DIS: Re: BUS: Election Intents
On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 at 13:40, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote: > Rulekeepor fails as I already initiated one. I don't know if this means > becoming a candidate fails, too. I think they were written independently, so I believe I have become a candidate. But I'm not really in this to win it, so *shruggie*. -Alexis
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Election Intents
twg wrote: G. wrote: On 2/10/2020 3:09 AM, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: Murphy wrote: Alexis wrote: I intend, with 2 Support, to initiate an election for each of the following offices: * Assessor, as I'm dissatisfied with the sparse content of resolutions; * Notary, as it is a brand new office; * Rulekeepor, as it is interim; and * Prime Minister, as it is interim. I support each of the last three. For each of the last three, I support and do so. Note the "provided..." bit in R2154: A player CAN initiate an election for a specified elected office: a) with 2 support, if either the office is interim or the most recent election for that office was resolved more than 90 days prior, and provided that the initiator becomes a candidate in the same message. Oh, good point. In that case I guess I supported but didn't do so. Yeah, that tripped me up too. I think the database is fixed to reflect that G. initiated PM and e and Alexis are candidates (reasonably clear from context that all those actions pertained to PM) but the others haven't been initiated.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Election Intents
G. wrote: > On 2/10/2020 3:09 AM, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: > > Murphy wrote: > >> Alexis wrote: > >> > >>> I intend, with 2 Support, to initiate an election for each of the > >>> following offices: > >>> > >>> * Assessor, as I'm dissatisfied with the sparse content of resolutions; > >>> * Notary, as it is a brand new office; > >>> * Rulekeepor, as it is interim; and > >>> * Prime Minister, as it is interim. > >> > >> I support each of the last three. > > > > For each of the last three, I support and do so. > > > > Note the "provided..." bit in R2154: > > > > A player CAN initiate an election for a specified elected office: > > > > a) with 2 support, if either the office is interim or the most > >recent election for that office was resolved more than 90 days > >prior, and provided that the initiator becomes a candidate in > >the same message. > Oh, good point. In that case I guess I supported but didn't do so. -twg
DIS: Re: BUS: Election Intents
On 2/10/2020 3:09 AM, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: > Murphy wrote: >> Alexis wrote: >> >>> I intend, with 2 Support, to initiate an election for each of the >>> following offices: >>> >>> * Assessor, as I'm dissatisfied with the sparse content of resolutions; >>> * Notary, as it is a brand new office; >>> * Rulekeepor, as it is interim; and >>> * Prime Minister, as it is interim. >> >> I support each of the last three. > > For each of the last three, I support and do so. > Note the "provided..." bit in R2154: > > A player CAN initiate an election for a specified elected office: > > a) with 2 support, if either the office is interim or the most >recent election for that office was resolved more than 90 days >prior, and provided that the initiator becomes a candidate in >the same message.
DIS: Re: BUS: Election Intents
On Sun, 9 Feb 2020 at 20:29, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote: > As do I. I never intended to keep Rulekeepor this long, and I can see > why people would want to replace me, given the recent delay in reporting. I just felt that if you've been in office this long, no reason for you to not be properly elected to it. No complaints about the quality of work; holding off on the report this week was justified. -Alexis
DIS: Re: BUS: Election Intents
I started to implement some rulekeepor automation a while back. I was getting really fancy, (manually) converting proposals to a machine-readable format and automatically applying them to the ruleset. I might finish that up and take up Rulekeepor, but I’m not sure. Gaelan > On Feb 9, 2020, at 5:29 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-business > wrote: > > On 2/9/20 7:55 PM, Edward Murphy via agora-business wrote: >> Alexis wrote: >> >>> I intend, with 2 Support, to initiate an election for each of the >>> following offices: >>> >>> * Assessor, as I'm dissatisfied with the sparse content of resolutions; >>> * Notary, as it is a brand new office; >>> * Rulekeepor, as it is interim; and >>> * Prime Minister, as it is interim. >> I support each of the last three. > > > As do I. I never intended to keep Rulekeepor this long, and I can see > why people would want to replace me, given the recent delay in reporting. > > -- > Jason Cobb >
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Election Intents
On 2/9/20 7:29 PM, Alexis Hunt via agora-discussion wrote: > I would absolutely prefer to see the full version from that site > posted to the mailing lists as it makes it much easier to work out. > Last time I mentioned conditional votes I believe you didn't mention > this site, and that was definitely one of the things. For this > particular draft, I definitely dislike the lack of additional > information about the proposal (class,chamber) and the way you show > voting strength using only symbols, but I would reasonably accept an > undertaking to address those as this is the first real resolution with > the new system. It would be ideal I think if the voting strength > calculation included, somewhere, at least a little breakdown of the > calculation (e.g. +1 from Speaker, -1 from blots, +4 from office > interest), but that's definitely going the extra mile. Chamber and class can probably be worked in (though I'll have to figure out how to deal with old resolutions somewhat cleanly). Voting strengths were done with symbols just because that was what I thought would be the most compact (and, honestly, easiest to implement). I previously just listed all of the voting strengths (along with the reason for them) at the top because they were the same for each of the decisions, but that's not really an option now. If it would be easier to read, I could also do: FOR: Alexis (4), Gaelan (487), nch (0) As for the format, I just tried to mirror the one my predecessor (D. Margaux) used. Switching to a tabular format would probably be a lot of work, but I would consider it if there was more demand. -- Jason Cobb
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Election Intents
On Sun, 9 Feb 2020 at 19:17, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion wrote: > On 2/9/20 7:14 PM, Alexis Hunt via agora-business wrote: > > * Assessor, as I'm dissatisfied with the sparse content of resolutions; > > What other content would you like in the resolutions? I'll also point > out there is more information at https://agoranomic.org/assessor/ since > I try to keep the messages short for the mailing list. I would absolutely prefer to see the full version from that site posted to the mailing lists as it makes it much easier to work out. Last time I mentioned conditional votes I believe you didn't mention this site, and that was definitely one of the things. For this particular draft, I definitely dislike the lack of additional information about the proposal (class,chamber) and the way you show voting strength using only symbols, but I would reasonably accept an undertaking to address those as this is the first real resolution with the new system. It would be ideal I think if the voting strength calculation included, somewhere, at least a little breakdown of the calculation (e.g. +1 from Speaker, -1 from blots, +4 from office interest), but that's definitely going the extra mile. For many years, resolutions were done in table format, which I personally found easier to read, but I just realized this long predates you joining the game. Here's some examples: https://www.mail-archive.com/agora-official@agoranomic.org/msg07793.html or https://www.mail-archive.com/agora-official@agoranomic.org/msg04982.html Alexis -Alexis
DIS: Re: BUS: Election Intents
On 2/9/20 7:14 PM, Alexis Hunt via agora-business wrote: > * Assessor, as I'm dissatisfied with the sparse content of resolutions; What other content would you like in the resolutions? I'll also point out there is more information at https://agoranomic.org/assessor/ since I try to keep the messages short for the mailing list. -- Jason Cobb
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Election Intents
I'm happy to give up Treasuror if anyone is interested, or maybe Registrar if someone really wants it. On Sat, 22 Jun 2019 at 04:08, Reuben Staley wrote: > Is anyone else interested in Rulekeepor right now? If you are, I'm good > with letting an election play out, though I really do enjoy the job. > > On 6/21/19 5:31 PM, Rebecca wrote: > > I intend to initiate elections for Promotor, Tailor, ADoP and Rulekeepor, > > with two support (90 days having passed) > > > > (I will stand for ADoP if that intent gets two support. I will not resolve > > the other intents because I do not wish to stand, but I am making them in > > case anyone else wishes to do so) > > > > -- > Trigon
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Election Intents
Or a proposal resolution, for that matter. On 6/22/19 9:32 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote: On 6/21/2019 7:40 PM, Aris Merchant wrote: I refuse to use it to help in scams, even when people offer bribes. It's true - I've tried. Speaking of which, I'm hoping to see a proposal distribution this week - there's some stuff in there I'm concerned about on timeliness. -- Trigon
DIS: Re: BUS: Election Intents
Is anyone else interested in Rulekeepor right now? If you are, I'm good with letting an election play out, though I really do enjoy the job. On 6/21/19 5:31 PM, Rebecca wrote: I intend to initiate elections for Promotor, Tailor, ADoP and Rulekeepor, with two support (90 days having passed) (I will stand for ADoP if that intent gets two support. I will not resolve the other intents because I do not wish to stand, but I am making them in case anyone else wishes to do so) -- Trigon
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Election Intents
You could still bribe them with getting a win in the scam, if it's proposal based. Maybe with the text "X gets a win, then Y gets a win", therefore making the scammer the speaker. This is actually my one regret with the one time I win the game, I should have made me win last haha. On Sat, Jun 22, 2019 at 1:38 PM ais...@alumni.bham.ac.uk < ais...@alumni.bham.ac.uk> wrote: > On Fri, 2019-06-21 at 20:00 -0700, Aris Merchant wrote: > > Anyhow, I've been contacted for scams at least twice, and refused to > > actively help each time. > > This is the the first thing you've said that's left me less than fully > onboard with you as Promotor :-D > > (I miss the days when you could bribe officers to help you with scams. > They're mostly gone nowadays simply because there's nothing > sufficiently valuable to bribe them /with/.) > > -- > ais523 > > -- >From R. Lee
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Election Intents
On Fri, 2019-06-21 at 20:00 -0700, Aris Merchant wrote: > Anyhow, I've been contacted for scams at least twice, and refused to > actively help each time. This is the the first thing you've said that's left me less than fully onboard with you as Promotor :-D (I miss the days when you could bribe officers to help you with scams. They're mostly gone nowadays simply because there's nothing sufficiently valuable to bribe them /with/.) -- ais523
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Election Intents
The Promotor has discretion over when e distributes proposals, which is surprisingly important for scams. There are some scams that depend on very tight timing, usually because they require something to be done at the end of the voting period. For instance, there was once a scam where people could withdraw the ballots of other players. Of course, that doesn't help unless you're the last player to vote, and for that to happen you ideally want the voting period to end sometime when you're awake and can be at your computer. Some players use automated scripts for that kind of thing, but even then, one really wants to be there to oversee it in person. The other case where it can come in handy is for a more general scam, where you want your scam proposal to be distributed earlier than the rest of the proposals so you have a head start on any attempt to patch the vulnerability you're exploiting, or you want to know the distribution time so you'll be able to slip your proposal in at the last moment. Anyhow, I've been contacted for scams at least twice, and refused to actively help each time. -Aris On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 7:48 PM Jason Cobb wrote: > > How exactly does one abuse the position of Promotor? It doesn't seem > like the office has much discretion over what it does. The only thing I > can see is deciding whether or not to retry FAILED QUORUM proposals. > > Changing the text of a proposal (or something like that) could probably > be construed as a lie or a falsehood published in a report. > > Jason Cobb > > On 6/21/19 10:40 PM, Aris Merchant wrote: > > I assure you, I’m not plotting anything malevolent. I just really enjoy the > > work, and it’s become part of my routine. I’d deeply miss it if no longer > > held the job. On the few occasions where I’ve considered resigning because > > of I have too much to do IRL, I’ve not done so because I’m afraid that the > > next person to take the office might not want to give it up if I wanted it > > back. > > > > Also, any long-standing player can tell you that I’ve been extremely > > scrupulous about avoiding malevolent use Promotorial power. I refuse to use > > it to help in scams, even when people offer bribes. > > > > This message is sent to the public forum so it’s illegal for me to lie. > > > > -Aris > > > > On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 7:32 PM Jason Cobb wrote: > > > >> That doesn't sound suspicious at all... > >> > >> Jason Cobb > >> > >> On 6/21/19 10:28 PM, Aris Merchant wrote: > >>> It’s kind of hard to communicate subtleties over text, so just so I’m > >>> clear: I’d really, really, really like to remain Promotor. :) > >>> > >>> -Aris > >>> > >>> On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 5:53 PM Aris Merchant < > >>> thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> > I would like to remain as Promotor, if the public doesn’t mind. > > -Aris > > On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 4:40 PM Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > I support the intent for ADoP. > > > > If any non-incumbent supports the others and notes that they want to > >> be a > > candidate, I'll support those too. Happy to keep doing tailor but > >> don't > > mind if someone else wants the job. > > > > On 6/21/2019 4:31 PM, Rebecca wrote: > >> I intend to initiate elections for Promotor, Tailor, ADoP and > Rulekeepor, > >> with two support (90 days having passed) > >> > >> (I will stand for ADoP if that intent gets two support. I will not > > resolve > >> the other intents because I do not wish to stand, but I am making them > in > >> case anyone else wishes to do so) > >>
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Election Intents
You can change the order of proposals as Promotor or Assessor which sometimes affects a lot. Also they can still change the text and hope that nobody notices until it becomes self-ratifying. Also support my ADoP intent On Sat, Jun 22, 2019 at 12:48 PM Jason Cobb wrote: > How exactly does one abuse the position of Promotor? It doesn't seem > like the office has much discretion over what it does. The only thing I > can see is deciding whether or not to retry FAILED QUORUM proposals. > > Changing the text of a proposal (or something like that) could probably > be construed as a lie or a falsehood published in a report. > > Jason Cobb > > On 6/21/19 10:40 PM, Aris Merchant wrote: > > I assure you, I’m not plotting anything malevolent. I just really enjoy > the > > work, and it’s become part of my routine. I’d deeply miss it if no longer > > held the job. On the few occasions where I’ve considered resigning > because > > of I have too much to do IRL, I’ve not done so because I’m afraid that > the > > next person to take the office might not want to give it up if I wanted > it > > back. > > > > Also, any long-standing player can tell you that I’ve been extremely > > scrupulous about avoiding malevolent use Promotorial power. I refuse to > use > > it to help in scams, even when people offer bribes. > > > > This message is sent to the public forum so it’s illegal for me to lie. > > > > -Aris > > > > On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 7:32 PM Jason Cobb > wrote: > > > >> That doesn't sound suspicious at all... > >> > >> Jason Cobb > >> > >> On 6/21/19 10:28 PM, Aris Merchant wrote: > >>> It’s kind of hard to communicate subtleties over text, so just so I’m > >>> clear: I’d really, really, really like to remain Promotor. :) > >>> > >>> -Aris > >>> > >>> On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 5:53 PM Aris Merchant < > >>> thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> > I would like to remain as Promotor, if the public doesn’t mind. > > -Aris > > On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 4:40 PM Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > I support the intent for ADoP. > > > > If any non-incumbent supports the others and notes that they want to > >> be a > > candidate, I'll support those too. Happy to keep doing tailor but > >> don't > > mind if someone else wants the job. > > > > On 6/21/2019 4:31 PM, Rebecca wrote: > >> I intend to initiate elections for Promotor, Tailor, ADoP and > Rulekeepor, > >> with two support (90 days having passed) > >> > >> (I will stand for ADoP if that intent gets two support. I will not > > resolve > >> the other intents because I do not wish to stand, but I am making > them > in > >> case anyone else wishes to do so) > >> > -- >From R. Lee
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Election Intents
How exactly does one abuse the position of Promotor? It doesn't seem like the office has much discretion over what it does. The only thing I can see is deciding whether or not to retry FAILED QUORUM proposals. Changing the text of a proposal (or something like that) could probably be construed as a lie or a falsehood published in a report. Jason Cobb On 6/21/19 10:40 PM, Aris Merchant wrote: I assure you, I’m not plotting anything malevolent. I just really enjoy the work, and it’s become part of my routine. I’d deeply miss it if no longer held the job. On the few occasions where I’ve considered resigning because of I have too much to do IRL, I’ve not done so because I’m afraid that the next person to take the office might not want to give it up if I wanted it back. Also, any long-standing player can tell you that I’ve been extremely scrupulous about avoiding malevolent use Promotorial power. I refuse to use it to help in scams, even when people offer bribes. This message is sent to the public forum so it’s illegal for me to lie. -Aris On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 7:32 PM Jason Cobb wrote: That doesn't sound suspicious at all... Jason Cobb On 6/21/19 10:28 PM, Aris Merchant wrote: It’s kind of hard to communicate subtleties over text, so just so I’m clear: I’d really, really, really like to remain Promotor. :) -Aris On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 5:53 PM Aris Merchant < thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote: I would like to remain as Promotor, if the public doesn’t mind. -Aris On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 4:40 PM Kerim Aydin wrote: I support the intent for ADoP. If any non-incumbent supports the others and notes that they want to be a candidate, I'll support those too. Happy to keep doing tailor but don't mind if someone else wants the job. On 6/21/2019 4:31 PM, Rebecca wrote: I intend to initiate elections for Promotor, Tailor, ADoP and Rulekeepor, with two support (90 days having passed) (I will stand for ADoP if that intent gets two support. I will not resolve the other intents because I do not wish to stand, but I am making them in case anyone else wishes to do so)
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Election Intents
I have zero objection to Aris maintaining that role On Sat, Jun 22, 2019 at 12:40 PM Aris Merchant < thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote: > I assure you, I’m not plotting anything malevolent. I just really enjoy the > work, and it’s become part of my routine. I’d deeply miss it if no longer > held the job. On the few occasions where I’ve considered resigning because > of I have too much to do IRL, I’ve not done so because I’m afraid that the > next person to take the office might not want to give it up if I wanted it > back. > > Also, any long-standing player can tell you that I’ve been extremely > scrupulous about avoiding malevolent use Promotorial power. I refuse to use > it to help in scams, even when people offer bribes. > > This message is sent to the public forum so it’s illegal for me to lie. > > -Aris > > On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 7:32 PM Jason Cobb wrote: > > > That doesn't sound suspicious at all... > > > > Jason Cobb > > > > On 6/21/19 10:28 PM, Aris Merchant wrote: > > > It’s kind of hard to communicate subtleties over text, so just so I’m > > > clear: I’d really, really, really like to remain Promotor. :) > > > > > > -Aris > > > > > > On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 5:53 PM Aris Merchant < > > > thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > >> I would like to remain as Promotor, if the public doesn’t mind. > > >> > > >> -Aris > > >> > > >> On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 4:40 PM Kerim Aydin wrote: > > >> > > >>> I support the intent for ADoP. > > >>> > > >>> If any non-incumbent supports the others and notes that they want to > > be a > > >>> candidate, I'll support those too. Happy to keep doing tailor but > > don't > > >>> mind if someone else wants the job. > > >>> > > >>> On 6/21/2019 4:31 PM, Rebecca wrote: > > I intend to initiate elections for Promotor, Tailor, ADoP and > > >> Rulekeepor, > > with two support (90 days having passed) > > > > (I will stand for ADoP if that intent gets two support. I will not > > >>> resolve > > the other intents because I do not wish to stand, but I am making > them > > >> in > > case anyone else wishes to do so) > > > > > -- >From R. Lee
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Election Intents
That doesn't sound suspicious at all... Jason Cobb On 6/21/19 10:28 PM, Aris Merchant wrote: It’s kind of hard to communicate subtleties over text, so just so I’m clear: I’d really, really, really like to remain Promotor. :) -Aris On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 5:53 PM Aris Merchant < thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote: I would like to remain as Promotor, if the public doesn’t mind. -Aris On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 4:40 PM Kerim Aydin wrote: I support the intent for ADoP. If any non-incumbent supports the others and notes that they want to be a candidate, I'll support those too. Happy to keep doing tailor but don't mind if someone else wants the job. On 6/21/2019 4:31 PM, Rebecca wrote: I intend to initiate elections for Promotor, Tailor, ADoP and Rulekeepor, with two support (90 days having passed) (I will stand for ADoP if that intent gets two support. I will not resolve the other intents because I do not wish to stand, but I am making them in case anyone else wishes to do so)
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Election Intents
It’s kind of hard to communicate subtleties over text, so just so I’m clear: I’d really, really, really like to remain Promotor. :) -Aris On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 5:53 PM Aris Merchant < thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote: > I would like to remain as Promotor, if the public doesn’t mind. > > -Aris > > On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 4:40 PM Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > > > I support the intent for ADoP. > > > > If any non-incumbent supports the others and notes that they want to be a > > candidate, I'll support those too. Happy to keep doing tailor but don't > > mind if someone else wants the job. > > > > On 6/21/2019 4:31 PM, Rebecca wrote: > > > I intend to initiate elections for Promotor, Tailor, ADoP and > Rulekeepor, > > > with two support (90 days having passed) > > > > > > (I will stand for ADoP if that intent gets two support. I will not > > resolve > > > the other intents because I do not wish to stand, but I am making them > in > > > case anyone else wishes to do so) > > > > > >
