Re: DIS: [Notary] Informal Contract Awards
The creator of the dragon corporation is warrigal On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 3:13 AM nch via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > On 6/29/20 12:11 PM, ATMunn via agora-discussion wrote: > > For the Participation Award, given to the people who are members to the > > most contracts: > I would restrict this to people who are members of contracts with at > least two members. Otherwise, I like the idea! > > -- >From R. Lee
DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Notary] The Notes (weekly report)
you have this right in the text but not in the initial summary On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 2:45 AM Ed Strange via agora-business < agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > (unofficial) CoE: the "new contract" between nch and I doesnt exist as we > both agreed to repeal it. > > On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 2:38 AM ATMunn via agora-official < > agora-offic...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > > [unfortunately, the web report isn't quite ready yet, but it will be > > soon] > > > > As per my duties as Notary, I publish the following as my weekly report: > > > > > > ██ ██ ███ ███ ██ █ ███ ██ > > ████ ██ ██ ██ ██ ██████ ██ > > █████ █ ██ ██ ██ ██ ██████ > > ████ ██ ████ ██ ██████ ██ > > ████ ██ ███ ██ ███ █ █████ ██ > > > > -~= Notary's weekly report =~- > > > > > > > > All times and dates in this report are given in Coordinated Universal > > Time (UTC). > > > > Date of last report: 22 Jun 2020 > > Date of this report: 29 Jun 2020 > > > > Abbreviations used in this report: > > --- > > P.S.S. | Publius Scribonius Scholasticus > > CB | Cuddlebeam > > con. | contract > > --- > > > > > > If any contract(s) have no name currently, I assign it/them the name(s) > > displayed in this report. > > > > > > === SHORT LIST OF CONTRACTS > > > > Title Parties > > "The Dragon Corporation" Aris, Jason, Falsifian > > "GRBaSTttPF"[1] Gaelan, twg, Warrigal, Falsifian > > "Needlessly Abstract Exchange"nch, P.S.S., ATMunn, Jason > > "The Mystical Menagerie" Cuddlebeam > > "Humble Agoran Moral Tripwire"Cuddlebeam > > "TPP"[2] CB, nch, R. Lee, P.S.S., Bögtil, Jason, ... [3] > > "DracoLotto" Aris, R. Lee, Falsifian, Jason > > "AAA"[4] Jason, P.S.S., R. Lee, nch > > "LoAFER"[5]Trigon, Jason, R. Lee, ATMunn, P.S.S. > > "Co Dependents" nch, R. Lee > > "Cuddlebeam's Locker" Cuddlebeam > > "Card Collective Contract, Agoran"Murphy, R. Lee > > "Contract No. 1: GIFT"Trigon > > "Contract No. 2: POEM"Trigon > > "Contract No. 3: CARD"Trigon > > "Contract No. 4: SURE"Trigon > > "Contract No. 5: DECK"Trigon > > "Contract No. 6: BOON"Trigon > > "SEAMSTRESS"[6] Trigon, nch, Jason > > "Dragon QuickExchange" Falsifian > > "New contract" R. Lee, nch > > "Obstruction"omd > > "Obstruction 2: Electric Boogaloo"R. Lee > > "SNOCS"[7] omd, ATMunn, R. Lee > > "Dragon Political Outreach"Falsifian > > > > > > [1] Gaelan's Really Bad At Sending Things To The Public Forum > > [2] The Plunder Partnership > > [3] Also Falsifian, Aris, ATMunn > > [4] The Agoran Arbitration Association > > [5] League of Agorans Facilitating Effective Recordkeeping > > [6] Signature Enthusiast Allows Modification of Signature Through > > Rigorous Exchanging of Signature Suggestions > > [7] Simple, No-Opportunity-Cost Sets > > > > > > > > > > == FULL TEXT AND HISTORY OF CONTRACTS == > > > > > > The following 25 contracts exist: > > > > > > "The Dragon Corporation" (revision 2) > > Parties: Aris, Jason, Falsifian > > > > -- > > > > ## Bylaw 1: Definition > > > > This contract is named "the Dragon Corporation". The purpose of the > > Dragon Corporation is to earn as much money as possible for its > > shareholders. > > > > All other provisions of this contract notwithstanding, this contract > > does
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: A Pledge
Were i still notary, I would hold it automatically destroyed (and did so for many other such pledges). nonetheless, notary reports aren't self-ratifying, so i suppose it's good to keep an eye on it. On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 2:33 AM ATMunn via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > It's just a matter of whether the pledge is automatically destroyed or > needs to be manually destroyed. > > On 6/29/2020 12:30 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via > agora-discussion wrote: > > On 6/29/20 12:29 PM, ATMunn via agora-discussion wrote: > >> Rule 2450: > >>The time window of a pledge is 60 days, unless the > >>pledge explicitly states otherwise. > >> > >> Is "for the next 24 hours" sufficient to be "explicitly stating > >> otherwise" regarding the time window? > > > > I think it does, but even if it doesn't, I think the 24 hours are > > assessed from creation, so it wouldn't have any effect. > > > > -- > ATMunn > friendly neighborhood notary here :) > -- >From R. Lee
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: A Pledge
Yes, it is very explicitly stating otherwise. Anyway, even if it were not, it would not have any effect beyond the 24 hours. On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 2:29 AM ATMunn via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > Rule 2450: >The time window of a pledge is 60 days, unless the >pledge explicitly states otherwise. > > Is "for the next 24 hours" sufficient to be "explicitly stating > otherwise" regarding the time window? > > On 6/29/2020 12:21 PM, grok via agora-business wrote: > > For the next 24 hours, I pledge to do your will. > > > > -- > ATMunn > friendly neighborhood notary here :) > -- >From R. Lee
DIS: Re: BUS: A Pledge
please, film yourself doing a silly dance (if you prefer for privacy reasons, record your voice singing a silly song, or do something textually silly, if you must) On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 2:21 AM grok via agora-business < agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > For the next 24 hours, I pledge to do your will. > -- >From R. Lee
DIS: Re: BUS: Justice for Trigon [attn. Herald]
I think the reason was that we'd then have to comb through the entire backlog as long service awards hadnt been awarded for a (very) long time. But as this is relatively recent, an exceptionally long and difficult period, and a current player, I wouldn't mind making an exception. On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 1:49 AM Jason Cobb via agora-business < agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > I petition the Herald to award Trigon the patent title of Long Service > in the class of 12 months, for eir service as Rulekeepor from 2018-10-14 > to 2019-10-22. > > [I just remembered this from R. Lee mentioning it. I think there was > some reason we didn't go back and do it retroactively, but I don't > remember it.] > > > ADoP report showing date of assumption: [0]. > > Resignation: [1]. > > [0]: > > https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-official/2019-October/013212.html > > [1]: > > https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-business/2019-October/041554.html > > -- > Jason Cobb > > -- >From R. Lee
DIS: [Referee] [Finger]
On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 12:20 PM Ed Strange via agora-business < agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > I point a finger at Aris for Promotor Tardiness > > On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 9:01 AM Aris Merchant via agora-discussion < > agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > > The Promotor's report is going to be late. I'm going to try to have a > draft > > out today (in the next 12 hours) and do the distribution tomorrow (in the > > next 36 hours). I apologise to everyone for my tardiness. I fell behind > on > > things. Entirely my fault. In good news, the distribution will be > current! > > > > Someone is going to point a finger at me. I don't suppose I could beg the > > Referee for a forgiveable fine? > > > > -Aris > > > > > -- > From R. Lee > (flagging the ref) -- >From R. Lee
Re: DIS: [Proto] Welcoming Back Outlaws
I agree! If Agora doesn't want me around, it is welcome to deregister me by proposal, which should be the only way to deregister someone without their consent. On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 1:40 AM Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > On 6/29/2020 8:05 AM, Ed Strange via agora-discussion wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 11:50 PM Kerim Aydin wrote: > >> > >> Yeah, I think the issue is that letting a person deregistered for crimes > >> back in the game sooner than a voluntary deregistrant is silly. Crime > >> deregistration should be a time out, I thought that was the main bug all > >> along. > >> > >> > >> > >> > > Very biased, but I'm not at all sure it's silly. Someone who wishes to > play > > but has accumulated 40 blots, without doing any serious destruction of > the > > game (racial slurs, spam, repealing the entire ruleset, etc) is > > very different from someone who doesn't wish to play the game. > > > > Then blots shouldn't be an exile condition at all. Exile should be wholly > reserved for "this was bad enough that this person really shouldn't be > playing for a while". In fact, delinking exile from blots actually makes > sense now that we're shifting our view of blots - "exile" should now just > be a straight-up option for an indictment penalty. > > If bugs allow for gaming/profitability of exile, those are true bugs. For > example: given the existence of lockboxes, I think exile should (somehow, > it's hard) embargo/seize all of their locked possessions. > > -G. > > -- >From R. Lee
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: @Arbitor, if it's not too much work
Certainly not Green, Orange is a big possibility if there is an assessment within the next few days, it's true. On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 1:14 AM Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion wrote: > On 6/29/20 11:11 AM, Ed Strange via agora-business wrote: > > I have an Emerald, Gray, and Magenta ribbon (or glitter) within the last > 2 > > days, I also can easily get Cyan (by resigning from my own office then > > deputising for it). Can I interest you in bribing you to assigning me a > CFJ > > in the next 3 days or so? If you do, I will qualify for transparent. I'd > be > > happy to give you all the assets I have for this (after redistributing > with > > nch) > > > > You should also check whether you qualify for Green or Orange. > > -- > > Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate > Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth > -- >From R. Lee
Re: DIS: [Promotor] Draft
Oh this is my fault, I thought I'd pended that proposal before the beginning of the GMT week but that was not so. On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 12:05 AM Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > On 6/29/2020 6:55 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote:> On 6/29/2020 2:09 AM, Ed Strange > via agora-discussion wrote:>> the pool also contains my most recent > proposal, the one about repealing>> summary judgement> > Aris,> > You just > asked why we should change the rule to actually state that> proposal pool > report is accurate to the beginning of the week instead of> being truly > current.> > This is why - your policies, while legal, are causing a wee > bit of> confusion around here. Whether it's people asking "what happened > to that> proposal from 13 days ago" or not noticing the date on the pool > report> each time, it just doesn't feel quite right to have constantly > backdated> reports with missing transactions. > Oh, and I don't have any issues with the policies themselves! A > reasonable solution to a hard job. Just the clarity bit. > > -- >From R. Lee
Re: DIS: [Proto] Welcoming Back Outlaws
On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 11:50 PM Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > Yeah, I think the issue is that letting a person deregistered for crimes > back in the game sooner than a voluntary deregistrant is silly. Crime > deregistration should be a time out, I thought that was the main bug all > along. > > > > Very biased, but I'm not at all sure it's silly. Someone who wishes to play but has accumulated 40 blots, without doing any serious destruction of the game (racial slurs, spam, repealing the entire ruleset, etc) is very different from someone who doesn't wish to play the game. -- >From R. Lee
Re: DIS: [Proto] Welcoming Back Outlaws
Why don't we just have "A player cannot receive a welcome package if eir
most recent deregistration was as a Fugitive". It means you aren't forever
barred, but you have to wait the 30 days like everyone else.
On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 10:42 PM nch via agora-discussion <
agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> On 6/29/20 1:46 AM, Aris Merchant via agora-discussion wrote:
> > Okay, I'm tired, and this is the best I can think of right now. This
> > would allow exiled players to be repeatedly exiled until they get down
> > to 9 blots, but give them welcome packages back afterward. Why 9? A
> > player with fewer than 9 blots has sufferage, and with the Blot-B-Gone
> > from the Justice Card in eir welcome package, a player who has 9 blots
> > can get down to 8 and be able to vote. This seems like as good a
> > solution as any to me. LMK what you all think.
> >
> > -Aris
> > ---
> > Title: Welcoming Back Outlaws
> > Adoption index: 3.0
> > Author: Aris
> > Co-authors:
> >
> >
> > Amend Rule 2556, "Penalties", by changing its final paragraph to read in
> full:
> >
> >Outlawed is a secured negative boolean switch, belonging to persons
> and
> >tracked by the Referee. A player CAN, with 7 days notice, deregister
> (exile)
> >a specified player (the outlaw) who has more than 40 blots or is
> outlawed.
> >A person who has been exiled becomes outlawed if e is not already. Any
> >person CAN cause any outlawed person with 9 or fewer blots to cease
> being
> >outlawed by announcement.
> >
> > If the proposal "Welcome Package Patch" passed, amend Rule 2499,
> > "Welcome Packages", by changing the last sentence of the first paragraph
> > to have the text labeled "FIXED TEXT" below. Otherwise, amend Rule 2499,
> > "Welcome Packages", by appending the text labeled "FIXED TEXT" below to
> the
> > first paragraph.
> >
> > FIXED TEXT: {
> >An outlawed player CANNOT receive a Welcome Package via this method.
> > }
>
> This seems really over engineered. All we need to do is amend the new
> sentence in Welcome Package Patch adds to read "A player CANNOT receive
> a Welcome Package via this method if was last deregistered by exile and
> currently has more than 9 blots."
>
> --
> nch
> Prime Minister, Webmastor, NAX Exchange Manager
>
>
>
--
>From R. Lee
Re: DIS: [Promotor] Draft
the pool also contains my most recent proposal, the one about repealing
summary judgement
On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 6:02 PM Aris Merchant via agora-discussion <
agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> Here's that draft I promised. Time for bed.
>
> -Aris
> ---
> I hereby distribute each listed proposal, initiating a referendum on it,
> and removing it from the proposal pool. For this decision, the vote
> collector
> is the Assessor, the quorum is 8, 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
> ---
> 8459* Jason, [1] 3.0 Talismans
> 8460* G., ais523 3.0 UV-G Sunblock
> 8461# R. Lee, Aris 2.0 Redoing Adopted Proposals
> 8462* Jason, Falsifian 3.0 Fee-based methods
> 8463* Jason3.0 Future-proofing black ribbons
> 8464# R. Lee 1.0 You can certify, but you can't win
> ever!
> 8465# Jason, P.S.S.1.0 Public defense
> 8466# ATMunn 1.0 the simple option
> 8467# Jason, Trigon2.0 Talismans auction patch
> 8468* Jason, nch, G. 3.0 Decision resolution patch
> 8469# Aris, [1]2.0 Bureaucratic Reengineering
>
> The proposal pool contains the following proposals:
>
> Author(s)AITitle
> ---
> G. 3.0 no backdating needed
> omd, nch 1.0 Reset deadlines when resetting the economy
> nch, G., Trigon 1.0 Sponsored Proposals
> Falsifian, G.1.0 Contract charities
> Murphy 1.7 Decriminalization
> Murphy, G. 1.0 Generalized card auctions
> omd 1.0 Stop disincentivizing bugfixes
>
> [1] nch, Falsifian
> [2] Alexis, Falsifian, nch, G.
>
> 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. Where
> the information shown below differs from the information shown above,
> the information shown above shall control.
>
> //
> ID: 8459
> Title: Talismans
> Adoption index: 3.0
> Author: Aris
> Co-authors: nch, Falsifian, G.
>
>
> For the purposes of this proposal, a player's prior master is eir master
> before this proposal applies any effects.
>
> Amend Rule 2532 to read, in whole:
> {
>
> A talisman is an indestructible asset, tracked by the Registrar, and
> with ownership wholly restricted to players and Agora. There exists
> exactly one talisman for each player, and no other talismans; if one
> does not exist for a certain player, it is created in eir posession.
> Talismans CAN only be transferred as explicitly specified by the rules.
> The creation, destruction, and transfer of talismans is secured.
>
> Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, a player CAN, by announcement,
> transfer the talisman for em to emself. The master of a player is the
> entity that possesses the talisman for em. A player who is eir own
> master is active; any other player is a zombie (syn. inactive).
>
> The master of a zombie CAN act on behalf of em, except a master CANNOT
> act on behalf of a zombie to:
> - initiate, support, object to, or perform a dependent action;
> - act on behalf of that zombie's zombies;
> - bid in a zombie auction;
> - enter a contract, pledge, or other type of agreement;
> - initiate a Call for Judgement;
> - create blots;
> - deregister.
>
> If a master causes a zombie to perform an ILLEGAL action, the master
> commits the Class 4+N Crime of Masterminding (where N is the class of
> the illegal action).
>
> If an active player who was a zombie has not received a Welcome Package
> since e most recently ceased being a zombie, and if eir resale value was
> less than 2 at any point during eir most recent time as a zombie, then
> any player CAN cause em to receive a Welcome Package by announcement.
>
> }
>
> Amend Rule 2574 to read, in whole:
> {
>
> Any player CAN, with notice, transfer the talisman for an active player
> who has not made a public announcement in the past 60 days to Agora.
>
> Resale value is a secured natural switch for zombies, tracked by the
> Registrar, with a default value of 2. Whenever the talisman for a zombie
> is transferred to a player, that zombie's resale value is decreased by
> 1. At the end of a zombie auction, the resale value
Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [ADoP] Resolving ADoP election
If it were an outright tie, I probably wouldn't feel right just giving it to myself, I might have rolled a dice. But PSS would have voted for you if you had voted, so you would actually would have won. On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 4:40 AM Edward Murphy via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > R. Lee wrote: > > >I resolve the ADoP election as follows. Quorum was 9, voting system > was > > IRV, candidates were R. Lee and Murphy. > > First round > > R. Lee: (16) tcbapo, R. Lee, G^., twg, PSS* > > Murphy: (9) Aris, ATMunn, Jason > > Present: (3)Falsifian > > > > ^: G. had 4 voting power as speaker > > *PSS cast a conditional vote for me unless Murphy cast a vote, which e > did > > not. > > > > I win this ADoP election and declare myself installed as ADoP. I award > > myself an emerald ribbon unless I already have one, in which case I award > > myself emerald glitter. > > Fair enough. > > I wondered what would happen if there was a dead tie (e.g. if I'd voted > and G. didn't have a Speaker bump then this would've been 12-12-3), but > Election Procedure specifies that the vote collector picks which > option-tied-for-lowest gets discarded, which makes sense. > -- >From R. Lee
Re: DIS: Archiving Metareports
it's on white now, also i think nch will show me how ot archive things in the same place Murphy did it On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 4:44 AM Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > On 6/28/2020 7:22 AM, Ed Strange via agora-official wrote: > > Success! Resending to OFF, for those who prefer it. > > Yay! > > > On 6/28/2020 7:16 AM, Ed Strange via agora-discussion wrote: > > https://leeonlaw.blogspot.com/2020/06/adop-metareport.html > > Bookmarked and thanks. That black on dark brown is super-hard to read tho. > > > > -- >From R. Lee
Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [ADOP] Salaries
You already got paid salary for that week in my most recent salaries (Jun 28) - i gave it to you for your June 21 full report not your June 16 CoE revision. So there is no refund to give. On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 4:12 AM Aris Merchant via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 11:01 AM Edward Murphy via agora-discussion < > agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > > R. Lee wrote: > > > > > I award the following players the following amount of money for their > > > officer reports and assessor resolutions . For more information, see > the > > > recent events section of my last weekly report. > > > > > > R. Lee: 5 coins (ADoP weekly x1) > > > > > > Falsifian: 10 coins (Registrar weekly x1, Registrar monthly x1) > > > > > > PSS: 10 coins (Referee weekly x1, Herald weekly x1) > > > > > > G.: 10 coins (Arbitor weekly x2) > > > > > > Jason: 15 coins (Assessor Assessments x1, SLR x1, FLR x1) > > > > > > Trigon: 5 coins (Treasuror weekly x1) > > > > > > ATMunn: 5 coins (Notary weekly x1) > > > > I think Aris also earned 5 coins for Promotor weekly x1 (June 16)? > > > I demand a refund, back pay, front pay, tonnage, and poundage. ;) > > -Aris > -- >From R. Lee
DIS: Test (double spacing)
=Metareport= This is the ADoP’s weekly report Date of last report: 2020-06-21 Date of this report: 2020-06-28 MISCELLANEOUS INFO -- Filled offices: 15/15 (100%) Total officers: 10 Consolidation[1]: 1.5 Late reports: 0% -- [1] This is the number of filled offices divided by the number of officers. Each officer, on average, holds this many offices. OFFICES Office Holder Since Last Election -- ADoP R. Lee 2020-06-072020-06-27 ArbitorG. 2019-06-112019-11-23 Assessor Jason 2019-07-092019-11-11 Distributoromd2018-06-15imposed Herald PSS2020-05-032020-05-16 Notary ATMunn 2020-06-152020-06-15 Prime Minister nch2020-06-222020-06-22 Promotor Aris 2016-10-212017-09-21 RefereePSS2020-03-292020-04-19 Registrar Falsifian 2019-05-042020-02-26 Rulekeepor Jason 2019-12-062020-03-07 SpeakerG. 2020-06-15imposed Tailor PSS2020-04-192020-04-19 Treasuror Trigon 2020-05-012020-05-01 Webmastor nch2020-06-032020-06-13 -- * = Interim office (vacant or holder not elected) WEEKLY REPORTS Office Report Last Published Late[1] -- ADoP Offices 2020-06-21[2] ArbitorJudicial matters 2020-06-20 Herald Matters of Honour2020-06-28 Notary Contracts2020-06-22 Promotor Proposal pool2020-06-21 RefereeRule violations 2020-06-28 Registrar Players, Fora2020-06-22 Rulekeepor Short Logical Ruleset2020-06-18 Treasuror Coins, other currencies 2020-06-28 Tailor Glitter Prices 2020-06-28 -- [1] ! = 1 period missed, !! = 2, !!! = 3+ [2] Not including this report MONTHLY REPORTS Office ReportLast Published Late -- Herald Patent titles 2020-05-31 Registrar Player history2020-06-16 Rulekeepor Full Logical Ruleset 2020-05-24 Tailor Ribbons 2020-05-31 Webmastor Web resources 2020-06-03 -- STARTABLE ELECTIONS[1] Office Last Election -- Promotor 2017-09-21 Assessor 2019-11-11 Arbitor 2019-11-23 Registrar2020-02-26 Rulekeepor 2020-03-07 -- [1] Anyone can start an election (with 2 support and also becoming a candidate) 90 days after the previous one (or if it's interim and no election is ongoing). This section lists the offices for which anyone could start an election this way. INTERESTS - Office Interest --ADoP Efficiency ArbitorJustice Assessor Efficiency, Legislation DistributorParticipation Herald Participation Notary Economy Prime Minister Every Ministry Promotor Legislation RefereeJustice Registrar Efficiency Rulekeepor Legislation, Participation SpeakerEvery Ministry Tailor Participation Treasuror Economy, Economy Webmastor Participation -- Recent Events - Jun 07: R. Lee pays rewards for previous officer duties. Jun 07: R. Lee initiates elections for ADoP and Webmastor Jun 07: Notary election enters voting phase. Jun 07: PSS publishes Herald weekly report Jun 07: PSS publishes Referee weekly report Jun 07: G. publishes Arbitor weekly report. BEGINNING OF NEW WEEK Jun 10: Aris publishes Promotor weekly report Jun 11: Prime Minister election enters voting phase Jun 11: Falsifian publishes Registrar weekly report Jun 11: Trigon publishes Treasuror weekly report Jun 12: Jason, the Assessor, resolves proposals Jun 13: Jason, the Rulekeepor, publishes Short Logical Ruleset Jun 13: R. Lee declared winner of ADoP election as only candidate Jun 13:
DIS: Archiving Metareports
Frankly, I have no idea how to code, automatically archive stuff or anything like that. However, I did promise to put all my metareports from now on in the same, easily accessible place. Please accept this blog (which I originally intended to be a pretentious law blog, which I abandoned thank god). Also the spacing is inexplicably single. https://leeonlaw.blogspot.com/2020/06/adop-metareport.html -- >From R. Lee
DIS: Re: OFF: [Tailor] Glitteral
By the way the glitteral is an official weekly report now, it would probably be best to say so in the text/title in the future. On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 11:42 PM Ed Strange wrote: > COE: I claimed glitter for winning the ADOP election that I did. > > On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 11:14 PM Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via > agora-official wrote: > >> >> Weekly Glitter Rewards (June 21 - June 28) >> >> >> Glitter prices at start of week: >> >> Red 15 coinsViolet9 coins >> Orange 12 coinsIndigo 20 coins >> Green16 coinsPlatinum 14 coins >> Emerald 15 coinsLime 19 coins >> Cyan 10 coinsWhite18 coins >> Blue 10 coinsblacK17 coins >> Magenta 10 coinsgrAy 8 coins >> Ultraviolet 10 coinsTransparent 15 coins >> >> * Jun 21: nch is awarded Blue Glitter for CFJ 3853 >> I award 10 coins. >> * Jun 23: R. Lee is awarded Blue Glitter for CFJ 3855 >> I award 10 coins. >> * Jun 27: P.S.S. is awarded Blue Glitter for CFJ 3851 >> I award 10 coins. >> >> Glitter prices at end of week: >> >> Red 15 coinsViolet8 coins >> Orange 12 coinsIndigo 20 coins >> Green15 coinsPlatinum 14 coins >> Emerald 15 coinsLime 19 coins >> Cyan 10 coinsWhite18 coins >> Blue 10 coinsblacK17 coins >> Magenta 10 coinsgrAy 8 coins >> Ultraviolet 10 coinsTransparent 15 coins >> -- >> >> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate >> Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth >> > > > -- > From R. Lee > -- >From R. Lee
DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Tailor] Glitteral
I didn't flag you, I guess i breached contract lol, sorry. On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 11:45 PM Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-business wrote: > On 6/28/20 9:42 AM, Ed Strange via agora-business wrote: > > COE: I claimed glitter for winning the ADOP election that I did. > > > > I'm sorry; I missed that: I award 15 coins to R. Lee for eir Emerald > Glitter, which e received for winning the ADoP election. > > -- > > Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate > Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth > -- >From R. Lee
DIS: Re: OFF: [Herald] Weekly Report
POSITIVE KARMA POGCHAMP On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 11:11 PM Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-official wrote: > Herald's Weekly report > > Date of Last Report: 21 June 2020 > Date of This Report: 28 June 2020 > > Karma Entity > - -- > > +7 Jason <= SHOGUN > +6 Publius Scribonius Scholasticus > +5 Aris > > - ABOVE +4 STAND THE SAMURAI > > +3 G. > +2 omd > +2 Trigon > +2 Warrigal > +1 R. Lee > +1 Tyler > -1 Agora > -1 Bernie > -1 Gaelan > -1 o > -1 Unspecified Behavior [1] > -2 Rance > -3 ATMunn > -3 CuddleBeam > -4 Baron von Vaderham > -4 D. Margaux > -4 Falsifian > -4 Murphy > > - BELOW -4 LIE THE GAMMAS > > <= HONOURLESS WORM > > - -- > All other entities have 0 Karma. > > Notes > - > [1] Unspecified Behavior purports to be a player; however, eir identity is > unspecified. > > > Notices of Honour (2 Years History): > > > grok (28 June 2020) > +1 R. Lee (for Being a Good Sport when faced with a judgment going the >wrong way and eir fun scam attempt that encouraged a flurry of >gameplay) > -1 grok (for neglecting judicial duties and dragging out the scam's > denouement) > > G. (28 June 2020) > +1 grok (for delivering a heavy judgement load under pressure) > -1 G. (for putting you in the situation with rushed Arbitoring) > > ATMunn (23 June 2020) > +1 Agora (Agora has negative karma right now) > -1 Unspecified Behavior [1] (for being suspicious and mysterious and weird) > > Trigon (23 June 2020) > +1 Jason (roolz) > -1 Trigon (sux) > > R. Lee (22 June 2020) > +1 Cuddlebeam (making an actually good contract) > -1 Alexis (inactive with positive honour) > > [New Week 22-June] > > G. (21 June 2020) > +1 Falsifian (e ain't no worm). > -1 G. (following a not-worm's example) > > [time of last report] > > Jason (21 June 2020) > +1 Aris (having to judge my silly CFJs) > -1 Jason (making Aris's life unnecessarily harder (silly CFJs, missing that > the proposal pool draft was backdated)) > > Aris (19 June 2020) > +1 Trigon (excellent work as Treasuror during an extremely difficult time) > -1 Aris (making the Treasuror's life difficult) > > Trigon (19 June 2020) > +1 G. for giving me actual criticism on the format of my report. > -1 twg for being inactive with positive karma (e should be down to 0 now) > > R. Lee (15 June 2020) > +1 PSS (who holds the most offices and does everything in a timely way.) > -1 Murphy (missing 3 reports, failing to contest an election or object to > my >deputisation, and then fussing about it weeks later) > > Falsifian (15 June 2020) > +1 Jason (for setting the record straight.) > -1 Falsifian (on behalf of the office of the Registrar, for bad > recordkeeping > in August 2017.) > > [New Week 15-June] > > Murphy (14 June 2020) > +1 R. Lee (picking up the slack) > -1 Murphy (falling behind again) > > Trigon (09 June 2020) > +1 PSS (for eir help proofreading this contract) > -1 twg (for being a gross zombie with higher karma than many honest > players.) > > nch (09 June 2020) > +1 Falsifian (excellence in journalism) > -1 Jason (to ensure eir ego doesn't grow too big up in the clouds above > the rest > of us) > > grok (09 June 2020) > +1 PSS (for noticing my mistake) > -1 Cuddlebeam (for eir "joke") > > R. Lee (09 June 2020) > +1 Cuddlebeam (for eir fun brand of distraction during a hard time) > -1 Falsifian (frivolous CFJ) > > [New Week 08-June] > > Jason (07 June 2020) > +1 Aris (Writing good proposals while having eir motivations questioned.) > -1 Jason (Karma source, I've been up there a while) > > R. Lee (07 June 2020) > +1 Tyler (seemingly engaged new player) > -1 twg (in service of getting non active players below or at 0) > > G. (04 June 2020) > +1 D. Margaux (for being a generally good person.) > -1 Aris (for starting us down the road to criminalizing intent with that > awful > forbidden arts thing, and continuing the criminalization of > intent by > proposing penalties for the basic free act of voting.) > > Falsifian (04 June 2020) > +1 nch (Great new office and first report!) > -1 Falsifian (default karma source) > > [New Week 01-June] > > ATMunn (28 May 2020) > +1 Agora (i have no clue what's going on so i don't know who else to pick) > -1 ATMunn (pretending to come back and then disappearing again for 6 > months) > > nch (25 May 2020) > +1 Aris (doing a hard job that I made harder) > -1 nch (obliviousness) > > [New Week 25-May] > > Falsifian (24 May 2020) > +1 Jason (doing the research) > -1 Falsifian (I think I'll try being my own default karma source for a > while > and see what happens) > > P.S.S. (24 May 2020) > +1 Murphy (giving a timely and thorough response to my petition) > -1 ATMunn (randomly selected karma source) > > Aris (18 May 2020) > -1 Aris (being the
Re: DIS: Draft Regulations for Diplonomic Birthday Tournament
Im not sure this contract itself can technically override No Faking, however it should be clear from context as the game goes on that nobody intends their statenents to be true. Acting on eir own behalf is fine terminology that we have used before. On Sun., 28 Jun. 2020, 11:21 am Jason Cobb via agora-discussion, < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > On 6/27/20 7:44 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion > wrote: > > Here are my draft regulations for the annual Birthday Tournament. > > > > I intend, Without 3 Objections, to enact the following — modified from > > previous Birthday regulations and a variety of rulesets for Diplomacy, > > primarily those of EPCC [0] and the official rules [1] — as the > > regulations for this year's 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. > > > > 1. Until July 7 or 7 days after the promulgation of these rules, > > whichever is later, any person CAN enter the contest (becoming a > > Contestant) by announcement, on eir own behalf, as long as no more than > > six other persons have already done so. > > > A person does not act on eir own behalf, e acts as emself. > > > > 10. Contestants SHALL NOT offer favors outside of this Tournament in > > order to influence the outcome of it. Contestants CAN and SHOULD lie and > > engage in deceit for personal gain. > > > Is this enough to override No Faking? > > > Otherwise, this all looks perfectly fine to me, a person who has never > played diplomacy before. > > -- > Jason Cobb > >
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Resolving Ambiguous Decisions
Something must be valid in order to have binding legal effect, surely thats what valid means (and my judgement on notices doesnt conflict with that). On Sun., 28 Jun. 2020, 11:23 am Jason Cobb via agora-discussion, < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > On 6/27/20 9:16 PM, Ed Strange via agora-discussion wrote: > > No, i said they may not disagree. Any contention that valid and effective > > are not synonyms is, with respect, unreasonable > > > The argument is that "the announcement" (i.e. the message) being not > "valid" is different from the attempt not being EFFECTIVE. We have > "invalid" notices of honour that are still notices of honour, so we > might be able to have announcements of taking actions that are not > "valid" but nevertheless take actions. > > -- > Jason Cobb > >
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Resolving Ambiguous Decisions
No, i said they may not disagree. Any contention that valid and effective are not synonyms is, with respect, unreasonable On Sun., 28 Jun. 2020, 11:12 am Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion, < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > On 6/27/2020 6:06 PM, Ed Strange via agora-discussion wrote: > > I point a finger at jason for uncertain certification. Reasonable players > > may not disagree about the operation of the current wording. > > Which means it's an ambiguity which is covered by CP? > > -G. > >
DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Resolving Ambiguous Decisions
I point a finger at jason for uncertain certification. Reasonable players
may not disagree about the operation of the current wording.
On Sun., 28 Jun. 2020, 11:02 am Jason Cobb via agora-business, <
agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> I submit the following proposal and certify it as a patch:
>
> Title: Decision resolution patch
>
> Author: Jason
>
> Coauthors: nch, G.
>
> Adoption index: 3.0
>
> {
>
> Amend Rule 208 by replacing the text "To be valid, this announcement
> must satisfy the following conditions" with the text "To be EFFECTIVE,
> such an attempt must satisfy the following conditions".
>
>
> [This resolves a potential bug that *may* permit the vote collector of a
> decision to resolve it without adhering to the conditions in the
> numbered list of Rule 208 based on the precise wording of how the
> conditions are enforced. The argument that they don't work is that the
> sentence doesn't sufficiently override R208's earlier statement that
> "The vote collector for an unresolved Agoran decision CAN resolve it by
> announcement, indicating the outcome.", because it describes the
> announcement, rather than the attempt itself.
>
> Even if that interpretation is wrong, there is enough of an ambiguity
> that it should be resolved. The new wording makes this clearer by
> describing the /attempt/ as INEFFECTIVE (clearly overriding the earlier
> CAN) rather than the "announcement".]
>
> }
>
>
> Justification for certification as a patch:
>
> An ambiguity exists because "reasonable players" can "disagree about the
> operation" of Rule 208. Even if you think I am not a reasonable player,
> nch and G. were at least willing to entertain my arguments and did not
> dismiss me as entirely insane. The proposal's "sole function" is to
> resolve this ambiguity and fix the (potential) bug.
>
> This ambiguity relates to my office as Assessor because it is the
> Assessor's entire function to collect votes on and resolve Agoran
> decisions. This ambiguity affects what requirements and abilities are
> placed on vote collectors, so it relates to the office of Assessor.
>
> --
> Jason Cobb
>
>
Re: DIS: Re: [Indictment] Re: BUS: actually fuck it
well i can still buy extra votes if voting is ever important to me (voting can't go below 0) On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 11:55 PM Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion wrote: > On 6/27/20 9:53 AM, Ed Strange via agora-discussion wrote: > > I have no defense (I also don't REALLY care how many blots i get as long > as > > it's less than 40, so 7 blots each is fine) > > > > On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 10:39 AM Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via > > agora-business wrote: > > > >> On 6/19/20 9:27 PM, Rebecca via agora-business wrote: > >>> I certify every proposal in the proposal pool. I wasn't going to win in > >>> this system anyway (and i dont really care about winning) and this > gives > >> me > >>> an amount of Blots truly coinciding with my self-image. > >>> > >>> I point fingers at myself for Uncertain Certification, once for each > >>> proposal I just certified. > >>> > >>> Also good luck punishing me in time for the statute of limitations > given > >>> that you guys just basically made it impossible to punish class 4 > crimes. > >>> > >> > >> Here is the list of proposals that I believe were pended in this way — > >> some may be missing, and I considered the possibility that the finger > >> pointing was insufficiently precise, but given that I can recommend > >> arbitrary punishment, I'm not particularly concerned: > >> > >> CHILL BRO > >> Redoing Adopted Proposals > >> UV-G Sunblock > >> Fee-based methods > >> You can certify, but you can't win ever! > >> > >> For each of the above proposals, I find that R. Lee committed the > >> Class-4 Crime of Uncertain Certification. Given that this crime was not > >> minor, accidental, or inconsequential and was willful, profitable, and > >> egregious, I plan to seek a fine of seven blots for each violation. > >> > >> As referee, I hereby indict the Honorable R. Lee for the Class-4 Crime > >> of Uncertain Certification, specifying a fine of 7 blots, for the > >> proposal, "CHILL BRO". As referee, I hereby indict the Honorable R. Lee > >> for the Class-4 Crime of Uncertain Certification, specifying a fine of 7 > >> blots, for the proposal, "Redoing Adopted Proposals". As referee, I > >> hereby indict the Honorable R. Lee for the Class-4 Crime of Uncertain > >> Certification, specifying a fine of 7 blots, for the proposal, "UV-G > >> Sunblock". As referee, I hereby indict the Honorable R. Lee for the > >> Class-4 Crime of Uncertain Certification, specifying a fine of 7 blots, > >> for the proposal, "You can certify, but you can't win ever!". As > >> referee, I hereby indict the Honorable R. Lee for the Class-4 Crime of > >> Uncertain Certification, specifying a fine of 7 blots, for the proposal, > >> "CHILL BRO". > >> > >> E should be convicted because e has clearly committed the crimes. The > >> current indictment should be improved given the willful and egregious > >> nature of the crime and the burden placed on the Honorable Arbitor and > >> myself in the great number of crimes and the poor specification of the > >> finger-pointings. I'd like to note that this has taken me around an hour > >> to determine the proposals involved and determine whether anything > >> occurred to make it reasonable and that the Honorable Arbitor will be > >> required to conduct ten decisions to process this. While this will > >> result in 35 blots if all are approved, this is not an overly harsh > >> penalty because e could have predicted the consequences or at least > >> should have been able to had e appropriately specified the > >> finger-pointings. Additionally, I'll note that these blots will almost > >> surely be imposed after the scam has been included meaning that e should > >> not be able to benefit from this. > >> > >> R. Lee, please submit your defences. > >> > >> G., my apologies for the great number of decisions, but please prepare > >> them. > >> > >> -- > >> > >> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate > >> Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth > >> > > > > > > Well, you'll have no votes, and given your tendency for rule-breaking, > you'll likely get more blots from other things, so I would still > recommend that you consider changing your behavior moving forwards. > > -- > > Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate > Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth > -- >From R. Lee
DIS: Re: [Indictment] Re: BUS: actually fuck it
I have no defense (I also don't REALLY care how many blots i get as long as it's less than 40, so 7 blots each is fine) On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 10:39 AM Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-business wrote: > On 6/19/20 9:27 PM, Rebecca via agora-business wrote: > > I certify every proposal in the proposal pool. I wasn't going to win in > > this system anyway (and i dont really care about winning) and this gives > me > > an amount of Blots truly coinciding with my self-image. > > > > I point fingers at myself for Uncertain Certification, once for each > > proposal I just certified. > > > > Also good luck punishing me in time for the statute of limitations given > > that you guys just basically made it impossible to punish class 4 crimes. > > > > Here is the list of proposals that I believe were pended in this way — > some may be missing, and I considered the possibility that the finger > pointing was insufficiently precise, but given that I can recommend > arbitrary punishment, I'm not particularly concerned: > > CHILL BRO > Redoing Adopted Proposals > UV-G Sunblock > Fee-based methods > You can certify, but you can't win ever! > > For each of the above proposals, I find that R. Lee committed the > Class-4 Crime of Uncertain Certification. Given that this crime was not > minor, accidental, or inconsequential and was willful, profitable, and > egregious, I plan to seek a fine of seven blots for each violation. > > As referee, I hereby indict the Honorable R. Lee for the Class-4 Crime > of Uncertain Certification, specifying a fine of 7 blots, for the > proposal, "CHILL BRO". As referee, I hereby indict the Honorable R. Lee > for the Class-4 Crime of Uncertain Certification, specifying a fine of 7 > blots, for the proposal, "Redoing Adopted Proposals". As referee, I > hereby indict the Honorable R. Lee for the Class-4 Crime of Uncertain > Certification, specifying a fine of 7 blots, for the proposal, "UV-G > Sunblock". As referee, I hereby indict the Honorable R. Lee for the > Class-4 Crime of Uncertain Certification, specifying a fine of 7 blots, > for the proposal, "You can certify, but you can't win ever!". As > referee, I hereby indict the Honorable R. Lee for the Class-4 Crime of > Uncertain Certification, specifying a fine of 7 blots, for the proposal, > "CHILL BRO". > > E should be convicted because e has clearly committed the crimes. The > current indictment should be improved given the willful and egregious > nature of the crime and the burden placed on the Honorable Arbitor and > myself in the great number of crimes and the poor specification of the > finger-pointings. I'd like to note that this has taken me around an hour > to determine the proposals involved and determine whether anything > occurred to make it reasonable and that the Honorable Arbitor will be > required to conduct ten decisions to process this. While this will > result in 35 blots if all are approved, this is not an overly harsh > penalty because e could have predicted the consequences or at least > should have been able to had e appropriately specified the > finger-pointings. Additionally, I'll note that these blots will almost > surely be imposed after the scam has been included meaning that e should > not be able to benefit from this. > > R. Lee, please submit your defences. > > G., my apologies for the great number of decisions, but please prepare > them. > > -- > > Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate > Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth > -- >From R. Lee
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: CFJ 3851 judged TRUE
to be fair, this might be different if i had not made it clear that i rule you all like a monarch On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 11:14 AM Aris Merchant via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 6:12 PM James Cook via agora-discussion < > agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > > On Fri, 26 Jun 2020 at 16:08, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion > > wrote: > > > On 6/26/2020 8:49 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote: > > > > On 6/19/20 8:26 PM, Kerim Aydin via agora-official wrote: > > > >> The below CFJ is 3851. I assign it to Publius Scribonius > > Scholasticus. > > > >> > > > >> status: https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/#3851 > > > >> > > > >> === CFJ 3851 > > === > > > >> > > > >> R. Lee attempted to perform a forbidden action in the message > in > > > >> evidence. > > > >> > > > >> > > > == > > > >> Caller:G. > > > >> Barred:R. Lee > > > >> > > > >> Judge: Publius Scribonius Scholasticus > > > >> > > > >> > > > == > > > >> > > > >> History: > > > >> > > > >> Called by G.: 19 Jun 2020 > 02:49:52 > > > >> Assigned to Publius Scribonius Scholasticus: [now] > > > >> > > > >> > > > == > > > > First, let's look at the common language definition of "attempt", one > > of > > > > which is "[To] make an effort to achieve or complete".[0] By this > > > > definition, it seems clear that, since an intent is an effort to > > > > complete the intended action, R. Lee did attempt to perform a > forbidden > > > > action; however, we should also look to the use of "attempt" as a > term > > > > of art in jurisprudence. Here, we find possibly conflicting > > definitions: > > > > "Any act that is more than merely preparatory to the intended > > commission > > > > of a crime"[1] and "the crime of having the intent to commit and > taking > > > > action in an effort to commit a crime that fails or is prevented".[2] > > > > The second of these is clearly fulfilled as R. Lee stated eir intent > > > > publicly and took action towards the commission of the crime, but the > > > > first rests upon whether the intent was "merely preparatory". Given > > that > > > > the statement of intent was a necessary condition for the later > > > > commission of the crime and could not have reasonably served any > other > > > > purpose, I find that the intent was more than merely preparatory. > Given > > > > that the three definitions are agreeable with respect to the > > > > circumstances, we need not further analyze which is best to use. As a > > > > result, I assign a judgment of TRUE to CFJ 3851. > > > > > > > > > > Actuallly I forgot about this, but I thought of something else > here. > > > > > > I took it for granted that changing the ruleset below Power=4 to "Meep" > > > would ossify agora. However, this would remove the explicit definition > > of > > > contract, which would make the document (potentially) a "common-law" > > > agreement that in Agoran custom, could be modified by the consent of > all > > > parties. > > > > > > And we'd still have the description of agora in Rules 101 and 1689. > > > > > > And you can make various arguments like - R101 still tells us a little > > > about the pieces we need to change an agreement (parties and an agreed > > > forum). Before the change we knew who the parties were, and we didn't > > > explicitly change that so they're the same; before the change we knew > > what > > > "public" meant, so that's still a common-law method of determining > proof > > > of consent, etc. Also noting the recent judgement (on shines) that > found > > > that rules-terms could persist in custom more than previously allowed. > > > > > > Or just tell me I'm silly and obviously the change would ossify agora, > > > that's fine too... > > > > > > -G. > > > > I've thought it would be interesting to play a Nomic that starts with > > just one simple rule with text like "This is a Nomic; figure the rest > > out.". Or just on rules written down explicitly. > > > > It doesn't sound that silly for Agora to still work with just the > > power-4 rules plus Meeps. The rules sort of say "There are fora; you > > say your actions over the fora; proposals change the gamestate; here's > > an example "fountain" rule some people made; now go have fun!" > > > > Given the absence of other guidance, R1698 might be interpreted as > > implying that the players can adopt proposals, and that they take > > effect unless they would ossify Agora. > > > > We have one of those on the Discord server. So far the end result appears > to be that, in the absence of any defined way of contributing to
Re: Nomic 217 Re: DIS: Re: BUS: CFJ 3851 judged TRUE
this nomic already exists: it's the ruleset of my discord server. nerds. On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 11:10 PM nch via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > On 6/27/20 4:43 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion > wrote: > > On 6/27/20 12:10 AM, omd via agora-discussion wrote: > >> On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 6:12 PM James Cook via agora-discussion > >> wrote: > >>> I've thought it would be interesting to play a Nomic that starts with > >>> just one simple rule with text like "This is a Nomic; figure the rest > >>> out.". Or just on rules written down explicitly. > >> Back in 2008, there was a short-lived nomic called "Nomic 217", whose > >> initial ruleset consisted in its entirety of this paragraph copied > >> from Agora's Rule 217: > >> > >>When interpreting and applying the rules, the text of the rules > >>takes precedence. Where the text is silent, inconsistent, or > >>unclear, it is to be augmented by game custom, common sense, past > >>judgements, and consideration of the best interests of the game. > >> > > I think that would be an interesting experiment to revive if others were > > interested. > > > > -- > > > > Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate > > Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth > > I like the idea but wouldn't commit to it right now just because there's > so much going on in Agora right now. > > -- > nch > Prime Minister, Webmastor, NAX Exchange Manager > > > -- >From R. Lee
DIS: Re: BUS: general objection
(trigon, put this in your signature) On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 11:56 PM Kerim Aydin via agora-business < agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > I object to any and all intents to declare apathy. > > -G. > > -- >From R. Lee
DIS: Re: BUS: [CFJ] Dependent dependencies
This is silly for the following reasons. Actions like "With T notice" are
called, by the ruleset, DEPENDENT ACTIONS. What do these actions depend on?
They depend on a specific set of conditions being met, in this case 7 days
passing. What does it mean to depend on objections? To have, in the
conditions for the DEPENDENT ACTION to work, the absence of objections as a
condition.
On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 11:59 AM Jason Cobb via agora-business <
agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> I CFJ: "An action to be performed with 7 days notice depends on
> objections."
>
> I bar nch, although I believe R. Lee also has self-interest.
>
>
> Evidence:
>
> {
>
> Rule 2124/26 [Excerpt]:
>
> > The above notwithstanding, if an action depends on objections, and
> > an objection to an intent to perform it has been withdrawn within
> > the past 24 hours, then Agora is not Satisfied with that intent.
> >
> > The above notwithstanding, Agora is not satisfied with an intent
> > if the Speaker has objected to it in the last 48 hours.
>
>
> Dictionary definition of "define":
>
> [0]: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/depend
>
> }
>
>
> Arguments:
>
> {
>
> What it means for an action to "depend on objections" is not defined in
> the rules. This means that it has its common language meaning. The word
> at issue is "depend". Merriam-Webster [0] defines "depend" as an
> intransitive verb meaning:
>
> 1. to be determined, based, or contingent
>
> 2. to be pending or undecided
>
> 3. a. to place reliance or trust
>
>b. to be dependent especially for financial support
>
> 4. to hang down
>
>
> I believe definition 1 here makes the most sense in context. I see two
> ways to interpret an action "depending on objections" - it either must
> require objects to be performable, or it must be affected by objections.
> The former makes no sense - no dependent action requires objections in
> order to be actionable, which would mean the clause has no effect. This
> leaves the second reading - the action "depends on objections" if
> objections affect whether it can be performed.
>
> An action to be performed with 7 days notice is affected by the presence
> or absence of objections. In particular, it is affected by the presence
> of an objection from the Speaker, who can veto an action for 48 hours by
> objecting. This is consistent with a common language reading - the
> effectiveness of an action to be performed with 7 days action is, in
> part, "determined" by, "based" on, or "contingent" upon, the presence or
> absence of an objection. Because of this, I argue that an action to be
> performed with 7 days notice "depends on objections" and argue for TRUE.
>
> }
>
> --
> Jason Cobb
>
>
--
>From R. Lee
Re: DIS: Regardless of the Scam Result
I personally am happy to write a proposal to reset the economy (everyone's assets) to the point they were right before the scam happens. so that trading in the interim will still be rewarded. On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 1:09 AM Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > On 6/23/2020 7:57 AM, nch via agora-discussion wrote: > > On 6/23/20 9:53 AM, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote: > >> On 6/23/2020 7:49 AM, nch via agora-discussion wrote: > >>> This scam doesn't actually grind out economy to a hault, or at least it > >>> doesn't have to. When someone wins by victory points, cards and > products > >>> get reset but coins, blots, and assets created by contracts don't. That > >>> means there should still be incentive to buy/sell/trade. If it looks > >>> like the scam is likely to succeed I recommend using what you have how > >>> you can and selling off the rest. > >>> > >> Trade what? coins, blots and contract assets were all the pre-Sets > >> economy. not much to trade there. > >> > >> If I wasn't thinking "ok here's my next trade, and my next, and then I > >> have these products" that might be a comfort. As it is, it's more like > >> "well might as well hold on to coins and there's no point in investing > in > >> any cards and products except maybe expunge a blot if I've got one". > >> > >> -G. > >> > > Trade Cards/Products to someone who can use them before the reset, in > > exchange for coins which you'll still have after. If you have extra > > pendants and someone wants to pend some things, they may be willing to > > buy. The urgency of you ditching the extras presumably will make them > > cheaper now than they will be post reset. > > ok. I'll go ahead and plan for a week for something that's so uncertain > that I might as well just wait it out. no, not gonna. That's my personal > attitude and like it or not, somewhere in Economics 101 is the fact that > uncertainty suppresses economies, even on a toy scale. Saying "hey you > can just change your strategy every time we get into scam/bug mode" is the > kind of thing that frustrates people and killed land, and spaceships. > Also consider your role: one of the things that soured us more quickly on > shinies is that o [the designer] pulled at least one scam off the bat and > maybe two and we got tired of that... hey here's something for your thesis > > [ps. not annoyed at all with the scam attempt, if it sounds like I am, > just pointing out some realities of past consequences to keep in mind if > you want the system to thrive through this]. > > -G. > > -- >From R. Lee
DIS: Re: BUS: Obstruction
More on the word "change" specifically: it might be an ambiguous phrase in
general (it doesn't specify what the change is to) but it's not ambiguous
in agoran context. it appears in the "Contracts" rule, and "a contract"
appears later in the phrase itself, textually it can be interpreted as
"change [to]...a contract". Ambiguity should be resolved in accordance with
the genuine game custom that nobody's expectation is that anyone can write
a contract overriding any rule they feel like.
On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 4:27 PM Aris Merchant via agora-business <
agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> I favor this CFJ. While I am trying to block the scam, I'm not emotionally
> invested enough in doing so that it would effect my ruling. In addition, my
> economic CoI is not greater than any other participant in the economy (I
> can always redo the DracoLotto under a new economy).
>
> -Aris
>
> On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 11:22 PM Ed Strange via agora-business <
> agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
>
> > CFJ: Any attempt to exile a player or claim a welcome package fails under
> > omd's contract.
> >
> > Arguments: The provision omd cites is very very clearly a block to any
> > "Change" in the CONTRACT'S text, rather than any change or action in the
> > entire game state. This is clear and unambiguous, but the best interests
> of
> > the game clearly are for contracts not to be able to block any type of
> > action. To demonstrate this,
> > I consent to and create the following contract:
> > {
> > R. Lee consents, assents to, wants to, and does automatically amend this
> > contract
> > by prepending the Secret Word, each time any of the following occur:
> > -The rule called :"Welcome Package" is amended
> > -Anyone votes FOR a proposal that would amend the rule "Welcome Package"
> >
> > If omd was wearing a hat at the time this contract was created, then the
> > Secret
> > Word is "Hello". Otherwise, it is "Goodbye".
> >
> > }
> >
> > I think this contract very clearly makes the "best interests of the game"
> > point.
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 3:45 PM omd via agora-business <
> > agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Well, here goes nothing.
> > >
> > > I consent to and create the following contract:
> > > {
> > > omd consents, assents to, wants to, and does automatically amend this
> > > contract
> > > by prepending the Secret Word, each time any of the following occur:
> > >
> > > - A contract other than this one is created or amended.
> > > - Any player is exiled.
> > > - Any player receives a Welcome Package.
> > >
> > > If omd was wearing a hat at the time this contract was created, then
> the
> > > Secret
> > > Word is "Hello". Otherwise, it is "Goodbye".
> > >
> > > [This is an attempt to exploit the following provision:
> > >
> > > Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, any change that would
> cause
> > > the full provisions or parties of a contract to become publicly
> > > unavailable is canceled and does not take effect.
> > >
> > > It's based on a discussion on Discord which seemed to conclude that
> > > consent is
> > > not just a condition for modifying contracts but the mechanism for it,
> > > under
> > > the relevant clause of Rule 1742:
> > >
> > >
> > >A contract may be modified,
> > > including by changing the set of parties, with the consent of all
> > > existing parties.
> > >
> > > Note that Rule 1742 does not provide any other mechanism, so if consent
> > is
> > > not
> > > a mechanism, amending and terminating contracts is probably impossible
> by
> > > Rule
> > > 2125.
> > >
> > > If consent is a mechanism, Rule 2519 item 2 (and to some extent item 4)
> > > suggests that contracts can trigger it automatically.
> > >
> > > Whether this actually succeeds at blocking actions depends, I suppose,
> on
> > > how
> > > you define "change", "cause", and "unambiguously".]
> > > }
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > From R. Lee
> >
>
--
>From R. Lee
DIS: Re: BUS: Vote on P8442
we all agree this is aris right On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 11:46 AM nch via agora-business < agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > On 6/22/20 8:44 PM, Unspecified Behavior via agora-business wrote: > > I do not register, as I am already a player. > > > > I withdraw any vote I may or may not have cast on Proposal 8442. I vote > FOR > > on Proposal 8442. > > I strongly disfavor any CFJs that relate to this. > > -- > nch > Prime Minister, Webmastor, NAX Exchange Manager > > > -- >From R. Lee
