I'm sorry, our messages crossed. I think it will be trivially determinable from my judgement to 3723 though.
-twg ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On Friday, March 8, 2019 12:12 AM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@uw.edu> wrote: > > > I favor this case. > > On 3/7/2019 4:08 PM, D. Margaux wrote: > > > I CoE this attempted distribution because the proposal is not in the > > proposal pool. > > I submit to the Referee a CFJ: “Aris’s attempt to distribute Proposal 8164 > > in the message below was EFFECTIVE.” > > Either ATMunn already distributed the proposal, in which case it is no > > longer in the proposal pool and this CFJ is FALSE. Or else it is > > PARADOXICAL whether ATMunn distributed it, in which case this CFJ is also > > PARADOXICAL (which is what I think is true). > > But this CFJ can’t be TRUE. There’s no way that this proposal is > > non-PARADOXICALLY still in the proposal pool. That is because ATMunn has > > already distributed this proposal unless the ADOPTION of this proposal > > fixed intents retroactively, which yields a PARADOX regarding whether this > > proposal is in the pool. > > On Thu, Mar 7, 2019 at 6:56 PM Aris Merchant < > > thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > To be painfully clear, I distribute the below proposal, initiating the > > > Agoran Decision of whether to adopt 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). > > > [Same note as last time.] > > > On Thu, Mar 7, 2019 at 3:53 PM Aris Merchant < > > > thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > As Promotor, I distribute Proposal 8164 as follows. > > > > [Whether or not it has already been distributed is complex and, > > > > apparently, subject to retroactive change; my attempt to distribute is > > > > unconditional to avoid causing further problems.] > > > > On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 5:34 PM D. Margaux dmargaux...@gmail.com > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Pursuant to the Living Zombie contract, I hereby cause ATMunn to issue > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > Cabinet Order of Manifesto to distribute the below proposal, > > > > > initiating > > > > > the > > > > > Agoran Decision of whether to adopt 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). > > > > > Proposal ID: 8164 > > > > > Title: Correction to Agoran Satisfaction, Version 2.4 > > > > > Author: Falsifian > > > > > Co-authors: ais523, D. Margaux, G., twg > > > > > Adoption Index: 3.1 > > > > > Text: > > > > > The gamestate, excluding the rules, is changed to what it would have > > > > > been if the text of the following amendment to Rule 2124 had > > > > > determined > > > > > whether Agora was Satisfied with any intents attempted after Proposal > > > > > 7815, rather than the text of what Rule 2124 was at that time. To the > > > > > extent allowed by the rules, this change is designated as a > > > > > convergence. > > > > > Rule 2124 is amended by replacing its text with the following: > > > > > > > > > > A Supporter of an intent to perform an action is an eligible > > > > > entity who has publicly posted (and not withdrawn) support (syn. > > > > > "consent") 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. > > > > > > > > > > The entities eligible to support or object to an intent to > > > > > perform > > > > > an action are, by default, all players, subject to modification > > > > > by > > > > > the document authorizing the dependent action. However, the > > > > > previous sentence notwithstanding, the initiator of the intent > > > > > is > > > > > not eligible to support it. > > > > > > > > > > Agora is Satisfied with an intent to perform a specific action > > > > > unless at least one of the following is true: > > > > > > > > > > 1. The action is to be performed Without N Objections, and there > > > > > are at least N Objectors to that intent. > > > > > > > > > > 2. The action is to be performed With N support, and there are > > > > > fewer than than N Supporters of that intent. > > > > > > > > > > 3. The action is to be performed with N Agoran Consent, and the > > > > > number of Supporters of the intent is less than or equal to N > > > > > times the number of Objectors to the intent. > > > > > > > > > > The above notwithstanding, if an action depends on objections, > > > > > 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. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > D. Margaux
