DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Registrar Tracks Birthdays
nix via agora-business [2023-04-29 19:59]: > Title: Registrar Tracks Birthdays Oh no, work! -- juan
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Herald] Awards Month (@Promotor, @Arbitor, @Tailor, @ADoP)
On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 11:29 AM nix via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > On 4/30/23 17:47, Edward Murphy via agora-business wrote: > > I intend to award Employee of the Year to either Janet or snail, > > subject to discussion. > I'm not convinced this works as an official intent (I'm not even sure if > it was meant to be one vs just a statement of what you plan to do). But > I also would support giving this to either person. I can make the intent > when/if you decide on a particular one. > > Very hard to choose between the two. Maybe other factors shouldn't > count, but since neither has ever won any yearly award, and snail > already looks like a lock for the Golden Glove, I'd personally lean > towards Janet for this one. > > -- > nix > Prime Minister, Herald > > Funnily, this was the award I thought I was most in the running for. I've put a lot of effort into running all the offices I've had, though I'm not sure how it would compare to Janet's effort, and if effort is even very important to consider (Janet probably runs eir offices more efficiently, since most of mine aren't automated). I'm really surprised Janet hasn't gotten this award already (I thought e had it already so I had more of a chance!), so if it comes down to the two of us e definitely deserves it more. But I thought I should mention we could both get it, if people think our efforts are of similar magnitude for the last year: "Each indicated Officer SHOULD award these titles to 1-2 persons each year". I've held 10 different offices after all, many of which were important for gameplay (Promotor, Arbitor, Notary, Registrar, and Notably Treasuror, after Trigon left (Treasuror is probably the one that took most of my time, despite being automated).) (Although dream keeper/ dreamor are the same lol) I also made the spreadsheet for assessments, which it seems like at least some people get use out of. (Thanks to nix for helping improve that!) I spent a good chunk of my lifespan on doing officework, and plan on continuing to do so (although it bordered on detrimental sometimes last year, I should probably offload some of my offices). Anyways I think we should both get it, but if not Janet should be chosen over me, and I'll support such an intent from the Herald. -- snail
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Herald] Awards Month (@Promotor, @Arbitor, @Tailor, @ADoP)
On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 9:38 AM Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote: > > On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 9:28 AM nix via agora-discussion > wrote: > > > > On 4/30/23 17:47, Edward Murphy via agora-business wrote: > > > I intend to award Employee of the Year to either Janet or snail, > > > subject to discussion. > > I'm not convinced this works as an official intent (I'm not even sure if > > it was meant to be one vs just a statement of what you plan to do). But > > I also would support giving this to either person. I can make the intent > > when/if you decide on a particular one. > > > > Very hard to choose between the two. Maybe other factors shouldn't > > count, but since neither has ever won any yearly award, and snail > > already looks like a lock for the Golden Glove, I'd personally lean > > towards Janet for this one. > > one other note is that (going from Murphy's list) some of snail's > offices are basically "contestmaster" in that e proposed a subgame e > wanted to run, and ran it. Nothing wrong with that (and it's great) > but it's more like thanking people for running tournaments. So > factoring that in, and seeing similar (excellent in both cases) effort > in the core offices, I'd also lean towards Janet. I'm also supporting Janet. In addition to the reasoning provided by nix and G., both of whom I find myself in agreement with, I've been impressed with eir devotion to understanding the actual state of the rules. Even if I sometimes disagree with em about which cases succeed and which fail and about the underlying standards, it is truly impressive how often e catches potential problems that others have missed. Without Janet, I doubt we would have noticed how restrictive our current precedent is on what constitutes an unambiguous rule change and how often the standard appears not to be met in practice. This is relatively minor compared to the rationales others have provided, but it is something I want to note. -Aspen
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Herald] Awards Month (@Promotor, @Arbitor, @Tailor, @ADoP)
On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 9:28 AM nix via agora-discussion wrote: > > On 4/30/23 17:47, Edward Murphy via agora-business wrote: > > I intend to award Employee of the Year to either Janet or snail, > > subject to discussion. > I'm not convinced this works as an official intent (I'm not even sure if > it was meant to be one vs just a statement of what you plan to do). But > I also would support giving this to either person. I can make the intent > when/if you decide on a particular one. > > Very hard to choose between the two. Maybe other factors shouldn't > count, but since neither has ever won any yearly award, and snail > already looks like a lock for the Golden Glove, I'd personally lean > towards Janet for this one. one other note is that (going from Murphy's list) some of snail's offices are basically "contestmaster" in that e proposed a subgame e wanted to run, and ran it. Nothing wrong with that (and it's great) but it's more like thanking people for running tournaments. So factoring that in, and seeing similar (excellent in both cases) effort in the core offices, I'd also lean towards Janet.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Herald] Awards Month (@Promotor, @Arbitor, @Tailor, @ADoP)
On 5/2/23 11:28, nix via agora-discussion wrote: Very hard to choose between the two. Maybe other factors shouldn't count, but since neither has ever won any yearly award, and snail already looks like a lock for the Golden Glove, I'd personally lean towards Janet for this one. Another thought: Janet has put a lot of work into RTRW ideas, and while they haven't all played out successfully they have been interesting experiments that I think are worthy of consideration for eir Rulekeepor service. -- nix Prime Minister, Herald
DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Delegation
On Mon, May 1, 2023 at 10:28 AM nix via agora-business wrote: > If an officer specified a Delegate when taking a Vacation, and the > Delegate has publicly consented, then the Delegate can act as if e > is the holder of the Office while the officer is On Vacation. I'm still against this happening with nothing but consent between two parties. I like Juan's idea of making this like the judicial list or the thesis committee lists, maybe just governed by SHOULDs and "relatively fair/equal chances". I think this could help us with both ends of the issue - it would ensure no one person got the best assignments, but there would also some expectation that if you volunteer to be on the delegate list, sometimes you should accept being assigned something that no one really wants to do. -G.
DIS: Re: BUS: [Herald] Awards Month (@Promotor, @Arbitor, @Tailor, @ADoP)
On 4/30/23 17:47, Edward Murphy via agora-business wrote: I intend to award Employee of the Year to either Janet or snail, subject to discussion. I'm not convinced this works as an official intent (I'm not even sure if it was meant to be one vs just a statement of what you plan to do). But I also would support giving this to either person. I can make the intent when/if you decide on a particular one. Very hard to choose between the two. Maybe other factors shouldn't count, but since neither has ever won any yearly award, and snail already looks like a lock for the Golden Glove, I'd personally lean towards Janet for this one. -- nix Prime Minister, Herald
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [proposal] 8639 rerun [CFJ]
On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 9:17 AM Aspen via agora-business wrote: > > On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 9:01 AM Janet Cobb via agora-discussion > wrote: > > > > On 5/2/23 01:01, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote: > > > On Mon, May 1, 2023 at 8:38 PM Janet Cobb via agora-business < > > > agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > > > > >> [Proposal 8639 > > >> failed to make this change because it used "amend" for a power change. > > > > > > If everyone involved including you knew what it meant at the time so as to > > > miss the “error” entirely, how could it possibly have been unclear, even > > > by > > > r105 standards? > > > I maintain that “amend a rule’s power” is a clear synonym for “change a > > > rules power” and is obviously not amending a rule’s text. > > > > > > Well, past me is an idiot and I disavow everything they've said. > > > > I've been consistent (or tried to be) in saying that "amend a rule's > > title" doesn't work, and AFAIK there have been no legal challenges to > > that (and it was suggested in Discord to legislate a different rule > > rather than that my reading is wrong). > > > > My reading is that R105 makes "amend" in the context of a rule mean only > > and exactly changing the text of the rule, and any other usage is > > inherently ambiguous. > > > > -- > > Janet Cobb > > > > Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason > > > > I CFJ 'Rule 879, "Quorum", has power 3.0.' I bar Janet. (I'd bar G. > too if I could - neither of them is biased, but I'm hoping for a third > opinion here.) Context can be found in the thread above. While you didn't file with the referee (won't be offended if you decide to withdraw and go with referee), I'll be sure to choose a judge that's not me (and without known-to-me biases on this). In fact, ITT this is a particularly good for a "newer" judge, as long standing "we've always read it that way" quibbles that resolve around exact text interpretation can benefit from a fresh reading by people not solidified in the game culture of the issue. -G.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: (@Promotor) Proposal - The Rice Game
Ah! Thank you. I'll amend that along with anything else you (or others) may see, in one go then, once time has passed or more comments have come in. On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 5:35 PM nix via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > On 5/2/23 05:06, Yachay Wayllukuq via agora-business wrote: > > if ey haven't done so > I'll read the rest soon, but just to note: the version of spivak Agora > iplements uses "e [singular agreement]" not "ey [plural agreement]" > which I understand that some similar systems use. So this should be "if > e hasn't done so" and so on for the other uses of "ey" in the proposal. > > -- > nix > Prime Minister, Herald > >
Re: DIS: (Draft) Blot overhaul
I appreciate the consideration but I'd suggest a different implementation,
perhaps using something different than blots.
On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 5:57 PM Forest Sweeney via agora-discussion <
agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 8:36 AM Forest Sweeney via agora-discussion <
> agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
>
> > @Yachay/Juan: both of you expressed interest in something a little less
> > grounded and more "dramatic" (EG play battles), hopefully this can
> > incorporate that, whilst also allowing for the "oops/ouch" mechanism to
> > function properly.
> >
> > {
> > Title: It's now called Drama
> >
>
> No one submit this, I want none of it also. (but I do want the
> conversation.)
> --
> 4st
> Referee
> Uncertified Bad Idea Generator
>
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [proposal] 8639 rerun
On 5/2/23 01:01, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote: > On Mon, May 1, 2023 at 8:38 PM Janet Cobb via agora-business < > agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > >> [Proposal 8639 >> failed to make this change because it used "amend" for a power change. > > If everyone involved including you knew what it meant at the time so as to > miss the “error” entirely, how could it possibly have been unclear, even by > r105 standards? > I maintain that “amend a rule’s power” is a clear synonym for “change a > rules power” and is obviously not amending a rule’s text. Well, past me is an idiot and I disavow everything they've said. I've been consistent (or tried to be) in saying that "amend a rule's title" doesn't work, and AFAIK there have been no legal challenges to that (and it was suggested in Discord to legislate a different rule rather than that my reading is wrong). My reading is that R105 makes "amend" in the context of a rule mean only and exactly changing the text of the rule, and any other usage is inherently ambiguous. -- Janet Cobb Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
Re: DIS: (Draft) Blot overhaul
On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 8:36 AM Forest Sweeney via agora-discussion <
agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> @Yachay/Juan: both of you expressed interest in something a little less
> grounded and more "dramatic" (EG play battles), hopefully this can
> incorporate that, whilst also allowing for the "oops/ouch" mechanism to
> function properly.
>
> {
> Title: It's now called Drama
>
No one submit this, I want none of it also. (but I do want the
conversation.)
--
4st
Referee
Uncertified Bad Idea Generator
Re: DIS: (Draft) Blot overhaul
On 5/2/23 10:35, Forest Sweeney via agora-discussion wrote: Title: It's now called Drama Adoption Index: 3.0 Author: 4st Co-author: Strong AGAINST on all of this. It has exactly the same issues as the current system, except with harsher penalties. -- nix Prime Minister, Herald
DIS: (Draft) Blot overhaul
@Yachay/Juan: both of you expressed interest in something a little less
grounded and more "dramatic" (EG play battles), hopefully this can
incorporate that, whilst also allowing for the "oops/ouch" mechanism to
function properly.
{
Title: It's now called Drama
Adoption Index: 3.0
Author: 4st
Co-author:
[From the Thesis "Metagaming or Roleplaying - two Approaches
to Playing Nomic", I want to bring back more Roleplaying
aspects of this game. As such, one of the systems where Drama
comes into play is the Blots system. Along with other issues it
currently has (IE forgiveness), it doesn't adequately
reflect whats going on. IN ADDITION, I seek to incorporate
the "Karma" system that has appeared now and again into it.
Karma seems like an adequate function of any drama.]
(Don't worry, it's still power 2. However, some power 1.7 rules
were merged into this rule.)
Firstly, amend "Blots" (Rule 2555) to read:
{
==Dramas are an Asset==
(Good) Drama and Bad Drama (syn. blots) are indestructible fixed
currencies with ownership restricted to persons. The Referee is
an office that tracks Drama and Bad Drama.
To expunge a drama is to destroy it. Creating and destroying Dramas
are secured with a Power Threshold of 1.7.
==Bad Drama==
A person with 1 or more Bad Drama is Impure. A rule can specify
other ways a person is Impure, but otherwise a person is Pure.
An impure unregistered person is a Fugitive.
At the beginning of each quarter, half (rounded down) of each
fugitive's dramas are destroyed.
==Controlling Drama==
Any player who has not expunged drama by this method this week
CAN expunge 1 specified drama from a specified player by announcement,
if e specifies a reason for doing so.
E CANNOT specify emself for this if e has gained any Bad Drama this or
the previous week.
A person CAN, by announcement, create a specified amount of Bad
Drama in eir possession, specifying a reason for doing so.
Any player who has not created drama by this method this week
CAN create a Good Drama in eir possession and another Good Drama
in a different specified player's possession by announcement,
if e specifies a reason for doing so. E CANNOT create drama this way
if e has gained any Bad Drama this or the previous week.
==Scenes==
A Scene (syn. Infraction, Crime) is a violation of a rule.
The person who made a Scene is its (Drama) Llama.
The intensity (syn. Class) of a scene is 1 unless a rule specifies a
different intensity for it. Specifying the intensity is a recommendation
for how much Drama the related Scene should create.
A Scene can be Dramatic, Accidental, or Foul, and is Accidental by default.
The Referee's weekly report contains a list of scenes made
in the previous week.
==Making A Scene==
A player CAN, by announcement, arrive at a fresh Scene, and SHALL
clearly specify the Scene. If E is the first player to arrive at a Scene,
e is the Victim. A Scene is fresh if it was made by any other player
in the last 7 days. When arriving at a Scene, a player MAY specify if
the scene feels Dramatic, Accidental, or Foul.
A player may only arrive at any particular scene once.
If a Scene is not clearly specified, e arrives at a Scene e is both
the Llama and the Victim of.
==Investigating A Scene==
The Detective for a scene is the Referee unless e is the
Llama. Otherwise, it is the Arbitor.
Within 14 days of a scene's creation, the Detective
CAN investigate the scene by announcement.
To investigate a scene, the Detective MUST, by announcement,
specify the Scene, the intensity of the Scene, and whether the Scene
was Dramatic, Accidental, or Foul.
The Detective MUST specify the intensity of a Scene, as an integer from 1
up to twice the number of players at a Scene, and SHOULD specify the
intensity as how intense the Scene feels.
If the Detective finds that a Scene is Dramatic, N Good Drama is created
in the possession of the Llama, where N is the Scene's intensity.
If the Detective finds that a Scene is Foul, N Bad Drama is created
in the possession of the Llama, where N is the Scene's intensity.
For a Scene to be found Dramatic or Foul, the Detective MUST
also specify 10 words to include in an Apology.
The previous notwithstanding, a Detective CANNOT investigate
a Scene that has already been Investigated. The Detective of a Scene
SHALL investigate the scene in a timely manner after a Victim is identified,
and failure to do so is the Class N crime of Favoritism, where N is
equal to the recommended intensity of the Scene.
A Scene SHOULD be Dramatic if:
(0) it feels like it was otherwise/relatively harmless;
(1) at the time the alleged Scene occured, it was not a Scene;
(2) the Scene was for failure to take an action that the
Llama, through no fault of eir own, COULD NOT have
performed;
(3) the Scene is for conduct that the Llama, through no
fault of eir own, was obliged to undertake by a rule of equal
or greater power to the one e'd violated;
(4) the Llama could not have avoided the scene when
exercising the
DIS: Re: BUS: (@Promotor) Proposal - The Rice Game
On 5/2/23 05:06, Yachay Wayllukuq via agora-business wrote: if ey haven't done so I'll read the rest soon, but just to note: the version of spivak Agora iplements uses "e [singular agreement]" not "ey [plural agreement]" which I understand that some similar systems use. So this should be "if e hasn't done so" and so on for the other uses of "ey" in the proposal. -- nix Prime Minister, Herald
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Delegation
Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion [2023-05-01 11:46]: > Maybe making the delegation subject to a public volunteer process - so it’s > treated differently if more than one person want the job, so the > hand-picking potential is more limited? I suggest we treat this the same way as the list of judges and peer-reviewers (perhaps more of the latter). Which means: some discretion on behalf of the ADoP (obvious officer choice), but using some ad-hoc publicly known method to distribute delegations. So, in this case, every player would have ample time before-hand to express which offices they'd be interested in experimenting, and we can collectively ensure a fair selection. Plus: this also would gauge the potential for officer change. -- juan
