Re: DIS: [Draft Proposal] Sunlight is the Best Disinfectant
> > > Any action performed by sending a message is performed at the time
> > > date-stamped on that message. Actions in messages (including their
> > > contained
> > > documents) are performed in the order they appear in the message, unless
> > > otherwise specified. If the performer of an action in a message is
> > > unreasonably unclear, the action is canceled and does not occur.
> >
> > Is the "unreasonably" needed? By-announcement already has an unqualified
> > "clear" as a requirement.
>
> Maybe not? My concern is that I still want registrations to work, and
> we have no identity to tie someone to until they're registered.
Good point. Come to think of it, it may even be unclear to you who I am.
However, two new thoughts:
* "If the performer ... is unclear" could be interpreted to mean they didn't
write clearly, as in "Could you be more clear?".
* What if the performer is different from the message sender? Here's a
contrived example. (The example is probably longer than the magnitude of this
nit warrants, but what am I here for if not coming up with silly
situations...)
Suppose Alice and Bob are both parties to the
following contract:
{
Figs are an asset. Any party CAN by announcement transfer a Fig from any
player to any other player. Parties can also act on behalf of each other to
transfer Figs.
"Rotating the Figs" is shorthand for causing one Fig to be transferred from
Alice to Bob and one from Bob to Alice.
}
If Bob sends a message, clearly from Bob, saying "I Rotate the Figs", it may
be unclear who exactly is performing the Fig-transferring actions, since the
contract lets Bob either do it directly or by acting on behalf of Alice.
However, the end result is clear.
It's possible we'd want this to fail anyway, but I think it would be an
unexpected surprise if this provision that's at first glance only about
message senders comes into play here. Should probably be handled by other
rules if at all.
A couple of ideas:
1. Modify the definition of "public" to require that it not be unreasonably
unclear who sent it.
2. Change the phrasing here: "If it's unclear who sent a message, actions taken
in the message are cancelled and do not occur."
I don't know if #1 would have extra consequences, but I do like the fact that
rather than one rule saying "an action happened" and another saying "no it
didn't; it's cancelled!" we simply have that it couldn't have happened to start
with.
> > > Retitle Rule 2518 from "Determinacy" to "Don't Even Think About It".
> > >
> > > Amend Rule 2518, "Don't Even Think About It", by changing it to read in
> > > full:
> > >
> > > The following terms are defined:
> > >
> > > 1. Clear: If something is reasonably obvious (especially, as
> > > applicable, by
> > > being reasonably visible and easy to understand), it is clear;
> > > otherwise
> > > it is unclear.
> > >
> > > 2. Ambiguous: If something has multiple reasonable interpretations
> > > that are substantively different and non-trivial to select between,
> > > it is ambiguous; otherwise it is unambiguous.
> > >
> > > 3. Conspicuous: If a text stands out so as to be visible with little
> > > effort,
> > > it is conspicuous; otherwise it is inconspicuous.
> > >
> > > 4. Obfuscated: If a text has been rendered hard to understand at a
> > > glance,
> > > it is obfuscated; otherwise it is unobfuscated.
> > >
> > > 5. Determinate: If a value can be reasonably determined (without
> > > circularity or paradox) from information reasonably available, and
> > > it
> > > does not alternate indefinitely between values, then the value is
> > > considered to be determinate; otherwise it is indeterminate.
> > >
> > > 6. Extricable: A condition is extricable if it is not unclear,
> > > ambiguous,
> > > circular, inconsistent, or paradoxical, does not depend on
> > > information
> > > that is indeterminate, and does not otherwise require an
> > > unreasonable
> > > effort to resolve; otherwise it is inextricable.
> >
> > I'm mildly against most of this change to 2518, unless you have an
> > argument that these defenitions are particularly helpful. (Did the
> > case of G.'s buried vote turn on one of these?)
> >
> > My first impression reading this was that a dictionary is sprouting from
> > the ruleset, which I personally prefer to be shorter where possible.
>
> My reasoning for adding these is that these words are, well, a bit
> confusing. What's the difference between clear and unobfuscated?
> What's the difference between conspicuous and clear? Yes, you can
> resolve most of these by use of dictionaries, but they're nuanced
> enough that you might end up finding that different dictionaries give
> definitions that conflict.
>
> Let me give "clear" as an example, because I think that's one of the
> messier ones. Google gives "easy to perceive, understand, or
>
Re: DIS: [Draft Proposal] Sunlight is the Best Disinfectant
On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 9:17 PM Falsifian via agora-discussion wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 16, 2020 at 10:25:40AM -0800, Aris Merchant via agora-discussion > wrote: > > Alright! Here's a new proto of my proposal, "Sunlight is the Best > > Disinfectant", from a few months ago. > > > > Major changes from my last version: > > 1. Break rule 478 into two rules (it's getting really long, especially > > if you consider the annotations). > > 2. Remove the unpopular "by notification" phrasing. > > 3. Change the arbitrary "registered within the last month" to a simple > > restriction that the performer of a message must be reasonably clear. > > That gives the judiciary license to interpret it in light of > > experience, common sense, and customary practice. > > > > If you weren't around for, or don't remember, my last version, you can > > just read the proposal afresh! Questions and comments are, as always, > > welcome. > > > > -Aris > > Thanks Aris. Could you remind us of the overall purpose of the changes? > Here's a quote from your July 1 email; does that cover it? > > > I'm working on a proposal to deal with hidden actions (such a G.'s burried > > vote). It'll also handle cases where the identity of the player sending a > > message is unclear. I'm done drafting the core, but I need to handle some > > technical and confirming amendments; I should have a proto out in the next > > day or two. Just letting everyone know so we avoid duplication of effort. > > Some comments inline... That more or less covers it, yes. Basically, I want to make our action standards clearer and stronger. It was a response to that incident and also the personhood shenanigans we had with Greg and the other person who wouldn't reveal their identity. However, it's not a narrow fix proposal, it's more a "okay, we have some potential problems, time to clean up these rules" sort of thing. > > --- > > > > Title: Sunlight is the Best Disinfectant > > Adoption index: 3.0 > > Author: Aris > > Co-authors: nch, G., Jason > > > > > > Amend Rule 2202, "Ratification Without Objection", by deleting: > > > > A public document is part (possibly all) of a public message. > > > > Amend Rule 478, "Fora", by replacing: > > > > A public message is a message sent via a public forum, or sent to > > all players and containing a clear designation of intent to be > > public. A rule can also designate that a part of one public > > message is considered a public message in its own right. To > > "publish" or "announce" something is to send a public message > > whose body contains that thing. To do something "publicly" is > > to do that thing within a public message. > > > > Where the rules define an action that a person CAN perform "by > > announcement", that person performs that action by unambiguously > > and clearly specifying the action and announcing that e performs > > it. Any action performed by sending a message is performed at the > > time date-stamped on that message. Actions in messages (including > > sub-messages) are performed in the order they appear in the > > message, unless otherwise specified. > > > > with: > > > > A public message is a message sent via a public forum, or sent to > > all players and containing a clear designation of intent to be > > public. A document is part (possibly all) of a message. To "publish" or > > "announce" something is to send a public message whose body contains that > > thing. To do something "publicly" is to do that thing within a public > > message. > > > > Enact a new power 3.0 rule, entitled "Actions in Messages", > > with the following text: > > > > Where the rules define an action that a person CAN perform "by > > announcement", that person performs that action by specifying the > > action and announcing that e performs it, all unambiguously and clearly. > > > > A notice is a document specifying conspicuously, clearly, and without > > obfuscation all information which the rules require that type of notice to > > contain to be valid. A notice must be public, unless a recipient is > > specified by the enabling rule. > > > > Any action performed by sending a message is performed at the time > > date-stamped on that message. Actions in messages (including their > > contained > > documents) are performed in the order they appear in the message, unless > > otherwise specified. If the performer of an action in a message is > > unreasonably unclear, the action is canceled and does not occur. > > Is the "unreasonably" needed? By-announcement already has an unqualified > "clear" as a requirement. Maybe not? My concern is that I still want registrations to work, and we have no identity to tie someone to until they're registered. > > Retitle Rule 2518 from "Determinacy" to "Don't Even Think About It". > > > > Amend Rule 2518, "Don't Even Think About It", by changing it to read in > > full: > > > > The following terms are defined: > > > > 1. Clear: If
Re: DIS: [Draft Proposal] Sunlight is the Best Disinfectant
On Mon, Nov 16, 2020 at 10:25:40AM -0800, Aris Merchant via agora-discussion wrote: > Alright! Here's a new proto of my proposal, "Sunlight is the Best > Disinfectant", from a few months ago. > > Major changes from my last version: > 1. Break rule 478 into two rules (it's getting really long, especially > if you consider the annotations). > 2. Remove the unpopular "by notification" phrasing. > 3. Change the arbitrary "registered within the last month" to a simple > restriction that the performer of a message must be reasonably clear. > That gives the judiciary license to interpret it in light of > experience, common sense, and customary practice. > > If you weren't around for, or don't remember, my last version, you can > just read the proposal afresh! Questions and comments are, as always, > welcome. > > -Aris Thanks Aris. Could you remind us of the overall purpose of the changes? Here's a quote from your July 1 email; does that cover it? > I'm working on a proposal to deal with hidden actions (such a G.'s burried > vote). It'll also handle cases where the identity of the player sending a > message is unclear. I'm done drafting the core, but I need to handle some > technical and confirming amendments; I should have a proto out in the next > day or two. Just letting everyone know so we avoid duplication of effort. Some comments inline... > --- > > Title: Sunlight is the Best Disinfectant > Adoption index: 3.0 > Author: Aris > Co-authors: nch, G., Jason > > > Amend Rule 2202, "Ratification Without Objection", by deleting: > > A public document is part (possibly all) of a public message. > > Amend Rule 478, "Fora", by replacing: > > A public message is a message sent via a public forum, or sent to > all players and containing a clear designation of intent to be > public. A rule can also designate that a part of one public > message is considered a public message in its own right. To > "publish" or "announce" something is to send a public message > whose body contains that thing. To do something "publicly" is > to do that thing within a public message. > > Where the rules define an action that a person CAN perform "by > announcement", that person performs that action by unambiguously > and clearly specifying the action and announcing that e performs > it. Any action performed by sending a message is performed at the > time date-stamped on that message. Actions in messages (including > sub-messages) are performed in the order they appear in the > message, unless otherwise specified. > > with: > > A public message is a message sent via a public forum, or sent to > all players and containing a clear designation of intent to be > public. A document is part (possibly all) of a message. To "publish" or > "announce" something is to send a public message whose body contains that > thing. To do something "publicly" is to do that thing within a public > message. > > Enact a new power 3.0 rule, entitled "Actions in Messages", > with the following text: > > Where the rules define an action that a person CAN perform "by > announcement", that person performs that action by specifying the > action and announcing that e performs it, all unambiguously and clearly. > > A notice is a document specifying conspicuously, clearly, and without > obfuscation all information which the rules require that type of notice to > contain to be valid. A notice must be public, unless a recipient is > specified by the enabling rule. > > Any action performed by sending a message is performed at the time > date-stamped on that message. Actions in messages (including their contained > documents) are performed in the order they appear in the message, unless > otherwise specified. If the performer of an action in a message is > unreasonably unclear, the action is canceled and does not occur. Is the "unreasonably" needed? By-announcement already has an unqualified "clear" as a requirement. > Retitle Rule 2518 from "Determinacy" to "Don't Even Think About It". > > Amend Rule 2518, "Don't Even Think About It", by changing it to read in full: > > The following terms are defined: > > 1. Clear: If something is reasonably obvious (especially, as applicable, by > being reasonably visible and easy to understand), it is clear; otherwise > it is unclear. > > 2. Ambiguous: If something has multiple reasonable interpretations > that are substantively different and non-trivial to select between, > it is ambiguous; otherwise it is unambiguous. > > 3. Conspicuous: If a text stands out so as to be visible with little > effort, > it is conspicuous; otherwise it is inconspicuous. > > 4. Obfuscated: If a text has been rendered hard to understand at a glance, > it is obfuscated; otherwise it is unobfuscated. > > 5. Determinate: If a value can be reasonably determined (without > circularity or paradox) from
DIS: [Draft Proposal] Sunlight is the Best Disinfectant
Alright! Here's a new proto of my proposal, "Sunlight is the Best Disinfectant", from a few months ago. Major changes from my last version: 1. Break rule 478 into two rules (it's getting really long, especially if you consider the annotations). 2. Remove the unpopular "by notification" phrasing. 3. Change the arbitrary "registered within the last month" to a simple restriction that the performer of a message must be reasonably clear. That gives the judiciary license to interpret it in light of experience, common sense, and customary practice. If you weren't around for, or don't remember, my last version, you can just read the proposal afresh! Questions and comments are, as always, welcome. -Aris --- Title: Sunlight is the Best Disinfectant Adoption index: 3.0 Author: Aris Co-authors: nch, G., Jason Amend Rule 2202, "Ratification Without Objection", by deleting: A public document is part (possibly all) of a public message. Amend Rule 478, "Fora", by replacing: A public message is a message sent via a public forum, or sent to all players and containing a clear designation of intent to be public. A rule can also designate that a part of one public message is considered a public message in its own right. To "publish" or "announce" something is to send a public message whose body contains that thing. To do something "publicly" is to do that thing within a public message. Where the rules define an action that a person CAN perform "by announcement", that person performs that action by unambiguously and clearly specifying the action and announcing that e performs it. Any action performed by sending a message is performed at the time date-stamped on that message. Actions in messages (including sub-messages) are performed in the order they appear in the message, unless otherwise specified. with: A public message is a message sent via a public forum, or sent to all players and containing a clear designation of intent to be public. A document is part (possibly all) of a message. To "publish" or "announce" something is to send a public message whose body contains that thing. To do something "publicly" is to do that thing within a public message. Enact a new power 3.0 rule, entitled "Actions in Messages", with the following text: Where the rules define an action that a person CAN perform "by announcement", that person performs that action by specifying the action and announcing that e performs it, all unambiguously and clearly. A notice is a document specifying conspicuously, clearly, and without obfuscation all information which the rules require that type of notice to contain to be valid. A notice must be public, unless a recipient is specified by the enabling rule. Any action performed by sending a message is performed at the time date-stamped on that message. Actions in messages (including their contained documents) are performed in the order they appear in the message, unless otherwise specified. If the performer of an action in a message is unreasonably unclear, the action is canceled and does not occur. Retitle Rule 2518 from "Determinacy" to "Don't Even Think About It". Amend Rule 2518, "Don't Even Think About It", by changing it to read in full: The following terms are defined: 1. Clear: If something is reasonably obvious (especially, as applicable, by being reasonably visible and easy to understand), it is clear; otherwise it is unclear. 2. Ambiguous: If something has multiple reasonable interpretations that are substantively different and non-trivial to select between, it is ambiguous; otherwise it is unambiguous. 3. Conspicuous: If a text stands out so as to be visible with little effort, it is conspicuous; otherwise it is inconspicuous. 4. Obfuscated: If a text has been rendered hard to understand at a glance, it is obfuscated; otherwise it is unobfuscated. 5. Determinate: If a value can be reasonably determined (without circularity or paradox) from information reasonably available, and it does not alternate indefinitely between values, then the value is considered to be determinate; otherwise it is indeterminate. 6. Extricable: A condition is extricable if it is not unclear, ambiguous, circular, inconsistent, or paradoxical, does not depend on information that is indeterminate, and does not otherwise require an unreasonable effort to resolve; otherwise it is inextricable. Amend Rule 208, "Resolving Agoran Decisions", by replacing: The vote collector for an unresolved Agoran decision CAN resolve it by announcement, indicating the outcome. If it was required to be initiated, then e SHALL resolve it in a timely fashion after the end of the voting period. To be EFFECTIVE, such an attempt must satisfy the following conditions: 1. It is published after the voting period has ended. 2. It clearly identifies the
