On Sun, Sep 24, 2017 at 2:23 PM, Gaelan Steele <g...@canishe.com> wrote:
> A little note on the all-caps words we use all the time: > > CAN, POSSIBLE - the action is possible. For example, any player CAN vote > on a proposal by announcement. > MAY - doing so is not banned. This is often used to clarify something or > make an exception to another rule. For example, normally you need to have > broken the rules to get a card, but the Prime Minister MAY issue one for > any reason. Note that MAY does not allow you to perform an action that > would otherwise be IMPOSSIBLE, just one that is ILLEGAL. > SHALL, MUST - players can be punished for not doing so. For example, most > officers MUST publish a report on a regular basis. > SHOULD, ENCOURAGED - a recommendation with no legal force. People may get > annoyed at you, but that’s about it. > > CANNOT, IMPOSSIBLE - attempts to do so don’t work. For example, players > CANNOT change the rules except by as permitted by the rules. > SHALL NOT - attempts to do so may work, but you can be punished. For > example, players SHALL NOT violate pledges. > SHOULD NOT - same as SHOULD. You can do it, but people might be annoyed at > you. > Yeah, thanks. I mostly understand those already, but thanks anyways. On Sun, Sep 24, 2017 at 1:21 PM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote: > > > It's in Rule 1728 and 2124, but those rules are a little confusingly > written. > > If the rules say you can do something "with N support", then you make > an "announcment of intent" announcing what you intend to do, and you > have to say you need N support to do it (if N isn't specified, it > defaults to 1). > > Then, when N or more people publish something that says they support > you doing it, you say something like "having gotten N support, I do > this." > > "Without N objections" is the opposite. You post the intent, saying > you'll do it Without N objections. There's then a 4 day waiting > period. If fewer than N people have announced that they Object in > that time, then you can say "having received fewer then N objections, > I do this". Again N defaults to 1. > > Finally there's an "with N Agoran Consent" option which is like a > mini-election, after 4 days the ratio of Supporters/Objectors must > exceed N. > > Support and objections an also be withdrawn. > > You're supposed to list your supporters/objectors when you do the > action, but that's enforced with a SHOULD and hardly anyone ever does, > and shorthand is used a lot. > > > On Sun, 24 Sep 2017, Cuddle Beam wrote: > > Yeah. > > > > ---------- Forwarded message --------- > > From: ATMunn . <iamingodsa...@gmail.com> > > Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2017 at 17:37 > > Subject: Re: DIS: Various questions > > To: Agora Nomic discussions (DF) <agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> > > > > > > I see. > > > > When something says that you can do something "with support," does that > mean that you say you're going to do something, people decide whether or > not to support you, and if there's enough support it > > happens? > > > > On Sun, Sep 24, 2017 at 10:48 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus < > p.scribonius.scholasti...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > > ---- > > Publius Scribonius Scholasticus > > p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > On Sep 24, 2017, at 10:41 AM, ATMunn . <iamingodsa...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > > A few more questions about offices: > > > > > > When do elections happen? Just whenever the ADoP feels like > starting one? > > > > Whenever someone starts one with either support, vacancy, or the > expiration of 90 days. > > > > > > > > How exactly does deputisation work? Do you just say "I deputize > for this office" and if nobody objects, you get the office? The rule on > that is kinda tricky to understand. > > > > You fulfill an obligation that they should have done and declare > it as deputisation and then you get the office. > > > > > > > > On Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 4:31 PM, Kerim Aydin < > ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Sat, 23 Sep 2017, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote: > > > > The catching up since that last holders is the hardest part, > when I took > > > > over the office of Registrar, I had to go back at least five > years, > > > > updating records. > > > > > > Just in the specific Tailor case, I was thinking all of the > recent doubt > > > over the Apathy and Tournament wins and CuddleBeam's speaker > thing makes > > > it pretty unclear which recent Ribbon awards were valid unless > you were > > > following along... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ah, I understand now. Thanks!
