Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Proposal: Limited tracking
On Sun, Feb 12, 2023 at 3:19 PM Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > I would not like to be considered a coauthor on this one, as IIRC my only > contribution was to speak against the cfj changes which you kept, so I > don’t endorse that. I think having switches that turn on and off on > tracking like that have the potential to create some significant level of > confusion with self-ratification eg if a switch is left off the list, then > ceases to be tracked invisibly, does it self ratify as an open case and > kick off the judge? Or since it’s a single switch type, it’s also not clear > to me that a “allegedly complete list” of the tracked ones wouldn’t ratify > the untracked ones to the default state. Just raises a whole can of worms > that could affect the status of ancient cases in a way we really might not > want. > > -G. > > On Sun, Feb 12, 2023 at 1:04 PM Edward Murphy via agora-business < > agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > > Proposal: Limited tracking > > (AI = 3, co-authors = Janet, G.) > This proposal would also create unnecessary reports. The assessor would have to report the AI of each proposal weekly, including if there are no unresolved Agoran decisions. (Rule 2379: No News Is Some News). -- snail
DIS: Re: BUS: Proposal: Limited tracking
Sorry I accidentally deleted a sentence at the beginning of my reply that said this concern was in spite of the first proposal sentence - just not really seeing the benefit of the partial tracking like that for cfjs On Sun, Feb 12, 2023 at 1:18 PM Kerim Aydin wrote: > I would not like to be considered a coauthor on this one, as IIRC my only > contribution was to speak against the cfj changes which you kept, so I > don’t endorse that. I think having switches that turn on and off on > tracking like that have the potential to create some significant level of > confusion with self-ratification eg if a switch is left off the list, then > ceases to be tracked invisibly, does it self ratify as an open case and > kick off the judge? Or since it’s a single switch type, it’s also not clear > to me that a “allegedly complete list” of the tracked ones wouldn’t ratify > the untracked ones to the default state. Just raises a whole can of worms > that could affect the status of ancient cases in a way we really might not > want. > > -G. > > On Sun, Feb 12, 2023 at 1:04 PM Edward Murphy via agora-business < > agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > >> Proposal: Limited tracking >> (AI = 3, co-authors = Janet, G.) >> >> Amend Rule 2162 (Switches) by adding this paragraph to the list item >> regarding tracking: >> >> Alternatively, if the rules assign an office to track only some >> instances of a switch, then the report includes the value of >> those instances, but a document purporting to be such a list is >> not self-ratifying. >> >> Amend Rule 2606 (Proposal Classes) by replacing this text: >> >>Proposals created since the enactment of this rule have a secured >>untracked Class switch with possible values ordinary (the default) >>and democratic. >> >> with this text: >> >>Proposals created since the enactment of this rule have a secured >>Class switch, tracked by the Promotor for proposals in the >>Proposal Pool, with possible values ordinary (the default) and >>democratic. >> >> Amend Rule 1950 (Decisions with Adoption Indices) by replacing this >> text: >> >>Adoption index (AI) is an untracked switch possessed by Agoran >>decisions and proposals, secured at power 2. >> >> with this text: >> >>Adoption index (AI) is a switch possessed by Agoran decisions and >>proposals, secured at power 2, tracked by the Assessor for Agoran >>decisions not yet resolved, and by the Promotor for proposals in >>the Proposal Pool. >> >> Amend Rule 991 (Calls for Judgement) by replacing this text: >> >>Judge is an untracked CFJ switch with possible values of any >>person or former person, or "unassigned" (default). >> >> with this text: >> >>Judge is a CFJ switch, tracked by the Arbitor for CFJs that have >>been unassigned at any point during the past week, with possible >>values of any person or former person, or "unassigned" (default). >> >
DIS: Re: BUS: Proposal: Limited tracking
I would not like to be considered a coauthor on this one, as IIRC my only contribution was to speak against the cfj changes which you kept, so I don’t endorse that. I think having switches that turn on and off on tracking like that have the potential to create some significant level of confusion with self-ratification eg if a switch is left off the list, then ceases to be tracked invisibly, does it self ratify as an open case and kick off the judge? Or since it’s a single switch type, it’s also not clear to me that a “allegedly complete list” of the tracked ones wouldn’t ratify the untracked ones to the default state. Just raises a whole can of worms that could affect the status of ancient cases in a way we really might not want. -G. On Sun, Feb 12, 2023 at 1:04 PM Edward Murphy via agora-business < agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > Proposal: Limited tracking > (AI = 3, co-authors = Janet, G.) > > Amend Rule 2162 (Switches) by adding this paragraph to the list item > regarding tracking: > > Alternatively, if the rules assign an office to track only some > instances of a switch, then the report includes the value of > those instances, but a document purporting to be such a list is > not self-ratifying. > > Amend Rule 2606 (Proposal Classes) by replacing this text: > >Proposals created since the enactment of this rule have a secured >untracked Class switch with possible values ordinary (the default) >and democratic. > > with this text: > >Proposals created since the enactment of this rule have a secured >Class switch, tracked by the Promotor for proposals in the >Proposal Pool, with possible values ordinary (the default) and >democratic. > > Amend Rule 1950 (Decisions with Adoption Indices) by replacing this > text: > >Adoption index (AI) is an untracked switch possessed by Agoran >decisions and proposals, secured at power 2. > > with this text: > >Adoption index (AI) is a switch possessed by Agoran decisions and >proposals, secured at power 2, tracked by the Assessor for Agoran >decisions not yet resolved, and by the Promotor for proposals in >the Proposal Pool. > > Amend Rule 991 (Calls for Judgement) by replacing this text: > >Judge is an untracked CFJ switch with possible values of any >person or former person, or "unassigned" (default). > > with this text: > >Judge is a CFJ switch, tracked by the Arbitor for CFJs that have >been unassigned at any point during the past week, with possible >values of any person or former person, or "unassigned" (default). >
