Re: DIS: Recruiting Github Group Owners
Me too! On April 10, 2024 3:32:35 PM GMT-03:00, nix via agora-discussion wrote: >On 4/10/24 13:28, 4st nomic wrote: >> Uh I'm not a player currently but it couldn't hurt? >> fjsweeney > >Seems good to me, as long as you're planning to at least generally stick >around for a while. > >-- >nix >Arbitor >
Re: DIS: (@Everyone) A question about gameplay
I like LEGO. For real, though, I like mechanics. And compositional systems. Think like connecting logic circuits to make a computer. Or Factorio. Or anything with a small and elegant pallete of pieces that compose to make complex behaviors possible, in a neat way. That's what I wanted with Golems, a TCG (for which I proposed the acting by commitment rule), or some sort of alternative to contracts that were more limited individually but can accomplish more when composed. One of the advantages of this approach over contracts is that it's more easily analyzable. Properties are true if they are for the base pieces and preserved by composition. So we could avoid the old issue of untraceable lockers that contracts have. As for gameplay, I like a sandbox style, but I get that's not for everyone. So the way I imagined a goal in such a system is to have a type of strategy that looks like multiple hops in checkers: one positions the pieces carefully over time, and the last one makes a large play possible. On June 13, 2023 12:45:23 AM GMT-03:00, secretsnail9 via agora-discussion wrote: >What kind of gameplay do you want to see in Agora? > >Personally I just want more of it, though less timing-based gameplay. I >think some sort of creativity-based gameplay could be interesting, or >hidden info games, though any kind of new social game would be fine by me. >I think there's a lot of unexplored territory we could uncover. How does >everyone else feel about this? >-- >snail -- Juan
DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Propositions 8990-9001
I feel this needs clarification then. It should be explicit. Or else, is there a CFJ with specific tests for what changes? On June 5, 2023 7:45:36 PM GMT-03:00, Janet Cobb via agora-discussion wrote: >On 6/5/23 16:57, juan via agora-discussion wrote: >> Janet Cobb via agora-discussion [2023-06-05 16:48]: >>> On 6/5/23 16:45, juan via agora-discussion wrote: No, it's not. It's a blanket assertion that “everything” is as it would have been. We don't know that. Maybe the different bytes stored on the server changed the CPU heat emission just enough so that, weeks later, there was a hurricane across the globe, which temporarily disconnected one of the players that then didn't perform a specific action at a s pecific time. Is this ridiculous? Yes. But then again: that is what is written. >>> None of that is "gamestate", and by this logic, all ratification is broken. >> It's not gamestate, but the gamestate would be different in that >> situation. Ratification is not broken because it specifically makes it >> so the assertions made in a document are true. Ratification of blanket >> assertions is broken. >> > >Actually, I'm not going to concede this point. > >This isn't ratifying anything about the physical world. It's ratifying >something about the state of the game, not about what message was sent >with the initial enactment (and it specifically is not modifying the >initial enactment, since it excludes the ruleset). The same messages >were still sent and received with the same content, and people still >read the same things. > >Anything else isn't the "minimal modification". > >-- >Janet Cobb > >Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason -- Juan
Re: DIS: Trade offer ad - Stamps for Stamps
I'll offer one of mine. Draft a promise and I'll take it. On March 19, 2023 7:18:09 PM GMT-03:00, Yachay Wayllukuq via agora-discussion wrote: >Hello, I would like to trade Stamps. The super-exclusive Yupay Stamp is a >gorgeous, deluxe ware; which I believe a number of you may find attractive >to own. I offer the following: > >- I offer 1 Yupay Stamp for 1 Stamp that only up to 2 active Players >currently own. >- I offer 1 Yupay Stamp for 3 Stamps of any kind of your choice. > >My email is open for you. -- Juan
Re: DIS: Doubts on birthdays
So the fact that yesterday was my birthday means nothing? On March 14, 2023 3:00:40 PM GMT-03:00, nix via agora-discussion wrote: >On 3/14/23 12:24, juan via agora-discussion wrote: >> Just checking the rules, and I can't find any mention of gifting during >> birthdays. Also, I just noticed the Herald is obliged to acknowledge >> birthdays. Has that always been so? Seems unncessary. > >So this is a bit of (recent) historical cruft. When we had coins, R2585 >authorized each player to grant the birthday person coins by announcement. >That was replaced with R2657's birthday score increase, which itself started >as something the Herald does (and is now something the recipient does). > >Having the Herald responsible for recognizing birthdays is because people are >historically bad at keeping track of even eir own, and so it's nice to >centralize the responsibility, especially when that would lead to everyone >gifting coins. > >Clearly the situation has changed enough that R2585's title (Birthday Gifts) >doesn't make sense anymore, but we just never retitled it. > >-- >nix >Prime Minister, Herald, Collector > -- Juan
Re: DIS: Looking for coauthors
I see. But in that case, isn't the rule authorizing that effect the lower-powered one? Because if not, a low-powered rule could define terms used in higher-powered ones to mean whatever it wants. For example, a power 0.1 rule could define “entity” to just mean player, thereby breaking a lot of things. On March 14, 2023 4:56:16 PM GMT-03:00, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote: >On Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 12:35 PM juan via agora-discussion > wrote: >> >> So here goes a draft. >> >> So, I came upon a problem. Suppose I had the following rule (excerpt) >> >> --- RULE DRAFT --- >> The Gamemastor is an Office. >> >> Cards are assets tracked by the Gamemastor. Cards have the following >> attributes >> >> * Type; a string >> * Rarity; a natural number >> * Action; text >> * Condition; text >> >> plus other attributes, depending on its Type, as defined by the rules. >> >> A Player CAN, by announcement, play a card e owns, whereupon e performs >> the action specified in the card's Action, and if successful discards >> that card. >> --- END --- >> >> How could such a rule allow for cards (rare, one would assume) that >> allow actions at greater power levels? >> >> One way to do it is to defer to rules that create card types to explicitly >> say a player can perform the actions, but that is clunky. Another, and >> this is the one I don't know if it will work, is to just say something >> to the effect that “for a Rule to define a card type means, besides, >> to make it so players CAN perform […]”, but I don't think it will >> work. What do you think? > >Pretty sure you need (as we've done before) different powered rules >containing card descriptions. I think one way to get around having >"CAN" in every description, is to change "action" to "effect" (that >is, the only action is "playing the card", and the effect is what >happens after that). This sort of text might work: > >"A player CAN, by announcement, play a card e owns, specifying the >necessary information for playing that card type. Unless blocked by >other rules, this causes the effects defined for that card to be >applied, and if they are applied successfully the card is discarded." > >Then the power=2 cards can be in a Power=2 rule that says: > >The following Cards are defined: > >Type: Vote Card >Effect: The voting strength of a specified player is increased by X. >(rarity, condition omitted) -- Juan
DIS: Re: BUS: registration
2022-10-14 11:49:38, the Astrally Forged via agora-business wrote: >My name is the Astrally Forged. > >I can be reached as AstrallyForged on LiberaChat (including in ##nomic), as >@moonb...@mst3k.interlinked.me on the fediverse, and (less preferably) at this >mailbox. > >I register myself. Welcome the Astrally Forged! I grant the Astrally Forged a Welcome Package and a Welcome Device. -- juan Registrar
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: humble agoran farmer auctions 4 Winsomes
Also, I object to any apathy intents in thid message. Just to be safe (and lazy). On April 4, 2022 11:12:47 AM GMT-03:00, Madrid via agora-discussion wrote: >Hehasbidfourdoessomeonegivemoredoessomeonegivemore? >Thatsrightheisonfourbutletshearfivedoihearfivethatsfourplusonefiveifidonthearanyfivethenheisgonnatakeitforfourdoihearfiveormaybeevensixdoihearsixoutthereinthecrowd,thatsrightyoucangetthesefourthickwinsomesforjustsevenfavorlevelsdoihearsevenfavorlevelsforsevenfavorlevelsyougetthesewinsomes > >On Sun, Apr 3, 2022 at 9:29 AM ais523 via agora-business < >agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > >> On Fri, 2022-04-01 at 15:11 +0200, Madrid via agora-business wrote: >> > Hi, this is an informal auction, and you bid with favors instead of >> actual >> > money. >> > >> > You bid should be a favor level, being a favor level of 10 one session >> of a >> > couple hours, like to theorycraft something or to design something >> complex. >> > A favor level of 1 is something like a small tip or some pocket change of >> > the currency at the time the favor is decided to be cashed in. >> > >> > Its not very exact but I trust that the participants will be satisfying >> but >> > reasonable, and I will too strive to be satisfying but reasonable with >> the >> > system. >> > >> > Minimum bid increment is 1, first bid is a minimum of 1! >> >> I bid 4. >> >> -- >> ais523 >> >> -- juan
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: humble agoran farmer auctions 4 Winsomes
I bid 5. On April 4, 2022 11:12:47 AM GMT-03:00, Madrid via agora-discussion wrote: >Hehasbidfourdoessomeonegivemoredoessomeonegivemore? >Thatsrightheisonfourbutletshearfivedoihearfivethatsfourplusonefiveifidonthearanyfivethenheisgonnatakeitforfourdoihearfiveormaybeevensixdoihearsixoutthereinthecrowd,thatsrightyoucangetthesefourthickwinsomesforjustsevenfavorlevelsdoihearsevenfavorlevelsforsevenfavorlevelsyougetthesewinsomes > >On Sun, Apr 3, 2022 at 9:29 AM ais523 via agora-business < >agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > >> On Fri, 2022-04-01 at 15:11 +0200, Madrid via agora-business wrote: >> > Hi, this is an informal auction, and you bid with favors instead of >> actual >> > money. >> > >> > You bid should be a favor level, being a favor level of 10 one session >> of a >> > couple hours, like to theorycraft something or to design something >> complex. >> > A favor level of 1 is something like a small tip or some pocket change of >> > the currency at the time the favor is decided to be cashed in. >> > >> > Its not very exact but I trust that the participants will be satisfying >> but >> > reasonable, and I will too strive to be satisfying but reasonable with >> the >> > system. >> > >> > Minimum bid increment is 1, first bid is a minimum of 1! >> >> I bid 4. >> >> -- >> ais523 >> >> -- juan
DIS: Re: BUS: A simple minesweeper for testing purposes
If there is no player, I ammend this contract ("Minesweeper") by appending to
it the following:
{
At any point, if the player has not lost, e CAN quit by announcement, whereby e
transfers the funds e has peviously transfered to this contract back to emself,
all other funds belonging to thr contract to the host, and the contract
terminates.
}
--
Juan
