Re: DIS: Change of email Address

[VJ Rada]

Yes, I am edwardostra...@gmail.com.

On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 11:48 AM, Alex Smith  wrote:
> On Sun, 2018-02-25 at 14:39 +1100, Ned Strange wrote:
>> Yo guys, it's me V.J. Rada, I'm changing my email that I use to this
>> game to this one because it's my regular email and I actually check
>> it. Thanks.
>
> Just to be certain, can you confirm this is you by sending an email
> from your previous address?
>
> --
> ais523



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: I suddenly remember playing Allied Assault as a kid

[VJ Rada]

Oh fair cop, Im sorry

On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 2:37 AM, Corona <liliumalbum.ag...@gmail.com> wrote:
> That's invalid, since you have to have Karma -3 or higher.
>
> On 02:05, Feb 20, 2018, at 02:05, VJ Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>Here's me declaring myself eligible for a medal, Corona, so I'm a valid
>>vote.
>>
>>On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 5:01 PM, VJ Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> As do I
>>>
>>> On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 12:22 PM, Alexis Hunt <aler...@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>>> As do I.
>>>> On Tue, 6 Feb 2018 at 19:12 Cuddle Beam <cuddleb...@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I do the same too.
>>>>>
>>>>> (I think everyone active right now actually qualifies lol)
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 12:52 AM, ATMunn <iamingodsa...@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> > I do the same. (I'm realizing now that I completely forgot about
>>my own
>>>>> > rule. :P)
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > On 2/6/2018 5:07 PM, Telnaior wrote:
>>>>> >
>>>>> >> I declare myself eligible for a Medal of Honour.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> From V.J. Rada
>>
>>
>>
>>--
> >From V.J. Rada



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

DIS: Re: OFF: [Herald] Medal of Honour Decision

[VJ Rada]

Did I not declare myself eligible? Not that I was winning but

On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 10:51 AM, Alexis Hunt  wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 at 18:32 Corona  wrote:
>
>>
>> I initiate the Agoran Decision on the Jan 2018 Medal of Honour.
>>
>> For this decision, the valid votes are {Murphy, ATMunn, Alexis, Cuddle
>> Beam, Telnaior}, the vote collector is the Herald, and the voting method is
>> instant-runoff.
>>
>> Upon the resolution of this decision, the Herald CAN, and SHALL in a
>> timely fashion, award the outcome of the decision a Medal of Honour by
>> announcement.
>>
>> ~Corona
>>
>
> I vote {endorse Murphy, Alexis, Murphy, Telnaior, Cuddle Beam, ATMunn}.
>
> -Alexis



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Herald] Karma - Old news

[VJ Rada]

i think some of us decided that and some of us disputed it, with
inconsistent agreements on what to do. never decided by cfj iirc

On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 8:18 PM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote:
>
>
> Didn't we decide that the type of grammar in that rule meant you can
> do it generally, and shall in a timely fashion?  (In other words, you can
> still do it but you're late).
>
> On Mon, 15 Jan 2018, Corona wrote:
>> Oh, you're right, a new quarter began. Well, since I'm technically not 
>> allowed to rebalance after Jan 7th (I think), I'll just post a revision 
>> later today, and if nobody CoEs it'll be done.
>>
>> I CoE my latest Herald report, as it did not account for the quarterly 
>> rebalancing.
>>
>> On 02:06, Jan 15, 2018, at 02:06, VJ Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >Have you done the quarterly karma rebalance of non-players?
>> >
>> >On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 8:39 AM, Corona <liliumalbum.ag...@gmail.com>
>> >wrote:
>> >> Court:
>> >>
>> >> KarmaEntity
>> >> -
>> >> SAMURAI
>> >> -
>> >> +3   ATMunn
>> >> +3   o
>> >> +3   Alexis
>> >> +3   Telnaior
>> >> +3   G.
>> >> +2   Trigon
>> >> +2   Aris
>> >> +1   天火狐
>> >> +1   Corona
>> >> -1   Quazie
>> >> -1   omd
>> >> -1   Bayushi
>> >> -2   ProofTechnique
>> >> -2   Murphy
>> >> -2   Ienpw III
>> >> -2   Gaelan
>> >> -4   CuddleBeam
>> >> -6   V.J. Rada <-- HONOURLESS WORM
>> >> -
>> >> GAMMAS
>> >> -
>> >> Karma    Entity
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>All other entities have 0 Karma.
>> >>
>> >> ---
>> >> Notices of Honour:
>> >>
>> >> [New Week]
>> >>
>> >> ATMunn (10 Dec 2017)
>> >> -1 ATMunn (doesn't feel that it's fair for em to be shogun)
>> >> +1 Corona (for a good first report)
>> >>
>> >> [New Week]
>> >>
>> >> [ Last report 10 Dec 2017]
>> >>
>> >> Corona (28 Nov 2017)
>> >> -1 Corona (not giving karma to Alexis instead, intent to bribe)
>> >> +1 VJ Rada (has given Corona shinies, balancing eir karma)
>> >>
>> >> o (27 Nov 2017)
>> >> -1 o (spending too long at the top of the list)
>> >> +1 CuddleBeam (having been duly chastened)
>> >>
>> >> Alexis (27 Nov 2017)
>> >> -1 V.J. Rada (generally poor sportsmanship)
>> >> +1 Telnaior (stepping up as Clork)
>> >>
>> >> PSS (27 Nov 2017)
>> >> -1 V.J. Rada (disrespecting others, the game and sportsmanship)
>> >> +1 Aris (encouraging civility)
>> >>
>> >> G. (27 Nov 2017)
>> >> -1 V.J. Rada (bad officing)
>> >> +1 ATMunn (being a good sport about ribbons)
>> >>
>> >> ATMunn (28 Nov 2017)
>> >> -1 V.J. Rada (bad ADoP, bad officer, bad Agoran)
>> >> +1 G. (good long-term player who know's what e's doing)
>> >>
>> >> Telnaior (28 Nov 2017)
>> >> -1 V.J. Rada (intentionally causing trouble several times)
>> >> +1 Corona (cool newbie)
>> >>
>> >> [New Week]
>> >>
>> >> PSS (20 Nov 2017)
>> >> -1 nichdel (for inactivity)
>> >> +1 ATMunn (for improving upon ADoP report)
>> >>
>> >> [New Week]
>> >>
>> >> ATMunn (16 Nov 2017)
>> >> -1 ATMunn (pushing boundaries of karma)
>> >> +1 G. (pushing boundaries of karma)
>> >>
>> >> V.J. Rada 15 Nov 2017)
>> >> -1 Quazie (for inactivity)
>> >> +1 Alexis (innovative timely rulekeepor)
>> >>
>> >> Telnaior (15 Nov 2017)
>> >> -1 V.J. Rada (being a contrarian)
>> >> +1 Alexis (Telnaior's favourite large proposal)
>> >>
>> >> [New Week]
>> >>
>> >> G. (12 Nov 2017)
>> >> -1 天火狐 (for a low-effort newspaper report).
>> >> +1 omd (for quick response to Distributor directives).
>> >>
>> >> ATMunn (6 Nov 2017)
>> >> -1 ATMunn (for forgetting to state quorum on Decision initiations).
>> >> +1 Publius Scribonius Scholast

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Reportor] Weekly Report

[VJ Rada]

willing to do a stopgap job for any job, still check this every day
although not very well up to date.

otherwise see y'all for may hyperactivity.

On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 2:29 PM, Edward Murphy  wrote:
> ATMunn wrote:
>
>> Speaking of the ADoP, I kind of feel like it's my responsibility to
>> figure out how to get people into these offices, and how to resolve
>> these elections. That's actually more of a responsibility that you might
>> think, and I'm just not feeling up to it right now. I've been somewhat
>> sick over the last week or so, and I lost a lot of interest in Agora
>> over the holidays when it was so inactive. I feel a bit more interested
>> in it now, but I still just don't want to do anything, at least not
>> anything with offices. But the ADoP is all about offices, and it's also
>> responsible for more than just publishing reports. I'm very close to
>> pushing that button and resigning from ADoP, but I feel that if I do
>> that, I'll throw Agora into even more of a state of anarchy than it
>> already is, and people are going to have to deputize like crazy. I could
>> appoint someone else in my spot, but they may not want the job and all
>> the weight they might get immediately.
>
>
> I think I could handle ADoP (though Github frightens and confuses me, so
> if someone else could update my e-mailed reports there, that'd be
> appreciated). Is there any significant uncertainty, or just a lot of
> elections to keep initiating until someone gets elected?
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

DIS: Re: OFF: [Registrar] Weekly Report

[VJ Rada]

shouldn't quazie be a zombie?

On Wed, Dec 27, 2017 at 12:02 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
<p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>Registrar's Weekly Report
> 
>
> (all times UTC)
>
> Date of last report: 17 Dec 2017
> Date of this report: 24 Dec 2017
>
> Recent events:
>
>
> Players (16) (Rule 869, self-ratifying)
>
> Player   Contact Registered
> --   --- --
> omd  comexk at gmail.com [4] 03 Feb 11
> oowen at grimoire.ca 12 Jul 16
> Aris thoughtsoflifeandlight17 at gmail.com   13 Sep 16
> 天火狐draconicdarkness at gmail.com   06 Nov 16
> Quazie   quazienomic at gmail.com15 Apr 17
> P. Scholasticus [2]  pscriboniusscholasticus at gmail.com[3] 16 Apr 17
> Gaelan   gbs at canishe.com  15 May 17
> nichdel  nichdel at gmail.com29 Jun 17
> G.   kerim at u.washington.edu   25 Aug 17
> Cuddle Beam  cuddlebeam at gmail.com 25 Aug 17
> ATMunn   iamingodsarmy at gmail.com  21 Sep 17
> Trigon   reuben.staley at gmail.com  24 Sep 17
> Alexis   alercah at gmail.com27 Sep 17
> Telnaior jdga at iinet.net.au20 Oct 17
> Corona   liliumalbum.agora at gmail.com  17 Nov 17
> pokespokes at botnoise.org   11 Dec 17
> Murphy   emurphy42 at zoho.com   17 Dec 17
>
>
> [1] also ais523 at alumni.bham.ac.uk
> [2] In full, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> [3] officially, but technically equivalent p.scribonius.scholasticus at
> googlemail.com
> [4] officially, but technically equivalent c.ome.xk at gmail.com
>
> Fora (Rule 478, self-ratifying)
>
> Type Location  Typical use
>   ---
> Public   agora-official at agoranomic.org  official reports
> Public   agora-business at agoranomic.org  other business
> Discussion   agora-discussion at agoranomic.orgdiscussion
> Discussion   irc://irc.freenode.net:6667/##nomic   discussion
> Public   agora at listserver.tue.nlbackup
>
> Writs of FAGE (Rule 1789)
> PlayerDate
> --
> Kelly 17 Sep 95
> Andre 13 Feb 99
> BobTHJ16 Jan 08
> P1 5 Nov 08
> P2 5 Nov 08
> P3 6 Nov 08
> G.29 Jun 17
>
> Subscribe or unsubscribe from main lists:
> http://www.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo
>
> Subscribe or unsubscribe from tue.nl backup list:
> http://listserver.tue.nl/mailman/listinfo/agora
>
> The IRC channel does not require subscription; set your IRC client to
> server irc.freenode.net, port 6667, channel ##nomic, and whatever
> nickname you like.
>
> Other rules pertaining to this office
> -
> Rule 2139 (The Registrar)
> Rule 1789 (Cantus Cygneus)
>
> Watchers (4)
>
> The list of Watchers is not governed by the rules, but is
> traditionally maintained in the Registrar's Report.  If you'd like to
> be listed as a Watcher or removed from the list, feel free to email
> the fora or the Registrar directly.
>
> Watchers confirmed as of May 2017:
>
> Nickname  Contact
>   ---
> Ørjan oerjan at nvg.ntnu.no
>
> Watchers confirmed as of May 2013:
>
> Nickname  Contact
>   ---
> Dave  davidnicol at gmail.com
> Phlogistique  noe.rubinstein at gmail.com
> Steve zardoz37 at gmail.com
> 
>   Registrar's Weekly Addenda on Switches and Emotions
> 
>
>
> Emotions:
>
> nichdel - Joyous
> Alexis  - Melancholy
> ATMunn  - Joyous (November 14, 2017)
> PSS - Melancholy
> G.  - Melancholy (November 17, 2017)
> Trigon  - Melancholy
> VJ Rada - Melancholy (November 17, 2017)
>
> --
> 
> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Reportor] Holiday Arts Supplement

[VJ Rada]

I should know this, but what's your nickname, David? Are you a player? Sorry.

On Tue, Dec 26, 2017 at 3:50 PM, David Nicol  wrote:
> you do realize of course that the moats of Fantasy Rules Castle are stocked
> with vicious leopleurodons and the southwest corner has a vicious unpatched
> radiation leak, though, so you not?
>
> On Mon, Dec 25, 2017 at 10:34 PM, David Nicol  wrote:
>
>> don't let me stop you ... the beginning of every round is without
>> constraint.
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 25, 2017 at 10:16 PM, Cuddle Beam 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> what about an Agoran invasion of FRC
>>>
>>> except a good one
>>>
>>> because Christmas
>>>
>>> On Tue, Dec 26, 2017 at 4:50 AM, David Nicol 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > On Mon, Dec 25, 2017 at 1:33 PM, Ørjan Johansen 
>>> > wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > On Mon, 25 Dec 2017, Cuddle Beam wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > If I've getting this correctly, FRC is heavily roleplay-based, yes?
>>> Like,
>>> > >> it's less about playing the rules than just making them for
>>> aesthetics
>>> > and
>>> > >> fantasy.
>>> > >>
>>> > >
>>> > > Back when I played, that varied from round to round, on a sliding
>>> scale
>>> > > between some rounds being mostly logic puzzles and some being mostly
>>> > story
>>> > > telling.
>>> > >
>>> > > Greetings,
>>> > > Ørjan.
>>> > >
>>> >
>>> > lately it seems to all be olympic ping-pong --- there's a serve,
>>> sometimes
>>> > it gets returned, very occasionally there's a volley.
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > “no man should be compelled to do what the laws do not require; nor to
>>> > refrain from acts which the laws permit.” Calder v. Bull (U.S. 1798)
>>> >
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> “no man should be compelled to do what the laws do not require; nor to
>> refrain from acts which the laws permit.” Calder v. Bull (U.S. 1798)
>>
>
>
>
> --
> “no man should be compelled to do what the laws do not require; nor to
> refrain from acts which the laws permit.” Calder v. Bull (U.S. 1798)



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

DIS: merry christmas guys

[VJ Rada]

see title

-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: Transitioning Agora off a Mailing List?

[VJ Rada]

I think it might be a forum on something free like zetaboards. Or a
subreddit, yeah.

On Sun, Dec 24, 2017 at 1:19 AM, Cuddle Beam  wrote:
> To add to this, if Agora were to be born today instead of a mailing list,
> in what format would it be? A subreddit? A Discord server? I feel like
> people nowadays wouldn't consider making a new nomic as a mailing list
> because of how obscure it is, which adds to my feeling that Agora should
> probably upgrade.
>
> On Sat, Dec 23, 2017 at 3:16 PM, Cuddle Beam  wrote:
>
>> Seeing how activity and Office-holders are waning, I'd like to know how
>> people would feel about transitioning Agora off a Mailing List and onto a
>> different kind of substrate.
>>
>> I personally find our mailing list-only system to be archaic and makes
>> Agora's human cost to be even "playable" quite high, versus having a GNDT
>> or something to handle tracking gamestate.
>>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Transitioning Agora off a Mailing List?

[VJ Rada]

personally i dislike the mailing list but it's not that hard to log on
to gmail compared to a forum, it doesn't really bother me at all.

On Sun, Dec 24, 2017 at 5:27 AM, Reuben Staley  wrote:
> Using a mailing list over a forum is the same type of argument add using
> IRC instead of a chatroom. Yes,  it's an archaic form of communication.
> Yes,  other software might have more features. But the thing is that you
> get to choose what client you want to use. You have far more choice with a
> mailing list and less with a forum.  The issue is, are those changes going
> to be worth it?
>
> On Dec 23, 2017 07:16, "Cuddle Beam"  wrote:
>
>> Seeing how activity and Office-holders are waning, I'd like to know how
>> people would feel about transitioning Agora off a Mailing List and onto a
>> different kind of substrate.
>>
>> I personally find our mailing list-only system to be archaic and makes
>> Agora's human cost to be even "playable" quite high, versus having a GNDT
>> or something to handle tracking gamestate.
>>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

DIS: Re: OFF: deputy-[Reportor] Weekly Report

[VJ Rada]

This may be the best reportor report ever published

On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 8:06 AM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
>
>
>  I deputise for the Reportor to publish the following Weekly Report.
>
>
>
>   THE WEEKLY SALPINX
> Winter Solstice Edition
>
>
> ULLETIN - ASSESSOR RESIGNS ** URGENT BULLETIN - ASSESSOR RESIGNS ** URGE
>
>
> AGORAN ECONOMIC MALAISE DEEPENS AS LEGISLATIVE REFORM IS SCUPPERED BY
> SPECIAL INTERESTS
>
> In a stunning reversal for the Reformers, Proposal 7988 was defeated by
> several late vote-switches from FOR to AGAINST, including a switch by
> the proposal's author.  Proposal 7988 would have changed the basis of
> Agoran money supply from a system of fluctuating stamps that drained the
> Agoran bank while making Officers' pay a weekly gamble dependent on the
> timing of the Treasuror's report, to a monthly automatic supply rate
> independent of Agora's balance sheet.
>
> While initial votes favored the proposal, several legislators switched
> votes due to a single clause, which eliminated non-players' ability to
> freely call CFJs (instead requiring w/o 3 objections).  The rights of
> non-players was seen as non-negotiable to some voters, who switched
> their votes and killed the proposal. The author of the proposal switched
> eir vote not for the non-players per se, but due to other events:  "I'm
> now convinced, by the events of the Black Card Scandal, that CFJs should
> be entirely removed from the economy and 2 CFJs/week should be an
> absolute right in Rule 217.  As for economic reforms, I'm done - you all
> can do what you want there."
>
> Since that vote, no non-player CFJs have been called in the time it
> would have taken to repair that clause, and economic reforms and general
> activity has come to a near-standstill, or at least reached a new level
> of uncertainty as the necessary Treasuror's Reports have languished.
> Still, in principle, those rights have been protected.  There is no
> current word on the next steps for the economy.  A land-reform bill has
> been in drafting for months, but its sheer complexity leaves in question
> its success with voters.  Meanwhile, a new gameplay system of Favours
> and Balloons may be rendering the importance of the base economy
> increasingly irrelevant.
>
>
> AGORAN CREDIT UNION OPENS, ATTRACTS DEPOSITS
>
> The one bright spot for economic action has been the opening of the
> Agoran Credit Union, a Contract that allows persons to deposit Shinies
> in exchange for an ACU private currency of Bills, at the rate of 10
> Bills for 1 Shiny.  This has allowed for some flexibility in exchanges
> and may ultimately provide some kind of private solution to economic
> troubles.  "If we can arrange it so Agora can borrow currency from the
> ACU, then Shinies can go from Agora to players to the ACU to Agora
> again, with the only casualty being Agora's national debt level which
> will continually expand.  Just like a real currency!" said one Agoran
> source, though whether it was a positive statement or deranged muttering
> is a subject for debate.
>
>
> IF THIS HEADLINE IS TRUE, CONDITIONALITY MAY BE ON ITS WAY OUT
>
> For over 17 years, since the foundational judgements of CFJs 1214-1215,
> taking actions "conditionally" has been seen as substantially clear for
> the purposes of specifying by-announcement actions, with certain limits
> on the complexity/scope of conditional clauses.  At press time, voting
> was very close on Proposal 7993, which enacts a Rule purporting to ban
> the practice once and for all.  However, the banning Rule would be
> enacted at Power-1, so there has been some discussion on whether it
> would succeed in overruling the accepted specifications of R478, as
> governed in interpretation by R217.
>
>
> HISTORY CORNER - AGORAN HOLIDAYS
>
> At its inception in 1993 (and in previous Nomic World), Agora was an
> extremely academic exercise - in the sense that most players' internet
> access was governed by the academic calendar.  As such, early on it
> became clear, if you were one of the few to be around on winter
> holidays, you could get through all sorts of bad proposals and scams
> while people weren't paying attention.
>
> R1769 was first adopted in 1998 as a way to work around this problem.
> From its initial adoption until late 2013, R1769 actually "changed" time
> in the game, by saying (in essence) "if a deadline [e.g. for voting, or
> an Officer's duty] occurs during a Holiday, the deadline is instead N
> time after the end of the Holiday." (N varied over the years).
>
> This was straightforward to say, but its legalistic effects were
> complex.  As mentioned recently in CFJ 3580, Agora does not have
> high-level protections against "mucking with the definition of time."  A
> Rule might say "a day in Agora is 3 centuries of real time" and
> effectively halt all play (subject to R217 definition limitations).  And
> indeed, every year it became a bit of a 

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: CFJ 3613 TRUE

[VJ Rada]

balloons don't need to be awarded and are automatically conferred.

On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 1:48 PM, Aris Merchant
 wrote:
> H. Clork, I believe I am owed several weeks back-balloons.
>
> -Aris
>
> On Sun, Dec 17, 2017 at 3:44 PM Corona  wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 26 Nov 2017, Aris Merchant wrote:
>> > I sh-CFJ "Aris has advised every politician in the row reduced echelon."
>>
>> I judge CFJ 3613 as TRUE. The caller's arguments are sound, and I have
>> gone through the relevant rules and found nothing contradicting that
>> interpretation. It goes without saying that rule 2536 should be fixed.
>>
>> ~Corona
>>
>> -
>> Caller's Arguments:
>>
>> > The rule "Taken Under Advisement" states that "A player CAN, by
>> > announcement, spend Favours in a Party to gain Influence over that
>> > Politican, depending on the Politician's Echelon". It does not state
>> > clearly that the party must be the same as that of the politician. It
>> > does say "that politician", but it is unclear what "that" means in
>> > this context, and there is certainly no textual basis for assuming
>> > that it means they must be of the same party. Further, the rule states
>> > that the process depends on "depend[s] on the Politician's Echelon",
>> > implying via expressio unius est exclusio alterius that it doesn't
>> > depend on anything else. In short, there is no textual basis for
>> > limiting the action to politicians of the same party as the favors. It
>> > would be reasonable to say that the action fails because its
>> > definition is ambiguous, but this is against the principle that the
>> > statements of the rules must be given effect, insofar as it is
>> > possible.
>>
>>
>> Caller's Evidence (Caller's actions preceding CFJ):
>>
>> On Sun, 26 Nov 2017, Aris Merchant wrote:
>> > I spend 24 NPR favors to gain 16 influence over Mad Cap'n Tom. I advise
>> em.
>> >
>> > I spend 10 NPR favors to gain 10 influence over Politician
>> > McPoliticianface. I advise em.
>> >
>> > I spend 8 NPR favors to gain 12 influence over Mickey Joker. I advise
>> > em. I spend 8 NPR favors to gain 12 influence over Nick P. Ronald. I
>> > advise em.
>> >
>> >
>> > Now for the questionable stuff.
>> >
>> > For each upper echelon politician I have not yet advised, I spend 5
>> > NPR favors to gain 5 influence over em, then advise em.
>> >
>> > For each row echelon politician I have not yet advised, I spend 4 NPR
>> > favors to gain 6 influence over em, then advise em.
>> >
>> > For each row reduced politician, I spend 2 NPR favors to gain 4
>> > influence over em, then advise em.
>>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Clork] Weekly Report

[VJ Rada]

you'll have to refer it to that specific cfj in a-b to fulfil ur obligation

On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 2:43 PM, Aris Merchant
<thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It's just a matter of knowing who to bribe. ;) Email is indeed weird.
>
> -Aris
>
> On Sun, Dec 10, 2017 at 7:36 PM Madeline <j...@iinet.net.au> wrote:
>
>> HOW DID I JUST GET YOUR RESPONSE TO THIS BEFORE I GOT MY OWN MESSAGE
>> E-mail is weird
>>
>>
>> On 2017-12-11 14:34, Aris Merchant wrote:
>> > I don't want it to self-ratify away. But yes, that CFJ is taking awhile.
>> >
>> > -Aris
>> >
>> > On Sun, Dec 10, 2017 at 7:32 PM Madeline <j...@iinet.net.au> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Isn't that still pending CFJ?
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On 2017-12-11 14:31, Aris Merchant wrote:
>> >>> I CoE this and the previous Clork report for not showing my standing
>> with
>> >>> the Row-Reduced politicians.
>> >>>
>> >>> -Aris
>> >>>
>> >>> On Sun, Dec 10, 2017 at 7:27 PM Telnaior <j...@iinet.net.au> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> I create a new Politician with the name Awuton Cyroce in the Costume
>> >>>> Conservatives.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> PARTIES AND FAVOURS
>> >>>> ---
>> >>>>
>> >>>> PLA - Platonic Isolationists   (4 Politicians,
>> >> Participation)
>> >>>> NPR - New Punchbowl Reformers  (3 Politicians, Economy)
>> >>>> COS - Costume Conservatives(5 Politicians, Justice)
>> >>>> SUL - Substance Use Liberals   (4 Politicians, Efficiency)
>> >>>> MLP - Official Raving Monster Looney Party (4 Politicians,
>> Legislation)
>> >>>>
>> >>>> +-+-+-+-+-+-+
>> >>>> | Player  | PLA | NPR | COS | SUL | MLP |
>> >>>> +-+-+-+-+-+-+
>> >>>> | Alexis  |   2 |   3 |   7 |   9 |   4 |
>> >>>> | Aris|   0 | 183 |   6 |   3 |   5 |
>> >>>> | ATMunn  |   2 | 214 |   2 |   5 |   4 |
>> >>>> | Corona  |   2 | 215 |   0 |   1 |   2 |
>> >>>> | Cuddle Beam |   0 | 214 |   0 |   0 |   0 |
>> >>>> | G.  |   2 | 429 |   2 |   5 |   4 |
>> >>>> | Gaelan  |   0 | 214 |   0 |   0 |   0 |
>> >>>> | nichdel |   0 | 214 |   0 |   0 |   0 |
>> >>>> | o   |   0 | 214 |   7 |   7 |   4 |
>> >>>> | PSS[1]  |   2 | 216 |   5 |   5 |   5 |
>> >>>> | Quazie  |   0 | 214 |   1 |   1 |   0 |
>> >>>> | Telnaior|   0 | 215 |   2 |   2 |   4 |
>> >>>> | 天火狐 |   0 | 214 |   1 |   1 |   2 | (not even gonna try)
>> >>>> | Trigon  |   2 | 214 |   0 |   0 |   0 |
>> >>>> +-+-+-+-+-+-+
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> RANKS AND POLITICIANS
>> >>>> -
>> >>>>
>> >>>> CHAMBER OF POWER[Rank 5]
>> >>>> Host  - VACANT (???, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
>> >>>> Break Election Ties
>> >>>>
>> >>>> UPPER ECHELON   [Rank 3]
>> >>>> Planner   - Joseph "Stealin'" McCarthy (PLA, 15 Stress, No Advisor)
>> >>>> Decide Party Policies
>> >>>>10 Influence - VJ Rada
>> >>>> Enforcer  - Xi Kingpin (PLA, 15 Stress, No Advisor)
>> >>>> Remove Row Echelon Politicians
>> >>>>8 Influence - VJ Rada
>> >>>> Organiser - Mad "Max" Robespierre (COS, 15 Stress, No Advisor)
>> >>>> Extra Voting Power
>> >>>>No Influencers
>> >>>> Creep - Politician McPoliticianface (NPR, 15 Stress, Aris)
>> >>>> Increase Politician Stress
>> >>>>10 Influence - Aris
>> >>>>
>> >>>> ROW ECHELON [Rank 1]
>> >>>> Schmoozer - The Drunk Clinton (SUL, 05 Stress, No Advisor)
>> >>>> Change Politician Parties
>> >>>>6 Influence - VJ Rada
>> >>>> Decorator - John Johnson (MLP, 

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 7989-7992

[VJ Rada]

im not a player obv

On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 12:47 PM, Reuben Staley  wrote:
>
>
> On 12/10/2017 5:47 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
>>
>> I extend the voting period on all of these decisions by 7 days and issue
>> a humiliating public reminder to 天火狐, Quazie, Gaelan, omd, nichdel, G.,
>> Cuddlebeam, V.J. Rada, ATMunn, Trigon, Telnaior, and Corona.
>>
>> On 12/03/2017 06:38 PM, Aris Merchant wrote:
>>>
>>> I hereby distribute each listed proposal, initiating the Agoran
>>> Decision of whether to adopt it, and removing it from the proposal
>>> pool. For this decision, the vote collector is the Assessor, the
>>> quorum is 6.0 [1], 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)  AITitlePender  Pend
>>> fee
>>>
>>> ---
>>> 7989*  Telnaior   3.0   Don't FAGE the FAGE  Telnaior1 AP
>
> FOR
>>>
>>> 7990*  P.S.S [2]  1.0   History by Force P.S.S. [2]  1 AP
>
> PRESENT
>>>
>>> 7991*  G. 3.0   Ribbon fix   G.  1 AP
>
> AGAINST
>>>
>>> 7992*  Alexis 3.0   More CAN Fixes   Alexis  1 AP
>
> FOR
>
> --
> Trigon



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: [Arbitor] Court Gazette

[VJ Rada]

I'm sad that we appear to be winding down quite a lot without having
fixed the problems that have vexed us: I understand that part of this
is my distractions' fault. But it's also real life sucking and all
that. Thanks for your service, G>

On Sat, Dec 9, 2017 at 12:59 PM, ATMunn  wrote:
> Thank you, G., for being willing to do the remaining Arbitor duties before
> resigning.  It's a bummer to see you resign, but I understand that real life
> exists, and sometimes you don't have time to pay attention to a random email
> Nomic game. :P
>
> I initiate an election for Arbitor.
>
>
> On 12/8/2017 7:06 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Didn't get enough support, so:  I resign the office of Arbitor.
>>
>> A deputy can claim the office by deputising to award appropriate Favours
>> for the below-delivered judgements.
>>
>> Incoming Arbitor:  I am not currently "interested" in being assigned
>> judgements.
>>
>> Cheers, all!
>>
>> -G.
>>
>>
>> On Fri, 8 Dec 2017, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>>>
>>> Recently-Delivered Verdicts and Implications
>>> 
>>> [** = consider for rules annotation]
>>>
>>>
>>> 3591 by Alexis:  Self-Ratification of an Agoran Decision ratifies the
>>> first result only.
>>>
>>> 3599-3601 by o:  Details of Rule Change mechanics in proposals (hard to
>>> summarize).
>>>
>>> 3602 by Telnaior:  Not all abuses of power for personal gain are
>>> prohibited by law.
>>>
>>> 3607 judged by ATMunn, Motion to Reconsider filed, DIMISSED by G. due to
>>> questions on calling procedure.
>>>
>>> 3608 by Corona:  Proposals not in the Proposal Pool cannot have an
>>> imminence switch.
>>>
>>> 3609 by G.:  Conditionals in Proposals have "effects" on the gamestate
>>> even if the net result of the clause is no change.
>>>
>>> 3610 by V.J. Rada:  Awarding Ribbons is broken for lack of a "by
>>> announcement" method.
>>>
>>> 3611-12 by Aris:  The rule on Black Cards violates the right to call
>>> CFJs, so it never became a rule.
>>
>>
>>
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Promotor Draft

[VJ Rada]

Can someone goddamn fix ribbons please?

On Sun, Dec 3, 2017 at 8:19 PM, Aris Merchant
 wrote:
> My not-very-weekly draft follows.
>
> -Aris
>
> ---
> I hereby distribute each listed proposal, initiating the Agoran
> Decision of whether to adopt it, and removing it from the proposal
> pool. For this decision, the vote collector is the Assessor, the
> quorum is 6.0 [1], 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)  AITitlePender  Pend fee
> ---
> 7989*  Telnaior   3.0   Don't FAGE the FAGE  Telnaior1 AP
> 7890*  P.S.S [2]  1.0   History by Force P.S.S. [2]  1 AP
>
> The proposal pool is currently empty.
>
> Legend: * : Proposal is pending.
>
>
> [1] There is a quite a bit of confusion about the last proposal to be
> purportedly resolved, 7981, so this value is provisional.
> [2] Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
>
> A proposal may be pended for 1 AP, or for 1/20th the Floating Value
> in shines (see the Treasuror's report).
>
> The full text of the aforementioned proposals is included below.
>
> //
> ID: 7989
> Title: Don't FAGE the FAGE
> Adoption index: 3.0
> Author: Telnaior
> Co-authors:
>
>
> Change the power of Rule 1789 ("Cantus Cygneus") to 3.
>
> //
> ID: 7990
> Title: History by Force
> Adoption index: 1.0
> Author: Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> Co-authors:
>
>
> Enact a new Rule "Miscellaneous Herald Duties", with the following text:
> {
>   The Herald SHALL in eir weekly report include an interesting Agoran
>   fact and SHALL in eir monthly report include a short essay of any
>   authorship, regarding an aspect of Agoran history. Any player
>   publishing a thesis for a degree, related to Agoran history SHOULD
>   offer a summary for publication in the Herald's monthly report.
>
>   The Herald SHALL in eir monthly report publish, with reasonable
>   effort, a summary of all theses written for the purpose of
>   receiving degrees, regardless of whether a degree was awarded.
>   The Herald SHOULD attempt to make theses available for reading.
> }
>
> //



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Logo?

[VJ Rada]

Aren't our rules based on a bunch of rules written in a book anyway?

On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 4:49 PM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote:
>
>
> No, it hasn't.
>
> On Thu, 30 Nov 2017, VJ Rada wrote:
>> I ask again: has it ever been a problem that people have been stealing
>> our rules without asking? Because there are hundreds and hundreds of
>> internet games in the world which don't go to lengths to protect their
>> own copyright.
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 4:41 PM, Aris Merchant
>> <thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > We can at least set copyright for every new contribution. We would
>> > even have a decent (alright, actually rather horrible given the way
>> > contract law works) argument that they had given up their rights to it
>> > in contributing it to Agora, or alternately that they agreed to abide
>> > by Agora's rules and are bound by this one (the reason this is a
>> > horrible argument is that no one realized, up to now, that Agoran
>> > rules have any real world legal implications, although the former
>> > argument might conceivably hold up in court).
>> >
>> > -Aris
>> >
>> > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 9:35 PM, Ørjan Johansen <oer...@nvg.ntnu.no> wrote:
>> >> On Wed, 29 Nov 2017, Aris Merchant wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> What would people think of a proposal actually specifying that Agorans
>> >>> all share copyright over the rules (and the gamestate in general) and
>> >>> that they are licensed under X licence? I don't think this would ever
>> >>> actually be a problem, but it's probably better to make it clear so
>> >>> that it can't be. Also, what license would be appropriate (public
>> >>> domain is a pretty strong contender, because that's basically the
>> >>> situation now)?
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Although I'm working only from impression myself, I don't think copyright
>> >> law works that way.  Any actual copyright reassignement or licensing
>> >> requires the explicit permission of every person who's contributed
>> >> nontrivially to the current rules.
>> >>
>> >> If it actually _is_ a problem, it's terribly complicated to fix, possibly
>> >> impossible (we might not be able to _find_ every contributor).  Agora was
>> >> created during a time when no one cared about copyright for stuff like 
>> >> this.
>> >> Barn doors and horses.
>> >>
>> >> Greetings,
>> >> Ørjan.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>> -Aris
>> >>>
>> >>> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 8:59 PM, Owen Jacobson <o...@grimoire.ca> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> On Nov 24, 2017, at 2:24 AM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> 
>> >>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> I don't recall who drew that particular image.  But the heraldic
>> >>>>> description was
>> >>>>> mandated by a proposal by GreyKnight adopted in 2007 (it was later made
>> >>>>> into
>> >>>>> a rule):
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Proposal 4898 by Greyknight, AI=1, Ordinary
>> >>>>> Agoran Arms
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> The coat of arms of Agora is defined by the following blazon:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>  Tierced palewise sable, argent, and sable, charged with a quill 
>> >>>>> and
>> >>>>> an
>> >>>>> axe in saltire, proper, and in the chief a capital letter A, gules.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> When any Player requires an image that e may use to represent Agora or
>> >>>>> the interests thereof, e must use an image which accurately depicts the
>> >>>>> blazon presented here.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Thanks.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I ended up using it, with some hesitation, for the app icon for
>> >>>> https://github.com/ojacobson/cadastre/
>> >>>> <https://github.com/ojacobson/cadastre/>. To see it in action you have 
>> >>>> to
>> >>>> have a Heroku account - it’s only displayed during setup, when you 
>> >>>> click the
>> >>>> “Deploy to Heroku” button in the README.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> -o
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> From V.J. Rada
>>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Logo?

[VJ Rada]

I ask again: has it ever been a problem that people have been stealing
our rules without asking? Because there are hundreds and hundreds of
internet games in the world which don't go to lengths to protect their
own copyright.

On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 4:41 PM, Aris Merchant
 wrote:
> We can at least set copyright for every new contribution. We would
> even have a decent (alright, actually rather horrible given the way
> contract law works) argument that they had given up their rights to it
> in contributing it to Agora, or alternately that they agreed to abide
> by Agora's rules and are bound by this one (the reason this is a
> horrible argument is that no one realized, up to now, that Agoran
> rules have any real world legal implications, although the former
> argument might conceivably hold up in court).
>
> -Aris
>
> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 9:35 PM, Ørjan Johansen  wrote:
>> On Wed, 29 Nov 2017, Aris Merchant wrote:
>>
>>> What would people think of a proposal actually specifying that Agorans
>>> all share copyright over the rules (and the gamestate in general) and
>>> that they are licensed under X licence? I don't think this would ever
>>> actually be a problem, but it's probably better to make it clear so
>>> that it can't be. Also, what license would be appropriate (public
>>> domain is a pretty strong contender, because that's basically the
>>> situation now)?
>>
>>
>> Although I'm working only from impression myself, I don't think copyright
>> law works that way.  Any actual copyright reassignement or licensing
>> requires the explicit permission of every person who's contributed
>> nontrivially to the current rules.
>>
>> If it actually _is_ a problem, it's terribly complicated to fix, possibly
>> impossible (we might not be able to _find_ every contributor).  Agora was
>> created during a time when no one cared about copyright for stuff like this.
>> Barn doors and horses.
>>
>> Greetings,
>> Ørjan.
>>
>>
>>> -Aris
>>>
>>> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 8:59 PM, Owen Jacobson  wrote:


> On Nov 24, 2017, at 2:24 AM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
>
>
>
> I don't recall who drew that particular image.  But the heraldic
> description was
> mandated by a proposal by GreyKnight adopted in 2007 (it was later made
> into
> a rule):
>
> Proposal 4898 by Greyknight, AI=1, Ordinary
> Agoran Arms
>
> The coat of arms of Agora is defined by the following blazon:
>
>  Tierced palewise sable, argent, and sable, charged with a quill and
> an
> axe in saltire, proper, and in the chief a capital letter A, gules.
>
> When any Player requires an image that e may use to represent Agora or
> the interests thereof, e must use an image which accurately depicts the
> blazon presented here.


 Thanks.

 I ended up using it, with some hesitation, for the app icon for
 https://github.com/ojacobson/cadastre/
 . To see it in action you have to
 have a Heroku account - it’s only displayed during setup, when you click 
 the
 “Deploy to Heroku” button in the README.

 -o

>>>
>>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: CFJ & Deregistration

[VJ Rada]

I think "reasonably implied consent" should be stronger: something
like "explicit and knowing consent"

On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 4:24 PM, Ørjan Johansen  wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Nov 2017, Telnaior wrote:
>
>> That's kind of a pity, given how longstanding that rule is. How about we
>> fix that?
>>
>> I create the following proposal and spend an Action Point (1 -> 0) to pend
>> it:
>>
>> Title: Don't FAGE the FAGE
>> Author: Telnaior
>> AI: 3
>> {
>> Change the power of Rule 1789 ("Cantus Cygneus") to 3.
>> }
>
>
> Some people have complained about Power creep, so I was wondering if it
> would be better to amend rule 869 a bit.  A couple alternatives:
>
> {
> Amend Rule 869 ("How to Join and Leave Agora") by replacing
>
>   A player CAN deregister (cease being a player) by announcement.
>
> by
>
>   A player CAN deregister (cease being a player), or with eir
>   reasonably implied consent be deregistered, by announcement.
>
> Amend Rule 1789 ("Cantus Cygneus") by replacing "commanding" by
> "announcing".
> }
>
> Alternatively:
>
> {
> Amend Rule 869 ("How to Join and Leave Agora") by replacing
>
>   Changes to citizenship are secured.
>
> by
>
>   Changes to a person's citizenship are secured, at Power Threshold 2
>   if e is reasonably implied to have consented to the change,
>   otherwise Power Threshold 3.
> }
>
> Greetings,
> Ørjan.



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Draft Ruling on CFJs 3611-3612

[VJ Rada]

>Cannons of Construction

Just canons I'm afraid (and not capitalized). I would love to buy a
cannon of statutory construction.

On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 12:42 PM, Alex Smith  wrote:
> On Wed, 2017-11-29 at 17:30 -0800, Aris Merchant wrote:
>> because the message where e did everything except the rewards got
>> caught in the scam filter and never went through.
>
> Ugh, if Agora really does have a scam filter now, I'll have to look
> into creative ways of getting round it.
>
> I suspect you meant the spam filter, though.
>
> --
> ais523



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: Notice of Honor

[VJ Rada]

I use gmail because my only electronic device is a chromebook so eh.

On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 7:10 AM, Aris Merchant
<thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I still use the gmail web client. It seems to work pretty reasonably
> for me, although it takes a bit of configuration.
>
> -Aris
>
> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 10:13 AM, ATMunn <iamingodsa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Ah, that would probably be a problem with Gmail, then.
>>
>> I would recommend using a client other than Gmail. Although using Gmail
>> works fine for most things, it's a hassle with Agora. I experienced this
>> firsthand. I joined Agora with Gmail, thought it was fine at first, and
>> slowly became more and more fed up with it before switching to a desktop
>> client.
>>
>> If you're looking for a good desktop email client, I recommend Thunderbird.
>> It's made by Mozilla (the same people who made Firefox) and is used by
>> several Agorans, including myself. There are probably other good ones too,
>> but Thunderbird is the only one I've tried. It took a bit of getting used
>> to, but once I figured it out I found it very useful.
>>
>>
>> On 11/29/2017 11:21 AM, Corona wrote:
>>>
>>> Yes, the message got a response, see below (the attachment is just an
>>> icon)
>>>
>>> ---
>>> Mail Delivery Subsystem - Nov 28 Attachments 1 - Attachments
>>> to liliumalbum.agora
>>>
>>> ** Message blocked **
>>>
>>> Your message to agora-busin...@agoranomic.org has been blocked. See
>>> technical details below for more information.
>>>
>>> Learn more here: https://support.google.com/mail/answer/69585
>>>
>>> The response was:
>>>
>>> Message rejected.  See https://support.google.com/mail/answer/69585
>>> for more information.
>>>
>>> On 11/28/17, Ørjan Johansen <oer...@nvg.ntnu.no> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, 28 Nov 2017, Corona wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> This message was blocked for some reason
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It indeed doesn't seem to have reached any of the archives.  Are you sure
>>>> it was sent, and if so did you receive an error message?
>>>>
>>>> Greetings,
>>>> Ørjan.
>>>>
>>>>> On 11/28/17, Corona <liliumalbum.ag...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is a Notice of Honor:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -1 Karma: Corona for not giving Karma to Alexis (who gave me 25sh)
>>>>>> instead of VJ Rada and for admission of intent to bribe miscellaneous
>>>>>> officials.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> +1 Karma: VJ Rada, belatedly, as e has given me 20 shinies to start
>>>>>> out with and also because I think eir crime was not terrible enough to
>>>>>> warrant such a strong reaction.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

DIS: Re: BUS: The black card issued to me was never issued.

[VJ Rada]

That sentence is this "The Prime Minister issues a specified Card to a
specified player". That's a general grant of power to the PM similar
to the grant of power to the referee to issue cards by summary
judgement. This doesn't take precedence over the rule which makes all
cards ineffective unless they meet certain criteria. Or it shouldn't.
If it does, the referee is also not bound by that.

On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:53 PM, Alexis Hunt <aler...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Nov 2017 at 23:51 VJ Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Cards issued for reasons that don't break the rules or cards that are
>> obviously inappropriate are INNEFFECTIVE. The Dive rule which Alexis
>> used says "Notwithstanding rule 2426, the reason for the card
>> MAY be any grievance held by the Prime Minister, not necessarily a
>> violation of the rules, against the person to whom the Card is
>> issued."
>>
>> That's a MAY not a CAN. So the card was ineffective because it is
>> obviously and facially inappropriate to issue a black card to a
>> player. This is the definitive answer, all other answers are wrong.
>>
>
> The CAN is in the first sentence of this rule.



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

DIS: Re: BUS: CFJ & Deregistration

[VJ Rada]

Can't non-players own bills?

On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:01 PM, Owen Jacobson <o...@grimoire.ca> wrote:
> On Nov 28, 2017, at 4:53 PM, VJ Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Also I deregister. If I can take game actions. If I can't, I can't
>> deregister. "but wait doesn't that mean Rada is a player w/out eir
>> consent, which is utterly repugnant to the genius of our laws?" yes.
>> yes it does.
>
> I cause Agora to transfer all Bills in its possession to the Agoran Credit 
> Union.
>
> -o
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Request for H. Arbitor

[VJ Rada]

https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-business/2017-November/037467.html

On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 1:21 PM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote:
>
>
> On phone for a few hours so won't go email hunting, but I assign telnaiors
>  below-mentioned CFJ to be 3612 and assign it to aris (I'll post it
> later if Aris doesn't dig it up first).
>
> On Wed, 29 Nov 2017, Aris Merchant wrote:
>> Sounds workable to me.
>>
>> -Aris
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 6:13 PM VJ Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > If you assigned it to Aris that would provide a proper vehicle for
>> > Aris to possibly decide that the Door Slam was impossible, as opposed
>> > to the current CFJ e has which is about the adoption of the whole rule
>> >
>> > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 1:06 PM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu>
>> > wrote:
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > With that in mind I'll hold off as assigning it as that won't move
>> > things any faster
>> > > and might confuse things more.
>> > >
>> > > On Wed, 29 Nov 2017, Aris Merchant wrote:
>> > >> G. has assigned me a CFJ, and asked me to resolve all the issues in one
>> > >> place. I'll have a full judgement out in the next day or so (I'm
>> > actually
>> > >> aiming for the next few hours, but no promises). Given the equities
>> > >> involved, I'm going to tell you right now that the black card at least
>> > >> failed to have any meaningful effect.
>> > >>
>> > >> -Aris
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 5:32 PM VJ Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >> > You obviously dismissed the CFJ I called that may or may not have
>> > >> > existed. But Telnaior also called a CFJ questioning whether or not
>> > >> > that CFJ existed. I request _that_ CFJ be urgently assigned, given the
>> > >> > interference with my rights as an Agoran currently being undertaken.
>> > >> > --
>> > >> > From V.J. Rada
>> > >> >
>> > >>
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > From V.J. Rada
>> >
>>
>
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Request for H. Arbitor

[VJ Rada]

If you assigned it to Aris that would provide a proper vehicle for
Aris to possibly decide that the Door Slam was impossible, as opposed
to the current CFJ e has which is about the adoption of the whole rule

On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 1:06 PM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote:
>
>
> With that in mind I'll hold off as assigning it as that won't move things any 
> faster
> and might confuse things more.
>
> On Wed, 29 Nov 2017, Aris Merchant wrote:
>> G. has assigned me a CFJ, and asked me to resolve all the issues in one
>> place. I'll have a full judgement out in the next day or so (I'm actually
>> aiming for the next few hours, but no promises). Given the equities
>> involved, I'm going to tell you right now that the black card at least
>> failed to have any meaningful effect.
>>
>> -Aris
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 5:32 PM VJ Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > You obviously dismissed the CFJ I called that may or may not have
>> > existed. But Telnaior also called a CFJ questioning whether or not
>> > that CFJ existed. I request _that_ CFJ be urgently assigned, given the
>> > interference with my rights as an Agoran currently being undertaken.
>> > --
>> > From V.J. Rada
>> >
>>
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

DIS: Request for H. Arbitor

[VJ Rada]

You obviously dismissed the CFJ I called that may or may not have
existed. But Telnaior also called a CFJ questioning whether or not
that CFJ existed. I request _that_ CFJ be urgently assigned, given the
interference with my rights as an Agoran currently being undertaken.
-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] CFJ 3611 assigned to Aris

[VJ Rada]

I agree with Ørjan. This CFJ is _not_ about this particular instance,
it's about the adoption of the rule. The judgement should only
consider whether the rule facially impermissably interferes with the
right to judicial processes, not whether the rule interferes with that
right as applied to me.

On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 12:24 PM, Ørjan Johansen <oer...@nvg.ntnu.no> wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Nov 2017, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 28 Nov 2017, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
>>>
>>> I AP-CFJ, on behalf of VJ Rada, "Rule 2507 does not exist." This is
>>> because its enactment was INEFFECTIVE, per paragraph 3 clause 1 of Rule
>>> 217.
>>
>>
>> This is CFJ 3611, I assign it to Aris.
>
>
>> Gratuitous Arguments
>>
>> H. Judge, I request you examine all the reasons that Slamming the Door
>> may have failed (i.e. if it's interpreted that Slamming the Door didn't
>> work for other reasons, it's possible for the rule to exist if it
>> didn't stop V.J. Rada from calling a CFJ for other reasons).
>
>
> More gratuitious arguments:
>
> I would suggest that although _general_ such reasons might apply, the
> question of whether rule 217 prevented rule 2507 should not depend on any
> concrete events happening after the taking effect of the relevant proposal.
> Otherwise there would be a serious retroactive effect problem.
>
> Greetings,
> Ørjan.



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: CFJ & Deregistration

[VJ Rada]

True actually. I forgot that "all game actions" really means "all game
actions of power 2 or less".

On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 9:34 AM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, 29 Nov 2017, VJ Rada wrote:
>> Paradoxes are easy.
>
> Yup - if you can put arbitrary text into something with legal status,
> it's trivial.
>
> Need to drag out the reasons from old precedents that basic contract
> loopiness from trivial paradoxes doesn't trigger PARADOXICAL wins, and
> see if that logic applies to new contracts.  (or of course, re-invent
> said logic, or accept, patch, and move on).
>
>> Also I deregister. If I can take game actions. If I can't, I can't
>> deregister. "but wait doesn't that mean Rada is a player w/out eir
>> consent, which is utterly repugnant to the genius of our laws?" yes.
>> yes it does.
>
> Keep in mind that it may not be all or nothing.  Black Cards are only
> Power-2.  So the RttCN clause in that Rule only applies to abilities of
> power 2 or less (if that approach is taken).  So likely all the stuff
> like deregistration/registration works.
>
> And if it didn't, it's likely that the act of you sending any of these
> message didn't work either...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

DIS: Re: BUS: CFJ & Deregistration

[VJ Rada]

I was also considering {V.J. Rada CAN shave all those who do not shave
themselves}

On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 8:53 AM, VJ Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> (If I can take actions)
>
> I destroy 10 bills, get 1 shinies, and use it to create a contract
> with the following text {This sentence is false. If the previous
> sentence is false, V.J. Rada SHALL give Agora 1 billion shinies within
> a month if e is a player}
>
> I destroy 10 bills and trade w/ ACU for 1 shiny and call a CFJ with
> the text: "V.J. Rada SHALL give agora 1 billion shinies within a month
> if e is a player"
>
> Paradoxes are easy.
>
> Also I deregister. If I can take game actions. If I can't, I can't
> deregister. "but wait doesn't that mean Rada is a player w/out eir
> consent, which is utterly repugnant to the genius of our laws?" yes.
> yes it does.
> --
> From V.J. Rada



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] CFJ 3609 assigned to G.

[VJ Rada]

Good judgement.

On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 7:35 AM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
>
>
> CFJ 3609 Statement:
>> > {{{
>> > It is LEGAL for me to pend the proposal "Self-Indulgence".
>> > }}}
>
>
> CFJ 3609 Judgement:
>
> This is the first case being judged where PARADOXICAL is potentially
> appropriate as a judgement (Proposal 7976 adopted November 26).  As
> such, there are some ground rules to consider.  In particular, when
> paradox was previously part of win conditions, the apparent ability of
> contracts to create arbitrary/circular text led to an explosion of
> paradox attempts.  It's important, as a matter of precedent going
> forward, to consider contracts as "natural agreements" to work in a
> straightforward manner within a body of law, and apply very strict
> scrutiny to attempts to set up paradoxes, by asking whether the rules
> explicitly enable the paradox (this is a note to future judges of
> potentially PARADOXICAL cases).
>
> Ok, with that statement of judicial bias in mind, the facts. This case
> hinges on what the "effects" of a proposal are, for the purposes of this
> clause of R2525:
>>  The following are protected actions:
>>  [...]
>>  2. Submitting, pending, or voting freely on a proposal, but only
>> if the sole effect the proposal would have if adopted is to
>> create, modify, or destroy a contract or group of contracts, or
>> to cause an entity or group of entities to become or cease to
>> be a contract or group of contracts;
>
> So we need to ask:  what are the "effects" of a proposal, from which
> we can identify a "sole" effect?
>
> It's possible to be highly pedantic and say "every character of a
> proposal has a game effect", because it would affect the outcome of a
> later CFJ "Does Proposal N contain text Z"?  But this doesn't satisfy.
> The appropriate legal question is:  Is it IRRELEVANT that the proposal
> contained a specific body of text, at the time the Proposal as a whole
> takes effect?  If so, the text didn't have an effect.
>
> To this end, []-delimited comments are a good example.  The test is, if
> you could replace the text in the [] with any arbitrary text, would it
> change an outcome?  In general, for clearly-delimited comments, no. So
> to set that limit:  comment text has no game effect (other than the
> aforementioned trivial, after-the-fact CFJ). So in general, the test is:
> if a part of the proposal text could be replaced with other arbitrary
> text without changing the results when it takes effect, that text has no
> "effect" for R2525 purposes.
>
> So, what about a conditional clause?  It's important to note that,
> while we've judged conditionals on "by announcement" actions to be
> informal conveniences without the weight of law, this is not true for
> conditionals within Proposals.  As instruments, any contained
> conditionals should be evaluated similarly to conditionals contained in
> the rules, and if their evaluation leads to a paradox, it doesn't
> outright nullify the action (the way it would for a conditional on a
> by-announcement action), so ambiguity/paradox alone doesn't stop the
> conditional from (potentially) having an effect.
>
> It helps to look at a non-paradoxical case.  What if the clause is
> simply "If FALSE, then Y"?  Since we can trivially evaluate the
> conditional clause as FALSE, we can use lazy evaluation of clause Y and
> ignore it (not evaluate it).  It doesn't matter what Y says, as long as
> the conditional is FALSE, then Y can be any text without game effect.
>
> So if a conditional clause is FALSE, the following clause Y has no game
> effect, as the Caller states.
>
> But what about the conditional clause itself?  Could we change it?  No!
> Obviously, if we changed "if FALSE" to "if TRUE", then the following
> clause Y would have game effect.  Which means that, whether FALSE, TRUE,
> or indeterminate, the conditional clause itself has the formal game
> effect of telling us whether to evaluate Y for game effect.
>
> Therefore, regardless of the truth value of the conditional clause
> (including if its truth value is indeterminate), its very existence
> instructs us to evaluate whether the following clause has an effect, so
> the conditional clause itself has a game effect.
>
> Therefore, the proposal does not have the "sole effect" of modifying a
> contract, regardless of the truth of its conditional clause.  So it was
> possible for the Contract to forbid pending it, and it was ILLEGAL for
> Alexis to pend it.  I find this CFJ to be FALSE.
>
>
> CALLER'S ARGUMENTS/EVIDENCE:
>
>> On Sun, 26 Nov 2017, Alexis Hunt wrote:
>> > I spend a shiny to create the following contract, entitled "No
>> > Self-Indulgence":
>> > {{{
>> > Alexis SHALL NOT pend any proposal e authored.
>> > Alexis CAN revoke this contract by announcement.
>> > }}}
>> >
>> > I submit the following proposal:
>> > Proposal: Self-Indulgence AI=3
>> > {{{
>> > The contract "No Self-Indulgence" is 

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Treasuror] Weekly Report

[VJ Rada]

No I think we probably need to sort out what actually happened.

I would just rule that the message destroyed just one stamp.

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 4:57 PM, Owen Jacobson  wrote:
>
> On Nov 28, 2017, at 12:30 AM, Aris Merchant 
>  wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 9:04 PM, Owen Jacobson  wrote:
>>> 1,011 repetitions of this pair of events:
>>> {{
>>> Thu,  9 Nov 2017 08:50:46 + V.J Rada paid Agora 1 sh.
>>> Thu,  9 Nov 2017 08:50:46   Agora paid V.J Rada 1 sh.
>>> }}
>>
>> CoE: all of these repetitions failed per CFJ 3597.
>
> Good point. My attempt to revisit that part of the CFJ failed.
>
>>> Thu,  9 Nov 2017 09:26:41   V.J Rada paid o 11 sh.
>>> Sat, 11 Nov 2017 21:13:19   Agora paid Alexis 5 sh.
>>> Sun, 12 Nov 2017 16:30:26   Agora paid 天火狐 5 sh.
>>> Sun, 12 Nov 2017 21:47:09   Agora paid G. 5 sh.
>>> Sun, 12 Nov 2017 22:45:07   Agora paid G. 5 sh.
>>> Sun, 12 Nov 2017 23:37:19 + Aris created a stamp for 6 sh.
>>> Sun, 12 Nov 2017 23:37:19   Agora paid Aris 5 sh.
>>> Sun, 12 Nov 2017 23:37:19   Agora paid Aris 5 sh.
>>> Mon, 13 Nov 2017 03:12:56 + 天火狐 paid Agora 1 sh.
>>> Tue, 14 Nov 2017 02:20:28   Agora paid V.J Rada 5 sh.
>>> Tue, 14 Nov 2017 02:45:07   Agora paid ATMunn 5 sh.
>>> Tue, 14 Nov 2017 07:34:51 +*V.J Rada paid Agora 1 sh.
>>> Wed, 15 Nov 2017 18:01:50   Agora paid G. 5 sh.
>>> - previous report -
>>> Thu, 16 Nov 2017 05:37:25   o destroyed an "o" stamp to gain 59 sh.
>>> Thu, 16 Nov 2017 05:37:25   o destroyed an "o" stamp to gain 59 sh.
>>> Thu, 16 Nov 2017 05:37:25   Agora paid o 15 sh.
>>> Thu, 16 Nov 2017 05:39:29   Aris destroyed an "Aris" stamp to gain 59 sh.
>>
>> CoE: I attempted to destroy two of these, unless one failed for some
>> reason. I know that there was a link in one of them, but I don't think
>> that would make it fail. It may have self-ratified by now
>> unfortunately, but I'd like to clear it up.
>
> Entirely my error. The quoting in your message was somewhat unusual, and read
>
>>> I destroy one stamp I own, which I made, to cause Agora to pay me 59 sh.
>> I destroy one stamp I own, which I made, to cause Agora to pay me 59 sh.
>>
>> -Aris
>
> I’m used to this - but I missed the leading action and only accounted for one 
> of the two. Unfortunately, correcting the record throws even more actions 
> involving V.J Rada into question in ways that are going to be awkward to 
> untangle. Would you be willing to accept partial compensation, plus the right 
> to keep the incorrect stamp, in lieu? I realize the Agoran tradition is light 
> on equitable remedies, but I’d like to at least try.
>
> -o
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

DIS: Re: BUS: [ACU] Bank Statement

[VJ Rada]

(If I can take game actions)

I deposit my shinies, exchanging them w/ ACU for bills.

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 3:57 PM, Owen Jacobson  wrote:
> The Agoran Credit Union report
>
> Date of this report:
> Date of last report: N/A
>
>
> Chair: o
>
> Policy:
>
>Bills are meant to be a gently inflationary medium of exchange, and a
>carrot to use to get people to take Shinies out of circulation and put them
>in the bank. With the members' consent, I hope to define systems for the
>bank to invest and recoup those Shinies, but even if that fails, dividing
>every Shiny into ten Bills while providing a reliable way to convert them
>back into Shinies as needed may help loosen the interpersonal economy a 
> bit.
>
>As Chair, I will cause The Agoran Credit Union to extend a loan, on
>request, to any party who has no outstanding loans, up to an amount of
>Bills equal to the net number of Shinies that player has deposited with the
>Credit Union. (This implies that the excess fraction of Bills is capped at
>10%.) Loans SHALL be repayable within three months, repayable early without
>penalty, and extendable up to an additional three months at the discretion 
> of
>the Chair.
>
>
> Balance: 239 sh.
>
>
> Bills in circulation:
>
>   2390 Bills  Player
>540 BillsATMunn
> 55 BillsAlexis
> 45 BillsAris
>490 BillsCorona
> 45 BillsCuddleBeam
> 45 BillsG.
> 40 BillsGaelan
> 40 BillsPublius Scribonius Scholasticus
> 40 BillsQuazie
>450 BillsTelnaior
> 40 BillsTrigon
>400 BillsV.J Rada
> 40 Billsnichdel
> 40 Billso
> 40 Billsomd
> 40 Bills天火狐
>
>
> Outstanding loans: None
>
>
> Recent Events (all times UTC):
>
> Tue, 21 Nov 2017 10:03:08  The Agoran Credit Union founded
> Tue, 21 Nov 2017 10:03:08  o appointed Chair
> Tue, 21 Nov 2017 10:03:08  o deposited 64 sh.
> Tue, 21 Nov 2017 10:03:08  o paid 40 bills each to ATMunn, Alexis, Aris, 
> Corona,
> CuddleBeam, G., Gaelan, Publius Scribonius
> Scholasticus, Quazie, Telnaior, Trigon, V.J Rada,
> nichdel, omd, and 天火狐
> Tue, 21 Nov 2017 10:08:11  V.J Rada deposited 57 sh.
> Tue, 21 Nov 2017 10:13:05  V.J Rada deposited 1 sh.
> Tue, 21 Nov 2017 10:13:38  Telnaior deposited 45 sh.
> Tue, 21 Nov 2017 14:26:25  ATMunn withdrew 4 sh.
> Tue, 21 Nov 2017 23:46:59  V.J Rada withdrew 1 sh.
> Wed, 22 Nov 2017 00:26:09  Telnaior transferred 30 Bills to ATMunn
> Wed, 22 Nov 2017 00:26:09  Telnaior transferred 15 Bills to Alexis
> Wed, 22 Nov 2017 00:26:09  Telnaior transferred 5 Bills to G.
> Wed, 22 Nov 2017 00:26:09  Telnaior transferred 5 Bills to CuddleBeam
> Wed, 22 Nov 2017 00:26:09  Telnaior transferred 50 Bills to Aris
> Wed, 22 Nov 2017 00:36:03  ATMunn deposited 53 sh.
> Wed, 22 Nov 2017 00:49:31  V.J Rada withdrew 20 sh.
> Wed, 22 Nov 2017 01:36:37  V.J Rada withdrew 1 sh.
> Wed, 22 Nov 2017 02:54:35  Telnaior deposited 2 sh.
> Wed, 22 Nov 2017 02:55:37  ATMunn deposited 2 sh.
> Wed, 22 Nov 2017 02:56:22  V.J Rada deposited 2 sh.
> Wed, 22 Nov 2017 02:59:30  V.J Rada deposited 1 sh.
> Wed, 22 Nov 2017 16:21:41  Corona deposited 45 sh.
> Wed, 22 Nov 2017 23:50:31  V.J Rada withdrew 1 sh.
> Fri, 24 Nov 2017 15:58:52  ATMunn withdrew 1 sh.
> Sun, 26 Nov 2017 23:20:31  V.J Rada withdrew 2 sh.
> Sun, 26 Nov 2017 23:58:06  Corona withdrew 49 sh.
> Sun, 26 Nov 2017 23:58:06  Corona deposited 49 sh.
> Tue, 28 Nov 2017 01:08:36  ATMunn withdrew 3 sh.
>
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Arbitor] CFJ 3607 assigned to G. (and judged with help from ATMunn)

[VJ Rada]

Neither rulesets nor referee reports self-ratify, no.

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 3:01 PM, Madeline <j...@iinet.net.au> wrote:
> Wouldn't something something self-ratification?
>
>
>
> On 2017-11-28 14:57, Ørjan Johansen wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 27 Nov 2017, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>>
>>> Oooh, yes - that's very far reaching and precisely the sort of thing that
>>> clause is meant to stop.  I need to go do Something Else now and this
>>> deserves some thoughts about arguments, but if no one gets to it before
>>> me,
>>> I'll call it tomorrow-ish.
>>
>>
>> So given that the rule 217 provision affects rule changes, rule 2507 was
>> never created, perhaps... Black Cards don't exist.
>>
>> Greetings,
>> Ørjan.
>>
>>> On Tue, 28 Nov 2017, VJ Rada wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Would like someone to make a challenge on that basis, won't myself bc of
>>>> uncertainty.
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 2:23 PM, VJ Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> It's not just can't register, it's CAN'T TAKE ANY GAME ACTIONS.
>>>>>
>>>>> Actually, now that I Think of it, it's probably null and void bc of the
>>>>> "stopping someone from formally resolving a controversy" clause.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 7982-7988

[VJ Rada]

Can persons own bills?

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 2:36 PM, Owen Jacobson <o...@grimoire.ca> wrote:
> I change my vote to AGAINST on proposal 7988.
>
> I pay Ørjan 5 Bills for spotting a significant error.
>
> -o
>
>> On Nov 26, 2017, at 9:27 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus 
>> <p.scribonius.scholasti...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>> As do I.
>> 
>> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
>> p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Nov 26, 2017, at 9:26 PM, VJ Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I change my vote to AGAINST on minimal econ reforms.
>>>
>>> On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 1:25 PM, Ørjan Johansen <oer...@nvg.ntnu.no> wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 26 Nov 2017, Aris Merchant wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> //
>>>>> ID: 7982
>>>>> Title: Referee Reform Fix
>>>>> Adoption index: 1.7
>>>>> Author: V.J. Rada
>>>>> Co-authors:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> At the end of rule 2478 "Viglilante Justice", add a new
>>>>> paragraph with the text "The Referee CANNOT Point eir Finger. The
>>>>> Arbitor CANNOT Point eir Finger at the Referee".
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The title of the rule is misspelled, and also the text misses a period.
>>>>
>>>>> //
>>>>> ID: 7988
>>>>> Title: Minimal Econ reforms
>>>>> Adoption index: 2.0
>>>>> Author: G.
>>>>> Co-authors:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Amend Rule 991 (Calls for Judgement) by replacing:
>>>>> a) by announcement, and spending 1 Action Point, OR
>>>>>
>>>>> b) by announcement, and spending the current CFJ cost in shinies,
>>>>>   OR
>>>>>
>>>>> c) by announcement if e is not a player.
>>>>> with:
>>>>> a) by announcement, and spending the current CFJ cost in shinies,
>>>>>   OR
>>>>>
>>>>> b) Without 2 Objections.  Players SHOULD object unless paying
>>>>>   with shinies is a significant barrier to the Caller's
>>>>>   ability to seek a resolution to the controversy.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I might not be calling a lot of CFJs if this passes, then.
>>>>
>>>> Greetings,
>>>> Ørjan.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> From V.J. Rada
>>
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Arbitor] CFJ 3607 assigned to G. (and judged with help from ATMunn)

[VJ Rada]

Would like someone to make a challenge on that basis, won't myself bc of
uncertainty.

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 2:23 PM, VJ Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote:

> It's not just can't register, it's CAN'T TAKE ANY GAME ACTIONS.
>
> Actually, now that I Think of it, it's probably null and void bc of the
> "stopping someone from formally resolving a controversy" clause.
>
> On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 2:09 PM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, 28 Nov 2017, VJ Rada wrote:
>> > Actually, G, if the CFJ is TRUE, it's not a CFJ because I can't take
>> game
>> > actions. So by judging this CFJ you've implicitly recognized that I can
>> > indeed take game actions.
>>
>> 1. If you're not a player, does the fact that you claimed to use AP to
>> call it invalidate your non-player ability to call it by announcement?
>>
>> 2. I've already self-filed a Motion to Reconsider and will wait for ATMunn
>> on the actual opinion.
>>
>> 3.  We never used to have separate mechanisms at all for non-player
>> versus player CFJs.  This is the first time it's caused an issue so far,
>> but it could happen again with economic trade.  Depending on what sort
>> of issues this causes this is another argument for making CFJs free for
>> everyone again (removing them from the economy).
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> From V.J. Rada
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Arbitor] CFJ 3607 assigned to G. (and judged with help from ATMunn)

[VJ Rada]

It's not just can't register, it's CAN'T TAKE ANY GAME ACTIONS.

Actually, now that I Think of it, it's probably null and void bc of the
"stopping someone from formally resolving a controversy" clause.

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 2:09 PM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote:

>
>
> On Tue, 28 Nov 2017, VJ Rada wrote:
> > Actually, G, if the CFJ is TRUE, it's not a CFJ because I can't take game
> > actions. So by judging this CFJ you've implicitly recognized that I can
> > indeed take game actions.
>
> 1. If you're not a player, does the fact that you claimed to use AP to
> call it invalidate your non-player ability to call it by announcement?
>
> 2. I've already self-filed a Motion to Reconsider and will wait for ATMunn
> on the actual opinion.
>
> 3.  We never used to have separate mechanisms at all for non-player
> versus player CFJs.  This is the first time it's caused an issue so far,
> but it could happen again with economic trade.  Depending on what sort
> of issues this causes this is another argument for making CFJs free for
> everyone again (removing them from the economy).
>
>
>


-- 
>From V.J. Rada

DIS: Re: BUS: Unsubscribe

[VJ Rada]

>This email (including any attachments) may include information that is
​>​
confidential or privileged only for the designated recipient.  If you are
​>​
not the designated recipient and reading the content of this message, your
​>​
activity is against the sender's will, and the sender reserves the right to
​>​
resort to legal action and seek compensation. If you have received it in
​>​
error, please delete it from your system without reading and notify sender.

​we're getting sued boys.​


On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 2:09 PM, Sawsan Gad <sawsan...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Please unsubscribe me for the list. Thank you.
>
>
>
> This email (including any attachments) may include information that is
> confidential or privileged only for the designated recipient.  If you are
> not the designated recipient and reading the content of this message, your
> activity is against the sender's will, and the sender reserves the right to
> resort to legal action and seek compensation. If you have received it in
> error, please delete it from your system without reading and notify sender.
>
> On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 10:06 PM, <agora-business-requ...@agoranomic.org>
> wrote:
>
> > Send agora-business mailing list submissions to
> > agora-busin...@agoranomic.org
> >
> > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> > https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/
> > agora-business
> >
> > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> > agora-business-requ...@agoranomic.org
> >
> > You can reach the person managing the list at
> > agora-business-ow...@agoranomic.org
> >
> > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> > than "Re: Contents of agora-business digest..."
> >
> >
> > Today's Topics:
> >
> >1. Re: CFJ: This time w/ passion (ATMunn)
> >2. [Arbitor] CFJ 3607 assigned to G. (and judged with help from
> >   ATMunn) (Kerim Aydin)
> >3. Re: [Arbitor] CFJ 3607 assigned to G. (and judged with help
> >   from ATMunn) (VJ Rada)
> >4. Re: [Arbitor] CFJ 3607 assigned to G. (and judged with help
> >   from ATMunn) (Kerim Aydin)
> >5. Re: [Arbitor] CFJ 3607 assigned to G. (and judged with help
> >   from ATMunn) (VJ Rada)
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Message: 1
> > Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2017 22:02:26 -0500
> > From: ATMunn <iamingodsa...@gmail.com>
> > To: agora-busin...@agoranomic.org
> > Subject: Re: BUS: CFJ: This time w/ passion
> > Message-ID: <311db3f6-d21d-8715-fb23-36a06621b...@gmail.com>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
> >
> > On 11/27/2017 9:56 PM, Telnaior wrote:
> > > (also barring the person who already wrote the judgement is kind of a
> > jerk move)
> > yeah, I was a kinda wondering why e did that
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Message: 2
> > Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2017 19:02:39 -0800 (PST)
> > From: Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu>
> > To: Agora Business <agora-busin...@agoranomic.org>
> > Subject: BUS: [Arbitor] CFJ 3607 assigned to G. (and judged with help
> > from ATMunn)
> > Message-ID:
> > <alpine.lrh.2.01.1711271902390.20...@hymn03.u.washington.edu>
> > Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, 28 Nov 2017, VJ Rada wrote:
> > > I use AP to call a CFJ with the statement: The Door cannot be Slammed
> on
> > > V.J. Rada.
> > >
> > > I bar ATMunn.
> >
> > I assign this CFJ to myself and number it 3607.
> >
> > [Note: I had not read the judgement in full and not really formed an
> > opinion on the matter].
> >
> >
> > I judge CFJ 3607 as follows:
> >
> > [Note for the record: these arguments were written by ATMunn, who was
> > the appropriate judge for this matter, as a matter of courtesy and
> > precedent, whenever possible I respect the judgement of "first judges"
> > on any matter until overturned.  If a motion to reconsider is filed,
> > I intend to give ATMunn the option to write a new opinion -the Arbitor]
> >
> > The Door CAN generally be Slammed on a player after a Black Card is
> > awarded to em, provided that eir most recent deregistration took
> > place with eir consent.
> >
> > Rule in question (2507):
> > A Black Card is a card appropriate for a person who plays the
> > gam

DIS: Re: OFF: [Herald] (Fixed) Karma Weekly Report

[VJ Rada]

KarmaEntity
   +4   o <-- SHOGUN
   +3   ATMunn
​
​
+
​3 ​
  Alexis​
   +2   Trigon
   +2   Telnaior
​
​

​  ​
​+2 ​
  G.​
   +1   天火狐
   +1   Aris
​

0   Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
​
​

​ ​

​   ​

​0  ​
 Nichdel​
​   -1   Quazie​

   -1   omd
   -1   Bayushi
​
​
  -
​-​
2   V.J. Rada​
   -2   ProofTechnique
   -2   Murphy
   -2   Ienpw III
   -2   Gaelan
   -5   CuddleBeam<-- HONOURLESS WORM

   All other entities have 0 Karma.




Uh.. ugh that is less than good brb fixing.

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 11:40 AM, VJ Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I accept Telnaior and PSS's CoE. The following is a fixed report. Sorry
> ​folks.
>
>
>
>
>The Honour Roll
>[Herald's Weekly Report]
>
>
>   KarmaEntity
>+4   o <-- SHOGUN
>+3   ATMunn
> ​
> ​
> +
> ​3 ​
>   Alexis​
>+2   Trigon
>+2   Telnaior
> ​
> ​
>
> ​  ​
> ​+2 ​
>   G.​
>+1   天火狐
>+1   Aris
> ​
>
> 0   Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> ​
> ​
>
> ​ ​
>
> ​   ​
>
> ​0  ​
>  Nichdel​
> ​   -1   Quazie​
>
>-1   omd
>-1   Bayushi
> ​
> ​
>   -
> ​-​
> 2   V.J. Rada​
>-2   ProofTechnique
>-2   Murphy
>-2   Ienpw III
>-2   Gaelan
>-5   CuddleBeam<-- HONOURLESS WORM
>
>All other entities have 0 Karma.
>
>
> NOTICES OF HONOUR (most recent on top)
> --
>
> PSS (20 Nov 2017)
> -1 nichdel (for inactivity)
> +1 ATMunn (for improving upon ADoP report)
>
> [New Week]
>
> ATMunn (16 Nov 2017)
> -1 ATMunn (pushing boundaries of karma)
> +1 G. (pushing boundaries of karma)
>
> V.J. Rada 15 Nov 2017)
> -1 Quazie (for inactivity)
> +1 Alexis (innovative timely rulekeepor)
>
> Telnaior (15 Nov 2017)
> -1 V.J. Rada (being a contrarian)
> +1 Alexis (Telnaior's favourite large proposal)
>
> [Last Report Wed Nov 15]
> [New Week]
>
> G. (12 Nov 2017)
> -1 天火狐 (for a low-effort newspaper report).
> +1 omd (for quick response to Distributor directives).
>
> ATMunn (6 Nov 2017)
> -1 ATMunn (for forgetting to state quorum on Decision initiations).
> +1 Publius Scribonius Scholasticus (for putting up with such mistakes).
>
>
> [New Week]
>
>
> G. (3 Nov 17)
> -1 Murphy (for being a near-Zombie).
> +1 Alexis (for putting the time into this thesis).
>
> ATMunn (30 Oct 2017)
> -1 omd (can't think of anyone else to lose karma and e is inactive).
> +1 Trigon (for seeming to do really well so far at publishing rulesets).
>
> Alexis (30 Oct 2017)
> -1 Alexis (for introducing such a silly pedantic bug into the ruleset).
> +1 ATMunn (for putting up with it).
>
> Telnaior (30 Oct 2017)
> -1 CuddleBeam (for attempting to game the karma system).
> +1 Aris (for putting in a valiant effort as Promotor during busy period).
>
> V.J. Rada (30 Oct 2017)
> -1 Bayushi (for inactivity).
> +1 Alexis (for having to judge my stupid cfjs).
>
>
> [new week]
>
>
> Telnaior (29 Oct 2017)
> -1 ProofTechnique (for not existing but having more karma than other
> inactives).
> +1 天火狐 (for creating a very cool contract).
>
> o (27 Oct 17)
> -1 CuddleBeam (for generally being contrarian)
> +1 G. (for producing a magnificent judgement)
>
> Alexis (25 Oct 17)
> -1 CuddleBeam (for objecting to deregistration making karma-sinks)
> +1 nichdel (for jumping right back in)
>
> PSS (25 Oct 17)
> -1 CuddleBeam (for confusing nichdel and being a contrarian)
> +1 天火狐 (for being a fun player and pushing boundaries with language)
>
> Nichdel (25 Oct 17)
> -1 PSS (for being a contrarian)
> +1 o (for being the best at what e does)
>
> Trigon (25 Oct 17)
> -1 Ienpw III (for being inactive)
> +1 ATMunn (for being a fantastic active new player)
>
> ATMunn (25 Oct 17)
> -1 Ienpw III (for being inactive)
> +1 o (for being honest, hardworking and generally awesome player)
>
> Aris (25 Oct 17)
> -1 ProofTechnique (for being inactive)
> +1 Trigon (for being a new active player)
>
> V.J. Rada (25 Oct 17)
> -1 omd (for being inactive)
> +1 Telnaior (cool that V.J. Rada brought 

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Herald] Karma Report

[VJ Rada]

Word list?

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 11:48 AM, Alexis Hunt <aler...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 27 Nov 2017 at 19:29 Alexis Hunt <aler...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I point my finger at V.J. Rada for violating Rule 2143 by publishing a
> > document purporting to be a Herald's report containing incorrect
> > information.
> >
> > -Alexis
> >
>
> I'm going to make an exception to my policy of not doing anything as
> referee for this, actually. For this finger-pointing, I issue VJ Rada a
> Yellow Card.
>
> -Alexis
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

DIS: Re: BUS: [Arbitor] CFJ 3607 assigned to G. (and judged with help from ATMunn)

[VJ Rada]

I intend to file a motion to reconsider this CFJ, with 2 support.

Arguments to follow.

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 2:02 PM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote:

>
>
> On Tue, 28 Nov 2017, VJ Rada wrote:
> > I use AP to call a CFJ with the statement: The Door cannot be Slammed on
> > V.J. Rada.
> >
> > I bar ATMunn.
>
> I assign this CFJ to myself and number it 3607.
>
> [Note: I had not read the judgement in full and not really formed an
> opinion on the matter].
>
>
> I judge CFJ 3607 as follows:
>
> [Note for the record: these arguments were written by ATMunn, who was
> the appropriate judge for this matter, as a matter of courtesy and
> precedent, whenever possible I respect the judgement of "first judges"
> on any matter until overturned.  If a motion to reconsider is filed,
> I intend to give ATMunn the option to write a new opinion -the Arbitor]
>
> The Door CAN generally be Slammed on a player after a Black Card is
> awarded to em, provided that eir most recent deregistration took
> place with eir consent.
>
> Rule in question (2507):
> A Black Card is a card appropriate for a person who plays the
> game, not currently a player, who either broke the rules while not
> a player or broke them while a player and then deregistered in bad
> faith. A Black Card CANNOT be issued to current players, and no
> more than 3 Black Cards CAN be issued per week. Any attempt to
> issue a Black Card in violation of these limitations is
> INEFFECTIVE.
> When a Black Card is issued, as a penalty, within the next 7 days,
> any player CAN once, with Agoran Consent, Slam the Door at the bad
> sport. After the Door is Slammed at a person, e CANNOT register or
> take any game actions for 30 days, rules to the contrary
> notwithstanding. Any attempt to Slam the Door on a player or a
> person whose most recent deregistration took place without eir
> consent is INEFFECTIVE, rules to the contrary notwithstanding.
>
> The rule in question here (see above) clearly states that the Door CAN
> be slammed on a bad sport after e has had a Black Card issued to them.
> The problem then is, can it also be slammed on a player, as long as eir
> most recent deregistration took place with eir consent?
>
> This rule strictly states that Black Cards CANNOT be issued to players.
> Rule 2426 says that "It is inappropriate to award a card to a non-player
> person unless the rule defining the card says otherwise." The Black
> Cards rule certainly says otherwise, and "inappropriate" is not a
> binding term. So, it is IMPOSSIBLE to issue a Black Card to a current
> player.
>
> So, this arises the question: What if a Black Card was issued to a
> non-player person who then became a player? This is certainly possible,
> as long as the Door was not Slammed on em when they were a non-player.
>
> Now we must determine if the Door CAN be Slammed on a player, if that
> player managed to get a Black Card as a non-player and then registered
> within the last 7 days. Rule 2507 says that "any attempt to Slam the
> Door at a *player* or a person whose most recent deregistration took
> place without eir consent is INEFFECTIVE." The answer is right here.
> The rule specifically says a player or a person, so the Door CAN be
> Slammed on players. And, if it is IMPOSSIBLE to Slam the Door on
> someone if eir most recent deregistration took place without eir
> consent, then the reverse is true as well, and it is POSSIBLE to Slam
> the Door on a person whose most recent deregistration took place with
> eir consent.
>
> I judge CFJ 3607 TRUE.
>
>
>
>


-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Notice of Honour

[VJ Rada]

This is not to the public forum.

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 11:37 AM, Reuben Staley <reuben.sta...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Another notice of honour: VJ loses one for the reasons discussed in this
> thread.
>
> ATMunn gains one because e is generally a really good player.
>
> --
> Trigon
>
> On Nov 27, 2017 5:33 PM, "ATMunn" <iamingodsa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Notice of Honour:
> > VJ Rada loses 1 karma for scamming, making things hard for me as
> > ADoP, and generally not being a good Agoran.
> > G. gains 1 karma for being such a great long-term player, and
> > generally knowing what e's doing.
> >
> > (I considered giving a karma to Corona, but I don't want new players to
> > just become karma farms. Don't get me wrong, I think Corona has been a
> > great player so far, but I think 1 or 2 Notices of Honour are enough.)
> >
> > On 11/27/2017 7:24 PM, Telnaior wrote:
> >
> >> This is a Notice of Honour.
> >>
> >> I award a karma to Corona for being a super cool newbie.
> >>
> >> I subtract a karma from VJ Rada for senselessly and intentionally
> causing
> >> Agora significant amounts of trouble on several occasions.
> >>
> >>
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

DIS: Re: BUS: CFJ: This time w/ passion

[VJ Rada]

>(also barring the person who already wrote the judgement is kind of a jerk
move)

Yes but you see I actually like being able to take actions for an entire
month unbarred by incorrect textual interpretation. I think that my right
to do that should supplant the ettiquete of cfj calling!

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 1:56 PM, Telnaior <j...@iinet.net.au> wrote:

> We've just been talking about how non-players need to be able to call CFJs
> so they can dispute eir own deregistration. That suggests the
> deregistration still takes hold, at least initially.
> In this instance the Door has already been Slammed, so I think a better
> idea for now might be to do this:
>
> I spend an Action Point (2 -> 1) to call a CFJ with the text "VJ Rada
> successfully called the quoted CFJ".
>
> Slamming the Door has no such protection, and we do already have an
> "informal opinion" that states it could have worked. I don't think it could
> have gone through.
> (also barring the person who already wrote the judgement is kind of a jerk
> move)
>
>
>
> On 2017-11-28 13:49, VJ Rada wrote:
>
>> I use AP to call a CFJ with the statement: The Door cannot be Slammed on
>> V.J. Rada.
>>
>> I bar ATMunn.
>>
>>


-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Herald] Karma Report

[VJ Rada]

I'm reading messages backwards (as is my custom), but I really do look
forward to gamma-hood.

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 11:59 AM, ATMunn <iamingodsa...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 11/27/2017 7:54 PM, VJ Rada wrote:
>
>> Correct, it's not a report per precedent (grossly negligent and not useful
>> enough to be a report). I can't, therefore, claim a reward for it.
>>
>> I did work on referee quite genuinely (which is why I was sad to lose it)
>> and I never scammed w/ any previous offices (the most recent one was a
>> spur-of-the-moment idea and I even attempted to award myself 3,000 cards
>> to
>> punish me for it, and will be carded for pledge-breaking), but yes, I take
>> your point entirely (and personally don't mind the swearing).
>>
>> The deputisation was because I have a large quantity of balloons, the
>> election will soon be completed, and that seemed like a good opportunity
>> to
>> use the hard-to-use resource for personal gain where usually little can be
>> found. I agree, though, that perhaps I shouldn't have done it. I tend to
>> act and speak very fast, which is fine on an internet forum in which
>> discussion happens, but not fine in a place where speech is also
>> technically actions.
>>
>> Despite the horrific disgrace of a report I attempted to file, Herald is
>> not that hard of a position recordkeeping. Obviously I made a mess of
>> recordkeeping ADoP but those mistakes are easy to avoid.
>>
> Yes, yes you did. I forgive you, though. :P I've recovered from your mess,
> and I'm actually a little bit glad I had to do all that instead of getting
> an easy job, it really introduced me to the hard work that is sometimes
> required in this game.
>
> Herald is an
>> interesting position, I suppose, for memorializing the history of the
>> game,
>> so it requires its holder to award titles when something suitably
>> historical happens. I don't think it's a wide-ranging policy role as
>> referee is, and I don't think it's scammable.
>>
>> However I take your point, I do take it. I shouldn't have done it,
>> probably. I do take your point. I know the way I take this game is less
>> than serious, which can be at times a slap in the face to those who
>> recognize the decades-long history of the game with a lot of weight. I
>> don't mean to shit all over everything, and that's a tough line to
>> navigate
>> with the other ways that I've played this game.
>>
>> I've got 13 messages in the last 10 minutes. I dread them, rather.
>>
> It's alright, we all make mistakes. I think we all have acted too fast
> before, and honestly I think we all might have just done that with the
> amount of Notices of Honour that were just made.
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

DIS: Re: BUS: Ugh

[VJ Rada]

I recalled the cfj allowing me to do this, but obviously that is not
successful if this actually worked, so I suggest that somebody else call
the same CFJ again.

The dependencies this week have been quite intolerable.

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 11:54 AM, Alexis Hunt <aler...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Having received support from PSS and ATMunn, I Slam the Door on VJ Rada.
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

DIS: Re: BUS: CFJ 3607 judged TRUE

[VJ Rada]

Get some series-qualifier principle up in this place.

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 12:37 PM, Aris Merchant <
thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I intend, with 2 support, to file a motion to reconsider this
> judgement. It fails to consider the fact that all players are persons
> under Rule 869, which states that "A registered person is a Player".
> This provides very strong evidence that the rule should be interpreted
> "a player or (a person who...)", not "(a player or a person who..)",
> because the later reading would render the word "player" superfluous.
> There's also a cannon of construction that applies to this exact
> situation called the last antecedent rule [1], which suggests that the
> last possible antecedent should be preferred in interpreting meaning.
> (I know that we do not necessarily apply all legal principles, but it
> seems like this one might provide general guidance in this kind of
> situation, so we may want to adopt it.) If these principles are deemed
> to not apply, I would like to hear some reasoning about why they don't
> in this case. My apologies to the judge for not getting to this
> sooner; this CFJ has had an unusually rapid turnaround.
>
> [1] https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/last_antecedent_rule
>
> -Aris
>
> On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 11:20 AM, ATMunn  wrote:
> > CFJ 3607:
> > The Door CAN generally be Slammed on a player after a Black Card
> is
> > awarded to em, provided that eir most recent deregistration took
> > place with eir consent.
> >
> > Rule in question (2507):
> > A Black Card is a card appropriate for a person who plays the
> > game, not currently a player, who either broke the rules while not
> > a player or broke them while a player and then deregistered in bad
> > faith. A Black Card CANNOT be issued to current players, and no
> > more than 3 Black Cards CAN be issued per week. Any attempt to
> > issue a Black Card in violation of these limitations is
> > INEFFECTIVE.
> > When a Black Card is issued, as a penalty, within the next 7
> days,
> > any player CAN once, with Agoran Consent, Slam the Door at the bad
> > sport. After the Door is Slammed at a person, e CANNOT register or
> > take any game actions for 30 days, rules to the contrary
> > notwithstanding. Any attempt to Slam the Door on a player or a
> > person whose most recent deregistration took place without eir
> > consent is INEFFECTIVE, rules to the contrary notwithstanding.
> >
> > The rule in question here (see above) clearly states that the Door CAN
> > be slammed on a bad sport after e has had a Black Card issued to them.
> > The problem then is, can it also be slammed on a player, as long as eir
> > most recent deregistration took place with eir consent?
> >
> > This rule strictly states that Black Cards CANNOT be issued to players.
> > Rule 2426 says that "It is inappropriate to award a card to a non-player
> > person unless the rule defining the card says otherwise." The Black
> > Cards rule certainly says otherwise, and "inappropriate" is not a
> > binding term. So, it is IMPOSSIBLE to issue a Black Card to a current
> > player.
> >
> > So, this arises the question: What if a Black Card was issued to a
> > non-player person who then became a player? This is certainly possible,
> > as long as the Door was not Slammed on em when they were a non-player.
> >
> > Now we must determine if the Door CAN be Slammed on a player, if that
> > player managed to get a Black Card as a non-player and then registered
> > within the last 7 days. Rule 2507 says that "any attempt to Slam the
> > Door at a *player* or a person whose most recent deregistration took
> > place without eir consent is INEFFECTIVE." The answer is right here.
> > The rule specifically says a player or a person, so the Door CAN be
> > Slammed on players. And, if it is IMPOSSIBLE to Slam the Door on
> > someone if eir most recent deregistration took place without eir
> > consent, then the reverse is true as well, and it is POSSIBLE to Slam
> > the Door on a person whose most recent deregistration took place with
> > eir consent.
> >
> > I judge CFJ 3607 TRUE.
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] Court Gazette

[VJ Rada]

The Gazette is not self-ratifying and CFJ ID numbers are not required. The
only consequence of that failure is that we now have an informal opinion
that the Door cannot be Slammed, not a CFJ stating as such.

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 1:31 PM, ATMunn <iamingodsa...@gmail.com> wrote:

> CoE: CFJ 3607 was never properly called, as VJ Rada did not own a shiny at
> the time.
>
> On 11/26/2017 6:25 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> 
>> COURT GAZETTE [Arbitor's Weekly Report for 26 Nov 2017]
>>
>>
>> Open Cases (CFJs)
>> 
>> [* = overdue, ! = <24 hours before deadline]
>>   3599* Assigned to o (due Sun, 26 Nov 2017 ~20:01:43)
>> 3600* Assigned to o (due Sun, 26 Nov 2017 ~20:01:43)
>> 3601* Assigned to o (due Sun, 26 Nov 2017 ~20:01:43)
>> 3602* Assigned to Telnaior  (due Sun, 26 Nov 2017 ~20:03:30)
>>
>> 3591  Assigned to Alexis(due Sun, 03 Dec 2017 ~22:44:50)
>> 3606  Assigned to Publius   (due Sun, 03 Dec 2017 ~23:11:30)
>> 3607  Assigned to ATMunn(due Sun, 03 Dec 2017 ~23:13:34)
>> 3608  Assigned to Corona(due Sun, 03 Dec 2017 ~23:15:03)
>> 3609  Assigned to G.(due Sun, 03 Dec 2017 ~23:16:02)
>> 3610  Assigned to V.J. Rada (due Sun, 03 Dec 2017 ~23:16:45)
>>
>>
>> Recently-Delivered Verdicts and Implications
>> 
>> [** = consider for rules annotation]
>>
>> 3595-3596 by G.:  Poetry Duel Challenge Writ is too confusing to work.
>>   **3597 by Aris:  Multiple payments can't add up to a single payment for
>> the purposes of formally (i.e. by the Rules) paying for something.
>>
>> 3598 by ATMunn:  A bit of poetry around 'enacted' *wasn't* too confusing
>> to work.
>>
>> **3603-3604 by Alexis:  ASCII art can be clear enough to use to
>> communicate actions.
>>
>> **3605 by Aris:  Applies a general test of functionality-towards-winning
>> to determine relative value of different currencies.  Very interesting
>> approach in a multi-currency world, not sure of best annotation.
>>
>>
>> Bench Roster
>>
>> Judge  Court[***]   Recent
>> -  ---
>> G. Day  3563, 3579, 3580, 3582, 3595, 3596, 3609
>> PubliusDay  3574, 3576, 3591, 3606
>> Corona Day  3608
>> o  Day  3572, 3584, 3590, 3592, 3599, 3600, 3601
>> Aris   Day  3577, 3578, 3589, 3597, 3605
>> V.J. Rada  Weekend  3610
>> Telnaior   Weekend  3602
>> Alexis Weekend  3587, 3588, 3603, 3604, 3591
>> ATMunn Weekend  3598, 3607
>>
>>
>> Highest Numbered Case:   3610
>> 
>> [***] Court Descriptions
>>
>> Day Court   [Default, rotate roster through as needed].
>>
>> Weekend Court [Backup/partial rotation, generally gets half as many
>> cases each as Day Court].
>>
>> Courts are informal relative levels of "interest" in judging as per
>> R991.  Players can change Court by notifying the Arbitor.
>> 
>>
>> DISCLAIMER
>>Informational only - No actions are contained in this report.
>>Information in this report is NOT self-ratifying.
>>
>> 
>>
>>
>>
>>


-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Herald] Karma Report

[VJ Rada]

Correct, it's not a report per precedent (grossly negligent and not useful
enough to be a report). I can't, therefore, claim a reward for it.

I did work on referee quite genuinely (which is why I was sad to lose it)
and I never scammed w/ any previous offices (the most recent one was a
spur-of-the-moment idea and I even attempted to award myself 3,000 cards to
punish me for it, and will be carded for pledge-breaking), but yes, I take
your point entirely (and personally don't mind the swearing).

The deputisation was because I have a large quantity of balloons, the
election will soon be completed, and that seemed like a good opportunity to
use the hard-to-use resource for personal gain where usually little can be
found. I agree, though, that perhaps I shouldn't have done it. I tend to
act and speak very fast, which is fine on an internet forum in which
discussion happens, but not fine in a place where speech is also
technically actions.

Despite the horrific disgrace of a report I attempted to file, Herald is
not that hard of a position recordkeeping. Obviously I made a mess of
recordkeeping ADoP but those mistakes are easy to avoid. Herald is an
interesting position, I suppose, for memorializing the history of the game,
so it requires its holder to award titles when something suitably
historical happens. I don't think it's a wide-ranging policy role as
referee is, and I don't think it's scammable.

However I take your point, I do take it. I shouldn't have done it,
probably. I do take your point. I know the way I take this game is less
than serious, which can be at times a slap in the face to those who
recognize the decades-long history of the game with a lot of weight. I
don't mean to shit all over everything, and that's a tough line to navigate
with the other ways that I've played this game.

I've got 13 messages in the last 10 minutes. I dread them, rather.

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 11:23 AM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu>
wrote:

>
>
> On Tue, 28 Nov 2017, VJ Rada wrote:
> > I deputise for Herald to publish the following weekly report (unless
> > PSS is the Herald).
>
> You should clearly know this to be false.  It updates nothing.
>
> It is questionable whether you can call this the weekly report for the
> appropriate (missing) week.
>
> Also:  trying this is a complete fucking, fucking insult to officers
> who actually, you know, work on their offices and don't just see them
> as scam opportunities.  Just some constructive feedback there.
>
>
>
>
>
>


-- 
>From V.J. Rada

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Herald] Karma Report

[VJ Rada]

there were indeed. brb.

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 11:23 AM, Telnaior <j...@iinet.net.au> wrote:
> CoE: There were in fact several Notices of Honour IMMEDIATELY after the
> previous report.
>
>
>
> On 2017-11-28 11:17, VJ Rada wrote:
>>
>> I deputise for Herald to publish the following weekly report (unless
>> PSS is the Herald).
>>
>> According to my search results there have been no notices of honour
>> since the last report. This is therefore the easiest report ever
>> filed.
>>
>>   
>> The Honour Roll
>> [Herald's Weekly Report]
>>   
>>
>>KarmaEntity
>> +4   o <-- SHOGUN
>> +3   ATMunn
>> +2   Trigon
>> +2   Telnaior
>> +1   天火狐
>> +1   Nichdel
>> +1   G.
>> +1   Aris
>> +1   Alexis
>>  0   Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
>> -1   V.J. Rada
>> -1   omd
>> -1   Bayushi
>> -2   ProofTechnique
>> -2   Murphy
>> -2   Ienpw III
>> -2   Gaelan
>> -5   CuddleBeam<-- HONOURLESS WORM
>>
>> All other entities have 0 Karma.
>>
>>
>> NOTICES OF HONOUR (most recent on top)
>> --
>> G. (12 Nov 2017)
>> -1 天火狐 (for a low-effort newspaper report).
>> +1 omd (for quick response to Distributor directives).
>>
>> ATMunn (6 Nov 2017)
>> -1 ATMunn (for forgetting to state quorum on Decision initiations).
>> +1 Publius Scribonius Scholasticus (for putting up with such mistakes).
>>
>> G. (3 Nov 17)
>> -1 Murphy (for being a near-Zombie).
>> +1 Alexis (for putting the time into this thesis).
>>
>> ATMunn (30 Oct 2017)
>> -1 omd (can't think of anyone else to lose karma and e is inactive).
>> +1 Trigon (for seeming to do really well so far at publishing rulesets).
>>
>> Alexis (30 Oct 2017)
>> -1 Alexis (for introducing such a silly pedantic bug into the ruleset).
>> +1 ATMunn (for putting up with it).
>>
>> Telnaior (30 Oct 2017)
>> -1 CuddleBeam (for attempting to game the karma system).
>> +1 Aris (for putting in a valiant effort as Promotor during busy period).
>>
>> V.J. Rada (30 Oct 2017)
>> -1 Bayushi (for inactivity).
>> +1 Alexis (for having to judge my stupid cfjs).
>>
>> Telnaior (29 Oct 2017)
>> -1 ProofTechnique (for not existing but having more karma than other
>> inactives).
>> +1 天火狐 (for creating a very cool contract).
>>
>> o (27 Oct 17)
>> -1 CuddleBeam (for generally being contrarian)
>> +1 G. (for producing a magnificent judgement)
>>
>> Alexis (25 Oct 17)
>> -1 CuddleBeam (for objecting to deregistration making karma-sinks)
>> +1 nichdel (for jumping right back in)
>>
>> PSS (25 Oct 17)
>> -1 CuddleBeam (for confusing nichdel and being a contrarian)
>> +1 天火狐 (for being a fun player and pushing boundaries with language)
>>
>> Nichdel (25 Oct 17)
>> -1 PSS (for being a contrarian)
>> +1 o (for being the best at what e does)
>>
>> Trigon (25 Oct 17)
>> -1 Ienpw III (for being inactive)
>> +1 ATMunn (for being a fantastic active new player)
>>
>> ATMunn (25 Oct 17)
>> -1 Ienpw III (for being inactive)
>> +1 o (for being honest, hardworking and generally awesome player)
>>
>> Aris (25 Oct 17)
>> -1 ProofTechnique (for being inactive)
>> +1 Trigon (for being a new active player)
>>
>> V.J. Rada (25 Oct 17)
>> -1 omd (for being inactive)
>> +1 Telnaior (cool that V.J. Rada brought em back and being clever)
>>
>> G. (24 Oct 17)
>> -1 V.J. Rada (making a deputization mess)
>> +1 o (for being the one to clean up messes)
>>
>> Telnaior (22 Oct 17)
>> -1 Gaelan (for slack Rulekeeping)
>> +1 Alexis (for being helpful)
>>
>> Alexis (22 Oct 17)
>> -1 CuddleBeam (for blocking deregistrations of inactives)
>> +1 Telnaior (for coming back with vigour)
>>
>> V.J. Rada (22 Oct 17)
>> -1 Murphy (being inactive)
>> +1 ATMunn (for being a good player, and proposals)
>>
>> G. (22 Oct 2017)
>> -1 V.J. Rada (random choice), +1 ATMunn (good first proposal).
>>
>> ===
>>
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Transparent Ribbon

[VJ Rada]

The ribbon rule itself is broken for all ribbons.

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 11:11 AM, ATMunn  wrote:
> How come? They were seperate actions. (I mean, if it does work that way,
> then great, but I don't think it does.)
>
>
> On 11/27/2017 7:10 PM, Alexis Hunt wrote:
>>
>> You still will, because you didn't get your White Ribbon either.
>>
>> On Mon, 27 Nov 2017 at 19:08 ATMunn  wrote:
>>
>>> That's quite unfortunate, because now I no longer have the option to
>>> claim
>>> a White Ribbon to obtain a Transparent Ribbon in the future. :(
>>>
>>> On 11/27/2017 7:06 PM, Alexis Hunt wrote:

 On Mon, 27 Nov 2017 at 14:28 ATMunn  wrote:

> Ok, here goes nothing.
>
> In the last 7 days, I earned a Black Ribbon, and qualified for Blue and
> Orange (I just judged a CFJ, and my Auctions proposal was unanimously
> adopted)
>
> I also have the ability to claim a White Ribbon at any time, as I have
> never previously owned one.
>
> That is 4 ribbons out of 5 I need for a Transparent Ribbon.
>
> However, I have held the office of ADoP for more than 30 days. I don't
> believe I have failed to perform any duties in the last 30 days.
>
> Therefore...
>
> I claim a Green Ribbon.
>
> I claim a White Ribbon.
>
> I now have qualified for 5 ribbons within the last 7 days. I claim a
> Transparent Ribbon!
>
> (I really hope this works...)
>

 Per CFJ 3610, it does not.

>>>
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Transparent Ribbon

[VJ Rada]

Yeah, nobody has got any ribbons for rather a while now.

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 11:10 AM, Alexis Hunt  wrote:
> You still will, because you didn't get your White Ribbon either.
>
> On Mon, 27 Nov 2017 at 19:08 ATMunn  wrote:
>
>> That's quite unfortunate, because now I no longer have the option to claim
>> a White Ribbon to obtain a Transparent Ribbon in the future. :(
>>
>> On 11/27/2017 7:06 PM, Alexis Hunt wrote:
>> > On Mon, 27 Nov 2017 at 14:28 ATMunn  wrote:
>> >
>> >> Ok, here goes nothing.
>> >>
>> >> In the last 7 days, I earned a Black Ribbon, and qualified for Blue and
>> >> Orange (I just judged a CFJ, and my Auctions proposal was unanimously
>> >> adopted)
>> >>
>> >> I also have the ability to claim a White Ribbon at any time, as I have
>> >> never previously owned one.
>> >>
>> >> That is 4 ribbons out of 5 I need for a Transparent Ribbon.
>> >>
>> >> However, I have held the office of ADoP for more than 30 days. I don't
>> >> believe I have failed to perform any duties in the last 30 days.
>> >>
>> >> Therefore...
>> >>
>> >> I claim a Green Ribbon.
>> >>
>> >> I claim a White Ribbon.
>> >>
>> >> I now have qualified for 5 ribbons within the last 7 days. I claim a
>> >> Transparent Ribbon!
>> >>
>> >> (I really hope this works...)
>> >>
>> >
>> > Per CFJ 3610, it does not.
>> >
>>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [CFJ] Judgement in CFJ 1610.

[VJ Rada]

God, I really need to stop making so many typos.

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 11:05 AM, Alexis Hunt <aler...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Nov 2017 at 18:59 VJ Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> The statement in CFJ 1610 is "G. owns a Black Ribbon.". I judge that e
>> does not, this CFJ is FALSE
>>
>
> 3610, surely?



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 7982-7988

[VJ Rada]

Eh just keep it as it is imo. Until and unless a non-player abuses
their status by calling 5 CFJs a week, there's no reason to stop it.

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 9:56 AM, Alexis Hunt  wrote:
> I've frequently called more. Two is in my opinion not enough.
>
> On Mon, Nov 27, 2017, 17:52 Kerim Aydin,  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Ah, gotcha.  I was racking by brain for any situation in the last N years
>> where 1/week for non-players would have been a hardship for em, and I
>> couldn't think of one - so doubling that for absolute safety seemed ok.
>>
>> On Mon, 27 Nov 2017, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
>> >
>> > Oh, I misunderstood what you meant the compromise was.
>> >
>> > On 11/27/2017 01:01 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>> > >
>> > > "Compromise - an agreement or a settlement of a dispute that is
>> reached by
>> > >   each side making concessions."
>> > >
>> > > On Mon, 27 Nov 2017, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
>> > >> No, currently they get 5.
>> > >>
>> > >> On 11/26/2017 10:30 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>> > >>> This time's economy is indeed the first time we've ever charged for
>> CFJs
>> > >>> in history, I'm going with the spirit of the experiment but just as
>> happy to
>> > >>> take it out again (preferably bringing in Blots as a replacement).
>> > >>>
>> > >>> Meantime, is 2 per week (free) for a non-player about a good
>> compromise?
>> > >>>
>> > >>> On Mon, 27 Nov 2017, Alexis Hunt wrote:
>> >  On Sun, 26 Nov 2017 at 21:56 Gaelan Steele  wrote:
>> > 
>> > > Honestly, I’m not sure there’s any reason we should cater to
>> non-players.
>> > > If you want to play the game, be a player.
>> > >
>> > > Gaelan
>> > >
>> >  I'm inclined to agree with this in general, but CFJs are a notable
>> >  exception, because otherwise deregistration shuts someone out of
>> being able
>> >  to raise questions, including about whether eir deregistration
>> works.
>> > 
>> >  Generally, I'm of the opinion that there should be no restrictions
>> on
>> >  CFJ-calling, except possibly for limits on excess cases. But if
>> you'll
>> >  notice, those restrictions are only about lawfulness, rather than
>> >  possibility.
>>
>>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: CFJ 3608 FALSE

[VJ Rada]

Oh sorry! I object to my own intent (obviously, this does nothing).

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 9:46 AM, Corona <liliumalbum.ag...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The Judge's Arguments are below the Caller's Arguments.
>
> On 11/27/17, VJ Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Imminence switches are power 1, the thing that states OPs shall always
>> be pending is power 1 but claims precedent over all rules to the
>> contrary. This judgement does not speak to that issue or indeed any
>> issue. I intend with 2 support to file a Motion to Reconsider
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 9:32 AM, Corona <liliumalbum.ag...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> I judge CFJ 3608 as FALSE, and note that proposals not in the Proposal
>>> Pool cannot have an Imminence switch. (What a headache. Hopefully
>>> that's right.)
>>>
>>> Caller's Arguments:
>>>
>>> On Sat, 25 Nov 2017, Ørjan Johansen wrote:
>>>> An Official Proposal is always pending, even after being retracted,
>>>> distributed or adopted.
>>>> Arguments:
>>>>
>>>> Rule 2445 (power 1) says "Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, an
>>>> Official
>>>> proposal is always pending."  The first clause of the rule implies that
>>>> "pending" only applies to proposals in the Pool, but rule 2240 (power 3)
>>>> implies that later clauses in a rule take precedence.
>>>>
>>>> Retraction and distribution both remove a proposal from the Proposal
>>>> Pool, and
>>>> are enabled by power 3 rules.  Adoption shouldn't change anything.
>>>>
>>>> Rule 2240/1 (Power=3.0)
>>>> No Cretans Need Apply
>>>>
>>>>   In a conflict between clauses of the same Rule, if exactly one
>>>>   claims precedence over the other, then it takes precedence;
>>>>   otherwise, the later clause takes precedence.
>>>>
>>>> Rule 2445/10 (Power=1.0)
>>>> How to Pend a Proposal
>>>>
>>>>   Imminence is a switch, tracked by the Promotor, possessed by
>>>>   proposals in the Proposal Pool, whose value is either "pending" or
>>>>   "not pending" (default).
>>>>
>>>>   Any player CAN flip a specified proposal's imminence to "pending"
>>>>   by announcement by:
>>>>
>>>> a) spending 1 Action Point, OR
>>>>
>>>> b) spending the current Pend Cost in shinies.
>>>>
>>>>   An Official Proposal is a proposal designated as such by the
>>>>   Rules; generally official proposals that are created as part of an
>>>>   Officer's duties. Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, an
>>>>   Official proposal is always pending. Rules to the contrary
>>>>   notwithstanding, players CANNOT claim rewards for the adoption of
>>>>   an Official proposal.
>>>
>>> /
>>> Judge's Arguments:
>>>
>>> The called statement consists of three atomic assertions:
>>> 1) A retracted, distributed or adopted (official) proposal exists as a
>>> formal, rule-defined entity
>>> 2) Such a proposal can possess an Imminence switch.
>>> 3) That switch is set to pending.
>>>
>>> -
>>>
>>> 3) is trivial, as official proposals are always pending due to R2445
>>> (quoted in caller's arguments)
>>>
>>> -
>>>
>>> 1) is quite obvious as well:
>>>
>>> Rule 106/39 (Power=3.0)
>>> Adopting Proposals
>>> [...] Once a proposal finishes taking effect, its power is set to 0.
>>>
>>> Clearly, proposals exist as rule-defined entities even after being
>>> adopted. As no rule destroys proposals after retraction or
>>> distribution, it seems that retracted or distributed proposals
>>> continue to be proposals.
>>>
>>> As there is no rule mechanism for proposals ceasing to be official,
>>> official proposals continue to be official after
>>> retraction/distribution/adoption.
>>>
>>> -
>>>
>>> 2) is the most difficult to decide:
>>>
>>> R2162/10 (Power=3.0)
>>> Switches
>>>
>>> A type of switch is a property that the rules define as a switch, and
>>> specify the following:
>>> 1. The type(s) of entity possessing an instance

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [ADoP] Favouritism

[VJ Rada]

This shouldn't be a CoE but a finger-point for illegal awarding.

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 8:47 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
 wrote:
> CoE: I am Herald.
>
> On 11/27/2017 01:49 PM, ATMunn wrote:
>> I award the following Efficiency favours:
>>
>> 7 to Alexis for Prime Minister, Referee, Rulekeepor, and Tailor
>> 3 to Aris for Promotor and Regkeepor
>> 2 to ATMunn for ADoP
>> 2 to G. for Arbitor
>> 7 to o for Agronomist, Notary, Surveyor, and Treasuror
>> 5 to PSS for Assessor and Registrar
>> 1 to Quazie for Speaker
>> 2 to Telnaior for Clork
>> 1 to 天火狐 for Reportor
>
> --
> 
> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
>
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 7982-7988

[VJ Rada]

>AGAINST.  Don't understand logic of Arbitor ban.
Arbitor can adjudicate fingers pointed at the referee and therefore
shouldn't be able to both point and adjudicate at once. Arbitor is
still not banned from pointing fingers at anyone else.

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 7:16 AM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
>
>
> I vote:
>
>> 7982*  V.J. Rada  1.7   Referee Reform Fix   V.J. Rada   1 sh.
> AGAINST.  Don't understand logic of Arbitor ban.
>
>> 7983*  Telnaior, [1]  1.0   SBOTGT [2]   Telnaior1 AP
> PRESENT
>
>> 7984*  Aris, [3]  2.6   Contract Flexibility Act Aris1 AP
> FOR
>
>> 7985*  Alexis 2.6   Open Season on Contracts Alexis  1 AP
> FOR
>
>> 7986*  P.S.S [4]  3.0   Quick FixP.S.S. [4]  1 AP
> FOR
>
>> 7987*  ATMunn, [5]1.0   AOC [6]  Aris1 AP
> FOR
>
>> 7988*  G. 2.0   Minimal Econ reforms G.  1 AP
> FOR
>
>
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 7982-7988

[VJ Rada]

making all non-player cfjs dependent actions is not optimal.

On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 1:48 PM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 27 Nov 2017, Ørjan Johansen wrote:
>> On Sun, 26 Nov 2017, Aris Merchant wrote:
>
>> >  b) Without 2 Objections.  Players SHOULD object unless paying
>> > with shinies is a significant barrier to the Caller's
>> > ability to seek a resolution to the controversy.
>>
>> I might not be calling a lot of CFJs if this passes, then.
>
> I'd say not-being-a-player is a significant barrier that shouldn't
> be objected to by anyone (unless the caller is massively abusing it) -
> that was the standard I was aiming for anyway.
>
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Clork] Weekly Report

[VJ Rada]

Yeah, sorry. Right. I just needed to CoE though to stop self-ratification.

On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 1:30 PM, Alexis Hunt <aler...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Nov 2017 at 21:04 VJ Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> A document is only doubted when there's a CoE or a CFJ specifically
>> identifying and disputing the document. A pending CFJ from before a
>> report does not dispute it.
>>
>
> No, but it's a reportor's responsibility and prerogative to interpret the
> rules and actions as e sees appropriate. If Telnaior is of the opinion that
> the actions failed, then e should not include them in eir report.



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Clork] Weekly Report

[VJ Rada]

You can either deny it or publish a revision. You should do neither,
but note that you will eventually have to choose one if the cfj isn't
judged w/in the next 7 days, which it won't be.

On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 1:20 PM, Telnaior <j...@iinet.net.au> wrote:
> I'm pretty sure I have to respond to this by saying this CoE is waiting on
> the result of a CFJ, yeah?
> I should probably go over the rules there again.
>
>
>
> On 2017-11-27 12:59, VJ Rada wrote:
>>
>> oh that should just be a coe to avoid self-ratification.
>>
>> coe: aris advised every politician.
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 12:58 PM, VJ Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> did you do the ones where e used eir favours to bribe every
>>> politician, even ones from other parties?
>>>
>>> On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 12:54 PM, Madeline <j...@iinet.net.au> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I did those.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 2017-11-27 12:51, VJ Rada wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> um i meant aris's actions sure they're basically the same person right?
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 12:49 PM, Madeline <j...@iinet.net.au> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Uh, which one are you referring to?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2017-11-27 12:45, VJ Rada wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I don't think ATMunn's actions were super-conditional?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 12:40 PM, Telnaior <j...@iinet.net.au> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The two mega-super-conditional actions I'm not gonna count barring a
>>>>>>>> CFJ
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> _>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I award VJ Rada 3 NPR favours for being the Advisor of the Drunk.
>>>>>>>> I award Aris 3 OOS favours for being the Advisor of the Mystery.
>>>>>>>> I award Aris 3 MLP favours for being the Advisor of the Hat Rack.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> PARTIES AND FAVOURS
>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> PLA - Platonic Isolationists   (4 Politicians, Economy)
>>>>>>>> NPR - New Punchbowl Reformers  (4 Politicians, Justice)
>>>>>>>> COS - Costume Conservatives(4 Politicians,
>>>>>>>> Efficiency)
>>>>>>>> SUL - Substance Use Liberals   (4 Politicians,
>>>>>>>> Legislation)
>>>>>>>> MLP - Official Raving Monster Looney Party (4 Politicians,
>>>>>>>> Participation)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> +-+-+-+-+-+-+
>>>>>>>> | Player  | PLA | NPR | COS | SUL | MLP |
>>>>>>>> +-+-+-+-+-+-+
>>>>>>>> | Alexis  |   0 |   3 |   0 |   2 |   4 |
>>>>>>>> | Aris|   0 | 183 |   0 |   0 |   2 |
>>>>>>>> | ATMunn  |   0 | 214 |   0 |   3 |   4 |
>>>>>>>> | Corona  |   0 | 215 |   0 |   0 |   2 |
>>>>>>>> | Cuddle Beam |   0 | 214 |   0 |   0 |   0 |
>>>>>>>> | G.  |   0 | 429 |   0 |   3 |   4 |
>>>>>>>> | Gaelan  |   0 | 214 |   0 |   0 |   0 |
>>>>>>>> | nichdel |   0 | 214 |   0 |   0 |   0 |
>>>>>>>> | o   |   0 | 214 |   0 |   0 |   4 |
>>>>>>>> | PSS[1]  |   0 | 216 |   0 |   0 |   2 |
>>>>>>>> | Quazie  |   0 | 214 |   0 |   0 |   0 |
>>>>>>>> | Telnaior|   0 | 215 |   0 |   0 |   4 |
>>>>>>>> | 天火狐 |   0 | 214 |   0 |   0 |   2 | (not even gonna try)
>>>>>>>> | Trigon  |   0 | 214 |   0 |   0 |   0 |
>>>>>>>> | VJ Rada |   0 |   3 |   0 |   0 |   2 |
>>>>>>>> +-+-+-+-+-+-+
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> RANKS AND POLITICIANS
>>>>>>>> -
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Clork] Weekly Report

[VJ Rada]

A document is only doubted when there's a CoE or a CFJ specifically
identifying and disputing the document. A pending CFJ from before a
report does not dispute it.

On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 1:01 PM, Madeline <j...@iinet.net.au> wrote:
> No, pending CFJ.
>
>
>
> On 2017-11-27 12:58, VJ Rada wrote:
>>
>> did you do the ones where e used eir favours to bribe every
>> politician, even ones from other parties?
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 12:54 PM, Madeline <j...@iinet.net.au> wrote:
>>>
>>> I did those.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2017-11-27 12:51, VJ Rada wrote:
>>>>
>>>> um i meant aris's actions sure they're basically the same person right?
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 12:49 PM, Madeline <j...@iinet.net.au> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Uh, which one are you referring to?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2017-11-27 12:45, VJ Rada wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't think ATMunn's actions were super-conditional?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 12:40 PM, Telnaior <j...@iinet.net.au> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The two mega-super-conditional actions I'm not gonna count barring a
>>>>>>> CFJ
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I award VJ Rada 3 NPR favours for being the Advisor of the Drunk.
>>>>>>> I award Aris 3 OOS favours for being the Advisor of the Mystery.
>>>>>>> I award Aris 3 MLP favours for being the Advisor of the Hat Rack.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> PARTIES AND FAVOURS
>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> PLA - Platonic Isolationists   (4 Politicians, Economy)
>>>>>>> NPR - New Punchbowl Reformers  (4 Politicians, Justice)
>>>>>>> COS - Costume Conservatives(4 Politicians,
>>>>>>> Efficiency)
>>>>>>> SUL - Substance Use Liberals   (4 Politicians,
>>>>>>> Legislation)
>>>>>>> MLP - Official Raving Monster Looney Party (4 Politicians,
>>>>>>> Participation)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> +-+-+-+-+-+-+
>>>>>>> | Player  | PLA | NPR | COS | SUL | MLP |
>>>>>>> +-+-+-+-+-+-+
>>>>>>> | Alexis  |   0 |   3 |   0 |   2 |   4 |
>>>>>>> | Aris|   0 | 183 |   0 |   0 |   2 |
>>>>>>> | ATMunn  |   0 | 214 |   0 |   3 |   4 |
>>>>>>> | Corona  |   0 | 215 |   0 |   0 |   2 |
>>>>>>> | Cuddle Beam |   0 | 214 |   0 |   0 |   0 |
>>>>>>> | G.  |   0 | 429 |   0 |   3 |   4 |
>>>>>>> | Gaelan  |   0 | 214 |   0 |   0 |   0 |
>>>>>>> | nichdel |   0 | 214 |   0 |   0 |   0 |
>>>>>>> | o   |   0 | 214 |   0 |   0 |   4 |
>>>>>>> | PSS[1]  |   0 | 216 |   0 |   0 |   2 |
>>>>>>> | Quazie  |   0 | 214 |   0 |   0 |   0 |
>>>>>>> | Telnaior|   0 | 215 |   0 |   0 |   4 |
>>>>>>> | 天火狐 |   0 | 214 |   0 |   0 |   2 | (not even gonna try)
>>>>>>> | Trigon  |   0 | 214 |   0 |   0 |   0 |
>>>>>>> | VJ Rada |   0 |   3 |   0 |   0 |   2 |
>>>>>>> +-+-+-+-+-+-+
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> RANKS AND POLITICIANS
>>>>>>> -
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> CHAMBER OF POWER[Rank 5]
>>>>>>> Host  - Mad Cap'n Tom (NPR, 15 Stress, Aris)
>>>>>>> Break Election Ties
>>>>>>>   16 Influence - Aris
>>>>>>>2 Influence - Alexis
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> UPPER ECHELON   [Rank 3]
>>>>>>> Planner   - Joseph "Stealin'" McCarthy (PLA, 09 Stress, VJ Rada)
>>>>>>> Decide Party Policies
>>>>>>>10 Influence - VJ Rada
>>>>>>> Enforcer  - Xi Kingpin (PLA, 09 Stress, VJ Rada)
>&g

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Clork] Weekly Report

[VJ Rada]

um i meant aris's actions sure they're basically the same person right?

On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 12:49 PM, Madeline <j...@iinet.net.au> wrote:
> Uh, which one are you referring to?
>
>
>
> On 2017-11-27 12:45, VJ Rada wrote:
>>
>> I don't think ATMunn's actions were super-conditional?
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 12:40 PM, Telnaior <j...@iinet.net.au> wrote:
>>>
>>> The two mega-super-conditional actions I'm not gonna count barring a CFJ
>>> >_>
>>> I award VJ Rada 3 NPR favours for being the Advisor of the Drunk.
>>> I award Aris 3 OOS favours for being the Advisor of the Mystery.
>>> I award Aris 3 MLP favours for being the Advisor of the Hat Rack.
>>>
>>>
>>> PARTIES AND FAVOURS
>>> ---
>>>
>>> PLA - Platonic Isolationists   (4 Politicians, Economy)
>>> NPR - New Punchbowl Reformers  (4 Politicians, Justice)
>>> COS - Costume Conservatives(4 Politicians, Efficiency)
>>> SUL - Substance Use Liberals   (4 Politicians, Legislation)
>>> MLP - Official Raving Monster Looney Party (4 Politicians, Participation)
>>>
>>> +-+-+-+-+-+-+
>>> | Player  | PLA | NPR | COS | SUL | MLP |
>>> +-+-+-+-+-+-+
>>> | Alexis  |   0 |   3 |   0 |   2 |   4 |
>>> | Aris|   0 | 183 |   0 |   0 |   2 |
>>> | ATMunn  |   0 | 214 |   0 |   3 |   4 |
>>> | Corona  |   0 | 215 |   0 |   0 |   2 |
>>> | Cuddle Beam |   0 | 214 |   0 |   0 |   0 |
>>> | G.  |   0 | 429 |   0 |   3 |   4 |
>>> | Gaelan  |   0 | 214 |   0 |   0 |   0 |
>>> | nichdel |   0 | 214 |   0 |   0 |   0 |
>>> | o       |   0 | 214 |   0 |   0 |   4 |
>>> | PSS[1]  |   0 | 216 |   0 |   0 |   2 |
>>> | Quazie  |   0 | 214 |   0 |   0 |   0 |
>>> | Telnaior|   0 | 215 |   0 |   0 |   4 |
>>> | 天火狐 |   0 | 214 |   0 |   0 |   2 | (not even gonna try)
>>> | Trigon  |   0 | 214 |   0 |   0 |   0 |
>>> | VJ Rada |   0 |   3 |   0 |   0 |   2 |
>>> +-----+-----+-+-+-+-+
>>>
>>>
>>> RANKS AND POLITICIANS
>>> -----
>>>
>>> CHAMBER OF POWER[Rank 5]
>>> Host  - Mad Cap'n Tom (NPR, 15 Stress, Aris)
>>> Break Election Ties
>>> 16 Influence - Aris
>>>  2 Influence - Alexis
>>>
>>> UPPER ECHELON   [Rank 3]
>>> Planner   - Joseph "Stealin'" McCarthy (PLA, 09 Stress, VJ Rada)
>>> Decide Party Policies
>>>  10 Influence - VJ Rada
>>> Enforcer  - Xi Kingpin (PLA, 09 Stress, VJ Rada)
>>> Remove Row Echelon Politicians
>>>  8 Influence - VJ Rada
>>> Organiser - Mad "Max" Robespierre (COS, 09 Stress, No Advisor)
>>> Extra Voting Power
>>>  No Influencers
>>> Creep - Politician McPoliticianface (NPR, 09 Stress, Aris)
>>> Increase Politician Stress
>>>  10 Influence - Aris
>>>
>>> ROW ECHELON [Rank 1]
>>> Schmoozer - The Drunk Clinton (SUL, 03 Stress, VJ Rada)
>>> Change Politician Parties
>>>  6 Influence - VJ Rada
>>> Decorator - John Johnson (MLP, 03 Stress, ATMunn)
>>> Extra Balloon
>>>  3 Influence - ATMunn
>>>  3 Influence - VJ Rada
>>> Loner - Pinocchio (COS, 03 Stress, No Advisor)
>>> PLA Favours
>>>  No Influencers
>>> Drunk - Aristotle (PLA, 03 Stress, VJ Rada)
>>> NPR Favours
>>>  3 Influence - VJ Rada
>>> Mystery   - Mickey Joker (NPR, 03 Stress, Aris)
>>> COS Favours
>>>  12 Influence - Aris
>>> Wild One  - Malcolm Turncoat (COS, 03 Stress, No Advisor)
>>> SUL Favours
>>>  No Influencers
>>> Hat Rack  - Nick P. Ronald (NPR, 03 Stress, Aris)
>>> MLP Favours
>>>  12 Influence - Aris
>>>
>>> ROW-REDUCED ECHELON [Rank 0]
>>> No Post   - Nikolai Shootemdedsky (SUL, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
>>>  No Influencers
>>> No Post   - Bob (SUL, 00 Stress, VJ Rada)
>>>  2 Influence - VJ Rada
>>> No Post   - Natasha Nogoodnik (SUL, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
>>>  No Influencers
>>> No Post   - Weird Al (MLP, 00 Stress, No 

DIS: Re: OFF: [Clork] Weekly Report

[VJ Rada]

I don't think ATMunn's actions were super-conditional?

On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 12:40 PM, Telnaior <j...@iinet.net.au> wrote:
> The two mega-super-conditional actions I'm not gonna count barring a CFJ >_>
> I award VJ Rada 3 NPR favours for being the Advisor of the Drunk.
> I award Aris 3 OOS favours for being the Advisor of the Mystery.
> I award Aris 3 MLP favours for being the Advisor of the Hat Rack.
>
>
> PARTIES AND FAVOURS
> ---
>
> PLA - Platonic Isolationists   (4 Politicians, Economy)
> NPR - New Punchbowl Reformers  (4 Politicians, Justice)
> COS - Costume Conservatives(4 Politicians, Efficiency)
> SUL - Substance Use Liberals   (4 Politicians, Legislation)
> MLP - Official Raving Monster Looney Party (4 Politicians, Participation)
>
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+
> | Player  | PLA | NPR | COS | SUL | MLP |
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+
> | Alexis  |   0 |   3 |   0 |   2 |   4 |
> | Aris|   0 | 183 |   0 |   0 |   2 |
> | ATMunn  |   0 | 214 |   0 |   3 |   4 |
> | Corona  |   0 | 215 |   0 |   0 |   2 |
> | Cuddle Beam |   0 | 214 |   0 |   0 |   0 |
> | G.  |   0 | 429 |   0 |   3 |   4 |
> | Gaelan  |   0 | 214 |   0 |   0 |   0 |
> | nichdel |   0 | 214 |   0 |   0 |   0 |
> | o   |   0 | 214 |   0 |   0 |   4 |
> | PSS[1]  |   0 | 216 |   0 |   0 |   2 |
> | Quazie  |   0 | 214 |   0 |   0 |   0 |
> | Telnaior|   0 | 215 |   0 |   0 |   4 |
> | 天火狐 |   0 | 214 |   0 |   0 |   2 | (not even gonna try)
> | Trigon  |   0 | 214 |   0 |   0 |   0 |
> | VJ Rada |   0 |   3 |   0 |   0 |   2 |
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+
>
>
> RANKS AND POLITICIANS
> -
>
> CHAMBER OF POWER[Rank 5]
> Host  - Mad Cap'n Tom (NPR, 15 Stress, Aris)
> Break Election Ties
>16 Influence - Aris
> 2 Influence - Alexis
>
> UPPER ECHELON   [Rank 3]
> Planner   - Joseph "Stealin'" McCarthy (PLA, 09 Stress, VJ Rada)
> Decide Party Policies
> 10 Influence - VJ Rada
> Enforcer  - Xi Kingpin (PLA, 09 Stress, VJ Rada)
> Remove Row Echelon Politicians
> 8 Influence - VJ Rada
> Organiser - Mad "Max" Robespierre (COS, 09 Stress, No Advisor)
> Extra Voting Power
> No Influencers
> Creep     - Politician McPoliticianface (NPR, 09 Stress, Aris)
> Increase Politician Stress
> 10 Influence - Aris
>
> ROW ECHELON [Rank 1]
> Schmoozer - The Drunk Clinton (SUL, 03 Stress, VJ Rada)
> Change Politician Parties
> 6 Influence - VJ Rada
> Decorator - John Johnson (MLP, 03 Stress, ATMunn)
> Extra Balloon
> 3 Influence - ATMunn
> 3 Influence - VJ Rada
> Loner - Pinocchio (COS, 03 Stress, No Advisor)
> PLA Favours
> No Influencers
> Drunk - Aristotle (PLA, 03 Stress, VJ Rada)
> NPR Favours
> 3 Influence - VJ Rada
> Mystery   - Mickey Joker (NPR, 03 Stress, Aris)
> COS Favours
> 12 Influence - Aris
> Wild One  - Malcolm Turncoat (COS, 03 Stress, No Advisor)
> SUL Favours
> No Influencers
> Hat Rack  - Nick P. Ronald (NPR, 03 Stress, Aris)
> MLP Favours
> 12 Influence - Aris
>
> ROW-REDUCED ECHELON [Rank 0]
> No Post   - Nikolai Shootemdedsky (SUL, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
> No Influencers
> No Post   - Bob (SUL, 00 Stress, VJ Rada)
> 2 Influence - VJ Rada
> No Post   - Natasha Nogoodnik (SUL, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
> No Influencers
> No Post   - Weird Al (MLP, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
> No Influencers
> No Post   - Rob Boss (COS, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
> No Influencers
> No Post   - Cookie Monster (MLP, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
> No Influencers
> No Post   - Screaming Lord Sutch (MLP, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
> No Influencers
> No Post   - Boris Eatstumuch (PLA, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
> No Influencers
>
>
> RETIREMENT AND ELECTIONS
> 
> Announcing Retirement:
> No One
>
> Recently Retired:
> No One
>
>
> BALLOONS
> 
>
> +-+---+---+---+
> | Player  | Last Week | This Week | Total |
> +-+---+---+---+
> | Alexis  | 0 | 0 | 0 |
> | Aris| 0 |10 |10 |
> | ATMunn  | 0 | 2 | 2 |
> | Corona  | 0 | 0 | 0 |
> | Cuddle Beam | 0 | 0 | 0 |
> | G.   

DIS: Re: BUS: Friendly Advice

[VJ Rada]

when did you get all these npr favours? are those economic?

On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 10:59 AM, Aris Merchant
 wrote:
> I spend 24 NPR favors to gain 16 influence over Mad Cap'n Tom. I advise em.
>
> I spend 10 NPR favors to gain 10 influence over Politician
> McPoliticianface. I advise em.
>
> I spend 8 NPR favors to gain 12 influence over Mickey Joker. I advise
> em. I spend 8 NPR favors to gain 12 influence over Nick P. Ronald. I
> advise em.
>
>
> Now for the questionable stuff.
>
> For each upper echelon politician I have not yet advised, I spend 5
> NPR favors to gain 5 influence over em, then advise em.
>
> For each row echelon politician I have not yet advised, I spend 4 NPR
> favors to gain 6 influence over em, then advise em.
>
> For each row reduced politician, I spend 2 NPR favors to gain 4
> influence over em, then advise em.
>
> I sh-CFJ "Aris has advised every politician in the row reduced echelon."
>
> Arguments:
>
> The rule "Taken Under Advisement" states that "A player CAN, by
> announcement, spend Favours in a Party to gain Influence over that
> Politican, depending on the Politician's Echelon". It does not state
> clearly that the party must be the same as that of the politician. It
> does say "that politician", but it is unclear what "that" means in
> this context, and there is certainly no textual basis for assuming
> that it means they must be of the same party. Further, the rule states
> that the process depends on "depend[s] on the Politician's Echelon",
> implying via expressio unius est exclusio alterius that it doesn't
> depend on anything else. In short, there is no textual basis for
> limiting the action to politicians of the same party as the favors. It
> would be reasonable to say that the action fails because its
> definition is ambiguous, but this is against the principle that the
> statements of the rules must be given effect, insofar as it is
> possible.
>
> -Aris



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

DIS: Re: BUS: party party party

[VJ Rada]

balloons actually happen automatically instead of needing the clork to
trigger them so this could lead to a long chain of dependencies.

On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 11:01 AM, VJ Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> u know i was going to do my scam but i completely forgot about it and
> then there are now two other scam things of c.
>
> On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 11:00 AM, ATMunn <iamingodsa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I use 3 participation favours to influence John Johnson, then advise him.
>>
>> :P
>>
>>
>> On 11/26/2017 4:52 PM, VJ Rada wrote:
>>>
>>> I use 2 participation favours to influence John Johnson, then advise him.
>>>
>>> Dudes, use your damn favours.
>>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> From V.J. Rada



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

DIS: Re: BUS: party party party

[VJ Rada]

u know i was going to do my scam but i completely forgot about it and
then there are now two other scam things of c.

On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 11:00 AM, ATMunn <iamingodsa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I use 3 participation favours to influence John Johnson, then advise him.
>
> :P
>
>
> On 11/26/2017 4:52 PM, VJ Rada wrote:
>>
>> I use 2 participation favours to influence John Johnson, then advise him.
>>
>> Dudes, use your damn favours.
>>
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Anyone want to be interim Referee?

[VJ Rada]

it's not that hard guys. @trigon @atmunn @telnaior etc.

On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 10:52 AM, Alexis Hunt  wrote:
> Anyone at all? Perhaps one of the candidates for Referee? I will resign the
> office before any further obligations come due; I'm not willing to do the
> work and am only holding onto it to deny it from VJ.
>
> On Wed, 22 Nov 2017 at 18:56 Alexis Hunt  wrote:
>
>> I don't actually.
>>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: [Herald] A Champion and Herald we now have (Was: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Resolution of Proposals 7973-7980)

[VJ Rada]

e never raised the banner. and the herald certainly isn't OVERDUE 4 a
thing that happened an hour ago allowing you to deputise. rules plz.

On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 9:21 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
 wrote:
> Actually no, it is for you raising the banner, but depending on the result I 
> will change that. Quick question: Have you been keeping the GH repo up to 
> date for the Herald?
> 
> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com
>
>
>
>> On Nov 26, 2017, at 4:53 PM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, 26 Nov 2017, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
>>> I deputise for the Herald to give G. the title of Champion.
>>>
>>
>> This is the uncertain Champion award for the Victory Election CFJ you
>> just recused yourself from, I'm guessing?  (just trying to keep track
>> of dependencies!)
>>
>>
>>
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Resolution of Proposals 7973-7980

[VJ Rada]

I favour this CFJ.

Gotta get those justice favours.

On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 8:46 AM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote:
>
>
> I award a Black Ribbon to each of the following persons:
> Aris
> ATMunn
> Corona
> G.
> o
> PSS
> Telnaior
> VJ Rada
> 天火狐
>
> [And now, a Petard-Hoist rather than a banner-raising..]
>
> AP-CFJ:  G. owns a Black Ribbon.
>
> ARGUMENTS:
>
> Ribbons is a place we never added "by announcement" to the awarding
> mechanism as far as I can tell.  I'm not sure any ribbons that people
> claimed to award themselves by announcement have worked since Proposal
> 7828 took effect on Oct 22 (that tightened up Rule 2125 requirements for
> specifying 'by announcement' along with CANs).
>
> [No, I obviously didn't notice this until I went just now to check].
>
>
> I submit and AP-pend the following proposal, "Ribbon fix", AI-3:
> --
>
> Amend Rule 2438 by replacing:
>While a person qualifies for a type of Ribbon, any player can
>generally award em that type of Ribbon.
> with:
>While a person qualifies for a type of Ribbon, any player CAN
>award em that type of Ribbon by announcement.
>
> --
>
>
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

DIS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 7982-7988

[VJ Rada]

>the following ist item to the end:
hmmm.

I vote as follows

7982*  V.J. Rada  1.7   Referee Reform Fix   V.J. Rada   1 sh.
FOR
7983*  Telnaior, [1]  1.0   SBOTGT [2]   Telnaior1 AP
FOR
7984*  Aris, [3]  2.6   Contract Flexibility Act Aris1 AP
FOR
7985*  Alexis 2.6   Open Season on Contracts Alexis  1 AP
AGAINST
7986*  P.S.S [4]  3.0   Quick FixP.S.S. [4]  1 AP
FOR
7987*  ATMunn, [5]1.0   AOC [6]  Aris1 AP
AGAINST
7988*  G. 2.0   Minimal Econ reforms G.  1 AP
FOR

On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 8:09 AM, Aris Merchant
<thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I hereby distribute each listed proposal, initiating the Agoran
> Decision of whether to adopt it, and removing it from the proposal
> pool. For this decision, the vote collector is the Assessor, the
> quorum is 8.0, 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)  AITitlePender  Pend fee
> ---
> 7982*  V.J. Rada  1.7   Referee Reform Fix   V.J. Rada   1 sh.
> 7983*  Telnaior, [1]  1.0   SBOTGT [2]   Telnaior1 AP
> 7984*  Aris, [3]  2.6   Contract Flexibility Act Aris1 AP
> 7985*  Alexis 2.6   Open Season on Contracts Alexis  1 AP
> 7986*  P.S.S [4]  3.0   Quick FixP.S.S. [4]  1 AP
> 7987*  ATMunn, [5]1.0   AOC [6]  Aris1 AP
> 7988*  G. 2.0   Minimal Econ reforms G.  1 AP
>
> The proposal pool currently contains the following proposals:
>
> ID   Author(s) AI   Title
> ---
> pp1  Alexis3.0  Terrible Economic Hack Job
>
> Legend: * : Proposal is pending.
>
>
> [1] Alexis, VJ Rada
> [2] Somehow Both Of These Got Through
> [3] V.J. Rada, Ørjan
> [3] Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> [5] Alexis
> [6] ADoP Obligation Clarification
>
> A proposal may be pended for 1 AP, or for 1/20th the Floating Value
> in shines (see the Treasuror's report).
>
> The full text of the aforementioned proposals is included below.
>
> //
> ID: 7982
> Title: Referee Reform Fix
> Adoption index: 1.7
> Author: V.J. Rada
> Co-authors:
>
>
> At the end of rule 2478 "Viglilante Justice", add a new
> paragraph with the text "The Referee CANNOT Point eir Finger. The
> Arbitor CANNOT Point eir Finger at the Referee".
>
> //////
> ID: 7983
> Title: Somehow Both Of These Got Through
> Adoption index: 1.0
> Author: Telnaior
> Co-authors: Alexis, VJ Rada
>
>
> Amend the Rule "Favour Awards" by changing
>   "For each voter who has not voted on an Agoran decision resolved
> earlier in the
>   same Agoran week, e SHALL award that player 2 Favours in the Party holding
>   Participaiton."
> to
>   "For each voter who has voted on an Agoran decision resolved earlier in the
>   same Agoran week, e SHALL award that player 2 Favours in the Party holding
>   Participation."
>
> //
> ID: 7984
> Title: Contract Flexibility Act
> Adoption index: 2.6
> Author: Aris
> Co-authors: V.J. Rada, Ørjan
>
>
> Amend Rule 2525, Interpreting Contracts, by:
>
>   Removing item 6 of the numbered list and renumbering appropriately; and
>   Changing the phrase "failing protected action" to read "failing to perform
>   a protected action".
>
> //
> ID: 7985
> Title: Open Season on Contracts
> Adoption index: 2.6
> Author: Alexis
> Co-authors:
>
>
> Amend rule 2525 (Interpreting Contracts) by deleting all but the first two
> paragraphs.
>
> //
> ID: 7986
> Title: Quick Fix
> Adoption index: 3.0
> Author: Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> Co-authors:
>
>
> In rule 105, add a full stop after "repeal a rule" in bullet point 2.
>
> //
> ID: 7987
> Title: ADoP Obligation Clarification
> Adoption index: 1.0
> Author: ATMunn
> Co-authors: Alexis
>
>
> Amend rule 2138, "The Associate Director of Personnel", by adding the 

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Resolution of Proposals 7973-7980

[VJ Rada]

y'all need to remember parties exist: they're a good mechanic, and
everyone has 4 hours or so to bribe some politicians this week.

On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 6:40 AM, VJ Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Oi! I point the finger at PSS for not awarding legislation favours. Again.
>
> On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 6:38 AM, VJ Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> So that's it: G. wins by ribbons (when e logs on). Congratulations.
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 3:04 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
>> <p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I resolve the decision(s) to adopt proposal(s) 7973-7980 below.
>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>> [This notice resolves the Agoran decisions of whether to adopt the
>>>  following proposals.  For each decision, the options available to
>>>  Agora are ADOPTED (*), REJECTED (x), and FAILED QUORUM (!). If a
>>>  decision's voting period is still ongoing, I end it immediately
>>>  before resolving it and after resolving the previous decision.]
>>>
>>> ID Author(s)AI   TitlePender  Pend 
>>> fee
>>> ---
>>> 7973X  Aris 1.0  Sky Pillars  ArisOP [1]
>>> 7974X  V.J. Rada3.0 [2]  Really minor fixes   V.J. Rada   1 AP
>>> 7975*  ATMunn, [3]  2.0  Auctions v6  ATMunn  1 AP
>>> 7976*  Alexis, [4]  1.7  A Mostest Ingenious Paradox  Alexis  2 sh.
>>> 7977X  ATMunn   3.0  Silver Ribbons   ATMunn  1 AP
>>> 7978X  G.   3.0  Gotta allow a win sometime   Corona  1 AP
>>> 7879*  G.   1.0  Plain Old BriberyG.  1 AP
>>> 7880*  ATMunn, [5]  1.0  [6]  Alexis  1 AP
>>>
>>> | | 7973 | 7974 | 7975 | 7976 | 7977 | 7978 | 7979 | 7980 |
>>> |-+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
>>> |Alexis   | P| AA   | P| FF   | AA   | AA   | AA   | F|
>>> |Aris | P| A| F| F| F| F| F| F|
>>> |ATMunn   | P| P| F| F| F| F| F| F|
>>> |Corona   | F| A| F| F| P| F| F    | F    |
>>> |G.   | A| A| F| F| A| A| F| A|
>>> |o| A| A| F| P| F| F| F| F|
>>> |PSS  | F| A| F| A| F| F| F| F|
>>> |Telnaior | A| A| F| A| F| F| F| F|
>>> |VJ Rada  | A| F| F| F| A| A| F| F|
>>> |天火狐| F| N| P| N| N| N| F| F|
>>> |-+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
>>> |F/A  | 3/4  | 1/8  | 8/0  | 7/2  | 5/4  | 6/4  | 9/2  | 9/1  |
>>> |AI   | 1.0  | 3.0  | 2.0  | 1.7  | 2.0  | 2.0  | 1.0  | 1.0  |
>>> |V| 10   | 9| 10   | 9| 9| 9| 10   | 10   |
>>> |Q| 4| 4| 4| 4| 4| 4| 4| 4|
>>> |P| F| F| T| T| F| F| T| T|
>>>
>>> //
>>> ID: 7975
>>> Title: Auctions v6
>>> Adoption index: 2.0
>>> Author: ATMunn
>>> Co-authors: o, Aris, nichdel, G.
>>>
>>> Create a power-2 rule titled "Auctions"
>>> {
>>>   An Auction is a way for entities to give away items in exchange for
>>>   a currency. Any rule or contract CAN permit (or require) Auctions to be
>>>   initiated.
>>> }
>>>
>>> Create a power-1 rule titled "Lots"
>>> {
>>>   Each Auction has one or more lots of items.
>>>
>>>   A lot is a non-empty list of items to be transferred by a single Auction 
>>> to
>>>   a single recipient.
>>> }
>>>
>>> Create a power-1 rule titled "The Auctioneer"
>>> {
>>>   Each Auction has an Auctioneer.
>>>
>>>   The Auctioneer of an Auction is the entity that initiates that
>>>   Auction, and describes all of the specifics of an Auction. All
>>>   rules or contracts permitting Auctions to be initiated should
>>>   specify an entity to be Auctioneer. If no Auctioneer is specified,
>>>   the default Auctioneer for Auctions defined by the rules is Agora, and
>&g

DIS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Resolution of Proposals 7973-7980

[VJ Rada]

So that's it: G. wins by ribbons (when e logs on). Congratulations.

On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 3:04 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
<p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I resolve the decision(s) to adopt proposal(s) 7973-7980 below.
>
> 
>
> [This notice resolves the Agoran decisions of whether to adopt the
>  following proposals.  For each decision, the options available to
>  Agora are ADOPTED (*), REJECTED (x), and FAILED QUORUM (!). If a
>  decision's voting period is still ongoing, I end it immediately
>  before resolving it and after resolving the previous decision.]
>
> ID Author(s)AI   TitlePender  Pend fee
> ---
> 7973X  Aris 1.0  Sky Pillars  ArisOP [1]
> 7974X  V.J. Rada3.0 [2]  Really minor fixes   V.J. Rada   1 AP
> 7975*  ATMunn, [3]  2.0  Auctions v6  ATMunn  1 AP
> 7976*  Alexis, [4]  1.7  A Mostest Ingenious Paradox  Alexis  2 sh.
> 7977X  ATMunn   3.0  Silver Ribbons   ATMunn  1 AP
> 7978X  G.   3.0  Gotta allow a win sometime   Corona  1 AP
> 7879*  G.   1.0  Plain Old BriberyG.  1 AP
> 7880*  ATMunn, [5]  1.0  [6]  Alexis  1 AP
>
> | | 7973 | 7974 | 7975 | 7976 | 7977 | 7978 | 7979 | 7980 |
> |-+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
> |Alexis   | P| AA   | P| FF   | AA   | AA   | AA   | F|
> |Aris | P| A| F| F| F| F| F| F|
> |ATMunn   | P| P| F| F| F| F| F| F|
> |Corona   | F| A| F| F| P| F| F| F|
> |G.   | A| A| F| F| A| A| F| A|
> |o| A| A| F| P| F| F| F| F|
> |PSS  | F| A| F| A| F| F| F| F|
> |Telnaior | A| A| F| A| F| F| F| F|
> |VJ Rada  | A| F| F| F| A| A| F| F|
> |天火狐| F| N| P| N| N| N| F| F|
> |-+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
> |F/A  | 3/4  | 1/8  | 8/0  | 7/2  | 5/4  | 6/4  | 9/2  | 9/1  |
> |AI   | 1.0  | 3.0  | 2.0  | 1.7  | 2.0  | 2.0  | 1.0  | 1.0  |
> |V| 10   | 9| 10   | 9| 9| 9| 10   | 10   |
> |Q| 4| 4| 4| 4| 4| 4| 4| 4|
> |P| F| F| T| T| F| F| T| T|
>
> //
> ID: 7975
> Title: Auctions v6
> Adoption index: 2.0
> Author: ATMunn
> Co-authors: o, Aris, nichdel, G.
>
> Create a power-2 rule titled "Auctions"
> {
>   An Auction is a way for entities to give away items in exchange for
>   a currency. Any rule or contract CAN permit (or require) Auctions to be
>   initiated.
> }
>
> Create a power-1 rule titled "Lots"
> {
>   Each Auction has one or more lots of items.
>
>   A lot is a non-empty list of items to be transferred by a single Auction to
>   a single recipient.
> }
>
> Create a power-1 rule titled "The Auctioneer"
> {
>   Each Auction has an Auctioneer.
>
>   The Auctioneer of an Auction is the entity that initiates that
>   Auction, and describes all of the specifics of an Auction. All
>   rules or contracts permitting Auctions to be initiated should
>   specify an entity to be Auctioneer. If no Auctioneer is specified,
>   the default Auctioneer for Auctions defined by the rules is Agora, and
>   the default Auctioneer for Auctions defined by a contract is the
>   contract itself.
>
>   A clause in a Contract purporting to make an entity which is neither the
>   Contract itself nor a party to the Contract the Auctioneer of an Auction
>   defined by that Contract is INEFFECTIVE.
> }
>
> Create a power-1 rule titled "The Auction Announcer"
> {
>   Each Auction has an Announcer. Only persons can be Announcers.
>
>   If the Auctioneer of an Auction is a player, then that player is the
>   Announcer of that Auction.
>
>   Otherwise, the rule or contract defining an Auction CAN define the
>   Announcer for that Auction. Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, no
>   Contract can define a person as the Announcer of an Auction unless that
>   person is a party to that Contract.
> }
>
> Create a power-1 rule titled "Auction Initiation"
> {
>   An entity authorized by a rule or contract to initiate an A

DIS: Re: BUS: Looking interesting

[VJ Rada]

One day after your yellow card expired, nice.

Welcome back.

On Sun, Nov 26, 2017 at 8:40 PM, Gaelan Steele  wrote:
> Darn, nobody deregistered me. Can’t make CFJs about that then. If I’m a 
> zombie with a master other than Gaelan, I flip my master switch to Gaelan.
>
> Gaelan
>
>> On Nov 26, 2017, at 1:28 AM, Gaelan Steele  wrote:
>>
>> I’ve been looking to get back into Agora. Now seems like a good time.
>>
>> Gaelan
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Promotor Draft

[VJ Rada]

I retract "clear statement rule"

On Sun, Nov 26, 2017 at 7:24 PM, Aris Merchant
<thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Does this look fine?
>
> -Aris
>
> ---
> I hereby distribute each listed proposal, initiating the Agoran
> Decision of whether to adopt it, and removing it from the proposal
> pool. For this decision, the vote collector is the Assessor, the
> quorum is 5.0, 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)  AITitlePender  Pend fee
> ---
> 7982*  V.J. Rada  1.7   Referee Reform Fix   V.J. Rada   1 sh.
> 7983*  Telnaior, [1]  1.0   [2]  Telnaior1 AP
> 7984*  Aris, [3]  2.6   Contract Flexibility Act Aris1 AP
> 7985*  Alexis 2.6   Open Season on Contracts Alexis  1 AP
> 7986*  V.J. Rada  2.6   Clear-Statement Rule V.J. Rada   1 sh.
> 7987*  Alexis 2.0   Re-opening the Door  Alexis  1 sh.
> 7988*  P.S.S [4]  3.0   Quick FixP.S.S. [4]  1 AP
> 7889*  ATMunn, [5]1.0   [6]  Aris1 AP
> 7890*  G. 2.0   Minimal Econ reforms G.  1 AP
>
> The proposal pool currently contains the following proposals:
>
> ID   Author(s) AI   Title
> ---
> pp1  Alexis3.0  Terrible Economic Hack Job
>
> Legend: * : Proposal is pending.
>
>
> [1] Alexis, VJ Rada
> [2] Somehow Both Of These Got Through
> [3] V.J. Rada, Ørjan
> [3] Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> [5] Alexis
> [6] ADoP Obligation Clarification
>
> A proposal may be pended for 1 AP, or for 1/20th the Floating Value
> in shines (see the Treasuror's report).
>
> The full text of the aforementioned proposals is included below.
>
> //
> ID: 7982
> Title: Referee Reform Fix
> Adoption index: 1.7
> Author: V.J. Rada
> Co-authors:
>
>
> At the end of rule 2478 "Viglilante Justice", add a new
> paragraph with the text "The Referee CANNOT Point eir Finger. The
> Arbitor CANNOT Point eir Finger at the Referee".
>
> //
> ID: 7983
> Title: Somehow Both Of These Got Through
> Adoption index: 1.0
> Author: Telnaior
> Co-authors: Alexis, VJ Rada
>
>
> Amend the Rule "Favour Awards" by changing
>   "For each voter who has not voted on an Agoran decision resolved
> earlier in the
>   same Agoran week, e SHALL award that player 2 Favours in the Party holding
>   Participaiton."
> to
>   "For each voter who has voted on an Agoran decision resolved earlier in the
>   same Agoran week, e SHALL award that player 2 Favours in the Party holding
>   Participation."
>
> //
> ID: 7984
> Title: Contract Flexibility Act
> Adoption index: 2.6
> Author: Aris
> Co-authors: V.J. Rada, Ørjan
>
>
> Amend Rule 2525, Interpreting Contracts, by:
>
>   Removing item 6 of the numbered list and renumbering appropriately; and
>   Changing the phrase "failing protected action" to read "failing to perform
>   a protected action".
>
> //
> ID: 7985
> Title: Open Season on Contracts
> Adoption index: 2.6
> Author: Alexis
> Co-authors:
>
>
> Amend rule 2525 (Interpreting Contracts) by deleting all but the first two
> paragraphs.
>
> //
> ID: 7986
> Title: Clear-Statement Rule
> Adoption index: 2.6
> Author: V.J. Rada
> Co-authors:
>
>
> Amend the last paragraph of rule 2525 "Interpreting Contracts" to state
> "Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, a contract CANNOT compel,
> forbid, or in any significant way alter, tamper with, or modify the
> performance of a protected action. A contract CANNOT punish a player
> for performing or failing protected action, or for doing so in a
> particular manner, except where it would otherwise be ILLEGAL.
> Exception: if a Contract specifically states that it shall be contrary
> to this rule for each protected action it compels, forbids, tampers
> with etc, and if each party to that Contract specifically consented to
> that contract's use of each protected action, the previous sentence
> does no

Re: DIS: Logo?

[VJ Rada]

is anyone actually stealing our logos/rules to make money?

On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 3:33 PM, Aris Merchant
 wrote:
> The ruleset is a collective work of the players. I suspect we all share
> copyright, although that should probably be made explicit.
>
> -Aris
>
> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 8:31 PM Alexis Hunt  wrote:
>
>> Does anyone know it for the ruleset?
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017, 22:53 Owen Jacobson,  wrote:
>>
>> > Does anyone know the licensing and copyright situation around the Agora
>> > logo at ?
>> >
>> > -o
>> >
>> >
>>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Would this work?

[VJ Rada]

>But this wouldn't work in the same way that the Registrar need not track 
>contract-defined switches.
The reason the Registrar need not track such switches is that switches
are defined as within the rules. Duties can be imposed by non-rule
things.

On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 12:31 PM, VJ Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>If you were also, Treasuror, with distributions, you could be even more 
>>efficient
> Yes, yeah, I already pointed out that o could get infinite favours this way
>
> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 12:30 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> <p.scribonius.scholasti...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> If you were also, Treasuror, with distributions, you could be even more 
>> efficient. But this wouldn't work in the same way that the Registrar need 
>> not track contract-defined switches.
>> 
>> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
>> p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Nov 22, 2017, at 8:28 PM, VJ Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> My promise to Cuddlebeam was much less strict than I remember, so I'm
>>> just going to solicit opinions on whether or not this would work. In
>>> fact, I pledge not to do any of the actions taken in this message.
>>>
>>> Basically you'd have to make a contract that said "you have to write a
>>> report on how many stars there are in the solar system every 5 seconds
>>> for the next 10 minutes". Reward claiming is not for duty-fulfilling
>>> OFFICIAL reports, but just for duty-fulfilling reports. Neither duty
>>> nor report is defined, so duty is just any obligation and report is
>>> some document giving information. Claim a reward of 5 shinies every 5
>>> seconds, pay that back to agora in economic favours, repeat ad
>>> nauseum.
>>>
>>> --
>>> From V.J. Rada
>>
>
>
>
> --
> From V.J. Rada



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: SCAM ALERT! ALL HANDS ON DECK! SCAM INCOMING! SCAM WARNING! SCAM WARNING!

[VJ Rada]

oh no it's a scam spam scam

On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 12:48 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
<p.scribonius.scholasti...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> I wonder why. What could the reason be?
> 
> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com
>
>
>
>> On Nov 22, 2017, at 8:47 PM, VJ Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> The most recent 5 of your messages went to my spam folder for some reason
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 12:19 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
>> <p.scribonius.scholasti...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>> SCAM ALERT! ALL HANDS ON DECK! SCAM INCOMING! SCAM WARNING! SCAM WARNING! A 
>>> test message contains confusing contents was received at 1:09 on November 
>>> 23, 2017. This message took the form of other similar messages that led up 
>>> to timing scams. Please be aware that a scam may be incoming. Watch out for 
>>> suspicious messages from this player or eir associates and scrutinize all 
>>> messages thoroughly. Agora has recently experienced an attempted scam and 
>>> this could be in preparation for a follow-up. Please monitor the list 
>>> carefully. Please forward this as widely as possible for maximum awareness.
>>> 
>>> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
>>> p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Nov 22, 2017, at 8:09 PM, Aris Merchant 
>>>> <thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> This message probably does absolutely nothing. Probably. There is also
>>>> a slim possibility that it is:
>>>>
>>>> *Part of a scam
>>>> *Part of a plot to permanently end the game
>>>> *An attempt to destroy the universe
>>>> *An invitation for alliens to invade earth
>>>> *A warning to the Party that you're all traitors
>>>> *A cue for your the thought suppressor in your brain to erase the
>>>> memory of the very exiting events that just happened... (what were
>>>> they again?)
>>>>
>>>> All persons are invited to speculate about what else this message
>>>> might be. Don't worry, we're sure you'll never figure it out (and live
>>>> to tell about it).
>>>>
>>>> -Aris
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> From V.J. Rada
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

DIS: Re: OFF: SCAM ALERT! ALL HANDS ON DECK! SCAM INCOMING! SCAM WARNING! SCAM WARNING!

[VJ Rada]

The most recent 5 of your messages went to my spam folder for some reason

On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 12:19 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
 wrote:
> SCAM ALERT! ALL HANDS ON DECK! SCAM INCOMING! SCAM WARNING! SCAM WARNING! A 
> test message contains confusing contents was received at 1:09 on November 23, 
> 2017. This message took the form of other similar messages that led up to 
> timing scams. Please be aware that a scam may be incoming. Watch out for 
> suspicious messages from this player or eir associates and scrutinize all 
> messages thoroughly. Agora has recently experienced an attempted scam and 
> this could be in preparation for a follow-up. Please monitor the list 
> carefully. Please forward this as widely as possible for maximum awareness.
> 
> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com
>
>
>
>> On Nov 22, 2017, at 8:09 PM, Aris Merchant 
>>  wrote:
>>
>> This message probably does absolutely nothing. Probably. There is also
>> a slim possibility that it is:
>>
>> *Part of a scam
>> *Part of a plot to permanently end the game
>> *An attempt to destroy the universe
>> *An invitation for alliens to invade earth
>> *A warning to the Party that you're all traitors
>> *A cue for your the thought suppressor in your brain to erase the
>> memory of the very exiting events that just happened... (what were
>> they again?)
>>
>> All persons are invited to speculate about what else this message
>> might be. Don't worry, we're sure you'll never figure it out (and live
>> to tell about it).
>>
>> -Aris
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: URGENT! SCAM ALERT! ALL HANDS ON DECK! SCAM INCOMING! SCAM WARNING! SCAM WARNING!

[VJ Rada]

are you demanding a human attorney or a canine attorney?

On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 12:43 PM, Aris Merchant
 wrote:
> We admit nothing. We invoke our rights to remain silent, and demand attorneys.
>
> -Aris
>
> On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 5:38 PM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
>>
>>
>> You're in on it.
>>
>> I knew it.
>>
>> Traitor.
>>
>> On Wed, 22 Nov 2017, Aris Merchant wrote:
>>> Isn't it possible that e was trying to test the size of different
>>> whitespace characters to make a report table line up? That's what it
>>> looks like to me.
>>>
>>> -Aris
>>>
>>> On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 4:53 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
>>>  wrote:
>>> > SCAM ALERT! ALL HANDS ON DECK! SCAM INCOMING! SCAM WARNING! SCAM WARNING! 
>>> > A test message contains confusing contents was received at 0:45 on 
>>> > November 23, 2017. This message took the form of other similar messages 
>>> > that led up to timing scams. Please be aware that a scam may be incoming. 
>>> > Watch out for suspicious messages from this player or eir associates and 
>>> > scrutinize all messages thoroughly. Agora has recently experienced an 
>>> > attempted scam and this could be in preparation for a follow-up. Please 
>>> > monitor the list carefully. Please forward this as widely as possible for 
>>> > maximum awareness.
>>> > 
>>> > Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
>>> > p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >> On Nov 22, 2017, at 7:45 PM, Madeline  wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> | Telnaior|
>>> >> | 天火狐 |
>>> >> | Trigon  |
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> | Telnaior|
>>> >> | 天火狐   |
>>> >> | Trigon  |
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> | Telnaior|
>>> >> | 天火狐  |
>>> >> | Trigon  |
>>> >>
>>> >
>>>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: I have no idea what I'm doing

[VJ Rada]

you just want australians to be able to easily do this while everyone
else is asleep, don't you? nice try.

On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 12:33 PM, Madeline  wrote:
> Potential expansion: They name an English letter along with the attempt, and
> whoever resolves it gets a token of that letter. Someone who manages to
> collect a token of every letter can receive a Black Ribbon.
> Alternatively this may work better as a contract, but then I have no idea
> what kind of reward to offer.
>
>
>
> On 2017-11-23 12:28, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
>>
>> I like this day.
>> 
>> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
>> p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Nov 22, 2017, at 8:24 PM, Madeline  wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2017-11-23 12:17, ATMunn wrote:

 It seems like Agora is in a scammy mood.

 I hereby declare that this message is a scam.
>>>
>>> Proposal draft:
>>>
>>> Any player can Attempt to Scam by announcement. Only one Attempt to Scam
>>> may be ongoing at a time.
>>>
>>> After an Attempt to Scam, any player can Resolve the Scam by
>>> announcement, but not in a timely fashion.
>>>
>>> If the player who Resolves the Scam is the same player who Attempted to
>>> Scam, that player earns a Scam Token.
>>>
>>> Scam Tokens may be traded in for some reward (I'm thinking assigning
>>> emself as the judge of any CFJ, though if we want to do this seriously
>>> perhaps something marginally less ridiculous)
>>>
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Would this work?

[VJ Rada]

>If you were also, Treasuror, with distributions, you could be even more 
>efficient
Yes, yeah, I already pointed out that o could get infinite favours this way

On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 12:30 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
<p.scribonius.scholasti...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> If you were also, Treasuror, with distributions, you could be even more 
> efficient. But this wouldn't work in the same way that the Registrar need not 
> track contract-defined switches.
> 
> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com
>
>
>
>> On Nov 22, 2017, at 8:28 PM, VJ Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> My promise to Cuddlebeam was much less strict than I remember, so I'm
>> just going to solicit opinions on whether or not this would work. In
>> fact, I pledge not to do any of the actions taken in this message.
>>
>> Basically you'd have to make a contract that said "you have to write a
>> report on how many stars there are in the solar system every 5 seconds
>> for the next 10 minutes". Reward claiming is not for duty-fulfilling
>> OFFICIAL reports, but just for duty-fulfilling reports. Neither duty
>> nor report is defined, so duty is just any obligation and report is
>> some document giving information. Claim a reward of 5 shinies every 5
>> seconds, pay that back to agora in economic favours, repeat ad
>> nauseum.
>>
>> --
>> From V.J. Rada
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Innocent message. Probably.

[VJ Rada]

Luckily, satire is illegal.

On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 12:20 PM, Aris Merchant
<thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It is indeed an invitation to speculate. It's also satire.
>
> -Aris
>
> On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 5:18 PM, VJ Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> saying that there's a possibility it's one of those things is
>> explicitly inviting others to speculate on that message's purpose,
>> implying that there is one and the message does not, indeed, do
>> nothing.
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 12:15 PM, Aris Merchant
>> <thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> It's only faking if it's intended to mislead. I certainly wasn't trying to
>>> mislead people into believing anything. I don't even what I'd be trying to
>>> mislead people into believing. That it could be one of those things? Any
>>> message could be any of them. Any message could theoretically be all of
>>> them.
>>>
>>> -Aris
>>>
>>> On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 5:11 PM VJ Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I point a finger at aris for faking. Aris knows whether or not it is
>>>> any of "Part of a scam
>>>> *Part of a plot to permanently end the game
>>>> *An attempt to destroy the universe
>>>> *An invitation for alliens to invade earth
>>>> *A warning to the Party that you're all traitors
>>>> *A cue for your the thought suppressor in your brain to erase the
>>>> memory of the very exiting events that just happened... (what were
>>>> they again?)"
>>>>
>>>> and em saying that it is possible it is any of those things is
>>>> misleading: e knows which one it is.
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 12:09 PM, Aris Merchant
>>>> <thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> > This message probably does absolutely nothing. Probably. There is also
>>>> > a slim possibility that it is:
>>>> >
>>>> > *Part of a scam
>>>> > *Part of a plot to permanently end the game
>>>> > *An attempt to destroy the universe
>>>> > *An invitation for alliens to invade earth
>>>> > *A warning to the Party that you're all traitors
>>>> > *A cue for your the thought suppressor in your brain to erase the
>>>> > memory of the very exiting events that just happened... (what were
>>>> > they again?)
>>>> >
>>>> > All persons are invited to speculate about what else this message
>>>> > might be. Don't worry, we're sure you'll never figure it out (and live
>>>> > to tell about it).
>>>> >
>>>> > -Aris
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> From V.J. Rada
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> From V.J. Rada



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Innocent message. Probably.

[VJ Rada]

saying that there's a possibility it's one of those things is
explicitly inviting others to speculate on that message's purpose,
implying that there is one and the message does not, indeed, do
nothing.

On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 12:15 PM, Aris Merchant
<thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It's only faking if it's intended to mislead. I certainly wasn't trying to
> mislead people into believing anything. I don't even what I'd be trying to
> mislead people into believing. That it could be one of those things? Any
> message could be any of them. Any message could theoretically be all of
> them.
>
> -Aris
>
> On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 5:11 PM VJ Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I point a finger at aris for faking. Aris knows whether or not it is
>> any of "Part of a scam
>> *Part of a plot to permanently end the game
>> *An attempt to destroy the universe
>> *An invitation for alliens to invade earth
>> *A warning to the Party that you're all traitors
>> *A cue for your the thought suppressor in your brain to erase the
>> memory of the very exiting events that just happened... (what were
>> they again?)"
>>
>> and em saying that it is possible it is any of those things is
>> misleading: e knows which one it is.
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 12:09 PM, Aris Merchant
>> <thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > This message probably does absolutely nothing. Probably. There is also
>> > a slim possibility that it is:
>> >
>> > *Part of a scam
>> > *Part of a plot to permanently end the game
>> > *An attempt to destroy the universe
>> > *An invitation for alliens to invade earth
>> > *A warning to the Party that you're all traitors
>> > *A cue for your the thought suppressor in your brain to erase the
>> > memory of the very exiting events that just happened... (what were
>> > they again?)
>> >
>> > All persons are invited to speculate about what else this message
>> > might be. Don't worry, we're sure you'll never figure it out (and live
>> > to tell about it).
>> >
>> > -Aris
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> From V.J. Rada



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Resignation, favours, and pledge

[VJ Rada]

Remember the way I tried to pay for the Estate? Given that economic
favours are 1 shiny right now, o. could generate as many favours as e
wanted if e got rid of eir shinies (e would be the earliest player to
register w/ 0 shinies). E could, of course, do that for other people
via contract if e got the other 0-shiny people out of the way.

Way that I promised CB to keep secret is obvious, but still secret.

On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 11:11 AM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote:
>
>
> Trying to get infinite stuff has a good history if it's legal go for it,
> there's several rulings that may stop that kind of thing but you
> never know.
>
> The shinies system was broken in subtle ways, but some big
> systems have big loopholes from the start we just shrug and reset,
> better now then after we've invested time in it - I did something like
> that at least once.
>
> On Thu, 23 Nov 2017, VJ Rada wrote:
>> You know I actually have a completely legal way that may well work and
>> be able to get infinite favours.
>>
>> It would be unethical to do it (I promised Cuddlebeam to keep it
>> secret) but wouldn't it be funny if I did it?
>>
>> (The answer to that question is no, rada. it wouldn't)
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 11:05 AM, Madeline <j...@iinet.net.au> wrote:
>> > Pledges aren't a currency and I doubt anyone would support a fine like 
>> > that.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On 2017-11-23 11:02, VJ Rada wrote:
>> >>
>> >> The rule is pretty broken though tbh. Imagine if Alexis had decided to
>> >> fine me 2 pledges (which are an asset). Are 2 pledges between 1 shiny
>> >> and 3,000 favours?
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 11:00 AM, Madeline <j...@iinet.net.au> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> And it's not even REMOTELY impossible to tell the relative value, you did
>> >>> so
>> >>> yourself earlier to say 3000 favours was more than 25 shinies!
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> On 2017-11-23 10:54, VJ Rada wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Arguments: Blue Cards states "The person issuing a Blue Card must, in
>> >>>> the same message, announce a penalty between 1 shiny and the greater
>> >>>> of 25 shinies and the amount the bad sport profited from the
>> >>>> infraction,". It is impossible to tell whether a penalty is between an
>> >>>> amount in shinies and an amount not in shinies. The rule would be
>> >>>> incredibly hard to apply should non-shiny penalties apply, so the best
>> >>>> interests of the game combine with the rule's context to mandate
>> >>>> shinies-only penalties.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> "E CAN additionally, in the same message, determine the distribution
>> >>>> of the money between Agora and the players(s) harmed"
>> >>>> This rule consistently uses the word "money". A synonym of "money" is
>> >>>> "currency". Shinies are a currency, favours are not.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 10:50 AM, Aris Merchant
>> >>>> <thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> I favor this CFJ, and can judge it immediately.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> -Aris
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 3:49 PM, VJ Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Good, I'm glad o. This Blue Card is legal, but the penalty is not
>> >>>>>> effective. I call an urgent CFJ with the statement: A blue card can
>> >>>>>> only have a penalty imposed in shinies.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Alexis and PSS are and should be obviously disqualified...I bar
>> >>>>>> Telnaior.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 10:45 AM, Owen Jacobson <o...@grimoire.ca>
>> >>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> On Nov 22, 2017, at 10:47 AM, ATMunn <iamingodsa...@gmail.com>
>> >>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> I, as ADoP, initiate an election for Referee, as the office is now
>> >>>>>>>> interim.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> On 11/22/2017 12:49 AM, VJ Rada wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> I award myself 3,000 justice favours for successfully pointing
>> >>>>>>>>> 3,000
>> >>>>>>>>> fingers. I resign as referee. I intend to call in the pledge, with
>> >>>>>>>>> agoran consent, that states "I pledge to not point fingers" (or
>> >>>>>>>>> similar)
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> I stand for election. I may have a campaign proposal later on.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> -o
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> --
>> >>>>>>   From V.J. Rada
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> From V.J. Rada
>>
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Resignation, favours, and pledge

[VJ Rada]

You know I actually have a completely legal way that may well work and
be able to get infinite favours.

It would be unethical to do it (I promised Cuddlebeam to keep it
secret) but wouldn't it be funny if I did it?

(The answer to that question is no, rada. it wouldn't)

On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 11:05 AM, Madeline <j...@iinet.net.au> wrote:
> Pledges aren't a currency and I doubt anyone would support a fine like that.
>
>
>
> On 2017-11-23 11:02, VJ Rada wrote:
>>
>> The rule is pretty broken though tbh. Imagine if Alexis had decided to
>> fine me 2 pledges (which are an asset). Are 2 pledges between 1 shiny
>> and 3,000 favours?
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 11:00 AM, Madeline <j...@iinet.net.au> wrote:
>>>
>>> And it's not even REMOTELY impossible to tell the relative value, you did
>>> so
>>> yourself earlier to say 3000 favours was more than 25 shinies!
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2017-11-23 10:54, VJ Rada wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Arguments: Blue Cards states "The person issuing a Blue Card must, in
>>>> the same message, announce a penalty between 1 shiny and the greater
>>>> of 25 shinies and the amount the bad sport profited from the
>>>> infraction,". It is impossible to tell whether a penalty is between an
>>>> amount in shinies and an amount not in shinies. The rule would be
>>>> incredibly hard to apply should non-shiny penalties apply, so the best
>>>> interests of the game combine with the rule's context to mandate
>>>> shinies-only penalties.
>>>>
>>>> "E CAN additionally, in the same message, determine the distribution
>>>> of the money between Agora and the players(s) harmed"
>>>> This rule consistently uses the word "money". A synonym of "money" is
>>>> "currency". Shinies are a currency, favours are not.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 10:50 AM, Aris Merchant
>>>> <thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I favor this CFJ, and can judge it immediately.
>>>>>
>>>>> -Aris
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 3:49 PM, VJ Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Good, I'm glad o. This Blue Card is legal, but the penalty is not
>>>>>> effective. I call an urgent CFJ with the statement: A blue card can
>>>>>> only have a penalty imposed in shinies.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Alexis and PSS are and should be obviously disqualified...I bar
>>>>>> Telnaior.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 10:45 AM, Owen Jacobson <o...@grimoire.ca>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Nov 22, 2017, at 10:47 AM, ATMunn <iamingodsa...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I, as ADoP, initiate an election for Referee, as the office is now
>>>>>>>> interim.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 11/22/2017 12:49 AM, VJ Rada wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I award myself 3,000 justice favours for successfully pointing
>>>>>>>>> 3,000
>>>>>>>>> fingers. I resign as referee. I intend to call in the pledge, with
>>>>>>>>> agoran consent, that states "I pledge to not point fingers" (or
>>>>>>>>> similar)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I stand for election. I may have a campaign proposal later on.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -o
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>>   From V.J. Rada
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: o can be silly now

[VJ Rada]

Step 1: be at school
Step 2: don't pay attention



On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 11:01 AM, ATMunn <iamingodsa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I certainly can't keep up. There are messages left and right here.
>
>
> On 11/22/2017 7:01 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
>>
>> Yes, I am supposed to be at a party tonight, but am claiming to be sick,
>> sick with the nomic bug.
>> 
>> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
>> p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Nov 22, 2017, at 6:49 PM, Reuben Staley <reuben.sta...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Holy frick, why is everyone on at the same time and able to respond to me
>>> literally seconds after each other?
>>>
>>> Is it due to this game that's happening?
>>>
>>> On 11/22/2017 4:45 PM, Madeline wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Not you! >_<
>>>> On 2017-11-23 10:43, Reuben Staley wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> This entire conversation went way over my head. As far as I understand,
>>>>> I'm being given a blue card and a fine of 3000 favours? Do I have any
>>>>> favours to pay this with?
>>>>>
>>>>> On 11/22/2017 4:34 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Oh I missed the second clause, that clearly allows it. I point my
>>>>>> finger at VJ Rada for giving emself favours illegally and profiting from 
>>>>>> it
>>>>>> and request the issuance of a blue card.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
>>>>>> p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Nov 22, 2017, at 6:22 PM, Madeline <j...@iinet.net.au> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Really guys? The rule says "a penalty between 1 shiny and the greater
>>>>>>> of 25 shinies and the amount the bad sport profited from the 
>>>>>>> infraction". We
>>>>>>> can do it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 2017-11-23 10:07, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No it is not. The rule says we may levy a fine between 1 and 25
>>>>>>>> shinies. Not all favours are equivalent, some may be more valuable than
>>>>>>>> others.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
>>>>>>>> p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Nov 22, 2017, at 5:06 PM, VJ Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This is atextual. Also, economic favours have an actual value of 1
>>>>>>>>> per
>>>>>>>>> shiny. It would cost 3,000 shinies to buy 3,000 favours. This would
>>>>>>>>> not survive a cfj.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 8:57 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
>>>>>>>>> <p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I think we could probably assess a fine of 3000 favours with a
>>>>>>>>>> blue
>>>>>>>>>> card, if we assessed it to be worth a value between 1 and 25
>>>>>>>>>> shinies.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 11/22/2017 04:54 PM, VJ Rada wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I point the finger at trigon 4 being a failure
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 8:52 AM, Kerim Aydin
>>>>>>>>>>> <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I designate o to be next week's silly person.  (week starting
>>>>>>>>>>>> Nov 27th).
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> [If I missed a Silly action last week, my apologies.  But I
>>>>>>>>>>>> think Aris
>>>>>>>>>>>> (on Sun 12th) appointed Trigon to be Silly for the week of
>>>>>>>>>>>> 13th-19th,
>>>>>>>>>>>> and Trigon didn't do anything silly, so there's no-one silly
>>>>>>>>>>>> this week,
>>>>>>>>>>>> and I just appointed someone for next week].
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>   From V.J. Rada
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> ---
>>>> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
>>>> http://www.avg.com
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Trigon
>>
>>
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Resignation, favours, and pledge

[VJ Rada]

The rule is pretty broken though tbh. Imagine if Alexis had decided to
fine me 2 pledges (which are an asset). Are 2 pledges between 1 shiny
and 3,000 favours?

On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 11:00 AM, Madeline <j...@iinet.net.au> wrote:
> And it's not even REMOTELY impossible to tell the relative value, you did so
> yourself earlier to say 3000 favours was more than 25 shinies!
>
>
> On 2017-11-23 10:54, VJ Rada wrote:
>>
>> Arguments: Blue Cards states "The person issuing a Blue Card must, in
>> the same message, announce a penalty between 1 shiny and the greater
>> of 25 shinies and the amount the bad sport profited from the
>> infraction,". It is impossible to tell whether a penalty is between an
>> amount in shinies and an amount not in shinies. The rule would be
>> incredibly hard to apply should non-shiny penalties apply, so the best
>> interests of the game combine with the rule's context to mandate
>> shinies-only penalties.
>>
>> "E CAN additionally, in the same message, determine the distribution
>> of the money between Agora and the players(s) harmed"
>> This rule consistently uses the word "money". A synonym of "money" is
>> "currency". Shinies are a currency, favours are not.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 10:50 AM, Aris Merchant
>> <thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I favor this CFJ, and can judge it immediately.
>>>
>>> -Aris
>>>
>>> On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 3:49 PM, VJ Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Good, I'm glad o. This Blue Card is legal, but the penalty is not
>>>> effective. I call an urgent CFJ with the statement: A blue card can
>>>> only have a penalty imposed in shinies.
>>>>
>>>> Alexis and PSS are and should be obviously disqualified...I bar
>>>> Telnaior.
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 10:45 AM, Owen Jacobson <o...@grimoire.ca>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Nov 22, 2017, at 10:47 AM, ATMunn <iamingodsa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I, as ADoP, initiate an election for Referee, as the office is now
>>>>>> interim.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 11/22/2017 12:49 AM, VJ Rada wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I award myself 3,000 justice favours for successfully pointing 3,000
>>>>>>> fingers. I resign as referee. I intend to call in the pledge, with
>>>>>>> agoran consent, that states "I pledge to not point fingers" (or
>>>>>>> similar)
>>>>>
>>>>> I stand for election. I may have a campaign proposal later on.
>>>>>
>>>>> -o
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>  From V.J. Rada
>>
>>
>>
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Resignation, favours, and pledge

[VJ Rada]

Huh, that is weird but fair enough!

On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 10:57 AM, Madeline <j...@iinet.net.au> wrote:
> SORE WA CHIGAU YO
> "For each Party, there is a currency called Favours in that Party."
>
>
>
> On 2017-11-23 10:54, VJ Rada wrote:
>>
>> Arguments: Blue Cards states "The person issuing a Blue Card must, in
>> the same message, announce a penalty between 1 shiny and the greater
>> of 25 shinies and the amount the bad sport profited from the
>> infraction,". It is impossible to tell whether a penalty is between an
>> amount in shinies and an amount not in shinies. The rule would be
>> incredibly hard to apply should non-shiny penalties apply, so the best
>> interests of the game combine with the rule's context to mandate
>> shinies-only penalties.
>>
>> "E CAN additionally, in the same message, determine the distribution
>> of the money between Agora and the players(s) harmed"
>> This rule consistently uses the word "money". A synonym of "money" is
>> "currency". Shinies are a currency, favours are not.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 10:50 AM, Aris Merchant
>> <thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I favor this CFJ, and can judge it immediately.
>>>
>>> -Aris
>>>
>>> On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 3:49 PM, VJ Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Good, I'm glad o. This Blue Card is legal, but the penalty is not
>>>> effective. I call an urgent CFJ with the statement: A blue card can
>>>> only have a penalty imposed in shinies.
>>>>
>>>> Alexis and PSS are and should be obviously disqualified...I bar
>>>> Telnaior.
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 10:45 AM, Owen Jacobson <o...@grimoire.ca>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Nov 22, 2017, at 10:47 AM, ATMunn <iamingodsa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I, as ADoP, initiate an election for Referee, as the office is now
>>>>>> interim.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 11/22/2017 12:49 AM, VJ Rada wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I award myself 3,000 justice favours for successfully pointing 3,000
>>>>>>> fingers. I resign as referee. I intend to call in the pledge, with
>>>>>>> agoran consent, that states "I pledge to not point fingers" (or
>>>>>>> similar)
>>>>>
>>>>> I stand for election. I may have a campaign proposal later on.
>>>>>
>>>>> -o
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>  From V.J. Rada
>>
>>
>>
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

DIS: Re: BUS: Resignation, favours, and pledge

[VJ Rada]

Arguments: Blue Cards states "The person issuing a Blue Card must, in
the same message, announce a penalty between 1 shiny and the greater
of 25 shinies and the amount the bad sport profited from the
infraction,". It is impossible to tell whether a penalty is between an
amount in shinies and an amount not in shinies. The rule would be
incredibly hard to apply should non-shiny penalties apply, so the best
interests of the game combine with the rule's context to mandate
shinies-only penalties.

"E CAN additionally, in the same message, determine the distribution
of the money between Agora and the players(s) harmed"
This rule consistently uses the word "money". A synonym of "money" is
"currency". Shinies are a currency, favours are not.



On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 10:50 AM, Aris Merchant
<thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I favor this CFJ, and can judge it immediately.
>
> -Aris
>
> On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 3:49 PM, VJ Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Good, I'm glad o. This Blue Card is legal, but the penalty is not
>> effective. I call an urgent CFJ with the statement: A blue card can
>> only have a penalty imposed in shinies.
>>
>> Alexis and PSS are and should be obviously disqualified...I bar Telnaior.
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 10:45 AM, Owen Jacobson <o...@grimoire.ca> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Nov 22, 2017, at 10:47 AM, ATMunn <iamingodsa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I, as ADoP, initiate an election for Referee, as the office is now interim.
>>>>
>>>> On 11/22/2017 12:49 AM, VJ Rada wrote:
>>>>> I award myself 3,000 justice favours for successfully pointing 3,000
>>>>> fingers. I resign as referee. I intend to call in the pledge, with
>>>>> agoran consent, that states "I pledge to not point fingers" (or
>>>>> similar)
>>>
>>> I stand for election. I may have a campaign proposal later on.
>>>
>>> -o
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> From V.J. Rada



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: o can be silly now

[VJ Rada]

No you're good, they're talking about fining me (which I will fight
tooth and nail)

I pointed a finger at you, I suppose Alexis must resolve it.

On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 10:43 AM, Reuben Staley <reuben.sta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> This entire conversation went way over my head. As far as I understand, I'm
> being given a blue card and a fine of 3000 favours? Do I have any favours to
> pay this with?
>
>
> On 11/22/2017 4:34 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
>>
>> Oh I missed the second clause, that clearly allows it. I point my finger
>> at VJ Rada for giving emself favours illegally and profiting from it and
>> request the issuance of a blue card.
>> 
>> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
>> p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Nov 22, 2017, at 6:22 PM, Madeline <j...@iinet.net.au> wrote:
>>>
>>> Really guys? The rule says "a penalty between 1 shiny and the greater of
>>> 25 shinies and the amount the bad sport profited from the infraction". We
>>> can do it.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2017-11-23 10:07, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
>>>>
>>>> No it is not. The rule says we may levy a fine between 1 and 25 shinies.
>>>> Not all favours are equivalent, some may be more valuable than others.
>>>> 
>>>> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
>>>> p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On Nov 22, 2017, at 5:06 PM, VJ Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> This is atextual. Also, economic favours have an actual value of 1 per
>>>>> shiny. It would cost 3,000 shinies to buy 3,000 favours. This would
>>>>> not survive a cfj.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 8:57 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
>>>>> <p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think we could probably assess a fine of 3000 favours with a blue
>>>>>> card, if we assessed it to be worth a value between 1 and 25 shinies.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 11/22/2017 04:54 PM, VJ Rada wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I point the finger at trigon 4 being a failure
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 8:52 AM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I designate o to be next week's silly person.  (week starting Nov
>>>>>>>> 27th).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> [If I missed a Silly action last week, my apologies.  But I think
>>>>>>>> Aris
>>>>>>>> (on Sun 12th) appointed Trigon to be Silly for the week of
>>>>>>>> 13th-19th,
>>>>>>>> and Trigon didn't do anything silly, so there's no-one silly this
>>>>>>>> week,
>>>>>>>> and I just appointed someone for next week].
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>>  From V.J. Rada
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
> --
> Trigon



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Campaign proposal proto

[VJ Rada]

It's a proto, correctly sent to discussion.

I question the wisdom of imposing an obligation on anyone who reads a
particular message. It's not possible to know who reads what. Also,
I'd like not to be punished for not being happy enough please. You
can't tell me what to do! Finally, I voted against emotions for adding
fluff to the rules: this is even more auxiliary fluff that I would
vote against.

On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 10:19 AM, Madeline  wrote:
> Need to TTttPF, and also you forgot Spivak pronouns.
>
>
>
> On 2017-11-23 10:17, Corona wrote:
>>
>> Well, I felt uncomfortable not having a Campaign Proposal if PSS is
>> going to have one, so... I'd rather if y'all checked it for obvious
>> holes, since it looks like it can't be retracted once announced.
>>
>> The idea was that since the Herald, among other things, manages the
>> celebrations, he could have some silly gadgets for celebrations (I was
>> low on ideas). The Red Fireworks are meant to complement the rule that
>> missing deadlines on holidays should be forgiven.
>>
>> I submit my Campaign Proposal for the Herald election:
>> Create a new rule with power 1, name "Fireworks" and text as follows:
>>
>> All types of Fireworks are fixed assets. The Herald is the
>> recordkeepor of all types of Fireworks. The Herald CAN create any type
>> of Fireworks in any player's possession. He SHALL not do so without an
>> appropriate reason, or excessively. The types of Fireworks are:
>>
>> Red Firework - appropriate for holidays. If a player destroys a Red
>> Firework and specifies in the same message any one instance of a rule-
>> or contract-defined time limit in which one or more players
>> SHALL/SHOULD perform an action, then it is ILLEGAL to punish, in any
>> manner, those players for violation of the time limit, until at least
>> two days have passed since the time limit without them having
>> performed the action pertaining to the time limit.
>>
>> Yellow Firework - appropriate for the joyous moments of Agora. If a
>> player destroys a Yellow Firework and, in the same message, writes a
>> celebratory message of at least 20 words, describing the event they
>> wish to celebrate, any player reading that message SHALL set their
>> emotion to Joyous.
>>
>> Blue Firework - appropriate for the tragic moments of Agora. If a
>> player destroys a Blue Firework and, in the same message, writes a
>> mournful message of at least 20 words, describing the event they wish
>> to mourn, any player reading that message SHALL set their emotion to
>> Melancholy.
>
>
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Resignation, favours, and pledge

[VJ Rada]

The lies were not the same every time though (for example: I am
Uruguayan). They were in the form "in the next sentence, I will do
something). So they were seperate.

On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 9:53 AM, VJ Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> i copied and pasted 3,000 lies, yes. they were the same lie, and i
> suppose the cards could have been challenged as such (given messages
> are supposed to be taken as a whole for no faking).
>
> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 9:49 AM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Were they all the same lie?  If so they may just be one violation in total
>> anyway.  (by the same principle of saying "I support" on a single intent
>> 1000 times is only 1 support).
>>
>> On Thu, 23 Nov 2017, VJ Rada wrote:
>>> The violations were just no faking violations, not related to the
>>> reeferee's power.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 9:33 AM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Oh, is there a finger-pointing that I should be doing something about
>>> > because of this clause:
>>> >
>>> >> When a Finger, other than the Arbitor's, is Pointed over
>>> >>  an allegation related to the official duties or powers of the
>>> >>  Referee, then the Arbitor CAN, by announcement, take over the
>>> >> investigation and thereby become the investigator.
>>> >
>>> > It would be amusing if the 3000 violations belatedly came through and
>>> > I got to do this.
>>> >
>>> > It also reveals a hole in the above clause, if the Referee gets to eir
>>> > own punishment before the Arbitor, the Referee can conclude the
>>> > investigation before the Arbitor can do anything about it...
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> From V.J. Rada
>>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> From V.J. Rada



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Resignation, favours, and pledge

[VJ Rada]

i copied and pasted 3,000 lies, yes. they were the same lie, and i
suppose the cards could have been challenged as such (given messages
are supposed to be taken as a whole for no faking).

On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 9:49 AM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote:
>
>
> Were they all the same lie?  If so they may just be one violation in total
> anyway.  (by the same principle of saying "I support" on a single intent
> 1000 times is only 1 support).
>
> On Thu, 23 Nov 2017, VJ Rada wrote:
>> The violations were just no faking violations, not related to the
>> reeferee's power.
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 9:33 AM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > Oh, is there a finger-pointing that I should be doing something about
>> > because of this clause:
>> >
>> >> When a Finger, other than the Arbitor's, is Pointed over
>> >>  an allegation related to the official duties or powers of the
>> >>  Referee, then the Arbitor CAN, by announcement, take over the
>> >> investigation and thereby become the investigator.
>> >
>> > It would be amusing if the 3000 violations belatedly came through and
>> > I got to do this.
>> >
>> > It also reveals a hole in the above clause, if the Referee gets to eir
>> > own punishment before the Arbitor, the Referee can conclude the
>> > investigation before the Arbitor can do anything about it...
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> From V.J. Rada
>>
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Resignation, favours, and pledge

[VJ Rada]

it is a strong expectation in every game that every player can win the
game, and has a decent chance of doing so. that's just what games do.

On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 9:51 AM, VJ Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> in that sense so is every game mechanic in every game ever created.
>
> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 9:50 AM, Corona <liliumalbum.ag...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Yes, but enacting ribbons that everyone has a roughly equal chance of
>> winning is kind of "trading wins"
>>
>> On 11/22/17, Aris Merchant <thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> What about ribbons? One of those can be one by deceit, but most of
>>> them are a matter of skill. What about victory elections, or medals of
>>> honor? None of these are intended to be won by deceit, nor do I think
>>> the players who enacted them each expected to win by them.
>>>
>>> -Aris
>>>
>>> On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 2:43 PM, Corona <liliumalbum.ag...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> I would not vote for such a mechanic unless I estimated, based on past
>>>> experience, my proposal-voting abilities to be above these of other
>>>> players. If it turns out a player is capable of voting on more
>>>> proposals per month than I estimated, they have arguably commited some
>>>> deceit by not correcting my misconception about their voting ability.
>>>> (And perhaps by rarely voting on proposals prior to the win mechanic's
>>>> introduction, even if they had the time and it did not bore them or
>>>> anything)
>>>>
>>>> On 11/22/17, Alexis Hunt <aler...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> That's not true at all. Many meaningful win mechanics are as those in
>>>>> other
>>>>> games: the person who does best at something. For instance, we could
>>>>> decide
>>>>> to award a win to the player who votes on the most proposals in a month;
>>>>> no
>>>>> deceit is necessary for the competition.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Nov 22, 2017, 17:29 Corona, <liliumalbum.ag...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Indeed, if one is not willing to participate in the questionable
>>>>>> practice of trading wins (I'll support your proposal to award yourself
>>>>>> a win if you support mine), every win in nomics must involve some
>>>>>> level of deceit, as one can't force a win, or offer anything less than
>>>>>> a win for a win, as 'wins' are the most valuable 'asset'.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 11/22/17, ATMunn <iamingodsa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> > Yes, me neither, I don't like the idea of breaking the rules just to
>>>>>> prevent
>>>>>> > a win. A win is a win, and if someone wins because of a scam, so
>>>>>> > what?
>>>>>> They
>>>>>> > become the Speaker, and the game moves on.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > On 11/22/2017 3:44 PM, Alex Smith wrote:
>>>>>> >> On Wed, 2017-11-22 at 20:39 +, Alexis Hunt wrote:
>>>>>> >>> Ahh, hmm, I think that might work provided we can get a non-player
>>>>>> >>> to
>>>>>> >>> call sufficient CFJs. Given the volume we couldn't do it with
>>>>>> >>> Shinies
>>>>>> >>> alone.
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> I can do 5, but am unwilling to violate the rules as part of a
>>>>>> >> counterscam. (Also, I haven't thought of good topics for them yet.)
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>
>
>
> --
> From V.J. Rada



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Resignation, favours, and pledge

[VJ Rada]

in that sense so is every game mechanic in every game ever created.

On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 9:50 AM, Corona  wrote:
> Yes, but enacting ribbons that everyone has a roughly equal chance of
> winning is kind of "trading wins"
>
> On 11/22/17, Aris Merchant  wrote:
>> What about ribbons? One of those can be one by deceit, but most of
>> them are a matter of skill. What about victory elections, or medals of
>> honor? None of these are intended to be won by deceit, nor do I think
>> the players who enacted them each expected to win by them.
>>
>> -Aris
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 2:43 PM, Corona 
>> wrote:
>>> I would not vote for such a mechanic unless I estimated, based on past
>>> experience, my proposal-voting abilities to be above these of other
>>> players. If it turns out a player is capable of voting on more
>>> proposals per month than I estimated, they have arguably commited some
>>> deceit by not correcting my misconception about their voting ability.
>>> (And perhaps by rarely voting on proposals prior to the win mechanic's
>>> introduction, even if they had the time and it did not bore them or
>>> anything)
>>>
>>> On 11/22/17, Alexis Hunt  wrote:
 That's not true at all. Many meaningful win mechanics are as those in
 other
 games: the person who does best at something. For instance, we could
 decide
 to award a win to the player who votes on the most proposals in a month;
 no
 deceit is necessary for the competition.

 On Wed, Nov 22, 2017, 17:29 Corona,  wrote:

> Indeed, if one is not willing to participate in the questionable
> practice of trading wins (I'll support your proposal to award yourself
> a win if you support mine), every win in nomics must involve some
> level of deceit, as one can't force a win, or offer anything less than
> a win for a win, as 'wins' are the most valuable 'asset'.
>
> On 11/22/17, ATMunn  wrote:
> > Yes, me neither, I don't like the idea of breaking the rules just to
> prevent
> > a win. A win is a win, and if someone wins because of a scam, so
> > what?
> They
> > become the Speaker, and the game moves on.
> >
> > On 11/22/2017 3:44 PM, Alex Smith wrote:
> >> On Wed, 2017-11-22 at 20:39 +, Alexis Hunt wrote:
> >>> Ahh, hmm, I think that might work provided we can get a non-player
> >>> to
> >>> call sufficient CFJs. Given the volume we couldn't do it with
> >>> Shinies
> >>> alone.
> >>
> >> I can do 5, but am unwilling to violate the rules as part of a
> >> counterscam. (Also, I haven't thought of good topics for them yet.)
> >>
> >
>

>>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Resignation, favours, and pledge

[VJ Rada]

The violations were just no faking violations, not related to the
reeferee's power.

On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 9:33 AM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
>
>
> Oh, is there a finger-pointing that I should be doing something about
> because of this clause:
>
>> When a Finger, other than the Arbitor's, is Pointed over
>>  an allegation related to the official duties or powers of the
>>  Referee, then the Arbitor CAN, by announcement, take over the
>> investigation and thereby become the investigator.
>
> It would be amusing if the 3000 violations belatedly came through and
> I got to do this.
>
> It also reveals a hole in the above clause, if the Referee gets to eir
> own punishment before the Arbitor, the Referee can conclude the
> investigation before the Arbitor can do anything about it...
>
>
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: o can be silly now

[VJ Rada]

This is atextual. Also, economic favours have an actual value of 1 per
shiny. It would cost 3,000 shinies to buy 3,000 favours. This would
not survive a cfj.

On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 8:57 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
<p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think we could probably assess a fine of 3000 favours with a blue
> card, if we assessed it to be worth a value between 1 and 25 shinies.
>
> On 11/22/2017 04:54 PM, VJ Rada wrote:
>> I point the finger at trigon 4 being a failure
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 8:52 AM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote:
>>>
>>> I designate o to be next week's silly person.  (week starting Nov 27th).
>>>
>>>
>>> [If I missed a Silly action last week, my apologies.  But I think Aris
>>> (on Sun 12th) appointed Trigon to be Silly for the week of 13th-19th,
>>> and Trigon didn't do anything silly, so there's no-one silly this week,
>>> and I just appointed someone for next week].
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> 
> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
>
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Resignation, favours, and pledge

[VJ Rada]

Character limit is good to know: means that if I ever do something
this stupid again I'll just email everybody individually (yes, I
suspected it was obviously not actually gmail's fault, the message
sent just fine)

And yes, "thanks Obama" is not a view on the real Obama. And your hard
anti-meme stance, PSS, is irreconcilable with the fact that there is
more than one politician in our very game right now with jokes
referencing real politicians ("Malcolm Turncoat")

On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 8:59 AM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, 23 Nov 2017, VJ Rada wrote:
>> it wasn't going to be rule-breaking (was pledge-breaking). I did
>> actually commit 3,000 infractions and give myself 3,000 actual cards.
>> just gmail sucks. thaks obama.
>
> omd used to have a size-limit on messages that e explicitly turned off
> for the Rulekeepor (the FLR was over the limit).  Can't remember what the
> limit was or if it's still on.
>
> [PSS - 'thanks Obama' is a joke meme, even Obama used it...]
>
>
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Resignation, favours, and pledge

[VJ Rada]

it wasn't going to be rule-breaking (was pledge-breaking). I did
actually commit 3,000 infractions and give myself 3,000 actual cards.
just gmail sucks. thaks obama.

On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 8:49 AM, Alexis Hunt  wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Nov 2017 at 15:52 Kerim Aydin  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, 22 Nov 2017, Alex Smith wrote:
>> > On Wed, 2017-11-22 at 20:39 +, Alexis Hunt wrote:
>> > > Ahh, hmm, I think that might work provided we can get a non-player to
>> > > call sufficient CFJs. Given the volume we couldn't do it with Shinies
>> > > alone.
>> >
>> > I can do 5, but am unwilling to violate the rules as part of a
>> > counterscam. (Also, I haven't thought of good topics for them yet.)
>>
>> I think in the volume needed, we're looking at rules-violation regardless,
>> someone can correct me if I'm wrong.  (I also would not be up to rules-
>> breaking to stop a Win.  A dictatorship maybe but not just a win).
>>
>> If we *did* go that route, I'd number the CFJs fractionally and list
>> them all under a single whole number, so I wouldn't use CFJs that actually
>> have some interest for anyone.
>>
>
> I'm more willing to use rule-breaking to stop a win that is itself a
> product of blatant rule-breaking. I would not use it for a different kind
> of win.



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Resignation, favours, and pledge

[VJ Rada]

The Oxford comma would be incorrect there. I think if you had meant it
the way alexis reads it you would have said "a player or person who"
instead of "a player or a person who" but it is true gramamatical
ambiguity.

On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 8:44 AM, Aris Merchant
<thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Is it worth CFJing then? It's certainly intended to be the former, and the
> serial comma is only required in lists, right?
>
> -Aris
>
> On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 1:43 PM Alexis Hunt <aler...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I read that as (a player or a person)... not a player or (a person ...).
>>
>> On Wed, 22 Nov 2017 at 16:42 VJ Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Oh, sorry, correct.
>> >
>> > On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 8:40 AM, Aris Merchant
>> > <thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > You are a player. Read it again. Also, sorry for the links.
>> > >
>> > > -Aris
>> > >
>> > > On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 1:38 PM VJ Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> My most recent deregistration was with my consent? It was back in
>> > august.
>> > >>
>> > >> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 8:35 AM, Aris Merchant
>> > >> <thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > >> > On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 11:15 AM Alexis Hunt <aler...@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> > >> >
>> > >> >> As PSS said, the favour award succeeds. There is no requirement
>> that
>> > >> >> fingers be pointed to award favours. That said, this is an enormous
>> > >> abuse
>> > >> >> of official power; V.J. Rada has shown emself unfit to be entrusted
>> > with
>> > >> >> the power of an office. Moreover, e deserves to have the profits of
>> > this
>> > >> >> scam taken from em.
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >> As e points out, an attainder cannot act fast enough to deny em a
>> > win.
>> > >> As
>> > >> >> far as I can tell, there are three ways to defeat eir scam. First,
>> > >> another
>> > >> >> officer authorized to issue favours violates the rules as well, in
>> > >> order to
>> > >> >> award sufficient countervailing favours to prevent V.J. Rada from
>> > >> >> sufficiently disrupting the game state (in particular by amassing
>> > >> balloons
>> > >> >> to gain significant voting power). Second, we could ratify it out
>> of
>> > >> >> existence by proposal.
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >> I have strong distate for ratification, so that is a last resort to
>> > me.
>> > >> >> Thus, I think the correct solution here is to have another officer
>> > issue
>> > >> >> illegal favours to a number of people, each of whom influences
>> > >> politicians
>> > >> >> sufficiently such that V.J. Rada cannot become an advisor, and
>> agrees
>> > >> not
>> > >> >> to use eir power. Then we pass a proposal absolving the officer of
>> > >> >> responsibility. This, however, requires more officers to break the
>> > law,
>> > >> >> which I am also loathe to do.
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >> There is one alternate approach, however, that avoids doing
>> anything
>> > >> >> outright illegal. It is incredibly harsh---I'm using it as a last
>> > >> >> resort---and if we go this route then it should absolutely be
>> undone
>> > >> >> quickly by proposal, but I'm going to set it in motion now so that
>> it
>> > >> can
>> > >> >> be finalized in time to prevent V.J. Rada from winning. If Agora
>> does
>> > >> not
>> > >> >> agree on implementing it, then we can go with the other approach.
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >> First off, an error in the FLR (which I will correct afterward).
>> PSS
>> > >> >> mis-applied the effects of Proposal 7918, so the correct text of
>> Rule
>> > >> 2160
>> > >> >> is as follows:
>> > >> >> {{{
>> > >> >>   A rule which purports to allow a person (a deputy) to perform
>> > an
>> &

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Resignation, favours, and pledge

[VJ Rada]

Oh, sorry, correct.

On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 8:40 AM, Aris Merchant
<thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> You are a player. Read it again. Also, sorry for the links.
>
> -Aris
>
> On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 1:38 PM VJ Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> My most recent deregistration was with my consent? It was back in august.
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 8:35 AM, Aris Merchant
>> <thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 11:15 AM Alexis Hunt <aler...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> As PSS said, the favour award succeeds. There is no requirement that
>> >> fingers be pointed to award favours. That said, this is an enormous
>> abuse
>> >> of official power; V.J. Rada has shown emself unfit to be entrusted with
>> >> the power of an office. Moreover, e deserves to have the profits of this
>> >> scam taken from em.
>> >>
>> >> As e points out, an attainder cannot act fast enough to deny em a win.
>> As
>> >> far as I can tell, there are three ways to defeat eir scam. First,
>> another
>> >> officer authorized to issue favours violates the rules as well, in
>> order to
>> >> award sufficient countervailing favours to prevent V.J. Rada from
>> >> sufficiently disrupting the game state (in particular by amassing
>> balloons
>> >> to gain significant voting power). Second, we could ratify it out of
>> >> existence by proposal.
>> >>
>> >> I have strong distate for ratification, so that is a last resort to me.
>> >> Thus, I think the correct solution here is to have another officer issue
>> >> illegal favours to a number of people, each of whom influences
>> politicians
>> >> sufficiently such that V.J. Rada cannot become an advisor, and agrees
>> not
>> >> to use eir power. Then we pass a proposal absolving the officer of
>> >> responsibility. This, however, requires more officers to break the law,
>> >> which I am also loathe to do.
>> >>
>> >> There is one alternate approach, however, that avoids doing anything
>> >> outright illegal. It is incredibly harsh---I'm using it as a last
>> >> resort---and if we go this route then it should absolutely be undone
>> >> quickly by proposal, but I'm going to set it in motion now so that it
>> can
>> >> be finalized in time to prevent V.J. Rada from winning. If Agora does
>> not
>> >> agree on implementing it, then we can go with the other approach.
>> >>
>> >> First off, an error in the FLR (which I will correct afterward). PSS
>> >> mis-applied the effects of Proposal 7918, so the correct text of Rule
>> 2160
>> >> is as follows:
>> >> {{{
>> >>   A rule which purports to allow a person (a deputy) to perform an
>> >>   action via normal deputisation or special deputisation for an
>> >>   office thereby allows them to perform the action as if e held the
>> >>   office, as long as
>> >>
>> >>   1. it would be POSSIBLE for the deputy to perform the action,
>> >>  other than by deputisation, if e held the office, and
>> >>
>> >>   2. the deputy, when performing the action, announces that e
>> >>is doing so by the appropriate form of deputisation.
>> >>
>> >>   Only this rule may allow normal deputisation. Any rule may allow
>> >>   special deputisation.
>> >>
>> >>   A player CAN perform an action as if e held a particular office,
>> >>   via normal deputisation, if all of the following are true:
>> >>
>> >>   1. The rules require the holder of that office, by virtue of
>> >>  holding that office, to perform the action. This requirement is
>> >>  fulfilled by the deputy performing the action.
>> >>
>> >>   2. Either (i) A time limit by which the rules require the action
>> >>  to be performed has expired or (ii) the office is vacant.
>> >>
>> >>   3. Either (i) the office is vacant; or (ii) the aforementioned
>> >>  time limit expired more than fourteen days ago; or (iii) the
>> >>  deputy announced between two and fourteen days earlier that e
>> >>  intended to deputise for that office for the purposes of the
>> >>  particular action.
>&

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Resignation, favours, and pledge

[VJ Rada]

My most recent deregistration was with my consent? It was back in august.

On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 8:35 AM, Aris Merchant
 wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 11:15 AM Alexis Hunt  wrote:
>
>> As PSS said, the favour award succeeds. There is no requirement that
>> fingers be pointed to award favours. That said, this is an enormous abuse
>> of official power; V.J. Rada has shown emself unfit to be entrusted with
>> the power of an office. Moreover, e deserves to have the profits of this
>> scam taken from em.
>>
>> As e points out, an attainder cannot act fast enough to deny em a win. As
>> far as I can tell, there are three ways to defeat eir scam. First, another
>> officer authorized to issue favours violates the rules as well, in order to
>> award sufficient countervailing favours to prevent V.J. Rada from
>> sufficiently disrupting the game state (in particular by amassing balloons
>> to gain significant voting power). Second, we could ratify it out of
>> existence by proposal.
>>
>> I have strong distate for ratification, so that is a last resort to me.
>> Thus, I think the correct solution here is to have another officer issue
>> illegal favours to a number of people, each of whom influences politicians
>> sufficiently such that V.J. Rada cannot become an advisor, and agrees not
>> to use eir power. Then we pass a proposal absolving the officer of
>> responsibility. This, however, requires more officers to break the law,
>> which I am also loathe to do.
>>
>> There is one alternate approach, however, that avoids doing anything
>> outright illegal. It is incredibly harsh---I'm using it as a last
>> resort---and if we go this route then it should absolutely be undone
>> quickly by proposal, but I'm going to set it in motion now so that it can
>> be finalized in time to prevent V.J. Rada from winning. If Agora does not
>> agree on implementing it, then we can go with the other approach.
>>
>> First off, an error in the FLR (which I will correct afterward). PSS
>> mis-applied the effects of Proposal 7918, so the correct text of Rule 2160
>> is as follows:
>> {{{
>>   A rule which purports to allow a person (a deputy) to perform an
>>   action via normal deputisation or special deputisation for an
>>   office thereby allows them to perform the action as if e held the
>>   office, as long as
>>
>>   1. it would be POSSIBLE for the deputy to perform the action,
>>  other than by deputisation, if e held the office, and
>>
>>   2. the deputy, when performing the action, announces that e
>>is doing so by the appropriate form of deputisation.
>>
>>   Only this rule may allow normal deputisation. Any rule may allow
>>   special deputisation.
>>
>>   A player CAN perform an action as if e held a particular office,
>>   via normal deputisation, if all of the following are true:
>>
>>   1. The rules require the holder of that office, by virtue of
>>  holding that office, to perform the action. This requirement is
>>  fulfilled by the deputy performing the action.
>>
>>   2. Either (i) A time limit by which the rules require the action
>>  to be performed has expired or (ii) the office is vacant.
>>
>>   3. Either (i) the office is vacant; or (ii) the aforementioned
>>  time limit expired more than fourteen days ago; or (iii) the
>>  deputy announced between two and fourteen days earlier that e
>>  intended to deputise for that office for the purposes of the
>>  particular action.
>>
>>   When a player deputises via normal deputisation for an elected
>>   office, e becomes the holder of that office.
>> }}}
>>
>> Thus, although the FLR does not indicate this, it is in fact possible to
>> deputise for a vacant office before any time limits have expired. I Point
>> my Finger at myself, alleging that I violated the rules by sending this
>> message (even though I didn't). I deputise for Referee to declare this
>> Finger-Pointing to be Shenanigans.
>>
>> Now that I hold the office of Referee (and preventing it from being
>> reclaimed by someone who can abuse it), I issue a Dive Cabinet Order,
>> issuing a Black Card to V.J. Rada for betraying the good faith placed in em
>> as an officer by Agora. Agora deliberately voted to give officers
>> significant, game-disrupting power in maintenance of a complex mechanical
>> system, and so this abuse is one of the greatest contempts of the rules
>> that can possibly be committed. In particular, V.J. Rada is set to win as a
>> result of these violations, which would be horrifically unjust, and a Black
>> Card is the only available punishment which will deny em eir victory.
>>
>> Now, the above may seem IMPOSSIBLE, as Rule 2507 says that Black Cards
>> cannot be issued to players. However, it does not contain a claim of
>> precedence over other rules in this regard, and Rule 2451 authorizes me to
>>