DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8287-8307

[Gaelan Steele via agora-discussion]

> On Jan 24, 2020, at 12:49 AM, omd via agora-business 
>  wrote:
> 
> On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 7:23 PM Aris Merchant via agora-official
>  wrote:
>> 8287  twg  2.0   Blot Stabilisation
> FOR
>> 8288  omd  1.0   Glitteral
> FOR
>> 8289  Alexis   1.0   You're Banned from the Theater
> PRESENT
>> 8290  G.   3.0   More Headroom
> FOR
>> 8291  Bernie, [1]  3.0   Interesting Chambers v3.1
> PRESENT (incidentally, "effects" should probably be "affects")
>> 8292  Bernie, twg  3.0   Self-Ratification Simplification Act
> FOR
>> 8293  Bernie, twg  1.0   CFJ Bait
> AGAINST
>> 8294  Bernie, twg  3.0   Authorial Intent
> AGAINST
>> 8295  Bernie, twg, Alexis  3.0   Rewards Reform Act
> AGAINST because the new text for R2496 is missing a "by announcement".
> Otherwise I'd be FOR.
>> 8296  Aris, G. 1.0   Divergence
> FOR, although it seems like two unrelated proposals in one

It’s not. A while back, we had a debate over whether some proposals worked, and 
we fixed it with another proposal that conditionally enacted all the rules. To 
save the Rulekeepor the trouble of figuring out when the rule was actually 
enacted, we introduced the convergence mechanism. If we repealed convergences 
without that accompanying Rulekeepor change, the Rulekeepor might have to go 
back and figure out what actually happened back then. 

Gaelan 

>> 8297  Aris 2.1   Imminent Failure
> FOR
>> 8298  Aris, [2]2.0   Administrative Adjudication v3
> AGAINST, way too scammable
>> 8299  Aris, G. 3.0   The Reset Button v2
> PRESENT
>> 8300  Aris 3.0   Patches
> AGAINST, if only because "once it has been rendered obsolete" is vague
> for a CAN condition
>> 8301  Aris, Jason Cobb 3.0   Consolidated Regulatory Recordkeeping v2
> Endorse the Rulekeepor.
>> 8302  Aris 1.5   Generic Petitions
> PRESENT
>> 8303  Aris, [3]3.0   Contract Patency v3
> PRESENT
>> 8304  Bernie, twg, Jason Cobb  3.0   Rewards Reform Act - v1.1 Patch
> AGAINST; making "officially timely fashion" mean something different
> from "timely fashion" is confusing.
>> 8305  Alexis   3.0   Keeping Up With the Times
> FOR
>> 8306  Gaelan   3.0   Deregistration
> Endorse D. Margaux.
>> 8307  D. Margaux   3.0   Deregistration
> Endorse Gaelan.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8287-8307

[Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion]

On 1/21/2020 4:31 AM, Timon Walshe-Grey via agora-discussion wrote:
> G. wrote:
>>> 8293  Bernie, twg  1.0   CFJ Bait
>> AGAINST.  Only natural persons can register so this fails off the
>> bat unless I miss something - not particularly interesting.
> 
> The first sentence yes, but none of the others are expressly
> conditional on that working :)
> 
> Several of the others probably fail for similar reasons but afaict "I
> grant myself 9 coins" meets the tests Aris outlined in eir judgement
> on your version, which means several of the "I transfer X coins" may
> work too. Genuinely have no idea what results it has if any.

Hmm, the Notice of Honour one might be interesting.

If a proposal used our standard proposal style and said "G.'s karma is
hereby increased by 1; nch's is hereby decreased by 1" it should work just
fine (karma isn't secured or anything so proposals can change it).

Does cloaking those two statements as a "notice of honour" make it subject
e.g. to R2510(1)'s "be the first valid Notice of Honour that player has
published..." which would invalidate it as it wasn't published by a player?
Or do we just say that the "notice" label is syntactic sugar and the changes
are made as if it was a pair of more normally-written proposal-specified
changes.

-G.

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8287-8307

[Timon Walshe-Grey via agora-discussion]

G. wrote:
> > 8293  Bernie, twg  1.0   CFJ Bait
> AGAINST.  Only natural persons can register so this fails off the
> bat unless I miss something - not particularly interesting.

The first sentence yes, but none of the others are expressly
conditional on that working :)

Several of the others probably fail for similar reasons but afaict "I
grant myself 9 coins" meets the tests Aris outlined in eir judgement
on your version, which means several of the "I transfer X coins" may
work too. Genuinely have no idea what results it has if any.

-twg