On 01/12/2010 11:06 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
An attempt to performed a fee-based action is also implicitly a
claim to be in possession of sufficient ergs to perform the
action, and such a claim is self-ratifying. If the claim is
erroneous but self-ratifies, then the action is deemed to have
occurred and destroyed all ergs in the possession of the claimant.
Making such a claim falsely is the Class-2 Crime of Assaulting the
Batteries, but it is appropriate to DISCHARGE such a crime if
it is disputed within four days.
I'd also add a note saying that it is not necessary to assign DISCHARGE
in such a case, even though it isn't strictly necessary.
Create the following Rule, Fee-based actions, power-2:
- A player CAN increase eir voting limit on a specified
decision to adopt a proposal in its voting period by 2Q, by
paying a fee of Q. This rule defers to other Rules that
defined maximum voting limits.
- A player CAN make a proposal Distributable for a fee of 1 erg.
- A player CAN make a proposal Undistributable for a fee of 2 ergs.
- A player CAN destroy a Rest in the possession of any player for
a fee of 1 erg.
- A player CAN make an ongoing Ordinary decision Democratic for a
fee of 3 ergs.
- A player CAN initiate an election for a specified Office for a
fee of 3 ergs.
- A player CAN change the chamber of an ongoing ordinary decision
for a fee of 2 ergs.
- A player CAN veto or rubberstamp an ongoing ordinary decision for
a fee of 3 ergs.
These should all be charges of ergs, not fees (no semantic reason, it's
just an extension of the metaphor).
Making Rest destruction be 1 erg seems low; that means even the most
basic of players can abolish 4 of eir own Rests per week. It should
probably be 2 or even 3.
-coppro
