Re: BUS: [Finger Pointing] Re: Expedited export
On Sun, Nov 22, 2020 at 01:49:31PM -0500, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-business wrote: > On 11/20/20 12:08 AM, Falsifian via agora-business wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 04:52:35AM +, Falsifian via agora-business > > wrote: > >> On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 05:42:00PM +, Falsifian via agora-business > >> wrote: > >>> I intend, with notice, to deregister Tyler. > >>> I intend, with notice, to deregister Zyborg. > >>> I intend, with notice, to deregister Fred. > >>> I intend, with notice, to deregister Shelvacu. > >> > >> Having given notice: > >> > >> I deregister Tyler. > >> I deregister Zyborg. > >> I deregister Fred. > >> I deregister Shelvacu. > >> > >> RIP > > > > I Point my Finger at myself, Falsifian, for failing to deregister the > > above players in a timely fashion after my last Registrar weekly report, > > as required under the last paragraph of Rule 2574. > > I find this finger-pointing to be shenanigans. I think that we need to > clarify the rules on this, but I decided to interpret it this way > because of how the alternative interpretation could play out in other > situations. Feel free to CFJ if you feel otherwise. I think the zombie rules are on their way out, so that rule text will likely be rewritten soon. -- Falsifian
Re: BUS: [Finger Pointing] Re: Expedited export
On 11/20/20 12:08 AM, Falsifian via agora-business wrote: > On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 04:52:35AM +, Falsifian via agora-business wrote: >> On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 05:42:00PM +, Falsifian via agora-business wrote: >>> I intend, with notice, to deregister Tyler. >>> I intend, with notice, to deregister Zyborg. >>> I intend, with notice, to deregister Fred. >>> I intend, with notice, to deregister Shelvacu. >> >> Having given notice: >> >> I deregister Tyler. >> I deregister Zyborg. >> I deregister Fred. >> I deregister Shelvacu. >> >> RIP > > I Point my Finger at myself, Falsifian, for failing to deregister the > above players in a timely fashion after my last Registrar weekly report, > as required under the last paragraph of Rule 2574. I find this finger-pointing to be shenanigans. I think that we need to clarify the rules on this, but I decided to interpret it this way because of how the alternative interpretation could play out in other situations. Feel free to CFJ if you feel otherwise. > > Arguments: > > I'm not sure whether I'm guilty here. From Rule 2574: > >> Any player CAN, with notice: >> - If a zombie has been a zombie for the past 90 days and not had >> Agora for a master during any of that time, transfer the >> talisman for em to Agora; >> - If a player possesses more than one talisman for persons other >> than emself, specify and transfer one of those talismans to >> Agora; >> - Deregister a zombie whose resale value is zero and whose >> master is Agora. >> >> The Registrar SHALL track the date for each zombie on which Agora >> was most recently eir master. The Registrar SHALL perform all >> POSSIBLE actions in the preceding paragraph in a timely fashion >> after first reporting their possibility via the facts in eir >> weekly report. > > Certainly I (unintentionally) failed to perform the actions within 7 > days of my last Registrar report: report published 2020-11-12; actions > taken by announcement 2020-11-20. What's not clear to me is whether the > actions were POSSIBLE. R2152 defines "POSSIBLE" as "Attempts to perform > the described action are successful". Immediately after publishing my > report, no such attempt could be successful because I had not given > notice, so arguably, the actions were not POSSIBLE when I published the > report. > > One counter-argument to this is that the SHALL became binding 4 days > after I announced intent, because it became POSSIBLE then. It's still > questionable whether I "reported [the actions'] possibility" in my > weekly report since they weren't actually POSSIBLE when the report > was published. > > Another counter-argument is that announcing intent, waiting between 4 > and 14 days, then taking the action by announcement together constitutes > an "attempt", so the actions were indeed POSSIBLE when I published the > report. > -- Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth
BUS: [Finger Pointing] Re: Expedited export
On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 04:52:35AM +, Falsifian via agora-business wrote: > On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 05:42:00PM +, Falsifian via agora-business wrote: > > I intend, with notice, to deregister Tyler. > > I intend, with notice, to deregister Zyborg. > > I intend, with notice, to deregister Fred. > > I intend, with notice, to deregister Shelvacu. > > Having given notice: > > I deregister Tyler. > I deregister Zyborg. > I deregister Fred. > I deregister Shelvacu. > > RIP I Point my Finger at myself, Falsifian, for failing to deregister the above players in a timely fashion after my last Registrar weekly report, as required under the last paragraph of Rule 2574. Arguments: I'm not sure whether I'm guilty here. From Rule 2574: > Any player CAN, with notice: > - If a zombie has been a zombie for the past 90 days and not had > Agora for a master during any of that time, transfer the > talisman for em to Agora; > - If a player possesses more than one talisman for persons other > than emself, specify and transfer one of those talismans to > Agora; > - Deregister a zombie whose resale value is zero and whose > master is Agora. > > The Registrar SHALL track the date for each zombie on which Agora > was most recently eir master. The Registrar SHALL perform all > POSSIBLE actions in the preceding paragraph in a timely fashion > after first reporting their possibility via the facts in eir > weekly report. Certainly I (unintentionally) failed to perform the actions within 7 days of my last Registrar report: report published 2020-11-12; actions taken by announcement 2020-11-20. What's not clear to me is whether the actions were POSSIBLE. R2152 defines "POSSIBLE" as "Attempts to perform the described action are successful". Immediately after publishing my report, no such attempt could be successful because I had not given notice, so arguably, the actions were not POSSIBLE when I published the report. One counter-argument to this is that the SHALL became binding 4 days after I announced intent, because it became POSSIBLE then. It's still questionable whether I "reported [the actions'] possibility" in my weekly report since they weren't actually POSSIBLE when the report was published. Another counter-argument is that announcing intent, waiting between 4 and 14 days, then taking the action by announcement together constitutes an "attempt", so the actions were indeed POSSIBLE when I published the report. -- Falsifian
