On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 1:34 PM Jason Cobb via agora-discussion <agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > On 1/20/20 10:22 PM, Aris Merchant via agora-official wrote: > > ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// > > ID: 8299 > > Title: The Reset Button v2 > > Adoption index: 3.0 > > Author: Aris > > Co-authors: G. > > > > If no proposal whose title contains the text "Administrative Adjudication" > > has passed within the last 30 days, the remainder of this proposal has no > > effect. > > > > Create the following power 3.0 rule entitled "The Reset Button": > > > > An officer CAN, without 3 objections, pursuant to a memorandum finding it > > in the best interests of the game, issue an adjustment, which shall be > > a public document. When the adjustment is issued, all changes that are > > included in the adjustment take effect. > > > [Sorry, I know these were drafted first and I should have paid more > attention then.] > > Err... what entity applies these effects? More importantly, what is the > power of that entity? If it's the regulation itself, then it can't make > any secured changes, but if it's the rule, then the patch can do > literally anything...
It's the rule. Regulations don't actually do anything; rules do. It's like if a contract refers to another document and says "do what's in that document". The contract applies the effect, the document is just state it looks at. As a consequence, you are in fact correct that a patch can do literally anything. It would be rather useless for its intended if it couldn't. However, it can be blocked by only three objections, and the rule refuses to apply any abusive change, which on its own prevents it from being used as part of a scam. Basically, there are so many protections in place that the risk of this being abused is IMO basically nonexistent. If it's being used as an obvious scam it'll be blocked by objections, and if the scam only becomes obvious when its used, the safety measures will kick in. Pretty much the same stuff applies if it accidentally breaks everything. The worst thing that can realistically happen is some confusion about whether the patch worked in a given situation, and that's unlikely because of the manifestness requirement. > > > > This is a RECOMMENDED method for resetting aspects of the game in a > > fair and equitable manner following the discovery and/or exploitation > > of unintended loopholes within the Rules, whether the exploitation > > was accidental or purposeful. > > > > ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// > > ID: 8300 > > Title: Patches > > Adoption index: 3.0 > > Author: Aris > > Co-authors: > > > > If no proposal whose title contains the text "Administrative Adjudication" > > has passed within the last 30 days, the remainder of this proposal has no > > effect. > > > > Create the following power 3.0 rule entitled "Patches": > > > > An officer CAN, without 3 objections, pursuant to a memorandum finding it > > in the best interests of the game, issue a regulation known as a patch. > > To the extent the patch is not manifestly abusive, disproportionate, or > > unreasonable, the rules are to be interpreted as if they were modified > > in the manner stipulated by the patch. > > > > Enacting and modifying patches are secured. A patch's promulgator CAN > > amend > > it without 3 objections. Any person CAN repeal the patch by announcement > > once it has been rendered obsolete. > > > Exactly when has a patch been "rendered obsolete"? When the change has > been propagated into the ruleset? What if the change is modified > slightly before putting it into the ruleset? Well, clearly, if the patch says "Read Rule 5000 as if it said 'Blue' instead of 'Red', and Rule 5000 is amended to say "Green" instead, the patch is no longer applicable, and is thus obsolete. More broadly, a patch would be obsolete whenever the problem it was intended to fix went away. I didn't really want to enumerate all the situations where that could happen; it could result from a judicial case saying the problem was never a real problem, or a proposal fixing the problem, or possibly under the right circumstances some gamestate change that resolved the problem. This sounds complicated in theory, but I think it's usually pretty obvious when a problem stops being a problem. -Aris
