DIS: Re: BUS: [Prop] Proletarian Revolution v2

If this passes, I'm up for allying up with other players to even out our Shinies to help dodge being the hot potato (we can automatize it with Agencies/Contracts too, so that we always have our "real" amounts available and limited to just that, while all of our shiny balances are equal). Ideally,

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Surveyor] September Estate Auction

I actually messed up in one place: "certain" begins with an s sound so shouldn't have been included. I'm glad you enjoyed it regardless though. 天火狐 On 9 September 2017 at 11:48, Owen Jacobson wrote: > > > On Sep 9, 2017, at 10:42 AM, Josh T wrote:

DIS: Re: BUS: Yellow card apology

I’m very not sorry, but this probably failed. R2427: "When a Yellow Card is issued, the bad sport SHOULD publish a formal apology of at least 200 words explaining eir error, shame, remorse, and ardent desire for self-improvement.” This explained none of those things. Gaelan > On Sep 8, 2017,

DIS: Re: BUS: Yellow card apology

This doesn't count as a "ormal apology of at least 200 words explaining eir error, shame, remorse, and ardent desire for self-improvement.". It's not an apology and it expresses none of the above. I'm counting your voting strength as 0 unless everyone else tells me otherwise. On Sat, Sep 9, 2017

DIS: Re: BUS: Proposal: Improved Buoyancy

I retract the proposal "Improved Buoyancy". I submit the following proposal. -Aris --- Title: Improved Buoyancy v2 Adoption index: 2.0 Author: Aris Co-authors: G. [Note to the Assessor: please resolve after "Float On".] [It is my belief that the current floating value problem was primarily

DIS: Re: BUS: Proposal: Improved Buoyancy

On Sat, 9 Sep 2017, Aris Merchant wrote: > The Secretary CAN flip the floating value once a week. As part of > eir weekly duties, e SHALL flip the Floating Value to the number of Shinies > owned by Agora; by announcement by announcement by announcement by announcement by announcement by

DIS: Re: BUS: Proposal: Agora Protection Act

I'm going to see whether this passes as is. I pend the proposal "Agora Protection Act" for 1 shiny. -Aris On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 1:48 PM, Aris Merchant wrote: > I submit the following proposal. I don't think anything in it should > be objectionable, but let

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Conditionals and Determinacy

On Sat, 9 Sep 2017, Aris Merchant wrote: > > So, in the balance of legislative and common law, I'd put conditionals > > on the common law side. Probably, among everything else that's common > > law, this is the one I would most want to keep there. > > > > -G. > > I don't object to having it be

DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] You can take it with you

On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 4:33 PM, Owen Jacobson wrote: > I submit the following proposal, and pend it by paying Agora 1 sh. > > Title: You can take it with you > Author: o > Co-authors: Aris > AI: 1 > > {{{ > Repeal rule 2485 (“You can’t take it with you”). > }}} > > This rule

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Conditionals and Determinacy

On Sat, Sep 9, 2017 at 12:41 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > On Sat, 9 Sep 2017, Aris Merchant wrote: >> I pend "Conditionals and Determinacy" by paying 1 shiny to Agora. > > Having read this, this is a place that has functioned through the Courts > for at least 15 years, and

DIS: Re: BUS: Conditionals and Determinacy

On Sat, 9 Sep 2017, Aris Merchant wrote: > I pend "Conditionals and Determinacy" by paying 1 shiny to Agora. Having read this, this is a place that has functioned through the Courts for at least 15 years, and I prefer to keep it that way. First because attempting to legislate and codify

DIS: Re: BUS: Proposals

Which proposal exactly did you retract, anyway? Both of them? -Aris On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 1:13 AM, V.J Rada wrote: > I retract the above. > > On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 6:01 PM, V.J Rada wrote: >> I pend the following w/ AP (I have none left this week,

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Surveyor] September Estate Auction

> On Sep 9, 2017, at 11:29 AM, Cuddle Beam wrote: > > I'm not entirely sure how many shinies I have right now but I believe I > should have 66 (Welcome Package [50] + Gaelan Transfer [10] + o Transfer [7] > - Stamp Purchase [1] = 66) > > If I have 66 shinies right now,

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Surveyor] September Estate Auction

> On Sep 9, 2017, at 10:42 AM, Josh T wrote: > > Oh well, I had fun writing my blurb. It was kind of hard to not use common > words like "the" or "of". > > 天火狐 I rather liked your blurb. You picked an interesting writing challenge to riff on. Thank you for

DIS: Re: BUS: [Surveyor] September Estate Auction

Oh well, I had fun writing my blurb. It was kind of hard to not use common words like "the" or "of". 天火狐 On 9 September 2017 at 03:20, Owen Jacobson wrote: > > > On Sep 2, 2017, at 12:02 AM, Owen Jacobson wrote: > > > > As Surveyor, it is my pleasure to

DIS: Re: BUS: Proposal: Mother, Can I?

I strongly oppose this rule because it is dangerous. We just need to be more careful in the future. Publius Scribonius Scholasticus p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com > On Sep 8, 2017, at 11:50 PM, VJ Rada wrote: > > Title: Mother, May I? > AI: 3 > Amend rule 2152

DIS: Re: BUS: MAYS that should be CANS PLEASE READ THIS WE'RE SO FUCKED

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com > On Sep 8, 2017, at 11:39 PM, VJ Rada wrote: > > "Whenever a Player feels that e has been treated so egregiously by the > Agoran community that e can no longer abide to be a part of it, e may >

Re: DIS: Proto: Rule Precedence Changes

If a rule with higher power defers to a rule of lower power, and the deference is allowed to work, then the lower powered rule could be modified (using an instrument of a lower power) to do something else, thus modifying the operation of the higher-powered rule with a lower- powered change.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Card Reform and Expansion v2

note a) this isn't a formal investigation because I'm over my finger limit and b) if it were, ais would be in charge. On Sat, Sep 9, 2017 at 5:51 PM, Aris Merchant wrote: > > On Sat, Sep 9, 2017 at 12:46 AM Owen Jacobson wrote: >> >> >> > On

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Card Reform and Expansion v2

On Sat, Sep 9, 2017 at 12:46 AM Owen Jacobson wrote: > > > On Sep 9, 2017, at 3:46 AM, VJ Rada wrote: > > > > "When a player Points a Finger, the investigator SHALL investigate the > > allegation and, in a timely fashion, SHALL conclude the investigation >

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Card Reform and Expansion v2

"When a player Points a Finger, the investigator SHALL investigate the allegation and, in a timely fashion, SHALL conclude the investigation by: issuing a Card to the pointed-at player by announcement whose reason is rooted in the allegation; if e believes that no rules violation occurred or

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Card Reform and Expansion v2

> On Sep 9, 2017, at 3:46 AM, VJ Rada wrote: > > "When a player Points a Finger, the investigator SHALL investigate the > allegation and, in a timely fashion, SHALL conclude the investigation > by: > > issuing a Card to the pointed-at player by announcement whose reason >

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Prop] Proletarian Revolution

> On Sep 9, 2017, at 3:15 AM, VJ Rada wrote: > > Doesn't this incentivise not having any money and spending all you get > quickly on other things? > > Huh, working as intended then I guess. Yup, exactly. It’s a nuclear lottery: accumulating a critical mass of shinies will

DIS: Re: BUS: [Prop] Proletarian Revolution

Doesn't this incentivise not having any money and spending all you get quickly on other things? Huh, working as intended then I guess. On Sat, Sep 9, 2017 at 4:43 PM, Gaelan Steele wrote: > On an alternate email address due to technical issues. > > I create the following

DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Billy Mays Here

On Sat, Sep 9, 2017 at 12:05 AM Owen Jacobson wrote: > > > On Sep 9, 2017, at 2:59 AM, Owen Jacobson wrote: > > > > I submit the following proposal. > > > > Title: BILLY MAYS HERE > > I retract the proposal BILLY MAYS HERE, and submit the following proposal >

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Billy Mays Here

yup sorry. On Sat, Sep 9, 2017 at 5:04 PM, Owen Jacobson wrote: > >> On Sep 9, 2017, at 3:03 AM, VJ Rada wrote: >> >> " An Agency is a document empowering persons to act on behalf of >>another player. A player CAN establish an Agency With 24 hours

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Card Reform and Expansion v2

I'll fix these tomorrow; it's getting rather late over here. -Aris On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 11:56 PM Ørjan Johansen wrote: > On Fri, 8 Sep 2017, Aris Merchant wrote: > > > Amend Rule 2474, "Green Cards", to read in full: > > > > A Green Card is a type of Card that is

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Billy Mays Here

> On Sep 9, 2017, at 3:03 AM, VJ Rada wrote: > > " An Agency is a document empowering persons to act on behalf of >another player. A player CAN establish an Agency With 24 hours >Notice, and thereby become its Director, by specifying the >properties

DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Billy Mays Here

You'll want to make festivals, agencies and rewards by announcement. On Sat, Sep 9, 2017 at 5:03 PM, VJ Rada wrote: > " An Agency is a document empowering persons to act on behalf of > another player. A player CAN establish an Agency With 24 hours > Notice,

DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Billy Mays Here

" An Agency is a document empowering persons to act on behalf of another player. A player CAN establish an Agency With 24 hours Notice, and thereby become its Director, by specifying the properties of the new Agency, provided e has not established any other Agency

DIS: Re: BUS: Card Reform and Expansion v2

On Fri, 8 Sep 2017, Aris Merchant wrote: Amend Rule 2474, "Green Cards", to read in full: A Green Card is a type of Card that is appropriate for minor, accidental, and/or inconsequential infraction. A Green Card is also appropriate for any infraction for which no other type of Card is

Re: DIS: Proto: Rule Precedence Changes

G., can you explain why it's that way? -Aris On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 11:39 PM, Aris Merchant wrote: > Why would anyone intend that? It doesn't make any sense. > > -Aris > > On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 11:38 PM, VJ Rada wrote: >> "Reading it's

Re: DIS: Proto: Rule Precedence Changes

Why would anyone intend that? It doesn't make any sense. -Aris On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 11:38 PM, VJ Rada wrote: > "Reading it's text, if a rule of higher power defers > to a rule of lower power, the rule of higher power is followed anyway." > Pretty sure that's intentional. >

Re: DIS: Proto: Rule Precedence Changes

"Reading it's text, if a rule of higher power defers to a rule of lower power, the rule of higher power is followed anyway." Pretty sure that's intentional. On Sat, Sep 9, 2017 at 4:36 PM, Aris Merchant wrote: > I know that this is one of the scariest, if not

DIS: Proto: Rule Precedence Changes

I know that this is one of the scariest, if not the scariest, game mechanics to fiddle with. That being said, Rule 1030 is pretty obviously broken. Reading it's text, if a rule of higher power defers to a rule of lower power, the rule of higher power is followed anyway. This fixes that and a few

DIS: Re: BUS: Card Reform and Expansion v2

On Fri, 8 Sep 2017, Aris Merchant wrote: When a player Points a Finger, the investigator SHALL investigate the allegation and, in a timely fashion, SHALL conclude the investigation by: - issuing a Card to the pointed-at person by announcement whose reason is rooted in the allegation;

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Restraining Bolt

On Fri, 8 Sep 2017, Aris Merchant wrote: I don't think this one is needed, because the definition of distribution resolves to an Agoran decision initiation, described as a publishing action elsewhere. In fact adding "by announcement" might do more harm than good. It shouldn't do any harm as

DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Restraining Bolt

I retract the proposal “Restraining Bolt” and submit the following proposal in its place. Title: Restraining Bolt Author: o Co-authors: V.J Rada, Ørjan AI: 2.0 {{{ Amend rule 103 ("The Speaker") by replacing the second paragraph with: {{{ The player or players who have most

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Card Reform and Expansion v2

I don't feel confident enough about the idea philosophically to add it to a proposal. The Referee's report doesn't self ratify, and this is the kind of thing you don't want to be ambiguous about, so what do you do? Make messages purporting to award a card self ratify? -Aris On Fri, Sep 8, 2017

DIS: Re: BUS: Card Reform and Expansion v2

Can you make it IMPOSSIBLE to issue people cards for doing legal things, not just SHALL NOT. My "cards are appealable" failed because of a different reason but that seems uncontro. On Sat, Sep 9, 2017 at 4:20 PM, Aris Merchant wrote: > I submit the following

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Restraining Bolt

Previous agency reports self-ratified right? So we're all good? On Sat, Sep 9, 2017 at 4:17 PM, Aris Merchant wrote: > On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 11:14 PM, Owen Jacobson wrote: >> >>> On Sep 9, 2017, at 2:08 AM, VJ Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Restraining Bolt

On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 11:15 PM, Ørjan Johansen wrote: > On Sat, 9 Sep 2017, Owen Jacobson wrote: > >>{{{ >>In a timely fashion after the start of June 1 of each year, the >>Herald SHALL propose a set of Regulations governing a Birthday >>Tournament

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Restraining Bolt

On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 11:14 PM, Owen Jacobson wrote: > >> On Sep 9, 2017, at 2:08 AM, VJ Rada wrote: >> >> Can you change the MAYs in agencies and Rewards to by announcement so >> that by adopting yours in conjunction w/ mine and ors, they're fixed? > > I

DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Restraining Bolt

On Sat, 9 Sep 2017, Owen Jacobson wrote: {{{ In a timely fashion after the start of June 1 of each year, the Herald SHALL propose a set of Regulations governing a Birthday Tournament for that year; the Herald CAN also delegate the responsibility for creating or

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Restraining Bolt

> On Sep 9, 2017, at 2:08 AM, VJ Rada wrote: > > Can you change the MAYs in agencies and Rewards to by announcement so > that by adopting yours in conjunction w/ mine and ors, they're fixed? I plan to vote against your proposal, if it reaches that point. The Mother, May I?

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Proposal: Mother, Can I?

On Sat, 9 Sep 2017, Owen Jacobson wrote: Rule 2431 doesn't seem to restrict where specifications can be made. "With Agoran Consent" is sufficient to restrict this to being done via the public fora, because rule 1728 specifies that an action with that constraint can be done by announcement

DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Restraining Bolt

Can you change the MAYs in agencies and Rewards to by announcement so that by adopting yours in conjunction w/ mine and ors, they're fixed? On Sat, Sep 9, 2017 at 4:04 PM, Owen Jacobson wrote: > I submit the following proposal. > > Title: Restraining Bolt > Author: o >