DIS: Re: BUS: Prime Minister Election Attempt

[Rebecca via agora-discussion]

On Sat, Jun 6, 2020 at 4:48 PM Aris Merchant via agora-business <
agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:

> On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 11:42 PM Rebecca via agora-business
>  wrote:
> >
> > Hey, nobody was biting at my attempt to elect other offices, but the
> prime
> > minister election is also due (it has been 91 days). And surely everyone
> > agrees we should elect that office as often as possible, right??
> >
> > I intend with 2 support to initiate a prime minister election
>
> I support. In accordance with tradition, I will not run for a second
> consecutive term (well, the tradition is actually that we don't elect
> someone for two terms in a row, but same difference). I suppose it
> will be my successor who gets to exercise all of the interesting
> powers I'm about to give em. :)
>
> -Aris
>

I intend to run, although I understand my victory is unlikely
-- 
>From R. Lee

DIS: [Promotor] Draft

[Aris Merchant via agora-discussion]

Here's a draft for this midweek distribution.

-Aris
---
I hereby distribute each listed proposal, initiating the Agoran
Decision of whether to adopt it, and removing it from the proposal
pool. For this decision, the vote collector is the Assessor, the
quorum is 7, the voting method is AI-majority, and the valid
options are FOR and AGAINST (PRESENT is also a valid vote, as are
conditional votes).

ID Author(s)AITitle
---
8409*  Aris 3.0   College of Letters, Arts, and Sciences
8410#  Aris 2.2   Promise Powers Patch
8411p  R. Lee   1.0   Contract Lawyers
8412#  R. Lee   1.7   Small Pledge Amendments
8413#  Aris 1.0   Why Track Pendency?
8414#  Aris 2.0   Ministerial Reshuffling
8415*  Aris 3.0   Proposal Recycling Initiative
8416*  Falsifian, G., P.S.S.3.1   Identity theft protection act v1.1
8417#  Aris, G. 1.0   PP [1]
8418*  Aris 3.0   Referenda
8419#  Aris 2.0   Executive Expansion
8420#  G.   2.0   Checks and balances
8421#  nch, Trigon  1.0   Transmutation
8422*  P.S.S., [2]  3.0   No More Numbers!
8423#  P.S.S., G.   2.0   Removing Repetition
8424#  Aris, nch, P.S.S.1.0   Certifiable Patches
8425#  Aris 2.0   Impossibility Defense
8426#  Aris 2.0   Impracticability Defense
8427j  R. Lee   2.0   Slap on the wrist
8428*  Aris 3.0   Pending Pends
8429#  Aris 1.7   Why Limit Clemency?


[1] Properly Prioritized Popular Proposal Proposer Privilege
[2] G., Trigon, Aris, nch

Proposal pool report: At 02:00 UTC, Friday, June 5, the proposal pool
contained the proposals listed above.

Legend: * : Democratic proposal.
# : Ordinary proposal, unset chamber.
e : Economy ministry proposal.
f : Efficiency ministry proposal.
j : Justice ministry proposal.
l : Legislation ministry proposal.
p : Participation ministry proposal.


The full text of the aforementioned proposal(s) is included below.

//
ID: 8409
Title: College of Letters, Arts, and Sciences
Adoption index: 3.0
Author: Aris
Co-authors:


[I fixed the problems pointed out with the last version. I also added an
A.N.A. degree (I hadn't done so previously, because I thought it was
unnecessary, but exceptions are messy). I rephrased and reordered some things
too.]

Amend Rule 1367, "Degrees", by changing it to read as follows:

Certain patent titles are known as degrees. The degrees are

  - Associate of Nomic Artistry(A.N.A.)
  - Associate of Nomic (A.N.)
  - Juris Doctorate of Nomic   (J.N.)
  - Baccalaureate of Nomic Artistry(B.N.A.)
  - Baccalaureate of Nomic (B.N.)
  - Magisteriate of Nomic Artistry (M.N.A)
  - Magisteriate of Nomic  (M.N.)
  - Doctorate of Nomic Artistry(D.N.Art.)
  - Doctorate of Nomic History (D.N.Hist.)
  - Doctorate of Nomic Law (D.N.Law.)
  - Doctorate of Nomic Science (D.N.Sci.)
  - Doctorate of Nomic Philosophy  (D.N.Phil.)

  There are four classes of degrees, ranked in ascending order of merit:
  Associate degrees (A.N.A. and A.N.), Baccalaureate degrees
  (J.N through B.N.), Magisteriate degrees (M.N.A and M.N), and
  Doctorate degrees (D.N.Art. through D.N.Phil.).

  A specified degree CAN be awarded by any player other than the
  awardee, with 2 Agoran consent. It SHOULD only be awarded for the
  publication of an original thesis of scholarly worth (including
  responses to peer-review), published with explicit intent to
  qualify for a degree. The Herald SHOULD coordinate the peer-review
  process and the awarding of degrees.

  Degrees SHOULD be awarded according to the extent to which the thesis
  contributes to Nomic culture or thought: Associate degrees for an
  appreciable contribution, Baccalaureate degrees for a substantial
  contribution, Magisteriate degrees for a remarkable contribution, and
  Doctorate degrees for an exceptional contribution. Any degree at the
  Doctorate level SHOULD take into account the awardee's academic history
  and participation in Agora over time.

  Theses for Artistry degrees SHOULD demonstrate substantial creativity
  and need not be in written form. Theses for all other degrees SHOULD
  demonstrate substantial research or analysis. J.N. and D.N.Law are
  appropriate for high-quality legal analysis, of the sort typical to CFJs,
  but exceeding an ordinary CFJ in depth. The D.N.Hist. degree is
  appropriate for historical research, especially when it presents a
  narrative that educates Agorans about the events of the past. The D

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] DADA Soft Repeal

[Aris Merchant via agora-discussion]

On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 9:49 PM Rebecca via agora-discussion
 wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jun 6, 2020 at 2:40 PM Alex Smith via agora-discussion <
> agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
>
> >  On Friday, 5 June 2020, 19:11:36 GMT+1, James Cook via agora-discussion <
> > agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> > > If a proposal does get enough votes, I think this makes the Assessor
> > > the one who violates the rule, when e resolves it. I guess Aris's "New
> > > Defenses" would protect em. Probably not a big deal.
> >
> > Gratuitous: in the unlikely event that a proposal that would ossify/end
> > Agora does end up being voted FOR, I would prefer the Assessor to not
> > resolve it. If resolving it were illegal, this would give em a good excuse
> > to violate the rules requiring em to resolve it.
> >
> > (For example, if we catch that a proposal has an ossifying effect at some
> > point after the voting period closes, the Assessor delaying the resolution
> > would likely be a necessary step in fixing the situation, buying time to,
> > e.g., pass a proposal to proactively negate the ossifying proposal's
> > effects.)
> >
> > Something similar has happened in other nomics: Wooble once "forfeited"
> > (effectively, deregistered from) B in order to avoid having to resolve a
> > proposal that would end the game. (It was eventually discovered that due to
> > some brokenness earlier, the proposal in question had never existed,
> > although B was dead anyway at that point.)
> >
> > --
> > ais523
> >
>
> Yes, it is a class 2 ( but really class 1) crime to be Tardy on resolving a
> proposal, and it is a class 4 crime to resolve it, ossifying agora. The
> correct course of action for an Assessor who is worried about an ossifying
> proposal is definitely to call a CFJ and not resolve the proposal, and the
> rules encouraging that is not such a bad thing.
>

Note that my proposal, at written, cares about rule power and not
crime class. That's because I didn't want lower power rules to be able
to override SHALLs in higher-powered rules. The obvious solution is to
move the prohibition into AiaN, so it overpowers everything. I may
propose that.

-Aris

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] DADA Soft Repeal

[Rebecca via agora-discussion]

On Sat, Jun 6, 2020 at 2:40 PM Alex Smith via agora-discussion <
agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:

>  On Friday, 5 June 2020, 19:11:36 GMT+1, James Cook via agora-discussion <
> agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> > If a proposal does get enough votes, I think this makes the Assessor
> > the one who violates the rule, when e resolves it. I guess Aris's "New
> > Defenses" would protect em. Probably not a big deal.
>
> Gratuitous: in the unlikely event that a proposal that would ossify/end
> Agora does end up being voted FOR, I would prefer the Assessor to not
> resolve it. If resolving it were illegal, this would give em a good excuse
> to violate the rules requiring em to resolve it.
>
> (For example, if we catch that a proposal has an ossifying effect at some
> point after the voting period closes, the Assessor delaying the resolution
> would likely be a necessary step in fixing the situation, buying time to,
> e.g., pass a proposal to proactively negate the ossifying proposal's
> effects.)
>
> Something similar has happened in other nomics: Wooble once "forfeited"
> (effectively, deregistered from) B in order to avoid having to resolve a
> proposal that would end the game. (It was eventually discovered that due to
> some brokenness earlier, the proposal in question had never existed,
> although B was dead anyway at that point.)
>
> --
> ais523
>

Yes, it is a class 2 ( but really class 1) crime to be Tardy on resolving a
proposal, and it is a class 4 crime to resolve it, ossifying agora. The
correct course of action for an Assessor who is worried about an ossifying
proposal is definitely to call a CFJ and not resolve the proposal, and the
rules encouraging that is not such a bad thing.
-- 
>From R. Lee

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] DADA Soft Repeal

[Alex Smith via agora-discussion]

 On Friday, 5 June 2020, 19:11:36 GMT+1, James Cook via agora-discussion 
 wrote:
> If a proposal does get enough votes, I think this makes the Assessor
> the one who violates the rule, when e resolves it. I guess Aris's "New
> Defenses" would protect em. Probably not a big deal.

Gratuitous: in the unlikely event that a proposal that would ossify/end Agora 
does end up being voted FOR, I would prefer the Assessor to not resolve it. If 
resolving it were illegal, this would give em a good excuse to violate the 
rules requiring em to resolve it.

(For example, if we catch that a proposal has an ossifying effect at some point 
after the voting period closes, the Assessor delaying the resolution would 
likely be a necessary step in fixing the situation, buying time to, e.g., pass 
a proposal to proactively negate the ossifying proposal's effects.)

Something similar has happened in other nomics: Wooble once "forfeited" 
(effectively, deregistered from) B in order to avoid having to resolve a 
proposal that would end the game. (It was eventually discovered that due to 
some brokenness earlier, the proposal in question had never existed, although B 
was dead anyway at that point.)

-- 
ais523  

Re: DIS: [Protos] Rule Violation Options

[Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion]

On 6/5/2020 11:43 AM, James Cook via agora-discussion wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Jun 2020 at 18:20, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion
>  wrote:
>> On 6/5/2020 10:58 AM, James Cook wrote:
>>> On Fri, 5 Jun 2020 at 02:47, Rebecca wrote:
 On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 12:42 PM Aris Merchant wrote:

> What do y'all think of these? If there's a strong consensus for one or
> the other, I'll only submit that one.
>
> -Aris
> ---
> Title: Rule Violations (option 1)
> Adoption index: 3.0
> Author: Aris
> Co-author(s):
>
>
> If the author's proposal "Rule Violations (option 2)" has been or
> would be adopted with a greater proportion of support, then this
> proposal has no effect. Otherwise:
>
> Amend Rule 869, "How to Join and Leave Agora", by appending at the end of
> the
> fourth paragraph:
>   Players SHOULD NOT violate the rules.
>
> ---
> Title: Rule Violations (option 2)
> Adoption index: 3.0
> Author: Aris
> Co-author(s):
>
>
> If the author's proposal "Rule Violations (option 1)" has been or
> would be adopted with a greater proportion of support, then this
> proposal has no effect. Otherwise:
>
> Amend Rule 869, "How to Join and Leave Agora", by appending at the end of
> the
> fourth paragraph:
>   Players SHOULD NOT violate the rules doing so is manifestly in the
>   best interests of the game due to extraordinary circumstances.
>

 I would vote against both because they both add text to the rules that we
 don't need and both are already perfectly implicit anyway. But I would
 greatly prefer the first one, given a choice (the second also has a typo,
 it is missing the word "unless")
>>>
>>> The first version also seems implicit to me. If we both feel that way
>>> I take that as evidence it might not actually resolve our
>>> disagreement. I think I would be PRESENT or a weak FOR on that one.
>>
>> When you talk about "implicit", it strikes me that this is the sort of
>> broad statement that belongs in R101, of things that are "deeply implicit"
>> but have come up persistently anyway.  I.e "Agora is a game, but it's a
>> game that doesn't end when someone wins, and by the way we expect you not
>> to break the rules, otherwise you aren't playing the game".
>>
>> Actually, it's not implicit at all: R101 currently reads "acting in
>> accordance with the Rules".  That's fairly clear, but takes a little
>> thought to get at.  So maybe just strengthen/clarify what that means?
>>
>> -G.
> 
> I forgot about R101. That makes the first option seem more redundant.
> The exception laid out in the second option seems less implicit,
> though. Is it general enough to belong in R101?

I don't think either is useful personally.  Option 1 is covered by R101
currently.  Option 2 entirely neglects the nuance we've been discussing in
what constitutes a rules breakage, and actually opens it up more by
suggesting there's reasons to break the rules.  It's one of those "better
to stay silent than say something halfway" sort of things.

I think we should have a standalone, full rule that accompanies the
definitions we've been talking about re-writing.

E.g. "Certain actions are defined as infractions - these incur penalties
but not rule violations per se.  Certain actions are defined as crimes.
You're breaking the rules if you do those.  Really, don't do those."

(This is included in sections on referee procedure, etc.).

I would also avoid the SHOULD language entirely, put those words in common
terms that can be interpreted independent of our terms of art.

Re: DIS: [Protos] Rule Violation Options

[James Cook via agora-discussion]

On Fri, 5 Jun 2020 at 18:20, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion
 wrote:
> On 6/5/2020 10:58 AM, James Cook wrote:
> > On Fri, 5 Jun 2020 at 02:47, Rebecca wrote:
> >> On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 12:42 PM Aris Merchant wrote:
> >>
> >>> What do y'all think of these? If there's a strong consensus for one or
> >>> the other, I'll only submit that one.
> >>>
> >>> -Aris
> >>> ---
> >>> Title: Rule Violations (option 1)
> >>> Adoption index: 3.0
> >>> Author: Aris
> >>> Co-author(s):
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> If the author's proposal "Rule Violations (option 2)" has been or
> >>> would be adopted with a greater proportion of support, then this
> >>> proposal has no effect. Otherwise:
> >>>
> >>> Amend Rule 869, "How to Join and Leave Agora", by appending at the end of
> >>> the
> >>> fourth paragraph:
> >>>   Players SHOULD NOT violate the rules.
> >>>
> >>> ---
> >>> Title: Rule Violations (option 2)
> >>> Adoption index: 3.0
> >>> Author: Aris
> >>> Co-author(s):
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> If the author's proposal "Rule Violations (option 1)" has been or
> >>> would be adopted with a greater proportion of support, then this
> >>> proposal has no effect. Otherwise:
> >>>
> >>> Amend Rule 869, "How to Join and Leave Agora", by appending at the end of
> >>> the
> >>> fourth paragraph:
> >>>   Players SHOULD NOT violate the rules doing so is manifestly in the
> >>>   best interests of the game due to extraordinary circumstances.
> >>>
> >>
> >> I would vote against both because they both add text to the rules that we
> >> don't need and both are already perfectly implicit anyway. But I would
> >> greatly prefer the first one, given a choice (the second also has a typo,
> >> it is missing the word "unless")
> >
> > The first version also seems implicit to me. If we both feel that way
> > I take that as evidence it might not actually resolve our
> > disagreement. I think I would be PRESENT or a weak FOR on that one.
>
> When you talk about "implicit", it strikes me that this is the sort of
> broad statement that belongs in R101, of things that are "deeply implicit"
> but have come up persistently anyway.  I.e "Agora is a game, but it's a
> game that doesn't end when someone wins, and by the way we expect you not
> to break the rules, otherwise you aren't playing the game".
>
> Actually, it's not implicit at all: R101 currently reads "acting in
> accordance with the Rules".  That's fairly clear, but takes a little
> thought to get at.  So maybe just strengthen/clarify what that means?
>
> -G.

I forgot about R101. That makes the first option seem more redundant.
The exception laid out in the second option seems less implicit,
though. Is it general enough to belong in R101?

- Falsifian

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Registrar] Agoran Directory

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 2:18 PM James Cook  wrote:
>
> Oops, not intended. P.S.S, any objection to being removed from the
> Watchers list?
>
> - Falsifian
>
> On Fri, 5 Jun 2020 at 17:47, ATMunn via agora-discussion
>  wrote:
> > Just noticed that P.S.S. is listed as both a player and a watcher. Is
> > this intended?
> >
> > On 6/2/2020 3:23 PM, James Cook via agora-official wrote:
> > > 
> > >   The Agoran Directory
> > > 
> > >
> > > Date of last report: 2020-05-30 (Sat)
> > > Date of this report: 2020-06-02 (Tue)
> > > (all times UTC)
> > >
> > > Archive of reports on the web: https://agoranomic.org/Registrar/Reports/
> > >
> > >
> > > Recent Events (recent events section not ratifying)
> > >
> > > 03-May-20 20:23  Alexis deregisters.
> > > 04-May-20 01:44  nch flips eir master switch to emself.
> > > 07-May-20 00:43  Falsifian flips Tcbapo's master switch to Agora.
> > > 07-May-20 00:52  ATMunn is an excess lot: resale value decreased
> > > 07-May-20 00:52  Tcbapo is an excess lot: resale value decreased
> > > 07-May-20 00:52  pikhq is an excess lot: resale value decreased
> > > 13-May-20 02:45  Falsifian flips twg's master switch to Agora.
> > > 20-May-20 03:25  grok registers.
> > > 22-May-20 19:44  Bögtil registers.
> > > 28-May-20 01:02  ATMunn flips eir Master switch to emself.
> > > 30-May-20 04:26  Falsifian deregisters pikhq with notice.
> > > (time of last report)
> > >
> > >
> > > Players (by Rule 869, Persons with 'Registered' Citizenship):
> > >
> > > There are 21 Players.
> > >
> > >Player Contact Registered
> > >-- --- --
> > >omdcomexk at gmail.com [1] 03 Feb 11
> > >Aris   thoughtsoflifeandlight17 at gmail.com   13 Sep 16
> > >Gaelan gbs at canishe.com  15 May 17
> > >G. kerim at uw.edu 25 Aug 17
> > >Cuddle Beamcuddlebeam at gmail.com 25 Aug 17
> > >Trigon reuben.staley at gmail.com  24 Sep 17
> > >Murphy emurphy42 at zoho.com   17 Dec 17
> > >ATMunn iamingodsarmy at gmail.com  11 Mar 18
> > >D. Margaux [2] dmargaux000 at gmail.com25 Aug 18
> > >Baron von Vaderham davidseeber at outlook.com  04 Feb 19
> > >Falsifian  jcook at cs.berkeley.edu13 Feb 19
> > >Jason  jason.e.cobb at gmail.com   02 Jun 19
> > >nchnchagora at protonmail.com  18 Oct 19
> > >sukil  sukiletxe+agora at gmail.com12 Feb 20
> > >P.S.S. [3] p.scribonius.scholasticus at gmail.com  01 Mar 20
> > >R. Lee edwardostrange at gmail.com 16 Mar 20
> > >Telnaior   JDGA at iinet.net.au21 Mar 20
> > >grok   grokagora at gmail.com  20 May 20
> > >Bögtil stefan.fjellander at gmail.com  22 May 20
> > > z twgme at timon.red 24 May 18
> > > z Tcbapo tcbapoagora at gmail.com28 Jan 20
> > >
> > > z=zombie
> > >
> > >
> > > Zombie master and resale value switches (self-ratifying)
> > >
> > >Resale   Last ownedDue to flip
> > > Zombie Master valueby Agora  to Agora
> > > -- -- ---  ---   ---
> > > twgAgora  2now
> > > Tcbapo Agora  1now
> > >
> > >
> > > Fora (Rule 478, self-ratifying)
> > >
> > > Type LocationTypical use
> > >  ---
> > > Public   agora-official at agoranomic.orgofficial reports
> > > Public   agora-business at agoranomic.orgother business
> > > Discussion   agora-discussion at agoranomic.org  discussion
> > > Discussion   irc://irc.freenode.net:6667/##nomic
> > >  discussion
> > > Public   agora at listserver.tue.nl  backup
> > >
> > > Subscribe or unsubscribe from main
> > > lists:http://www.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo
> > >
> > > Subscribe or unsubscribe from tue.nl backup
> > > list:http://listserver.tue.nl/mailman/listinfo/agora
> > >
> > > The IRC channel does not require subscription; set your IRC client to
> > > server irc.freenode.net, port 6667, channel ##nomic, and whatever
> > > nickname you like.
> > >
> > >
> > > Watchers (7)
> > >
> > > The list of Watchers is not governed by the rules, but 

Re: DIS: [Protos] Rule Violation Options

[Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion]

On 6/5/2020 10:58 AM, James Cook wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Jun 2020 at 02:47, Rebecca wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 12:42 PM Aris Merchant wrote:
>>
>>> What do y'all think of these? If there's a strong consensus for one or
>>> the other, I'll only submit that one.
>>>
>>> -Aris
>>> ---
>>> Title: Rule Violations (option 1)
>>> Adoption index: 3.0
>>> Author: Aris
>>> Co-author(s):
>>>
>>>
>>> If the author's proposal "Rule Violations (option 2)" has been or
>>> would be adopted with a greater proportion of support, then this
>>> proposal has no effect. Otherwise:
>>>
>>> Amend Rule 869, "How to Join and Leave Agora", by appending at the end of
>>> the
>>> fourth paragraph:
>>>   Players SHOULD NOT violate the rules.
>>>
>>> ---
>>> Title: Rule Violations (option 2)
>>> Adoption index: 3.0
>>> Author: Aris
>>> Co-author(s):
>>>
>>>
>>> If the author's proposal "Rule Violations (option 1)" has been or
>>> would be adopted with a greater proportion of support, then this
>>> proposal has no effect. Otherwise:
>>>
>>> Amend Rule 869, "How to Join and Leave Agora", by appending at the end of
>>> the
>>> fourth paragraph:
>>>   Players SHOULD NOT violate the rules doing so is manifestly in the
>>>   best interests of the game due to extraordinary circumstances.
>>>
>>
>> I would vote against both because they both add text to the rules that we
>> don't need and both are already perfectly implicit anyway. But I would
>> greatly prefer the first one, given a choice (the second also has a typo,
>> it is missing the word "unless")
> 
> The first version also seems implicit to me. If we both feel that way
> I take that as evidence it might not actually resolve our
> disagreement. I think I would be PRESENT or a weak FOR on that one.

When you talk about "implicit", it strikes me that this is the sort of
broad statement that belongs in R101, of things that are "deeply implicit"
but have come up persistently anyway.  I.e "Agora is a game, but it's a
game that doesn't end when someone wins, and by the way we expect you not
to break the rules, otherwise you aren't playing the game".

Actually, it's not implicit at all: R101 currently reads "acting in
accordance with the Rules".  That's fairly clear, but takes a little
thought to get at.  So maybe just strengthen/clarify what that means?

-G.

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Registrar] Agoran Directory

[James Cook via agora-discussion]

Oops, not intended. P.S.S, any objection to being removed from the
Watchers list?

- Falsifian

On Fri, 5 Jun 2020 at 17:47, ATMunn via agora-discussion
 wrote:
> Just noticed that P.S.S. is listed as both a player and a watcher. Is
> this intended?
>
> On 6/2/2020 3:23 PM, James Cook via agora-official wrote:
> > 
> >   The Agoran Directory
> > 
> >
> > Date of last report: 2020-05-30 (Sat)
> > Date of this report: 2020-06-02 (Tue)
> > (all times UTC)
> >
> > Archive of reports on the web: https://agoranomic.org/Registrar/Reports/
> >
> >
> > Recent Events (recent events section not ratifying)
> >
> > 03-May-20 20:23  Alexis deregisters.
> > 04-May-20 01:44  nch flips eir master switch to emself.
> > 07-May-20 00:43  Falsifian flips Tcbapo's master switch to Agora.
> > 07-May-20 00:52  ATMunn is an excess lot: resale value decreased
> > 07-May-20 00:52  Tcbapo is an excess lot: resale value decreased
> > 07-May-20 00:52  pikhq is an excess lot: resale value decreased
> > 13-May-20 02:45  Falsifian flips twg's master switch to Agora.
> > 20-May-20 03:25  grok registers.
> > 22-May-20 19:44  Bögtil registers.
> > 28-May-20 01:02  ATMunn flips eir Master switch to emself.
> > 30-May-20 04:26  Falsifian deregisters pikhq with notice.
> > (time of last report)
> >
> >
> > Players (by Rule 869, Persons with 'Registered' Citizenship):
> >
> > There are 21 Players.
> >
> >Player Contact Registered
> >-- --- --
> >omdcomexk at gmail.com [1] 03 Feb 11
> >Aris   thoughtsoflifeandlight17 at gmail.com   13 Sep 16
> >Gaelan gbs at canishe.com  15 May 17
> >G. kerim at uw.edu 25 Aug 17
> >Cuddle Beamcuddlebeam at gmail.com 25 Aug 17
> >Trigon reuben.staley at gmail.com  24 Sep 17
> >Murphy emurphy42 at zoho.com   17 Dec 17
> >ATMunn iamingodsarmy at gmail.com  11 Mar 18
> >D. Margaux [2] dmargaux000 at gmail.com25 Aug 18
> >Baron von Vaderham davidseeber at outlook.com  04 Feb 19
> >Falsifian  jcook at cs.berkeley.edu13 Feb 19
> >Jason  jason.e.cobb at gmail.com   02 Jun 19
> >nchnchagora at protonmail.com  18 Oct 19
> >sukil  sukiletxe+agora at gmail.com12 Feb 20
> >P.S.S. [3] p.scribonius.scholasticus at gmail.com  01 Mar 20
> >R. Lee edwardostrange at gmail.com 16 Mar 20
> >Telnaior   JDGA at iinet.net.au21 Mar 20
> >grok   grokagora at gmail.com  20 May 20
> >Bögtil stefan.fjellander at gmail.com  22 May 20
> > z twgme at timon.red 24 May 18
> > z Tcbapo tcbapoagora at gmail.com28 Jan 20
> >
> > z=zombie
> >
> >
> > Zombie master and resale value switches (self-ratifying)
> >
> >Resale   Last ownedDue to flip
> > Zombie Master valueby Agora  to Agora
> > -- -- ---  ---   ---
> > twgAgora  2now
> > Tcbapo Agora  1now
> >
> >
> > Fora (Rule 478, self-ratifying)
> >
> > Type LocationTypical use
> >  ---
> > Public   agora-official at agoranomic.orgofficial reports
> > Public   agora-business at agoranomic.orgother business
> > Discussion   agora-discussion at agoranomic.org  discussion
> > Discussion   irc://irc.freenode.net:6667/##nomic
> >  discussion
> > Public   agora at listserver.tue.nl  backup
> >
> > Subscribe or unsubscribe from main
> > lists:http://www.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo
> >
> > Subscribe or unsubscribe from tue.nl backup
> > list:http://listserver.tue.nl/mailman/listinfo/agora
> >
> > The IRC channel does not require subscription; set your IRC client to
> > server irc.freenode.net, port 6667, channel ##nomic, and whatever
> > nickname you like.
> >
> >
> > Watchers (7)
> >
> > The list of Watchers is not governed by the rules, but is
> > traditionally maintained in the Registrar's Report.  If you'd like to
> > be listed as a Watcher or removed from the list, feel free to email
> > the fora or the Registrar directly.
> >
> > Nickname  Contact L

DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] DADA Soft Repeal

[James Cook via agora-discussion]

On Fri, 5 Jun 2020 at 03:14, Rebecca via agora-business
 wrote:
> I create the following proposal
> Title: Guilderoy Lockhart
> Coauthor G.
> AI: 1
> Chamber: Legislation
> Text: Amend rule 2617 by deleting the last three paragraphs and the first
> sentence [nonbinding explanatory note: this would make it forbidden to
> attempt an action that would ossify the game, but not forbidden to create
> or vote FOR a proposal that would have that effect]
> --
> From R. Lee

If a proposal does get enough votes, I think this makes the Assessor
the one who violates the rule, when e resolves it. I guess Aris's "New
Defenses" would protect em. Probably not a big deal.

- Falsifian

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Identity theft protection act v1.1 (was: Aris Reshapes the Legislative Process)

[James Cook via agora-discussion]

Oops, I forgot. I think it's now the H. Promotor's second distribution
cutoff of 00:00 Friday, so perhaps I should leave it as is. If I'm
lucky maybe I'll squeeze another coin out of it, though it was not
intentional. If I'm unlucky F/A will turn out to be 3.05 or something.

- Falsifian

On Fri, 5 Jun 2020 at 02:55, Rebecca via agora-discussion
 wrote:
>
> it doesn't need AI 3.1: any proposal with AI 3 can amend any rule of
> whatever power (rules are odd)
>
> On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 4:20 AM James Cook via agora-business <
> agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
>
> > > Title: Identity theft protection act
> > > Co-authors: G., P.S.S.
> > > AI: 3.1
> > > Text:
> > >
> > > Amend Rule 2141 by adding the sentence "Once assigned, a rule's ID
> > > number CANNOT be changed." to the end of the second paragraph.
> > >
> > > - Falsifian
> >
> > I withdraw the above proposal and submit a proposal as follows.
> >
> > Title: Identity theft protection act v1.1
> > Co-authors: G., P.S.S.
> > AI: 3.1
> > Text:
> >
> > Amend Rule 2141 by replacing the text
> >
> >   Rules have ID numbers, to be assigned by the Rulekeepor.
> >
> > with
> >
> >   Every rule shall have an ID number, distinct among current and
> >   former rules, to be assigned once by the Rulekeepor.
> >
> > [Comment: this version is designed to prevent the Rulekeepor from
> > assigning the same ID to two rules in addition to the protection
> > against changing IDs.]
> >
> > - Falsifian
> >
>
>
> --
> From R. Lee

Re: DIS: [Protos] Rule Violation Options

[James Cook via agora-discussion]

On Fri, 5 Jun 2020 at 02:47, Rebecca via agora-discussion
 wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 12:42 PM Aris Merchant via agora-discussion <
> agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
>
> > What do y'all think of these? If there's a strong consensus for one or
> > the other, I'll only submit that one.
> >
> > -Aris
> > ---
> > Title: Rule Violations (option 1)
> > Adoption index: 3.0
> > Author: Aris
> > Co-author(s):
> >
> >
> > If the author's proposal "Rule Violations (option 2)" has been or
> > would be adopted with a greater proportion of support, then this
> > proposal has no effect. Otherwise:
> >
> > Amend Rule 869, "How to Join and Leave Agora", by appending at the end of
> > the
> > fourth paragraph:
> >   Players SHOULD NOT violate the rules.
> >
> > ---
> > Title: Rule Violations (option 2)
> > Adoption index: 3.0
> > Author: Aris
> > Co-author(s):
> >
> >
> > If the author's proposal "Rule Violations (option 1)" has been or
> > would be adopted with a greater proportion of support, then this
> > proposal has no effect. Otherwise:
> >
> > Amend Rule 869, "How to Join and Leave Agora", by appending at the end of
> > the
> > fourth paragraph:
> >   Players SHOULD NOT violate the rules doing so is manifestly in the
> >   best interests of the game due to extraordinary circumstances.
> >
>
> I would vote against both because they both add text to the rules that we
> don't need and both are already perfectly implicit anyway. But I would
> greatly prefer the first one, given a choice (the second also has a typo,
> it is missing the word "unless")

The first version also seems implicit to me. If we both feel that way
I take that as evidence it might not actually resolve our
disagreement. I think I would be PRESENT or a weak FOR on that one.

I think I prefer the second, sort of grudgingly. The exception it
describes is not part of my personal view of the rules, but (a) our
escape valve for distributing unpended proposals depends on this point
of view and (b) if it's in the rules, then I guess the rules are okay
with it... so, I think it has my vote.

I'd prefer lower-case "should" based on ais523's argument.

- Falsifian

DIS: Re: OFF: [Registrar] Agoran Directory

[ATMunn via agora-discussion]

Just noticed that P.S.S. is listed as both a player and a watcher. Is 
this intended?


On 6/2/2020 3:23 PM, James Cook via agora-official wrote:


  The Agoran Directory


Date of last report: 2020-05-30 (Sat)
Date of this report: 2020-06-02 (Tue)
(all times UTC)

Archive of reports on the web: https://agoranomic.org/Registrar/Reports/


Recent Events (recent events section not ratifying)

03-May-20 20:23  Alexis deregisters.
04-May-20 01:44  nch flips eir master switch to emself.
07-May-20 00:43  Falsifian flips Tcbapo's master switch to Agora.
07-May-20 00:52  ATMunn is an excess lot: resale value decreased
07-May-20 00:52  Tcbapo is an excess lot: resale value decreased
07-May-20 00:52  pikhq is an excess lot: resale value decreased
13-May-20 02:45  Falsifian flips twg's master switch to Agora.
20-May-20 03:25  grok registers.
22-May-20 19:44  Bögtil registers.
28-May-20 01:02  ATMunn flips eir Master switch to emself.
30-May-20 04:26  Falsifian deregisters pikhq with notice.
(time of last report)


Players (by Rule 869, Persons with 'Registered' Citizenship):

There are 21 Players.

   Player Contact Registered
   -- --- --
   omdcomexk at gmail.com [1] 03 Feb 11
   Aris   thoughtsoflifeandlight17 at gmail.com   13 Sep 16
   Gaelan gbs at canishe.com  15 May 17
   G. kerim at uw.edu 25 Aug 17
   Cuddle Beamcuddlebeam at gmail.com 25 Aug 17
   Trigon reuben.staley at gmail.com  24 Sep 17
   Murphy emurphy42 at zoho.com   17 Dec 17
   ATMunn iamingodsarmy at gmail.com  11 Mar 18
   D. Margaux [2] dmargaux000 at gmail.com25 Aug 18
   Baron von Vaderham davidseeber at outlook.com  04 Feb 19
   Falsifian  jcook at cs.berkeley.edu13 Feb 19
   Jason  jason.e.cobb at gmail.com   02 Jun 19
   nchnchagora at protonmail.com  18 Oct 19
   sukil  sukiletxe+agora at gmail.com12 Feb 20
   P.S.S. [3] p.scribonius.scholasticus at gmail.com  01 Mar 20
   R. Lee edwardostrange at gmail.com 16 Mar 20
   Telnaior   JDGA at iinet.net.au21 Mar 20
   grok   grokagora at gmail.com  20 May 20
   Bögtil stefan.fjellander at gmail.com  22 May 20
z twgme at timon.red 24 May 18
z Tcbapo tcbapoagora at gmail.com28 Jan 20

z=zombie


Zombie master and resale value switches (self-ratifying)

   Resale   Last ownedDue to flip
Zombie Master valueby Agora  to Agora
-- -- ---  ---   ---
twgAgora  2now
Tcbapo Agora  1now


Fora (Rule 478, self-ratifying)

Type LocationTypical use
 ---
Public   agora-official at agoranomic.orgofficial reports
Public   agora-business at agoranomic.orgother business
Discussion   agora-discussion at agoranomic.org  discussion
Discussion   irc://irc.freenode.net:6667/##nomic
 discussion
Public   agora at listserver.tue.nl  backup

Subscribe or unsubscribe from main
lists:http://www.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo

Subscribe or unsubscribe from tue.nl backup
list:http://listserver.tue.nl/mailman/listinfo/agora

The IRC channel does not require subscription; set your IRC client to
server irc.freenode.net, port 6667, channel ##nomic, and whatever
nickname you like.


Watchers (7)

The list of Watchers is not governed by the rules, but is
traditionally maintained in the Registrar's Report.  If you'd like to
be listed as a Watcher or removed from the list, feel free to email
the fora or the Registrar directly.

Nickname  Contact Last confirmed
  --- --
P.S.S. [3]p.scribonius.scholasticus at gmail.com  2020 February
ais523AIS523 at alumni.bham.ac.uk 2020 February
Lykaina   mjbermanator at gmail.com   2019 September
Ørjan oerjan at nvg.ntnu.no   2017 May
Dave  davidnicol at gmail.com 2013 May
Phlogistique  noe.rubinstein at gmail.com 2013 May
Steve zardoz3

Re: DIS: [Protos] Rule Violation Options

[ATMunn via agora-discussion]

what happens if both proposals pass with equal support?

On 6/4/2020 10:41 PM, Aris Merchant via agora-discussion wrote:

What do y'all think of these? If there's a strong consensus for one or
the other, I'll only submit that one.

-Aris
---
Title: Rule Violations (option 1)
Adoption index: 3.0
Author: Aris
Co-author(s):


If the author's proposal "Rule Violations (option 2)" has been or
would be adopted with a greater proportion of support, then this
proposal has no effect. Otherwise:

Amend Rule 869, "How to Join and Leave Agora", by appending at the end of the
fourth paragraph:
   Players SHOULD NOT violate the rules.

---
Title: Rule Violations (option 2)
Adoption index: 3.0
Author: Aris
Co-author(s):


If the author's proposal "Rule Violations (option 1)" has been or
would be adopted with a greater proportion of support, then this
proposal has no effect. Otherwise:

Amend Rule 869, "How to Join and Leave Agora", by appending at the end of the
fourth paragraph:
   Players SHOULD NOT violate the rules doing so is manifestly in the
   best interests of the game due to extraordinary circumstances.

Re: DIS: [Protos] Rule Violation Options

[Alex Smith via agora-discussion]

 On Friday, 5 June 2020, 03:41:58 GMT+1, Aris Merchant via agora-discussion 
 wrote:
> What do y'all think of these? If there's a strong consensus for one or
> the other, I'll only submit that one.

> Players SHOULD NOT violate the rules.

This should be a lowercase "should". It's the ordinary-language definition we 
want here, not a definition that tries to define things in terms of Agora's 
rules (otherwise we just have a circular definition).

-- 
ais523  

DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] DADA Soft Repeal

[Aris Merchant via agora-discussion]

On Thu, Jun 4, 2020 at 8:14 PM Rebecca via agora-business
 wrote:
>
> I create the following proposal
> Title: Guilderoy Lockhart
> Coauthor G.
> AI: 1
> Chamber: Legislation
> Text: Amend rule 2617 by deleting the last three paragraphs and the first
> sentence [nonbinding explanatory note: this would make it forbidden to
> attempt an action that would ossify the game, but not forbidden to create
> or vote FOR a proposal that would have that effect]


I intend to vote PRESENT on this.

Also, as a warning, I'll be extending the freeze deadline for the
midweek distribution to 02:00 UTC, but not beyond that. That's about
when I finished writing the index of proposals. So this will be in the
distribution early next week.

-Aris