Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] More Actions Should Use Agoran Consent

But retraction is itself informal. On 10/26/2017 08:49 PM, Aris Merchant wrote: > NttPF. > > -Aris > > > On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 6:53 PM, ATMunn wrote: >> Ah. I retract the below proposal. I didn't pend it anyway, and obviously >> nobody will vote for it. >> >> >> On

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] More Actions Should Use Agoran Consent

NttPF. -Aris On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 6:53 PM, ATMunn wrote: > Ah. I retract the below proposal. I didn't pend it anyway, and obviously > nobody will vote for it. > > > On 10/25/2017 9:51 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: >> >> >> >> Needs to be AI-3 to work. >> >> On Wed, 25 Oct

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] More Actions Should Use Agoran Consent

On Thu, 26 Oct 2017, Alex Smith wrote: > On Thu, 2017-10-26 at 13:13 +1100, VJ Rada wrote: > > Actually, I wonder whether or not we should just repeal the Public Forum > > rule? Because there are so many references to Public Fora in the rules, as > > well as Agora is a Nomic being a rule, it

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] More Actions Should Use Agoran Consent

On Thu, 2017-10-26 at 13:13 +1100, VJ Rada wrote: > Actually, I wonder whether or not we should just repeal the Public Forum > rule? Because there are so many references to Public Fora in the rules, as > well as Agora is a Nomic being a rule, it feels like the existence of the > current Public

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] More Actions Should Use Agoran Consent

Repealing the rule would probably leave us with a common-law definition of fora that is something like "A place that all Agorans have access to and is regularly used and understood by Agorans as a place game actions are sent to". Discussion fora are not so understood. Changing fora would simply

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] More Actions Should Use Agoran Consent

On Thu, 26 Oct 2017, VJ Rada wrote: > Actually, I wonder whether or not we should just repeal the Public Forum > rule? > Because there are so many references to Public Fora in the rules, as well as > Agora is a Nomic being a rule, it feels like the existence of the current > Public Fora as

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] More Actions Should Use Agoran Consent

Actually, I wonder whether or not we should just repeal the Public Forum rule? Because there are so many references to Public Fora in the rules, as well as Agora is a Nomic being a rule, it feels like the existence of the current Public Fora as Fora would still be implied. And having the whole

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] More Actions Should Use Agoran Consent

Yeah, if we had a significant amount of time and quorum for agoran consent, there would be no point in having it. It does feel odd that you would have to bribe less people to give you a title of your choice if you did it "non-traditionally", though. I mean, it's quite possible without doing

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] More Actions Should Use Agoran Consent

Deregistering the players wouldn't destroy Agora. As long as the public forum exists (now *that's* worth protecting), a person CAN still register when there's no players. This would allow the Assessor to resolve the proposal and register and be the only player in the game for the duration

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] More Actions Should Use Agoran Consent

On Thu, 26 Oct 2017, Madeline wrote: > Isn't it? They seem to be the same in terms of the proportion of people you > need to get on side, it's hard to see how they aren't intended to be similar. > It seems kind of strange that it's easier to award a patent title by making an > AI1.5 proposal

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] More Actions Should Use Agoran Consent

Actually, I agree with you. It probably should be 1.5 Agoran Consent. Or 1.4 Consent. On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 12:59 PM, Madeline wrote: > Isn't it? They seem to be the same in terms of the proportion of people > you need to get on side, it's hard to see how they aren't

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] More Actions Should Use Agoran Consent

I was tempted. On Wed, 25 Oct 2017 at 21:53 ATMunn wrote: > Ah. I retract the below proposal. I didn't pend it anyway, and obviously > nobody will vote for it. > > On 10/25/2017 9:51 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > > > > Needs to be AI-3 to work. > > > > On Wed, 25 Oct

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] More Actions Should Use Agoran Consent

Ah. I retract the below proposal. I didn't pend it anyway, and obviously nobody will vote for it. On 10/25/2017 9:51 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: Needs to be AI-3 to work. On Wed, 25 Oct 2017, ATMunn wrote: For fun, I create the below proposal: Title: Way More Controversial Version of the Above

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] More Actions Should Use Agoran Consent

On Wed, 25 Oct 2017 at 21:40 Kerim Aydin wrote: > > 2. Flipping Officeholder switches isn't secured anywhere > That's a good catch, worth fixing. > Is it? It's still regulated.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Agoran Newspaper Repeal

> On Oct 24, 2017, at 10:40 PM, Alexis Hunt wrote: > > Campaign Proposals are Official Proposals, so they don't need manual pending. Thanks. I read the rules on the subject and came away uncertain; pending both of my campaign proposals was cheap and reliable. -o

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Agoran Newspaper Repeal

The one thing I like least about agora's current high activity is there's always one person who answered your question just slightly before you, and one just slightly after. On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 1:49 PM, Aris Merchant < thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Agoran Newspaper Repeal

On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 7:47 PM Alex Smith wrote: > On Wed, 2017-10-25 at 02:40 +, Alexis Hunt wrote: > > Campaign Proposals are Official Proposals, so they don't need manual > > pending. > > If you decide to pay the shinies to pend one even though it's already >

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Agoran Newspaper Repeal

The text of the rules has this to say: "Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, an Official proposal is always pending. Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, players CANNOT claim rewards for the adoption of an

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Agoran Newspaper Repeal

On Tue, 24 Oct 2017 at 22:47 Alex Smith wrote: > On Wed, 2017-10-25 at 02:40 +, Alexis Hunt wrote: > > Campaign Proposals are Official Proposals, so they don't need manual > > pending. > > If you decide to pay the shinies to pend one even though it's already >

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Agoran Newspaper Repeal

On Wed, 2017-10-25 at 02:40 +, Alexis Hunt wrote: > Campaign Proposals are Official Proposals, so they don't need manual > pending. If you decide to pay the shinies to pend one even though it's already pending, does it then pay out shinies if it passes? -- ais523

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Agoran Newspaper Repeal

Campaign Proposals are Official Proposals, so they don't need manual pending. On Tue, 24 Oct 2017 at 22:38 Owen Jacobson wrote: > I stand for election. > > I submit the following campaign proposal, and pend it by paying Agora 1 > shiny. > > Title: Farm No More > AI: 2 >

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Agoran Newspaper Repeal

I initiate and stand for the Agronomist election (to avoid it all getting repealed). My campaign proposal is as follows. Title: Agronomist-Surveyor Combination Author: VJ Rada Text: Repeal rule 2504 "The Agronomist". Amend rule 2488 "The Surveyor" by adding the text at the end "The Surveyor's

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Agoran Newspaper Repeal

Er, which election? On Wed, 25 Oct 2017, VJ Rada wrote: > I initiate and stand for the election. My campaign proposal is as follows. > > Title: Agronomist-Surveyor Combination > Author: VJ Rada > Text: Repeal rule 2504 "The Agronomist". Amend rule 2488 "The > Surveyor" by adding the text at

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Agoran Newspaper Repeal

Ineffective, you did not become a candidate. On Tue, Oct 24, 2017, 05:49 VJ Rada, wrote: > I do so. > > On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 8:32 PM, Alexis Hunt wrote: > > I support as well. > > > > > > On Tue, Oct 24, 2017, 03:13 Owen Jacobson,

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Agoran Newspaper Repeal

I support as well. On Tue, Oct 24, 2017, 03:13 Owen Jacobson, wrote: > > > On Oct 24, 2017, at 3:12 AM, VJ Rada wrote: > > > > Yep. I intend to, with two support, initiate an Agronomist election > > (the position is interim). > > I support. > > >

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Agoran Newspaper Repeal

On Tue, 24 Oct 2017, Owen Jacobson wrote: I straight-up resign. If it is possible for me to do so, I initiate an election for the office of Agronomist. I submit the following as a campaign proposal: I think the first action made the second impossible. Greetings, Ørjan.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Proposal Clearing out our win-cons

I certainly don't have beef with underutilised mechanics either, and I'll confess I looked at this wincon as perhaps the most achievable without catching onto a scam. I wouldn't vote to repeal any wincons without adding new ones. On 2017-10-24 12:07, Josh T wrote: I think I have one trust

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Proposal Clearing out our win-cons

I think I have one trust token that nobody else has, and doesn't think it make sense to track mine because of how few I have. I like the idea of having a long goal in mind, although I really don't have any beef with having underused mechanics. It may be worth pointing out that I have ideas for

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Proposal Clearing out our win-cons

On 10/23/2017 8:29 PM, VJ Rada wrote: Does anyone want to come forward as actually significantly tracking their trust tokens? Because then I will admit that they have worth as a wincon. But it seems to me they're just even less achievable Stamps that nobody tracks. I track my trust tokens. I

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Proposal Clearing out our win-cons

On Tue, 24 Oct 2017, VJ Rada wrote: > Does anyone want to come forward as actually significantly tracking > their trust tokens? Because then I will admit that they have worth as > a wincon. But it seems to me they're just even less achievable Stamps > that nobody tracks. Yes. But I'll admit to

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Proposal Clearing out our win-cons

On Tue, 2017-10-24 at 11:29 +1100, VJ Rada wrote: > Does anyone want to come forward as actually significantly tracking > their trust tokens? Because then I will admit that they have worth as > a wincon. But it seems to me they're just even less achievable Stamps > that nobody tracks. I know I'm

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Proposal Clearing out our win-cons

Apathy isn't really a reset button though? And it incentivizes either A: hiding things so that nobody can see them (eg, in invisible email formats, long rulesets), B: obnoxious scams like posting "I intend to win by apathy" 4000 times or C: making other players unable to object for four days. None

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Agoran Newspaper Repeal

On Mon, 23 Oct 2017, Alexis Hunt wrote: > I believe the report is overdue though, traditionally, we are lax on officers > who take over midweek. In an old system, we had a strong precedent or rule (can't remember) that you can't ding an officer for missing something in eir first objection

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Agoran Newspaper Repeal

I believe the report is overdue though, traditionally, we are lax on officers who take over midweek. Note that the new rules regarding your report mean you'll likely need to go through some mailing list history to pick up the date that elections ended for each office. On Sun, 22 Oct 2017 at

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Agoran Newspaper Repeal

oh. I wasn't sure whether or not "I ratify the below document, which is: {Just now, ATMunn won an election for ADoP. Just now, Alexis won an election for Prime Minister}." actually meant that I hold ADoP and Alexis holds PM. I guess I should have figured that out, however, since Alexis's vote

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Agoran Newspaper Repeal

I agree with this and have written o, asking em, if e needed interim help. On 10/22/2017 07:49 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > On Mon, 23 Oct 2017, VJ Rada wrote: >> By the by, I forgot o. is also the agronomist. I intend to deputize >> for the position to publish its weekly report. > I have to say,

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Agoran Newspaper Repeal

Fair enough on that last point - I shouldn't talk I grabbed Herald from PSS last month for the same reasons (i.e. I needed the cash). On Mon, 23 Oct 2017, VJ Rada wrote: > It is 4 and 14 days, isn't it? That still gives em 3 to 4 days, if I > prepare a report immediately after I'm allowed,

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Agoran Newspaper Repeal

Yeah, lost and gone. I also just lost superintendent and PM rip. Bad two days. On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 10:57 AM, Alexis Hunt wrote: > E already did. You're the ADoP now! > > On Sun, 22 Oct 2017 at 19:57 ATMunn . wrote: >> >> That's true. I think I'd

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Agoran Newspaper Repeal

Especially given that e is the Referee and the Secretary, which are VERY important to publish each week, given the 7-day statute of limitations and the Floating Value (and general effects of economic uncertainty). I feel little guilt, honestly, and now that we have excellent electoral systems I'm

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Agoran Newspaper Repeal

E already did. You're the ADoP now! On Sun, 22 Oct 2017 at 19:57 ATMunn . wrote: > That's true. I think I'd agree on that, especially for you, since you'll > soon lose ADoP. > > On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 7:54 PM, VJ Rada wrote: > >> It is 4 and 14

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Agoran Newspaper Repeal

That's true. I think I'd agree on that, especially for you, since you'll soon lose ADoP. On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 7:54 PM, VJ Rada wrote: > It is 4 and 14 days, isn't it? That still gives em 3 to 4 days, if I > prepare a report immediately after I'm allowed, which I doubt. >

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Agoran Newspaper Repeal

It is 4 and 14 days, isn't it? That still gives em 3 to 4 days, if I prepare a report immediately after I'm allowed, which I doubt. I don't deny o's good officerlyness, I have complimented em on it many times. Having said that, e is also the richest Agoran, a holder of 5 offices currently. It

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Agoran Newspaper Repeal

Agronomy in Agora can still go a long way, and I don't think it should be repealed. At most, it needs to be reworked. The sentiment among Agorans is that we need a more player-centric economy, so that shinies can trade hands between players rather than between Agora and a player. On

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Agoran Newspaper Repeal

On Mon, 23 Oct 2017, VJ Rada wrote: > By the by, I forgot o. is also the agronomist. I intend to deputize > for the position to publish its weekly report. I have to say, o has been a conscientious and hard-working Officer that hasn't missed deadlines generally - it seems churlish to grab

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Agoran Newspaper Repeal

No I love the buying and selling of voting power idea there. If we maybe made it cheaper and easier to understand, and increased the number of Estates perhaps, it would maybe work. Problem, of course, is buy-in. On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 10:46 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > >

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Agoran Newspaper Repeal

On Mon, 23 Oct 2017, VJ Rada wrote: > We should probably just repeal Agronomy? It's a really complicated > modification of five things that creates so many empty reports that > the reportor forgot to publish them until last week. And the person > whose idea it was left immediately after coming

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Agoran Newspaper Repeal

>From now on, I will "create the following and spend a shiny to pend it" On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 10:42 AM, ATMunn . wrote: > Also, "create and spend a shiny to pend the following" implies that you're > creating a shiny, and then spending it, which is IMPOSSIBLE. > > On

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Agoran Newspaper Repeal

On Sun, 22 Oct 2017, Alexis Hunt wrote: > > Contracts passed, and was enacted unless my CFJ turns out true (G., any > likelihood > of expediting that one and possibly linking it with my previous one about the > Promotor's report?) Might not be today, but should get it out by tomorrow. But I

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Agoran Newspaper Repeal

Also, "create and spend a shiny to pend the following" implies that you're creating a shiny, and then spending it, which is IMPOSSIBLE. On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 5:53 PM, Aris Merchant < thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote: > I think you mean pend, not spend. > > -Aris > > On Sun, Oct 22,

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Agoran Newspaper Repeal

On Sun, 22 Oct 2017, Aris Merchant wrote: > On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 4:31 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > > > > The regkeepor should be monthly not weekly - if you want a sinecure > > it's that - a completely empty weekly report for the last two months. > > The Regkeepor

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Agoran Newspaper Repeal

Did it? OK, fair enough. We should probably just repeal Agronomy? It's a really complicated modification of five things that creates so many empty reports that the reportor forgot to publish them until last week. And the person whose idea it was left immediately after coming up with it. On Mon,

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Agoran Newspaper Repeal

Contracts passed, and was enacted unless my CFJ turns out true (G., any likelihood of expediting that one and possibly linking it with my previous one about the Promotor's report?) On Sun, 22 Oct 2017 at 19:36 VJ Rada wrote: > Superintendent still exists and Secretary does

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Agoran Newspaper Repeal

On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 4:31 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > The regkeepor should be monthly not weekly - if you want a sinecure > it's that - a completely empty weekly report for the last two months. The Regkeepor has been diligently doing eir work unpaid, except for those

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Agoran Newspaper Repeal

Superintendent still exists and Secretary does pending Contracts actually passing, of course. On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 10:34 AM, Alexis Hunt wrote: > On Sun, 22 Oct 2017 at 19:32 Kerim Aydin wrote: >> >> >> >> The regkeepor should be monthly not weekly

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Agoran Newspaper Repeal

On Sun, 22 Oct 2017 at 19:32 Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > The regkeepor should be monthly not weekly - if you want a sinecure > it's that - a completely empty weekly report for the last two months. > > We just repealed organizations, right? So that's the Secretary gone. >

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Agoran Newspaper Repeal

The regkeepor should be monthly not weekly - if you want a sinecure it's that - a completely empty weekly report for the last two months. We just repealed organizations, right? So that's the Secretary gone. I thought for a while that the Herald and Tailor should be merged, but now with Karma

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Agoran Newspaper Repeal

So make a length or substance requirement or something. Our current reportor is doing quite an excellent job. Also, offices aren't bad so long as they do _something_. This one tells people what's going on in an interesting way, and provides an archive for future generations of Agorans [1]. [1]

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Agoran Newspaper Repeal

It's literally a complete sinecure. We have 20 offices now, I think. And 20 players. It seems like pruning non-essential offices is sorely needed, and this one is the least essential possible. While all the other offices have a report containing information, this office is just "make a report!"

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Agoran Newspaper Repeal

I concur. We finally have an active reportor, now is not the time to repeal the newspaper. -Aris On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 3:01 PM, Reuben Staley wrote: > Why though? Even if it isn't an entirely useful of the game, I still enjoy > reading the newspaper every week. > > On

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Agoran Newspaper Repeal

At least let me do the things I want to do with the office that I've held off doing since I wanted to wait until Contracts was out. 天火狐 On 22 October 2017 at 17:55, VJ Rada wrote: > I _spend_ a shiny to _pend_ "Repeal the Reportor" > > On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 8:53 AM, Aris

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] A Reward for Obedience

Alright. I think this looks pretty good. If nobody mentions anything else in the next day or so, I'll pend it for real. On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 9:40 AM, ATMunn . wrote: > Changes from last version: > * Repealed victory elections > * Clarified when certain things can

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] A Reward for Obedience

[sorry for double post, Gmail doesn't have a good way to reply to multiple emails at once. I'm probably going to switch to a desktop client soon.] On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 8:37 PM, Alexis Hunt wrote: > Looking it over again, I see three potential other issues: > - A player

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] A Reward for Obedience

On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 8:22 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > Just a note: It looks like the Herald isn't required to track who has a > Medal of > Honour once it's awarded. So it's like trust tokens that people just have > to > keep track - is that intentional? (As Herald

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] A Reward for Obedience

Looking it over again, I see three potential other issues: - A player does not stop becoming eligible at the end of the month. I would say "eligible for a Medal of Honour that month", to avoid this. - If a player incorrectly announces eligibility, this could invalidate the entire vote later. Not

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] A Reward for Obedience

Oh, last thing: you should throw in this Proposal a repeal of the Victory Elections (Rule 2482). This is a much better replacement and we don't need both. On Tue, 17 Oct 2017, Kerim Aydin wrote: > Just a note: It looks like the Herald isn't required to track who has a > Medal of > Honour

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Proposal: Deregulation

On Sat, 14 Oct 2017 at 22:28 Aris Merchant < thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote: > Regulations are not dangerous, certainly not "very dangerous". > Regulations only work at the power of their parent rule, and can only > do what their parent rule says they can do. This is the first of >

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Proposal: Deregulation

On Sat, 14 Oct 2017 at 21:57 Publius Scribonius Scholasticus < p.scribonius.scholasti...@googlemail.com> wrote: > Why not keep the birthday tournament. It existed before regulations. > It is kept, in its original form as part of 2464.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Proposal: Deregulation

I haven't seen any sign of it making interesting gameplay thusfar: I would vote to repeal (unless a use is found for them, such as in the new contract proposal). Having said that: I agree with Aris. There has been no sign of them being especially dangerous, or any more dangerous than real legal

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Pledge Withdrawal

Oh, okay, I see. Well, there goes my second attempt at taking advantage of the cheap pend price. :P On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 8:41 PM, VJ Rada wrote: > This is actually a version of the rules so new our H. Rulekeepor > hasn't written it yet :) > > On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 11:39

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Pledge Withdrawal

This is actually a version of the rules so new our H. Rulekeepor hasn't written it yet :) On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 11:39 AM, ATMunn . wrote: > On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 8:32 PM, Alexis Hunt wrote: >> >> On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 at 20:31 Alex Smith

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Pledge Withdrawal

Yeah, the pledge rule as written in the ruleset does not, but the proposal that made pledges an asset ("make your home shine) also made pledges withdrawable, and it passed a few days ago On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 11:32 AM, Alexis Hunt wrote: > On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 at 20:31 Alex

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Pledge Withdrawal

On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 8:32 PM, Alexis Hunt wrote: > On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 at 20:31 Alex Smith wrote: > >> On Thu, 2017-10-12 at 20:28 -0400, ATMunn . wrote: >> > Amend rule 2450 by adding the following text at the end: >> > { >> > If, at any time, a

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Pledge Withdrawal

On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 at 20:31 Alex Smith wrote: > On Thu, 2017-10-12 at 20:28 -0400, ATMunn . wrote: > > Amend rule 2450 by adding the following text at the end: > > { > > If, at any time, a player owns a pledge which is impossible for em to > > break, e CAN withdraw

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Another Economy Fix Attempt

That doesn't do it. Agency and agency actions are defined by the rules. Saying this excludes a specific instance of an agency is like saying "since the rules don't define the exact amount of shinies in your possession, shiny transfers aren't entirely defined by the rules." On Wed, 4 Oct

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Another Economy Fix Attempt

On Wed, 4 Oct 2017, Alex Smith wrote: > On Tue, 2017-10-03 at 23:54 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > Yup.  It only pauses it for 48 hours though, so in current context > > useless unless I keep renewing it, and it's been around a while. > > Is it even possible to object to the same intent twice?

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Another Economy Fix Attempt

You're right, I'm tired. That would almost certainly work. It might not, in the basis that transferring shinies is defined by the rules, but I think that argument in unlikely to succeed. On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 12:07 AM Gaelan Steele wrote: > I have the “action defined entirely

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Another Economy Fix Attempt

I have the “action defined entirely by the rules” clause in there for exactly this reason. Gaelan > On Oct 4, 2017, at 12:03 AM, Aris Merchant > wrote: > > Agency: > Director: Conspirator 1 > Agent: Conspirator 2 > Text: If Agora has more than 10,000

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Another Economy Fix Attempt

On Tue, 2017-10-03 at 23:54 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote: > Yup.  It only pauses it for 48 hours though, so in current context > useless unless I keep renewing it, and it's been around a while. Is it even possible to object to the same intent twice? Rule 2124 used to use "objector" which is precisely

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Another Economy Fix Attempt

Agency: Director: Conspirator 1 Agent: Conspirator 2 Text: If Agora has more than 10,000 shinies, the power to transfer 1 shiny from Conspirator 1 to Conspirator 2. -Aris On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 11:59 PM Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > Remember that intent can be posted before

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Another Economy Fix Attempt

Remember that intent can be posted before conditions are true, and last 14 days. If I post staggered intents (first ones before this is adopted), then any time the economy goes low I can get a win instantly. On Tue, 3 Oct 2017, Gaelan Steele wrote: > Fair enough. I’ll put out a revised

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Another Economy Fix Attempt

On Tue, 2017-10-03 at 23:44 -0700, Gaelan Steele wrote: > Curious about how you intend to pull off that win. I tried to avoid > trivial abuse (create an agency with “do X as long as agora has less > that 1000 shines”) by having the “defined entirely by the rules” > clause; does Agora actually owe

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Another Economy Fix Attempt

Fair enough. I’ll put out a revised version once I give everyone else a chance to give feedback. > On Oct 3, 2017, at 11:53 PM, Aris Merchant > wrote: > > I'd just make it With Notice. Seems fair to give people some more time to > attempt a fix. > > -Aris

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Another Economy Fix Attempt

Yup. It only pauses it for 48 hours though, so in current context useless unless I keep renewing it, and it's been around a while. But I've thought of about 3 ways to win using this, which I'll keep to myself since you've proposed this already (and combo of assessor and ability to

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Another Economy Fix Attempt

On Wed, 2017-10-04 at 16:52 +1000, VJ Rada wrote: On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 4:49 PM, Gaelan Steele > wrote: > > Wait, the speaker can object to Notice? I’m not sure how I feel > > about that. > > Yup, the speaker can stop the amendment or creation of any agency. > Quazie could have

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Another Economy Fix Attempt

I'd just make it With Notice. Seems fair to give people some more time to attempt a fix. -Aris On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 11:52 PM VJ Rada wrote: > Yup, the speaker can stop the amendment or creation of any agency. > Quazie could have stopped me much easier. > > On Wed, Oct 4,

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Another Economy Fix Attempt

Yup, the speaker can stop the amendment or creation of any agency. Quazie could have stopped me much easier. On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 4:49 PM, Gaelan Steele wrote: > Wait, the speaker can object to Notice? I’m not sure how I feel about that. > > On Oct 3, 2017, at 11:41 PM, Kerim

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Another Economy Fix Attempt

On Wed, 2017-10-04 at 16:40 +1000, VJ Rada wrote: > It is a real sort. "With T notice" is a type, and includes such > things as agencies. Huh, I checked and you're right. (This also implies that "with 4 days' notice" is a different sort of dependent action from "with notice", which wouldn't have

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Fixing Executive Orders

The rule that says "players SHALL NOT issue inappropriate cards" is power 2.0 and EOs are 1.7. BUT WAIT A MINUTE I REMEMBER DIRECTLY PASSING A PROPOSAL CALLED "CARDS ARE POWER 1.7" I retract the above proposal and draw the attention of the rulekeepor. On Sat, Sep 30, 2017 at 4:22 AM, Quazie

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Passive Income

> On Sep 28, 2017, at 11:28 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > > On Thu, 28 Sep 2017, Owen Jacobson wrote: >> Create a new rule, titled "Distributing Assets", with power 1, whose text is >> >>To “distribute” a quantity of a fungible asset to a set of recipients is >>

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Proposal: Guaranteed Stampage

> On Sep 28, 2017, at 3:31 AM, Ørjan Johansen wrote: > > On Thu, 28 Sep 2017, Owen Jacobson wrote: > >>> On Sep 28, 2017, at 3:09 AM, Ørjan Johansen wrote: >>> >>> On Tue, 26 Sep 2017, Nic Evans wrote: >>> Enact a Power 1 rule titled "Stamp Wins"

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Proposal: Guaranteed Stampage

On Thu, 28 Sep 2017, Owen Jacobson wrote: On Sep 28, 2017, at 3:09 AM, Ørjan Johansen wrote: On Tue, 26 Sep 2017, Nic Evans wrote: Enact a Power 1 rule titled "Stamp Wins" with the following text: If a player owns 10 stamps with different Creaters, none of which

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Proposal: Guaranteed Stampage

> On Sep 28, 2017, at 3:09 AM, Ørjan Johansen wrote: > > On Tue, 26 Sep 2017, Nic Evans wrote: > >> Enact a Power 1 rule titled "Stamp Wins" with the following text: >> >>If a player owns 10 stamps with different Creaters, none of which >>have Agora as its Creater,

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Slower Promotion

On Tue, 26 Sep 2017 at 20:49 Aris Merchant < thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 1:27 PM, Nic Evans wrote: > > I personally find it frustrating that we vote on things before the last > > setis resolved. This should be a relatively safe way to

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Proposal: Guaranteed Stampage

On Tue, 2017-09-26 at 19:08 -0500, Nicholas Evans wrote: > I was intending to propose a minimum value at least for stamps. Same > idea different implementation. It strikes me that it'd make a lot of sense for there to be a fixed cost for Stamp creation, in addition to the FV-scaling cost, but

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Proposal: Guaranteed Stampage

I was intending to propose a minimum value at least for stamps. Same idea different implementation. On Sep 26, 2017 7:00 PM, "Kerim Aydin" wrote: On Tue, 26 Sep 2017, Nic Evans wrote: >If a player has not received one since e most recently became a >player, any

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Fixing Fingers

Ah, found it. It was called by o on Sept 7 (a few days before ais523 deregistered) and never got a number or judge. Will fix. On Tue, 26 Sep 2017, VJ Rada wrote: > No, I meant CFJ. There was one called by Orjan contending that, > because my proposal "minor fixes" that fixed that loophole

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Fixing Fingers

No, I meant CFJ. There was one called by Orjan contending that, because my proposal "minor fixes" that fixed that loophole referred to a rule as "a rule with no number", which was wrong by the time the proposal passed, the fix did not work. On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 2:24 PM, Kerim Aydin

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Fixing Fingers

Oh you mean "proposal" not CFJ ... that's in the late-to-assess batch. On Tue, 26 Sep 2017, VJ Rada wrote: > Card Reform & Expansion, from the really massive distribution a couple > of weeks ago. > > On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 2:17 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > > > > Which

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Fixing Fingers

Below, surely? Would have been strangely amusing if they'd both passed... I've started to dislike proposals written in a way that's super vulnerable to race conditions. Greetings, Ørjan. On Tue, 26 Sep 2017, VJ Rada wrote: I rescind the above proposal. On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 2:16 PM,

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Fixing Fingers

Card Reform & Expansion, from the really massive distribution a couple of weeks ago. On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 2:17 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > Which one was that? The only unresolved ones are on different subjects > I think. > > On Tue, 26 Sep 2017, VJ Rada wrote: >> Did

<    2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   >