(@Geologist) Re: BUS: [Geologist] Healing Crystals and You: Speedrun Walkthru Guide
On Mon, 2024-05-20 at 19:37 -0700, 4st nomic via agora-business wrote: > =ais523= > Crystal 2471 - size 1. > > ===Events=== > May 19th Assessor Report (assuming it's correct): > - ais523, 2618 @ 2 (New!) > - Murphy, 2478 @ 1 (+1, changes hands) CoE: The events section is inconsistent with the main portion of the report. -- ais523
BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Propositions 9111-9113
On Sun, 2024-05-12 at 18:54 -0500, secretsnail9 via agora-official wrote: > ID Author(s) AI Title > --- I vote as follows: > 9111~ ais523 2.2 Resolve The Paradox FOR > 9112~ Murphy 1.7 What's a crime? FOR > 9113~ Murphy 1.0 No apathetic apathy AGAINST -- ais523
Re: BUS: Vacation intents
On Fri, 2024-05-10 at 17:00 +0200, Janet Cobb via agora-business wrote: > For each intent to declare apathy that has been made within the past 21 days, I object to it. (Probably an apparently empty message can't hide one of those, but may as well exercise the usual level of paranoia.) -- ais523
(@Assessor) BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Propositions 9102-9110
On Mon, 2024-04-29 at 21:16 -0500, secretsnail9 via agora-official wrote: > ID Author(s) AI Title > --- I vote as follows: > 9102~ juniper 1.0 An Overpowering Proposal AGAINST, because it isn't clear whether "Dictator"/"Dictatorship" are being defined as terms of art that have no game meaning except as defined by the rules, or whether they have their ordinary-language meaning – if you want to reward players for managing to set this situation up, it is probably better to just give them a win > 9103~ juniper 1.0 Dictator Takes the Quorum AGAINST, see above > 9104~ snail 1.0 Stamp Raffle fix FOR > 9105~ snail 1.0 Stamp Raffle Repeal PRESENT > 9106* snail...[1] 3.0 No Overpowered Deputizations FOR > 9107~ Jaff 2.0 Market Stone Pricing AGAINST – stones are too cheap as it is and this will make them even cheaper (multiple transfers of a single stone within a week are unlikely as there isn't much point to taking a stone unless you can use it immediately) > 9108~ nix, Janet 2.0 Less Smooth, More Immune FOR – this still leaves some bugs unfixed (e.g. using the Protection Stone to protect itself, something which I have abused heavily in the past) but is overall an improvement (This message does not contain a vote on 9109.) I vote as follows: > 9110* Janet 3.0 Delegate removal FOR -- ais523
(@Herald, Illuminator, Collector, Stonemason) BUS: A hat-trick
On Sun, 2024-04-21 at 21:20 -0500, secretsnail9 via agora-official wrote: > ais523 (56): > - 1 4st stamp > - 18 ais523 stamps > - 1 Janet stamp > - 1 juan stamp > - 8 Kate stamps > - 2 Katie stamps > - 2 kiako stamps > - 14 Madrid stamps > - 1 Maloney stamp > - 1 Mercury stamp > - 1 Murphy stamp > - 3 nix stamp > - 2 snail stamp > - 1 Yachay stamp (I have also since obtained a blob stamp.) On Sun, 2024-05-05 at 16:55 -0400, Quadrantal via agora-official wrote: > PLACE NAME [0] RADIANCE CHANGE [1] > - -- > 2ndAIS 040 +14 I wield the Radiance Stone, specifying myself. (This increases my radiance to 43.) I pay 1 ais523 stamp, 1 Kate stamp, 1 Katie stamp, 1 kiako stamp, 1 Madrid stamp, 1 nix stamp, and 1 snail stamp to gain (7^2-7) = 42 radiance. (This increases my radiance to 85.) I pay 7 ais523 stamps to gain (7-1)*2 = 12 radiance. (This increases my radiance to 97.) Three times, I pay a fee of 2 Spendies to increase my radiance by 1. (This increases my radiance to 100.) My radiance is 100. This announcement causes me to win the game. -- ais523
(@Arbitor, Stonemason) BUS: A Stone CFJ
I wield the Anti-Equatorial Stone, specifying the Power Stone. CFJ: I own the Power Stone. Arguments: The Anti-Equatorial Stone transfers the "mossiest non-immune stone", or a specified such stone if multiple non-immune stones are tied for mossiest. Currently, "mossiness" is not defined (with the only mention outside the Anti-Equatorial stone being in rule 2451, which allows the Prime Minister to increase a stone's mossiness by 2). Does that mean that all stones are currently tied for mossiest, on the basis that the Prime Minister has not used the power in question to make them mossier? I transfer the Power Stone to Janet (to remove the gamestate ambiguity, and because e deserves it for putting up with all my (recent and historical) stone-related nonsense). -- ais523
(@Herald, Stonemason) BUS: Wining the game using Stones
On Sun, 2024-05-05 at 18:52 -0400, Janet Cobb via agora-official wrote: > THE BILLBOARD ROCK CHART (STONEMASON'S WEEKLY REPORT) > > Stone Owner Last Wielded Stone Cost Immune? > --- --- -- --- > Power Janet 2024-04-01 8 > Soul ais523 2024-04-21 8 > Sabotage Janet 2023-10-25 6 > Minty Murphy 2024-04-28 6 > Protection ais523 2024-04-01 6 > Recursion ais523 2024-04-01 8 Protection > Hot Potato Goren 2024-04-28 9 > Blank ais523 2024-04-01 6 > Anti-Equatorial ais523 2024-04-01 6 Protection > Radiance ais523 2024-04-30 10 > Loud Agora 9 I pay a fee of 6 Spendies to transfer the Sabotage Stone to myself. I pay a fee of 6 Spendies to transfer the Minty Stone to myself. I Notice the Rock Garden, specifying myself. -- ais523
(@Herald, Prime Minister, Promotor) Re: BUS: Judgement of CFJs 4075 and 4076
On Sun, 2024-04-28 at 15:38 -0700, Edward Murphy via agora-business
wrote:
> CFJ 4075: "Yachay CAN cash Promise Q, either by directly cashing it, or
> by transferring it from the Library to emself and then cashing it."
>
> CFJ 4076: "I CAN cash the promise 'Awakening'."
[snip]
> I judge 4075 PARADOXICAL.
> I judge 4076 PARADOXICAL.
I Transcend Logic, specifying CFJ 4076. (This causes me to win the
game, creating obligations for the Herald and Prime Minister.)
I submit the following proposal, "Resolve The Paradox", AI 2.2:
[The following change amends the promise rules to prevent the same
paradox re-occurring, via making "cashing a promise from the Library"
into a single action rather than two actions linked by a future
conditional.]
In rule 2618, amend
{{{
A promise's bearer CAN, by announcement, cash the promise,
provided that any conditions for cashing it specified by its text
are unambiguously met.
}}}
to
{{{
A player (the casher) CAN, by announcement, cash a promise,
provided that both a) any conditions for cashing it specified by
its text are unambiguously met, and b) either the casher is the
promise's bearer, or the promise is owned by the Library.
}}}
and, as part of the same amendment, amend
{{{
In a promise's text, "the bearer" (or the like) refers to the
promise's bearer, and "this promise" (or the like) refers to the
promise.
}}}
to
{{{
In a promise's text, "the bearer" and "the casher" (or the like)
both refer to the player who cashed the promise, and "this
promise" (or the like) refers to the promise.
}}}
and delete
{{{
Any player CAN take
a specified promise from the Library by announcement, provided e
cashes the promise in the same message.
}}}.
[The following change resolves any gamestate uncertainty caused by the
paradox by destroying all relevant promises, and should not affect any
promises other than those that were used to cause, or were created by,
the paradox.]
Destroy all promises that were created on 7 April 2024 and whose
creator is ais523.
--
ais523
BUS: Re: OFF: [Illuminator] BRIGHTEST BULBS (05 May 2024)
On Sun, 2024-05-05 at 14:46 -0400, Quadrantal via agora-official wrote: > I deputise as Illuminator to publish þe following report: > > Radiances as of 18:45:00 UTC, 05 May 2024 > > PLACE NAME [0] RADIANCE CHANGE [1] > - -- > 1st JWN 055 +10 > 2nd AIS 026 > 3rd SNL 023 +10 > 4th MCY 013 > 5th MUR 011 +2 > 6th NIX 010 +10 > QDR 010 +10 > 8th BEN 008 > 9th KIA 006 > 10th JNT 004 > WST 004 +4 CoE: I wielded the Radiance Stone on the following occasions: * Mon, 01 Apr 2024 00:09:28 UTC * Tue, 30 Apr 2024 17:23:22 UTC neither of which is reflected in the quoted report. Additionally, I wielded the Hot Potato Stone on the former of these two occasions, which also is not reflected in the quoted report. (The Radiance Stone grants 3 Radiance, and the Hot Potato Stone 8, so I should now have 40.) -- ais523
BUS: Re: OFF: Re: BUS: Petitions [further attn. Promotor, Arbitor, Tailor, ADoP]
On Sun, 2024-05-05 at 11:26 -0700, Edward Murphy via agora-official wrote: > I intend, with 2 Agoran consent, to award Employee of the Year 2023 > to snail. I support. > I intend, with 2 Agoran consent, to award Employee of the Year 2023 > to Janet. I support. -- ais523
(@Stonemason, Illuminator) Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Stonemason] Billboard Rock Chart - 28 Apr 2024
On Tue, 2024-04-30 at 18:20 +0100, ais523 via agora-business wrote: > On Sun, 2024-04-28 at 03:18 -0400, Janet Cobb via agora-official wrote: > > THE BILLBOARD ROCK CHART (STONEMASON'S WEEKLY REPORT) > > > > Stone Owner Last Wielded Stone Cost Immune? > > --- --- -- --- > > Power Janet 2024-04-01 9 > > Soul ais523 2024-04-21 9 > > Sabotage Janet 2023-10-25 7 > > Minty Murphy 2024-04-21 7 > > Protection ais523 2024-04-01 7 > > Recursion ais523 2024-04-01 9 Protection > > Hot Potato Ben 2024-04-21 9 > > Blank ais523 2024-04-01 7 > > Anti-Equatorial ais523 2024-04-01 7 Protection > > Radiance snail 2024-04-22 8 > > Loud R. Lee 7 > > I transfer the Loud Stone to myself by paying a fee of 7 spendies. > I transfer the Radiance Stone to myself by paying a fee of 8 spendies. > > I wield the Radiance Stone, specifying myself. And in case the above failed due to the costs reducing every week: I transfer the Loud Stone to myself by paying a fee of 6 spendies. I transfer the Radiance Stone to myself by paying a fee of 7 spendies. I wield the Radiance Stone, specifying myself. -- ais523
(@Stonemason, Illuminator) BUS: Re: OFF: [Stonemason] Billboard Rock Chart - 28 Apr 2024
On Sun, 2024-04-28 at 03:18 -0400, Janet Cobb via agora-official wrote: > THE BILLBOARD ROCK CHART (STONEMASON'S WEEKLY REPORT) > > Stone Owner Last Wielded Stone Cost Immune? > --- --- -- --- > Power Janet 2024-04-01 9 > Soul ais523 2024-04-21 9 > Sabotage Janet 2023-10-25 7 > Minty Murphy 2024-04-21 7 > Protection ais523 2024-04-01 7 > Recursion ais523 2024-04-01 9 Protection > Hot Potato Ben 2024-04-21 9 > Blank ais523 2024-04-01 7 > Anti-Equatorial ais523 2024-04-01 7 Protection > Radiance snail 2024-04-22 8 > Loud R. Lee 7 I transfer the Loud Stone to myself by paying a fee of 7 spendies. I transfer the Radiance Stone to myself by paying a fee of 8 spendies. I wield the Radiance Stone, specifying myself. -- ais523
(@Arbitor) BUS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] Recusal and Assignment of CFJ 4073
On Tue, 2024-04-23 at 11:39 -0500, nix via agora-official wrote: > I recuse Yachay from CFJ 4073 for lateness. I assign CFJ 4073 to > ais523. (CFJ 4073: "The quoted message contains a game action.", where "the quoted message" is "I confirm, under penalty of no faking, this message contains a game action.".) I judge CFJ 4073 DISMISS. As far as I can tell, "action" isn't a defined term of art in Agora – the rules are using it in an ordinary-language sense. As such, whether or not something is an action, or a game action, is dependent on the context. For example, when rule 2450 discusses players pledging to perform certain actions, it is taking quite a broad view of the subject – actions outside Agora have been taken to violate pledges in the past, e.g. see CFJ 2119. Likewise, rule 2679 is focused primarily on non-Rules-defined actions. Meanwhile, rule 2466's use of "action" seems to be more constrained to things that people do via game-defined mechanisms. Rule 1698 is somewhere in between – envisaging a type of "action" that affects the game, but being worded generally enough to still work even under hypothetical rulesets that are quite different from the current one, and in particular it would be able to handle forms of action that aren't really anticipated at the moment. This sort of inconsistency is not a problem for the ruleset in general – there isn't any particular reason why multiple rules should have to use "action" in the same way, and this sort of non-formally- defined language is not typically a problem. However, the CFJ statement uses "game action" without defining specifically what that means, and there is not enough context to work out which of the various possible meanings of "action" is in use there. The statement would be true under some definitions (the "quoted message" is doing something that the game is capable of taking note of, as in rule 2450 or 2679), and false under others (the "quoted message" does not attempt to use a rules-defined mechanism for performing an action). As such, the CFJ is somewhere between "ambiguous" and "malformed", and as such the appropriate judgement is DISMISS. -- ais523
(@Collector) BUS: Re: OFF: [Deputy-Collector] Stamp Collections (22 Apr 2024)
On Sun, 2024-04-21 at 21:20 -0500, secretsnail9 via agora-official wrote: > I temporarily deputize as Collector to publish the following report: > > Stamp Holdings as of 22 Apr 2024 > > -- > Stamp Holdings > -- > Agora (0): > > L (1): > - 1 blob stamp I pay a fee of 5 spendies to transfer 1 blob stamp from the L to me. -- ais253
(@Assessor) BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Propositions 9087-9095
On Sat, 2024-04-13 at 20:44 -0500, secretsnail9 via agora-official wrote: > ID Author(s) AI Title > --- I vote as follows: > 9087~ Janet 1.0 A repeal FOR > 9088~ nix... [1] 2.0 Spendie Fixie FOR > 9089~ Janet 1.0 Who are you, again, again? FOR > 9090~ R. Lee 1.0 More instability so crystals can > actually change hands AGAINST, due to the typo > 9091~ Janet, Aris 1.0 Welcome package fix, again, again FOR > 9092~ ais523 2.0 Paying your time FOR > 9093~ ais523 2.0 Stamp down on crime FOR > 9094~ snail, R. Lee 1.0 More instability with a hyphen FOR > 9095~ snail 1.0 Spendy Sizing PRESENT -- ais523
Re: BUS: [EMERGENCY] Spendy Funding
On Sun, 2024-04-07 at 19:50 -0500, secretsnail9 via agora-business
wrote:
> I intend, with 3 Agoran Consent and in an emergency message, to enact the
> following Emergency Regulation:
> {
> On the beginning of the 14th of April, 2024, each player is granted 20
> spendies.
> }
> This should jumpstart the economy. If there is any issue with this, please
> object.
I support.
--
ais523
Re: [CFJ] Re: BUS: (@Notary, Arbitor) A Broken Promise
On Sun, 2024-04-07 at 19:18 +0100, Katherina Walshe-Grey via agora-business wrote: > On 07/04/2024 13:19, ais523 via agora-business wrote: > > I take Promise Q from the Library (using the "Any player CAN…" > > mechanism in rule 2618). > > > > I transfer Promise Q from myself to Yachay. > > > > I take Promise Q from the Library (using the "Any player CAN…" > > mechanism in rule 2618). > > > > I cash Promise Q. > > Gratuitous arguments: > > I was talking about this IRL with Gaelan earlier and we thought it > worked, but now I'm working through it in more detail I can see exactly > one internally consistent sequence of events: > > 1. Attempting to take Promise Q fails because ais523 is not going to > cash it in the same message. > > 2. Attempting to transfer Promise Q fails because ais523 does not own it. > > 3. Attempting to take Promise Q fails because ais523 is not going to > cash it in the same message. > > 4. Attempting to cash Promise Q fails because ais523 does not own it. > > But there's no reason you couldn't say points 3 and 4 about any normally > taken-and-cashed promise that doesn't involve transferring it to someone > else! And in that case there is another internally consistent sequence > of events, i.e., that nothing failed and it worked entirely as intended. > > So I wonder if ais523 has hit on the exactly one class of sequences of > actions to do with the Library that does *not* cause a paradox. > > Just for completeness... > > I grant the Library a promise with the text "This promise is > irrevocable. I intend, without objection, to Declare Apathy, specifying > myself." I take the promise, whose creator is myself, from the Library, > and cash it. > > CFJ: "There exists a tabled immature intent, sponsored by me, to Declare > Apathy." Gratuitous: In the case of your example, although there might be two consistent readings (and I'm not sure yours even works – the wording "provided that" seems to contradict it), this is (at best) simply an ambiguity rather than any sort of paradox, and can be resolved by rule 217. I think all the rule 217 tests point strongly towards the promise actually being taken (given that with the other possible reading, the Library wouldn't work at all, which defies common sense, is counter to game custom, and is against the best interests of the game – there are also past judgements about the Tree (e.g. CFJ 3313), the predecessor of the Library). I also don't think the situation is any different in my case, just because the ambiguity can be resolved in an unintended way to produce a consistent reading; "an absurdity that can be concluded from the assumption that a statement about rule-defined concepts is false does not constitute proof that it is true" (R217), and in particular, that the natural/intended reading of the rule produces a paradox does not imply that the "the Tree does nothing" reading is any more correct for my cashing attempts than it is for yours. -- ais523
BUS: (@Promotor) Linking justice to the economy
I submit the following proposal, "Paying your time", AI 2:
Amend rule 2555 by removing the following text, if present:
{{{
Any player who has not expunged a blot by this method this week
CAN expunge 1 blot from a specified player by announcement. E
CANNOT specify emself for this if e has gained any blots this or
the previous week.
}}}
Amend rule 2555 by adding the following text, as a new paragraph, prior
to its last sentence:
{{{
Any player CAN pay a fee of 7 Spendies to revoke a blot from a
specified person.
}}}
[A straightforward "get fined for crimes" mechanic.]
I submit the following proposal, "Stamp down on crime", AI 2:
Amend rule 2555 by removing the following text, if present:
{{{
Any player who has not expunged a blot by this method this week
CAN expunge 1 blot from a specified player by announcement. E
CANNOT specify emself for this if e has gained any blots this or
the previous week.
}}}
Amend rule 2555 by adding the following text, as a new paragraph, prior
to its last sentence:
{{{
Any player CAN, with notice, pay a fee of 11 Spendies to revoke
a blot from a specified person. When a blot is revoked this way,
a Stamp with type corresponding to the person from whom the blot
was revoked is created in the possession of the player who
revoked it.
}}}
[A less straightforward "get fined for crimes" mechanic, which could
combine well with my other proposal: the risk of someone else gaining
one of your stamps (leading to a minor but semi-permanent loss of
economic power) serves as an incentive to remove blots, and as a
potential punishment in its own right.]
--
ais523
BUS: (@Collector) Raffle
I enter the raffle by paying a fee of 1 ais523 stamp. -- ais523
BUS: (@Prime Minister) An economic petition
I petition the Prime Minister to enact an Emergency Regulation that gives everyone a suitable number of spendies with which to initialise the economy. (At present, we have a new economy, but no spendies to spend, because they are only awarded at the start of each month, and the proposal introducing spendies didn't create any.) -- ais523
Re: BUS: (@Notary, Arbitor) A Broken Promise
On Sun, 2024-04-07 at 13:19 +0100, ais523 via agora-business wrote: > I call for judgement on the statement "Yachay CAN cash Promise Q, > either by directly cashing it, or by transferring it from the Library > to emself and then cashing it." > > I call for judgement on the statement "I CAN cash the promise > 'Awakening'." Further arguments: CFJs 3256 and 2650 are related and may be worth looking at for possible precedent. -- ais523
BUS: (@Notary, Arbitor) A Broken Promise
I wrote (in another thread, a few seconds ago):
> I grant the Library a promise, "Promise Q", with the following text:
>
> This promise is irrevocable.
>
> I grant myself a promise, "Awakening", with the following text:
> {{{
> If I am inactive, I become active.
> }}}
>
"Promise Q" in this message refers to the promise created, and
designated as "Promise Q", in that above-quoted message.
(A reminder: at Agora, attempts to perform IMPOSSIBLE actions fail.)
I take Promise Q from the Library (using the "Any player CAN…"
mechanism in rule 2618).
I transfer Promise Q from myself to Yachay.
I take Promise Q from the Library (using the "Any player CAN…"
mechanism in rule 2618).
I cash Promise Q.
I call for judgement on the statement "Yachay CAN cash Promise Q,
either by directly cashing it, or by transferring it from the Library
to emself and then cashing it."
I call for judgement on the statement "I CAN cash the promise
'Awakening'."
I recommend linked assignment for these two CFJs.
Arguments:
{{{
We haven't had a good paradox attempt in a while, but I think this one
might be an actual paradox in the rules. This all stems from a future
conditional in rule 2618, "Any player CAN take a specified promise from
the Library by announcement, provided e cashes the promise in the same
message.". Because Promise Q's text unambiguously denotes it as
irrevocable, this is the only mechanism available to me to take Promise
Q from the Library.
According to rule 2618, each of the attempt to take a promise from the
Library (i.e. to transfer a promise from the Library to myself – these
are R2577 synonyms) above succeeds if and only if a) Promise Q is in
the Library at the time, and b) Promise Q is cashed in the same
message.
First, let's look at whether the second attempt to take succeeds. It is
clear that if Promise Q is in the Library at the time of the second
attempt to take, then transferring the promise will allow it to be
cashed (it does not specify cashing conditions, so it is trivial that
any cashing conditions it has are unambiguously met). As such, if
Promise Q is in the Library at the time, the transfer will succeed and
the promise will be cashed. Obviously, if Promise Q is not in the
Library, that will cause the transfer to fail (because you cannot
transfer an asset from an entity that does not own it).
What about the first attempt to take? That one succeeds if the promise
will be cashed, which depends on whether or not I have possession of
the promise after the second attempt to take:
- if it fails, then Promise Q will still be in the Library as of the
second attempt to take (because nothing else could have moved it),
so the promise will be cashed, i.e. if it fails, it will succeed;
- if it succeeds, then I will transfer Promise Q to Yachay, meaning
that I then have no mechanism to cash it, i.e. if it succeeds, it
will fail.
The first attempt to take thus produces a paradox: rule 2618 requires
it to succeed if and only if the promise will be cashed in the same
message (because it is unambiguously in the Library before the
attempt); however, it will be cashed in the same message if and only if
it is not successfully taken.
This paradox attempt gets around the various "unambiguously"
requirements in rule 2618 because those only apply to cashing
conditions, expiration conditions, and statements of irrevocability.
The former two do not exist on any of the involved promises, and the
statement of irrevocability is entirely unambiguous (and not directly
involved in the paradox). Rather, the paradox stems from a future
conditional, that does not have any particular heightened requirement
for unambiguity: it's just "provided e cashes the promise in the same
message".
}}}
--
ais523
BUS: (@Notary) A Promise
I grant the Library a promise, "Promise Q", with the following text:
This promise is irrevocable.
I grant myself a promise, "Awakening", with the following text:
{{{
If I am inactive, I become active.
}}}
--
ais523
(@ADoP) BUS: Re: OFF: [ADoP] Election cycle
On Thu, 2024-04-04 at 02:31 -0700, Edward Murphy via agora-official wrote: > I hereby publish a Notice of Election, specifying and initiating > elections for ADoP, Registrar, Tailor, and Referee (last election > for each of these was 2023-07-09). > > I become a candidate for ADoP. > > I become a candidate for Tailor. I become a candidate for Referee (unless I already am one). I'm finding the pace of Referee (i.e. often nothing happens, but sometimes there's a lot that happens all at once) quite a good fit for my current ability to focus on Agora, so it's a way that I can help to contribute, and I'd like to continue. -- ais523 Referee
Re: BUS: @Notary @ADoP Delegating for tailor
On Thu, 2024-04-04 at 18:40 +0200, wunst via agora-business wrote: > I intend, with Agoran Consent, to > > 1) become delegate for tailor I support. > 2) take the promise "Tailor Delegation 2024-04-04" by Murphy from the > Library and cash it This doesn't need Agoran Consent – you can take promises from the Library by announcement as long as you cash them in the same message (rule 2618 paragraph 5). -- ais523
BUS: (@Stonemason, Illuminator, Assessor) Re: OFF: [Stonemason] Billboard Rock Chart - 31 Mar 2024
On Sun, 2024-03-31 at 21:49 +0100, ais523 via agora-business wrote: > I reach for the Blank Stone. I wield the Protection Stone, specifying the Recursion Stone. I wield the Recursion Stone as the Protection Stone, specifying the Anti-Equatorial Stone. I wield the Soul Stone, specifying the Radiance Stone. I wield the Anti-Equatorial Stone. I wield the Radiance Stone, specifying myself. I wield the Power Stone. I wield the Hot Potato Stone, specifying Murphy. I wield the Blank Stone, although not for any particularly good reason. -- ais523
(@Notary, Collector, Stonemason) Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Rent-Seeking Street Food Vendor
On Mon, 2024-03-25 at 22:09 +, Gaelan Steele via agora-business
wrote:
> I grant the following promise to the Library: {
> Conditions: the bearer has transferred me, in the same message,
> either four stamps of the same type or three stamps of different
> types.
>
> I wield the Hot Potato Stone, specifying the bearer.
> }
I transfer 4 ais523 stamps to Gaelan.
I take the above-quoted promise from the Library and cash it.
--
ais523
BUS: (@Stonemason) Re: OFF: [Stonemason] Billboard Rock Chart - 31 Mar 2024
On Sun, 2024-03-31 at 16:40 -0400, Janet Cobb via agora-official wrote: > Stone Mossiness Owner Last Wielded Immune? > --- - --- --- > Power 4 Janet 2024-03-07 > Soul 1 ais523 2024-03-11 > Sabotage 1 Janet 2023-10-25 > Minty 1 Murphy 2024-03-31 > Protection 3 ais523 2024-03-04 > Recursion 3 ais523 2024-03-04 > Hot Potato 0 Gaelan 2024-02-18 > Blank 0 Agora 2023-05-28 Agora > Anti-Equatorial 0 ais523 2024-03-04 > Radiance 1 snail 2024-03-25 > Loud 0 R. Lee I reach for the Blank Stone. -- ais523
(@Arbitor) BUS: Judgement in CFJ 4069
On Mon, 2024-03-25 at 11:46 -0500, nix via agora-business wrote: > On 3/25/24 10:37, nix via agora-official wrote: > > On 3/11/24 17:52, nix via agora-business wrote: > > > On 3/11/24 17:41, Gaelan Steele via agora-business wrote: > > > > CFJ: There exists a rule 105. > > > I number this CFJ 4069. I assign CFJ 4069 to 4st. > > > > > This has since been recused. I assign CFJ 4069 to ais423. > > If CFJ 4069 is unassigned, I assign it to ais523. As far as I can tell, proposal 4894 created a situation in which a rule and former rule had the same number. Proposal 8416 then introduced a requirement for rules and former rules to have distinct ID numbers, a requirement that was not met by the set of rules and former rules at the time. This isn't really a problem, though: rules don't have ID numbers immediately upon being created anyway, and the "shall have" reads a lot like an obligation rather than a statement of fact: i.e. "the Rulekeepor shall publicly designate ID numbers for rules in order to ensure that all current and former rules have distinct numbers". Although "rule" would normally refer to current rules only, the context of the sentence (which in the current ruleset reads as follows:) Every rule shall have an ID number, distinct among current and former rules, to be assigned once by the Rulekeepor by public designation. is fairly clear that both current and former rules are meant to count for the purposes of that sentence (otherwise the former rules would not have numbers at all, so the numbers being distinct wouldn't matter). The requirement to assign ID numbers so that they are distinct appears to me to apply equally in the case that a rule doesn't have an ID number at all, and in the case that a rule has an ID number but is not distinct. It is pretty clear to me that the current rule 105 is numbered 105: * The requirement for ID number assignments to be distinct doesn't appear to un-assign any assignments that existed under previous rules - having a rule with no number is just as much a violation as having a rule with the same number as another, so there is no reason why the paragraph in question would change one possibility to the other; * The rule is therefore very likely to have been numbered rule 105 all along; * If at least one recent ruleset ratification has worked, the rule's number would have been ratified as 105. As such, as far as I can tell, there is indeed a rule numbered 105, meaning that the Rulekeepor has probably violated eir obligation to cause the rule numbers to become distinct. (You could make an argument that one of the ruleset ratifications may have deleted the repealed rule 105's number, as a minimal change to make the SLR correct, in which case the obligation would not exist, although I'm not convinced). I note that this requirement came into effect as of the adoption of proposal 4894, at which point it was impossible for the Rulekeepor to satisfy (as e had no mechanism to do so), and e had a week to do so (rule 1023 item 1). Under the current ruleset, this infraction has been automatically forgiven (rule 2531 item 3), and thus although the obligation conceptually still exists, there will be no consequences if the Rulekeepor continues to ignore it. (Note that I think that it might be possible to fulfil this requirement by assigning a new number to the old, repealed rule 105 - which would likely be the least disruptive way to do it - although I am not sure on this, and it doesn't matter for the judgement of this CFJ.) I judge CFJ 4069 TRUE. -- ais523 Judge, CFJ 4069
(@Assessor) BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Propositions 9073-9086
Special note to the Assessor: the second paragraph of rule 1551 is still broken, so you will need to take special care when assessing the proposal to ensure that the results of the ruleset ratification proposal self-ratify (i.e. explicitly publishing the statement that will self-ratify), otherwise we'll again be in a situation where we're unsure whether the ruleset ratification worked or not. On Mon, 2024-03-25 at 17:49 -0500, secretsnail9 via agora-official wrote: > ID Author(s) AI Title > - I vote as follows: > 9073~ Kate, Gaelan 1.0 In case of unexpected > nonplayerhood FOR > 9074* Janet 3.0 Close enough AGAINST: the "must include" here seems wrong, what happens if it doesn't? Some nomics would read this as creating a legal fiction that the ruleset contains revision numbers, even if it doesn't. This should use proper MMI terminology and be clear about who the requirement is being placed on (presumably the Rulekeepor) > 9075* nix, Janet, kiako 3.0 No Hidden Ownership Restrictions FOR - note that this causes the rule to contradict itself (by default, assets both aren't and are ownable by the L), but the new text resolves correctly under Cretans > 9076* nix 3.0 FUNgibility conditionally: FOR, unless someone endorses me on this referendum, in which case PRESENT (I am only mildly in favour) > 9077~ snail 1.0 Less Fragile Crystals PRESENT > 9078~ Janet 1.0 Empire fixes FOR - I was mildly hoping that this would be a scam, but sadly it doesn't seem to be (unless it's a *really* good one) > 9079~ nix, Janet, kiako 2.0 Spendies v1.1 FOR - this might not be perfect but we need an economy and the remains of the existing economy aren't functioning well > 9080~ Gaelan, Kate 1.0 One from the archives FOR - arguably this should be combined with Webmastor, but the problem with offices is finding someone to do them, and it seems plausible that nobody would want to do the job of the combined office > 9081~ Gaelan 2.0 Don't humiliate the recently departed FOR > 9082~ Gaelan 1.7 yes, yes, I got the memo FOR > 9083* Janet 3.0 SLR ratification 2023-12-31 FOR, this isn't any more broken than the last one we tried to ratify: but this still contains the bug in which referendum results don't self- ratify unless you publish the statement that is being self-ratified (second paragraph of rule 1551) > 9084~ kiako 2.0 Oneironauts in the Ocean PRESENT > 9085~ ais523 1.0 Fix truthfulness loophole FOR > 9086~ R. Lee 1.0 Trimming the most useless rule in the > ruleset AGAINST - surprisingly, this rule seems to be serving a useful purpose (giving players a game action they can take when they're not sure what to do otherwise, helping prevent them falling off the lists), and it seems like something that could be linked into other rules in the future -- ais523
Re: BUS: Joining
On Tue, 2024-03-26 at 20:18 -0400, Michael Simutis via agora-business wrote: > I intend to register as a player. > > -Michael Welcome! What name should we use to refer to you? I grant you a welcome package. -- ais523
Re: BUS: Testing Agora of Empires @Everyone
On Sun, 2024-03-24 at 05:08 +1100, Sarah S. via agora-business wrote: > I amend the Empireworld by announcement (progressing the narrative in > a > 'reasonable fashion' so it reads the following) > > I intend, without two objections, to win the game as the records of > Empireworld clearly demonstrate I have achieved 3 extraordinary feats I object. This isn't an interesting way to win the game (and I'm still not sure why we passed the proposal in the first place). -- ais523
(@Promotor) BUS: A truthfulness loophole fix
I create and submit a proposal with AI 1, title "Fix truthfulness
loophole", and text:
{{{
In rule 2471, replace
"The author believed the statement to be not true."
with
"The author did not believe the statement to be true."
[Under the existing rules, it's possible to legally make a statement
under penalty of No Faking, when you have no idea whether or not the
statement is true – neither of the existing clauses apply, because you
neither believe it to be not true, nor should have known that it was
false. This makes the "penalty of No Faking" ineffective for one of its
primary purposes, of allowing people to introduce new facts into the
judicial record based on their own personal knowledge.]
}}}
--
ais523
(@Arbitor) Re: [Arbitor] Assignment of CFJ 4071 to ais523 [Re: BUS: A Silly Little Message]
On Mon, 2024-03-11 at 17:54 -0500, nix via agora-business wrote: > On 3/11/24 17:47, nix via agora-business wrote: > > I CFJ: The quotes message contains at least one game action. > > I number this CFJ 4071. I assign CFJ 4071 to ais523. For context, the "quoted message" is: > This email contains no game actions. > > I CFJ: This CFJ exists. Rule 991 says: > Any person (the initiator) can initiate a Call for Judgement (CFJ, > syn. Judicial Case), specifying a statement to be inquired into by > announcement. Rule 478 says: > Where the rules define an action that a person CAN perform "by > announcement", that person performs that action by, in a single > public message, specifying the action and setting forth intent to > perform that action by sending that message, doing both clearly > and unambiguously. The quoted message specifies an action, but does not unambiguously set forth intent to perform the action (due to the disclaimer that the message contains no actions, which makes it unclear what the intent behind specifying the action was). It is most likely from context that the message intended to be ambiguous about whether or not the action was being performed. By rule 478, that means that it wasn't. (See also CFJ 2133, which is based on an older version of the ruleset, but the same principles still apply.) I judge CFJ 4071 DISMISS due to the typo that causes its statement to be malformed. However, the answer to the question that the caller probably meant to ask is "no, that message didn't create a CFJ". (It's also possible that the caller was wondering whether the message might have performed actions other than creating a CFJ, e.g., whether publishing the disclaimer was itself an action. Rule 2466 implies that the ruleset draws a distinction between actions and messages, e.g. a general permission to take actions on behalf of someone still doesn't let you sent messages on eir behalf. The last paragraph of rule 2125 makes it irrelevant whether the *sending* of a message is an action or not, by clarifying that the ruleset cannot prevent the sending of a message, and by explicitly allowing the ruleset to criminalize the sending of certain messages regardless of whether doing so is an action – although, even if the sending of a message were an action, it would not be an action contained within the email itself. So the answer to the question of "does the message contain any actions at all, even actions other than the caling of a CFJ?" is "it at least doesn't contain any *relevant* actions".) -- ais523 Judge, CFJ 4071at least,
(@Arbitor) Re: [Arbitor] @ais523 Re: BUS: (@Collector) So welcome
On Sat, 2024-03-09 at 19:05 -0600, nix via agora-business wrote:
> On 3/9/24 18:51, secretsnail9 via agora-business wrote:
> > CFJ: snail was granted a stamp in this message.
>
> I number this CFJ 4068. I assign CFJ 4068 to ais523.
(Context: the relevant part of "this message" = "I grant myself a
welcome package.")
This CFJ is basically a question about "definition direction". For
snail, a Welcome Package is generally assumed to currently be defined
to contain 1 snail stamp. So this CFJ is basically asking: does this
mean that a set of assets consisting of 1 snail stamp is a Welcome
Package? Or does the snail stamp count as a Welcome Package only when
it's granted by the "grant a Welcome Package" action?
These sorts of questions are often difficult, and we don't have much
guidance on them in the rules at the moment. However, in the case of
this CFJ, the question is kind-of sidestepped because one of the two
possible readings of rule 2499 doesn't make much sense at the moment.
The exact current definition of a Welcome Package is:
"A Welcome Package is a set of assets containing: * 1 Stamp of eir own
type"
This is written without giving any referent to "eir" (in fact, the only
plausible reading of this as a standalone sentence is for "eir" to
refer to the set of assets; but no set of assets is currently a person,
thus cannot be a type of stamps). In the "a Welcome Package exists in
the abstract" reading of the rules, this problem means that there is no
such thing as a Welcome Package, which clearly defies common sense.
As such, the only consistent way to read the start of rule 2499 is that
it's saying "when a rule gives someone a Welcome Package, this is
what's in it" – that would allow the "eir" to gain its referent. So
rule 2499 basically defines its own last sentence to mean "Any player
CAN, by announcement, grant a Welcome Package containing 1 stamp of eir
own type to any player if the grantee has neither received one since e
last registered nor in the last 30 days". This sentence at least
contains no dangling modifiers, although it is ambiguous in two
different ways (the referent of "eir" as the granter or the grantee;
and the referent of "one" as "Welcome Package" or "Welcome Package
containing 1 stamp").
Here's snail's most recent Welcome Package grant:
On Sat, 2022-01-29 at 08:34 +, Trigon via agora-business wrote:
> El 29/01/2022 a las 08:31, Mark Wieland via agora-business escribió:
> > I register. You can call me secretsnail. :)
> >
> > From, secretsnail
>
> Welcome! I cause secretsnail to receive a Welcome Package.
and at the time, rule 2499 looked like this:
> Rule 2499/13 (Power=1)
> Welcome Packages
>
>If a player has not received a Welcome Package since e most
>recently registered, any player CAN cause em to receive one by
>announcement.
>
>When a player receives a Welcome Package, e gains 10 boatloads of
>coins and one of each type of Card defined in the rules, unless e,
>or any person of whom e was a part or who was a part of em has
>received a welcome package in the last 30 days.
As such, the former ambiguity doesn't matter for this CFJ (snail was
both the granter and the grantee in the attempted welcome-package-
granting action), but the latter ambiguity does (snail's previous
welcome package did not contain a snail stamp). However, the ambiguity
only really arises in the "inlined" version of rule 2499; in the
original language of the rule ("Any player CAN, by announcement, grant
a Welcome Package to any player if the grantee has neither received one
since e last registered nor in the last 30 days.") "one" clearly refers
to "a Welcome Package" in general rather that being a reference to a
specific sort of Welcome Package (indeed, one reason why a rule drafter
might split up rule 2499 into two parts, like it currently is, would be
to clarify what "one" refers to). As such, Welcome Packages defined
under previous rulesets would also count.
Because snail has received a Welcome Package since e last registered, e
cannot grant emself another. I judge CFJ 4068 FALSE.
(Fun aside: my most recent registration was actually a timing scam
involving Welcome Packages! There was an economic reset pending, and I
registered immediately before the reset occurred, meaning that I gained
the assets from the reset but nobody had a chance to award me the
Welcome Package until after the reset. So I ended up starting with more
assets than everyone else: everyone had the same basic set of assets
from the reset, but I had the assets from the Welcome Package on top of
that. This was the start of a long sequence of events which eventually
resulted in the economy of today being flooded with ais523 stamps.)
--
ais523
Judge, CFJ 4068
(@Dreamkeeper) Re: BUS: in need
On Sun, 2024-03-10 at 19:50 -0500, secretsnail9 via agora-business wrote: > I envision wealth as my dream. I envision a Dream of Sharing. -- ais523
Re: BUS: (@Absurdor, @stonemason) Contracting back pain
On Sun, 2024-03-10 at 18:56 -0500, secretsnail9 via agora-business wrote: > I push the boulder. > > I reach for the anti-equatorial stone. > -- > snail I reach for the anti-equatorial stone. -- ais523
(@nix) Re: BUS: NOTICE OF NO CONFIDENCE: wait what?
On Sat, 2024-03-09 at 12:36 -0600, nix via agora-business wrote:
> On 1/1/24 16:16, Gaelan Steele via agora-business wrote:
> > CFJ: The office of Prime Minister is vacant.
> >
> > Arguments: {
> > Rule 2463/3 reads: {
> > Any player can cause the office of Prime Minister to become
> > vacant with Agoran consent by publishing a message with the
> > character string "MOTION OF NO CONFIDENCE" in the subject line.
> > }
> >
> > Which, to my reading, arguably defines a mechanism by
> > which I can "cause the office of Prime Minister to become
> > vacant with Agoran consent”. This is, of course, very strange,
> > as “with Agoran consent” is normally itself a mechanism.
> > }
> >
> > Gaelan
>
> I number this CFJ 4061. I assign it to myself.
Gratuitous argument: I think CFJ 4008 is relevant here
<https://agoranomic.org/cases/?4008>. Both CFJs deal with mechanisms
being defined in terms of other mechanisms.
--
ais523
(@Arbitor) Re: BUS: [Arbitor] New Arbitor in Town
On Sat, 2024-03-09 at 12:33 -0600, nix via agora-business wrote: > I assign CFJ 4057 to ais523. > https://www.mail-archive.com/agora-business@agoranomic.org/msg45651.html I recuse myself from this CFJ. It depends on events that happened on a mailing list that I was never subscribed to, and most of the messages of which I have never read, so I would have to do an excessive amount of catching up in order to be able to make an informed judgement. -- ais523
(@Stonemason) Re: BUS: Stone Actions - 7 Mar 2024
On Thu, 2024-03-07 at 15:49 -0500, Janet Cobb via agora-business wrote: > I reach for the Hot Potato Stone. > > I wield the Power Stone, specifying myself. I also reach for the Hot Potato Stone. -- ais523
(@Stonemason, Illuminator) BUS: Re: OFF: [Stonemason] Billboard Rock Chart - 4 Mar 2024
On Mon, 2024-03-04 at 00:40 -0500, Janet Cobb via agora-official wrote: > THE BILLBOARD ROCK CHART (STONEMASON'S WEEKLY REPORT) > > Stone Mossiness Owner Last Wielded Immune? > --- - --- --- > Power 3 Janet 2024-02-18 Protection > Soul 0 ais523 2024-02-19 > Sabotage 0 Janet 2023-10-25 > Minty 0 Murphy 2023-02-18 > Protection 2 ais523 2024-02-06 > Recursion 2 Janet 2024-02-18 > Hot Potato 0 nix 2024-02-18 > Blank 2 4st 2023-05-28 > Anti-Equatorial 2 ais523 2024-01-15 > Radiance 0 snail 2024-03-03 I wield the Anti-Equatorial Stone, specifying the Recursion Stone (the Power Stone is protected). I wield the Recursion Stone as the Protection Stone, specifying the Recursion Stone. I wield the Protection Stone, specifying the Protection Stone. I wield the Soul Stone, specifying the Radiance Stone. I wield the Radiance Stone, specifying myself. -- ais523
(@Collector) BUS: Re: OFF: [Collector] Stamp Collections (03 Mar 2024)
I enter the raffle by paying a fee of 1 ais523 stamp to Agora. -- ais523
BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Propositions 9062-9067
On Sun, 2024-02-25 at 17:00 -0600, secretsnail9 via agora-official wrote: > ID Author(s) AI Title > --- I vote as follows: > 9062~ kiako, ais523 2.0 Insurance Policy FOR > 9063~ kiako, ais523 2.0 Dreaming of a Return Home FOR > 9064~ kiako, snail 2.0 Carving Canyons PRESENT: although this is mechanically fine, I'm not too keen on the idea of making Stones even harder to understand, because enough players struggle with the current mechanics as it is > 9065~ Jimmy 1.0 (none) AGAINST: radiance is (and should be) reduced via a radiance win, so this basically locks out any attempts to change the way that radiance wins work > 9066~ 4st 2.0 No Taxation Without Representation AGAINST: this would only be viable if you severely reduced the activity timer at the same time, because Agora usually has several players who are active according to the switch, but inactive in practice > 9067* snail...[1] 3.0 Vacations v3 Conditional vote: PRESENT if 9062 and 9063 are both enactable, otherwise AGAINST (as written the only way to resign a delegation is to become inactive or deregister, so the mechanic is only functional if the penalty for becoming inactive is reduced) As a side note, it's interesting that this batch contains both multiple proposals to reduce the inactivity penalty, and multiple proposals that would only function correctly if players became inactive much more often. Perhaps it's time to substantially reduce the inactivity timer (whilst increasing the deregistration timer to compensate)? -- ais523
BUS: Re: OFF: Re: BUS: (@ADoP) A Complex Petition
On Sun, 2024-02-18 at 12:23 -0800, Edward Murphy via agora-official wrote: > snail wrote: > > > I petition the ADoP to increase the complexity of the office of > > Collector > > to 2. It's akin to the previous office of Treasuror. > > Per Rule 2632 (Complexity), I can't do so unilaterally, but I intend > with 2 Agoran consent to increase the complexity of Collector to 2. I support. -- ais523
(@Collector) Re: BUS: What a nice trade again
On Mon, 2024-02-12 at 19:00 -0600, secretsnail9 via agora-business wrote: > I transfer 1 Katie stamp to ais523. I transfer 2 Kate stamps to snail. -- ais523
(@Collector) Re: BUS: (@adop) siccumbq (@Collector) also
On Sun, 2024-02-11 at 00:50 -0600, secretsnail9 via agora-business
wrote:
> I succumb.
>
> I publish the following Raffle Result: { nobody entered the raffle
> last week}
>
> I enter the raffle by paying a fee of 1 snail stamp to Agora.
I enter the raffle by paying a fee of 1 ais523 stamp to Agora.
--
ais523
(@Stonemason) Re: BUS: Reaching - 7 Feb 2024
On Wed, 2024-02-07 at 16:44 -0500, Janet Cobb via agora-business wrote: > I reach for the Minty Stone. I reach for the Radiance Stone. -- ais523
(@Illuminator) Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Stonemason] Billboard Rock Chart - 28 Jan 2024
On Tue, 2024-02-06 at 23:13 +, ais523 wrote: > I wield the Protection Stone, specifying the Protection Stone. > I wield the Radiance Stone, specifying myself. Flagging this for the Illuminator. -- ais523
(@Stonemason) BUS: Re: OFF: [Stonemason] Billboard Rock Chart - 28 Jan 2024
On Sun, 2024-01-28 at 02:58 -0500, Janet Cobb via agora-official wrote: > THE BILLBOARD ROCK CHART (STONEMASON'S WEEKLY REPORT) > > Stone Mossiness Owner Last Wielded Immune? > --- - --- --- > Power 2 Janet 2023-12-08 > Soul 1 Kate 2023-12-11 > Sabotage 0 snail 2023-10-25 > Minty 0 Janet 2023-01-28 > Protection 1 ais523 2024-01-15 > Recursion 1 Janet 2024-01-07 > Hot Potato 0 Janet 2024-01-22 > Blank 1 4st 2023-05-28 > Anti-Equatorial 1 ais523 2024-01-15 Protection > Radiance 2 ais523 2024-01-27 I wield the Protection Stone, specifying the Protection Stone. I wield the Radiance Stone, specifying myself. -- ais523
Re: (@Stonemason, Illuminator) Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Stonemason] Billboard Rock Chart - 14 Jan 2024
On Sat, 2024-01-27 at 01:02 +, ais523 via agora-business wrote: > I wield the Radiance Stone, specifying myself. > I wield the Radiance Stone, specifying myself. -- ais523
Re: (@Stonemason, Illuminator) Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Stonemason] Billboard Rock Chart - 14 Jan 2024
On Mon, 2024-01-15 at 22:25 +, ais523 via agora-business wrote: > I wield the Anti-Equatorial Stone, specifying the Radiance Stone. > I wield the Radiance Stone, specifying myself. > I wield the Protection Stone, specifying the Anti-Equatorial Stone. I wield the Radiance Stone, specifying myself. -- ais523
BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Propositions 9049-9051
On Sat, 2024-01-13 at 04:24 -0600, secretsnail9 via agora-official wrote: > ID Author(s) AI Title > - I vote as follows: > 9049* Janet, Aris, ais523 3.0 Registration restrictions FOR > 9050* Janet 3.0 Self-ratification limitations FOR > 9051~ snail 2.0 A Mossy Cabinet PRESENT - this is much more of a straightforward economic boost than the other Prime Minister powers, and I'm conflicted on whether that would be a good thing for the game or not. -- ais523
(@Stonemason, Illuminator) Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Stonemason] Billboard Rock Chart - 14 Jan 2024
On Sun, 2024-01-14 at 08:34 +, ais523 via agora-business wrote: > On Sun, 2024-01-14 at 03:01 -0500, Janet Cobb via agora-official > wrote: > > THE BILLBOARD ROCK CHART (STONEMASON'S WEEKLY REPORT) > > > > Stone Mossiness Owner Last Wielded Immune? > > --- - --- --- > > Power 2 Janet 2023-12-08 > > Soul 1 Kate 2023-12-11 > > Sabotage 0 Agora 2023-10-25 Agora > > Minty 0 Janet 2023-01-14 > > Protection 1 ais523 2023-12-31 > > Recursion 1 Janet 2024-01-07 > > Hot Potato 0 Agora 2023-12-31 Agora > > Blank 1 4st 2023-05-28 > > Anti-Equatorial 0 Agora 2023-12-11 Agora > > Radiance 2 snail 2024-01-11 > > I reach for the Anti-Equatorial Stone. I wield the Anti-Equatorial Stone, specifying the Radiance Stone. I wield the Radiance Stone, specifying myself. I wield the Protection Stone, specifying the Anti-Equatorial Stone. -- ais523
(@Stonemason) BUS: Re: OFF: [Stonemason] Billboard Rock Chart - 14 Jan 2024
On Sun, 2024-01-14 at 03:01 -0500, Janet Cobb via agora-official wrote: > THE BILLBOARD ROCK CHART (STONEMASON'S WEEKLY REPORT) > > Stone Mossiness Owner Last Wielded Immune? > --- - --- --- > Power 2 Janet 2023-12-08 > Soul 1 Kate 2023-12-11 > Sabotage 0 Agora 2023-10-25 Agora > Minty 0 Janet 2023-01-14 > Protection 1 ais523 2023-12-31 > Recursion 1 Janet 2024-01-07 > Hot Potato 0 Agora 2023-12-31 Agora > Blank 1 4st 2023-05-28 > Anti-Equatorial 0 Agora 2023-12-11 Agora > Radiance 2 snail 2024-01-11 I reach for the Anti-Equatorial Stone. -- ais523
Re: BUS: Reaching - 7 Jan 2024 [attn. Stonemason]
On Sun, 2024-01-07 at 02:54 -0500, Janet Cobb via agora-business wrote: > I reach for the Minty Stone. I reach for the Radiance Stone. -- ais523
(@Arbitor) Re: BUS: NOTICE OF NO CONFIDENCE: wait what?
On Mon, 2024-01-01 at 14:16 -0800, Gaelan Steele via agora-business
wrote:
> CFJ: The office of Prime Minister is vacant.
>
> Arguments: {
> Rule 2463/3 reads: {
> Any player can cause the office of Prime Minister to become
> vacant with Agoran consent by publishing a message with the
> character string "MOTION OF NO CONFIDENCE" in the subject line.
> }
>
> Which, to my reading, arguably defines a mechanism by
> which I can "cause the office of Prime Minister to become
> vacant with Agoran consent”. This is, of course, very strange,
> as “with Agoran consent” is normally itself a mechanism.
> }
Gratuitous: we've had a semi-recent CFJ about cases where the rules
define a mechanism for performing an action performed via another
mechanism, CFJ 4008; I think the verdict there basically boils down to
"you have to satisfy both mechanisms simultaneously", which in this
case would mean that the subject like "MOTION OF NO CONFIDENCE" has to
be used when resolving the tabled intent.
As a bonus, this reading also happens to match the common-sense meaning
of the rule.
Also, if I have not yet done so, I judge CFJ 4008 FALSE. (I apparently
typoed my previous attempt to judge it in a way that means that that
attempt may not have been successful)
--
ais523
Re: (@Stonemason, Illuminator) BUS: Re: OFF: [Stonemason] Billboard Rock Chart - 31 Dec 2023
On Sun, 2023-12-31 at 22:03 +, ais523 via agora-business wrote: > On Sun, 2023-12-31 at 16:57 -0500, Janet Cobb via agora-official > wrote: > > THE BILLBOARD ROCK CHART (STONEMASON'S WEEKLY REPORT) > > > > Stone Mossiness Owner Last Wielded Immune? > > --- - --- --- > > Power 1 Janet 2023-12-08 > > Soul 0 Kate 2023-12-11 > > Sabotage 0 Janet 2023-10-25 > > Minty 0 Kate 2023-12-04 > > Protection 0 ais523 2023-10-01 > > Recursion 0 Janet 2023-12-03 > > Hot Potato 0 ais523 2023-12-07 > > Blank 2 Agora 2023-05-28 Agora > > Anti-Equatorial 1 snail 2023-12-11 > > Radiance 1 snail 2023-12-11 > > I activate the Protection Stone, specifying the Protection Stone. > > I activate the Hot Potato Stone, specifying 4st. And in case that didn't work: I wield the Protection Stone, specifying the Protection Stone. I wield the Hot Potato Stone, specifying 4st. -- ais523
(@Stonemason, Illuminator) BUS: Re: OFF: [Stonemason] Billboard Rock Chart - 31 Dec 2023
On Sun, 2023-12-31 at 16:57 -0500, Janet Cobb via agora-official wrote: > THE BILLBOARD ROCK CHART (STONEMASON'S WEEKLY REPORT) > > Stone Mossiness Owner Last Wielded Immune? > --- - --- --- > Power 1 Janet 2023-12-08 > Soul 0 Kate 2023-12-11 > Sabotage 0 Janet 2023-10-25 > Minty 0 Kate 2023-12-04 > Protection 0 ais523 2023-10-01 > Recursion 0 Janet 2023-12-03 > Hot Potato 0 ais523 2023-12-07 > Blank 2 Agora 2023-05-28 Agora > Anti-Equatorial 1 snail 2023-12-11 > Radiance 1 snail 2023-12-11 I activate the Protection Stone, specifying the Protection Stone. I activate the Hot Potato Stone, specifying 4st. -- ais523
(@Stonemason) BUS: Re: OFF: [Stonemason] Billboard Rock Chart - 17 Dec 2023
On Sun, 2023-12-17 at 17:22 -0500, Janet Cobb via agora-official wrote: > THE BILLBOARD ROCK CHART (STONEMASON'S WEEKLY REPORT) > > Stone Mossiness Owner Last Wielded Immune? > --- - --- --- > Power 1 Janet 2023-12-08 > Soul 0 Kate 2023-12-11 > Sabotage 2 Agora 2023-10-25 Agora > Minty 0 Agora 2023-12-04 Agora > Protection 0 ais523 2023-10-01 > Recursion 0 Janet 2023-12-03 > Hot Potato 0 Agora 2023-12-07 Agora > Blank 2 Agora 2023-05-28 Agora > Anti-Equatorial 1 snail 2023-12-11 > Radiance 1 snail 2023-12-11 > > Player Reached For Time > - --- --- > Janet Sabotage 2023-12-11 00:00:45 > Kate Minty 2023-12-11 00:00:56 I reach for the Hot Potato stone. -- ais523
BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Propositions 9046-9048
On Sun, 2023-12-10 at 16:48 -0600, secretsnail9 via agora-official wrote: > ID Author(s) AI Title > - I vote as follows: > 9046~ 4st, ais523, Gaelan 1.0 Crystal fix 1 FOR > 9047* 4st, Janet, ais523 3.0 Shameless copy of Adoption AI > Security with the right AI FOR > 9048* nix, 4st, snail 3.0 It's been 4+ years, Agora. 4+ > YEARS. AGAINST. Proposal result ratification appears to be broken in the ruleset being ratified (and thus probably the current ruleset) – this is one of the things I check for when it comes to doing ruleset ratifications. (Ratification requires the document or statement to have been published, but proposal result ratification is defined as a self- ratifying attestation to an unpublished statement, so the ratificaiton rules don't seem to work properly.) Additionally, proposal distribution appears to rely on a rule 217 disambiguation (of "authorized" – the Promotor CAN distribute proposals but no rule explicitly says that they MAY distribute proposals, and "authorized" means "explicitly permitted". As such, the published ruleset is dangerously close to not having the proposal system work at all, with neither the primary method nor the safeguard unambiguously working. -- ais523
Re: BUS: Shenanigans
On Wed, 2023-12-13 at 10:21 -0800, 4st nomic via agora-business wrote: > I intend to declare apathy, specifying all players. > > I object to all intents to declare apathy, including that one. I also object to all intents to declare apathy, including that one. -- ais523
Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Resolution of Proposals 9032-9034
On Mon, 2023-12-04 at 16:47 -0600, nix via agora-business wrote: > On 12/3/23 16:48, Janet Cobb via agora-official wrote: > > ID Title Result > > -- > > 9032 Rules as Items v6 ADOPTED > > 9033 It's been 4 years, Agora. 4 YEARS. REJECTED > > 9034 A simple fix ADOPTED > > CoE (if applicable): None of these were distributed. Distribution is > not self-ratifying, and the AI of the decision, which is required for > distribution, was not listed in the attempt to distribute. Distribution is self-ratifying, because the initiation of an Agora decision is self-ratifying (rule 107). So these may have ratified into having been distributed. -- ais523
(@Geologist) BUS: Re: OFF: [Geologist] shiny stuff
On Sun, 2023-12-03 at 16:48 -0800, 4st nomic via agora-official wrote: > Here are the crystals and their owners (geologist required monthly > report) > > ID Owner Size Instability > 2659 Snail 1 0 > > Per Nov 19 2023 FLR, 130 rules are enacted. > > History > Dec 4 2023 - P9034 - snail gained crystal 2659, size 1, instability 0 CoE: This crystal's size is 0. (The size is increased by the power of the proposal, which is 0 because it is set back to 0 by rule 106 after the proposal takes effect. See CFJ 4017 for information about the timing of things that trigger as a consequence of proposals being enacted relative to the enactment process itself.) -- ais523
(@Stonemason, Illuminator, Collector) BUS: Re: OFF: [Stonemason] Billboard Rock Chart - 3 Dec 2023
On Sun, 2023-12-03 at 18:38 -0500, Janet Cobb via agora-official wrote: > THE BILLBOARD ROCK CHART (STONEMASON'S WEEKLY REPORT) > > Stone Mossiness Owner Last Wielded Immune? > --- - --- --- > Power 0 Janet 2023-10-25 Protection > Soul 1 Agora 2023-04-23 Agora > Sabotage 1 Agora 2023-10-25 Agora > Minty 1 Agora 2023-10-31 Agora > Protection 1 Agora 2023-10-01 Agora > Recursion 1 Janet 2023-12-03 > Hot Potato 0 snail 2023-11-04 > Blank 1 Agora 2023-05-28 Agora > Anti-Equatorial 1 Agora 2023-11-01 Agora > Radiance 0 ais523 2023-12-01 > > Player Reached For Time > - --- --- > snail Minty 2023-11-27 08:41:29 > ais523 Minty 2023-12-01 20:38:51 > Janet Protection 2023-12-03 23:36:41 I wield the Radiance Stone, specifying myself. I wield the Minty Stone, specifying myself. I reach for the Protection Stone. -- ais523
(@Illuminator, Stonemason) BUS: Some weekly actions
I reach for the Minty Stone. I wield the Radiance Stone, specifying myself. -- ais523
Re: BUS: Test message
On Thu, 2023-11-23 at 21:30 -0500, Janet Cobb via agora-business wrote: > This message contains no game actions. > > In fact, I object so you don't have to. I object – the "this message contains no game actions" may disclaim the objection and prevent it from working, and, well, it's tradition for *somebody* to object to these test messages :-D -- ais523
(@Assessor) BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 9032-9034
On Sun, 2023-11-19 at 17:26 -0600, secretsnail9 via agora-official wrote: > ID Author(s) AI Title > - I vote as follows: > 9032~ 4st, ...[1] 1.0 Rules as Items v6 FOR, although this is currently slightly broken and needs fixing (the crystals don't actually grow because the power of the proposal will have been set back to 0 by the time the rule triggers), we can fix this with a followup proposal and the basic mechanics seem fine > 9033* 4st, Janet, nix, snail 3.0 It's been 4 years, Agora. 4 > YEARS. AGAINST. I will explain why to a-d. > 9034~ snail, nix 1.0 A simple fix PRESENT -- ais523
Re: BUS: [Prime Minister] State-sanctioned celebrations (for real)
On Thu, 2023-11-16 at 22:02 -0500, Janet Cobb via agora-business wrote:
> [Oops we forgot to get Royal Assent last time.]
>
> I issue a Cabinet Order of Manifesto, distributing the proposal in the
> Proposal Pool with title "Celebration!" that I most recently submitted,
> removing it from the Proposal Pool and initiating a referendum on it.
> For this decision, the vote collector is the Assessor, the quorum is 3,
> the voting method is AI-majority, and the valid options are FOR and
> AGAINST (PRESENT is also a valid vote, as are conditional votes).
>
> For this proposal, the class is Democratic. Other attributes of the
> proposal are as follows:
>
> Title: Celebration!
> Author: Janet
> Coauthors:
> Adoption index: 3.0
>
> {
[snip]
> }
CoE: This decision has not been initiated, because this notice is not
valid; specifically, it is missing an essential parameter (the adoption
index of the decision, defined as essential in rule 1950 for decisions
with adoption indices; this is such a decision per rule 1607).
It does specify the adoption index of the *proposal*, but the wording
is quite clear that the adoption index specified is an attribute of the
proposal, not of the decision about whether to adopt it. According to
rule 1950, both proposals and decisions have adoption indices, and they
are not necessarily required to be equal (e.g. the Sabotage Stone can
cause them to differ). So the error in the original distribution is
that per rules 107 and 1950, the notice must clearly specify the
adoption index of the *decision* – but it actually specifies the
adoption index of the *proposal* instead.
--
ais523
(@Illuminator, Stonemason) BUS: Re: OFF: [Illuminator] BRIGHTEST BULBS (21 Nov 2023)
On Tue, 2023-11-21 at 05:22 -0600, secretsnail9 via agora-official wrote: > Radiances as of 21 Nov 2023: > > PLACE NAME [0] RADIANCE CHANGE [1] > - -- > 1st MUR 033 -34 > 2nd AIS 013 -14 I wield the Radiance Stone, specifying myself. -- ais523
(@Notary, Collector) Re: BUS: Stamp Trade (attn. ais523)
On Mon, 2023-11-20 at 17:51 +, Katherina Walshe-Grey via agora-business wrote: > I grant ais523 the following promise, titled "Stamp Trade": > > - > Cashing conditions: It is no later than 96 hours after this promise was > created, and the bearer has granted or transferred to me 10 ais523 > Stamps earlier in the same message that e cashes this promise, and e > has not cashed any other promise in that message, and that message > contains no other actions that could cause me not to still possess at > least 10 ais523 Stamps immediately after that message, and I have at > least 10 Kate Stamps. > > I transfer 10 Kate Stamps to the bearer. > ----- I transfer 10 ais523 stamps to Kate. Then I cash the first (and probably only) promise titled "Stamp Trade" that Kate has granted to me today. -- ais523
Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] CFJ 4051 Assigned to snail
On Fri, 2023-11-17 at 12:29 +, Katherina Walshe-Grey via agora-business wrote: > On 13/11/2023 05:26, nix via agora-business wrote: > > On 10/20/23 16:42, secretsnail9 via agora-business wrote: > > > I self-file a motion to reconsider CFJ 4051, and judge it FALSE. I thought > > > 67 was the "dream didn't work" number. > > > > I intend with 5 support to enter this CFJ 4051 into a moot. I intend > > with 6 support to enter CFJ 4051 into a moot (in case enough time passes > > to invalidate the previous). > > I support both these intents. As do I. -- ais523
(@Assessor, Stonemason) Re: BUS: [Prime Minister] State-sanctioned celebrations (for real)
On Thu, 2023-11-16 at 22:02 -0500, Janet Cobb via agora-business wrote:
> [Oops we forgot to get Royal Assent last time.]
>
> I issue a Cabinet Order of Manifesto, distributing the proposal in the
> Proposal Pool with title "Celebration!" that I most recently submitted,
> removing it from the Proposal Pool and initiating a referendum on it.
> For this decision, the vote collector is the Assessor, the quorum is 3,
> the voting method is AI-majority, and the valid options are FOR and
> AGAINST (PRESENT is also a valid vote, as are conditional votes).
>
> For this proposal, the class is Democratic. Other attributes of the
> proposal are as follows:
>
> Title: Celebration!
> Author: Janet
> Coauthors:
> Adoption index: 3.0
>
> {
>
> Enact a new Rule with power 3, title "Dictatorship", and text as follows:
> {
> Janet, acting as emself, CAN proclaim by announcement, specifying a
> published document as being the Decree. When e does so, the Decree's
> power is set to the power of this rule, then it takes effect, then its
> power is set to 0.
>
> When a Decree takes effect, the Decree applies the changes
> that it specifies in its text, except as prohibited by other
> rules. Unless otherwise specified by the text, the effects are
> applied in the order they appear in the text. Clearly marked
> comments are ignored. If the Decree cannot make some changes it
> specifies, that does not preclude the other changes from taking
> place.
>
> A document CANNOT become a Decree except as specified in this Rule. A
> Decree CANNOT take effect except as specified in this Rule.
> }
>
> }
For each referendum initiated today, I vote AGAINST on that referendum.
(If Janet has a way to force this through, I'd like to see it:
sometimes a forcethrough attempt ends up passing just on natural votes,
which is really boring compared to seeing a scam in action, and thus
it's a lot more interesting to vote AGAINST rather than FOR when this
sort of thing happens.)
Not coincidentally, I reach for the Sabotage Stone.
--
ais523
(@Referee) Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Referee] Infraction Reaction
On Sat, 2023-11-11 at 08:55 +, ais523 via agora-business wrote:
> In this message, numbers in square brackets refer to infractions using
> the naming scheme in the message that this message is a reply to (and
> is archived at
> <https://www.mail-archive.com/agora-official@agoranomic.org/msg13594.html>).
>
> For each infraction in the set {[2] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [13]
> [14]}, I intend, with Agoran Consent, to forgive it. 4st cannot support
> these intents.
>
> (If all these infractions are forgiven, it will reduce the penalty for
> 4st's fake report from a rather unreasonable 25 Blots to a more
> reasonable 6 Blots.)
For each such infraction, with Agoran Consent, I forgive it. (snail,
Aris, nix, and juan supported, and nobody objected.)
--
ais523
Re: BUS: continuing research
On Tue, 2023-11-14 at 22:41 -0800, 4st nomic via agora-business wrote: > ; Could not find Bucky, Canada, Ben, Claire, Blue, BethMo, Peter Suber, > Douglas Hofstadter, or Troublemaker at Large Bucky, Peter Suber and Douglas Hofstadter are all real persons who have never been players. (Bucky interacted significantly with Agora despite never registering – the other two people listed are responsible for inventing and/or popularising nomic, but as far as I know have never interacted with Agora directly.) -- ais523
(@Referee) Re: BUS: (@notary) Exorcism
On Mon, 2023-11-13 at 08:32 -0800, 4st nomic via agora-business wrote:
> (this should make it so if I were to win the tourney, then I've sold my
> soul, and if I hadn't won the tourney, tough luck. I think I'm winning the
> tourney tho, at least?)
>
> I create the following promise ("Exorcism") in the library:
> {
> Cashing Condition: 4st has 0 blots, a promise with this text has not been
> cashed by the bearer prior, the bearer has expunged a blot from 4st in the
> past week, and 4st has won in the past week.
>
> Effect: Create a promise ("4st's Horcrux") in the possession of the bearer
> with the text:
> {
> 4st transfers any asset e owns to the bearer.
> }
> If less than 5 promises "4st's soul" exist, create a promise with this text
> in the library.
> }
I expunge 1 Blot from 4st.
--
ais523
(@Stonemason) BUS: Re: OFF: [Stonemason] Billboard Rock Chart - 12 Nov 2023
On Sun, 2023-11-12 at 14:21 -0500, Janet Cobb via agora-official wrote: > THE BILLBOARD ROCK CHART (STONEMASON'S WEEKLY REPORT) > > Stone Mossiness Owner Last Wielded Immune? > --- - --- --- > Power 1 Agora 2023-10-25 Agora > Soul 1 Agora 2023-04-23 Agora > Sabotage 1 Agora 2023-10-25 Agora > Minty 1 Agora 2023-10-31 Agora > Protection 1 Agora 2023-10-01 Agora > Recursion 1 Janet 2023-11-01 > Hot Potato 1 Agora 2023-11-04 Agora > Blank 1 Agora 2023-05-28 Agora > Anti-Equatorial 1 Agora 2023-11-01 Agora > Radiance 1 Agora 2023-10-31 Agora I reach for the Radiance Stone. -- ais523
(@Referee) BUS: Expunge
I expunge a blot from 4st. -- ais523
(@everyone) BUS: Re: OFF: [Referee] Infraction Reaction
In this message, numbers in square brackets refer to infractions using
the naming scheme in the message that this message is a reply to (and
is archived at
<https://www.mail-archive.com/agora-official@agoranomic.org/msg13594.html>).
For each infraction in the set {[2] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [13]
[14]}, I intend, with Agoran Consent, to forgive it. 4st cannot support
these intents.
(If all these infractions are forgiven, it will reduce the penalty for
4st's fake report from a rather unreasonable 25 Blots to a more
reasonable 6 Blots.)
--
ais523
Referee
Re: BUS: Agora
On Fri, 2023-11-10 at 16:48 -0500, Fredrica Turner via agora-business wrote: > I award myself a Welcome Package. Are you a player? If not, I recommend registering first, and then trying that again. -- ais523
BUS: Re: OFF: [Collector] Stamp Collections (08 Nov 2023)
On Wed, 2023-11-08 at 05:58 -0600, secretsnail9 via agora-official wrote: > Stamp Holdings as of 8 Nov 2023 > > -- > Stamp Holdings > -- > > L (0): > > ais523 (58): > - 1 4st stamp > - 34 ais523 stamps > - 1 Janet stamp > - 1 juan stamp > - 15 Madrid stamps > - 1 Murphy stamp > - 3 nix stamp > - 1 snail stamp > - 1 Yachay stamp CoE: I own a kiako stamp. (This was traded by promise in a message dated "Wed, 11 Oct 2023 14:30:57 -0500", which accidentally wasn't flagged for the Collector, and I didn't notice at the time.) -- ais523
(@Herald) BUS: Re: OFF: [Herald] BRIGHTEST BULBS (08 Nov 2023)
On Wed, 2023-11-08 at 06:33 -0600, secretsnail9 via agora-official wrote: > I deputize as Herald to publish the following report: > Radiances as of 08 Nov 2023. > > PLACE NAME [0] RADIANCE CHANGE [1] > - -- > 1st MUR 067 > 2rd AIS 021 +14 > 3nd SNL 011 > 4st 4ST 007 > ARI 007 > JNT 007 > YCY 007 > BEO 007 > BLB 007 > CBN 007 > IWR 007 > JWN 007 > ANK 007 CoE: I have 27 radiance. I suspect you missed two uses of the Radiance Stone, which I wielded on the following dates: 09 Oct 2023 00:05:26 16 Oct 2023 00:16:54 28 Oct 2023 06:33:48 31 Oct 2023 00:30:13 -- ais523
(@Assessor) BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Propositions 9020-9026
On Sun, 2023-11-05 at 15:27 -0600, secretsnail9 via agora-official wrote: > ID Author(s) AI Title > - I vote as follows: > 9020~ 4st, ...[1] 1.0 Free Black Ribbons AGAINST, unless you're willing to bribe me with something separate from what the proposal itself does > 9021~ 4st, ...[1] 1.0 Free Points AGAINST (in addition to disagreeing with the bribery, this is broken) > 9022~ 4st, ...[1] 1.0 Free Pebbles AGAINST; I'm actually not sure whether this is broken or not, and it'd be interesting to put it through the courts, but I still think it's a bad idea > 9023~ 4st, ...[1] 1.0 Free Stamps AGAINST, again due to the bribery > 9024~ Janet 1.7 Investigation time limits FOR > 9025~ Yachay 2.0 Stone Repeal AGAINST; please stop repealing the economy without simultaneously suggesting something to replace it > 9026~ Janet, Kate 1.5 It's a bit dark in here FOR -- ais523
(@Stonemason) BUS: Re: OFF: [Stonemason] Billboard Rock Chart - 5 Nov 2023
On Sun, 2023-11-05 at 00:36 -0400, Janet Cobb via agora-official wrote: > THE BILLBOARD ROCK CHART (STONEMASON'S WEEKLY REPORT) > > Stone Mossiness Owner Last Wielded Immune? > --- - --- --- > Power 0 Agora 2023-10-25 Agora > Soul 0 Agora 2023-04-23 Agora > Sabotage 0 Agora 2023-10-25 Agora > Minty 0 Agora 2023-10-31 Agora > Protection 0 Agora 2023-10-01 Agora > Recursion 0 Agora 2023-11-01 Agora > Hot Potato 0 Agora 2023-11-04 Agora > Blank 0 Agora 2023-05-28 Agora > Anti-Equatorial 0 Agora 2023-11-01 Agora > Radiance 0 Agora 2023-10-31 Agora I reach for the Radiance Stone. -- ais523
(@Herald, Stonekeepor, Notary) BUS: Heating the Potato
I grant myself the following promise:
{{{
Cashing condition: ais523 is the Speaker.
I wield the Hot Potato stone, specifying Janet.
}}}
I cash that promise.
--
ais523
(@Stonemason, Notary, Herald, Prime Minister) BUS: My very own rock garden
On Sun, 2023-10-15 at 19:38 -0400, Janet Cobb via agora-official wrote:
> THE BILLBOARD ROCK CHART (STONEMASON'S WEEKLY REPORT)
> REVISION 1
>
> Stone Mossiness Owner Last Wielded Immune?
> --- - --- ---
> Power 2 Janet 2023-09-17
> Soul 1 Janet 2023-04-23
> Sabotage 1 Janet 2023-05-21
> Minty 1 ais523 2023-10-09
> Protection 2 ais523 2023-10-01
> Recursion 3 ais523 2023-10-09
> Hot Potato 1 ais523 2023-08-27
> Blank 0 ais523 2023-05-28
> Anti-Equatorial 3 ais523 2023-10-08
> Radiance 3 ais523 2023-10-09
I grant myself a promise with the following text:
{{{
Cashing condition: The bearer owns the Minty, Protection, Recursion,
Hot Potato, Blank, Anti-Equatorial, and Radiance stones; and the
Recursion stone is the mossiest stone or tied for mossiest or both; and
the Sabotage Stone is not owned by Agora.
I wield the Recursion Stone as the Soul Stone, specifying the Sabotage
Stone as the stone to steal.
I wield the Anti-Equatorial Stone, specifying the Recursion Stone as
the stone to steal.
I Notice the Rock Garden, specifying myself.
}}}
I cash that promise. (This transfers the Recursion Stone to Janet and
the Sabotage Stone to me; then transfers the Recursion Stone back to
me; and then causes me to win the game, as I now have 8 stones and have
Noticed the Rock Garden.)
I temporarily deputise for Herald to award myself the patent title
Champion.
(Anyone see anything controversial about this win? I think it's
straightforward, but have been surprised before. Perhaps wins should
come with a mandatory CFJ, to make things more official and add more
ceremony to the event; some other nomics do something like that and I
enjoy it when they do.)
--
ais523
(@Registrar, Arbitor) BUS: Re: OFF: [Registrar] Weekly report
On Mon, 2023-10-30 at 16:37 -0300, juan via agora-official wrote: > Publicity Location or description Typical use > - --- --- [snip] > Public agoranomic at groups.io * backup [snip] > * The forum is specifically just that email list. CoE: m...@agoranomic.groups.io is a public forum (as ratified without objection by Aris recently). CFJ: agorano...@groups.io and m...@agoranomic.groups.io are the same forum (and thus share a single Publicity switch between them). Arguments: Are agorano...@groups.io and m...@agoranomic.groups.io the same forum, or two different fora? The Registrar's report, saying "specifically just that email list", may imply that there's a distinction. Messages sent via the two addresses are distinguishable by their "To:" address. (The former has its Reply-to: set to point to the latter, but the same situation exists between, e.g., agora-business and agora-discussion.) The latter of the two addresses is the address that was set public by RWO recently. The former was set public by proposal (and possibly by the Registrar's without-objection mechanism). As such, there isn't currently ambiguity as to which is public (they both are), but there's still some ambiguity as to whether they're the same forum or not. -- ais523
BUS: Re: ALT: This Message Contains a Clear Designation of Intent to be Public (But Please Don't Read It) [Thanks]
On Mon, 2023-10-16 at 11:38 -0500, nix wrote: > A + path + y is what I intend to declare, and I intend to specify > myself in doing so. I object to all attempts to Declare Apathy that I can object to. -- ais523
(@Stonemason, Collector, Herald) Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Stonemason] Billboard Rock Chart - 15 Oct 2023
On Mon, 2023-10-16 at 00:31 +0100, ais523 via agora-business wrote: > On Mon, 2023-10-16 at 00:29 +0100, ais523 via agora-business wrote: > > I wield the Minty Stone. > > I wield the Radiance Stone. > > These fail due to being approximately half an hour early. I will try > again in a bit. Trying again now that it's actually Monday: I wield the Minty Stone, specifying myself. I wield the Radiance Stone, specifying myself. -- ais523
Re: (@Stonemason, Collector, Herald) BUS: Re: OFF: [Stonemason] Billboard Rock Chart - 15 Oct 2023
On Mon, 2023-10-16 at 00:29 +0100, ais523 via agora-business wrote: > I wield the Minty Stone. > I wield the Radiance Stone. These fail due to being approximately half an hour early. I will try again in a bit. -- ais523
(@Stonemason, Collector, Herald) BUS: Re: OFF: [Stonemason] Billboard Rock Chart - 15 Oct 2023
On Sun, 2023-10-15 at 19:20 -0400, Janet Cobb via agora-official wrote: > Stone Mossiness Owner Last Wielded Immune? > --- - --- --- > Recursion 3 ais523 2023-10-09 > Anti-Equatorial 2 ais523 2023-10-08 [snip] > History: > === > 2023-10-09 00:05:26 Mossiness of Blank stone incremented due to > Recursion Stone as Anti-Equatorial Stone. > 2023-10-08 23:59:35 Mossiness of Blank stone incremented due to > Anti-Equatorial Stone. CoE: you increased the mossiness of the wrong stones here (the Anti- Equatorial stone effect increases the mossiness of the wielded stone, not the transferred stone). I wield the Minty Stone. I wield the Radiance Stone. -- ais523
(@Notary) Re: BUS: A promise for a promise, a stamp for a stamp
I grant kiako the following promise:
{{{
Cashing condition: kiako has transferred a kiako stamp to ais523 in the
message in which this promise is cashed.
Expiry condition: It is 14 October 2023 or later.
I transfer a Madrid stamp to kiako.
}}}
--
ais523
Re: BUS: General objections
On Mon, 2023-10-09 at 15:46 -0400, Janet Cobb via agora-business wrote: > I object to each intent to declare Apathy. > > I object to each intent to award any patent title via any mechanism. I object to every intent that Janet objected to in the above-quoted message. -- ais523
Re: BUS: Reaching [attn. Stonemason]
On Sun, 2023-10-08 at 23:57 -0400, Janet Cobb via agora-business wrote: > I reach for the Blank Stone. This fails. The stone in question is not owned by Agora. -- ais523
(@Stonemason, Herald, Collector, Notary) Re: BUS: Like a skateboard trick, but with stones instead of skateboards
On Mon, 2023-10-09 at 00:59 +0100, ais523 via agora-business wrote:
> I wield the Anti-Equatorial Stone, transferring the Blank Stone to
> me.
>
> I transfer the Blank Stone to Agora.
>
> I reach for the Blank Stone.
I grant myself the following promise:
{{{
Cashing condition: The Radiance Stone has a mossiness of 3, and no
Stone has a higher mossiness.
I wield the Recursion Stone as the Anti-Equatorial Stone, specifying
the Radiance Stone as the stone to transfer to me.
}}}
I cash the promise I granted myself earlier in this message. (Assuming
I got everything correct, this should work because the Blank Stone's
mossiness was reset to 0 when I transferred it to Agora.)
I wield the Minty Stone, specifying myself as the player to gain a
stamp.
I wield the Radiance Stone.
--
ais523
(@Stonemason) BUS: Like a skateboard trick, but with stones instead of skateboards
I wield the Anti-Equatorial Stone, transferring the Blank Stone to me. I transfer the Blank Stone to Agora. I reach for the Blank Stone. -- ais523
Re: BUS: FREE HORSES!!!!!…
On Tue, 2023-10-03 at 09:03 -0700, Forest Sweeney via agora-business wrote: > Hi Agorans! This is 4st sending a game message with this HOT NEW > update! > > I intend to declare apathy by announcement, specifying myself. I object. -- ais523
Re: (@Stonemason, Collector) BUS: Re: OFF: [Stonemason] Billboard Rock Chart - 27 Sep 2023
On Thu, 2023-09-28 at 00:04 +0100, ais523 via agora-business wrote: > I wield the Minty Stone, specifying myself as the person to gain a > Stamp. I wield the Minty Stone, specifying myself as the person to gain a Stamp. -- ais523
(@Stonemason) BUS: Re: OFF: [Stonemason] Billboard Rock Chart - 27 Sep 2023
On Wed, 2023-09-27 at 01:50 -0400, Janet Cobb via agora-official wrote: > THE BILLBOARD ROCK CHART (STONEMASON'S WEEKLY REPORT) > > Stone Mossiness Owner Last Wielded Immune? > --- - --- --- > Power 1 Janet 2023-09-17 > Soul 0 Janet 2023-04-23 > Sabotage 0 Janet 2023-05-21 > Minty 0 ais523 2023-09-18 > Protection 1 ais523 2023-09-01 > Recursion 2 ais523 2023-08-01 > Hot Potato 0 ais523 2023-08-27 > Blank 4 snail 2023-05-28 > Anti-Equatorial 1 ais523 2023-08-01 > Radiance 2 juan 2023-09-04 I wield the Protection Stone, specifying the Anti-Equatorial Stone as the stone to make immune. -- ais523
(@Stonemason, Collector) BUS: Re: OFF: [Stonemason] Billboard Rock Chart - 27 Sep 2023
On Wed, 2023-09-27 at 01:50 -0400, Janet Cobb via agora-official wrote: > Minty0 ais523 2023-09-18 > Recursion 2 ais523 2023-08-01 I wield the Recursion Stone as the Protection Stone, specifying the Recursion Stone as the stone to make immune. I wield the Minty Stone, specifying myself as the person to gain a Stamp. -- ais523
(@Collector, Stonemason) Re: BUS: Grinding the stones
I wield the Minty Stone, specifying myself. I reach for the Hot Potato stone. -- ais523
