Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Archival disclosure

[Owen Jacobson]

> On Sep 29, 2017, at 1:31 AM, Gaelan Steele  wrote:
> 
> Fair enough.
> 
> Side note: many claim the the Rulekeepor is a challenging office, but I’d 
> argue that in some ways it’s one of the easiest. The Secretary has to watch 
> pretty much every BUS message for a random shiny spend; all I have to do is 
> post an SLR when I see the Assessor message.

You also have to interpret all of the random clauses people put into proposals. 
There are backstops (both the CFJ and CoE systems can be used to catch 
incorrect rules publications) but you’re the first line of interpretation for 
those instruments, and they can be very hairy instruments indeed.

-o



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Archival disclosure

[Gaelan Steele]

Fair enough.

Side note: many claim the the Rulekeepor is a challenging office, but I’d argue 
that in some ways it’s one of the easiest. The Secretary has to watch pretty 
much every BUS message for a random shiny spend; all I have to do is post an 
SLR when I see the Assessor message.

Gaelan

> On Sep 28, 2017, at 10:21 PM, Owen Jacobson  wrote:
> 
> 
>> On Sep 29, 2017, at 1:18 AM, Gaelan Steele  wrote:
>> 
>> I’m kind of curious what the eventual goal here is. Are we trying to build 
>> something with sufficient detail that the gamestate could be reconstructed? 
>> If so, we’d need support for conditionals, which means the “annotations” may 
>> need to support arbitrary code. Is it simply “find me all messages with 
>> votes on proposals”? That seems much more possible, and may even be largely 
>> automatable.
>> 
>> Gaelan
> 
> The goal is a calculator that can work out the correct state of the game for 
> certain kinds of values. I have no desire to try to capture all of Agora in 
> code: it’s impossible, and as I’ve said in the past, Agora’s prose nature is 
> part of its appeal to me. Instead, I want to streamline my offices, and maybe 
> help others streamline theirs, by providing a tool with well-defined 
> properties that can be applied to the problems posed by those offices while 
> being flexible enough to handle some portion of future needs as well.
> 
> I suspect it’ll need some variety of condition, but it’ll also likely need 
> active curation as the “correct” annotation for a message may change due to a 
> CFJ, or due to better understanding of the consequences of schema choices, or 
> due to evolution of the software.
> 
> “Find me all the messages with votes on proposals” is a good example use 
> case. For me, it’s “store data that lets me generate the weekly reports for 
> surveyor and secretary mechanically.” And “keep me interested and help me 
> practice my skills as a developer."
> 
> -o
> 
> 

DIS: Re: BUS: 🎵Spooky Scary Skeletonsð沁ｵ

[Owen Jacobson]

On Sep 28, 2017, at 11:20 PM, Josh T  wrote:

> I just wanted to mention how amused I am at the emoji getting mangled in new 
> and exciting ways in the title.
> 
> 天火狐

I have read the relevant RFCs.

I am both amused and cynically unsurprised. Non-ASCII headers are very much an 
afterthought in the design of email, even beyond the degree to which email 
bodies are presumed to be ASCII-friendly (or at least Latin-9-friendly) even in 
this day and age.

-o



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Archival disclosure

[Owen Jacobson]

> On Sep 29, 2017, at 1:18 AM, Gaelan Steele  wrote:
> 
> I’m kind of curious what the eventual goal here is. Are we trying to build 
> something with sufficient detail that the gamestate could be reconstructed? 
> If so, we’d need support for conditionals, which means the “annotations” may 
> need to support arbitrary code. Is it simply “find me all messages with votes 
> on proposals”? That seems much more possible, and may even be largely 
> automatable.
> 
> Gaelan

The goal is a calculator that can work out the correct state of the game for 
certain kinds of values. I have no desire to try to capture all of Agora in 
code: it’s impossible, and as I’ve said in the past, Agora’s prose nature is 
part of its appeal to me. Instead, I want to streamline my offices, and maybe 
help others streamline theirs, by providing a tool with well-defined properties 
that can be applied to the problems posed by those offices while being flexible 
enough to handle some portion of future needs as well.

I suspect it’ll need some variety of condition, but it’ll also likely need 
active curation as the “correct” annotation for a message may change due to a 
CFJ, or due to better understanding of the consequences of schema choices, or 
due to evolution of the software.

“Find me all the messages with votes on proposals” is a good example use case. 
For me, it’s “store data that lets me generate the weekly reports for surveyor 
and secretary mechanically.” And “keep me interested and help me practice my 
skills as a developer."

-o




signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Archival disclosure

[Owen Jacobson]

> On Sep 28, 2017, at 3:55 PM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> You have just reminded me of my (real world) thesis.  What wasn't in Excel/VB 
> was
> in Perl.  *shudder*.

The core parts of perldoc are still, in my view, the sine qua non of good 
developer documentation. They’re almost exactly the right balance of normative 
specifications of the language and library and informative commentary on the 
use and implementation considerations.

For example, consider perldoc perlmod: https://perldoc.perl.org/perlmod.html 


It’s something I aspire to when writing docs in any language.

-o



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Archival disclosure

[Gaelan Steele]

I’m kind of curious what the eventual goal here is. Are we trying to build 
something with sufficient detail that the gamestate could be reconstructed? If 
so, we’d need support for conditionals, which means the “annotations” may need 
to support arbitrary code. Is it simply “find me all messages with votes on 
proposals”? That seems much more possible, and may even be largely automatable.

Gaelan

> On Sep 28, 2017, at 9:44 PM, Owen Jacobson  wrote:
> 
> 
>> On Sep 28, 2017, at 5:52 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus 
>>  wrote:
>> 
>> I would be happy to help you code or annotate, whoever word you are using, 
>> each message.
> 
> Thanks, I’ll probably take you up on that. It’s a daunting job.
> 
> -o
> 
> 

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Archival disclosure

[Owen Jacobson]

> On Sep 28, 2017, at 12:29 PM, Gaelan Steele  wrote:
> 
> [sits in corner with my Ruby-powered ruleset]
> 
> Gaelan

I like Ruby. It and Go pay my rent, and they’re interesting languages.

I just happen to like Python more for this specific use case. (I seriously 
considered writing it in Rust, too.)

However, I’m a big believer in interoperability. The framework I’m using, 
apistar, automatically generates API docs in HTML form, as well as a coreapi 
schema document, for APIs implemented against it. The support for including 
useful prose in those docs is limited, but it’s improving (and I may send the 
apistar author a few pull requests about that myself, too).

The idea is that the archive is an API-first service, accessible by any 
language, so that if it’s useful, any Agoran can write tools against it in 
their languages of choice.

-o



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Passive Income

[Owen Jacobson]

> On Sep 28, 2017, at 11:28 AM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, 28 Sep 2017, Owen Jacobson wrote:
>> Create a new rule, titled "Distributing Assets", with power 1, whose text is
>> 
>>To “distribute” a quantity of a fungible asset to a set of recipients is 
>> to
>>transfer one instance of that asset at a time to the recipient that owns
>>the least number of instances of that asset, until either no more 
>> instances
>>of the asset are eligible to be distributed, or the number of instances so
>>transferred equals the quantity to be distributed. If, when distributing a
>>specific asset, two or more recipients each own the least number of
>>instances of that asset, then the recipient that most recently became
>>eligible to own the asset SHALL receive the asset being distributed.
>> 
>> Create a rule, titled "Passive Income", with power 2, whose text is
>> 
>>The Tax Rate is a singleton natural switch which can take values between 0
>>and 100, inclusive, tracked by the Secretary. The Tax Rate has a default
>>value of 50.
>> 
>>Whenever Agora receives Shinies from another owner other than itself, the
>>Secretary CAN cause Agora to distribute a percentage of that payment equal
>>to the Tax Rate to all players, and SHALL do so in a timely fashion. As
>>part of eir weekly duties, the Secretary SHALL do so for all payments to
>>Agora that have not yet been distributed.
> 
> I'm concerned with mechanism technicalities - unless I'm misreading, this 
> requires
> a lot of unit transfers ("1 for G., 1 for o, 1 for PSS, 1 more for G") and
> since they're all linked under a single distribution (distribution works on 
> the
> "set") for which group properties have to be determined ("least"), does 
> getting a
> single one wrong invalidate the whole lot?  Or just some?

Probably the whole lot.

There are some mitigating factors, and I expect to send out distribution 
messages as “I cause Agora to pay G. 2 shinies, o 1 shiny, and PSS 1 shiny to 
distribute four shinies” rather than specifying each individual shiny in 
detail. Such a description should be unambiguous, as far as I can tell - 
there’s either only one or only zero possible ways to decompose that into 
individual actions required by the rules, and it’s not the kind of shorthand 
that’s generally used for scams so I don’t foresee people refusing to accept it 
most of the time.

There are two useful cases with obvious shortcuts:

* If there is a single player who is behind by N shinies, then the first N 
actions can be determined easily: all of those shinies go to em.

* If there are K players with the least shinies and they are behind by N 
shinies from the next-highest player, then distribute the floor of the amount 
remaining to be distributed, divided by K, to each of them, and do the 
remainder (if any) by registration order.

I expect most distributions to involve applying the first case once, then the 
second case a handful of times.

-o



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Archival disclosure

[Owen Jacobson]

> On Sep 28, 2017, at 5:52 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus 
>  wrote:
> 
> I would be happy to help you code or annotate, whoever word you are using, 
> each message.

Thanks, I’ll probably take you up on that. It’s a daunting job.

-o




signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: I attempt to Declare A NEW ERA

[VJ Rada]

"The speaker has the power to use the Super-Special Weekly Speaker
Veto (SSWSV). Agora is not satisfied with any intent if the speaker
uses eir SSWSV and objects to that intent. The Speaker can only use
the SSWSV once a week. Once the Speaker has used the SSWSV on an
intent, an identical or functionally intent CANNOT be resolved for a
period of two weeks unless the Speaker supports it".

On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 2:22 PM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
>
>
> That makes it useless because someone can re-post the intent right
> after the speaker uses eir objection (in principle it's about the right
> Amount of usage though).
>
> On Fri, 29 Sep 2017, VJ Rada wrote:
>> We could make the speaker have like one a week. Remove it from the
>> rule its currently in and add to the rule "The Speaker" something like
>> "The speaker has the power to use the Super-Special Weekly Speaker
>> Veto (SSWSV). Agora is not satisfied with any intent if the speaker
>> uses eir SSWSV and objects to that intent. The Speaker can only use
>> the SSWSV once a week."
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 2:14 PM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > I'm torn on that.  It lets the speaker say whoa, stop and think a bit 
>> > without
>> > killing it.  Maybe extend it to a longer window, so a speaker who wants to 
>> > kill
>> > it completely only has to do it 2-3 times not every other day?
>> >
>> > Thinking more, I was initially wondering if I was bribeable, but removing
>> > green cards would be a real miscarriage of justice, better put that to 
>> > power 1
>> > first.
>> >
>> > On Fri, 29 Sep 2017, VJ Rada wrote:
>> >> Correct of course (I knew how long the period lasted but I thought the
>> >> veto power...was a veto power). That's rather strange. Would anyone
>> >> object were the 48 hours bit removed?
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 2:04 PM, Alexis Hunt  wrote:
>> >> > On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 at 00:01 VJ Rada  wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> RIP good point.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> As G. is the speaker, the intent is scuppered. G. and Aris objected,
>> >> >> Alexis and nichdel supported.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > That's not how dependent actions work. The intent does not get 
>> >> > "scuppered";
>> >> > it remains active (technically indefinitely, but in practice until two 
>> >> > weeks
>> >> > pass and it expires). The Speaker's special objection power only lasts 
>> >> > 48
>> >> > hours.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> From V.J. Rada
>> >>
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> From V.J. Rada
>>
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: I attempt to Declare A NEW ERA

[Kerim Aydin]

That makes it useless because someone can re-post the intent right 
after the speaker uses eir objection (in principle it's about the right
Amount of usage though).

On Fri, 29 Sep 2017, VJ Rada wrote:
> We could make the speaker have like one a week. Remove it from the
> rule its currently in and add to the rule "The Speaker" something like
> "The speaker has the power to use the Super-Special Weekly Speaker
> Veto (SSWSV). Agora is not satisfied with any intent if the speaker
> uses eir SSWSV and objects to that intent. The Speaker can only use
> the SSWSV once a week."
> 
> On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 2:14 PM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
> >
> >
> > I'm torn on that.  It lets the speaker say whoa, stop and think a bit 
> > without
> > killing it.  Maybe extend it to a longer window, so a speaker who wants to 
> > kill
> > it completely only has to do it 2-3 times not every other day?
> >
> > Thinking more, I was initially wondering if I was bribeable, but removing
> > green cards would be a real miscarriage of justice, better put that to 
> > power 1
> > first.
> >
> > On Fri, 29 Sep 2017, VJ Rada wrote:
> >> Correct of course (I knew how long the period lasted but I thought the
> >> veto power...was a veto power). That's rather strange. Would anyone
> >> object were the 48 hours bit removed?
> >>
> >> On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 2:04 PM, Alexis Hunt  wrote:
> >> > On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 at 00:01 VJ Rada  wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> RIP good point.
> >> >>
> >> >> As G. is the speaker, the intent is scuppered. G. and Aris objected,
> >> >> Alexis and nichdel supported.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > That's not how dependent actions work. The intent does not get 
> >> > "scuppered";
> >> > it remains active (technically indefinitely, but in practice until two 
> >> > weeks
> >> > pass and it expires). The Speaker's special objection power only lasts 48
> >> > hours.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> From V.J. Rada
> >>
> >
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> From V.J. Rada
>

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] CFJs 3563-3564 assigned to Gaelan

[VJ Rada]

If 3464 is TRUE, 3563 is automatically FALSE. But I would like you to
expand a little bit on that ruling...

On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 2:15 PM, Gaelan Steele  wrote:
> I judge 3464 as TRUE. It seems to be a reasonable interpretation of the 
> rules, and it is also just a good idea. (I’m withholding judgement on 3563 
> for now as I’m a bit confused on the card-the-Referee issue that seems to be 
> going around; I’ll judge it once I figure out what’s going on there.)
>
> Gaelan
>
>> On Sep 27, 2017, at 4:37 PM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> [The following two CFJs were not technically linked by the callers, but
>> are interdependent.  ProofTechnique, I know you expressed some interest
>> in one of these, but I decided to hold off on a case assignment until
>> you've settled in a bit - if you want in on the next batch, let me know]
>>
>>
>> I assign the following two CFJs (3563-3564) to Gaelan:
>>
>> ==  CFJ 3563  ==
>>
>>  The Green card o. issued emself in the below message was illegally
>>  issued, as the green card e issued nichdel was legally issued.
>>
>> 
>>
>> Caller:   V.J. Rada
>> Barred:   Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
>>
>> Judge:Gaelan
>>
>> 
>>
>> History:
>>
>> Called by V.J. Rada:  23 Sep 2017
>>
>> 
>>
>> Caller's Arguments:
>>
>> I think the most natural reading of "that reason" is the act itself,
>> not the particular rule breached. That is, someone can be carded twice
>> for breaking the same pledge on two totally seperate occasions. There
>> is also a question as to the interpretation of the pledge rule itself.
>> It says "a pledge is considered broken if...", which may mean that the
>> pledge is permanently broken, and cannot be broken more than once.
>>
>> 
>>
>> Caller's Evidence:
>>
>> On Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 4:17 PM, Owen Jacobson  wrote:
>>> On Sep 22, 2017, at 11:45 PM, Nic Evans  wrote:
>>>
 As for the gerontocracy argument: Money is an inherently gerontocratic
 system. It abstracts value from labor in a way that allows arbitrary
 allocation.

 I'm about 95% sure this is the gist of my partner’s argument when she said
 “inventing money is _rude_” about the original Shinies proposal.

 I’m not sure I fully appreciated Spending Power while we had it. The debate
 and adoption predates me. I’ve long had a fascination with throughput-based
 monetary systems like Total Annihilation’s metal economy, where the driving
 numbers are the amount of money in per time, not the amount of money in the
 pile, and SP is as close as I’ve ever seen to that in a political system.
>>>
>>> On Sep 23, 2017, at 12:30 AM, VJ Rada  wrote:
>>>
 I point the finger at nichdel. He replied to CB in discussion again.
>>>
>>> As recently discussed, this is over a pledge under rule 2450, made by
>>> nichdel, which reads:
>>>
 I pledge to not acknowledge any messages Cuddle Beam sends to a-d, or
 to respond in a-d to anything CB does.
>>>
>>> This pledge was previously broken, and punishment for that breach
>>> issued from this office on Sep 20, 2017, at 1:39 AM Eastern Daylight
>>> Time.
>>>
>>> The message quoted above is, indeed, in response to a message from
>>> Cuddlebeam, and violates the above-quoted pledge. Issuing a second
>>> card for the same pledge appears to violate rule 2426, which reads in
>>> part:
>>>
 A person SHALL NOT issue a Card unless:

 …

 * there has not already been a Card issued for that reason; and
>>>
>>> Therefore, as issuing a card would be ILLEGAL, I find this finger-
>>> pointing to be Shenanigans.
>>>
>>> I issue nichdel a green card by summary judgement, as required by rule
>>> 2478, for violating rule 2450.
>>>
>>> I issue myself a green card by summary judgement for violating rule
>>> 2426, as cited above.
>>>
>>> I’ll note that I’ve now issued nichdel a card by summary judgement
>>> twice in a week, and myself a card twice in a week. It is no longer
>>> possible for me to card either of us for the remainder of the week,
>>> rules requiring me to do so notwithstanding.
>>>
>>> -o
>>
>> 
>>
>>
>>
>> ==  CFJ 3464  ==
>>
>>  A pledge can only be broken once.
>>
>> 
>>
>> Caller:   Nichdel
>>
>> Judge:Gaelan
>>
>> 

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: I attempt to Declare A NEW ERA

[VJ Rada]

We could make the speaker have like one a week. Remove it from the
rule its currently in and add to the rule "The Speaker" something like
"The speaker has the power to use the Super-Special Weekly Speaker
Veto (SSWSV). Agora is not satisfied with any intent if the speaker
uses eir SSWSV and objects to that intent. The Speaker can only use
the SSWSV once a week."

On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 2:14 PM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
>
>
> I'm torn on that.  It lets the speaker say whoa, stop and think a bit without
> killing it.  Maybe extend it to a longer window, so a speaker who wants to 
> kill
> it completely only has to do it 2-3 times not every other day?
>
> Thinking more, I was initially wondering if I was bribeable, but removing
> green cards would be a real miscarriage of justice, better put that to power 1
> first.
>
> On Fri, 29 Sep 2017, VJ Rada wrote:
>> Correct of course (I knew how long the period lasted but I thought the
>> veto power...was a veto power). That's rather strange. Would anyone
>> object were the 48 hours bit removed?
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 2:04 PM, Alexis Hunt  wrote:
>> > On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 at 00:01 VJ Rada  wrote:
>> >>
>> >> RIP good point.
>> >>
>> >> As G. is the speaker, the intent is scuppered. G. and Aris objected,
>> >> Alexis and nichdel supported.
>> >
>> >
>> > That's not how dependent actions work. The intent does not get "scuppered";
>> > it remains active (technically indefinitely, but in practice until two 
>> > weeks
>> > pass and it expires). The Speaker's special objection power only lasts 48
>> > hours.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> From V.J. Rada
>>
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: I attempt to Declare A NEW ERA

[Kerim Aydin]

On Fri, 29 Sep 2017, Alexis Hunt wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 at 00:12 Aris Merchant 
>  wrote:
>   I would. It means that the Speaker has to care enough to maintain eir
>   veto. If e doesn't, and someone else does care about doing it, e can.
>   It also means that a Speaker can object to something as a player
>   without maintaining eir Speaker veto if e doesn't want to.
> 
>   -Aris
> 
> 
> It doesn't work this way because you can't object more than once.

The rules don't say that.  The rules count the number of objectors, and
you can't object if you've withdrawn it, but there's nothing against 
objecting multiple times, though it only takes once to become an
Objector.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: I attempt to Declare A NEW ERA

[Alexis Hunt]

On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 at 00:12 Aris Merchant <
thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I would. It means that the Speaker has to care enough to maintain eir
> veto. If e doesn't, and someone else does care about doing it, e can.
> It also means that a Speaker can object to something as a player
> without maintaining eir Speaker veto if e doesn't want to.
>
> -Aris
>

It doesn't work this way because you can't object more than once.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: I attempt to Declare A NEW ERA

[Aris Merchant]

I would. It means that the Speaker has to care enough to maintain eir
veto. If e doesn't, and someone else does care about doing it, e can.
It also means that a Speaker can object to something as a player
without maintaining eir Speaker veto if e doesn't want to.

-Aris

On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 9:08 PM, VJ Rada  wrote:
> Correct of course (I knew how long the period lasted but I thought the
> veto power...was a veto power). That's rather strange. Would anyone
> object were the 48 hours bit removed?
>
> On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 2:04 PM, Alexis Hunt  wrote:
>> On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 at 00:01 VJ Rada  wrote:
>>>
>>> RIP good point.
>>>
>>> As G. is the speaker, the intent is scuppered. G. and Aris objected,
>>> Alexis and nichdel supported.
>>
>>
>> That's not how dependent actions work. The intent does not get "scuppered";
>> it remains active (technically indefinitely, but in practice until two weeks
>> pass and it expires). The Speaker's special objection power only lasts 48
>> hours.
>
>
>
> --
> From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: I attempt to Declare A NEW ERA

[VJ Rada]

Correct of course (I knew how long the period lasted but I thought the
veto power...was a veto power). That's rather strange. Would anyone
object were the 48 hours bit removed?

On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 2:04 PM, Alexis Hunt  wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 at 00:01 VJ Rada  wrote:
>>
>> RIP good point.
>>
>> As G. is the speaker, the intent is scuppered. G. and Aris objected,
>> Alexis and nichdel supported.
>
>
> That's not how dependent actions work. The intent does not get "scuppered";
> it remains active (technically indefinitely, but in practice until two weeks
> pass and it expires). The Speaker's special objection power only lasts 48
> hours.



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: I attempt to Declare A NEW ERA

[Alexis Hunt]

On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 at 00:01 VJ Rada  wrote:

> RIP good point.
>
> As G. is the speaker, the intent is scuppered. G. and Aris objected,
> Alexis and nichdel supported.
>

That's not how dependent actions work. The intent does not get "scuppered";
it remains active (technically indefinitely, but in practice until two
weeks pass and it expires). The Speaker's special objection power only
lasts 48 hours.

Re: DIS: I think I fixed the rulesets

[Gaelan Steele]

Might have something to do with the fact that my git push failed. :|

2496 is fixed as well, might take a few minutes for GH pages to update.

Gaelan

> On Sep 28, 2017, at 8:59 PM, Ørjan Johansen  wrote:
> 
> Still no farming in sight in the SLR there. Also, sneaking a peek at the HLR, 
> rule 2496 looks misformatted.

DIS: Re: BUS: I attempt to Declare A NEW ERA

[VJ Rada]

RIP good point.

As G. is the speaker, the intent is scuppered. G. and Aris objected,
Alexis and nichdel supported.

On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 1:59 PM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, 29 Sep 2017, VJ Rada wrote:
>
>> I intend, with Agoran Consent, to declare a new era, repealing all
>> ephemeral rules.
>>
>> That is, both of them. Victory by apathy and Trust Tokens. IMO.
>> they're kind of worthless. Apathy is useless bc if the game is really
>> dead you can propose yourself winner anyway. And Trust Tokens are not
>> exactly engaging gameplay.
>
> I object.
>
> Not my reason for objecting, but Green Cards would also be repealed.
>
> -G.
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: I think I fixed the rulesets

[Ørjan Johansen]

On Thu, 28 Sep 2017, Gaelan Steele wrote:

I believe the rulesets on GitHub are now accurate. If something is still 
wrong, please speak up before I publicly embarrass myself again. :)


Still no farming in sight in the SLR there. Also, sneaking a peek at the 
HLR, rule 2496 looks misformatted.


Greetings,
Ørjan.

DIS: I think I fixed the rulesets

[Gaelan Steele]

I believe the rulesets on GitHub are now accurate. If something is still wrong, 
please speak up before I publicly embarrass myself again. :)

Gaelan

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Take-backsies

[VJ Rada]

"appears to contemplate that anyone may cause Agora to transfer an
asset it owns"

Doesn't it say "without objection", which you didn't solicit?

On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 1:44 PM, Owen Jacobson  wrote:
> On Sep 28, 2017, at 5:46 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus 
>  wrote:
>
>> Could ou explain the issue? I see a way to scam it to oneself, but I don't 
>> see an attempt by you to do that.
>
> The issue is solely a clarity problem. Read one way, the clause
>
>> If an asset's backing document restricts its ownership to a class of 
>> entities, then that asset CANNOT be gained by or transferred to an entity 
>> outside that class, and is destroyed if it is owned by an entity outside 
>> that class (except for Agora, in which case any player CAN transfer or 
>> destroy it without objection).
>
> appears to contemplate that anyone may cause Agora to transfer an asset it 
> owns, which is worrying. Read another, it restricts that action only to 
> assets owned by Agora for which Agora is not a legal owner.
>
> Stamps may legally be owned by Agora, so mostly, I want to make sure I did 
> not receive grok’s stamp.
>
> -o
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Take-backsies

[Owen Jacobson]

On Sep 28, 2017, at 5:46 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus 
 wrote:

> Could ou explain the issue? I see a way to scam it to oneself, but I don't 
> see an attempt by you to do that.

The issue is solely a clarity problem. Read one way, the clause

> If an asset's backing document restricts its ownership to a class of 
> entities, then that asset CANNOT be gained by or transferred to an entity 
> outside that class, and is destroyed if it is owned by an entity outside that 
> class (except for Agora, in which case any player CAN transfer or destroy it 
> without objection).

appears to contemplate that anyone may cause Agora to transfer an asset it 
owns, which is worrying. Read another, it restricts that action only to assets 
owned by Agora for which Agora is not a legal owner.

Stamps may legally be owned by Agora, so mostly, I want to make sure I did not 
receive grok’s stamp.

-o



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: I attempt to Declare A NEW ERA

[Owen Jacobson]

> On Sep 28, 2017, at 11:40 PM, Ørjan Johansen  wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 28 Sep 2017, Owen Jacobson wrote:
> 
>> I withdraw my objection. I support the above-quoted intent.
> 
> This cannot be continued though:
> 
>  A person CANNOT support or object to an announcement of intent before the
>  intent is announced, or after e has withdrawn the same type of response.

Whups, I did not realize that. Nice catch - you’ve got me over a barrel if you 
think that I deserve a card, because you can now force me to break a pledge.

-o



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

DIS: Re: BUS: I attempt to Declare A NEW ERA

[Ørjan Johansen]

On Thu, 28 Sep 2017, Owen Jacobson wrote:


I withdraw my objection. I support the above-quoted intent.


This cannot be continued though:

  A person CANNOT support or object to an announcement of intent before the
  intent is announced, or after e has withdrawn the same type of response.

Greetings,
Ørjan.

DIS: Re: BUS: 🎵Spooky Scary Skeletonsð沁ｵ

[Ørjan Johansen]

Yep, as well as a weekly Silly Person (ideally appointed by the previous 
one) to make them.


Greetings,
Ørjan.

On Thu, 28 Sep 2017, Gaelan Steele wrote:


Were Silly Proposals a game concept at that point?

Gaelan

DIS: Re: BUS: 🎵Spooky Scary Skeletonsð沁ｵ

[Josh T]

I just wanted to mention how amused I am at the emoji getting mangled in
new and exciting ways in the title.

天火狐

On 28 September 2017 at 23:02, Gaelan Steele  wrote:

> Were Silly Proposals a game concept at that point?
>
> Gaelan
>
> > On Sep 28, 2017, at 7:33 PM, Ørjan Johansen  wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 28 Sep 2017, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> >
> >>> From the archives (by memory):
> >>
> >> AN INSANE PROPOSAL IS A PROPOSAL IN ALL CAPS.
> >>
> >> VOTES FOR AN INSANE PROPOSAL ARE SECRET AND CANNOT BE DISCUSSED,
> >> EVEN IN PRIVATE.
> >>
> >> IF NOT A SINGLE FOR VOTE IS CAST FOR AN INSANE PROPOSAL, THE
> >> PROPOSERS WIN THE GAME.
> >
> > Good times. I created the first version of that, although I understand
> people later rewrote it because they found it too unclear, not the least of
> which because it was a Silly Proposal and so had to be in verse:
> >
> > ()()()()
> > There exists an imbalance. To correct this inanity,
> > This Rule is created, enTitled "Insanity":
> >
> >  An Interested Proposal is Insane, if it contains no minuscule
> letter.
> >  (That is the opposite of CAPITAL, for those who know not better.)
> >
> >  For such a Proposal, until the Voting Period has ended:
> >  there shall be no discussing Votes, or this Rule has been bended.
> >  Nor shall a Player Vote in public, only to Assessor.
> >  The Votes shall be unknown to others, even employer and professor.
> >
> >  And should it occur (due to greed or sin)
> >  that no one Votes FOR it, the Proposer shall Win.
> > ()()()()
> >
> > (The "imbalance" refers to Sane Proposals, which iirc used
> one-Player-one-vote at a time when it was otherwise easy to manipulate
> voting strength.)
> >
> > Greetings,
> > Ørjan.
>
>

DIS: Re: BUS: 🎵Spooky Scary Skeletonsð沁ｵ

[Gaelan Steele]

Were Silly Proposals a game concept at that point?

Gaelan

> On Sep 28, 2017, at 7:33 PM, Ørjan Johansen  wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 28 Sep 2017, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> 
>>> From the archives (by memory):
>> 
>> AN INSANE PROPOSAL IS A PROPOSAL IN ALL CAPS.
>> 
>> VOTES FOR AN INSANE PROPOSAL ARE SECRET AND CANNOT BE DISCUSSED,
>> EVEN IN PRIVATE.
>> 
>> IF NOT A SINGLE FOR VOTE IS CAST FOR AN INSANE PROPOSAL, THE
>> PROPOSERS WIN THE GAME.
> 
> Good times. I created the first version of that, although I understand people 
> later rewrote it because they found it too unclear, not the least of which 
> because it was a Silly Proposal and so had to be in verse:
> 
> ()()()()
> There exists an imbalance. To correct this inanity,
> This Rule is created, enTitled "Insanity":
> 
>  An Interested Proposal is Insane, if it contains no minuscule letter.
>  (That is the opposite of CAPITAL, for those who know not better.)
> 
>  For such a Proposal, until the Voting Period has ended:
>  there shall be no discussing Votes, or this Rule has been bended.
>  Nor shall a Player Vote in public, only to Assessor.
>  The Votes shall be unknown to others, even employer and professor.
> 
>  And should it occur (due to greed or sin)
>  that no one Votes FOR it, the Proposer shall Win.
> ()()()()
> 
> (The "imbalance" refers to Sane Proposals, which iirc used 
> one-Player-one-vote at a time when it was otherwise easy to manipulate voting 
> strength.)
> 
> Greetings,
> Ørjan.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Rulekeepor] Short Logical Ruleset

[Ørjan Johansen]

After looking a bit, I think

(1) the person complaining may have been confused about Nichdel's 
erroneous assessment of Sep 7, or possibly just complaining that the SLR 
was late.
(2) however, the current SLR does not include any of the results from the 
_correct_ assessment of Sep 12, posted shortly after the last SLR.


Greetings,
Ørjan.

On Fri, 29 Sep 2017, Ørjan Johansen wrote:

This is also missing the farming stuff, which was one of several things 
someone else complained was missing in the _previous_ Ruleset. (That's the 
one thing I recall. I didn't save the message.)


Greetings,
Ørjsn.

On Thu, 28 Sep 2017, Gaelan Steele wrote:


THE SHORT LOGICAL RULESET

[snip]

DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] We Reinstated Infinte Rewards Again

[Owen Jacobson]

> On Sep 28, 2017, at 8:45 PM, VJ Rada  wrote:
> 
> The last amendment to "Rewards" actually undid my fix to it, allowing
> CoEing to get infinite money.

My bad.

-o



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

DIS: Re: BUS: [Rulekeepor] Short Logical Ruleset

[Ørjan Johansen]

This is also missing the farming stuff, which was one of several things 
someone else complained was missing in the _previous_ Ruleset. (That's the 
one thing I recall. I didn't save the message.)


Greetings,
Ørjsn.

On Thu, 28 Sep 2017, Gaelan Steele wrote:


THE SHORT LOGICAL RULESET

[snip]

DIS: Re: BUS: 🎵Spooky Scary Skeletons🎵

[Ørjan Johansen]

On Thu, 28 Sep 2017, Kerim Aydin wrote:


From the archives (by memory):


AN INSANE PROPOSAL IS A PROPOSAL IN ALL CAPS.

VOTES FOR AN INSANE PROPOSAL ARE SECRET AND CANNOT BE DISCUSSED,
EVEN IN PRIVATE.

IF NOT A SINGLE FOR VOTE IS CAST FOR AN INSANE PROPOSAL, THE
PROPOSERS WIN THE GAME.


Good times. I created the first version of that, although I understand 
people later rewrote it because they found it too unclear, not the least 
of which because it was a Silly Proposal and so had to be in verse:


()()()()
There exists an imbalance. To correct this inanity,
This Rule is created, enTitled "Insanity":

  An Interested Proposal is Insane, if it contains no minuscule letter.
  (That is the opposite of CAPITAL, for those who know not better.)

  For such a Proposal, until the Voting Period has ended:
  there shall be no discussing Votes, or this Rule has been bended.
  Nor shall a Player Vote in public, only to Assessor.
  The Votes shall be unknown to others, even employer and professor.

  And should it occur (due to greed or sin)
  that no one Votes FOR it, the Proposer shall Win.
()()()()

(The "imbalance" refers to Sane Proposals, which iirc used 
one-Player-one-vote at a time when it was otherwise easy to manipulate 
voting strength.)


Greetings,
Ørjan.

DIS: Re: BUS: Spooky Scary Skeletons

[Ørjan Johansen]

On Thu, 28 Sep 2017, Cuddle Beam wrote:


- Title: Terrifying Proposals Reward
- Content: The victor of the "The Terrifying Proposals" Proposal
Competition, once ever via this effect, can gain 3 Stamps from Agora by
announcement.


I get really queasy about proposals having non-instantaneous effects, 
although I recall someone pointing out there was an old such proposal 
already existing, so possibly it does work. (Although the competition 
fails for other reasons mentioned.)


Greetings,
Ørjan.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Fearmongor] Pick list

[Gaelan Steele]

Ah, yep. I added the rule files, but forgot to add them to rules/index (which 
controls ordering). G., the safest way to get a list of rules is probably just 
`ls rules`. 

Gaelan 

> On Sep 28, 2017, at 5:56 PM, VJ Rada  wrote:
> 
> This doesn't include Black Cards and Blue cards, which are omitted in error.
> 
>> On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 10:54 AM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> I will shortly roll a 118-sided die via a dice server.  First roll is
>> rule to propose for repeal, second is for amending.
>> 
>> List as follows, sorted by decreasing precedence for fun.
>> 
>> I transfer 4 shinies to Gaelan for ruleset update when I needed it -
>> it changed halfway through testing this script I thought I had an error :)
>> 
>> 
>> 1 101 (The Game of Agora), power=4
>> 2 1698 (Agora Is A Nomic), power=4
>> 3 2029 (Town Fountain), power=4
>> 4 1030 (Precedence between Rules), power=3.2
>> 5 2486 (The Royal Parade), power=3.14
>> 6 1551 (Ratification), power=3.1
>> 7 2493 (Regulations), power=3.1
>> 8 104 (First Speaker), power=3
>> 9 105 (Rule Changes), power=3
>> 10 106 (Adopting Proposals), power=3
>> 11 107 (Initiating Agoran Decisions), power=3
>> 12 208 (Resolving Agoran Decisions), power=3
>> 13 217 (Interpreting the Rules), power=3
>> 14 478 (Fora), power=3
>> 15 683 (Voting on Agoran Decisions), power=3
>> 16 693 (Agoran Decisions), power=3
>> 17 869 (How to Join and Leave Agora), power=3
>> 18 955 (Determining the Will of Agora), power=3
>> 19 1367 (Degrees), power=3
>> 20 1607 (Distribution), power=3
>> 21 1688 (Power), power=3
>> 22 1728 (Dependent Actions), power=3
>> 23 1769 (Holidays), power=3
>> 24 1950 (Decisions with Adoption Indices), power=3
>> 25 2034 (Vote Protection and Cutoff for Challenges), power=3
>> 26 2125 (Regulated Actions), power=3
>> 27 2127 (Conditional Votes), power=3
>> 28 2140 (Power Controls Mutability), power=3
>> 29 2141 (Role and Attributes of Rules), power=3
>> 30 2152 (Mother, May I?), power=3
>> 31 2160 (Deputisation), power=3
>> 32 2166 (Assets), power=3
>> 33 2201 (Self-Ratification), power=3
>> 34 2202 (Ratification Without Objection), power=3
>> 35 2231 (Order of the Hero of Agora Nomic), power=3
>> 36 2240 (No Cretans Need Apply), power=3
>> 37 2350 (Proposals), power=3
>> 38 2422 (Voting Strength), power=3
>> 39 2430 (Cleanup Time), power=3
>> 40 2438 (Ribbons), power=3
>> 41 2443 (Expediting Proposals), power=3
>> 42 2449 (Winning the Game), power=3
>> 43 2466 (Acting on Behalf), power=3
>> 44 2490 (Estate Ballots), power=3
>> 45 2480 (Festivals), power=2.1
>> 46 2481 (Festival Restrictions), power=2.1
>> 47 103 (The Speaker), power=2
>> 48 879 (Quorum), power=2
>> 49 991 (Calls for Judgement), power=2
>> 50 1006 (Offices), power=2
>> 51 1023 (Common Definitions), power=2
>> 52 1789 (Cantus Cygneus), power=2
>> 53 2124 (Agoran Satisfaction), power=2
>> 54 2139 (The Registrar), power=2
>> 55 2154 (Election Procedure), power=2
>> 56 2162 (Switches), power=2
>> 57 2423 (First Among Equals), power=2
>> 58 2426 (Cards), power=2
>> 59 2427 (Yellow Cards), power=2
>> 60 2472 (Office Incompatibilities), power=2
>> 61 2475 (Red Cards), power=2
>> 62 2483 (Economics), power=2
>> 63 2487 (Shiny Supply Level), power=2
>> 64 2489 (Estates), power=2
>> 65 2491 (Estate Auctions), power=2
>> 66 2508 (Community Chest), power=2.0
>> 67 591 (Delivering Judgements), power=1.7
>> 68 911 (Motions and Moots), power=1.7
>> 69 2450 (Pledges), power=1.7
>> 70 2451 (Executive Orders), power=1.7
>> 71 2462 (Bankruptcy), power=1.7
>> 72 2478 (Vigilante Justice), power=1.7
>> 73 2479 (Official Justice), power=1.7
>> 74 649 (Patent Titles), power=1.5
>> 75 2415 (Badges), power=1.5
>> 76 2457 (Lockout), power=1.2
>> 77 2458 (Invoking Lockout), power=1.2
>> 78 2459 (Organizations), power=1.2
>> 79 2460 (Organizational Restructuring), power=1.2
>> 80 2461 (Death and Birth of Organizations), power=1.2
>> 81 1051 (The Rulekeepor), power=1
>> 82 1681 (The Logical Rulesets), power=1
>> 83 1727 (Happy Birthday), power=1
>> 84 2137 (The Assessor), power=1
>> 85 2138 (The Associate Director of Personnel), power=1
>> 86 2143 (Official Reports and Duties), power=1
>> 87 2168 (Extending the voting period), power=1
>> 88 2175 (Judicial Retraction and Excess), power=1
>> 89 2327 (Read the Ruleset Week), power=1
>> 90 2379 (No News Is Some News), power=1
>> 91 2429 (Bleach), power=1
>> 92 2431 (Proposal Competitions), power=1
>> 93 2444 (Silver Quill), power=1
>> 94 2445 (How to Pend a Proposal), power=1
>> 95 2446 (The Agoran Newspaper), power=1
>> 96 2448 (Eras), power=1
>> 97 2456 (The Secretary), power=1
>> 98 2463 (Motion of No Confidence), power=1
>> 99 2464 (Tournaments), power=1
>> 100 2467 (Agencies), power=1
>> 101 2468 (Superintendent), power=1
>> 102 2471 (No Faking), power=1
>> 103 2476 (Pink Slips), power=1
>> 104 2477 (The Referee), power=1
>> 105 2488 (The Surveyor), power=1
>> 106 2492 (Recusal), power=1
>> 107 2494 (The Regkeepor), power=1
>> 108 

DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] We Reinstated Infinte Rewards Again

[Gaelan Steele]

Wasn’t me. 

> On Sep 28, 2017, at 5:45 PM, VJ Rada  wrote:
> 
> The last amendment to "Rewards" actually undid my fix to it, allowing
> CoEing to get infinite money.
> 
> I submit and with shinies pend the following.
> 
> Proposal: Infinite Money Fix
> AI: 1
> Author: V.J. Rada (I remember somebody else discovering this like a
> month ago, maybe Gaelan? Lmk if you want coauthorship)
> Text:
> Amend rule 2496, "Rewards" by replacing "Publishing a duty-fulfilling
> report: 5 shinies." with "Publishing a duty-fulfilling report: 5
> shinies. This reward can only be claimed once per office per week for
> a weekly report and once per office per month for a monthly report."
> 
> 
> -- 
> From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: I attempt to Declare A NEW ERA

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

I'm not expressing an opinion on the era creation, I don't have a strong 
preference and I want to see how other votes are flowing, but I do agree with 
the principle expressed.

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



> On Sep 28, 2017, at 9:31 PM, VJ Rada  wrote:
> 
> Nttpf publius, and you'll want "support"
> 
> On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 11:29 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
>  wrote:
>> I agree.
>> 
>> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
>> p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Sep 28, 2017, at 9:17 PM, VJ Rada  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Unrelated: It would probs be a good idea to lower the power of lots of
>>> our game mechanics and have it all be like 0.1, 0.2, 0.3 etc, allowing
>>> us to use Eras more like what they were probably intended for.
>>> 
>>> On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 11:17 AM, Nic Evans  wrote:
 I support.
 
 
 On 09/28/17 20:08, VJ Rada wrote:
> I intend, with Agoran Consent, to declare a new era, repealing all
> ephemeral rules.
> 
> That is, both of them. Victory by apathy and Trust Tokens. IMO.
> they're kind of worthless. Apathy is useless bc if the game is really
> dead you can propose yourself winner anyway. And Trust Tokens are not
> exactly engaging gameplay.
> 
 
 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> From V.J. Rada
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> From V.J. Rada



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: I attempt to Declare A NEW ERA

[VJ Rada]

oh sorry, that was in reply to my other post about lowering power.
Email threading is confusing sometimes.

On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 11:31 AM, VJ Rada  wrote:
> Nttpf publius, and you'll want "support"
>
> On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 11:29 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
>  wrote:
>> I agree.
>> 
>> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
>> p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Sep 28, 2017, at 9:17 PM, VJ Rada  wrote:
>>>
>>> Unrelated: It would probs be a good idea to lower the power of lots of
>>> our game mechanics and have it all be like 0.1, 0.2, 0.3 etc, allowing
>>> us to use Eras more like what they were probably intended for.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 11:17 AM, Nic Evans  wrote:
 I support.


 On 09/28/17 20:08, VJ Rada wrote:
> I intend, with Agoran Consent, to declare a new era, repealing all
> ephemeral rules.
>
> That is, both of them. Victory by apathy and Trust Tokens. IMO.
> they're kind of worthless. Apathy is useless bc if the game is really
> dead you can propose yourself winner anyway. And Trust Tokens are not
> exactly engaging gameplay.
>


>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> From V.J. Rada
>>
>
>
>
> --
> From V.J. Rada



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: I attempt to Declare A NEW ERA

[VJ Rada]

Nttpf publius, and you'll want "support"

On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 11:29 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
 wrote:
> I agree.
> 
> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com
>
>
>
>> On Sep 28, 2017, at 9:17 PM, VJ Rada  wrote:
>>
>> Unrelated: It would probs be a good idea to lower the power of lots of
>> our game mechanics and have it all be like 0.1, 0.2, 0.3 etc, allowing
>> us to use Eras more like what they were probably intended for.
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 11:17 AM, Nic Evans  wrote:
>>> I support.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 09/28/17 20:08, VJ Rada wrote:
 I intend, with Agoran Consent, to declare a new era, repealing all
 ephemeral rules.

 That is, both of them. Victory by apathy and Trust Tokens. IMO.
 they're kind of worthless. Apathy is useless bc if the game is really
 dead you can propose yourself winner anyway. And Trust Tokens are not
 exactly engaging gameplay.

>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> From V.J. Rada
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: I attempt to Declare A NEW ERA

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

I agree.

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



> On Sep 28, 2017, at 9:17 PM, VJ Rada  wrote:
> 
> Unrelated: It would probs be a good idea to lower the power of lots of
> our game mechanics and have it all be like 0.1, 0.2, 0.3 etc, allowing
> us to use Eras more like what they were probably intended for.
> 
> On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 11:17 AM, Nic Evans  wrote:
>> I support.
>> 
>> 
>> On 09/28/17 20:08, VJ Rada wrote:
>>> I intend, with Agoran Consent, to declare a new era, repealing all
>>> ephemeral rules.
>>> 
>>> That is, both of them. Victory by apathy and Trust Tokens. IMO.
>>> they're kind of worthless. Apathy is useless bc if the game is really
>>> dead you can propose yourself winner anyway. And Trust Tokens are not
>>> exactly engaging gameplay.
>>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> From V.J. Rada



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

DIS: Re: BUS: I attempt to Declare A NEW ERA

[Alexis Hunt]

On Thu, 28 Sep 2017 at 21:09 VJ Rada  wrote:

> I intend, with Agoran Consent, to declare a new era, repealing all
> ephemeral rules.
>
> That is, both of them. Victory by apathy and Trust Tokens. IMO.
> they're kind of worthless. Apathy is useless bc if the game is really
> dead you can propose yourself winner anyway. And Trust Tokens are not
> exactly engaging gameplay.
>
> --
> From V.J. Rada
>

I support.

DIS: Re: BUS: I attempt to Declare A NEW ERA

[VJ Rada]

Unrelated: It would probs be a good idea to lower the power of lots of
our game mechanics and have it all be like 0.1, 0.2, 0.3 etc, allowing
us to use Eras more like what they were probably intended for.

On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 11:17 AM, Nic Evans  wrote:
> I support.
>
>
> On 09/28/17 20:08, VJ Rada wrote:
>> I intend, with Agoran Consent, to declare a new era, repealing all
>> ephemeral rules.
>>
>> That is, both of them. Victory by apathy and Trust Tokens. IMO.
>> they're kind of worthless. Apathy is useless bc if the game is really
>> dead you can propose yourself winner anyway. And Trust Tokens are not
>> exactly engaging gameplay.
>>
>
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Rulekeepor] Short Logical Ruleset

[Kerim Aydin]

On Fri, 29 Sep 2017, VJ Rada wrote:
> Another error, this ruleset does not include "Blue cards" and "black
> cards" although it does include the rest of the changes from "card
> reform and expansion v4"

(ok, will hold off dice rolls for a day maybe...)

DIS: Re: BUS: [Fearmongor] Pick list

[VJ Rada]

This doesn't include Black Cards and Blue cards, which are omitted in error.

On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 10:54 AM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
>
>
> I will shortly roll a 118-sided die via a dice server.  First roll is
> rule to propose for repeal, second is for amending.
>
> List as follows, sorted by decreasing precedence for fun.
>
> I transfer 4 shinies to Gaelan for ruleset update when I needed it -
> it changed halfway through testing this script I thought I had an error :)
>
>
> 1 101 (The Game of Agora), power=4
> 2 1698 (Agora Is A Nomic), power=4
> 3 2029 (Town Fountain), power=4
> 4 1030 (Precedence between Rules), power=3.2
> 5 2486 (The Royal Parade), power=3.14
> 6 1551 (Ratification), power=3.1
> 7 2493 (Regulations), power=3.1
> 8 104 (First Speaker), power=3
> 9 105 (Rule Changes), power=3
> 10 106 (Adopting Proposals), power=3
> 11 107 (Initiating Agoran Decisions), power=3
> 12 208 (Resolving Agoran Decisions), power=3
> 13 217 (Interpreting the Rules), power=3
> 14 478 (Fora), power=3
> 15 683 (Voting on Agoran Decisions), power=3
> 16 693 (Agoran Decisions), power=3
> 17 869 (How to Join and Leave Agora), power=3
> 18 955 (Determining the Will of Agora), power=3
> 19 1367 (Degrees), power=3
> 20 1607 (Distribution), power=3
> 21 1688 (Power), power=3
> 22 1728 (Dependent Actions), power=3
> 23 1769 (Holidays), power=3
> 24 1950 (Decisions with Adoption Indices), power=3
> 25 2034 (Vote Protection and Cutoff for Challenges), power=3
> 26 2125 (Regulated Actions), power=3
> 27 2127 (Conditional Votes), power=3
> 28 2140 (Power Controls Mutability), power=3
> 29 2141 (Role and Attributes of Rules), power=3
> 30 2152 (Mother, May I?), power=3
> 31 2160 (Deputisation), power=3
> 32 2166 (Assets), power=3
> 33 2201 (Self-Ratification), power=3
> 34 2202 (Ratification Without Objection), power=3
> 35 2231 (Order of the Hero of Agora Nomic), power=3
> 36 2240 (No Cretans Need Apply), power=3
> 37 2350 (Proposals), power=3
> 38 2422 (Voting Strength), power=3
> 39 2430 (Cleanup Time), power=3
> 40 2438 (Ribbons), power=3
> 41 2443 (Expediting Proposals), power=3
> 42 2449 (Winning the Game), power=3
> 43 2466 (Acting on Behalf), power=3
> 44 2490 (Estate Ballots), power=3
> 45 2480 (Festivals), power=2.1
> 46 2481 (Festival Restrictions), power=2.1
> 47 103 (The Speaker), power=2
> 48 879 (Quorum), power=2
> 49 991 (Calls for Judgement), power=2
> 50 1006 (Offices), power=2
> 51 1023 (Common Definitions), power=2
> 52 1789 (Cantus Cygneus), power=2
> 53 2124 (Agoran Satisfaction), power=2
> 54 2139 (The Registrar), power=2
> 55 2154 (Election Procedure), power=2
> 56 2162 (Switches), power=2
> 57 2423 (First Among Equals), power=2
> 58 2426 (Cards), power=2
> 59 2427 (Yellow Cards), power=2
> 60 2472 (Office Incompatibilities), power=2
> 61 2475 (Red Cards), power=2
> 62 2483 (Economics), power=2
> 63 2487 (Shiny Supply Level), power=2
> 64 2489 (Estates), power=2
> 65 2491 (Estate Auctions), power=2
> 66 2508 (Community Chest), power=2.0
> 67 591 (Delivering Judgements), power=1.7
> 68 911 (Motions and Moots), power=1.7
> 69 2450 (Pledges), power=1.7
> 70 2451 (Executive Orders), power=1.7
> 71 2462 (Bankruptcy), power=1.7
> 72 2478 (Vigilante Justice), power=1.7
> 73 2479 (Official Justice), power=1.7
> 74 649 (Patent Titles), power=1.5
> 75 2415 (Badges), power=1.5
> 76 2457 (Lockout), power=1.2
> 77 2458 (Invoking Lockout), power=1.2
> 78 2459 (Organizations), power=1.2
> 79 2460 (Organizational Restructuring), power=1.2
> 80 2461 (Death and Birth of Organizations), power=1.2
> 81 1051 (The Rulekeepor), power=1
> 82 1681 (The Logical Rulesets), power=1
> 83 1727 (Happy Birthday), power=1
> 84 2137 (The Assessor), power=1
> 85 2138 (The Associate Director of Personnel), power=1
> 86 2143 (Official Reports and Duties), power=1
> 87 2168 (Extending the voting period), power=1
> 88 2175 (Judicial Retraction and Excess), power=1
> 89 2327 (Read the Ruleset Week), power=1
> 90 2379 (No News Is Some News), power=1
> 91 2429 (Bleach), power=1
> 92 2431 (Proposal Competitions), power=1
> 93 2444 (Silver Quill), power=1
> 94 2445 (How to Pend a Proposal), power=1
> 95 2446 (The Agoran Newspaper), power=1
> 96 2448 (Eras), power=1
> 97 2456 (The Secretary), power=1
> 98 2463 (Motion of No Confidence), power=1
> 99 2464 (Tournaments), power=1
> 100 2467 (Agencies), power=1
> 101 2468 (Superintendent), power=1
> 102 2471 (No Faking), power=1
> 103 2476 (Pink Slips), power=1
> 104 2477 (The Referee), power=1
> 105 2488 (The Surveyor), power=1
> 106 2492 (Recusal), power=1
> 107 2494 (The Regkeepor), power=1
> 108 2495 (The Birthday Tournament), power=1
> 109 2496 (Rewards), power=1
> 110 2497 (Floating Value), power=1
> 111 2498 (Economic Wins), power=1
> 112 2499 (Welcome Packages), power=1
> 113 2500 (Action Points), power=1
> 114 2505 (Random Choices), power=1.0
> 115 2452 (Trust Tokens), power=0.5
> 116 2474 (Green Cards), power=0.5
> 117 2482 (Victory Elections), power=0.5
> 118 2465 

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Rulekeepor] Short Logical Ruleset

[VJ Rada]

Another error, this ruleset does not include "Blue cards" and "black
cards" although it does include the rest of the changes from "card
reform and expansion v4"

On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 10:39 AM, Gaelan Steele  wrote:
> Bleh, I thought I fixed that. Will fix it when off mobile.
>
> Gaelan
>
>> On Sep 28, 2017, at 5:37 PM, VJ Rada  wrote:
>>
>> Error (although not in the rules themselves)
>>
>> "Last Ruleset Ratification:
>>  Short Logical Ruleset of 2017-09-26"
>>
>> The ratification happened at that time but the ruleset itself was from
>> December 2016
>>
>>> On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 10:30 AM, Gaelan Steele  wrote:
>>> THE SHORT LOGICAL RULESET
>>>
>>> Most Recent Ruleset Change Recorded:
>>>Adoption of Proposal 7898, 26 Sep 2017
>>>
>>> Online documents:
>>> https://agoranomic.github.io/ruleset/slr.txt (SLR)
>>> https://agoranomic.github.io/ruleset/flr.txt (FLR)
>>> https://agoranomic.github.io/ruleset/ (HLR, not legally part of my
>>>   report but always in sync with the other two)
>>>
>>> ==
>>> Agora
>>> --
>>>
>>> Rule 101/17 (Power=4)
>>> The Game of Agora
>>>
>>>  Agora is a game of Nomic, wherein Persons, acting in accordance
>>>  with the Rules, communicate their game Actions and/or results of
>>>  these actions via Fora in order to play the game.  The game may
>>>  be won, but the game never ends.
>>>
>>>  Please treat Agora Right Good Forever.
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Rule 1698/5 (Power=4)
>>> Agora Is A Nomic
>>>
>>>  Agora is ossified if it is IMPOSSIBLE for any reasonable combination of
>>>  actions by players to cause arbitrary rule changes to be made and/or
>>>  arbitrary proposals to be adopted within a four-week period.
>>>
>>>  If, but for this rule, the net effect of a proposal would cause Agora 
>>> to
>>>  become ossified, or would cause Agora to cease to exist, it cannot take
>>>  effect, rules to the contrary notwithstanding.Any other single change 
>>> or
>>>  inseparable group of changes to the gamestate would cause Agora to 
>>> become
>>>  ossified, or would cause Agora to cease to exist, it is cancelled and 
>>> does
>>>  not occur, rules to the contrary notwithstanding.
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Rule 478/34 (Power=3)
>>> Fora
>>>
>>>  Freedom of speech being essential for the healthy functioning of
>>>  any non-Imperial nomic, it is hereby resolved that no Player
>>>  shall be prohibited from participating in the Fora, nor shall
>>>  any person create physical or technological obstacles that
>>>  unduly favor some players' fora access over others.
>>>
>>>  Publicity is a forum switch with values Public, Discussion, and
>>>  Foreign (default), tracked by the Registrar.  Changes to
>>>  publicity are secured.
>>>
>>>  The Registrar may change the publicity of a forum without
>>>  objection as long as:
>>>
>>>  1. e sends eir announcement of intent to that forum; and
>>>
>>>  2. if the forum is to be made public, the announcement by which
>>> the Registrar makes that forum public is sent to all
>>> existing public fora.
>>>
>>>  Each player should ensure e can receive messages via each public
>>>  forum.
>>>
>>>  A public message is a message sent via a public forum, or sent
>>>  to all players and containing a clear designation of intent to
>>>  be public.  A rule can also designate that a part of one public
>>>  message is considered a public message in its own right. A
>>>  person "publishes" or "announces" something by sending a public
>>>  message.
>>>
>>>  Where the rules define an action that CAN be performed "by
>>>  announcement", a person performs that action by unambiguously
>>>  and clearly specifying the action and announcing that e performs
>>>  it.  Any action performed by sending a message is performed at
>>>  the time date-stamped on that message. Actions in messages
>>>  (including sub-messages) are performed in the order they appear
>>>  in the message, unless otherwise specified.
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> ==
>>> Players
>>> --
>>>
>>> Rule 869/39 (Power=3)
>>> How to Join and Leave Agora
>>>
>>>  Any organism that is generally capable of freely originating and
>>>  communicating independent thoughts and ideas is a person.  Rules
>>>  to the contrary notwithstanding, no other entities are persons.
>>>
>>>  Citizenship is a person switch with values 

DIS: Re: BUS: [Rulekeepor] Short Logical Ruleset

[VJ Rada]

Error (although not in the rules themselves)

"Last Ruleset Ratification:
  Short Logical Ruleset of 2017-09-26"

The ratification happened at that time but the ruleset itself was from
December 2016

On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 10:30 AM, Gaelan Steele  wrote:
> THE SHORT LOGICAL RULESET
>
> Most Recent Ruleset Change Recorded:
> Adoption of Proposal 7898, 26 Sep 2017
>
> Online documents:
>  https://agoranomic.github.io/ruleset/slr.txt (SLR)
>  https://agoranomic.github.io/ruleset/flr.txt (FLR)
>  https://agoranomic.github.io/ruleset/ (HLR, not legally part of my
>report but always in sync with the other two)
>
> ==
> Agora
> --
>
> Rule 101/17 (Power=4)
> The Game of Agora
>
>   Agora is a game of Nomic, wherein Persons, acting in accordance
>   with the Rules, communicate their game Actions and/or results of
>   these actions via Fora in order to play the game.  The game may
>   be won, but the game never ends.
>
>   Please treat Agora Right Good Forever.
>
> --
>
> Rule 1698/5 (Power=4)
> Agora Is A Nomic
>
>   Agora is ossified if it is IMPOSSIBLE for any reasonable combination of
>   actions by players to cause arbitrary rule changes to be made and/or
>   arbitrary proposals to be adopted within a four-week period.
>
>   If, but for this rule, the net effect of a proposal would cause Agora to
>   become ossified, or would cause Agora to cease to exist, it cannot take
>   effect, rules to the contrary notwithstanding.Any other single change or
>   inseparable group of changes to the gamestate would cause Agora to 
> become
>   ossified, or would cause Agora to cease to exist, it is cancelled and 
> does
>   not occur, rules to the contrary notwithstanding.
>
> --
>
> Rule 478/34 (Power=3)
> Fora
>
>   Freedom of speech being essential for the healthy functioning of
>   any non-Imperial nomic, it is hereby resolved that no Player
>   shall be prohibited from participating in the Fora, nor shall
>   any person create physical or technological obstacles that
>   unduly favor some players' fora access over others.
>
>   Publicity is a forum switch with values Public, Discussion, and
>   Foreign (default), tracked by the Registrar.  Changes to
>   publicity are secured.
>
>   The Registrar may change the publicity of a forum without
>   objection as long as:
>
>   1. e sends eir announcement of intent to that forum; and
>
>   2. if the forum is to be made public, the announcement by which
>  the Registrar makes that forum public is sent to all
>  existing public fora.
>
>   Each player should ensure e can receive messages via each public
>   forum.
>
>   A public message is a message sent via a public forum, or sent
>   to all players and containing a clear designation of intent to
>   be public.  A rule can also designate that a part of one public
>   message is considered a public message in its own right. A
>   person "publishes" or "announces" something by sending a public
>   message.
>
>   Where the rules define an action that CAN be performed "by
>   announcement", a person performs that action by unambiguously
>   and clearly specifying the action and announcing that e performs
>   it.  Any action performed by sending a message is performed at
>   the time date-stamped on that message. Actions in messages
>   (including sub-messages) are performed in the order they appear
>   in the message, unless otherwise specified.
>
> --
>
> ==
> Players
> --
>
> Rule 869/39 (Power=3)
> How to Join and Leave Agora
>
>   Any organism that is generally capable of freely originating and
>   communicating independent thoughts and ideas is a person.  Rules
>   to the contrary notwithstanding, no other entities are persons.
>
>   Citizenship is a person switch with values Unregistered
>   (default) and Registered, tracked by the Registrar.  Changes to
>   citizenship are secured.  A registered person is a Player.
>
>   A person CAN (unless explicitly forbidden or prevented by the
>   rules) register by publishing a message that indicates
>   reasonably clearly and reasonably unambiguously that e intends
>   to become a player at that time.  A person, by registering,
>   agrees to abide by the Rules.  The Rules CANNOT otherwise bind a
>   person to abide by any agreement without that person's willful

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Archival disclosure

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

If I am elected, I would be happy to work with you on developing compatible 
systems.

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



> On Sep 28, 2017, at 5:06 PM, Gaelan Steele  wrote:
> 
> I change my assessor vote to [Gaelan, PSS, G]. If I can’t do it myself, at 
> least a common language will make automation easier.
> 
> Gaelan
> 
>> On Sep 28, 2017, at 12:38 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus 
>>  wrote:
>> 
>> I love Ruby. R is my favorite, behind it is Ruby and Python and C and Java 
>> behind them.
>> 
>> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
>> p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Sep 28, 2017, at 12:29 PM, Gaelan Steele  wrote:
>>> 
>>> [sits in corner with my Ruby-powered ruleset]
>>> 
>>> Gaelan
>>> 
 On Sep 28, 2017, at 6:38 AM, ATMunn .  wrote:
 
 Sounds interesting. I also see that you're using Python, my favorite 
 programming language. Nice.
 
> On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 3:28 AM, Owen Jacobson  wrote:
> This is the first stage of an attempt to create an annotation system 
> designed to formalize game state changes by attaching formal descriptions 
> of those changes to documents, represented by email messages. At this 
> time, I plan only to archive messages, but there will be a read element 
> allowing anonymous users to read and enumerate messages from the archive 
> in the near future.
 
 The broader scheme here is this:
 
 1. A client app forwards public messages to the archive. They sit in an 
 “unannotated messages” queue until someone - me, probably - picks them up 
 and annotates them.
 
 2. A user annotates each message with a short formal description of the 
 game-state changes imposed by a message. These annotations are mutable, so 
 mistaken annotations are not a permanent problem, and are versioned so 
 that vandalism can be undone. I haven’t worked out the exact schema for 
 these annotations, yet, but the concept I’m working with is loosely based 
 on the RFC 6902 JSON Patch format, adapted for Agora’s specific needs. For 
 example, an annotation transferring shinies might read, in YAML form for 
 readability:
 
> - op: event
> office: Secretary
> summary: o paid Ørjan 1 sh.
> 
> - op: transfer
> from: /Shinies/Player/o
> to: /Shinies/Player/Ørjan
> delta: 1
 
 Obviously, this is an awkward format, but it has some nice properties that 
 I think make it worth building on. I’m still tweaking the actual format 
 for annotaitons, and it’s likely I’ll add a UI or some variety of terse 
 syntax so that it’s possible to write this kind of simple action in fewer 
 than eight lines.
 
 3. The archive exposes an API that can sum up the annotations, starting 
 from the beginning of time, all the way up to a specific point in time, 
 and then return the computed state of the game plus a list of events by 
 office. My report scripts will become “query this API in a specific way, 
 and feed the resulting data to a template to render it for email.”
 
 The idea is that instead of trying to reduce Agora to a set of formal 
 actions, I instead want to keep the prose forms as the primary documents 
 and allow formal note-taking alongside them. Many of Agora’s state changes 
 are formalizable, and from there, those parts of Agora’s state are 
 computable, so this could take a bunch of load off for computing those 
 parts of the game.
 
 I’ve had some success with a reduced version of this approach for the 
 office of Surveyor. All Surveyor’s reports have been generated by a 
 built-to-purpose Python script that applies the same principles to a set 
 of local YAML files instead of a web API.
 
 -o
 
>> 



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: 🎵Spooky Scary Skeletons🎵

[Gaelan Steele]

Hah, I saw that looking through old rules.

Gaelan

> On Sep 28, 2017, at 1:12 PM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> On Thu, 28 Sep 2017, Cuddle Beam wrote:
>> I intend to, with Agoran Consent, initiate the following Proposal 
>> Competition:
>> The TERRIFYING Proposals
>> 
>> The Objective of this Proposal Competition is to make the most malevolent, 
>> heinous and EVIL proposal that you can design.
>> 
>> Of course, since it's likely that none of these proposals are going to pass 
>> lol, I create and pend the following proposal with 1 AP:
>> 
>> - Title: Terrifying Proposals Reward
>> - Content: The victor of the "The Terrifying Proposals" Proposal 
>> Competition, once ever via this effect, can gain 3 Stamps from Agora by 
>> announcement.
> 
> From the archives (by memory):
> 
> AN INSANE PROPOSAL IS A PROPOSAL IN ALL CAPS.
> 
> VOTES FOR AN INSANE PROPOSAL ARE SECRET AND CANNOT BE DISCUSSED,
> EVEN IN PRIVATE.
> 
> IF NOT A SINGLE FOR VOTE IS CAST FOR AN INSANE PROPOSAL, THE 
> PROPOSERS WIN THE GAME.
> 
> 
> 

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: ð µSpooky Scary Skeletonsð µ

[Kerim Aydin]

On Thu, 28 Sep 2017, Alexis Hunt wrote:
> The higher-power one takes precedence, so I believe it's legal for the 
> promotor to leave them undistributed.

I don't think we ever clarified if a SHALL NOT overriding a SHALL means
that it's legal, or it's still Illegal but nothing worse than a Green
Card is appropriate if you follow the higher-powered rule.  That said,
neither interpretation lets Proposal Competitions work.


proto-fix (also covers some timing issues).


Amend Rule 2431 (Proposal Competitions) by replacing:

   During the Agoran Week following the initiation of a Proposal
   Competition, any player CAN specify that a Proposal e submits is
   a Competition Proposal for that Competition.  Players are
   ENCOURAGED to describe how their Competition Proposals fulfill
   the Objective.

   The Promotor SHALL distribute all Competition Proposals for a
   given Competition in the same message. The Assessor SHALL
   resolve all the Agoran Decisions to adopt the Competition
   Proposals for a given Competition in the same message.

   Once all Agoran decisions to adopt Competition Proposals for a
   given Competition have been resolved, the Competition ends.

with:

   In the seven days following the initiation of a Proposal
   Competition (the submission period), any player CAN specify that
   a Proposal e submits is a Competition Proposal for that
   Competition.  Players are ENCOURAGED to describe how their
   Competition Proposals fulfill the Objective.  A proposal so-
   submitted CANNOT be made Pending except as described in this
   rule, rules to the contrary notwithstanding.

   In a timely fashion after the end of the submission period, the
   Promotor:
  - first, CAN and SHALL flip every Competition Proposal to pending
by announcement.  However, before doing so, e CAN, With 2 Support,
declare that any Competition Proposal does not fit the objective,
therefore causing it to cease being a Competition Proposal.
  - then the Promotor SHALL distribute all Competition Proposals, for
a given Competition, and no other proposals, in the same message.

   The Assessor SHALL resolve all the Agoran Decisions to adopt the
   Competition Proposals for a given Competition in the same message.
   Once all Agoran decisions to adopt Competition Proposals for a
   given Competition have been resolved, the Competition ends.

DIS: Re: BUS: 🎵Spooky Scary Skeletons🎵

[Kerim Aydin]

On Thu, 28 Sep 2017, Cuddle Beam wrote:
> I intend to, with Agoran Consent, initiate the following Proposal Competition:
> The TERRIFYING Proposals
> 
> The Objective of this Proposal Competition is to make the most malevolent, 
> heinous and EVIL proposal that you can design.
> 
> Of course, since it's likely that none of these proposals are going to pass 
> lol, I create and pend the following proposal with 1 AP:
> 
> - Title: Terrifying Proposals Reward
> - Content: The victor of the "The Terrifying Proposals" Proposal Competition, 
> once ever via this effect, can gain 3 Stamps from Agora by announcement.

>From the archives (by memory):

AN INSANE PROPOSAL IS A PROPOSAL IN ALL CAPS.

VOTES FOR AN INSANE PROPOSAL ARE SECRET AND CANNOT BE DISCUSSED,
EVEN IN PRIVATE.

IF NOT A SINGLE FOR VOTE IS CAST FOR AN INSANE PROPOSAL, THE 
PROPOSERS WIN THE GAME.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Archival disclosure

[Kerim Aydin]

You have just reminded me of my (real world) thesis.  What wasn't in Excel/VB 
was
in Perl.  *shudder*.

On Thu, 28 Sep 2017, Cuddle Beam wrote:
> >not using excel sheet formulas like real pros
> smh
> 
> On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 9:49 PM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
> 
> 
>   On Thu, 28 Sep 2017, Gaelan Steele wrote:
>   > I’ll ty and get one out today. Also, why are there mail headers here?
> 
>   Something on your setting that puts full headers in reply?  That's 
> definitely
>   not in the copy in my Sent folder.
> 
>   And thanks much for the ruleset!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Archival disclosure

[Cuddle Beam]

>not using excel sheet formulas like real pros

smh

On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 9:49 PM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:

>
>
> On Thu, 28 Sep 2017, Gaelan Steele wrote:
> > I’ll ty and get one out today. Also, why are there mail headers here?
>
> Something on your setting that puts full headers in reply?  That's
> definitely
> not in the copy in my Sent folder.
>
> And thanks much for the ruleset!
>
>
>
>

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Archival disclosure

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

I was introduced to it for stats, but now use it for all sorts of things.

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



> On Sep 28, 2017, at 3:47 PM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, 28 Sep 2017, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
>> I love Ruby. R is my favorite, behind it is Ruby and Python and C and Java 
>> behind them.
> 
> Yay, another R lover!  Rare outside of the straight stats community now that 
> Python
> is taking over so much.
> 
> I go R, C, Fortran (2003 or later Fortran is actually v. nice, very 
> expressive for matrices.
> Not Fortran 77!)  Still stuck in php for web stuff though.
> 
> 
> 



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Archival disclosure

[Kerim Aydin]

On Thu, 28 Sep 2017, Gaelan Steele wrote:
> I’ll ty and get one out today. Also, why are there mail headers here?

Something on your setting that puts full headers in reply?  That's definitely
not in the copy in my Sent folder.

And thanks much for the ruleset!

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Archival disclosure

[Kerim Aydin]

On Thu, 28 Sep 2017, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
> I love Ruby. R is my favorite, behind it is Ruby and Python and C and Java 
> behind them.

Yay, another R lover!  Rare outside of the straight stats community now that 
Python
is taking over so much.

I go R, C, Fortran (2003 or later Fortran is actually v. nice, very expressive 
for matrices.  
Not Fortran 77!)  Still stuck in php for web stuff though.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Archival disclosure

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

I love Ruby. R is my favorite, behind it is Ruby and Python and C and Java 
behind them.

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



> On Sep 28, 2017, at 12:29 PM, Gaelan Steele  wrote:
> 
> [sits in corner with my Ruby-powered ruleset]
> 
> Gaelan
> 
> On Sep 28, 2017, at 6:38 AM, ATMunn .  wrote:
> 
>> Sounds interesting. I also see that you're using Python, my favorite 
>> programming language. Nice.
>> 
>> On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 3:28 AM, Owen Jacobson  wrote:
>> > This is the first stage of an attempt to create an annotation system 
>> > designed to formalize game state changes by attaching formal descriptions 
>> > of those changes to documents, represented by email messages. At this 
>> > time, I plan only to archive messages, but there will be a read element 
>> > allowing anonymous users to read and enumerate messages from the archive 
>> > in the near future.
>> 
>> The broader scheme here is this:
>> 
>> 1. A client app forwards public messages to the archive. They sit in an 
>> “unannotated messages” queue until someone - me, probably - picks them up 
>> and annotates them.
>> 
>> 2. A user annotates each message with a short formal description of the 
>> game-state changes imposed by a message. These annotations are mutable, so 
>> mistaken annotations are not a permanent problem, and are versioned so that 
>> vandalism can be undone. I haven’t worked out the exact schema for these 
>> annotations, yet, but the concept I’m working with is loosely based on the 
>> RFC 6902 JSON Patch format, adapted for Agora’s specific needs. For example, 
>> an annotation transferring shinies might read, in YAML form for readability:
>> 
>> > - op: event
>> >   office: Secretary
>> >   summary: o paid Ørjan 1 sh.
>> >
>> > - op: transfer
>> >   from: /Shinies/Player/o
>> >   to: /Shinies/Player/Ørjan
>> >   delta: 1
>> 
>> Obviously, this is an awkward format, but it has some nice properties that I 
>> think make it worth building on. I’m still tweaking the actual format for 
>> annotaitons, and it’s likely I’ll add a UI or some variety of terse syntax 
>> so that it’s possible to write this kind of simple action in fewer than 
>> eight lines.
>> 
>> 3. The archive exposes an API that can sum up the annotations, starting from 
>> the beginning of time, all the way up to a specific point in time, and then 
>> return the computed state of the game plus a list of events by office. My 
>> report scripts will become “query this API in a specific way, and feed the 
>> resulting data to a template to render it for email.”
>> 
>> The idea is that instead of trying to reduce Agora to a set of formal 
>> actions, I instead want to keep the prose forms as the primary documents and 
>> allow formal note-taking alongside them. Many of Agora’s state changes are 
>> formalizable, and from there, those parts of Agora’s state are computable, 
>> so this could take a bunch of load off for computing those parts of the game.
>> 
>> I’ve had some success with a reduced version of this approach for the office 
>> of Surveyor. All Surveyor’s reports have been generated by a 
>> built-to-purpose Python script that applies the same principles to a set of 
>> local YAML files instead of a web API.
>> 
>> -o
>> 



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Election Campaigns

[Kerim Aydin]

On Thu, 28 Sep 2017, Nic Evans wrote:
> On 09/28/17 14:26, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 28 Sep 2017, Alex Smith wrote:
> >> On Thu, 2017-09-28 at 19:06 +, Alexis Hunt wrote:
> >>> I submit the following and spend 1 AP to pend it:
> >>> I pend this proposal for 1 AP.
> >> IIRC these both work, leaving you out of AP for the week.
> > I don't think so.
> >
> > CFJ 3529 found recently that setting a switch to a value it had 
> > already was a null-op (didn't count as "flipping the switch").
> >
> > There was some discussion of "if you pay a fee for an action that
> > fails to do anything, you don't lose the money" recently.  I 
> > thought the conclusion was that you didn't lose the money, but I
> > don't think it was CFJ'd.
> 
> I think there's a difference between 'the action fails to happen' and
> 'the action fails to have a meaningful effect'. Pending something
> already pended might be more of the latter.

That was exactly the difference discussed in CFJ 3529.  I forgot, but
I actually used Pending as the example in the judgement:

>From https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/?3529

> For other practical game effects, if you tried to pay a fee to flip a
> Proposal to pending, and it was already pending, you'd probably not want
> to lose the money, and the general consensus is that the whole
> transaction fails (note, this has not been fully adjudicated, this is a
> consensus from discussion).

[...]

> So in balance, the "no change" = "no flip" is textually correct, and
> also, on balance, in the better interests of the game.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Election Campaigns

[Nic Evans]

On 09/28/17 14:26, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> On Thu, 28 Sep 2017, Alex Smith wrote:
>> On Thu, 2017-09-28 at 19:06 +, Alexis Hunt wrote:
>>> I submit the following and spend 1 AP to pend it:
>>> I pend this proposal for 1 AP.
>> IIRC these both work, leaving you out of AP for the week.
> I don't think so.
>
> CFJ 3529 found recently that setting a switch to a value it had 
> already was a null-op (didn't count as "flipping the switch").
>
> There was some discussion of "if you pay a fee for an action that
> fails to do anything, you don't lose the money" recently.  I 
> thought the conclusion was that you didn't lose the money, but I
> don't think it was CFJ'd.

I think there's a difference between 'the action fails to happen' and
'the action fails to have a meaningful effect'. Pending something
already pended might be more of the latter.



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Archival disclosure

[Gaelan Steele]

I’ll ty and get one out today. Also, why are there mail headers here?

> On Sep 28, 2017, at 11:01 AM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
> 
> Return-Path: 
> Delivered-To: gae...@mail.canishe.com
> Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
>by mail.canishe.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F43041E6B0D
>for ; Thu, 28 Sep 2017 11:02:50 -0700 (PDT)
> X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mail.canishe.com
> Received: from mail.canishe.com ([127.0.0.1])
>by localhost (mail.canishe.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
>with ESMTP id Ag0NhmEU5t4M for ;
>Thu, 28 Sep 2017 11:02:43 -0700 (PDT)
> Received: from vps.qoid.us (unknown [71.19.146.223])
>by mail.canishe.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 8CF5841E6B01
>for ; Thu, 28 Sep 2017 11:02:43 -0700 (PDT)
> Received: (qmail 24208 invoked from network); 28 Sep 2017 18:02:39 -
> Received: from vps.qoid.us (127.0.0.1)
>  by vps.qoid.us with SMTP; 28 Sep 2017 18:02:39 -
> Delivered-To: agn-agora-discuss...@agoranomic.org
> Received: (qmail 24192 invoked from network); 28 Sep 2017 18:02:37 -
> Received: from mxout25.s.uw.edu (140.142.234.175)
> by vps.qoid.us with SMTP; 28 Sep 2017 18:02:37 -
> Received: from smtp.washington.edu (smtp.washington.edu [140.142.234.163])
> by mxout25.s.uw.edu (8.14.4+UW14.03/8.14.4+UW16.03) with ESMTP id
> v8SI10q100
> (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK)
> for ; Thu, 28 Sep 2017 11:01:01 -0700
> X-Auth-Received: from hymn01.u.washington.edu (hymn01.u.washington.edu
> [140.142.9.110]) (authenticated authid=mailadm)
> by smtp.washington.edu (8.14.4+UW14.03/8.14.4+UW16.03) with ESMTP id
> v8SI10Z7003506
> (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT)
> for ; Thu, 28 Sep 2017 11:01:00 -0700
> X-UW-Orig-Sender: mail...@smtp.washington.edu
> X-Auth-Received: from [161.55.112.117] by hymn01.u.washington.edu via HTTP;
> Thu, 28 Sep 2017 11:01:00 PDT
> Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2017 11:01:00 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Kerim Aydin 
> To: "Agora Nomic discussions (DF)" 
> Subject: Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Archival disclosure
> In-Reply-To: 
> Message-ID: 
> User-Agent: Web Alpine 2.01 (LRH 1302 2010-07-20)
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
> X-PMX-Version: 6.3.3.2656215, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.2.2107409,
> Antispam-Data: 2017.9.28.175115, AntiVirus-Engine: 5.36.0,
> AntiVirus-Data: 2017.5.15.5360003
> X-PMX-Server: mxout25.s.uw.edu
> X-Uwash-Spam: Gauge=, Probability=8%, Report='
> HTML_00_01 0.05, HTML_00_10 0.05, BODYTEXTP_SIZE_3000_LESS 0,
> BODY_SIZE_1000_LESS 0, BODY_SIZE_2000_LESS 0, BODY_SIZE_5000_LESS 0,
> BODY_SIZE_500_599 0, BODY_SIZE_7000_LESS 0, DATE_TZ_NA 0, IN_REP_TO 0,
> LEGITIMATE_SIGNS 0, MSG_THREAD 0, NO_CTA_URI_FOUND 0, NO_URI_FOUND 0,
> NO_URI_HTTPS 0, __BOUNCE_CHALLENGE_SUBJ 0, __BOUNCE_NDR_SUBJ_EXEMPT 0, __CT 0,
> __CTE 0, __CT_TEXT_PLAIN 0, __HAS_FROM 0, __HAS_MSGID 0, __IN_REP_TO 0,
> __MIME_TEXT_ONLY 0, __MIME_TEXT_P 0, __MIME_TEXT_P1 0, __MIME_VERSION 0,
> __NO_HTML_TAG_RAW 0, __SANE_MSGID 0, __SUBJ_ALPHA_END 0, __SUBJ_ALPHA_NEGATE 
> 0,
> __TO_MALFORMED_2 0, __TO_NAME 0, __TO_NAME_DIFF_FROM_ACC 0, __TO_REAL_NAMES 0,
> __USER_AGENT 0'
> X-BeenThere: agora-discussion@agoranomic.org
> X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
> Precedence: list
> List-Id: "Agora Nomic discussions \(DF\)" 
> List-Unsubscribe: 
> , 
> 
> List-Archive: 
> 
> List-Post: 
> List-Help: 
> List-Subscribe: 
> , 
> 
> Reply-To: "Agora Nomic discussions \(DF\)" 
> Errors-To: agora-discussion-boun...@agoranomic.org
> Sender: "agora-discussion" 
> 
> 
> 
>> On Thu, 28 Sep 2017, Gaelan Steele wrote:
>> [sits in corner with my Ruby-powered ruleset]
>> 
>> Gaelan
> 
> Hey Gaelan,
> 
> Is there a chance you will get an SLR up in the next day or so before the 
> end of the month?  My reason is specific - I was foolish enough in the
> Fearmongor proposal to require making a random rule selection from the
> plantonic ruleset (rather than from an LR) before the end of the month, 
> and in this case the most recent SLR is quite different than current.  I 
> can manage it, but if 

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Election Campaigns

[Kerim Aydin]

On Thu, 28 Sep 2017, Alex Smith wrote:
> On Thu, 2017-09-28 at 19:06 +, Alexis Hunt wrote:
> > I submit the following and spend 1 AP to pend it:
> > I pend this proposal for 1 AP.
> 
> IIRC these both work, leaving you out of AP for the week.

I don't think so.

CFJ 3529 found recently that setting a switch to a value it had 
already was a null-op (didn't count as "flipping the switch").

There was some discussion of "if you pay a fee for an action that
fails to do anything, you don't lose the money" recently.  I 
thought the conclusion was that you didn't lose the money, but I
don't think it was CFJ'd.

DIS: Re: BUS: Election Campaigns

[Alex Smith]

On Thu, 2017-09-28 at 19:06 +, Alexis Hunt wrote:
> I submit the following and spend 1 AP to pend it:
> I pend this proposal for 1 AP.

IIRC these both work, leaving you out of AP for the week.

-- 
ais523

Re: DIS: Various questions

[Alex Smith]

On Thu, 2017-09-28 at 14:24 -0400, ATMunn . wrote:
> What exactly is quorum? I read rule 879 stating that it's a thing,
> but it doesn't seem to explain what it is and what it means.

It's a mechanism that causes votes to end with no result if not enough
people participate in them. This exists in both Agora and in real-life
legislative systems for much the same reason: it prevents a small
minority of people forcing something through while other people aren't
paying attention.

More specifically, quorum in Agora is a number attached to Agoran
Decisions. See rules 955 and 2168 for the precise effect it has, but at
a rough approximation, it causes voting periods to be first extended,
and then ended with no useful result, if fewer people than quorum have
a valid vote on the decision.

Quorum's also connected to PRESENT votes; a vote of PRESENT helps to
satisfy the quorum restriction even though it doesn't express an
opinion on the decision itself. So if, e.g., you don't care about
whether a proposal passes or don't want to express an opinion, but
don't think that there's an attempt at foul play on the proposal or to
force it through, you can vote PRESENT to reduce the chance it ends up
inquorate, whilst allowing other players' votes to determine whether it
actually passes.

-- 
ais523

Re: DIS: Various questions

[Kerim Aydin]

On Thu, 28 Sep 2017, ATMunn . wrote:
> What exactly is quorum? I read rule 879 stating that it's a thing, 
> but it doesn't seem to explain what it is and what it means.

R955:  "If there is more than one option, and the number of valid 
ballots is less than the quorum of that decision, the outcome is 
instead FAILED QUORUM."

Re: DIS: Various questions

[ATMunn .]

What exactly is quorum? I read rule 879 stating that it's a thing, but it
doesn't seem to explain what it is and what it means.

On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 7:37 AM, VJ Rada  wrote:

> >> On Sep 24, 2017, at 10:41 AM, ATMunn .  wrote:
> >
> > A few more questions about offices:
> >
> > When do elections happen? Just whenever the ADoP feels like starting one?
> >Whenever someone starts one with either support, vacancy, or the
> expiration of 90 days.
>
> Or when the ADoP feels like it :). And it's 4 support, so it's hard to
> get. But yeah I've abused my ADoP power a few times already to get
> more equitable elections.
>
> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 9:30 PM, VJ Rada  wrote:
> >>One office that I could go for that doesn't seem too difficult is the
>  Tailor. If an election for it comes up, I'll definitely vote for
>  myself.
> >
> > G. actually won that election like two days ago :(
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 11:05 AM, ATMunn . 
> wrote:
> >> On second thought, I don't think I really want the responsibilities of
> an
> >> office yet. I think I'll stay unemployed for now.
> >>
> >> On Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 3:26 PM, ATMunn . 
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Thanks, everyone, for your answers.
> >>>
> >>> I'm not too interested in the Superintendent office, so I don't think
> I'll
> >>> go for that.
> >>> I could go for the Referee, since o said e wouldn't mind me taking it,
> but
> >>> I'm not really sure I want it either.
> >>>
> >>> One office that I could go for that doesn't seem too difficult is the
> >>> Tailor. If an election for it comes up, I'll definitely vote for
> myself. (Or
> >>> could I deputize for it? I still don't fully understand the
> deputisation
> >>> thing)
> >>>
> >>> On Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 2:35 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> >>>  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  > On Sep 23, 2017, at 2:10 PM, Owen Jacobson 
> wrote:
>  >
>  >
>  > * Voting to enter a CFJ into moot if there’s a serious doubt about
> the
>  > judgement (r. 911, rare),
> 
>  This has happened for the first time relatively recently and it has
> come
>  up a few times since.
> 
>  > * Voting to win the game (r. 2482, rare),
> 
>  Something is supposed to be happening in regards to this
> 
>  > * Voting for a proposal author to win the Silver Quill for the year
> (r.
>  > 2444, rare).
> 
>  And this...
> 
>  
>  Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
>  p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > From V.J. Rada
>
>
>
> --
> From V.J. Rada
>

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Archival disclosure

[Kerim Aydin]

On Thu, 28 Sep 2017, Gaelan Steele wrote:
> [sits in corner with my Ruby-powered ruleset]
> 
> Gaelan

Hey Gaelan,

Is there a chance you will get an SLR up in the next day or so before the 
end of the month?  My reason is specific - I was foolish enough in the
Fearmongor proposal to require making a random rule selection from the
plantonic ruleset (rather than from an LR) before the end of the month, 
and in this case the most recent SLR is quite different than current.  I 
can manage it, but if you know you'll get a doc out soon, I'll wait...

-G.

Re: DIS: Proto: Election Campaigns

[Alexis Hunt]

On Wed, 27 Sep 2017 at 23:06 Owen Jacobson  wrote:

>
> On Sep 27, 2017, at 1:35 PM, Alexis Hunt  wrote:
>
> On Wed, 27 Sep 2017 at 13:30 VJ Rada  wrote:
>
>> I mean I like the interim thing because it fixes the ADoP's unlimited
>> power and gives other people to call elections when they're actually
>> needed. I would like the Campaign Proposals if it was just
>> for...say... the Prime Minister. But I don't like going through all
>> that for uncontested 2-0 Superintendent elections, for example.
>>
>
> Hmm, there should be something for uncontested elections: if they don't
> have a proposal, just install em; if they do, run the proposal and install
> em if it passes.
>
>
> Given that persons can become candidates for an office mid-election, I
> don’t see how this is possible.
>
> -o
>

I think it's reasonable to say that if you don't become a candidate in the
first week, it's fine to just end the election there. In practice, we
currently have a shorter timeline because you need to express interest by
the time people start voting. The main reason I allowed people to continue
becoming candidates during a vote is there's little harm to doing
otherwise, but I don't think we need to say that's some form of inviolable
right.

I think the other thing I want to do is make it so that the "your proposal
must pass to be elected" bit is optional.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Archival disclosure

[Gaelan Steele]

[sits in corner with my Ruby-powered ruleset]

Gaelan

> On Sep 28, 2017, at 6:38 AM, ATMunn .  wrote:
> 
> Sounds interesting. I also see that you're using Python, my favorite 
> programming language. Nice.
> 
>> On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 3:28 AM, Owen Jacobson  wrote:
>> > This is the first stage of an attempt to create an annotation system 
>> > designed to formalize game state changes by attaching formal descriptions 
>> > of those changes to documents, represented by email messages. At this 
>> > time, I plan only to archive messages, but there will be a read element 
>> > allowing anonymous users to read and enumerate messages from the archive 
>> > in the near future.
>> 
>> The broader scheme here is this:
>> 
>> 1. A client app forwards public messages to the archive. They sit in an 
>> “unannotated messages” queue until someone - me, probably - picks them up 
>> and annotates them.
>> 
>> 2. A user annotates each message with a short formal description of the 
>> game-state changes imposed by a message. These annotations are mutable, so 
>> mistaken annotations are not a permanent problem, and are versioned so that 
>> vandalism can be undone. I haven’t worked out the exact schema for these 
>> annotations, yet, but the concept I’m working with is loosely based on the 
>> RFC 6902 JSON Patch format, adapted for Agora’s specific needs. For example, 
>> an annotation transferring shinies might read, in YAML form for readability:
>> 
>> > - op: event
>> >   office: Secretary
>> >   summary: o paid Ørjan 1 sh.
>> >
>> > - op: transfer
>> >   from: /Shinies/Player/o
>> >   to: /Shinies/Player/Ørjan
>> >   delta: 1
>> 
>> Obviously, this is an awkward format, but it has some nice properties that I 
>> think make it worth building on. I’m still tweaking the actual format for 
>> annotaitons, and it’s likely I’ll add a UI or some variety of terse syntax 
>> so that it’s possible to write this kind of simple action in fewer than 
>> eight lines.
>> 
>> 3. The archive exposes an API that can sum up the annotations, starting from 
>> the beginning of time, all the way up to a specific point in time, and then 
>> return the computed state of the game plus a list of events by office. My 
>> report scripts will become “query this API in a specific way, and feed the 
>> resulting data to a template to render it for email.”
>> 
>> The idea is that instead of trying to reduce Agora to a set of formal 
>> actions, I instead want to keep the prose forms as the primary documents and 
>> allow formal note-taking alongside them. Many of Agora’s state changes are 
>> formalizable, and from there, those parts of Agora’s state are computable, 
>> so this could take a bunch of load off for computing those parts of the game.
>> 
>> I’ve had some success with a reduced version of this approach for the office 
>> of Surveyor. All Surveyor’s reports have been generated by a 
>> built-to-purpose Python script that applies the same principles to a set of 
>> local YAML files instead of a web API.
>> 
>> -o
> 

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Arbitor] Experimental Bench procedure

[Kerim Aydin]

On Thu, 28 Sep 2017, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
> I would be happy to take night court cases, if you ever start to be 
> overloaded.
> 
> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com

Thanks!  I'll put you on that list.  Hard to tell if that distinction will
be used frequently or occasionally...

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Arbitor] Experimental Bench procedure

[Kerim Aydin]

On Thu, 28 Sep 2017, Ørjan Johansen wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Sep 2017, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> 
> > Experimental procedure for assigning CFJs.  You can just tell me
> > what Court you want to be on.  Favoring still works of course.
> > Comments welcome.
> 
> Is this allowed by the "reasonably equal opportunities to judge" clause?

The rule requires "all interested players have reasonably equal 
opportunities to judge."  The definition of 'interested' is not strongly 
regulated (or regulated at all).

There's a couple ways to interpret what I'm doing:

1.  Interest isn't binary but a sliding scale to weight relative equality 
of opportunities.

2.  The difference between "day" and "weekend" is the difference between
weekend judges turning off their "interest" every other rotation, so
I'm just allowing that to be automatic.  Between "day" and "night"
I'm not sure there will be a volume difference, just different types
of cases (but I'm not sure on that one).

-G.

 

DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Passive Income

[Kerim Aydin]

On Thu, 28 Sep 2017, Owen Jacobson wrote: 
> Create a new rule, titled "Distributing Assets", with power 1, whose text is
> 
> To “distribute” a quantity of a fungible asset to a set of recipients is 
> to
> transfer one instance of that asset at a time to the recipient that owns
> the least number of instances of that asset, until either no more 
> instances
> of the asset are eligible to be distributed, or the number of instances so
> transferred equals the quantity to be distributed. If, when distributing a
> specific asset, two or more recipients each own the least number of
> instances of that asset, then the recipient that most recently became
> eligible to own the asset SHALL receive the asset being distributed.
> 
> Create a rule, titled "Passive Income", with power 2, whose text is
> 
> The Tax Rate is a singleton natural switch which can take values between 0
> and 100, inclusive, tracked by the Secretary. The Tax Rate has a default
> value of 50.
> 
> Whenever Agora receives Shinies from another owner other than itself, the
> Secretary CAN cause Agora to distribute a percentage of that payment equal
> to the Tax Rate to all players, and SHALL do so in a timely fashion. As
> part of eir weekly duties, the Secretary SHALL do so for all payments to
> Agora that have not yet been distributed.

I'm concerned with mechanism technicalities - unless I'm misreading, this 
requires 
a lot of unit transfers ("1 for G., 1 for o, 1 for PSS, 1 more for G") and
since they're all linked under a single distribution (distribution works on the
"set") for which group properties have to be determined ("least"), does getting 
a
single one wrong invalidate the whole lot?  Or just some?

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Archival disclosure

[ATMunn .]

Sounds interesting. I also see that you're using Python, my favorite
programming language. Nice.

On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 3:28 AM, Owen Jacobson  wrote:

> > This is the first stage of an attempt to create an annotation system
> designed to formalize game state changes by attaching formal descriptions
> of those changes to documents, represented by email messages. At this time,
> I plan only to archive messages, but there will be a read element allowing
> anonymous users to read and enumerate messages from the archive in the near
> future.
>
> The broader scheme here is this:
>
> 1. A client app forwards public messages to the archive. They sit in an
> “unannotated messages” queue until someone - me, probably - picks them up
> and annotates them.
>
> 2. A user annotates each message with a short formal description of the
> game-state changes imposed by a message. These annotations are mutable, so
> mistaken annotations are not a permanent problem, and are versioned so that
> vandalism can be undone. I haven’t worked out the exact schema for these
> annotations, yet, but the concept I’m working with is loosely based on the
> RFC 6902 JSON Patch format, adapted for Agora’s specific needs. For
> example, an annotation transferring shinies might read, in YAML form for
> readability:
>
> > - op: event
> >   office: Secretary
> >   summary: o paid Ørjan 1 sh.
> >
> > - op: transfer
> >   from: /Shinies/Player/o
> >   to: /Shinies/Player/Ørjan
> >   delta: 1
>
> Obviously, this is an awkward format, but it has some nice properties that
> I think make it worth building on. I’m still tweaking the actual format for
> annotaitons, and it’s likely I’ll add a UI or some variety of terse syntax
> so that it’s possible to write this kind of simple action in fewer than
> eight lines.
>
> 3. The archive exposes an API that can sum up the annotations, starting
> from the beginning of time, all the way up to a specific point in time, and
> then return the computed state of the game plus a list of events by office.
> My report scripts will become “query this API in a specific way, and feed
> the resulting data to a template to render it for email.”
>
> The idea is that instead of trying to reduce Agora to a set of formal
> actions, I instead want to keep the prose forms as the primary documents
> and allow formal note-taking alongside them. Many of Agora’s state changes
> are formalizable, and from there, those parts of Agora’s state are
> computable, so this could take a bunch of load off for computing those
> parts of the game.
>
> I’ve had some success with a reduced version of this approach for the
> office of Surveyor. All Surveyor’s reports have been generated by a
> built-to-purpose Python script that applies the same principles to a set of
> local YAML files instead of a web API.
>
> -o
>

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: My first proposal!

[ATMunn .]

Wait, did I not send it to a-b again? Crap.

On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 11:29 PM, Owen Jacobson  wrote:

>
> > On Sep 27, 2017, at 9:20 PM, ATMunn .  wrote:
> >
> > [Okay. I think I've got it as I want. I'm going to pend it now, and this
> time for real.]
> > I retract the proposal "Cheer Up v6?" and create and pend the following
> proposal in its place:
>
> With AP or with shinies? (Remember to send your reply to a-b!)
>
> -o
>
>

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: My first proposal!

[ATMunn .]

Oh, you mean for when I post a new reply. Okay.

On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 9:27 AM, ATMunn .  wrote:

> Wait, did I not send it to a-b again? Crap.
>
> On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 11:29 PM, Owen Jacobson  wrote:
>
>>
>> > On Sep 27, 2017, at 9:20 PM, ATMunn .  wrote:
>> >
>> > [Okay. I think I've got it as I want. I'm going to pend it now, and
>> this time for real.]
>> > I retract the proposal "Cheer Up v6?" and create and pend the following
>> proposal in its place:
>>
>> With AP or with shinies? (Remember to send your reply to a-b!)
>>
>> -o
>>
>>
>

DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Passive Income

[Nic Evans]

On 09/28/2017 03:15 AM, Owen Jacobson wrote:

I submit the following proposal:

Title: Passive Income
Author: o
Co-authors: G.
AI: 2.0

Create a new rule, titled "Distributing Assets", with power 1, whose text is

 To “distribute” a quantity of a fungible asset to a set of recipients is to
 transfer one instance of that asset at a time to the recipient that owns
 the least number of instances of that asset, until either no more instances
 of the asset are eligible to be distributed, or the number of instances so
 transferred equals the quantity to be distributed. If, when distributing a
 specific asset, two or more recipients each own the least number of
 instances of that asset, then the recipient that most recently became
 eligible to own the asset SHALL receive the asset being distributed.

Create a rule, titled "Passive Income", with power 2, whose text is

 The Tax Rate is a singleton natural switch which can take values between 0
 and 100, inclusive, tracked by the Secretary. The Tax Rate has a default
 value of 50.

 Whenever Agora receives Shinies from another owner other than itself, the
 Secretary CAN cause Agora to distribute a percentage of that payment equal
 to the Tax Rate to all players, and SHALL do so in a timely fashion. As
 part of eir weekly duties, the Secretary SHALL do so for all payments to
 Agora that have not yet been distributed.

Interesting way to implement a flat tax. But as such, it relies on the 
rich players spending enough. If poorer players are spending more or the 
same amount as richer players, then it's just benefiting the rich.

DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Passive Income

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

I like this.

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



> On Sep 28, 2017, at 4:15 AM, Owen Jacobson  wrote:
> 
> I submit the following proposal:
> 
> Title: Passive Income
> Author: o
> Co-authors: G.
> AI: 2.0
> 
> Create a new rule, titled "Distributing Assets", with power 1, whose text is
> 
>To “distribute” a quantity of a fungible asset to a set of recipients is to
>transfer one instance of that asset at a time to the recipient that owns
>the least number of instances of that asset, until either no more instances
>of the asset are eligible to be distributed, or the number of instances so
>transferred equals the quantity to be distributed. If, when distributing a
>specific asset, two or more recipients each own the least number of
>instances of that asset, then the recipient that most recently became
>eligible to own the asset SHALL receive the asset being distributed.
> 
> Create a rule, titled "Passive Income", with power 2, whose text is
> 
>The Tax Rate is a singleton natural switch which can take values between 0
>and 100, inclusive, tracked by the Secretary. The Tax Rate has a default
>value of 50.
> 
>Whenever Agora receives Shinies from another owner other than itself, the
>Secretary CAN cause Agora to distribute a percentage of that payment equal
>to the Tax Rate to all players, and SHALL do so in a timely fashion. As
>part of eir weekly duties, the Secretary SHALL do so for all payments to
>Agora that have not yet been distributed.
> 



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Archival disclosure

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

I would be happy to help you code or annotate, whoever word you are using, each 
message.

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



> On Sep 28, 2017, at 3:28 AM, Owen Jacobson  wrote:
> 
>> This is the first stage of an attempt to create an annotation system 
>> designed to formalize game state changes by attaching formal descriptions of 
>> those changes to documents, represented by email messages. At this time, I 
>> plan only to archive messages, but there will be a read element allowing 
>> anonymous users to read and enumerate messages from the archive in the near 
>> future.
> 
> The broader scheme here is this:
> 
> 1. A client app forwards public messages to the archive. They sit in an 
> “unannotated messages” queue until someone - me, probably - picks them up and 
> annotates them.
> 
> 2. A user annotates each message with a short formal description of the 
> game-state changes imposed by a message. These annotations are mutable, so 
> mistaken annotations are not a permanent problem, and are versioned so that 
> vandalism can be undone. I haven’t worked out the exact schema for these 
> annotations, yet, but the concept I’m working with is loosely based on the 
> RFC 6902 JSON Patch format, adapted for Agora’s specific needs. For example, 
> an annotation transferring shinies might read, in YAML form for readability:
> 
>> - op: event
>>  office: Secretary
>>  summary: o paid Ørjan 1 sh.
>> 
>> - op: transfer
>>  from: /Shinies/Player/o
>>  to: /Shinies/Player/Ørjan
>>  delta: 1
> 
> Obviously, this is an awkward format, but it has some nice properties that I 
> think make it worth building on. I’m still tweaking the actual format for 
> annotaitons, and it’s likely I’ll add a UI or some variety of terse syntax so 
> that it’s possible to write this kind of simple action in fewer than eight 
> lines.
> 
> 3. The archive exposes an API that can sum up the annotations, starting from 
> the beginning of time, all the way up to a specific point in time, and then 
> return the computed state of the game plus a list of events by office. My 
> report scripts will become “query this API in a specific way, and feed the 
> resulting data to a template to render it for email.”
> 
> The idea is that instead of trying to reduce Agora to a set of formal 
> actions, I instead want to keep the prose forms as the primary documents and 
> allow formal note-taking alongside them. Many of Agora’s state changes are 
> formalizable, and from there, those parts of Agora’s state are computable, so 
> this could take a bunch of load off for computing those parts of the game.
> 
> I’ve had some success with a reduced version of this approach for the office 
> of Surveyor. All Surveyor’s reports have been generated by a built-to-purpose 
> Python script that applies the same principles to a set of local YAML files 
> instead of a web API.
> 
> -o



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

DIS: Re: BUS: [Arbitor] Experimental Bench procedure

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

I would be happy to take night court cases, if you ever start to be overloaded.

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



> On Sep 28, 2017, at 12:01 AM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> Experimental procedure for assigning CFJs.  You can just tell me
> what Court you want to be on.  Favoring still works of course.
> Comments welcome.
> 
> 
> Night Court [Assigned quick turnaround cases (either trivial or game-urgent), 
> generally
> promises to judge in 4 days].
> 
>  G.
> 
> 
> Day Court [Default, rotate roster through as needed].
> 
> Publius
> o
> Aris
> Gaelan
> Alexis
> 
> 
> Weekend Court [Backup/partial rotation, generally gets half as
>   many cases each as Day Court].
> 
>  V.J. Rada
>  Nichdel
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

DIS: Re: BUS: Take-backsies

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

Could ou explain the issue? I see a way to scam it to oneself, but I don't see 
an attempt by you to do that.

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



> On Sep 27, 2017, at 9:41 PM, Owen Jacobson  wrote:
> 
> 
>> On Sep 27, 2017, at 12:35 PM, grok (caleb vines)  wrote:
>> 
>> I transfer one stamp to Agora.
> 
> I cause Agora to transfer this stamp to me.
> 
> I pay Agora 1 sh. to CFJ on the statement “I caused Agora to transfer this 
> stamp to me in this message.”
> 
> I think rule 2166 (“Assets”) has a clarity problem around this action, so 
> this is a test case CFJ. Either I own one of grok’s Stamps now, or Agora 
> does; I don’t care which it is, I just want to know so that I can recordkeep 
> similar actions in the future
> 
> The rule in question reads, in part:
> 
>> Each asset has exactly one owner. If an asset would otherwise lack an owner, 
>> it is owned by Agora. If an asset's backing document restricts its ownership 
>> to a class of entities, then that asset CANNOT be gained by or transferred 
>> to an entity outside that class, and is destroyed if it is owned by an 
>> entity outside that class (except for Agora, in which case any player CAN 
>> transfer or destroy it without objection). The restrictions in the previous 
>> sentence are subject to modification by its backing document.
> 
> The backing document for stamps, rule 2498 (“Economic Wins”) presently reads:
> 
>> Stamps are an asset. The Secretary is the recordkeepor of Stamps.
>> 
>> The Stamp Value is always 1/5th the current Floating Value.
>> 
>> Once per month, a player CAN, by announcement, create a stamp
>> by transferring the Stamp Value, in shinies, to Agora.
>> 
>> If Agora owns at least as many Shinies as the current Stamp
>> Value, a player CAN, by announcement, destroy a Stamp e owns to
>> cause Agora to transfer the Stamp Value, in shinies, to emself.
>> 
>> If a player owns Stamps created by at least 10 different
>> players, e CAN win the game by announcement, by destroying 10
>> stamps e owns, each of which was created by a distinct player.
>> 
> 
> 
> I submit the following proposal, and pend it for 1 AP:
> 
> Title: Stamp Floating Derived Value Patch
> Author: o
> AI: 1.0
> 
> Amend rule 2498 (“Economic Wins”) by removing the paragraph that begins “The 
> Stamp Value is”.
> 



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Trouble with agencies

[Alex Smith]

On Thu, 2017-09-28 at 09:24 +0200, Ørjan Johansen wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Sep 2017, VJ Rada wrote:
> 
> > To avoid committing fraud I hereby specify that the document I am
> > attempting to ratify is inaccurate to the extent that no such agency
> > exists. Oh, I made a typo in the below ratification as well. I object
> > to that ratification and intend to, without objection, ratify this:
> 
> As others have mentioned, this kind of ratification has problems. The 
> system is designed to ratify _old documents_ with _simulated 
> retroactivity_ - not a _new_ document containing _retroactive claims_. I 
> see at least two issues:
> 
> (1) The impossibility of rule changes, that others have mentioned.
> (2) It is really not obvious what
>   "the gamestate is modified to what it would be
>    if, at the time the ratified document was published, the
>    gamestate had been minimally modified to make the ratified
>    document as true and accurate as possible"
>  means - what is a minimal change _at the time of publishing_ in
>  order to achieve a retroactive claim _much earlier_?
> 
> In your case, the minimality in (2) might plausibly mean that it simply 
> changes "now" the state of the agency itself - but _none_ of the 
> intermediate side effects on other game state that are your real reason 
> for wanting to save it.

(2) has already been found to be a genuine issue that can prevent
ratifications working (and was the cause of a minor crisis in the
past); proposal 6930 (2 January 2011) was the fix proposal. Reading
posts from that time is likely to have relevant discussion. (I can't
find a relevant CFJ; that doesn't necessarily mean that there isn't
one, of course, as searching old CFJs can be hard.)

-- 
ais523

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Archival disclosure

[Owen Jacobson]

On Sep 28, 2017, at 4:15 AM, Alex Smith  wrote:

> If you're subscribed to the Agora lists (and I'm pretty sure you are),
> you should also be able to log in to the archive here:
> 

Would you believe, these archives are corrupt according to the more reasonable 
interpretations of the BSD mbox format? I suspect that there may be a very old 
Mailman bug lurking in them.

The agora-business archive contains, in the message

Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2002 00:31:31 +1100 (EST)
From: Steve Gardner 
To: Agora Business 
Message-id: 

a line beginning with the characters ‘From ‘ which is not prefixed with > or 
transformed by any encoding.

I’ll happily consider that my parser may be incorrect, but I’m reasonably sure 
that no BSD mailbox should contain such a line, other than as a message 
delimiter.

It’s not the end of the world, I can easily fix the message in my local copy 
and carry on with life, but: wow.

-o



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Archival disclosure

[Owen Jacobson]

> On Sep 28, 2017, at 4:15 AM, Alex Smith  wrote:
> 
> I recommend doing that sort of bulk download rather than trying to
> piece together archives from current players. (Older messages,
> predating a-b, are another issue and one that may well take some
> Internet-forensics work.)

I’ve done something that I hope is smart, rather than clever, by rigging the 
archive to accept (and retain) multiple “revisions” of the same document. (I 
intend for document revisions and annotation revisions to operate 
independently.) If you submit a second email with the same Message-ID header, 
then either:

* If it’s byte-for-byte identical to the currently-stored version, it’s 
accepted but ignored.
* If it’s not, it creates a new revision, which becomes the current revision of 
that document.

Since the “same email” from different recipients will inevitably vary at least 
by the Received: headers, I _hope_ that the worst that can happen when 
importing emails piecemeal is that the archive will end up with multiple 
revisions of a few messages.

I agree with your advice, nonetheless. No amount of foresight beats ongoing 
thought.

-o



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

DIS: Re: BUS: Archival disclosure

[Alex Smith]

On Thu, 2017-09-28 at 03:05 -0400, Owen Jacobson wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> As part of a project to mechanize some of my reports (and, hopefully,
> others eventually), I will begin archiving public messages to a
> Heroku application in approximately 72 hours, unless someone objects
> before that time. Once I begin archiving, I will retroactively
> archive all public messages I have at my disposal, stretching back
> well over a year; I would also welcome submissions from others who
> have much more substantial archives.

Several archives already exist, at least one of which is public
(; it
doesn't have an easy way to mass-download that I'm aware of). This
means that people are unlikely to object to an additional public
archive.

If you're subscribed to the Agora lists (and I'm pretty sure you are),
you should also be able to log in to the archive here:


This will allow you to bulk-download all the messages that have ever
been sent via a-b (see the "download the full raw archive" link near
the top). Equivalent archives exist for a-o and a-d; edit the URL in
the obvious way. They don't contain the entire history of Agora, as we
haven't always used the lists in question, but they certainly contain a
large portion.

I recommend doing that sort of bulk download rather than trying to
piece together archives from current players. (Older messages,
predating a-b, are another issue and one that may well take some
Internet-forensics work.)

-- 
ais523

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Proposal: Guaranteed Stampage

[Owen Jacobson]

> On Sep 28, 2017, at 3:31 AM, Ørjan Johansen  wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 28 Sep 2017, Owen Jacobson wrote:
> 
>>> On Sep 28, 2017, at 3:09 AM, Ørjan Johansen  wrote:
>>> 
>>> On Tue, 26 Sep 2017, Nic Evans wrote:
>>> 
 Enact a Power 1 rule titled "Stamp Wins" with the following text:
 
   If a player owns 10 stamps with different Creaters, none of which
   have Agora as its Creater, e CAN win by announcement. Doing so
   destroys the specified stamps.
>>> 
>>> Specified where?
>> 
>> In the announcement is the only interpretation that makes sense.
> 
> I wasn't really asking how it _should_ be done, I was asking why the rule 
> doesn't say how it works.
> 
> In particular, there is (1) no requirement to specify, and (2) no requirement 
> that the specification uses the player's own stamps. (Shades of recent scam, 
> anyone?)

Understood. I’m somewhat convinced, on reading of the text, that no other 
interpretation could possibly succeed, but your scam concerns are valid. 
There’s no harm, and plenty to gain, in being explicit.

-o



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Proposal: Guaranteed Stampage

[Ørjan Johansen]

On Thu, 28 Sep 2017, Owen Jacobson wrote:


On Sep 28, 2017, at 3:09 AM, Ørjan Johansen  wrote:

On Tue, 26 Sep 2017, Nic Evans wrote:


Enact a Power 1 rule titled "Stamp Wins" with the following text:

   If a player owns 10 stamps with different Creaters, none of which
   have Agora as its Creater, e CAN win by announcement. Doing so
   destroys the specified stamps.


Specified where?


In the announcement is the only interpretation that makes sense.


I wasn't really asking how it _should_ be done, I was asking why the rule 
doesn't say how it works.


In particular, there is (1) no requirement to specify, and (2) no 
requirement that the specification uses the player's own stamps. (Shades 
of recent scam, anyone?)


Greetings,
Ørjan.

DIS: Re: BUS: Archival disclosure

[Owen Jacobson]

> This is the first stage of an attempt to create an annotation system designed 
> to formalize game state changes by attaching formal descriptions of those 
> changes to documents, represented by email messages. At this time, I plan 
> only to archive messages, but there will be a read element allowing anonymous 
> users to read and enumerate messages from the archive in the near future.

The broader scheme here is this:

1. A client app forwards public messages to the archive. They sit in an 
“unannotated messages” queue until someone - me, probably - picks them up and 
annotates them.

2. A user annotates each message with a short formal description of the 
game-state changes imposed by a message. These annotations are mutable, so 
mistaken annotations are not a permanent problem, and are versioned so that 
vandalism can be undone. I haven’t worked out the exact schema for these 
annotations, yet, but the concept I’m working with is loosely based on the RFC 
6902 JSON Patch format, adapted for Agora’s specific needs. For example, an 
annotation transferring shinies might read, in YAML form for readability:

> - op: event
>   office: Secretary
>   summary: o paid Ørjan 1 sh.
> 
> - op: transfer
>   from: /Shinies/Player/o
>   to: /Shinies/Player/Ørjan
>   delta: 1

Obviously, this is an awkward format, but it has some nice properties that I 
think make it worth building on. I’m still tweaking the actual format for 
annotaitons, and it’s likely I’ll add a UI or some variety of terse syntax so 
that it’s possible to write this kind of simple action in fewer than eight 
lines.

3. The archive exposes an API that can sum up the annotations, starting from 
the beginning of time, all the way up to a specific point in time, and then 
return the computed state of the game plus a list of events by office. My 
report scripts will become “query this API in a specific way, and feed the 
resulting data to a template to render it for email.”

The idea is that instead of trying to reduce Agora to a set of formal actions, 
I instead want to keep the prose forms as the primary documents and allow 
formal note-taking alongside them. Many of Agora’s state changes are 
formalizable, and from there, those parts of Agora’s state are computable, so 
this could take a bunch of load off for computing those parts of the game.

I’ve had some success with a reduced version of this approach for the office of 
Surveyor. All Surveyor’s reports have been generated by a built-to-purpose 
Python script that applies the same principles to a set of local YAML files 
instead of a web API.

-o


signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

DIS: Re: BUS: Trouble with agencies

[Ørjan Johansen]

On Wed, 27 Sep 2017, VJ Rada wrote:


To avoid committing fraud I hereby specify that the document I am
attempting to ratify is inaccurate to the extent that no such agency
exists. Oh, I made a typo in the below ratification as well. I object
to that ratification and intend to, without objection, ratify this:


As others have mentioned, this kind of ratification has problems. The 
system is designed to ratify _old documents_ with _simulated 
retroactivity_ - not a _new_ document containing _retroactive claims_. I 
see at least two issues:


(1) The impossibility of rule changes, that others have mentioned.
(2) It is really not obvious what
 "the gamestate is modified to what it would be
  if, at the time the ratified document was published, the
  gamestate had been minimally modified to make the ratified
  document as true and accurate as possible"
means - what is a minimal change _at the time of publishing_ in
order to achieve a retroactive claim _much earlier_?

In your case, the minimality in (2) might plausibly mean that it simply 
changes "now" the state of the agency itself - but _none_ of the 
intermediate side effects on other game state that are your real reason 
for wanting to save it.


Greetings,
Ørjan.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Proposal: Guaranteed Stampage

[Owen Jacobson]

> On Sep 28, 2017, at 3:09 AM, Ørjan Johansen  wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 26 Sep 2017, Nic Evans wrote:
> 
>> Enact a Power 1 rule titled "Stamp Wins" with the following text:
>> 
>>If a player owns 10 stamps with different Creaters, none of which
>>have Agora as its Creater, e CAN win by announcement. Doing so
>>destroys the specified stamps.
> 
> Specified where?

In the announcement is the only interpretation that makes sense.

Stamps with the same creater are fungible, so it’s likely sufficient to say 
something like

> I destroy 1 of my stamps created by nichdel, and 9 of my stamps created by 
> Ørjan, and win the game.

-o



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

DIS: Re: BUS: Proposal: Guaranteed Stampage

[Ørjan Johansen]

On Tue, 26 Sep 2017, Nic Evans wrote:


Enact a Power 1 rule titled "Stamp Wins" with the following text:

   If a player owns 10 stamps with different Creaters, none of which
   have Agora as its Creater, e CAN win by announcement. Doing so
   destroys the specified stamps.


Specified where?

Greetings,
Ørjan.

DIS: Re: BUS: [Arbitor] Experimental Bench procedure

[Ørjan Johansen]

On Wed, 27 Sep 2017, Kerim Aydin wrote:


Experimental procedure for assigning CFJs.  You can just tell me
what Court you want to be on.  Favoring still works of course.
Comments welcome.


Is this allowed by the "reasonably equal opportunities to judge" clause?

Greetings,
Ørjan.