Re: DIS: Agora the karma bank
On 2020-07-04 5:28 p.m., Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote: Proto: Agora the karma bank Amend Rule 2510 (Such is Karma) by deleting: 4. Not result in Agora's karma moving farther away from 0. and by replacing its last paragraph with: At the beginning of each quarter, the Karma of every person is halved (rounding towards 0). [It's still an exchange of karma, but you can take freely from Agora. Everybody's karma decays every quarter, but Agora's karma isn't reset to zero-sum, therefore Agoran's karma is an inverse measure of our overall positivity/negativity over time.] I'd vote vote for this version. I like the simplicity of the change, and that there's no question of what amount of Karma you should grant in one transaction. I think I also like keeping the once-per-week limit. omd did make a good point about the opportunity cost, but I think it's nice the way karma is paced right now: in a week where not a lot happens, there's an opportunity to point out the few good/bad things that do, and in a busy week, we don't get flooded with karma transfers adding to the noise. -- Falsifian
Re: DIS: Notary Web Report Progress
On 2020-07-04 9:50 p.m., ATMunn via agora-discussion wrote: As I've mentioned elsewhere, I've been working on getting the Notary report online. At this point, the formatting and basic structure is complete. I've put the first 5 contracts and pledges into it just for testing. You can see it here: https://atmunn.gitlab.io/notary/template.html Thank you, this seems convenient to use and looks nice too. -- Falsifian
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Birthday Tournament Fix
On Sat, Jul 4, 2020 at 2:46 PM Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote: > > > On 7/4/2020 2:09 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote: > > On 7/4/20 3:52 PM, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote: > >> > >> On 7/4/2020 12:40 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus: > >>> Unless > >>> explicitly permitted by the Diplonomic 2020 rules, all Contestants > >>> SHALL NOT make use of loopholes in the underlying game of > >>> Diplomacy in order to gain a competitive advantage. > >> > >> I'm a little puzzled/concerned about this bit. We're introducing > >> proposals to modify these rules and therefore reading these rules closely, > >> and it doesn't seem right to forbid that? Are there specific types of > >> loopholes in Diplomacy (a game with very very stable rules for a long > >> time) that you're trying to prevent us from using? > > > > My thinking was not to prevent paradoxes or that sort of thing, but more > > an instance where an unexpected interaction between two rules is > > intentionally used to get an advantage. I also don't intend for this to > > apply to any modified rules but only the initial text I draft and the > > original rules of Diplomacy because those aren't really written as part > > of the game. If there's strong opposition, I'll drop it. > > I'm not super-bothered - was thinking that, with Diplomacy being around a > long time and having a lot of advice out on the internet, I could imagine > someone finding an article that said "I bet you didn't know you could do > this counterintuitive move in Diplomacy, which might not have been > intended by the original authors, but try surprising your enemies with > it!" or something, and wouldn't want anyone to find themselves Blotted for > trying that kind of thing. I'm actually more bothered. twg's thesis convinced me that flat out prohibitions on scamming are a Bad Thing. I don't mind if the judge equities eir way around the scam. However, criminalizing it makes me very uncomfortable. Normally I'd object, but I don't want to hold things up. I'm not sure whether the correct way to handle it is a separate intent from P.S.S. or a proposal within the tournament once it gets going? -Aris
Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [CotC] CFJ 3854 Judged DISMISS by Murphy
G. wrote: On 7/3/2020 10:41 AM, Cuddle Beam via agora-discussion wrote: What's the Annabel Crisis? - After a lot of discussion about whether the game was unfixable, it was fixed by proposal ratifying everything e'd done, and became the case study for self-ratification and the "document purporting to be" language. The fix steps included everyone announcing that they "resigned promotor" so there was certainty over who might be promotor (because only the promotor could distribute the fix). Which was itself borrowed from the Quantum Crisis years earlier: - A proposal switching to a new economy (Points -> Marks) was noticed months after the fact to have failed on a technicality. - This led to something like a couple dozen different potential gamestates /just/ on the basis of how various officer successions were interpreted, never mind the rest of the gamestate. - Eventually there was consensus that the only sensible fix was to collapse Promotor and Assessor via resignations, then adopt a fix proposal to clean up the rest.
Re: [Attn. Referee] Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Resolution of Proposal 8458 (Third time's the charm)
G. wrote: On 7/1/2020 8:24 PM, omd via agora-business wrote: “Yes,” said Arthur, “yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying ‘Beware of the Leopard.” [Just entering the case now]. Funnily enough, in discord (before the case was called) I used this quote as a reason the ballot *did* work. Because the quote illustrates that it's possible to fill the letter of the law legal/formal process about a notice being clearly written on a piece of paper (I have no doubt that the Planning Department followed the letter of the law), while still in practice locking it away. True as far as it goes, but the law in question probably lacks such requirements as the judgement found must be met in Agora. It instead described a hypothetical case where Arthur also got a (not obfuscated in any way) letter a week earlier, even if all that letter said is "there's some demolition taking place in your neighborhood, full documentation is on display at the Such-and-Such Building".
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Birthday Tournament Fix
On 7/4/20 5:45 PM, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote: > > On 7/4/2020 2:09 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote: >> On 7/4/20 3:52 PM, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote: >>> >>> On 7/4/2020 12:40 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus: Unless explicitly permitted by the Diplonomic 2020 rules, all Contestants SHALL NOT make use of loopholes in the underlying game of Diplomacy in order to gain a competitive advantage. >>> >>> I'm a little puzzled/concerned about this bit. We're introducing >>> proposals to modify these rules and therefore reading these rules closely, >>> and it doesn't seem right to forbid that? Are there specific types of >>> loopholes in Diplomacy (a game with very very stable rules for a long >>> time) that you're trying to prevent us from using? >> >> My thinking was not to prevent paradoxes or that sort of thing, but more >> an instance where an unexpected interaction between two rules is >> intentionally used to get an advantage. I also don't intend for this to >> apply to any modified rules but only the initial text I draft and the >> original rules of Diplomacy because those aren't really written as part >> of the game. If there's strong opposition, I'll drop it. > > I'm not super-bothered - was thinking that, with Diplomacy being around a > long time and having a lot of advice out on the internet, I could imagine > someone finding an article that said "I bet you didn't know you could do > this counterintuitive move in Diplomacy, which might not have been > intended by the original authors, but try surprising your enemies with > it!" or something, and wouldn't want anyone to find themselves Blotted for > trying that kind of thing. Things like that aren't intended to be prohibited by this. I mean something where they find a loophole that could allow them to duplicate armies or other things which clearly violate the spirit of the game. Do you think there's a better phrasing? -- Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth
Re: DIS: on negative karma (Re: BUS: Proposal: Upvotes)
On 7/4/20 12:19 PM, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote: > > On 7/3/2020 4:32 PM, omd via agora-business wrote: >> - The ability to take away others' karma is removed. I didn't want to do >> this, >> since I think the 'balanced karma' system is a quite interesting >> mechanic. >> But for karma transfers to feel cheap, I think you have to be able to >> perform >> them without penalizing someone else, at least sometimes. > After thinking on this a little overnight, I don't think it's good to > remove negative karma. I *do* think it's a good idea to go away from zero > sum though. > > It's true that large % of the time I want to give positive karma and feel > bad for having to find a zero-sum negative. But there's a small > percentage of the time when it's useful to be able to apply a social > negative feedback that's "real" (e.g. it is recorded against someone so it > is "heard") but isn't gamified (doesn't stop a person from winning or > voting or anything). > > Without that relief valve I think we'll be more quick to point > fingers/blot and get annoyed, because there won't be any other relief > valve. And finger-pointing is really an escalation. It's not "I've made > my minor point of disapproval and we can move on now"; fingerpointing > suggests that the person has to defend themselves rather than saying > "you're right my bad" and letting it pass. > > Also, karma should decay for everyone, much faster than it is. Sometimes > people end up down at say -4 when they make a single ill-advised move and > several people get annoyed. Fine, ding them and it's deserved - but when > they're still at -4 six months later that's a problem, it lends itself to > "no one will let me forget that so who cares if I'm down here" attitude. > > -G. > > Quick proto that integrates negative karma into omd's idea: Positive Karma and Negative Karma are currencies. [All the stuff omd had about Karma but just for Positive Karma.] A player CAN by announcement create Negative Karma in eir ownership and specify another player to receive the same amount of Negative Karma. If a player has both Negative and Positive Karma, an equal amount of both is automatically destroyed such that e only has one type. -- nch Prime Minister, Webmastor, NAX Exchange Manager
DIS: Re: BUS: Proposal: Upvotes
omd wrote:
Proposal: Upvotes (AI=1)
{
Multiply all positive Karma values by 3 (to compensate existing Karma
holders
for expected inflation). Replace all negative Karma values with 0 (because
Karma will become a currency).
Amend Rule 2510 (Such is Karma) to read:
Karma is a currency tracked by the Herald.
Up to once per week, each player CAN grant a specified other
player 1 Karma by announcement. A player CAN also transfer any
amount of eir own Karma to another player by announcement. In
both cases, for this to be effective, e must give a reason why
the other player should gain Karma.
At the beginning of each quarter, the Karma of every
Unregistered person is halved (rounding towards 0).
Karma cannot otherwise be transferred or destroyed.
Proto: "A player CAN also destroy 1 of another player's Karma by paying
a fee of 1 Karma", once again must give a reason why.
DIS: Notary Web Report Progress
As I've mentioned elsewhere, I've been working on getting the Notary report online. At this point, the formatting and basic structure is complete. I've put the first 5 contracts and pledges into it just for testing. You can see it here: https://atmunn.gitlab.io/notary/template.html Like I said, this only includes the first 5 contracts and is not meant to be perfectly accurate. Right now everything is copied by hand, which is very slow and tedious. The next step will be to create a script that takes my text report and generates a web report from it automatically. I need to, of course, add promises into the final version. Another thing I would like to add is the ability to hover over contract names in the table of contents and see the summary, revision number, and parties. If it is requested, I will also add each pledge to the table of contents and add the same hover effect. I will also probably add a bit more information to the header, and make the text reports available online. Any and all feedback or feature requests are greatly appreciated. -- ATMunn friendly neighborhood notary here :)
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Birthday Tournament Fix
On 7/4/2020 2:09 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote: > On 7/4/20 3:52 PM, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote: >> >> On 7/4/2020 12:40 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus: >>> Unless >>> explicitly permitted by the Diplonomic 2020 rules, all Contestants >>> SHALL NOT make use of loopholes in the underlying game of >>> Diplomacy in order to gain a competitive advantage. >> >> I'm a little puzzled/concerned about this bit. We're introducing >> proposals to modify these rules and therefore reading these rules closely, >> and it doesn't seem right to forbid that? Are there specific types of >> loopholes in Diplomacy (a game with very very stable rules for a long >> time) that you're trying to prevent us from using? > > My thinking was not to prevent paradoxes or that sort of thing, but more > an instance where an unexpected interaction between two rules is > intentionally used to get an advantage. I also don't intend for this to > apply to any modified rules but only the initial text I draft and the > original rules of Diplomacy because those aren't really written as part > of the game. If there's strong opposition, I'll drop it. I'm not super-bothered - was thinking that, with Diplomacy being around a long time and having a lot of advice out on the internet, I could imagine someone finding an article that said "I bet you didn't know you could do this counterintuitive move in Diplomacy, which might not have been intended by the original authors, but try surprising your enemies with it!" or something, and wouldn't want anyone to find themselves Blotted for trying that kind of thing. -G.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Birthday Tournament Fix
On 7/4/20 3:52 PM, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote: > > On 7/4/2020 12:40 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus: >> Unless >> explicitly permitted by the Diplonomic 2020 rules, all Contestants >> SHALL NOT make use of loopholes in the underlying game of >> Diplomacy in order to gain a competitive advantage. > > I'm a little puzzled/concerned about this bit. We're introducing > proposals to modify these rules and therefore reading these rules closely, > and it doesn't seem right to forbid that? Are there specific types of > loopholes in Diplomacy (a game with very very stable rules for a long > time) that you're trying to prevent us from using? My thinking was not to prevent paradoxes or that sort of thing, but more an instance where an unexpected interaction between two rules is intentionally used to get an advantage. I also don't intend for this to apply to any modified rules but only the initial text I draft and the original rules of Diplomacy because those aren't really written as part of the game. If there's strong opposition, I'll drop it. -- Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Birthday Tournament Fix
On 7/4/2020 1:00 PM, Aris Merchant wrote: > On Sat, Jul 4, 2020 at 12:56 PM Kerim Aydin wrote: > >> >> On 7/4/2020 12:40 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus: >>> Unless >>> explicitly permitted by the Diplonomic 2020 rules, all Contestants >>> SHALL NOT make use of loopholes in the underlying game of >>> Diplomacy in order to gain a competitive advantage. >> >> I'm a little puzzled/concerned about this bit. We're introducing >> proposals to modify these rules and therefore reading these rules closely, >> and it doesn't seem right to forbid that? Are there specific types of >> loopholes in Diplomacy (a game with very very stable rules for a long >> time) that you're trying to prevent us from using? > > > There's at least one well known way to get the standard diplomacy rules to > generate a paradox (Pandin's paradox). That said, I think it generally > speaking makes more sense to have the gamemaster adjudicate the problem > into non-existence than to impose a SHALL NOT on the contestants. oh the convoy thing! There's several little movement edge cases like that. But they also rely on what the opponent does, so it's not "I'm trying to use an unintended loophole" but "my normal moves and the opponents' normal moves have given rise to an edge-case conflict, and the rules are silent on who has priority." So yeah, the sort of thing the gamemaster should just house rule on, not a SHALL NOT. -G.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Birthday Tournament Fix
On Sat, Jul 4, 2020 at 12:56 PM Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > On 7/4/2020 12:40 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus: > > Unless > > explicitly permitted by the Diplonomic 2020 rules, all Contestants > > SHALL NOT make use of loopholes in the underlying game of > > Diplomacy in order to gain a competitive advantage. > > I'm a little puzzled/concerned about this bit. We're introducing > proposals to modify these rules and therefore reading these rules closely, > and it doesn't seem right to forbid that? Are there specific types of > loopholes in Diplomacy (a game with very very stable rules for a long > time) that you're trying to prevent us from using? There's at least one well known way to get the standard diplomacy rules to generate a paradox (Pandin's paradox). That said, I think it generally speaking makes more sense to have the gamemaster adjudicate the problem into non-existence than to impose a SHALL NOT on the contestants. -Aris >
DIS: Re: BUS: Birthday Tournament Fix
On 7/4/2020 12:40 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus: > Unless > explicitly permitted by the Diplonomic 2020 rules, all Contestants > SHALL NOT make use of loopholes in the underlying game of > Diplomacy in order to gain a competitive advantage. I'm a little puzzled/concerned about this bit. We're introducing proposals to modify these rules and therefore reading these rules closely, and it doesn't seem right to forbid that? Are there specific types of loopholes in Diplomacy (a game with very very stable rules for a long time) that you're trying to prevent us from using? -G.
Re: DIS: Draft Judgement of CFJ 3860
On Thursday, 2 July 2020, 19:05:59 GMT+1, ATMunn via agora-discussion wrote: > Thank you for the input. I will definitely take a closer look at those > previous cases and incorporate them into my judgement. It's my bad for > not at least briefly looking for previous precedents. If someone finds > that other successful hidden message from 2018, I will incorporate that too. https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/?2211 (from 2008) is also relevant. This was a dependent action intent buried deep in a report, not a ballot (and 12 years is a lot of opportunity for rules to change!), but it's still likely to be relevant. -- ais523
DIS: Agora the karma bank
Proto: Agora the karma bank Amend Rule 2510 (Such is Karma) by deleting: 4. Not result in Agora's karma moving farther away from 0. and by replacing its last paragraph with: At the beginning of each quarter, the Karma of every person is halved (rounding towards 0). [It's still an exchange of karma, but you can take freely from Agora. Everybody's karma decays every quarter, but Agora's karma isn't reset to zero-sum, therefore Agoran's karma is an inverse measure of our overall positivity/negativity over time.]
Re: DIS: on negative karma (Re: BUS: Proposal: Upvotes)
And to your point, I'm at -3 karma right now (or was at the time of the last Herald report). Two of those negative karma were simply because I was a randomly chosen zombie and therefore karma source. The other one was just be saying "I should be active more." I'm not complaining or upset in any way, I don't really care, but it is a bit meh. On 7/4/2020 1:19 PM, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote: Also, karma should decay for everyone, much faster than it is. Sometimes people end up down at say -4 when they make a single ill-advised move and several people get annoyed. Fine, ding them and it's deserved - but when they're still at -4 six months later that's a problem, it lends itself to "no one will let me forget that so who cares if I'm down here" attitude. -- ATMunn friendly neighborhood notary here :)
DIS: on negative karma (Re: BUS: Proposal: Upvotes)
On 7/3/2020 4:32 PM, omd via agora-business wrote: > - The ability to take away others' karma is removed. I didn't want to do > this, >since I think the 'balanced karma' system is a quite interesting mechanic. >But for karma transfers to feel cheap, I think you have to be able to > perform >them without penalizing someone else, at least sometimes. After thinking on this a little overnight, I don't think it's good to remove negative karma. I *do* think it's a good idea to go away from zero sum though. It's true that large % of the time I want to give positive karma and feel bad for having to find a zero-sum negative. But there's a small percentage of the time when it's useful to be able to apply a social negative feedback that's "real" (e.g. it is recorded against someone so it is "heard") but isn't gamified (doesn't stop a person from winning or voting or anything). Without that relief valve I think we'll be more quick to point fingers/blot and get annoyed, because there won't be any other relief valve. And finger-pointing is really an escalation. It's not "I've made my minor point of disapproval and we can move on now"; fingerpointing suggests that the person has to defend themselves rather than saying "you're right my bad" and letting it pass. Also, karma should decay for everyone, much faster than it is. Sometimes people end up down at say -4 when they make a single ill-advised move and several people get annoyed. Fine, ding them and it's deserved - but when they're still at -4 six months later that's a problem, it lends itself to "no one will let me forget that so who cares if I'm down here" attitude. -G.
Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] ACORN - 4 Jul 2020
On 7/4/20 10:38 AM, ATMunn via agora-discussion wrote: > on a more serious note though, you say that these ACORNs are also online > at https://agoranomic.org/ruleset/ but I looked there and don't see any. Yes, sorry. I did it late last night and haven't gotten around to it yet. It should be up there soon. -- Jason Cobb
Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] ACORN - 4 Jul 2020
on a more serious note though, you say that these ACORNs are also online at https://agoranomic.org/ruleset/ but I looked there and don't see any. On 7/4/2020 10:36 AM, ATMunn via agora-discussion wrote: Oh look, a squirrel! wait, where did the ACORN go? On 7/4/2020 12:16 AM, Jason Cobb via agora-official wrote: THE AGORA NOMIC CODE OF REGULATIONS These ACORNs are also online at http://agoranomic.org/ruleset/ Date of this ACORN: 5 Jul 2020 The Birthday Tournament This section has the regulations governing the Birthday Tournament. Regulation BT0/0 Birthday Tournament 0 P.S.S. CANNOT win this Tournament or become a Contestant. P.S.S. is the Gamemaster and Judge of this game. Regulation BT1/0 Birthday Tournament 1 Until July 7 or 7 days after the promulgation of these regulations, whichever is later, any person CAN enter the contest (becoming a Contestant) by announcement, acting as emself, as long as no more than six other persons have already done so. Regulation BT2/0 Birthday Tournament 2 The Gamemaster CAN cause any person to cease to be a Contestant by announcement. The Gamemaster CAN cause any consenting person to become a Contestant by announcement. The Gamemaster CAN, by announcement, amend the gamestate by substituting one Contestant into all instances of another Contestant. If fewer than seven persons have become Contestants, the Gamemaster CAN replace the text of these regulations with appropriate regulations for a Nomic-inspired game, such as FRC, an experimental Nomic, or a sub-Nomic. The Gamemaster CAN amend the text of these regulations arbitrarily in order to prevent breaches of Agoran custom or rules. The Gamemaster SHOULD NOT take any actions permitted by this section unless it is in the best interests of the game. Regulation BT3/0 Birthday Tournament 3 When all contestants except one have been eliminated from the contest, the victor is the last contestant remaining. The judge SHALL then, with 2 days notice, announce them as winners, whereupon they win the tournament and the tournament is concluded. If the judge believes that more than one person is deserving of the win, e CAN announce them all as winners. The judge SHOULD award a badge to all participants in the Tournament, broadly construed, after the conclusion of the Tournament unless it has not been completed in a satisfactory manner. Regulation BT4/0 Birthday Tournament 4 The judge is the final arbitor on matters of this tournament, and eir decisions can be overturned if and only if a CFJ finds eir decisions were made with arbitrary or capricious disregard for the terms of these regulations. The judge shall adjudicate these regulations in an equitable manner, with emphasis placed on the intent of the clauses and the fair treatment of all parties. Regulation BT5/0 Birthday Tournament 5 Sections numbered 0 through 5 CANNOT be amended except according to the procedures established by Section 2 or the rules of Agora. Regulation BT6/0 Birthday Tournament 6 The game SHALL be conducted on a map mechanically indistinguishable from that appearing at [2]. The Gamemaster SHALL assign Great Powers to Contestants according to an equitable and random method. Regulation BT7/0 Birthday Tournament 7 Contestants may seek the assistance of non-Contestants. If any do so, they SHALL notify the Judge and publicly announce the identities of any such non-Contestants and what assistance they will provide. This could include negotiating on eir behalf, providing feedback on orders, or drafting proposals on eir behalf. Regulation BT8/0 Birthday Tournament 8 At any time, any Contestant CAN submit a Proposal to change these regulations by announcement. Any Contestant CAN withdraw any Proposal e has submitted by announcement. When a Proposal has been submitted but not withdrawn, any Contestant other than the Proposer CAN privately send a vote to the Judge. When a Proposal has
DIS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] ACORN - 4 Jul 2020
Oh look, a squirrel! wait, where did the ACORN go? On 7/4/2020 12:16 AM, Jason Cobb via agora-official wrote: THE AGORA NOMIC CODE OF REGULATIONS These ACORNs are also online at http://agoranomic.org/ruleset/ Date of this ACORN: 5 Jul 2020 The Birthday Tournament This section has the regulations governing the Birthday Tournament. Regulation BT0/0 Birthday Tournament 0 P.S.S. CANNOT win this Tournament or become a Contestant. P.S.S. is the Gamemaster and Judge of this game. Regulation BT1/0 Birthday Tournament 1 Until July 7 or 7 days after the promulgation of these regulations, whichever is later, any person CAN enter the contest (becoming a Contestant) by announcement, acting as emself, as long as no more than six other persons have already done so. Regulation BT2/0 Birthday Tournament 2 The Gamemaster CAN cause any person to cease to be a Contestant by announcement. The Gamemaster CAN cause any consenting person to become a Contestant by announcement. The Gamemaster CAN, by announcement, amend the gamestate by substituting one Contestant into all instances of another Contestant. If fewer than seven persons have become Contestants, the Gamemaster CAN replace the text of these regulations with appropriate regulations for a Nomic-inspired game, such as FRC, an experimental Nomic, or a sub-Nomic. The Gamemaster CAN amend the text of these regulations arbitrarily in order to prevent breaches of Agoran custom or rules. The Gamemaster SHOULD NOT take any actions permitted by this section unless it is in the best interests of the game. Regulation BT3/0 Birthday Tournament 3 When all contestants except one have been eliminated from the contest, the victor is the last contestant remaining. The judge SHALL then, with 2 days notice, announce them as winners, whereupon they win the tournament and the tournament is concluded. If the judge believes that more than one person is deserving of the win, e CAN announce them all as winners. The judge SHOULD award a badge to all participants in the Tournament, broadly construed, after the conclusion of the Tournament unless it has not been completed in a satisfactory manner. Regulation BT4/0 Birthday Tournament 4 The judge is the final arbitor on matters of this tournament, and eir decisions can be overturned if and only if a CFJ finds eir decisions were made with arbitrary or capricious disregard for the terms of these regulations. The judge shall adjudicate these regulations in an equitable manner, with emphasis placed on the intent of the clauses and the fair treatment of all parties. Regulation BT5/0 Birthday Tournament 5 Sections numbered 0 through 5 CANNOT be amended except according to the procedures established by Section 2 or the rules of Agora. Regulation BT6/0 Birthday Tournament 6 The game SHALL be conducted on a map mechanically indistinguishable from that appearing at [2]. The Gamemaster SHALL assign Great Powers to Contestants according to an equitable and random method. Regulation BT7/0 Birthday Tournament 7 Contestants may seek the assistance of non-Contestants. If any do so, they SHALL notify the Judge and publicly announce the identities of any such non-Contestants and what assistance they will provide. This could include negotiating on eir behalf, providing feedback on orders, or drafting proposals on eir behalf. Regulation BT8/0 Birthday Tournament 8 At any time, any Contestant CAN submit a Proposal to change these regulations by announcement. Any Contestant CAN withdraw any Proposal e has submitted by announcement. When a Proposal has been submitted but not withdrawn, any Contestant other than the Proposer CAN privately send a vote to the Judge. When a Proposal has received a number of non-withdrawn votes in favor greater than half the number of Contestants, the Judge SHALL, in a timely
Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] ACORN - 4 Jul 2020
On 7/4/20 2:25 AM, Aris Merchant via agora-discussion wrote: > On Fri, Jul 3, 2020 at 9:16 PM Jason Cobb via agora-official < > agora-offic...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > >> THE AGORA NOMIC CODE OF REGULATIONS >> >> These ACORNs are also online at http://agoranomic.org/ruleset/ >> >> Date of this ACORN: 5 Jul 2020 > > Soft CoE: This doesn't include the footnotes. The map footnote, in > particular, is rather crucial to play. > > -Aris Accepted. I've added the map footnote as a comment to BT6, but not the other footnotes because they are not referenced in the text of the regulations. -- Jason Cobb
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Registration - Fred
coming soon to a nicely formatted web report near you! On 7/3/2020 10:40 PM, nch via agora-discussion wrote: There's also quite a few Contracts to interact with right now. Most but not all have something to do with the Cards. You can join whichever ones seem interesting to you. They're listed here: https://www.mail-archive.com/agora-official@agoranomic.org/msg10267.html -- ATMunn friendly neighborhood notary here :)
DIS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] ACORN - 4 Jul 2020
On Fri, Jul 3, 2020 at 9:16 PM Jason Cobb via agora-official < agora-offic...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > THE AGORA NOMIC CODE OF REGULATIONS > > These ACORNs are also online at http://agoranomic.org/ruleset/ > > Date of this ACORN: 5 Jul 2020 Soft CoE: This doesn't include the footnotes. The map footnote, in particular, is rather crucial to play. -Aris > >
