Wouldn't it just be ossified because arbitrary rule changes cannot be
made? The "and/or" does function as an or!
On 2019-02-21 19:37, Gaelan Steele wrote:
I create the AI-1 proposal “Minor bug fix” with the following text:
{
Create the power-1 rule “Don’t mind me” with the following text:
{The rules CANNOT change by any mechanism.}
}
Why that works (at power 1):
106/40: "Except as prohibited by other rules, a proposal that takes effect CAN and
does, as part of its effect, apply the changes that it specifies"
106/40: "Preventing a proposal from taking effect is a secured change; this
does not apply to generally preventing changes to specified areas of the gamestate”
The proposed rule is a prohibition on a certain type of change. Because 106
says “except as prohibited by other rules”, it defers to this rule.
The second quoted clause fails to prevent this, because the rule "generally
[prevents] changes to specified areas of the gamestate.”
1698/5 "Agora is ossified if it is IMPOSSIBLE for any reasonable combination of
actions by players to cause arbitrary rule changes to be made and/or arbitrary
proposals to be adopted within a four-week period.”
Note the “and/or.” Nothing here prevents arbitrary proposals from being
adopted—it just prevents them from changing the rules upon doing so. Therefore,
Agora isn’t ossified.
I retract the above proposal.
Gaelan
On Feb 21, 2019, at 12:21 AM, Timon Walshe-Grey <m...@timon.red> wrote:
Yes, the "gamestate" includes the rules, and I initially assumed the same thing
as you. But ais523 pointed out a few days ago that rule 105/19 says
A rule change is wholly prevented from taking effect unless its
full text was published, along with an unambiguous and clear
specification of the method to be used for changing the rule, at
least 4 days and no more than 60 days before it would otherwise
take effect.
which overrides the passage in rule 106/40 that says
Except as prohibited by other rules, a proposal that
takes effect CAN and does, as part of its effect, apply the
changes that it specifies.
-twg
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On Thursday, February 21, 2019 2:47 AM, James Cook <jc...@cs.berkeley.edu>
wrote:
I'd prefer to just repeat the cleanings. Mass changes to the ruleset
are one of the riskiest things you can do in Agora (which is why there
are so many protections preventing them being done by accident).
My proposal says "The gamestate is changed...". I assumed that
includes the rules, making re-cleaning unnecessary. Is there precedent
for what "gamestate" means?
