Re: ***UNCHECKED*** Re: DIS: PROTO: [Proposal] Clearing up language confusion for new players

[ATMunn .]

I had no idea that website existed. That would have been useful as a new
player (although by now I know pretty much all of them)

On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 2:25 PM, Aris Merchant <
thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 11:15 AM, Alex Smith 
> wrote:
> > On Thu, 2017-10-12 at 11:04 -0700, Gaelan Steele wrote:
> >> If we do this all (doesn’t seem terribly necessary) I’d say something
> >> like “understandable to an average English speaker.” This lets us
> >> avoid grammar-nazi arguments about if something counts as
> >> English(TM). (grammar issues, funner, deja vu)
> >
> > I'd argue that statements like TIYAEOTISIDTIDFTHPAFALT aren't
> > understandable to an average English speaker, but nonetheless used to
> > be understandable to the majority of Agorans.
>
> Pardon? I'd heard ATEOISIDTIDWHPAFALT
> (http://zenith.homelinux.net/agora_acronyms.php) but not this one,
> although they're clearly realated.
>
> -Aris
>

Re: DIS: PROTO: [Proposal] Clearing up language confusion for new players

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

I agree that Agora should be language-agnostic for the most part.


On 10/12/2017 09:47 AM, Josh T wrote:
I object to this for hopefully obvious reasons, given my history with 
playing with language.


天火狐

On 12 October 2017 at 09:34, ATMunn . > wrote:


Title: "Clearing up Language Confusion" [CuLC in short]
Author: ATMunn
AI: 1

Create a power-1 rule titled "The Language of Agora"
{
A language is a set of symbols, sounds and rules used to
communicate information.
The official language that should be used in all Agoran fora is
Spivak.

The Spivak language is defined as being nearly identical to
English except for the following:
* The pronouns "he," "she," and "they" have been replaced with "e"
* The pronouns "him," "her," and "them" have been replaced with "em"
* The adjectives "his," "her," and "their" have been replaced with
"eir"
* The pronouns "his," "hers," and "theirs" have been replaced with
"eirs"
* The pronouns "himself," "herself," and "themself" have been
replaced with "emself"
}

Let me know what you think. I've had this idea for a little while
now, as a way to make it clear for new players why we use these
abnormal pronouns; and now seems like a great time as the pend
cost is only 1 shiny, so I might as well take advantage of that
while I can.

Re: ***UNCHECKED*** Re: Re: DIS: PROTO: [Proposal] Clearing up language confusion for new players

[Aris Merchant]

A SHALL NOT on registering, under any circumstances, is probably a bad
idea. I'd tend to just go with the official language thing instead.

-Aris

On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 11:54 AM, Gaelan Steele  wrote:
> How about this: “Public messages must be communicated using a form of 
> communication that can be interpreted by all players without unreasonable 
> effort. People SHALL NOT register if they are not capable in communicating in 
> such a fashion, or understanding communications understood by other players.”
>
> Could use some ironing out, but I think it’s a good start.
>
> Gaelan
>
>> On Oct 12, 2017, at 11:22 AM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Well, the interesting thing to me is that we don't codify (in the Rules)
>> that English is our official language.  We used to say that a person was
>> someone who was generally "capable of communicating by email in English
>> (including via a translation service)", but that's as close as we got.
>> In fact, IIRC we, at least once, specifically voted down an attempt to
>> make English the official language.
>>
>> Now we're governed by the precedents of "if most/all of the players
>> understand a communication with reasonable effort, it works" while
>> acknowledging that, because of history, that pretty much limits us to
>> English.  But if we suddenly realized we all have a second language in
>> common, we could use that.
>>
>> So if we "codify" Spivak, it's two different things to say "we're calling
>> Spivak a language and codifying it, thereby codifying English with Spivak
>> pronouns as our official language" versus codifying "if you happen to be
>> using English, as we mostly do, please use the Spivak version."
>>
>> This becomes the difference between saying "That Japanese had a perfectly
>> clear and unambiguous translation using Google, therefore we allow it by
>> precedent" and saying "sorry, that wasn't in English, and (Spivak) English
>> is the official language, it doesn't matter how clear the translation is".
>>
>>
>> On Thu, 12 Oct 2017, Gaelan Steele wrote:
>>> If we do this all (doesn’t seem terribly necessary) I’d say something like
>>> “understandable to an average English speaker.” This lets us avoid 
>>> grammar-nazi
>>> arguments about if something counts as English(TM). (grammar issues, 
>>> funner, deja vu)
>>>
>>> Gaelan
>>>
 On Oct 12, 2017, at 10:14 AM, Alex Smith  wrote:

> On Thu, 2017-10-12 at 07:39 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> Don't mind codifying spivak, but it's not it's own language rather
> (by Wikipedia definition) "a set of gender-neutral pronouns in
> English".

 I'd argue that an English-like language which uses Spivak pronouns (and
 a few other changes) is indeed a language which we habitually use at
 Agora. Whether is actually has a name is less certain, but Spivak is as
 good a name as any.

 If we're codifying this in the rules, I'd recommend defining the
 language itself (whatever we call it), stating that players should not
 perform actions that would cause rules to be created or amended to be
 written in other languages, and recommending (in a non-binding way)
 that the language is used for other communication. (I can see a good
 argument for using a consistent language for the ruleset; messing
 around with language in other contexts is probably not something we
 should ban though.)

 --
 ais523
>>>
>

Re: ***UNCHECKED*** Re: Re: DIS: PROTO: [Proposal] Clearing up language confusion for new players

[Gaelan Steele]

How about this: “Public messages must be communicated using a form of 
communication that can be interpreted by all players without unreasonable 
effort. People SHALL NOT register if they are not capable in communicating in 
such a fashion, or understanding communications understood by other players.”

Could use some ironing out, but I think it’s a good start.

Gaelan

> On Oct 12, 2017, at 11:22 AM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> Well, the interesting thing to me is that we don't codify (in the Rules)
> that English is our official language.  We used to say that a person was 
> someone who was generally "capable of communicating by email in English
> (including via a translation service)", but that's as close as we got.
> In fact, IIRC we, at least once, specifically voted down an attempt to
> make English the official language.
> 
> Now we're governed by the precedents of "if most/all of the players
> understand a communication with reasonable effort, it works" while 
> acknowledging that, because of history, that pretty much limits us to
> English.  But if we suddenly realized we all have a second language in
> common, we could use that.
> 
> So if we "codify" Spivak, it's two different things to say "we're calling
> Spivak a language and codifying it, thereby codifying English with Spivak
> pronouns as our official language" versus codifying "if you happen to be
> using English, as we mostly do, please use the Spivak version."
> 
> This becomes the difference between saying "That Japanese had a perfectly
> clear and unambiguous translation using Google, therefore we allow it by
> precedent" and saying "sorry, that wasn't in English, and (Spivak) English
> is the official language, it doesn't matter how clear the translation is".
> 
> 
> On Thu, 12 Oct 2017, Gaelan Steele wrote:
>> If we do this all (doesn’t seem terribly necessary) I’d say something like 
>> “understandable to an average English speaker.” This lets us avoid 
>> grammar-nazi 
>> arguments about if something counts as English(TM). (grammar issues, funner, 
>> deja vu)
>> 
>> Gaelan
>> 
>>> On Oct 12, 2017, at 10:14 AM, Alex Smith  wrote:
>>> 
 On Thu, 2017-10-12 at 07:39 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
 Don't mind codifying spivak, but it's not it's own language rather
 (by Wikipedia definition) "a set of gender-neutral pronouns in
 English".
>>> 
>>> I'd argue that an English-like language which uses Spivak pronouns (and
>>> a few other changes) is indeed a language which we habitually use at
>>> Agora. Whether is actually has a name is less certain, but Spivak is as
>>> good a name as any.
>>> 
>>> If we're codifying this in the rules, I'd recommend defining the
>>> language itself (whatever we call it), stating that players should not
>>> perform actions that would cause rules to be created or amended to be
>>> written in other languages, and recommending (in a non-binding way)
>>> that the language is used for other communication. (I can see a good
>>> argument for using a consistent language for the ruleset; messing
>>> around with language in other contexts is probably not something we
>>> should ban though.)
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> ais523
>> 

Re: ***UNCHECKED*** Re: DIS: PROTO: [Proposal] Clearing up language confusion for new players

[Kerim Aydin]

On Thu, 12 Oct 2017, Aris Merchant wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 11:15 AM, Alex Smith  wrote:
> > On Thu, 2017-10-12 at 11:04 -0700, Gaelan Steele wrote:
> >> If we do this all (doesn’t seem terribly necessary) I’d say something
> >> like “understandable to an average English speaker.” This lets us
> >> avoid grammar-nazi arguments about if something counts as
> >> English(TM). (grammar issues, funner, deja vu)
> >
> > I'd argue that statements like TIYAEOTISIDTIDFTHPAFALT aren't
> > understandable to an average English speaker, but nonetheless used to
> > be understandable to the majority of Agorans.
> 
> Pardon? I'd heard ATEOISIDTIDWHPAFALT
> (http://zenith.homelinux.net/agora_acronyms.php) but not this one,
> although they're clearly realated.
> 
> -Aris
>

"This Is Yet Another Example Of The I Say I Did, Therefore I Did
Fallacy That Has Plagued Agora For A Long Time."

But I personally don't recognize any of these until I pick out the
"ISID", then I might be able to reconstruct from memory.

Re: ***UNCHECKED*** Re: DIS: PROTO: [Proposal] Clearing up language confusion for new players

[Alexis Hunt]

This is yet another example of the I say I do therefore I do fallacy that
has plagued Agora for a long time, unless I mistake myself.

On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 at 14:26 Aris Merchant <
thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 11:15 AM, Alex Smith 
> wrote:
> > On Thu, 2017-10-12 at 11:04 -0700, Gaelan Steele wrote:
> >> If we do this all (doesn’t seem terribly necessary) I’d say something
> >> like “understandable to an average English speaker.” This lets us
> >> avoid grammar-nazi arguments about if something counts as
> >> English(TM). (grammar issues, funner, deja vu)
> >
> > I'd argue that statements like TIYAEOTISIDTIDFTHPAFALT aren't
> > understandable to an average English speaker, but nonetheless used to
> > be understandable to the majority of Agorans.
>
> Pardon? I'd heard ATEOISIDTIDWHPAFALT
> (http://zenith.homelinux.net/agora_acronyms.php) but not this one,
> although they're clearly realated.
>
> -Aris
>

Re: ***UNCHECKED*** Re: DIS: PROTO: [Proposal] Clearing up language confusion for new players

[Aris Merchant]

On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 11:15 AM, Alex Smith  wrote:
> On Thu, 2017-10-12 at 11:04 -0700, Gaelan Steele wrote:
>> If we do this all (doesn’t seem terribly necessary) I’d say something
>> like “understandable to an average English speaker.” This lets us
>> avoid grammar-nazi arguments about if something counts as
>> English(TM). (grammar issues, funner, deja vu)
>
> I'd argue that statements like TIYAEOTISIDTIDFTHPAFALT aren't
> understandable to an average English speaker, but nonetheless used to
> be understandable to the majority of Agorans.

Pardon? I'd heard ATEOISIDTIDWHPAFALT
(http://zenith.homelinux.net/agora_acronyms.php) but not this one,
although they're clearly realated.

-Aris

Re: ***UNCHECKED*** Re: DIS: PROTO: [Proposal] Clearing up language confusion for new players

[Kerim Aydin]

Well, the interesting thing to me is that we don't codify (in the Rules)
that English is our official language.  We used to say that a person was 
someone who was generally "capable of communicating by email in English
(including via a translation service)", but that's as close as we got.
In fact, IIRC we, at least once, specifically voted down an attempt to
make English the official language.

Now we're governed by the precedents of "if most/all of the players
understand a communication with reasonable effort, it works" while 
acknowledging that, because of history, that pretty much limits us to
English.  But if we suddenly realized we all have a second language in
common, we could use that.

So if we "codify" Spivak, it's two different things to say "we're calling
Spivak a language and codifying it, thereby codifying English with Spivak
pronouns as our official language" versus codifying "if you happen to be
using English, as we mostly do, please use the Spivak version."

This becomes the difference between saying "That Japanese had a perfectly
clear and unambiguous translation using Google, therefore we allow it by
precedent" and saying "sorry, that wasn't in English, and (Spivak) English
is the official language, it doesn't matter how clear the translation is".


On Thu, 12 Oct 2017, Gaelan Steele wrote:
> If we do this all (doesn’t seem terribly necessary) I’d say something like 
> “understandable to an average English speaker.” This lets us avoid 
> grammar-nazi 
> arguments about if something counts as English(TM). (grammar issues, funner, 
> deja vu)
> 
> Gaelan
> 
> > On Oct 12, 2017, at 10:14 AM, Alex Smith  wrote:
> > 
> >> On Thu, 2017-10-12 at 07:39 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> >> Don't mind codifying spivak, but it's not it's own language rather
> >> (by Wikipedia definition) "a set of gender-neutral pronouns in
> >> English".
> > 
> > I'd argue that an English-like language which uses Spivak pronouns (and
> > a few other changes) is indeed a language which we habitually use at
> > Agora. Whether is actually has a name is less certain, but Spivak is as
> > good a name as any.
> > 
> > If we're codifying this in the rules, I'd recommend defining the
> > language itself (whatever we call it), stating that players should not
> > perform actions that would cause rules to be created or amended to be
> > written in other languages, and recommending (in a non-binding way)
> > that the language is used for other communication. (I can see a good
> > argument for using a consistent language for the ruleset; messing
> > around with language in other contexts is probably not something we
> > should ban though.)
> > 
> > -- 
> > ais523
>

Re: ***UNCHECKED*** Re: DIS: PROTO: [Proposal] Clearing up language confusion for new players

[Alex Smith]

On Thu, 2017-10-12 at 11:04 -0700, Gaelan Steele wrote:
> If we do this all (doesn’t seem terribly necessary) I’d say something
> like “understandable to an average English speaker.” This lets us
> avoid grammar-nazi arguments about if something counts as
> English(TM). (grammar issues, funner, deja vu)

I'd argue that statements like TIYAEOTISIDTIDFTHPAFALT aren't
understandable to an average English speaker, but nonetheless used to
be understandable to the majority of Agorans.

Last time it came up, many of the players hadn't seen it before but
some of them were very close to figuring it out. As we've had an almost
total playerlist turnover since, I'm curious as to who'd be able to
interpret it correctly nowadays.

Another example is TTttPF, but that's used much more often and I think
most Agorans are familiar with it.

(Note that such a statement is distinct from a word such as
nkeplwgplxgioyzjvtxjnncsqscvntlbdqromyeyvlhkjgteaqnneqgujjpwcbyfrpueoydjjk,
which although it's been frequently used at Agora, in fact often enough
that it's typically just abbreviated to "nkep", still doesn't have any
widely agreed upon meaning; it's normally used as a metasyntactic
variable for a word for which some people know the meaning of, and
others don't, i.e. the whole point of it is that you might not know
what it means, and when it /does/ mean something it hasn't had a
consistent meaning.)

-- 
ais523

Re: ***UNCHECKED*** Re: DIS: PROTO: [Proposal] Clearing up language confusion for new players

[Gaelan Steele]

If we do this all (doesn’t seem terribly necessary) I’d say something like 
“understandable to an average English speaker.” This lets us avoid grammar-nazi 
arguments about if something counts as English(TM). (grammar issues, funner, 
deja vu)

Gaelan

> On Oct 12, 2017, at 10:14 AM, Alex Smith  wrote:
> 
>> On Thu, 2017-10-12 at 07:39 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>> Don't mind codifying spivak, but it's not it's own language rather
>> (by Wikipedia definition) "a set of gender-neutral pronouns in
>> English".
> 
> I'd argue that an English-like language which uses Spivak pronouns (and
> a few other changes) is indeed a language which we habitually use at
> Agora. Whether is actually has a name is less certain, but Spivak is as
> good a name as any.
> 
> If we're codifying this in the rules, I'd recommend defining the
> language itself (whatever we call it), stating that players should not
> perform actions that would cause rules to be created or amended to be
> written in other languages, and recommending (in a non-binding way)
> that the language is used for other communication. (I can see a good
> argument for using a consistent language for the ruleset; messing
> around with language in other contexts is probably not something we
> should ban though.)
> 
> -- 
> ais523

Re: DIS: PROTO: [Proposal] Clearing up language confusion for new players

[Alexis Hunt]

I miss the PNP. Also the President, that was fun.

On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 at 13:49 Alex Smith  wrote:

> On Thu, 2017-10-12 at 11:41 -0600, Reuben Staley wrote:
> > You appear to be arguing for the e vs it distinction to be used to
> > distinguish between persons, as defined by R869 and everything else. By
> > this definition, Agora, not being capable of ideation on its own, does
> not
> > count as a person.
>
> The definition of "person" was somewhat different for many years. What
> we currently call a "person" used to be a "first-class person". We had
> "second-class persons" too, which were basically legal constructs which
> we treated as though they were persons; for example, some contracts
> used to be persons (and the text of the contract would specify how e
> was capable of performing actions). They had several restrictions on
> them, such as not having any voting power unless someone else donated
> them voting power.
>
> That all got removed in a mass repeal some time ago, though, and we
> decided to go back to having first-class persons as the only sort of
> person. Arguably this was for the best, given some of the shenanigans
> that second-class persons got up to.
>
> --
> ais523
>

Re: DIS: PROTO: [Proposal] Clearing up language confusion for new players

[Alex Smith]

On Thu, 2017-10-12 at 11:41 -0600, Reuben Staley wrote:
> You appear to be arguing for the e vs it distinction to be used to
> distinguish between persons, as defined by R869 and everything else. By
> this definition, Agora, not being capable of ideation on its own, does not
> count as a person.

The definition of "person" was somewhat different for many years. What
we currently call a "person" used to be a "first-class person". We had
"second-class persons" too, which were basically legal constructs which
we treated as though they were persons; for example, some contracts
used to be persons (and the text of the contract would specify how e
was capable of performing actions). They had several restrictions on
them, such as not having any voting power unless someone else donated
them voting power.

That all got removed in a mass repeal some time ago, though, and we
decided to go back to having first-class persons as the only sort of
person. Arguably this was for the best, given some of the shenanigans
that second-class persons got up to.

-- 
ais523

Re: DIS: PROTO: [Proposal] Clearing up language confusion for new players

[Reuben Staley]

You appear to be arguing for the e vs it distinction to be used to
distinguish between persons, as defined by R869 and everything else. By
this definition, Agora, not being capable of ideation on its own, does not
count as a person.

On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 11:34 AM, Kerim Aydin 
wrote:

>
>
> On Thu, 12 Oct 2017, Alex Smith wrote:
> > On Thu, 2017-10-12 at 11:21 -0600, Reuben Staley wrote:
> > > This proto is definitely technically superior to the first one, but it
> has
> > > contradictions. One option is to replace "personal" with "third
> person",
> > > since "personal pronoun" refers to all three persons of pronoun.
> >
> > I just realised we have to be very careful in defining this: "e"
> > replaces "it" in addition to "he" and "she", at least in cases where we
> > want to treat something like (say) a rule as a though e were a person,
> > but doesn't replace the typical plural meaning of "they" (it does
> > replace singular "they").
> >
> > At present, we'd probably use "e" for the game of Agora as a whole,
> > given that e's the main holder of Shinies. However, after months/years
> > of not having any second-class persons, I think that pronoun usage fell
> > somewhat by the wayside. Maybe we should bring it back.
>
> Hmm, I personally use e only for people and prefer to keep the e versus it
> distinction for non-persons (including using 'it' for Agora), though I
> admit that's a personal preference based on our Agoran traditions of
> personhood.  (In particular, thinking along the lines of CFJ 1895) and
> the fundamental importance of "natural persons" as originating causal
> agents).
>
>
>
>

Re: DIS: PROTO: [Proposal] Clearing up language confusion for new players

[Reuben Staley]

Good points.

On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 11:27 AM, Alex Smith 
wrote:

> On Thu, 2017-10-12 at 11:21 -0600, Reuben Staley wrote:
> > This proto is definitely technically superior to the first one, but it
> has
> > contradictions. One option is to replace "personal" with "third person",
> > since "personal pronoun" refers to all three persons of pronoun.
>
> I just realised we have to be very careful in defining this: "e"
> replaces "it" in addition to "he" and "she", at least in cases where we
> want to treat something like (say) a rule as a though e were a person,
> but doesn't replace the typical plural meaning of "they" (it does
> replace singular "they").
>

This could be sidestepped by replacing "singular personal pronouns" with
"singular third-person personal pronouns." This specifies that it's only
the pronouns that are used to describe a singular person, not the ones used
to describe multiple person or singular non-persons.


> At present, we'd probably use "e" for the game of Agora as a whole,
> given that e's the main holder of Shinies.


That depends on if you treat Agora as a person or as an institution.


> However, after months/years
> of not having any second-class persons, I think that pronoun usage fell
> somewhat by the wayside. Maybe we should bring it back.


Interesting idea. I am not opposed to it.

--
> ais523
>

Re: DIS: PROTO: [Proposal] Clearing up language confusion for new players

[Kerim Aydin]

On Thu, 12 Oct 2017, Alex Smith wrote:
> On Thu, 2017-10-12 at 11:21 -0600, Reuben Staley wrote:
> > This proto is definitely technically superior to the first one, but it has
> > contradictions. One option is to replace "personal" with "third person",
> > since "personal pronoun" refers to all three persons of pronoun.
> 
> I just realised we have to be very careful in defining this: "e"
> replaces "it" in addition to "he" and "she", at least in cases where we
> want to treat something like (say) a rule as a though e were a person,
> but doesn't replace the typical plural meaning of "they" (it does
> replace singular "they").
> 
> At present, we'd probably use "e" for the game of Agora as a whole,
> given that e's the main holder of Shinies. However, after months/years
> of not having any second-class persons, I think that pronoun usage fell
> somewhat by the wayside. Maybe we should bring it back.

Hmm, I personally use e only for people and prefer to keep the e versus it
distinction for non-persons (including using 'it' for Agora), though I
admit that's a personal preference based on our Agoran traditions of
personhood.  (In particular, thinking along the lines of CFJ 1895) and
the fundamental importance of "natural persons" as originating causal 
agents).

Re: DIS: PROTO: [Proposal] Clearing up language confusion for new players

[ATMunn .]

On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 1:01 PM, Alexis Hunt  wrote:

> A power-1 rule can only amend rules with power at most 1.
>
>
> On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 at 12:57 ATMunn .  wrote:
>
>> New proto:
>>
>> Title: "Clearing up Language Confusion" [CuLC in short]
>> Author: ATMunn
>> Co-Author(s): Alexis
>> AI: 1
>>
>> Create a power-1 rule titled "The Language of Agora"
>> {
>> A language is a set of symbols, sounds, and rules used to communicate
>> information.
>> The official language of Agora that SHOULD, under most circumstances, be
>> used in all Agoran fora is English, with Spivak pronouns.
>>
>> Any player CAN, without objection, cause this rule to amend a rule to
>> replace to replace singular personal pronouns (e.g.
>> "he/him/his/his/himself",
>> "she/her/her/hers/herself", or singular "they/them/their/theirs/themself")
>> with corresponding Spivak pronouns ("e/em/eir/eirs/emself").
>> }
>>
>> I think this looks a lot better. if there's anything else that should be
>> changed, then let me know. If not, I'll post and pend this by tonight.
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 9:34 AM, ATMunn . 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Title: "Clearing up Language Confusion" [CuLC in short]
>>> Author: ATMunn
>>> AI: 1
>>>
>>> Create a power-1 rule titled "The Language of Agora"
>>> {
>>> A language is a set of symbols, sounds and rules used to communicate
>>> information.
>>> The official language that should be used in all Agoran fora is Spivak.
>>>
>>> The Spivak language is defined as being nearly identical to English
>>> except for the following:
>>> * The pronouns "he," "she," and "they" have been replaced with "e"
>>> * The pronouns "him," "her," and "them" have been replaced with "em"
>>> * The adjectives "his," "her," and "their" have been replaced with "eir"
>>> * The pronouns "his," "hers," and "theirs" have been replaced with "eirs"
>>> * The pronouns "himself," "herself," and "themself" have been replaced
>>> with "emself"
>>> }
>>>
>>> Let me know what you think. I've had this idea for a little while now,
>>> as a way to make it clear for new players why we use these abnormal
>>> pronouns; and now seems like a great time as the pend cost is only 1 shiny,
>>> so I might as well take advantage of that while I can.
>>>
>>
>> Hm, that's a problem. I don't really want to make it AI 3 though. I'm
starting to think that maybe I should just give up on this and let a more
experienced player do it, or just not do it at all.
On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 1:14 PM, Alex Smith 
wrote:

> On Thu, 2017-10-12 at 07:39 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> > Don't mind codifying spivak, but it's not it's own language rather
> > (by Wikipedia definition) "a set of gender-neutral pronouns in
> > English".
>
> I'd argue that an English-like language which uses Spivak pronouns (and
> a few other changes) is indeed a language which we habitually use at
> Agora. Whether is actually has a name is less certain, but Spivak is as
> good a name as any.
>
> If we're codifying this in the rules, I'd recommend defining the
> language itself (whatever we call it), stating that players should not
> perform actions that would cause rules to be created or amended to be
> written in other languages, and recommending (in a non-binding way)
> that the language is used for other communication. (I can see a good
> argument for using a consistent language for the ruleset; messing
> around with language in other contexts is probably not something we
> should ban though.)
>
> --
> ais523
>
Yeah, that's probably a good idea, although it might take me a little while
to figure out how to implement it.
On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 1:27 PM, Alex Smith 
wrote:

> On Thu, 2017-10-12 at 11:21 -0600, Reuben Staley wrote:
> > This proto is definitely technically superior to the first one, but it
> has
> > contradictions. One option is to replace "personal" with "third person",
> > since "personal pronoun" refers to all three persons of pronoun.
>
> I just realised we have to be very careful in defining this: "e"
> replaces "it" in addition to "he" and "she", at least in cases where we
> want to treat something like (say) a rule as a though e were a person,
> but doesn't replace the typical plural meaning of "they" (it does
> replace singular "they").
>
> At present, we'd probably use "e" for the game of Agora as a whole,
> given that e's the main holder of Shinies. However, after months/years
> of not having any second-class persons, I think that pronoun usage fell
> somewhat by the wayside. Maybe we should bring it back.
>
> --
> ais523
>
Regarding the personal/third person thing, I'm not that familiar with the
names of groups of pronouns in English. I was just copying from what Alexis
mentioned.
Regarding "e" being used as a replacement to "it" as well, I was wondering
if that might be an issue. Again, I might just abandon this and/or leave it
up to the more experienced players.

Re: DIS: PROTO: [Proposal] Clearing up language confusion for new players

[Alexis Hunt]

If my memory serves, "e" was used to refer to persons, but not to
non-person entities that may have person-like characteristics. The Lost and
Found Department, for instance, was never referred to with "e" in my memory.

On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 at 13:27 Alex Smith  wrote:

> On Thu, 2017-10-12 at 11:21 -0600, Reuben Staley wrote:
> > This proto is definitely technically superior to the first one, but it
> has
> > contradictions. One option is to replace "personal" with "third person",
> > since "personal pronoun" refers to all three persons of pronoun.
>
> I just realised we have to be very careful in defining this: "e"
> replaces "it" in addition to "he" and "she", at least in cases where we
> want to treat something like (say) a rule as a though e were a person,
> but doesn't replace the typical plural meaning of "they" (it does
> replace singular "they").
>
> At present, we'd probably use "e" for the game of Agora as a whole,
> given that e's the main holder of Shinies. However, after months/years
> of not having any second-class persons, I think that pronoun usage fell
> somewhat by the wayside. Maybe we should bring it back.
>
> --
> ais523
>

Re: DIS: PROTO: [Proposal] Clearing up language confusion for new players

[Alex Smith]

On Thu, 2017-10-12 at 11:21 -0600, Reuben Staley wrote:
> This proto is definitely technically superior to the first one, but it has
> contradictions. One option is to replace "personal" with "third person",
> since "personal pronoun" refers to all three persons of pronoun.

I just realised we have to be very careful in defining this: "e"
replaces "it" in addition to "he" and "she", at least in cases where we
want to treat something like (say) a rule as a though e were a person,
but doesn't replace the typical plural meaning of "they" (it does
replace singular "they").

At present, we'd probably use "e" for the game of Agora as a whole,
given that e's the main holder of Shinies. However, after months/years
of not having any second-class persons, I think that pronoun usage fell
somewhat by the wayside. Maybe we should bring it back.

-- 
ais523

Re: DIS: PROTO: [Proposal] Clearing up language confusion for new players

[Reuben Staley]

This proto is definitely technically superior to the first one, but it has
contradictions. One option is to replace "personal" with "third person",
since "personal pronoun" refers to all three persons of pronoun.

On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 10:57 AM, ATMunn .  wrote:

> New proto:
>
> Title: "Clearing up Language Confusion" [CuLC in short]
> Author: ATMunn
> Co-Author(s): Alexis
> AI: 1
>
> Create a power-1 rule titled "The Language of Agora"
> {
> A language is a set of symbols, sounds, and rules used to communicate
> information.
> The official language of Agora that SHOULD, under most circumstances, be
> used in all Agoran fora is English, with Spivak pronouns.
>
> Any player CAN, without objection, cause this rule to amend a rule to
> replace to replace singular personal pronouns (e.g.
> "he/him/his/his/himself",
> "she/her/her/hers/herself", or singular "they/them/their/theirs/themself")
> with corresponding Spivak pronouns ("e/em/eir/eirs/emself").
> }
>
> I think this looks a lot better. if there's anything else that should be
> changed, then let me know. If not, I'll post and pend this by tonight.
>
> On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 9:34 AM, ATMunn .  wrote:
>
>> Title: "Clearing up Language Confusion" [CuLC in short]
>> Author: ATMunn
>> AI: 1
>>
>> Create a power-1 rule titled "The Language of Agora"
>> {
>> A language is a set of symbols, sounds and rules used to communicate
>> information.
>> The official language that should be used in all Agoran fora is Spivak.
>>
>> The Spivak language is defined as being nearly identical to English
>> except for the following:
>> * The pronouns "he," "she," and "they" have been replaced with "e"
>> * The pronouns "him," "her," and "them" have been replaced with "em"
>> * The adjectives "his," "her," and "their" have been replaced with "eir"
>> * The pronouns "his," "hers," and "theirs" have been replaced with "eirs"
>> * The pronouns "himself," "herself," and "themself" have been replaced
>> with "emself"
>> }
>>
>> Let me know what you think. I've had this idea for a little while now, as
>> a way to make it clear for new players why we use these abnormal pronouns;
>> and now seems like a great time as the pend cost is only 1 shiny, so I
>> might as well take advantage of that while I can.
>>
>
>

Re: DIS: PROTO: [Proposal] Clearing up language confusion for new players

[Alex Smith]

On Thu, 2017-10-12 at 07:39 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> Don't mind codifying spivak, but it's not it's own language rather
> (by Wikipedia definition) "a set of gender-neutral pronouns in
> English".

I'd argue that an English-like language which uses Spivak pronouns (and
a few other changes) is indeed a language which we habitually use at
Agora. Whether is actually has a name is less certain, but Spivak is as
good a name as any.

If we're codifying this in the rules, I'd recommend defining the
language itself (whatever we call it), stating that players should not
perform actions that would cause rules to be created or amended to be
written in other languages, and recommending (in a non-binding way)
that the language is used for other communication. (I can see a good
argument for using a consistent language for the ruleset; messing
around with language in other contexts is probably not something we
should ban though.)

-- 
ais523

Re: DIS: PROTO: [Proposal] Clearing up language confusion for new players

[Alexis Hunt]

A power-1 rule can only amend rules with power at most 1.

On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 at 12:57 ATMunn .  wrote:

> New proto:
>
> Title: "Clearing up Language Confusion" [CuLC in short]
> Author: ATMunn
> Co-Author(s): Alexis
> AI: 1
>
> Create a power-1 rule titled "The Language of Agora"
> {
> A language is a set of symbols, sounds, and rules used to communicate
> information.
> The official language of Agora that SHOULD, under most circumstances, be
> used in all Agoran fora is English, with Spivak pronouns.
>
> Any player CAN, without objection, cause this rule to amend a rule to
> replace to replace singular personal pronouns (e.g.
> "he/him/his/his/himself",
> "she/her/her/hers/herself", or singular "they/them/their/theirs/themself")
> with corresponding Spivak pronouns ("e/em/eir/eirs/emself").
> }
>
> I think this looks a lot better. if there's anything else that should be
> changed, then let me know. If not, I'll post and pend this by tonight.
>
> On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 9:34 AM, ATMunn .  wrote:
>
>> Title: "Clearing up Language Confusion" [CuLC in short]
>> Author: ATMunn
>> AI: 1
>>
>> Create a power-1 rule titled "The Language of Agora"
>> {
>> A language is a set of symbols, sounds and rules used to communicate
>> information.
>> The official language that should be used in all Agoran fora is Spivak.
>>
>> The Spivak language is defined as being nearly identical to English
>> except for the following:
>> * The pronouns "he," "she," and "they" have been replaced with "e"
>> * The pronouns "him," "her," and "them" have been replaced with "em"
>> * The adjectives "his," "her," and "their" have been replaced with "eir"
>> * The pronouns "his," "hers," and "theirs" have been replaced with "eirs"
>> * The pronouns "himself," "herself," and "themself" have been replaced
>> with "emself"
>> }
>>
>> Let me know what you think. I've had this idea for a little while now, as
>> a way to make it clear for new players why we use these abnormal pronouns;
>> and now seems like a great time as the pend cost is only 1 shiny, so I
>> might as well take advantage of that while I can.
>>
>
>

Re: DIS: PROTO: [Proposal] Clearing up language confusion for new players

[ATMunn .]

New proto:

Title: "Clearing up Language Confusion" [CuLC in short]
Author: ATMunn
Co-Author(s): Alexis
AI: 1

Create a power-1 rule titled "The Language of Agora"
{
A language is a set of symbols, sounds, and rules used to communicate
information.
The official language of Agora that SHOULD, under most circumstances, be
used in all Agoran fora is English, with Spivak pronouns.

Any player CAN, without objection, cause this rule to amend a rule to
replace to replace singular personal pronouns (e.g.
"he/him/his/his/himself",
"she/her/her/hers/herself", or singular "they/them/their/theirs/themself")
with corresponding Spivak pronouns ("e/em/eir/eirs/emself").
}

I think this looks a lot better. if there's anything else that should be
changed, then let me know. If not, I'll post and pend this by tonight.

On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 9:34 AM, ATMunn .  wrote:

> Title: "Clearing up Language Confusion" [CuLC in short]
> Author: ATMunn
> AI: 1
>
> Create a power-1 rule titled "The Language of Agora"
> {
> A language is a set of symbols, sounds and rules used to communicate
> information.
> The official language that should be used in all Agoran fora is Spivak.
>
> The Spivak language is defined as being nearly identical to English except
> for the following:
> * The pronouns "he," "she," and "they" have been replaced with "e"
> * The pronouns "him," "her," and "them" have been replaced with "em"
> * The adjectives "his," "her," and "their" have been replaced with "eir"
> * The pronouns "his," "hers," and "theirs" have been replaced with "eirs"
> * The pronouns "himself," "herself," and "themself" have been replaced
> with "emself"
> }
>
> Let me know what you think. I've had this idea for a little while now, as
> a way to make it clear for new players why we use these abnormal pronouns;
> and now seems like a great time as the pend cost is only 1 shiny, so I
> might as well take advantage of that while I can.
>

Re: DIS: PROTO: [Proposal] Clearing up language confusion for new players

[ATMunn .]

On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 9:47 AM, Josh T  wrote:

> I object to this for hopefully obvious reasons, given my history with
> playing with language.
>
> 天火狐
>
> On 12 October 2017 at 09:34, ATMunn .  wrote:
>
>> Title: "Clearing up Language Confusion" [CuLC in short]
>> Author: ATMunn
>> AI: 1
>>
>> Create a power-1 rule titled "The Language of Agora"
>> {
>> A language is a set of symbols, sounds and rules used to communicate
>> information.
>> The official language that should be used in all Agoran fora is Spivak.
>>
>> The Spivak language is defined as being nearly identical to English
>> except for the following:
>> * The pronouns "he," "she," and "they" have been replaced with "e"
>> * The pronouns "him," "her," and "them" have been replaced with "em"
>> * The adjectives "his," "her," and "their" have been replaced with "eir"
>> * The pronouns "his," "hers," and "theirs" have been replaced with "eirs"
>> * The pronouns "himself," "herself," and "themself" have been replaced
>> with "emself"
>> }
>>
>> Let me know what you think. I've had this idea for a little while now, as
>> a way to make it clear for new players why we use these abnormal pronouns;
>> and now seems like a great time as the pend cost is only 1 shiny, so I
>> might as well take advantage of that while I can.
>>
>
> It wouldn't be mandatory.

On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 11:14 AM, Alexis Hunt  wrote:

> On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 at 10:40 Kerim Aydin  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Don't mind codifying spivak, but it's not it's own language rather (by
>> Wikipedia definition) "a set of gender-neutral pronouns in English".
>>
>
> I had been intending to bring back the old WO rule cleanup mechanism to
> fix minor typos and errors without a proposal; it would be easy enough to
> put a more explicit description of Spivak pronouns in there. Something like
>
> {{{
>  Any player CAN, Without Objection, cause this rule to amend a rule to
> correct
>  errors, or to replace singular personal pronouns (e.g.
>  "he/him/his/his/himself", "she/her/her/hers/herself", or singular
>  "they/them/their/theirs/themself") with corresponding Spivak pronouns
>  ("e/em/eir/eirs/emself").
> }}}
>
> (I should look up the previous wording of this rule, when we had it).
>
I like that way of doing it. Again, the whole intent with this was to make
it less confusing for new players. (and to take advantage of the cheap pend
price, since this was the only idea I really had)

Re: DIS: PROTO: [Proposal] Clearing up language confusion for new players

[Alexis Hunt]

On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 at 10:40 Kerim Aydin  wrote:

>
>
> Don't mind codifying spivak, but it's not it's own language rather (by
> Wikipedia definition) "a set of gender-neutral pronouns in English".
>

I had been intending to bring back the old WO rule cleanup mechanism to fix
minor typos and errors without a proposal; it would be easy enough to put a
more explicit description of Spivak pronouns in there. Something like

{{{
 Any player CAN, Without Objection, cause this rule to amend a rule to
correct
 errors, or to replace singular personal pronouns (e.g.
 "he/him/his/his/himself", "she/her/her/hers/herself", or singular
 "they/them/their/theirs/themself") with corresponding Spivak pronouns
 ("e/em/eir/eirs/emself").
}}}

(I should look up the previous wording of this rule, when we had it).

Re: DIS: PROTO: [Proposal] Clearing up language confusion for new players

[Kerim Aydin]

Don't mind codifying spivak, but it's not it's own language rather (by 
Wikipedia definition) "a set of gender-neutral pronouns in English".

On Thu, 12 Oct 2017, ATMunn . wrote:
> Title: "Clearing up Language Confusion" [CuLC in short]
> Author: ATMunn
> AI: 1
> 
> Create a power-1 rule titled "The Language of Agora"
> {
> A language is a set of symbols, sounds and rules used to communicate 
> information.
> The official language that should be used in all Agoran fora is Spivak.
> 
> The Spivak language is defined as being nearly identical to English except 
> for the following:
> * The pronouns "he," "she," and "they" have been replaced with "e"
> * The pronouns "him," "her," and "them" have been replaced with "em"
> * The adjectives "his," "her," and "their" have been replaced with "eir"
> * The pronouns "his," "hers," and "theirs" have been replaced with "eirs"
> * The pronouns "himself," "herself," and "themself" have been replaced with 
> "emself"
> }
> 
> Let me know what you think. I've had this idea for a little while now, as a 
> way to make it clear for new players why we use
> these abnormal pronouns; and now seems like a great time as the pend cost is 
> only 1 shiny, so I might as well take advantage of
> that while I can.
> 
>

Re: DIS: PROTO: [Proposal] Clearing up language confusion for new players

[Josh T]

I object to this for hopefully obvious reasons, given my history with
playing with language.

天火狐

On 12 October 2017 at 09:34, ATMunn .  wrote:

> Title: "Clearing up Language Confusion" [CuLC in short]
> Author: ATMunn
> AI: 1
>
> Create a power-1 rule titled "The Language of Agora"
> {
> A language is a set of symbols, sounds and rules used to communicate
> information.
> The official language that should be used in all Agoran fora is Spivak.
>
> The Spivak language is defined as being nearly identical to English except
> for the following:
> * The pronouns "he," "she," and "they" have been replaced with "e"
> * The pronouns "him," "her," and "them" have been replaced with "em"
> * The adjectives "his," "her," and "their" have been replaced with "eir"
> * The pronouns "his," "hers," and "theirs" have been replaced with "eirs"
> * The pronouns "himself," "herself," and "themself" have been replaced
> with "emself"
> }
>
> Let me know what you think. I've had this idea for a little while now, as
> a way to make it clear for new players why we use these abnormal pronouns;
> and now seems like a great time as the pend cost is only 1 shiny, so I
> might as well take advantage of that while I can.
>

DIS: PROTO: [Proposal] Clearing up language confusion for new players

[ATMunn .]

Title: "Clearing up Language Confusion" [CuLC in short]
Author: ATMunn
AI: 1

Create a power-1 rule titled "The Language of Agora"
{
A language is a set of symbols, sounds and rules used to communicate
information.
The official language that should be used in all Agoran fora is Spivak.

The Spivak language is defined as being nearly identical to English except
for the following:
* The pronouns "he," "she," and "they" have been replaced with "e"
* The pronouns "him," "her," and "them" have been replaced with "em"
* The adjectives "his," "her," and "their" have been replaced with "eir"
* The pronouns "his," "hers," and "theirs" have been replaced with "eirs"
* The pronouns "himself," "herself," and "themself" have been replaced with
"emself"
}

Let me know what you think. I've had this idea for a little while now, as a
way to make it clear for new players why we use these abnormal pronouns;
and now seems like a great time as the pend cost is only 1 shiny, so I
might as well take advantage of that while I can.