DIS: Protos: Two Small Offices
There's a couple jobs that aren't necessary but should probably still have an
assigned officer. I tried to write these such that they don't add too much
responsibility while still encouraging them to fulfil the goals of the offices.
First, the Reportor. We've had it before, it gets sporadic usage, and then it
disappears. I think repealing it is a mistake. There's little-to-no legal debt
in having such a simple office, and its existence encourages someone to take
over its responsibility. Sporadic reports are better than none.
I plan to submit the following proposal {
Title: The Reportor
Author: nch
AI: 1.0
Enact a rule titled "The Reportor" with Power=1 and the following text:
{
The Reportor is an office.
The Reportor's weekly report includes a list of notable events,
with citations. The weekly report SHOULD include events in the last
7 days minimum and up to the last weekly Reportor's report at
maximum.
Where 'notable' is used in this rule its meaning is up to the
Reportor's discretion.
}
As far as I know, we currently have the best online resources we've ever had.
But there's little coordination and attention to aging resources. Thus I
propose the Webmastor. The webmastor isn't intended to have any actual
authority over anything, but rather to be responsible in identifying our
resources and any problems that crop up.
I plan to submit the following proposal {
Title: The Webmastor
Author: nch
AI: 1.0
Enact a rule titled "The Webmastor" with Power=1 and the following text:
{
The Webmastor is an office.
The Webmastor's monthly report includes a Directory, a Changelog, a
Warning Log, and an Error Log. The Directory lists notable
currently maintained public resources. The Changelog lists notable
changes to resources. The Warning Log lists notable potential
issues, such as inaccurate or aging resources or unintended issues
with a public resource. The Error Log lists notable losses of
resources - where a resource has become inaccessible, unmaintained,
or unusable. Where 'notable' is used in this rule its meaning is up
to the Webmastor's discretion.
}
--
nch
DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Registrar] May Zombie Auction
On Thu, 7 May 2020 at 00:58, nch via agora-business wrote: > On Wednesday, May 6, 2020 7:51:56 PM CDT James Cook via agora-official wrote: > > I initiate a zombie auction, with the following lots (each zombie a > > separate lot) ordered as follows (highest-bid first): > > > > 1. pikhq > > 2. ATMunn > > 3. Tcbapo > > > > Agora is the Auctioneer, and the Registrar is the Announcer. The > > currency is Coins with a minimum bid of 1. > > > > - Falsifian > > I bid 1 coin on each of the above lots. > -- > nch You bid on the auction as a whole, not on individual lots. This seems to be a common mistake; if I remember to, I'll include a note next time. - Falsifian
DIS: Re: BUS: Re: Contract to win the game by circuitous means
On Thursday, May 7, 2020 9:39:15 AM CDT nch via agora-business wrote: > Gratuitous: > > Some players have argued that the original CFJ is not about actions, this > one unambiguously is. Since the game impact of the CFJ rulings would be > different, I don't think it can be trivially determined, nor is it > IRRELEVANT. > > Additionally, someone has now attempted to perform the described action and > this CFJ is now directly relevant to gamestate. Another reason to not rule > IRRELEVANT. Oops, looks like this CFJ got withdrawn already. Should've read all the threads before responding. -- nch
DIS: Re: BUS: Proposal Criminal Stuff
On 5/7/20 9:52 AM, Rebecca via agora-business wrote: > Amend the title of rule 2531 to "Defendant's Rights" > Amend the title of rule 2479 to "Official Injustice" Per Rule 105, amending a rule and retitling a rule are distinct actions, so this might fail. -- Jason Cobb
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: Contract to win the game by circuitous means
It wouldn't have worked, the sentence purporting to void transfers in an indeterminate way would have still made it unspecified. On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 11:36 PM Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > > On 5/7/2020 6:30 AM, Rebecca via agora-discussion wrote: > > On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 11:26 PM Jason Cobb via agora-discussion < > > agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > > >> On 5/7/20 3:32 AM, Rebecca via agora-business wrote: > >>> I create a contract with the following text > >>> > >>> "Any player may become a party to this contract. Any party to this > >>> contract may act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin away from R. > >> Lee > >>> to emselves. The previous sentence is void and has no effect if a rule > >>> titled "A coin award" was enacted and awarded R. Lee one coin after its > >>> enactment, and then repealed itself. For the avoidance of ambiguity, > the > >>> current position of the said coin does not matter for the purposes of > >> this > >>> contract." > >> > >> > >> By the way, any party to this contract can transfer away all of your > >> coins, so you might want to destroy it. > >> > >> -- > >> Jason Cobb > >> > >> Well, it's indeterminate whether they can or not. > > > > Well sure let's test because the conditional that voids the transfer would > fail, but there's no conditional allowing the transfer: > > I become a party to the above contract. > I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. > I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. > I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. > I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. > I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. > I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. > I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. > I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. > I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. > I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. > I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. > I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. > I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. > I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. > I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. > I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. > I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. > I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. > I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. > I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. > I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. > I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. > I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. > I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. > I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. > I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. > I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. > I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. > I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. > I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. > > -- >From R. Lee
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Contract to win the game by circuitous means
By the way I hope everyone knows I will call all future CFJs with magic about how it is possible to do something just in case of indeterminacy On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 11:32 PM Rebecca wrote: > Oh yes, that in 2166 will do it. Fine, I retract my two most recent CFJs > and destroy my most recent contract. I could just re-CFJ the original CFJ > with slightly different magic words phrasing but that would risk > IRRELEVANCE (for duplication and no change in current game state). h > > On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 11:28 PM Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion < > agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > >> >> >> On 5/7/2020 12:28 AM, Rebecca via agora-business wrote: >> > I create a contract with the following text >> > >> > "Any player may become a party to this contract. Any party to this >> > contract may act on behalf of R. Lee to trasnfer one coin away from em >> to >> > emselves. The previous sentence is void and has no effect if a rule >> titled >> > "A coin award" was enacted and awarded R. Lee one coin after its >> enactment, >> > and then repealed itself. For the avoidance of ambiguity, the current >> > position of the said coin does not matter for the purposes of this >> > contract." >> >> Gratuitous: >> >> You can't do this with a contract, in the way you can't make a paradox by >> conditional announcement (e.g. "If this statement is false, I transfer a >> coin"). >> >> I'll find the precedent before I assign the case, but in R2166 this part: >> "An asset's backing document can generally specify when and how that asset >> is created, destroyed, and transferred." uses "specify" which does not >> allow for indeterminate conditionals - those are unclear and fail. >> >> The sole reason it worked in the previous version is the "text of the >> rules has precedence" concept. (I had some text about this in CFJ 3828 to >> explain why doing it by-rule would lead to paradox but doing it >> by-proposal, without a rule, would outright fail, but it seemed like a >> digression and I cut it). >> >> So if it's in a rule, paradoxical conditionals are still "resolved" as >> indeterminate because those texts have special status. But contracts, >> like announcements, don't, so they fail if they don't clearly specify >> (without ambiguity OR indeterminacy). >> >> This is why you have to be more careful of voting for rules texts than >> when creating other types of backing documents. >> >> >> > > -- > From R. Lee > -- >From R. Lee
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Contract to win the game by circuitous means
On 5/7/2020 6:32 AM, Rebecca via agora-business wrote: > Oh yes, that in 2166 will do it. Fine, I retract my two most recent CFJs > and destroy my most recent contract. I could just re-CFJ the original CFJ > with slightly different magic words phrasing but that would risk > IRRELEVANCE (for duplication and no change in current game state). h Drat I was too slow!
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: Contract to win the game by circuitous means
On 5/7/2020 6:30 AM, Rebecca via agora-discussion wrote: > On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 11:26 PM Jason Cobb via agora-discussion < > agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > >> On 5/7/20 3:32 AM, Rebecca via agora-business wrote: >>> I create a contract with the following text >>> >>> "Any player may become a party to this contract. Any party to this >>> contract may act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin away from R. >> Lee >>> to emselves. The previous sentence is void and has no effect if a rule >>> titled "A coin award" was enacted and awarded R. Lee one coin after its >>> enactment, and then repealed itself. For the avoidance of ambiguity, the >>> current position of the said coin does not matter for the purposes of >> this >>> contract." >> >> >> By the way, any party to this contract can transfer away all of your >> coins, so you might want to destroy it. >> >> -- >> Jason Cobb >> >> Well, it's indeterminate whether they can or not. > Well sure let's test because the conditional that voids the transfer would fail, but there's no conditional allowing the transfer: I become a party to the above contract. I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself. I act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin to myself.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: Contract to win the game by circuitous means
Too late, I already just destroyed i t before you showed up (also ntttpf i think) On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 11:34 PM Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-business wrote: > Well, let's test this. I become a party to the contract. For each coin > currently in R. Lee's possession (I believe 30, but there isn't an > up-to-date Treasuror's report), I transfer it to myself, then for each > coin, if the previous action has succeeded, I transfer it to G. > > Publius Scribonius Scholasticus > > > On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 9:26 AM Jason Cobb via agora-discussion < > agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > > On 5/7/20 3:32 AM, Rebecca via agora-business wrote: > > > I create a contract with the following text > > > > > > "Any player may become a party to this contract. Any party to this > > > contract may act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin away from R. > > Lee > > > to emselves. The previous sentence is void and has no effect if a rule > > > titled "A coin award" was enacted and awarded R. Lee one coin after its > > > enactment, and then repealed itself. For the avoidance of ambiguity, > the > > > current position of the said coin does not matter for the purposes of > > this > > > contract." > > > > > > By the way, any party to this contract can transfer away all of your > > coins, so you might want to destroy it. > > > > -- > > Jason Cobb > > > > > -- >From R. Lee
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: Contract to win the game by circuitous means
On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 11:26 PM Jason Cobb via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > On 5/7/20 3:32 AM, Rebecca via agora-business wrote: > > I create a contract with the following text > > > > "Any player may become a party to this contract. Any party to this > > contract may act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin away from R. > Lee > > to emselves. The previous sentence is void and has no effect if a rule > > titled "A coin award" was enacted and awarded R. Lee one coin after its > > enactment, and then repealed itself. For the avoidance of ambiguity, the > > current position of the said coin does not matter for the purposes of > this > > contract." > > > By the way, any party to this contract can transfer away all of your > coins, so you might want to destroy it. > > -- > Jason Cobb > > Well, it's indeterminate whether they can or not. -- >From R. Lee
DIS: Re: BUS: Contract to win the game by circuitous means
On 5/7/2020 12:28 AM, Rebecca via agora-business wrote: > I create a contract with the following text > > "Any player may become a party to this contract. Any party to this > contract may act on behalf of R. Lee to trasnfer one coin away from em to > emselves. The previous sentence is void and has no effect if a rule titled > "A coin award" was enacted and awarded R. Lee one coin after its enactment, > and then repealed itself. For the avoidance of ambiguity, the current > position of the said coin does not matter for the purposes of this > contract." Gratuitous: You can't do this with a contract, in the way you can't make a paradox by conditional announcement (e.g. "If this statement is false, I transfer a coin"). I'll find the precedent before I assign the case, but in R2166 this part: "An asset's backing document can generally specify when and how that asset is created, destroyed, and transferred." uses "specify" which does not allow for indeterminate conditionals - those are unclear and fail. The sole reason it worked in the previous version is the "text of the rules has precedence" concept. (I had some text about this in CFJ 3828 to explain why doing it by-rule would lead to paradox but doing it by-proposal, without a rule, would outright fail, but it seemed like a digression and I cut it). So if it's in a rule, paradoxical conditionals are still "resolved" as indeterminate because those texts have special status. But contracts, like announcements, don't, so they fail if they don't clearly specify (without ambiguity OR indeterminacy). This is why you have to be more careful of voting for rules texts than when creating other types of backing documents.
DIS: Re: BUS: Re: Contract to win the game by circuitous means
On 5/7/20 3:32 AM, Rebecca via agora-business wrote: > I create a contract with the following text > > "Any player may become a party to this contract. Any party to this > contract may act on behalf of R. Lee to transfer one coin away from R. Lee > to emselves. The previous sentence is void and has no effect if a rule > titled "A coin award" was enacted and awarded R. Lee one coin after its > enactment, and then repealed itself. For the avoidance of ambiguity, the > current position of the said coin does not matter for the purposes of this > contract." By the way, any party to this contract can transfer away all of your coins, so you might want to destroy it. -- Jason Cobb
DIS: Re: BUS: Re: Contract to win the game by circuitous means
On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 11:12 PM Jason Cobb via agora-business < agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > On 5/7/20 3:32 AM, Rebecca via agora-business wrote: > > I call the following CFJ (I bar trigon) > > "It is a possible game action for a player to use the contract contained > in > > this message to act on R. Lee's behalf to transfer a coin". > > I also call the following (unofficially linked) CFJ barring trigon. > > "If the statement in the first CFJ contained in this message is judged > > PARADOXICAL, and that judgement stands for seven days, R. Lee may win the > > game by announcement" > > > Gratuitous: > > R. Lee emself admits that the first CFJ is basically identical to CFJ > 3828. I believe this means it is IRRELEVANT because the case "can be > trivially determined from the outcome of another [...] judicial case > that was not itself judged IRRELEVANT". > > -- > Jason Cobb > > Not trivial (trivial is an extremely low amount of effort). Perhaps there is some other defect with the contract, who knows? -- >From R. Lee
DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] CFJ 3832 Assigned to Trigon
On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 12:14 AM Rebecca via agora-business < agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > 1 > > On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 2:35 PM Aris Merchant via agora-business < > agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > > On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 9:24 PM Kerim Aydin via agora-business > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > On 5/6/2020 6:36 PM, Rebecca wrote: > > > > On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 9:55 AM Reuben Staley wrote: > > > > > > > > > > [snip] > > > > > > >> I judge FALSE. > > > >> > > > >> -- > > > >> Trigon > > > > > > > > You accurately recite our arguments, but you don't actually provide > any > > > > reasoning as to why one is superior to another apart from "I think" > > and so > > > > forth. I intend to group-file a motion to reconsider with 2 support > > > > > > > > > > Hmm, yes I think I might agree but it would be good to know why? I > > > support. Regardless, here's an attempt to clean up the conversation > > > between Aris and R. Lee, for the case record, let me know if I missed > > > anything... > > > > > > I very much appreciate the judge's adoption of my arguments, and I > > sincerely thank em for it. I, of course, agree (this isn't one of > > those cases where I'm making arguments as devil's advocate). However, > > I would like to know precisely which part of my arguments was the > > basis for the decision. It would certainly be helpful in future cases. > > Thus, while continuing to express my approval of the verdict, I > > support and do so. > > > > -Aris > > > I file a motion to reconsider, having 2 support. > > Also this is a notice of honour > -1 Trigon. There are about six paragraphs of introduction to this judgement > and just one of "analysis" The last paragraph of this judgement is exactly > the sort of paragraph to be avoided because it's all waffle and no > argument. "Far more convincing", "doesn't seem to indicate or even imply". > +1 Falsifian timely performance of registrar's duties For the record, I already did so, so you can't file the motion. -Aris > >
