=================
PROMOTOR'S REPORT
=================
I initiate a referendum on each of the following proposals, removing
them from the proposal pool. For each referendum the vote collector is the
Assessor, the quorum is 7, the adoption index is that of the associated
proposal, the voting method is AI-majority, and the valid options are FOR
and AGAINST. (PRESENT and conditional votes are also both valid votes.)
ID Author AI Name
-----------------------------------------------------------------
9373~ Mischief+ 1.5 Dim Prospects v1.1
9374* Galle 3.0 Tying Up White Ribbons
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The proposal pool contains the following proposals (self-ratifying):
Author AI Name
--------------------
--------------------
Legend:
NNNN*: Democratic proposal
NNNN~: Ordinary proposal
NAME+: Coauthors listed below
The full text of all above mentioned proposals is listed below. Where
the information shown below differs from the information shown above,
the information shown above shall control.
==========
ID 9373
Dim Prospects v1.1 (AI=1.5)
author: Mischief
coauthors: snail
[Adding new terms to make the various antecedants more obvious. The one
in the current third bullet is borderline ambiguous, for example; the
intent -- I think -- is to refer to the winning player but it could get
misread as referring to "each other player" in the prior bullet. This
should also reduce the risk of a subsequent amendment breaking an
antecedant somewhere. Additionally, changes a singular "their" to "eir"
in the fifth bullet.]
Amend rule 2711 (Outshining the Sun) by replacing the text reading:
When a player Outshines the Sun, e wins the game. When a player
wins the game this way, the following happen in order:
* Eir radiance is set to 0.
* The radiance of each other player is set to half its current
value (rounded down).
* All Pyrite in eir possession is destroyed.
* Half of all Pyrite in each other player's possession, rounded
up, is destroyed.
* For each player with more than 4000 Pyrite, all but 4000 Pyrite
in their possession is destroyed.
* The Fields Wither.
* All Hectares are destroyed.
* Each player is granted 16 Hectares.
with:
When a pure player Outshines the Sun, the following happen in
order:
* That player (the Luminary) wins the game.
* The Luminary's radiance is set to 0.
* The radiance of each other player (each: a Dim One) is set to
half its current value (rounded down).
* All Pyrite in the Luminary's possession is destroyed.
* Half of all Pyrite in each Dim One's possession, rounded up, is
destroyed.
* For each player with more than 4000 Pyrite, all but 4000 Pyrite
in eir possession is destroyed.
* The Fields Wither.
* All Hectares are destroyed.
* Each player is granted 16 Hectares.
==========
ID 9374
Tying Up White Ribbons (AI=3.0)
author: Galle
coauthors:
Amend Rule 2438 ("Ribbons") by replacing the following text:
---
White (W): A player qualifies for a White Ribbon if e has never
previously owned a White Ribbon (including under previous rulesets). A
player who has been registered for the past 30+ days or 180+ cumulative
days and has never acted on eir own behalf to cause another person to
gain a White Ribbon (including under a previous ruleset) CAN act on eir
own behalf to cause another person to earn a White Ribbon by announcement.
---
With the following text:
---
White (W): A player qualifies for a White Ribbon if e has never
previously owned a White Ribbon (including under previous rulesets). A
player who has been registered for the past 30+ days or 180+ cumulative
days and has never acted on eir own behalf to cause another person to
earn or gain a White Ribbon (including under a previous ruleset) CAN act
on eir own behalf to cause another person to earn a White Ribbon by
announcement.
---
[The current version of White Ribbons has a possible loophole: players
"gift" White Ribbons by causing other players to EARN White Ribbons, and
then in response Rule 2438 itself causes the earning player to GAIN a
White Ribbon. However, the "you can only do this once" clause only
checks to see if the player has previously directly caused another
player to gain a White Ribbon. You could argue that the current
mechanism counts, because there's a clear chain of causality from
earning to gaining, but given the technical nature of the language here
I think there's definitely a case to be made that the blocking clause
simply doesn't work as-is. The "gain" wording is kept in to make sure
everyone who was already blocked is still blocked.]
--
Cosmo
Promotor, Illuminator
