BUS: so as not to keep people up until midnight
[Only just realized that ending a voting period is doable by power-1 R2168, as long as it doesn't go shorter than 5 days (R107). So a power-1 thingie should do it]. I demonstrate the following rulebending form: --- Every valid ballot on the referendum to adopt Proposal 8494 that has a vote of FOR or that evaluates to FOR is hereby withdrawn. Every valid ballot on the referendum to adopt Proposal 8495 that has a vote of FOR or that evaluates to FOR is hereby withdrawn. The voting period on the referendum to adopt proposal 8494 hereby ends. The voting period on the referendum to adopt proposal 8495 hereby ends. [ For reference: ID Author(s)AITitle 8494l^ Gaelan 1.0 nope 8495*^ Gaelan 3.0 nopenopenope ] ---
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Anti-timing-scam contract
As do I
> On Sep 4, 2020, at 15:53, Nathan S via agora-discussion
> wrote:
>
> On 9/4/2020 12:03 PM, Gaelan Steele via agora-business wrote:
>>
On Sep 4, 2020, at 7:51 PM, Gaelan Steele via agora-business
wrote:
>>>
>>> I agree to the following contact:
>>>
>>> {Any player may become a party to this contract. Any party may act on
>>> behalf of any other party to vote FOR the proposals "nope" and
>>> "nopenopenope" (the ones by Gaelan, created before this contract).}
>>>
>>> The intention is that we all have a shot at putting our votes back in the
>>> event of a timing scam.
>>>
>>> Gaelan
>> I amend the contract to the following:
>>
>> {Any player may become a party to this contract. Any party may act on behalf
>> of any other party to vote FOR the proposals "nope" and "nopenopenope" (the
>> ones by Gaelan, created before this contract). This contract ceases to exist
>> (or, if it cannot do so, ceases to have any effect) after the referendum for
>> those proposals is resolved.}
>>
>> Gaelan
>
> I become a party to this contract.
>
BUS: Re: OFF: [Prime Minister] New Speaker
On Fri, Sep 4, 2020, 4:56 PM nix via agora-official < agora-offic...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > Myself, grok, and Jason are laureled thanks to our swift victory in the > nomaoic tournament. I appoint grok to speaker. > > -- > nix > Prime Minister, Webmastor > I award myself a platinum ribbon. Long live the speaker. >
BUS: to the moooooon [Emergency]
I demonstrate the following rulebending form: The following Emergency Regulation is enacted: The publicity of the Lunar Laser Ranging experiment is set to Discussion. [ For reference: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_Laser_Ranging_experiment ] Note: this had/has nothing to do with the original purpose of the scam, but in setting this up it became apparent that the creation of emergency regulations isn't secured, so it's a huge hole whereby an AI-1 instrument, including a proposal, can change AI-3 secured stuff (arguably, of course!) I think the emergency regulations would get around just about every limit that rulebending places on itself.
(@Referee PETITION) Re: BUS: CFJ about scam
While this wasn't filed with the referee, I petition the Referee to
recommend a judge for this case, whom I will assign if POSSIBLE and LEGAL.
I suggest further CFJs on this matter also be filed with the referee.
-G.
On 9/4/2020 12:37 PM, Gaelan Steele via agora-business wrote:
> I CFJ, barring G.: {Jason is REQUIRED to resolve the referendum on proposal
> 8493 within a timely fashion.}
>
> Arguments:
>
> 208/14 says "The vote collector for an unresolved Agoran decision CAN resolve
> it by announcement, indicating the outcome. If it was required to be
> initiated, then e SHALL resolve it in a timely fashion after the end of the
> voting period."
>
> This decision was not required to be initiated; the PM used the Manifesto
> cabinet order, which e had no obligation to do.
>
> Gaelan
>
BUS: CFJ about scam
I CFJ, barring G.: {Jason is REQUIRED to resolve the referendum on proposal
8493 within a timely fashion.}
Arguments:
208/14 says "The vote collector for an unresolved Agoran decision CAN resolve
it by announcement, indicating the outcome. If it was required to be initiated,
then e SHALL resolve it in a timely fashion after the end of the voting period."
This decision was not required to be initiated; the PM used the Manifesto
cabinet order, which e had no obligation to do.
Gaelan
BUS: (@treasuror) cashing
I pay a set of 4 Voting Cards to earn 10 Extra Votes. I transfer 1 Voting Card to nix. -G.
BUS: time bending
I demonstrate the following rulebending form: The voting period on the referendum to adopt proposal 8494 is hereby increased to 14 days. The voting period on the referendum to adopt proposal 8495 is hereby increased to 14 days. [ For reference: ID Author(s)AITitle 8494l^ Gaelan 1.0 nope 8495*^ Gaelan 3.0 nopenopenope ] Also, I can't see anything in the rules that says ballot withdrawals can't happen after the voting period ends (if using instruments).
Re: BUS: Anti-timing-scam contract
On 9/4/20 3:03 PM, Gaelan Steele via agora-business wrote:
>
>> On Sep 4, 2020, at 7:51 PM, Gaelan Steele via agora-business
>> wrote:
>>
>> I agree to the following contact:
>>
>> {Any player may become a party to this contract. Any party may act on behalf
>> of any other party to vote FOR the proposals "nope" and "nopenopenope" (the
>> ones by Gaelan, created before this contract).}
>>
>> The intention is that we all have a shot at putting our votes back in the
>> event of a timing scam.
>>
>> Gaelan
> I amend the contract to the following:
>
> {Any player may become a party to this contract. Any party may act on behalf
> of any other party to vote FOR the proposals "nope" and "nopenopenope" (the
> ones by Gaelan, created before this contract). This contract ceases to exist
> (or, if it cannot do so, ceases to have any effect) after the referendum for
> those proposals is resolved.}
>
> Gaelan
I become a party.
--
Jason Cobb
Re: BUS: Anti-timing-scam contract
On Fri, Sep 4, 2020 at 12:03 PM Gaelan Steele via agora-business <
agora-business@agoranomic.org> wrote:
>
>
> > On Sep 4, 2020, at 7:51 PM, Gaelan Steele via agora-business <
> agora-business@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> >
> > I agree to the following contact:
> >
> > {Any player may become a party to this contract. Any party may act on
> behalf of any other party to vote FOR the proposals "nope" and
> "nopenopenope" (the ones by Gaelan, created before this contract).}
> >
> > The intention is that we all have a shot at putting our votes back in
> the event of a timing scam.
> >
> > Gaelan
>
> I amend the contract to the following:
>
> {Any player may become a party to this contract. Any party may act on
> behalf of any other party to vote FOR the proposals "nope" and
> "nopenopenope" (the ones by Gaelan, created before this contract). This
> contract ceases to exist (or, if it cannot do so, ceases to have any
> effect) after the referendum for those proposals is resolved.}
>
> Gaelan
I join.
-Aris
Re: BUS: Anti-timing-scam contract
> On Sep 4, 2020, at 7:51 PM, Gaelan Steele via agora-business
> wrote:
>
> I agree to the following contact:
>
> {Any player may become a party to this contract. Any party may act on behalf
> of any other party to vote FOR the proposals "nope" and "nopenopenope" (the
> ones by Gaelan, created before this contract).}
>
> The intention is that we all have a shot at putting our votes back in the
> event of a timing scam.
>
> Gaelan
I amend the contract to the following:
{Any player may become a party to this contract. Any party may act on behalf of
any other party to vote FOR the proposals "nope" and "nopenopenope" (the ones
by Gaelan, created before this contract). This contract ceases to exist (or, if
it cannot do so, ceases to have any effect) after the referendum for those
proposals is resolved.}
Gaelan
BUS: Anti-timing-scam contract
I agree to the following contact:
{Any player may become a party to this contract. Any party may act on behalf of
any other party to vote FOR the proposals "nope" and "nopenopenope" (the ones
by Gaelan, created before this contract).}
The intention is that we all have a shot at putting our votes back in the event
of a timing scam.
Gaelan
Re: BUS: Re: (proposal)
I vote FOR Proposal 8493. On 2020-09-04 18:17, Kerim Aydin via agora-business wrote: > > I demonstrate the following rulebending form: > - > > Every valid ballot on the referendum to adopt Proposal 8493 [quoted below] > that has a vote of AGAINST or that evaluates to AGAINST is hereby withdrawn. > > - > > -G. > > On 8/28/2020 11:20 AM, nix via agora-business wrote: >> On 8/28/20 1:09 PM, nix via agora-business wrote: >>> On 8/28/20 11:17 AM, Kerim Aydin via agora-business wrote: I submit the following proposal, "Minor Adjustments", AI-3: --- Increase the power of Rule 2633 (Rulebending) to 3. --- >>> I issue the cabinet order Manifesto, distributing the above proposal. (I >>> don't think I can assign it an ID, the Promotor has to I believe). The >>> valid votes are FOR, AGAINST, PRESENT, as well as conditional votes. The >>> assessor is the vote collector on this decision. >>> >>> -- >>> nix >>> Prime Minister, Webmastor >>> >> If this failed because I forgot some essential parameters then I do the >> following: >> >> I issue the cabinet order Manifesto, distributing the above proposal. (I >> don't think I can assign it an ID, the Promotor has to I believe). For this >> decision, the vote collector is the Assessor, the voting method is >> AI-majority, and the valid options are FOR and AGAINST (PRESENT is also a >> valid vote, as are conditional votes). The author is G., the AI is 3. There >> are no co-authors, the class is democratic. >> >> Sorry about the messy distribution, I missed the essential parameters >> requirement when I was checking the rules. >> -- Falsifian
BUS: Re: (proposal)
I demonstrate the following rulebending form: - Every valid ballot on the referendum to adopt Proposal 8493 [quoted below] that has a vote of AGAINST or that evaluates to AGAINST is hereby withdrawn. - -G. On 8/28/2020 11:20 AM, nix via agora-business wrote: > On 8/28/20 1:09 PM, nix via agora-business wrote: >> On 8/28/20 11:17 AM, Kerim Aydin via agora-business wrote: >>> I submit the following proposal, "Minor Adjustments", AI-3: >>> --- >>> >>> Increase the power of Rule 2633 (Rulebending) to 3. >>> >>> --- >> I issue the cabinet order Manifesto, distributing the above proposal. (I >> don't think I can assign it an ID, the Promotor has to I believe). The >> valid votes are FOR, AGAINST, PRESENT, as well as conditional votes. The >> assessor is the vote collector on this decision. >> >> -- >> nix >> Prime Minister, Webmastor >> > If this failed because I forgot some essential parameters then I do the > following: > > I issue the cabinet order Manifesto, distributing the above proposal. (I > don't think I can assign it an ID, the Promotor has to I believe). For this > decision, the vote collector is the Assessor, the voting method is > AI-majority, and the valid options are FOR and AGAINST (PRESENT is also a > valid vote, as are conditional votes). The author is G., the AI is 3. There > are no co-authors, the class is democratic. > > Sorry about the messy distribution, I missed the essential parameters > requirement when I was checking the rules. >
Re: BUS: [Promotor] Administrative Regulations
I support both such intents. On 9/4/2020 3:01 AM, Aris Merchant via agora-business wrote: I intend, for each of the two "---" delimited texts below, to promulgate that text as an Administrative Regulation of the office of Promotor with 1.5 Agoran consent. --- Certification For the Promotor to cause a proposal to become pending with 2+N support, where N is equal to the number of times e has done so in the past 7 days, is for em to certify it. A proposal is certifiable if: 1. it is reasonably narrowly tailored to fix one or more problems, including a) bugs, b) errors, c) ambiguities, and d) vulnerabilities*; or 2. unusual or exigent circumstance render it in the public interest for it to become pending via this method. * Note: Any of these problems may arise from a single source or the interaction of multiple sources, which may be individually unproblematic. This provision is to be interpreted broadly and flexibly to effectuate its spirit. The Promotor SHOULD NOT certify a non-certifiable proposal. Players SHOULD support an intent to certify a proposal if and only if it is certifiable. The author of a proposal in the pool CAN, by announcement, request certification of the proposal, provided e does so in a message that has either "Promotor" or "Proposal" in the subject line; e SHOULD NOT do so unless e believes eir proposal is certifiable and is ENCOURAGED to explain why eir proposal is certifiable. Once certification is requested, the Promotor SHALL respond publicly before publishing the next report that contains the proposal, unless the proposal is withdrawn or pended in the interim. Petitioning the Promotor to certify a proposal is DEPRECATED. --- Proposal Style Guide Players SHOULD format proposals in accordance with the following guidelines. These guidelines represent the Promotor's preferred formatting. Most of these guidelines are flexible recommendations, but where something is marked as STRONGLY DISCOURAGED, doing it is actively inconvenient for the Promotor. I. Headers and Metadata. 1. Format headers as close as possible to the heading used for distributions, which looks like this: Title: _ Adoption index: _._ Author: Co-authors: , To be clear: a) write the fields in that order; b) write out all the fields, even the ones that have default values; and c) write each field on its own line. 2. a) Give proposals titles 35 characters or less. b) Giving proposals titles over 70 characters is STRONGLY DISCOURAGED. II. Bodies. 1. Indent Proposals two spaces per indent level. 2. a) Wrap proposal lines to 80 characters or less. b) Making it so the Promotor cannot wrap lines to 80 characters or less is STRONGLY DISCOURAGED unless it is absolutely unavoidable (e.g. in the case of URLs). 3. Players are STRONGLY DISCOURAGED from placing markings that indicate the start of the proposal's text on the same line as the start of the text. --- -- ATMunn friendly neighborhood notary and Speaker of Agora :)
BUS: [Promotor] Administrative Regulations
I intend, for each of the two "---" delimited texts below, to promulgate that text as an Administrative Regulation of the office of Promotor with 1.5 Agoran consent. --- Certification For the Promotor to cause a proposal to become pending with 2+N support, where N is equal to the number of times e has done so in the past 7 days, is for em to certify it. A proposal is certifiable if: 1. it is reasonably narrowly tailored to fix one or more problems, including a) bugs, b) errors, c) ambiguities, and d) vulnerabilities*; or 2. unusual or exigent circumstance render it in the public interest for it to become pending via this method. * Note: Any of these problems may arise from a single source or the interaction of multiple sources, which may be individually unproblematic. This provision is to be interpreted broadly and flexibly to effectuate its spirit. The Promotor SHOULD NOT certify a non-certifiable proposal. Players SHOULD support an intent to certify a proposal if and only if it is certifiable. The author of a proposal in the pool CAN, by announcement, request certification of the proposal, provided e does so in a message that has either "Promotor" or "Proposal" in the subject line; e SHOULD NOT do so unless e believes eir proposal is certifiable and is ENCOURAGED to explain why eir proposal is certifiable. Once certification is requested, the Promotor SHALL respond publicly before publishing the next report that contains the proposal, unless the proposal is withdrawn or pended in the interim. Petitioning the Promotor to certify a proposal is DEPRECATED. --- Proposal Style Guide Players SHOULD format proposals in accordance with the following guidelines. These guidelines represent the Promotor's preferred formatting. Most of these guidelines are flexible recommendations, but where something is marked as STRONGLY DISCOURAGED, doing it is actively inconvenient for the Promotor. I. Headers and Metadata. 1. Format headers as close as possible to the heading used for distributions, which looks like this: Title: _ Adoption index: _._ Author: Co-authors: , To be clear: a) write the fields in that order; b) write out all the fields, even the ones that have default values; and c) write each field on its own line. 2. a) Give proposals titles 35 characters or less. b) Giving proposals titles over 70 characters is STRONGLY DISCOURAGED. II. Bodies. 1. Indent Proposals two spaces per indent level. 2. a) Wrap proposal lines to 80 characters or less. b) Making it so the Promotor cannot wrap lines to 80 characters or less is STRONGLY DISCOURAGED unless it is absolutely unavoidable (e.g. in the case of URLs). 3. Players are STRONGLY DISCOURAGED from placing markings that indicate the start of the proposal's text on the same line as the start of the text. ---
