installed Mailman 3 (+ HyperKitty + Postorius), which
> predictably was a lot more annoying than it should be, partly because
> it's split into three projects for no good reason.  But so far,
> impressions are better than GroupServer.  I like the Web UI slightly
> less, but it's not bad, and it does allow sending messages from the
> browser - plaintext, mercifully.
>
> You can see it here:
>
> https://list.agoranomic.org/
>
> The installation is currently entirely separate from the existing
> Mailman 2 list, but I did import a copy of the list archives to
> Hyperkitty so anyone interested can get a better feel for the UI.
> Don't try posting there, but feel free to join and post on
> agora-mm3test.
>
> I'd like to change the HTML so it shares the site header (and maybe
> other styling) from https://agoranomic.org.
>
> The eventual plan would be to migrate the existing lists to Mailman 3.
> Existing subscriptions and subscription settings would be brought
> over; the base mbox archive would be continued from the existing
> lists; all existing messages would be added to the HyperKitty site;
> I'd also make a static copy of the existing Mailman 2 web archive, so
> archive links would continue to work, although that would be separate
> from the new site.  In short, minimal disruption.
>
> Thoughts?  Concerns?  Suggestions?
>
> Known issues:
> - The Hyperkitty importer is less than perfect.  It doesn't like
> messages with no Message-Id, or with non-ascii sender addresses, of
> which we apparently have a bunch.  Also, messages without a normally
> formatted Date header get marked as new, including a report ais523
> sent in 2009 with the delightful "Date: some time near the end of
> July", and some messages from Magu in 2003 with no Date at all.
> - The test list adds a signature; it shouldn't.  Also need to make
> sure the subject line munging works the same way as currently.
> - I should switch to something other than sqlite.
> - The initial indexing takes a rather long time in Xapian and produces
> a huge index compared to the input size.  Maybe I should try switching
> the backend to Solr or something.
> - Hyperkitty is kind of slow.  I tried some things to make it faster
> already, but not enough I guess...

DIS: Draft: Promotor report

[Aris Merchant]

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 5.0 and the valid options are FOR and AGAINST (PRESENT is
also a valid vote).


ID  Author(s)AI   Title   Pender Pend fee (sh.)
---
7865*   Aris, o, [1] 3.1  Regulations v4  Aris   6
7866*   o, Quazie, [2]   1.7  More Betterer Pledges   o  6


The proposal pool is currently empty.

Legend: * : Proposal is pending.

[1] nichdel, ais523
[2] G., Gaelan, Aris, 天火狐

The Pending List Price (PLP) is 6 shinies.

The full text of the aforementioned proposals is included below.

//
ID: 7865
Title: Regulations v4
Adoption index: 3.1
Author: Aris
Co-authors: o, nichdel, ais523


Change the title of Rule 2125, "Regulation Regulations", to "Regulated Actions".

Amend Rules 2125 and 1023 by changing all instances of the word "regulated" to
"restricted", and all instances of the word "unregulated" to "unrestricted".

Amend Rule 2143, "Official Reports and Duties," by changing all instances of the
word "regulations" to "restrictions".

Create a new power 3.1 rule entitled "Regulations", with the flowing text:

  A Regulation is an instrument defined as such by this rule. A regulation
  allows an officer (known as the Promulgator) to exercise rule defined powers.
  A regulation is in effect continuously from the time of its creation to the
  time of either its revocation or the repeal of the rule that allowed for its
  creation. When recommending a regulation, its Promulgator must specify by
  number the rule(s) upon which it is based (the parent rules), the list of
  which becomes an integral part of the regulation. The list of rules can
  generally be modified by the Promulgator according to the procedure for text
  changes.

  A regulation must be authorized by at least one rule in order for it to exist.
  A regulation has effect on the game (only) insofar as the rule or rules that
  authorized it permit it to have effect, and a regulation generally inherits
  the power of its least powerful parent rule, unless its Promulgator defines
  a lower power. If reasonably possible, a regulation should be
  interpreted so as to defer to other rules. The procedure for resolving
  conflict between regulations is the same as it is for rules.

  Regulations are generally issued according to the following procedures,
  and they can be repealed by the announcement of their Promulgator. Alternate
  procedures may be used if provided for by all of the regulations's parent
  rules. If one parent rule specifies procedures that are more stringent than
  those that the other(s) specifies, those apply. Creating, modifying, revoking,
  or allowing for a regulation is secured at power 1.

  A regulation (or set of regulations), authorized by another rule, may
  generally be enacted or modified by its promulgator without 2 objections,
  or with Agoran consent. A notice pursuant to the previous sentence is
  known as a "recommendation", and the regulation(s) are said to be
  "recommended" to Agora.


Create a new power 1 rule, entitled "The Regkeepor", with the following text:

  The Regkeepor is an office, responsible for the maintenance of the
  Regulations. The Regulations are contained in the Regkeepor's weekly report,
  know as the Agora Nomic Code of Regulations (ACORN). E MAY publish multiple
  versions or editions of the ACORN.

  The ACORN is divided into titles, assigned by the Regkeepor, which are
  each given an integer.  Generally, each office with the power to create
  regulations SHOULD be assigned the next successive natural number. Title 0 of
  the ACORN is reserved for use by the Regkeepor, and nothing in that title
  need be a regulation. Non-regulations printed in the ACORN
  have no binding effect, and SHALL clearly be marked by the Regkeepor.

  Each regulation SHALL be assigned an ID number by the Regkeepor, consisting
  of a string of the characters [0-9] and separator characters. The Regkeepor
  SHOULD establish some way of keeping track of the version of a regulations.
  The Regkeepor MAY also, at eir discretion, create ways of marking special
  types of Regulation (even in violation of the previous restrictions of this
  paragraph), mark sections or titles as reserved for future use, and
  make such other discussions of arrangement, annotation, and marking as are
  necessary and proper in the execution of eir duties.

  The Regkeepor SHOULD remember that the purpose of the ACORN is to make the
  regulations easily readable, and e SHALL not act in a manner intended to
  deceive others in eir official capacity.


Make Aris the Regkeepor.

Amend Rule 2464, "Tournaments", to read in full:

   A Tournament is a sub-game of Agora 

Re: DIS: Proto: Lets all use [Insert agreed language here] when we can.

[Aris Merchant]

On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 2:12 PM, CuddleBeam  wrote:
> I think this could be a pretty good ribbon opportunity for me lol. Here we
> go:
>
> Proto:
>
> Official Language:

Two points:

1: Necessity. This is not necessary, as the rules are in English. The
fact that they are implies that all players can read English, and that
it is the default language of play.

2: Pragmatics. I'm of the opinion that there are no unregulated game
actions, but that doesn't mean that all aspects of the game are (or
need to be) defined by the rules. Indeed, a lot of the principles on
which the game operates are defined by custom, not the rules, and we
don't need to change that unless there is a good reason. I might be in
favor of, for instance, more definition of what ambiguity means, but
this goes too far.

I therefore respectfully oppose this proposal. However, CuddleBeam, I
applaud you for handling this well. You came up with a fairly
reasonable seeming way of fixing a problem you saw, and the fact that
everyone disagrees with you doesn't indicate that you can't succeed.
Everyone's first few protos have problems. I waited a long time before
trying my first proposal (Free Agency, which allowed for conditionals
in Agencies), and people still regularly find holes in my proposals. I
congratulate you on seeking public comment first, which is exactly the
right way to propose anything non-trivial.

-Aris