On 10/22/20 10:01 AM, Gaelan Steele wrote:
> This looks fun!
>
>> On Oct 22, 2020, at 12:28 AM, Jason Cobb <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> With apologies to G.:
>>
>> Proto: Stones
>> Coauthors: G., Aris, nix, Trigon
>>
>> [Reason: we need more uses for coins.]
>>
>> Enact a new rule, power 1, title "Stones", with the following text:
>> {
>> A Stone is a unique indestructable liquid asset defined by the Rules. To
>> define a stone, the definition must include:
>> (i) A unique name;
>> (ii) The Escape Risk of the stone, which must be a percentage between
>> 0% and 100% inclusive;
>> (iii) A Scroll, which is a document specifying the effects of the stone
>> (iv) Optionally, a frequency, which must be one of daily, weekly,
>> monthly, quarterly.
>>
>> Ownership of stones is entirely restricted to Agora and players. If a
>> stone is owned by the Lost and Found Department, it is immediately
>> transferred to Agora.
> This is potentially problematic if we ever have issues transferring things to
> Agora - our paradox prevention mechanism could end up in a paradoxical state,
> which is Probably Bad.
This seems pretty unlikely, and we'll probably have bigger asset issues
if that breaks.
>
>> The Stonekeepor is an office, and the recordkeepor of stones.
> Agorans are a creative bunch, I'm sure we can do better than Stonekeepor.
> Stonemason, maybe?
/shrug
I'm a programmer, so I'm not very good at naming things.
>
>> }
>>
>> Enact a new rule, power 1, title "Wielding Stones", with the following text:
>> {
>> Except as otherwise specified by the rules, the owner of a stone CAN
>> wield it by announcement specifying any values needed to interpret the
>> stone's effects.
>>
>> If a stone has a frequency, then it is IMPOSSIBLE to wield that stone if
>> it has been previously wielded in the same Agoran time interval as
>> indicated by its frequency (e.g. if its frequency is daily, if it has
>> been wielded in the same Agoran day).
>>
>> When a stone is wielded, the Rule defining that stone applies the
>> effects in that stone's scroll.
>> }
>>
>> Enact a new rule, power 1, title "Distributing Stones", with the
>> following text:
>> {
>> The Stonekeepor CAN initiate an auction for any set of stones belonging
>> to Agora for which an auction is not ongoing, with each individual stone
>> being an auction lot. The stonekeepor is the auctioneer, the currency is
>> coins, and the minimum bid is one coin.
> I'm not up to date on how auctions work these days - does this mean we
> potentially need to do the thing where we compete for second highest bid or
> w/e to get the stone we want?
Depends on the auction method selected by the Stonekeepor.
>
>> The Stonekeepor SHALL so initiate an auction for a set of stones
>> consisting of at least one third the stones eligible for auction in a
>> timely fashion after publishing a Collection Notice.
> Does this require zero-lot auctions if no stones are for sale?
Fixed.
>
>> }
>>
>> Enact a new rule, power 1, title "Collecting Stones", with the following
>> text:
>> {
>> A stone is immune if it has been Granted Immunity in the past two weeks,
>> as specified by other rules, and there has been no intervening
>> Collection Notice after the grant.
> Why two weeks? Shouldn't it just last to the next collection notice?
Fixed.
>
>> Once per month, the Stonekeepor CAN publish a Collection Notice by
>> announcement, specifying all necessary information and choices. A
>> collection notice includes, for every non-immune stone not belonging to
>> Agora, a random choice of whether that stone escapes; it escapes with a
>> probability equal to its escape risk. When a stone escapes, it is
>> transferred to Agora. The Stonekeepor SHALL publish such a notice in a
>> timely fashion after the beginning of each Agoran month.
> This feels a little ambiguous about when exactly the stone escapes.
Fixed by specifying an order in the collection notice.
>
>> }
>>
>>
>> Enact a new rule, power 1, title "The Gauntlet", with the following text:
>> {
>> When a player makes a correct announcement that a single specified
>> player owns 5 or more stones, the specified player Wields the Guantlet.
> Couldn't this just be "A person who owns 5 or more stones can Wield the
> Gauntlet by announcement"?
That wouldn't let anyone forcibly end the game if someone has 5 stones,
which may not really be necessary.
>
>> When a player Wields the Gauntlet, e wins the game and all existing
>> stones are transferred to Agora.
>> }
>>
>> Enact a new rule, power 1, title "The Stones", with the following text:
>> {
>> The following stones are defined, one per paragraph, with the following
>> format: Stone Name (Frequency, Escape Risk): Scroll.
>>
>> - Power Stone (weekly, 40%): A specified player hereby buys strength 3
>> times on a specified unresolved Agoran Decision.
>>
>> - Wealth Stone (weekly, 50%): The specified player earns 5 boatloads of
>> coins.
>>
>> - Soul Stone (weekly, 50%): The Soul Stone is hereby transferred to the
>> owner of a different specified stone, then that stone is transferred to
>> the wielder.
>>
>> - Sabotage Stone (weekly, 80%): The adoption index of a specified Agoran
>> decision is hereby increased by 1.
> We should make absolutely sure this only affects the AI of the decision, and
> not the power of the proposal if passed. (I think the rules work this way,
> but it's a little ambiguous.)
I'm relatively sure it does (for the same reason as a certain power
escalation scam works, but that's another matter).
>
> Also, what happens if you Sabotage a proposal with a method other than
> AI-majority? Such a proposal has an AI of "none"; does none+1 = 1? If so,
> that would case the voting method of the proposal to become AI-majority.
Fixed.
--
Jason Cobb
Assessor, Rulekeepor
_______________________________________________
Agora mailing list
[email protected]
https://listserver.tue.nl/mailman/listinfo/agora
