Re: BUS: Not so fast!
(Rounding up the AI to 3.1. Thanks twg.) I withdraw all my propsal(s) that are in the proposal pool, and submit a proposal as follows. Title: Correction to Agoran Satisfaction, Version 2.4 Co-authors, listed alphabetically: ais523, D. Margaux, G., twg Adoption Index: 3.1 Text: The gamestate, excluding the rules, is changed to what it would have been if the text of the following amendment to Rule 2124 had determined whether Agora was Satisfied with any intents attempted after Proposal 7815, rather than the text of what Rule 2124 was at that time. To the extent allowed by the rules, this change is designated as a convergence. Rule 2124 is amended by replacing its text with the following: A Supporter of an intent to perform an action is an eligible entity who has publicly posted (and not withdrawn) support (syn. "consent") for an announcement of that intent. An Objector to an intent to perform an action is an eligible entity who has publicly posted (and not withdrawn) an objection to the announcement of that intent. The entities eligible to support or object to an intent to perform an action are, by default, all players, subject to modification by the document authorizing the dependent action. However, the previous sentence notwithstanding, the initiator of the intent is not eligible to support it. Agora is Satisfied with an intent to perform a specific action unless at least one of the following is true: 1. The action is to be performed Without N Objections, and there are at least N Objectors to that intent. 2. The action is to be performed With N support, and there are fewer than than N Supporters of that intent. 3. The action is to be performed with N Agoran Consent, and the number of Supporters of the intent is less than or equal to N times the number of Objectors to the intent. The above notwithstanding, if an action depends on objections, and an objection to an intent to perform it has been withdrawn within the past 24 hours, then Agora is not Satisfied with that intent. The above notwithstanding, Agora is not satisfied with an intent if the Speaker has objected to it in the last 48 hours. A person CANNOT support or object to an announcement of intent before the intent is announced, or after e has withdrawn the same type of response.
Re: BUS: Not so fast!
(Adding "excluding the rules".) I withdraw all my propsal(s) that are in the proposal pool, and submit a proposal as follows. Title: Correction to Agoran Satisfaction, Version 2.3 Co-authors, listed alphabetically: ais523, D. Margaux, G., twg Adoption Index: 3.05 Text: The gamestate, excluding the rules, is changed to what it would have been if the text of the following amendment to Rule 2124 had determined whether Agora was Satisfied with any intents attempted after Proposal 7815, rather than the text of what Rule 2124 was at that time. To the extent allowed by the rules, this change is designated as a convergence. Rule 2124 is amended by replacing its text with the following: A Supporter of an intent to perform an action is an eligible entity who has publicly posted (and not withdrawn) support (syn. "consent") for an announcement of that intent. An Objector to an intent to perform an action is an eligible entity who has publicly posted (and not withdrawn) an objection to the announcement of that intent. The entities eligible to support or object to an intent to perform an action are, by default, all players, subject to modification by the document authorizing the dependent action. However, the previous sentence notwithstanding, the initiator of the intent is not eligible to support it. Agora is Satisfied with an intent to perform a specific action unless at least one of the following is true: 1. The action is to be performed Without N Objections, and there are at least N Objectors to that intent. 2. The action is to be performed With N support, and there are fewer than than N Supporters of that intent. 3. The action is to be performed with N Agoran Consent, and the number of Supporters of the intent is less than or equal to N times the number of Objectors to the intent. The above notwithstanding, if an action depends on objections, and an objection to an intent to perform it has been withdrawn within the past 24 hours, then Agora is not Satisfied with that intent. The above notwithstanding, Agora is not satisfied with an intent if the Speaker has objected to it in the last 48 hours. A person CANNOT support or object to an announcement of intent before the intent is announced, or after e has withdrawn the same type of response.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Not so fast!
I create the AI-1 proposal “Minor bug fix” with the following text:
{
Create the power-1 rule “Don’t mind me” with the following text:
{The rules CANNOT change by any mechanism.}
}
Why that works (at power 1):
106/40: "Except as prohibited by other rules, a proposal that takes effect CAN
and does, as part of its effect, apply the changes that it specifies"
106/40: "Preventing a proposal from taking effect is a secured change; this
does not apply to generally preventing changes to specified areas of the
gamestate”
The proposed rule is a prohibition on a certain type of change. Because 106
says “except as prohibited by other rules”, it defers to this rule.
The second quoted clause fails to prevent this, because the rule "generally
[prevents] changes to specified areas of the gamestate.”
1698/5 "Agora is ossified if it is IMPOSSIBLE for any reasonable combination of
actions by players to cause arbitrary rule changes to be made and/or arbitrary
proposals to be adopted within a four-week period.”
Note the “and/or.” Nothing here prevents arbitrary proposals from being
adopted—it just prevents them from changing the rules upon doing so. Therefore,
Agora isn’t ossified.
I retract the above proposal.
Gaelan
> On Feb 21, 2019, at 12:21 AM, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote:
>
> Yes, the "gamestate" includes the rules, and I initially assumed the same
> thing as you. But ais523 pointed out a few days ago that rule 105/19 says
>
> A rule change is wholly prevented from taking effect unless its
> full text was published, along with an unambiguous and clear
> specification of the method to be used for changing the rule, at
> least 4 days and no more than 60 days before it would otherwise
> take effect.
>
> which overrides the passage in rule 106/40 that says
>
>Except as prohibited by other rules, a proposal that
> takes effect CAN and does, as part of its effect, apply the
> changes that it specifies.
>
> -twg
>
>
> ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
> On Thursday, February 21, 2019 2:47 AM, James Cook
> wrote:
>
>>> I'd prefer to just repeat the cleanings. Mass changes to the ruleset
>>
>>> are one of the riskiest things you can do in Agora (which is why there
>>> are so many protections preventing them being done by accident).
>>
>> My proposal says "The gamestate is changed...". I assumed that
>> includes the rules, making re-cleaning unnecessary. Is there precedent
>> for what "gamestate" means?
>
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: BUS: Not so fast!
I withdraw all my propsal(s) that are in the proposal pool, and submit a proposal as follows. (Comment: I replaced "dependent actions" with "intents" in the first paragraph. I'm guessing the old version would have been just as good, since the intention is pretty clear, but just to be safe.) Title: Correction to Agoran Satisfaction, Version 2.2 Co-authors, listed alphabetically: ais523, D. Margaux, G., twg Adoption Index: 3.05 Text: The gamestate is changed to what it would have been if the text of the following amendment to Rule 2124 had determined whether Agora was Satisfied with any intents attempted after Proposal 7815, rather than the text of what Rule 2124 was at that time. To the extent allowed by the rules, this change is designated as a convergence. Rule 2124 is amended by replacing its text with the following: A Supporter of an intent to perform an action is an eligible entity who has publicly posted (and not withdrawn) support (syn. "consent") for an announcement of that intent. An Objector to an intent to perform an action is an eligible entity who has publicly posted (and not withdrawn) an objection to the announcement of that intent. The entities eligible to support or object to an intent to perform an action are, by default, all players, subject to modification by the document authorizing the dependent action. However, the previous sentence notwithstanding, the initiator of the intent is not eligible to support it. Agora is Satisfied with an intent to perform a specific action unless at least one of the following is true: 1. The action is to be performed Without N Objections, and there are at least N Objectors to that intent. 2. The action is to be performed With N support, and there are fewer than than N Supporters of that intent. 3. The action is to be performed with N Agoran Consent, and the number of Supporters of the intent is less than or equal to N times the number of Objectors to the intent. The above notwithstanding, if an action depends on objections, and an objection to an intent to perform it has been withdrawn within the past 24 hours, then Agora is not Satisfied with that intent. The above notwithstanding, Agora is not satisfied with an intent if the Speaker has objected to it in the last 48 hours. A person CANNOT support or object to an announcement of intent before the intent is announced, or after e has withdrawn the same type of response.
Re: BUS: Not so fast!
I withdraw all of my proposals that are in the Proposal Pool (I think there's only one, but this should make it easier to be sure). I submit a proposal as follows. Title: Correction to Agoran Satisfaction, Version 2.1 Co-authors, listed alphabetically: ais523, D. Margaux, G., twg Adoption Index: 3.05 Text: The gamestate is changed to what it would have been if the text of the following amendment to Rule 2124 had determined whether Agora was Satisfied with any dependent action attempted after Proposal 7815, rather than the text of what Rule 2124 was at that time. To the extent allowed by the rules, this change is designated as a convergence. Rule 2124 is amended by replacing its text with the following: A Supporter of an intent to perform an action is an eligible entity who has publicly posted (and not withdrawn) support (syn. "consent") for an announcement of that intent. An Objector to an intent to perform an action is an eligible entity who has publicly posted (and not withdrawn) an objection to the announcement of that intent. The entities eligible to support or object to an intent to perform an action are, by default, all players, subject to modification by the document authorizing the dependent action. However, the previous sentence notwithstanding, the initiator of the intent is not eligible to support it. Agora is Satisfied with an intent to perform a specific action unless at least one of the following is true: 1. The action is to be performed Without N Objections, and there are at least N Objectors to that intent. 2. The action is to be performed With N support, and there are fewer than than N Supporters of that intent. 3. The action is to be performed with N Agoran Consent, and the number of Supporters of the intent is less than or equal to N times the number of Objectors to the intent. The above notwithstanding, if an action depends on objections, and an objection to an intent to perform it has been withdrawn within the past 24 hours, then Agora is not Satisfied with that intent. The above notwithstanding, Agora is not satisfied with an intent if the Speaker has objected to it in the last 48 hours. A person CANNOT support or object to an announcement of intent before the intent is announced, or after e has withdrawn the same type of response.
Re: BUS: Not so fast!
I withdraw my previous proposal (Correction to Agoran Satisfaction, Version 1.2) and submit a proposal as follows. Title: Correction to Agoran Satisfaction, Version 2 Co-authors, listed alphabetically: ais523, D. Margaux, G. Adoption Index: 3.05 Text: The gamestate is changed as if the below amendment had taken effect immediately after Proposal 7815, and as if no further changes had been made to that Rule since. (In particular, the text of Rule 2124 is now as described in the amendment, since the Rules are changed by this proposal as part of the gamestate.) The amendment is to replace the text of Rule 2124 with: A Supporter of an intent to perform an action is an eligible entity who has publicly posted (and not withdrawn) support (syn. "consent") for an announcement of that intent. An Objector to an intent to perform an action is an eligible entity who has publicly posted (and not withdrawn) an objection to the announcement of that intent. The entities eligible to support or object to an intent to perform an action are, by default, all players, subject to modification by the document authorizing the dependent action. However, the previous sentence notwithstanding, the initiator of the intent is not eligible to support it. Agora is Satisfied with an intent to perform a specific action unless at least one of the following is true: 1. The action is to be performed Without N Objections, and there are at least N Objectors to that intent. 2. The action is to be performed With N support, and there are fewer than than N Supporters of that intent. 3. The action is to be performed with N Agoran Consent, and the number of Supporters of the intent is less than or equal to N times the number of Objectors to the intent. The above notwithstanding, if an action depends on objections, and an objection to an intent to perform it has been withdrawn within the past 24 hours, then Agora is not Satisfied with that intent. The above notwithstanding, Agora is not satisfied with an intent if the Speaker has objected to it in the last 48 hours. A person CANNOT support or object to an announcement of intent before the intent is announced, or after e has withdrawn the same type of response.
Re: BUS: Not so fast!
> Co-authors: ais...@alumni.bham.ac.uk, D. Margaux "ais...@alumni.bham.ac.uk" refers to the same person as ais523. I suggest that the list of co-authors in this proposal be presented as "ais523, D. Margaux" by anyone distributing the proposal.
Re: BUS: Not so fast!
I assign this CFJ to Trigon. CFJ number forthcoming, when I publish the Arbitor report. > On Feb 14, 2019, at 8:32 AM, James Cook wrote: > > I submit a CFJ, specifying: > > "Agora is not Satisfied with an intent to perform an action unless it > is to be performed With Notice or With T Notice. In particular, > Gaelan's recent attempt to Declare Apathy on February 7, 2019 was > ineffective, and D. Margaux's dependent actions in their recent > message that starts 'I thought for sure people would object...' were > ineffective." > > See below for my evidence, argument, and a proposal to fix it. If it's > judged true, I encourage others to consider that other recent > dependent actions may not have been effective. > > As evidence, I quote Rule 2124: > > # Agora is Satisfied with an intent to perform a specific action if > # and only if: > # > # 1. if the action is to be performed Without N Objections, then it > #has fewer than N objectors; > # > # 2. if the action is to be performed With N support, then it has > #N or more supporters; and > # > # 3. if the action is to be performed with N Agoran Consent, then > #the ratio of supporters to objectors is greater than N, or the > #action has at least one supporter and no objectors. > # > # 4. if the action is to be performed With Notice or With T Notice. > > Here is my argument: Number 4 in that list doesn't have any word to > link it to other items in the list (like the "and" between 2 and 3), > but the only reasonable interpretation is that it's an additional > condition that needs to be satisfied. > > I submit a proposal as follows. > Title: Correction to Agoran Satisfaction > Adoption Index: 2 > Text: > Amend Rule 2124 by deleting the text "4. if the action is to be > performed With Notice or With T Notice.".
Re: BUS: Not so fast!
Sorry for all the versions. I withdraw my previous proposal (Correction to Agoran Satisfaction, Version 1.1.2) and submit a proposal as follows, and comment that I removed the word "and" between #2 and #3 and turned the items into sentences. Title: Correction to Agoran Satisfaction, Version 1.1.3 Adoption Index: 2 Text: Replace the following part of of Rule 2124: Agora is Satisfied with an intent to perform a specific action if and only if: 1. if the action is to be performed Without N Objections, then it has fewer than N objectors; 2. if the action is to be performed With N support, then it has N or more supporters; and 3. if the action is to be performed with N Agoran Consent, then the ratio of supporters to objectors is greater than N, or the action has at least one supporter and no objectors. 4. if the action is to be performed With Notice or With T Notice. with this: Agora is Satisfied with an intent to perform a specific action unless at least one of the following is true: 1. The action is to be performed Without N Objections, and it has at least N objectors. 2. The action is to be performed With N support, and it has fewer than N supporters. 3. The action is to be performed with N Agoran Consent, and the ratio of supporters to objectors is no more than N, and the action has no supporters or at least one objector.
Re: BUS: Not so fast!
I sigh, and withdraw my previous proposal ("Correction to Agoran
Satisfaction, Version 1.1.1"), and submit a proposal as follows.
(Note: deleted #4, which was the whole point.)
Title: Correction to Agoran Satisfaction, Version 1.1.2
Adoption Index: 2
Text:
Replace the following part of of Rule 2124:
Agora is Satisfied with an intent to perform a specific action if
and only if:
1. if the action is to be performed Without N Objections, then it
has fewer than N objectors;
2. if the action is to be performed With N support, then it has
N or more supporters; and
3. if the action is to be performed with N Agoran Consent, then
the ratio of supporters to objectors is greater than N, or the
action has at least one supporter and no objectors.
4. if the action is to be performed With Notice or With T Notice.
with this:
Agora is Satisfied with an intent to perform a specific action
unless at least one of the following is true:
1. the action is to be performed Without N Objections, and it has
at least N objectors;
2. the action is to be performed With N support, and it has fewer
than N supporters; and
3. the action is to be performed with N Agoran Consent, and
the ratio of supporters to objectors is no more than N, and the
action has no supporters or at least one objector.
Re: BUS: Not so fast!
> Title: Correction to Agoran Satisfaction, Version 1.1
I withdraw that proposal ("Correction to Agoran Satisfaction, Version
1.1") and submit a proposal as follows. (Note: I replaced "unless one"
with "unless at least one").
Title: Correction to Agoran Satisfaction, Version 1.1.1
Adoption Index: 2
Text:
Replace the following part of of Rule 2124:
Agora is Satisfied with an intent to perform a specific action if
and only if:
1. if the action is to be performed Without N Objections, then it
has fewer than N objectors;
2. if the action is to be performed With N support, then it has
N or more supporters; and
3. if the action is to be performed with N Agoran Consent, then
the ratio of supporters to objectors is greater than N, or the
action has at least one supporter and no objectors.
4. if the action is to be performed With Notice or With T Notice.
with this:
Agora is Satisfied with an intent to perform a specific action
unless at least one of the following is true:
1. the action is to be performed Without N Objections, and it has
at least N objectors;
2. the action is to be performed With N support, and it has fewer
than N supporters; and
3. the action is to be performed with N Agoran Consent, and
the ratio of supporters to objectors is no more than N, and the
action has no supporters or at least one objector.
4. if the action is to be performed With Notice or With T Notice.
Re: BUS: Not so fast!
> I submit a proposal as follows. > Title: Correction to Agoran Satisfaction > Adoption Index: 2 > Text: > Amend Rule 2124 by deleting the text "4. if the action is to be > performed With Notice or With T Notice.". I withdraw my proposal titled "Correction to Agoran Satisfaction". I submit a proposal as follows. (Note: I'm not sure others agree this is how Rule 2124 is supposed to work, but I want my proposal to at least clearly reflect the way I see it.) Title: Correction to Agoran Satisfaction, Version 1.1 Adoption Index: 2 Text: Replace the following part of of Rule 2124: Agora is Satisfied with an intent to perform a specific action if and only if: 1. if the action is to be performed Without N Objections, then it has fewer than N objectors; 2. if the action is to be performed With N support, then it has N or more supporters; and 3. if the action is to be performed with N Agoran Consent, then the ratio of supporters to objectors is greater than N, or the action has at least one supporter and no objectors. 4. if the action is to be performed With Notice or With T Notice. with this: Agora is Satisfied with an intent to perform a specific action unless one of the following is true: 1. the action is to be performed Without N Objections, and it has at least N objectors; 2. the action is to be performed With N support, and it has fewer than N supporters; and 3. the action is to be performed with N Agoran Consent, and the ratio of supporters to objectors is no more than N, and the action has no supporters or at least one objector. 4. if the action is to be performed With Notice or With T Notice.
BUS: Not so fast!
I submit a CFJ, specifying: "Agora is not Satisfied with an intent to perform an action unless it is to be performed With Notice or With T Notice. In particular, Gaelan's recent attempt to Declare Apathy on February 7, 2019 was ineffective, and D. Margaux's dependent actions in their recent message that starts 'I thought for sure people would object...' were ineffective." See below for my evidence, argument, and a proposal to fix it. If it's judged true, I encourage others to consider that other recent dependent actions may not have been effective. As evidence, I quote Rule 2124: # Agora is Satisfied with an intent to perform a specific action if # and only if: # # 1. if the action is to be performed Without N Objections, then it #has fewer than N objectors; # # 2. if the action is to be performed With N support, then it has #N or more supporters; and # # 3. if the action is to be performed with N Agoran Consent, then #the ratio of supporters to objectors is greater than N, or the #action has at least one supporter and no objectors. # # 4. if the action is to be performed With Notice or With T Notice. Here is my argument: Number 4 in that list doesn't have any word to link it to other items in the list (like the "and" between 2 and 3), but the only reasonable interpretation is that it's an additional condition that needs to be satisfied. I submit a proposal as follows. Title: Correction to Agoran Satisfaction Adoption Index: 2 Text: Amend Rule 2124 by deleting the text "4. if the action is to be performed With Notice or With T Notice.".
BUS: Not so fast
I go supine.
