PROMOTOR'S REPORT AS OF RIGHT NOW.
I hereby distribute each listed proposal, initiating a referendum on it,
and removing it from the proposal pool. For this decision, the vote collector
is the Assessor, the quorum is 5, the voting method is AI-majority, and the
valid options are FOR and AGAINST (PRESENT is also a valid vote, as are
conditional votes).
ID Author(s) AI Title
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
8607* Telna, ais523, Alexis 3.0 Asset Self-Ratification Fix
8608* Telna, Jason, G., [1] 3.0 Powering Up
8609& Jason 1.0 Axiom of Limitations
8610& Jason 1.7 No Immediate Shenanigans
8611& Jason, Trigon 1.0 Reasonably Responsive Reactivation
8612& Jason, G., Ørjan 1.0 Tournament Conclusion Fixes v2
8613* Jason, Trigon 3.0 The Name of the Win Cards v2
8614* Jason 3.0 Simultaneity Security
8615* Jason 3.0 Supporter/Objector clarification v2
8616& nix, Telna, Trigon 1.0 Narrowing Margins
8617& nix, G. 1.0 Forgiveness
8618& nix, Jason 1.0 Solo Acitivity
8619& ATMunn 1.0 The Bottomless Pit
8620& R. Lee 1.0 Im coolxa
8621* R. Lee 3.0 Proposal spreading
8622* R. Lee 3.0 [2]
8623& Trigon 1.0 No prizeless victory auctions
8624& Trigon 1.0 I'd like to thank the academy
8625& Trigon 1.0 giving the gift of an amendment
8626* Trigon, Jason, ais523 3.0 pledge(2)(2)
8627& G. 1.0 INSANITY CLAUSES
8628& G. 2.0 tacking into the win
8629* G., Telna, nix, [3] 3.0 Independence Day
The proposal pool is currently empty.
[1] R. Lee, Trigon, ATMunn
[2] Allow acting on behalf to support or object
[3] CuddleBeam, cuddlybanana, Jason
Legend: <ID>* : Democratic proposal.
<ID>& : Ordinary proposal.
<ID>~ : Unsponsored proposal.
The full text of the aforementioned proposal(s) is included below. Where
the information shown below differs from the information shown above,
the information shown above shall control.
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
ID: 8607
Title: Asset Self-Ratification Fix
Adoption index: 3.0
Author: Telna
Co-author(s): ais523, Alexis
In Rule 2166 "Assets", replace the text "This portion of that entity's
report is self-ratifying." with the following:
A public document purporting to be this portion of that entity's report
is self-ratifying.
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
ID: 8608
Title: Powering Up
Adoption index: 3.0
Author: Telna
Co-author(s): Jason, G., R. Lee, Trigon, ATMunn
Enact a Power-5 Rule titled "High Five" with the following text:
This Power-5 Rule (the first ever) commemorates the Agoran Spirit To
Break The Game.
Agora is no stranger to love. You know the Rules, and so do I.
This is the highest-powered Rule, no matter what. Even if it wouldn't
be, it is.
What is logic? Agora, don't hurt me.
Agora hereby apologises to the Rulekeepor for making em track this mess.
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
ID: 8609
Title: Axiom of Limitations
Adoption index: 1.0
Author: Jason
Co-author(s):
Amend Rule 2553 by, as a single amendment, replacing "CAN, by
announcement, Transcend Logic," with "CAN, by announcement, Transcend
Logic, specifying that CFJ," and replacing "for at least 7 days" with
"for between 7 and 90 days".
[Requires that people Transcending Logic specify which case they are
claiming the win for, ensuring that the "with respect to that CFJ"
clause actually functions. Also adds a time limit to claim to prevent
shenanigans and limit the scope of any bugs.]
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
ID: 8610
Title: No Immediate Shenanigans
Adoption index: 1.7
Author: Jason
Co-author(s):
Amend Rule 2478 by appending the following to the paragraph beginning
"Initiating a Finger pointing found to be Shenanigans is ILLEGAL": "The
investigator of a finger pointing SHALL NOT point eir finger for the
Crime of Unjustified Gesticulation with respect to that finger pointing.".
[Prohibits the Referee from ruling Shenanigans, then immediately
pointing eir finger at the first pointer in order to get ahead on the
finger pointing contest.]
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
ID: 8611
Title: Reasonably Responsive Reactivation
Adoption index: 1.0
Author: Jason
Co-author(s): Trigon
Amend Rule 2646 (Activity) by replacing "A player CAN activate or
deactivate emself by announcement." with "A player CAN activate emself
by publishing a message that indicates reasonably clearly and reasonably
unambiguously that e intends to become active. A player CAN deactivate
emself by announcement.".
[People who are reactivating themselves are unlikely to know the exact
phrasing that is necessary to do so. This makes it easier by bringing
the standard for reactivation in line with the standard for registration.]
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
ID: 8612
Title: Tournament Conclusion Fixes v2
Adoption index: 1.0
Author: Jason
Co-author(s): G., Ørjan
Amend Rule 2464, Tournaments, by replacing:
{
If a winner of a tournament is determined within within 3 months of its
initiation, that person or persons win the game, otherwise the
tournament concludes with no winner.
}
with:
{
Each time that one or more winners of a tournament are determined before
it concludes, that person or those persons win the game. A tournament
concludes when its regulations state that it concludes. Additionally, if
it has not previously concluded, a tournament concludes 3 months after its
initiation.
}
All ongoing tournaments hereby conclude with no (further) winner, except
for the tournament initiated on or about 2 July 2021 (if it is still
ongoing).
[Ensures that any previous ongoing tournaments that found a winner are
concluded (which the rule did not explicitly state).]
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
ID: 8613
Title: The Name of the Win Cards v2
Adoption index: 3.0
Author: Jason
Co-author(s): Trigon
In ascending numerical order, amend each enacted rule by
case-insensitively replacing, as a single amendment per Rule:
* "Victory Card" with "Win Card"
* "Victory Point" with "Winsome"
* "Extra Vote" with "Votive"
Win Card balances are hereby set to what Victory Card balances were at
the time immediately before this proposal began taking effect.
Winsome balances are hereby set to what Victory Point balances were at
the time immediately before this proposal began taking effect.
Votive balances are hereby set to what Extra Vote balances were at the
time immediately before this proposal began taking effect.
[This introduces more whimsy into the asset names and means that Voting
Card and Victory Card are no longer both VCs.]
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
ID: 8614
Title: Simultaneity Security
Adoption index: 3.0
Author: Jason
Co-author(s):
Amend Rule 478 by, as a single amendment, inserting a paragraph break
before "Any action performed by sending a message", then appending to
the (new) final paragraph: "Allowing actions performed by sending a
message to take place simultaneously must be done explicitly and is
secured at power 2."
[This prohibits simultaneity without an authorizing rule, which is less
extreme than a total ban (which G. has exposed disapproval of).]
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
ID: 8615
Title: Supporter/Objector clarification v2
Adoption index: 3.0
Author: Jason
Co-author(s):
Amend Rule 2124 by replacing the following:
{
The above notwithstanding, if an action is to be performed without
N objections or with N Agoran consent, and an objection to an
intent to perform it has been withdrawn within the past 24 hours,
then Agora is not Satisfied with that intent.
The above notwithstanding, Agora is not satisfied with an intent
if the Speaker has objected to it in the last 48 hours.
A person CANNOT support or object to an announcement of intent
before the intent is announced, or after e has withdrawn the same
type of response.
}
with the following:
{
The above notwithstanding, if an action is to be performed without N
objections or with N Agoran consent, and an entity has ceased to be an
Objector to that intent within the past 24 hours, then Agora is not
Satisfied with that intent.
The above notwithstanding, Agora is not Satisfied with an intent if the
Speaker has become an Objector to it in the last 48 hours.
An entity is not considered a Supporter or Objector to an intent solely
due to a purported support or objection made before the intent was
announced. An entity is not considered a Supporter to an intent if e has
previously ceased to be a Supporter to it, and e is not considered an
Objector to an intent if e has previously ceased to be an Objector to it.
}
[
In each paragraph, use Objector/Supportor status instead of evaluating
whether objections were withdrawn. For instance, it has been previously
pointed out (in private conversation) that the Speaker could potentially
completely block an intent by objecting multiple times. Additionally, in
the third paragraph, extend the restrictions to entities instead of just
persons (since the definition of Supporter/Objector applies to entities,
rather than persons).
Fixes the bug in the previous version where ever withdrawing an
objection would prevent you from ever objecting again.
]
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
ID: 8616
Title: Narrowing Margins
Adoption index: 1.0
Author: nix
Co-author(s): Telna, Trigon
Amend R2621, VP Wins, to read in full:
The Victory Threshold is 20-5x, where x is the number of months
since the last time someone Took Over The Economy. If it would
be less, the Victory Threshold is instead 1.
If a player has at least the Victory Threshold more Victory
Points than any other player, e CAN Take Over the Economy by
announcement, provided no person has won the game by doing so in
the past 30 days.
When a player takes over the economy, e wins the game. Four days
after such a win occurs, all Cards and all Products are
destroyed. Then, each active player gains 1 card of each type
and eir grant (if any).
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
ID: 8617
Title: Forgiveness
Adoption index: 1.0
Author: nix
Co-author(s): G.
Agora formally forgives all fugitives listed on the most recent scroll
of Agora.
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
ID: 8618
Title: Solo Acitivity
Adoption index: 1.0
Author: nix
Co-author(s): Jason
Amend R2646, "Activity" by by replacing:
A player CAN activate or deactivate emself by announcement.
with:
A player CAN, acting as emself, activate or deactivate emself by
announcement.
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
ID: 8619
Title: The Bottomless Pit
Adoption index: 1.0
Author: ATMunn
Co-author(s):
Enact a new power-1 rule entitled "The Bottomless Pit":
Any player CAN throw (syn. "yeet") a number of coins into the
Bottomless Pit by announcement. Upon doing so, the specified number
of coins is destroyed from eir posession.
Though these coins may be gone for all legal purposes within this
sacred game of Nomic, let the wise Agoran note that these coins are
not truly gone, but have simply taken on a new form in the Infinity
of the Pit...
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
ID: 8620
Title: Im cool
Adoption index: 1.0
Author: R. Lee
Co-author(s):
Create a power one rule with the text "Anyone who voted for the adoption
of this rule CAN once by announcement redeem this rule to win the game.
Anyone who does so CAN by announcement award emself one of the following
patent titles: God, Goddess, Deity".
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
ID: 8621
Title: Proposal spreading
Adoption index: 3.0
Author: R. Lee
Co-author(s):
At the end of paragraph four of the rule 1607 "Distribution", append the
following sentence
"If there are ten or more pending undistributed proposals in the proposal
pool, the promotor MAY refrain from distributing the most recently added 5
proposals if e distributes each other pending proposal in that Agoran week.
E SHALL then distribute those undistributed proposals the next Agoran week.
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
ID: 8622
Title: Allow acting on behalf to support or object
Adoption index: 3.0
Author: R. Lee
Co-author(s):
Amend rule 2124 by replacing
" A Supporter of an intent to perform an action is an eligible
entity who has publicly posted (and not withdrawn) support for an
announcement of that intent. An Objector to an intent to perform
an action is an eligible entity who has publicly posted (and not
withdrawn) an objection to the announcement of that intent."
with
" A Supporter of an intent to perform an action is an eligible
entity who has supported and has not withdrawn their support for an
announcement of that intent. An Objector to an intent to perform
an action is an eligible entity who has objected to and has not
withdrawn their objection to the announcement of that intent."
and by adding as a new paragraph at the very start of the rule
"A person CAN support or object to an intent to perform an action by
announcement and CAN withdraw support or objection by announcement."
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
ID: 8623
Title: No prizeless victory auctions
Adoption index: 1.0
Author: Trigon
Co-author(s):
[ COMMENT: After the reset, the poor player who still has the highest
claim might be forced to pay for nothing; or, more realistically, the
auction runner might just not be able to distribute lots for the
auction. Either way, this is certainly not an ideal situation. ]
In Rule 2561 "VP Wins" replace the following:
Four days after such a win occurs, all Cards and all Products are
destroyed.
with:
Four days after such a win occurs, all Cards and all Products are
destroyed and any ongoing victory auctions end with no victors.
All victory auctions that were initiated before this proposal was
created end with no victors.
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
ID: 8624
Title: I'd like to thank the academy
Adoption index: 1.0
Author: Trigon
Co-author(s):
[ COMMENT: This one's a lot less serious, but I like the concept.
Initially, I felt bad that I won and Cuddlebeam didn't even get a
consolation prize for eir cooperation in the victory.
I just wanted to add the second half of this proposal to allow winners
to nominate players for helping them win because we could always use
more patent titles, but I realized that it might be fun to make it a
ceremony. Being a Champion merits more whimsy than we afford it now.
Neither of the lists in the rule are super solid right now, though
their whimsical nature should be preserved in future revisions. ]
Create a new (Power=1) rule entitled "Champion's Patent Titles" with the
text:
For each time a person is awarded the patent title of Champion, e
CAN once post a Champion's Address within seven days of that
awarding. A Champion's Address SHOULD, but NEED NOT include the
following components:
* A recap of how that victory was achieved.
* A declaration of eir superiority over the rest of the Agoran
Community for eir well-earned victory.
* A sincere expression of gratitude to the Agoran Community for
their duly-given recognition of the victory.
Within a Champion's Address, the following patent titles CAN be
awarded to persons in acknowledgement for the help they have given
in securing the win, substituting the word "Champion" for the
winning player's name:
* Champion's Conspirator, awardable to a person who contributed
significantly to the strategy employed to secure the win.
* Champion's Financer, awardable to a person who contributed
significantly economically to the Champion in order to secure
the win.
* Champion's Adjunct, awardable to a person who contributed
in a minor fashion to the win.
* Champion's Pawn, awardable to a person who unknowingly
contributed to the Champion's win.
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
ID: 8625
Title: giving the gift of an amendment
Adoption index: 1.0
Author: Trigon
Co-author(s):
[ COMMENT: Introduces a new term of art so that we don't have to worry
about messing up the wording for giving a birthday gift again. ]
Amend Rule 2585 "Birthday Gifts" by replacing:
During a player's Agoran Birthday and the 7 days following, each
other player CAN once grant em X boatloads of coins by
announcement, where X is 3 if it is actually the day of the
player's birthday, and 2 otherwise.
with:
During a player's Agoran Birthday and the 7 days following, each
other player CAN once give that player a birthday gift, granting
em 3 boatloads of coins if it is actually the day of the player's
birthday, or 2 otherwise.
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
ID: 8626
Title: pledge(2)(2)
Adoption index: 3.0
Author: Trigon
Co-author(s): Jason, ais532
[ COMMENT: The gist of this idea is that players can choose for some
part of their messages which actions should succeed and which actions
should fail. Hopefully, this would be integrated gracefully into the
rest of the rules, but that's a lot of SHALLs to sort through to
decide which should be scoped actions. Comments can be found
throughout.
Second update: I've reworked some of the wording. There might still be
room for breaking. Feel free to tell me to fix it. ]
Enact a new Power=3 rule entitled "Scopes" with text:
Players CAN take actions in a specific scope. When a player does
so, e must either clearly and unambiguously describe a list of
allowed actions or a list of prohibited actions for that scope, or
e must refer to a source which clearly and unambiguously defines
such a list. E must also clearly and unambiguously specify when e
begins acting in that scope and when e finishes acting in that
scope.
Actions within a scope which are prohibited or not allowed are
blocked actions, while actions which are allowed or not prohibited
are unblocked actions.
[ COMMENT: I'm not sure what I think of this terminology. ]
When a player is acting within a specific scope, if an action
which would otherwise succeed is blocked within that scope, then
that action instead fails.
When a player begins acting in a scope, e CAN specify which
of the following modifiers apply, if any.
* Indirection allowed: actions within this scope whose end results
are solely to initiate one or more unblocked actions within this
scope succeed as well.
* Partial success prohibited: if one action within this scope
would fail, then all actions within the scope fail.
* Acting on behalf allowed: acting on behalf to perform an
unblocked action within this scope succeeds as well.
[ COMMENT: There's got to be a way to phrase these scope modifiers
better, right? ]
The following scopes are defined:
[ COMMENT: These are just random suggestions , though I think they are
useful. Feel free to suggest more. ]
* Global scope: all actions are allowed in this scope.
[ COMMENT: This should also allow players to say something like "I act
in the global scope, disallowing partial success, to do the following:
{...}" instead of "If all the following succeed I do this: {...}".
I think that it's elegant, if a bit wordy. Suggestions for better
terminology for scopes are welcome. ]
* Transaction scope: when acting in this scope, only transfers of
assets are allowed.
* Economic scope: when acting in this scope, creation,
destruction, and transfers of assets are allowed.
* Official scope: for a specified office, only actions mandated by
the rules for that office succeed.
[ COMMENT: This is a rather broad specification, but it might allow us
to write something like "When the rules say an Officer CAN do
something, then e does so in that Office's scope", though whether we
want to is another question. ]
[ COMMENT: So what do you think? I like the idea, but executing actions
within a scope is wordy. As is the proposed rule. With no comments,
it's still over 40 lines long. Suggestions to make either more
succinct are very welcome. ]
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
ID: 8627
Title: INSANITY CLAUSES
Adoption index: 1.0
Author: G.
Co-author(s):
The clauses in the most recent document that has been published by
G. labelled as THE INSANITY CLAUSES takes effect.
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
ID: 8628
Title: tacking into the win
Adoption index: 2.0
Author: G.
Co-author(s):
Amend Rule 2638 (Player Focuses) by replacing:
At the beginning of a month, every active player's
Ministry Focus is set to the value e mostly recently specified by
Planning to Flip. If a player did not Plan to Flip eir Ministry
Focus switch in the last month, it is not flipped.
with:
When the rules state that the winds change, every active
player's Ministry Focus is set to the value e mostly recently
specified by Planning to Flip. If a player did not Plan to Flip
eir Ministry Focus switch since the last time the winds changed,
it is not flipped.
The winds change at the beginning of each month.
Amend Rule 2621 (VP Wins) by replacing:
Then, each active player gains 1 card of each type and eir grant
(if any).
with:
Then, the winds change, following which each active player
gains 1 card of each type and eir grant (if any).
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
ID: 8629
Title: Independence Day
Adoption index: 3.0
Author: G.
Co-author(s): Gaelan, Telna, nix, CuddleBeam, cuddlybanana, Jason
[Note: this proposal was not rushed, it was originally part of survivor
golf, and then substantially honed on discord. Doesn't mean it should be
thoroughly checked! Also, please see the note at the bottom.]
Amend Rule 1728 (Dependent Action Methods) by changing its title to
"Tabled Actions" and amending its text to:
An action is a Tabled Action if it is performed with one of the
following methods:
* With N Support, where N is a positive integer.
* Without N Objections, where N is a positive integer.
* With N Agoran Consent, where N is a positive integer multiple of
0.1.
* With T notice, where T is a time period.
The parameters N and T, if omitted, default to 1 and 4 days,
respectively (e.g. "without objection" means N=1). If a rule defines
N as less than 1 or greater than 8, it is instead treated as 1 or 8,
respectively.
A person CAN act on eir own behalf, by announcement, to table an
intent (syn. "intend") to perform a tabled action, conspicuously and
without obfuscation specifying the action, the method (including non-
default parameter values), and optionally, conditions.
A person is the sponsor of such an intent if e tabled it, or if e is
authorized to perform its action due to holding a rule-defined
position previously held by the person who tabled it.
Amend Rule 2124 (Agoran Satisfaction) by changing its title to
"Performing Tabled Actions" and amending its text to:
For a given tabled intent, a player CAN, unless otherwise forbidden by
the rules or the document enabling the action, act on eir own behalf,
by announcement, to:
* Become a supporter ("support" it), unless e tabled or previously
supported it;
* Become an objector ("object to" it), unless e previously
objected to it;
* Cease to be a supporter or objector ("withdraw" support/objection).
An intent is ripe if was tabled within the past 14 days, the Speaker
hasn't objected to it in the past 48 hours, and its conditions, if
any, are met.
An intent is mature if it was tabled at least 4 days ago and nobody
withdrew objections from it in the past 24 hours.
A rule purporting to allow a person to perform a tabled action allows
em to do so by announcement, if, considering only intents for that
action/method combination:
* With N Support: e is a sponsor or supporter of a ripe intent with
at least N supporters.
* Without N Objections: e is a sponsor of a mature ripe intent with
less than N objectors.
* With N Agoran Consent: e is a sponsor or supporter of a mature
ripe intent with supporters greater than N times its objectors
(e SHOULD list supporters and objectors).
* With T notice: e is the sponsor of a ripe intent created at
least T ago.
Repeal Rule 2595 (Performing a Dependent Action).
Amend Rule 2481 (Festival Restrictions) by replacing:
1. Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, non-Festive players are
not eligible to support a dependent action;
with:
1. Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, non-Festive players
CANNOT support/be a supporter for tabled action intents;
If the effects of a proposal authored by R. Lee have amended Rule 2124
in the previous 14 days, then amend Rule 2124 by deleting:
"on eir own behalf,"
[On this final clause: this proposal is meant to keep all actual mechanics
of dep. actions unchanged. I didn't want to take a particular position on
whether you can act-on-behalf of someone to support/object to an intent.
Unfortunately, it's unclear what the current rules allow. By clarifying
in either direction, I'm taking a side. But R. Lee has submitted a
proposal called "Allow acting on behalf to support or object". The clause
above ensures that if R. Lee's proposal is adopted, the act-on-behalf
functionality stays in the rewrite as per the will of the voters.]
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
