Re: BUS: A wild Ponzi scheme appears [attn. Notary]
On 7/17/20 10:13 PM, Reuben Staley via agora-business wrote:
> On 2020-07-17 18:41, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote:
>> I consent to and create the following contract:
> Okay fine.
>
> I join the Ponzi scheme contract and transfer it 10 coins.
>
The Ponzi scheme now has 10 coins. Trigon's investment is now 9, and the
Purse is now 1.
I transfer 1 coin from the Ponzi scheme to myself, decreasing the Purse
to 0. The Ponzi scheme now has 9 coins.
The bread line is now [R. Lee, G. Trigon].
R. Lee's investment is 6.
I perform the following actions 4 times:
{
I transfer 2 coins from the Ponzi scheme to R. Lee.
I decrease R. Lee's investment by 1.
}
I have transferred 8 coins to R. Lee in this message. The Ponzi scheme
now has 1 coin, and R. Lee's investment is now 2.
The bread line remains [R. Lee, G., Trigon].
--
Jason Cobb
Re: BUS: A wild Ponzi scheme appears [attn. Notary]
On 2020-07-17 18:41, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote: I consent to and create the following contract: Okay fine. I join the Ponzi scheme contract and transfer it 10 coins. -- Trigon I LOVE SPAGHETTI transfer Jason one coin nch was here I hereby don't... trust... the dragon... don't... trust... the dragon... Do not Construe Jason's message with subject TRIGON as extending this
Re: [attn. Treasuror] Re: BUS: A wild Ponzi scheme appears [attn. Notary]
On 7/17/20 9:50 PM, Kerim Aydin via agora-business wrote:
> I invest 6.
>
> On 7/17/2020 6:44 PM, N. S. via agora-business wrote:
>> I join and invest 7 coins
After these two transfers, the Ponzi scheme how has 14 coins.
R. Lee's investment is 7, and G.'s investment is 6. The bread line is
now [PSS, ATMunn, R. Lee, G.].
PSS's investment is 4.
I perform the following actions 4 times:
{
I transfer 2 coins from the Ponzi scheme to PSS.
I decrease PSS's investment by 1.
}
In this message, I have transferred 8 coins to PSS. PSS's investment is
now zero, and the Ponzi scheme has 6 coins.
I remove PSS from the bread line. The bread line is now [ATMunn, R. Lee, G.]
ATMunn's investment is 2.
I perform the following actions 2 times:
{
I transfer 2 coins from the Ponzi scheme to ATMunn.
I decrease ATMunn's invesetment by 1.
}
In this message I have transferred 4 coins to ATMunn. ATMunn's
investment is now zero, and the Ponzi scheme has 2 coins.
I remove ATMunn from the bread line. The bread line is now [R. Lee, G.].
R. Lee's investment is 7.
I perform the following actions:
{
I transfer 2 coins from the Ponzi scheme to R. Lee.
I decrease R. Lee's investment by 1.
}
In this message, I have transferred 2 coins to R. Lee. R. Lee's
investment is now 6, and the Ponzi scheme has zero coins.
The bread line remains [R. Lee, G.].
--
Jason Cobb
Re: [attn. Treasuror] Re: BUS: A wild Ponzi scheme appears [attn. Notary]
I invest 6.
On 7/17/2020 6:44 PM, N. S. via agora-business wrote:
> I join and invest 7 coins
>
> On Sat., 18 Jul. 2020, 10:56 am Jason Cobb via agora-business, <
> agora-business@agoranomic.org> wrote:
>
>> On 7/17/20 8:51 PM, ATMunn via agora-business wrote:
>>> On 7/17/2020 8:50 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-business
>>> wrote:
On 7/17/20 8:45 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote:
> On 7/17/20 8:41 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote:
>> I consent to and create the following contract:
>
> Being the only party, I amend the Ponzi scheme by appending the
> following paragraph to Section 1:
>
> {
>
> If an investor's investment is less than or equal to 1, the
> Administrator CAN by announcement remove em from the bread line.
>
> }
>
>
I become a party to this contract and transfer ten coins to it.
>>> I become a party to this contract and transfer two coins to it.
>>>
>>
>> The Ponzi Scheme now has 3 coins, and the Purse remains at 0. ATMunn's
>> investment is now 2.
>>
>> I perform the following actions:
>>
>> {
>>
>> I transfer 2 coins from the Ponzi scheme to PSS.
>>
>> I decrease PSS's investment by 1.
>>
>> }
>>
>>
>> The Ponzi scheme now has 1 coin, and PSS's investment is 4.
>>
>> The bread line is now [PSS, ATMunn].
>>
>> --
>> Jason Cobb
>>
>>
Re: [attn. Treasuror] Re: BUS: A wild Ponzi scheme appears [attn. Notary]
I join and invest 7 coins
On Sat., 18 Jul. 2020, 10:56 am Jason Cobb via agora-business, <
agora-business@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> On 7/17/20 8:51 PM, ATMunn via agora-business wrote:
> > On 7/17/2020 8:50 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-business
> > wrote:
> >> On 7/17/20 8:45 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote:
> >>> On 7/17/20 8:41 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote:
> I consent to and create the following contract:
> >>>
> >>> Being the only party, I amend the Ponzi scheme by appending the
> >>> following paragraph to Section 1:
> >>>
> >>> {
> >>>
> >>> If an investor's investment is less than or equal to 1, the
> >>> Administrator CAN by announcement remove em from the bread line.
> >>>
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>>
> >> I become a party to this contract and transfer ten coins to it.
> >>
> >>
> > I become a party to this contract and transfer two coins to it.
> >
>
> The Ponzi Scheme now has 3 coins, and the Purse remains at 0. ATMunn's
> investment is now 2.
>
> I perform the following actions:
>
> {
>
> I transfer 2 coins from the Ponzi scheme to PSS.
>
> I decrease PSS's investment by 1.
>
> }
>
>
> The Ponzi scheme now has 1 coin, and PSS's investment is 4.
>
> The bread line is now [PSS, ATMunn].
>
> --
> Jason Cobb
>
>
Re: [attn. Treasuror] Re: BUS: A wild Ponzi scheme appears [attn. Notary]
On 7/17/20 8:51 PM, ATMunn via agora-business wrote:
> On 7/17/2020 8:50 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-business
> wrote:
>> On 7/17/20 8:45 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote:
>>> On 7/17/20 8:41 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote:
I consent to and create the following contract:
>>>
>>> Being the only party, I amend the Ponzi scheme by appending the
>>> following paragraph to Section 1:
>>>
>>> {
>>>
>>> If an investor's investment is less than or equal to 1, the
>>> Administrator CAN by announcement remove em from the bread line.
>>>
>>> }
>>>
>>>
>> I become a party to this contract and transfer ten coins to it.
>>
>>
> I become a party to this contract and transfer two coins to it.
>
The Ponzi Scheme now has 3 coins, and the Purse remains at 0. ATMunn's
investment is now 2.
I perform the following actions:
{
I transfer 2 coins from the Ponzi scheme to PSS.
I decrease PSS's investment by 1.
}
The Ponzi scheme now has 1 coin, and PSS's investment is 4.
The bread line is now [PSS, ATMunn].
--
Jason Cobb
Re: [attn. Treasuror] Re: BUS: A wild Ponzi scheme appears [attn. Notary]
On 7/17/20 8:50 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-business
wrote:
> On 7/17/20 8:45 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote:
>> On 7/17/20 8:41 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote:
>>> I consent to and create the following contract:
>>
>> Being the only party, I amend the Ponzi scheme by appending the
>> following paragraph to Section 1:
>>
>> {
>>
>> If an investor's investment is less than or equal to 1, the
>> Administrator CAN by announcement remove em from the bread line.
>>
>> }
>>
>>
> I become a party to this contract and transfer ten coins to it.
>
>
The Ponzi scheme now has 10 coins. The Purse is now 1, and PSS's
investment is 9.
I transfer 1 coin from the Ponzi scheme to myself. The Ponzi scheme now
has 9 coins, and the Purse is 0.
I perform the following actions 4 times:
{
I transfer 2 coins from the Ponzi scheme to PSS.
I decrease PSS's investment by 1.
}
The Ponzi scheme now has 1 coin, and PSS's investment is 5.
--
Jason Cobb
Re: [attn. Treasuror] Re: BUS: A wild Ponzi scheme appears [attn. Notary]
On 7/17/2020 8:50 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-business
wrote:
On 7/17/20 8:45 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote:
On 7/17/20 8:41 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote:
I consent to and create the following contract:
Being the only party, I amend the Ponzi scheme by appending the
following paragraph to Section 1:
{
If an investor's investment is less than or equal to 1, the
Administrator CAN by announcement remove em from the bread line.
}
I become a party to this contract and transfer ten coins to it.
I become a party to this contract and transfer two coins to it.
--
ATMunn
friendly neighborhood notary and Czar of Russia :)
[attn. Treasuror] Re: BUS: A wild Ponzi scheme appears [attn. Notary]
On 7/17/20 8:45 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote:
> On 7/17/20 8:41 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote:
>> I consent to and create the following contract:
>
>
> Being the only party, I amend the Ponzi scheme by appending the
> following paragraph to Section 1:
>
> {
>
> If an investor's investment is less than or equal to 1, the
> Administrator CAN by announcement remove em from the bread line.
>
> }
>
>
I become a party to this contract and transfer ten coins to it.
--
Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth
Re: BUS: A wild Ponzi scheme appears [attn. Notary]
On 7/17/20 8:41 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote:
> I consent to and create the following contract:
Being the only party, I amend the Ponzi scheme by appending the
following paragraph to Section 1:
{
If an investor's investment is less than or equal to 1, the
Administrator CAN by announcement remove em from the bread line.
}
The contract's new text is this:
{
THE PONZI SCHEME
# SECTION 0: INTRODUCTION
This contract is a Ponzi scheme, and shall be known as the "Ponzi
Scheme". Its purpose is to provide a guaranteed* 80% return on investment.
The Administrator of this contract is Jason.
*: this is a Ponzi scheme; don't get your hopes up too high
# SECTION 1: INVESTMENT
A party to this contract is known as an investor. Any player CAN become
party to this contract by annoucnement. Any party to this contract
(besides the Administrator) CAN cease being a party to this contract by
announcement. When a party to this contract ceases being a player, e
ceases being a party to this contract.
The Bread Line is an ordered list of investors. No person can occupy
more than one spot in the bread line. To "push" someone onto the bread
line is to remove em from the bread line (if e is in it), and then add
em to the end of the bread line. The "head" of the bread line is the
first person in the bread line (if any). If a person ceases to be an
investor, e is removed from the bread line.
Investment is a natural switch possessed by investors, defaulting to 0.
The Purse is a singleton natural switch, defaulting to 0.
When an investor transfers N coins to this contract, e is appended to
the bread line, the Purse is increased by floor(N / 10), and eir
investment is increased by (N - floor(N / 10)).
If an investor's investment is less than or equal to 1, the
Administrator CAN by announcement remove em from the bread line.
# SECTION 2: RETURN
When the Purse is non-zero, the Administrator CAN, by announcement,
transfer a specified number of coins from this contract to emself, thus
decreasing the purse by the number of coins transferred.
When this contract possesses at least two coins, and when the bread line
is not empty, the Administrator CAN, by announcement, perform the
following actions:
1. Transfer two coins from this contract to the head of the bread line.
2. Decrease the investment of the head of the bread line by 1.
# SECTION 3: AVOIDING PROSECUTION
The Administrator CAN, with notice, avoid prosecution. When e does so, e
transfers all coins from this contract to emself, and this contract is
destroyed.
# SECTION 4: MOB RULE
The Administrator CAN, with Agoran consent from the investors, amend
this contract's text in a specified way.
}
--
Jason Cobb
BUS: A wild Ponzi scheme appears [attn. Notary]
I consent to and create the following contract:
{
THE PONZI SCHEME
# SECTION 0: INTRODUCTION
This contract is a Ponzi scheme, and shall be known as the "Ponzi
Scheme". Its purpose is to provide a guaranteed* 80% return on investment.
The Administrator of this contract is Jason.
*: this is a Ponzi scheme; don't get your hopes up too high
# SECTION 1: INVESTMENT
A party to this contract is known as an investor. Any player CAN become
party to this contract by annoucnement. Any party to this contract
(besides the Administrator) CAN cease being a party to this contract by
announcement. When a party to this contract ceases being a player, e
ceases being a party to this contract.
The Bread Line is an ordered list of investors. No person can occupy
more than one spot in the bread line. To "push" someone onto the bread
line is to remove em from the bread line (if e is in it), and then add
em to the end of the bread line. The "head" of the bread line is the
first person in the bread line (if any). If a person ceases to be an
investor, e is removed from the bread line.
Investment is a natural switch possessed by investors, defaulting to 0.
The Purse is a singleton natural switch, defaulting to 0.
When an investor transfers N coins to this contract, e is appended to
the bread line, the Purse is increased by floor(N / 10), and eir
investment is increased by (N - floor(N / 10)).
# SECTION 2: RETURN
When the Purse is non-zero, the Administrator CAN, by announcement,
transfer a specified number of coins from this contract to emself, thus
decreasing the purse by the number of coins transferred.
When this contract possesses at least two coins, and when the bread line
is not empty, the Administrator CAN, by announcement, perform the
following actions:
1. Transfer two coins from this contract to the head of the bread line.
2. Decrease the investment of the head of the bread line by 1.
# SECTION 3: AVOIDING PROSECUTION
The Administrator CAN, with notice, avoid prosecution. When e does so, e
transfers all coins from this contract to emself, and this contract is
destroyed.
# SECTION 4: MOB RULE
The Administrator CAN, with Agoran consent from the investors, amend
this contract's text in a specified way.
}
--
Jason Cobb
BUS: definitely not bribery
I pledge that when the proposal "Contract Charities" passes, if no votes were evaluated to AGAINST, I will transfer 100 coins to R. Lee. [For those wondering, I told R. Lee on Discord that I would do this if e voted for my proposal. The proposal would already pass, but if it passed unanimously, I would be able to claim an orange ribbon, which would give me enough to get a transparent ribbon. Though e did change eir vote immediately, I want to 1) live up to my word and 2) ensure e doesn't change eir vote at the last moment. 100 coins is a lot, and I'm not super happy about losing them, but to me, the long term investment is worth it. Transparent is one of the hardest ribbons to get, and if I don't take this opportunity now, it could be a long time before I can get it again.] -- ATMunn friendly neighborhood notary and Czar of Russia :)
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8473-8476
Whatever, i change my vote to FOR On Sat., 18 Jul. 2020, 2:51 am ATMunn via agora-discussion, < agora-discuss...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > On 7/17/2020 12:34 PM, ATMunn via agora-discussion wrote: > > On 7/12/2020 11:24 PM, N. S. via agora-business wrote: > >> 8476e^ ATMunn, [1] 1.0 Contract charities > >> AGAINST > > > > R. Lee, I would kindly ask you to withdraw this vote. If you do so, I > > can get an orange ribbon for this proposal and get a transparent ribbon. > > I will gladly pay you in coins or cards (though I don't have all that > > much at the moment). > > > Or at the very least, if you are so adamantly against the proposal that > you are not willing to change your vote, I would appreciate an > explanation as to what is wrong with the proposal. > > -- > ATMunn > friendly neighborhood notary and Czar of Russia :) >
[Glitter] Re: BUS: CFJ 3868 judged FALSE
I award myself blue glitter for this timely judgement.
On 7/17/2020 12:26 PM, ATMunn via agora-business wrote:
My CFJ judgement formatting is consistently inconsistent.
I deliver the following judgement on CFJ 3868:
=== CFJ 3868 =
The above-quoted message created an Agoran proposal.
Caller: ais523
Judge: ATMunn
Judgement: FALSE
Caller's Evidence: (The above-quoted message):
On Sun, 2020-07-12 at 16:02 +, Falsifian via agora-business wrote:
> I submit the following Diplonomic Proposal, titled "Judicial Veto":
>
> {
> To the end of Rule 8, append: "If enacting a proposal would
> interfere
> with the Judge's ability to ensure the smooth running of the game in
> accordance with these rules, then e NEED NOT enact that proposal, so
> long as e publishes an explanation of the problem, and this
> exception
> overrides any requirement for em to enact that proposal."
> }
>
> (This also gives the Judge a way out if a proposal would make eir
> job very difficult.)
Caller's Arguments:
The quoted body of text appears to satisfy the requirements
to be a proposal in the Agoran sense, and its author has stated that e
is submitting it as a proposal; it was sent to a public forum, thus
appears to meet the requirements for acting by announcement (the
standard for creating a proposal). It is stated to be a Diplonomic
Proposal; however, I don't see any reason why a Diplonomic Proposal
can't also be an Agoran proposal, as this proposal appears to match
both sets of requirements.
Weighing against this is the fact that it obviously wasn't intended to
create an Agoran proposal. Is that relevant, when establishing whether
an action by announcement has occurred?
Judge's Arguments:
Let's first examine the rules involved here. The main rule involved is
Rule 2350, "Proposals":
A proposal is a type of entity consisting of a body of text and
other attributes. A player CAN create a proposal by announcement,
specifying its text and optionally specifying any of the following
attributes:
* An associated title.
* A list of coauthors (which must be persons other than the
author).
* An adoption index.
* A chamber to which the proposal shall be assigned upon its
creation.
By this definition, the only thing required for a proposal to be a valid
proposal is for it to have a body of text. Other attributes can be
added, but are not mandatory. The message in question clearly fulfils
the definition of a proposal. The true question is: Did Falsifian
"create a proposal by announcement"?
Let us return to our old friend, Rule 478.
Where the rules define an action that a person CAN perform "by
announcement", that person performs that action by unambiguously
and clearly specifying the action and announcing that e performs
it.
This is where the argument for TRUE falls apart. While I will not go
in-depth on the word "clearly", as I have done that previously and am
quite frankly tired of the word, I think that "unambiguously" is the key
here.
To better understand what is going on here, let us substitute the
definition of "by announcement" from Rule 478 into Rule 2350. Doing so
gives us this:
A player CAN create a proposal by unambiguously and clearly
specifying the action of creating a proposal and announcing that e
performs it, specifying ...
Falsifian did not unambiguously specify the action of creating a
proposal. E did unambiguously specify the action of creating a
Diplonomic proposal. That phrasing does, of course, contain the word
"proposal", but it also contains the word "Diplonomic", and the
Diplnomic rules clearly define a method of creating proposals associated
with Diplonomic. Though neither "Diplonomic proposal" nor "Agoran
proposal" are actually defined, the use of one word or the other clearly
designates which sense of "proposal" is to be used.
The fact that a CFJ was called in the first place indicates that it is
ambiguous as to whether e created a proposal, thereby failing the
definition of "by announcement" in Rule 478, thereby making it not a
proposal.
I judge CFJ 3868 to be FALSE.
--
ATMunn
friendly neighborhood notary and Czar of Russia :)
BUS: CFJ 3868 judged FALSE
My CFJ judgement formatting is consistently inconsistent.
I deliver the following judgement on CFJ 3868:
=== CFJ 3868 =
The above-quoted message created an Agoran proposal.
Caller:ais523
Judge: ATMunn
Judgement: FALSE
Caller's Evidence: (The above-quoted message):
On Sun, 2020-07-12 at 16:02 +, Falsifian via agora-business wrote:
> I submit the following Diplonomic Proposal, titled "Judicial Veto":
>
> {
> To the end of Rule 8, append: "If enacting a proposal would
> interfere
> with the Judge's ability to ensure the smooth running of the game in
> accordance with these rules, then e NEED NOT enact that proposal, so
> long as e publishes an explanation of the problem, and this
> exception
> overrides any requirement for em to enact that proposal."
> }
>
> (This also gives the Judge a way out if a proposal would make eir
> job very difficult.)
Caller's Arguments:
The quoted body of text appears to satisfy the requirements
to be a proposal in the Agoran sense, and its author has stated that e
is submitting it as a proposal; it was sent to a public forum, thus
appears to meet the requirements for acting by announcement (the
standard for creating a proposal). It is stated to be a Diplonomic
Proposal; however, I don't see any reason why a Diplonomic Proposal
can't also be an Agoran proposal, as this proposal appears to match
both sets of requirements.
Weighing against this is the fact that it obviously wasn't intended to
create an Agoran proposal. Is that relevant, when establishing whether
an action by announcement has occurred?
Judge's Arguments:
Let's first examine the rules involved here. The main rule involved is
Rule 2350, "Proposals":
A proposal is a type of entity consisting of a body of text and
other attributes. A player CAN create a proposal by announcement,
specifying its text and optionally specifying any of the following
attributes:
* An associated title.
* A list of coauthors (which must be persons other than the
author).
* An adoption index.
* A chamber to which the proposal shall be assigned upon its
creation.
By this definition, the only thing required for a proposal to be a valid
proposal is for it to have a body of text. Other attributes can be
added, but are not mandatory. The message in question clearly fulfils
the definition of a proposal. The true question is: Did Falsifian
"create a proposal by announcement"?
Let us return to our old friend, Rule 478.
Where the rules define an action that a person CAN perform "by
announcement", that person performs that action by unambiguously
and clearly specifying the action and announcing that e performs
it.
This is where the argument for TRUE falls apart. While I will not go
in-depth on the word "clearly", as I have done that previously and am
quite frankly tired of the word, I think that "unambiguously" is the key
here.
To better understand what is going on here, let us substitute the
definition of "by announcement" from Rule 478 into Rule 2350. Doing so
gives us this:
A player CAN create a proposal by unambiguously and clearly
specifying the action of creating a proposal and announcing that e
performs it, specifying ...
Falsifian did not unambiguously specify the action of creating a
proposal. E did unambiguously specify the action of creating a
Diplonomic proposal. That phrasing does, of course, contain the word
"proposal", but it also contains the word "Diplonomic", and the
Diplnomic rules clearly define a method of creating proposals associated
with Diplonomic. Though neither "Diplonomic proposal" nor "Agoran
proposal" are actually defined, the use of one word or the other clearly
designates which sense of "proposal" is to be used.
The fact that a CFJ was called in the first place indicates that it is
ambiguous as to whether e created a proposal, thereby failing the
definition of "by announcement" in Rule 478, thereby making it not a
proposal.
I judge CFJ 3868 to be FALSE.
--
ATMunn
friendly neighborhood notary and Czar of Russia :)
BUS: [Diplonomic 2020] Resolution and Enactment of Proposals
It is now after 00:00 UTC on July 18, 2020, so the fifth negotiating
phase has begun. You may now submit orders. Please remember to include
conditional orders for retreating because civil unrest never serves
nations well.
With 5 votes FOR and 1 AGAINST, I enact "Further Order Clarification":
{
If the previous Diplonomic Proposal submitted by ATMunn has not passed,
then amend Diplonomic Rule 17 by replacing the last sentence with the
following paragraph:
{
A Convoy order orders a fleet in a water province to move an army from
one coastal province to another. All fleets that have convoy orders
listing the same source and destination provinces are "participating" in
that convoy, with the exception that if a fleet is dislodged, it is not
participating. A convoy is successful if the army in question makes a
move order consistent with that convoy, and the fleets participating in
the convoy form an unbroken chain connecting the two coastal provinces.
(Extra participating fleets / multiple chains are okay.) When a convoy
is successful, that army's move order, and any support orders for that
move, are interpreted as if the source and destination provinces were
adjacent: for example, if the destination province holds one unsupported
unit with a Hold order, and another army is supporting the move into the
destination, then the move succeeds and dislodges that unsupported unit.
}
If the previous Diplonomic Proposal submitted by ATMunn has passed, then
amend Diplonomic Rule 17 by replacing the last paragraph with the
paragraph above.
}
The new text of the rules is as follows:
{
6. The game SHALL be conducted on a map mechanically indistinguishable
from that appearing at [2]. The Gamemaster SHALL assign Great Powers to
Contestants according to an equitable and random method.
7. Contestants may seek the assistance of non-Contestants. If any do so,
they SHALL notify the Judge and publicly announce the identities of any
such non-Contestants and what assistance they will provide. This could
include negotiating on eir behalf, providing feedback on orders, or
drafting proposals on eir behalf. Any notifications given under the
former section 7 of the Birthday Tournament regulations are considered
to have fulfilled this section of the Diplonomic 2020 rules.
A contestant CAN, by announcement, cause a person who consents to become
or cease to be eir teammate, provided the person is not another
contestant or the teammate of another contestant. Designating someone as
a teammate is considered a notification that the teammate may assist the
contestant in any manner. When these rules provide for certain
contestants to win by a certain method, the Gamemaster CAN include their
teammates and SHALL do so unless it is eir opinion that extraordinary
circumstances render it against the best interest of the tournament.
Teammates are encouraged to lie to and cheat other teams, and SHALL NOT
engage in any behaviors outside of the tournament intended to influence
its course; however, they SHALL NOT betray their teams.
8. At any time, any Contestant CAN submit a Proposal to change these
rules by announcement. Any Contestant CAN withdraw any Proposal e has
submitted by announcement. When a Proposal has been submitted but not
withdrawn, any Contestant CAN privately send a vote to the Judge, or
withdraw eir previous vote. If a Proposal has received a number of
non-withdrawn votes in favor greater than half the number of
Contestants, the Judge CAN enact the proposal by publishing the new text
of the rules and the number of votes in favor and against, and SHALL do
so immediately after resolving orders the next time e does so. As an
exception, if a proposal was designated as urgent in the message in
which it was submitted, the Judge MAY enact the proposal sooner, and
SHOULD do so as soon as possible. Proposals SHOULD NOT be designated as
urgent unless they are bug-fixes, and the Judge SHOULD NOT resolve non
bug-fix proposals early. The Judge SHALL NOT reveal the votes of
specific Contestants.
9. If in the past three game-years, no province has changed ownership,
the Gamemaster CAN declare the game a draw, with 2 days notice,
concluding the Tournament and announcing all remaining Contestants as
winners.
11. There are two types of units: Armies and Fleets.
12. All units have the same strength.
13. There can only be one unit in a province at a time.
14. At the start of the game, each Great Power controls three supply
centers, with the exception of Russia, which controls four. These are
allocated according to the table shown in the official rules.
15. At the beginning of each turn, there is a period, lasting from 0:00
UTC until 24:00 UTC on the same calendar day, in which negotiations
should occur. Following this, there is a period until 12:00 UTC on the
following day, during which orders CAN be submitted privately to the
Gamemaster. The next turn will begin at 24:00 UTC on that day, by which
time the Gamemaster SHALL have resolved the
