BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8607-8629

[Edward Murphy via agora-business]

n.b. also contains partial suggested revision of Scope proposal

I vote as follows:


8607*   Telna, ais523, Alexis   3.0   Asset Self-Ratification Fix

FOR

8608*   Telna, Jason, G., [1]   3.0   Powering Up

AGAINST

8609&   Jason   1.0   Axiom of Limitations

FOR

8610&   Jason   1.7   No Immediate Shenanigans

FOR

8611&   Jason, Trigon   1.0   Reasonably Responsive Reactivation

AGAINST

8612&   Jason, G., Ørjan1.0   Tournament Conclusion Fixes v2

PRESENT

8613*   Jason, Trigon   3.0   The Name of the Win Cards v2

PRESENT

8614*   Jason   3.0   Simultaneity Security

FOR

8615*   Jason   3.0   Supporter/Objector clarification v2

PRESENT

8616&   nix, Telna, Trigon  1.0   Narrowing Margins

PRESENT

8617&   nix, G. 1.0   Forgiveness

PRESENT

8618&   nix, Jason  1.0   Solo Acitivity

FOR

8619&   ATMunn  1.0   The Bottomless Pit

FOR

8620&   R. Lee  1.0   Im coolxa

FOR

8621*   R. Lee  3.0   Proposal spreading

FOR

8622*   R. Lee  3.0   [2]

PRESENT

8623&   Trigon  1.0   No prizeless victory auctions

FOR

8624&   Trigon  1.0   I'd like to thank the academy

FOR

8625&   Trigon  1.0   giving the gift of an amendment

PRESENT

8626*   Trigon, Jason, ais523   3.0   pledge(2)(2)


AGAINST

Suggested fix:

  * When a player states that e takes an action within a scope, then
rules to the contrary notwithstanding, that action fails if any of
the following is true:

  a) The scope specifies that it allows one or more types of
 actions (unblocked actions), and the action is not unblocked.

  b) The scope specifies that it prevents one or more types of
 actions (blocked actions), and the action is blocked.

  * If it would otherwise be unclear or ambiguous whether an action
would fail due to its scope, then its scope is the null scope.

  * The following scopes are defined:

  - Null scope: All actions are blocked.
  - Global scope: All actions are unblocked.
  (etc.)


8627&   G.  1.0   INSANITY CLAUSES

AGAINST

8628&   G.  2.0   tacking into the win

PRESENT

8629*   G., Telna, nix, [3] 3.0   Independence Day

PRESENT

Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8607-8629

[Cuddle Beam via agora-business]

I act on behalf of cuddlybanana to vote FOR on all Proposals
I vote FOR on all Proposals

On Fri, Oct 8, 2021 at 12:09 AM Trigon via agora-business <
agora-business@agoranomic.org> wrote:

> Some votes that I hadn't submitted yet:
>
> El 04/10/2021 a las 06:14, Trigon escribió:
> >> 8627&   G.  1.0   INSANITY CLAUSES
> >
> > No vote for now. I want to see what this proposal's document contains
> > before doing anything here.
>
> AGAINST. The least popular proposal thing was a fun idea, but everyone
> else ruined it. Sorry.
>
> > ID  Author(s)   AITitle
> >
> ---
> > 8630*   Cuddlebeam  3.0   A Very Merry Unvictory to Me! [1]
>
> AGAINST.
>
> --
> Trigon
>
>   ¸¸.•*¨*• Play AGORA QUEST
>
> 
> 
> 
>
> I’m always happy to become a party to contracts.
> I LOVE SPAGHETTI
> transfer Jason one coin
> nch was here
> I hereby
> don't... trust... the dragon...
> don't... trust... the dragon...
> Do not Construe Jason's message with subject TRIGON as extending this
>

BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8607-8629

[Trigon via agora-business]

Some votes that I hadn't submitted yet:

El 04/10/2021 a las 06:14, Trigon escribió:

8627&   G.  1.0   INSANITY CLAUSES


No vote for now. I want to see what this proposal's document contains 
before doing anything here.


AGAINST. The least popular proposal thing was a fun idea, but everyone 
else ruined it. Sorry.



ID  Author(s)   AITitle
---
8630*   Cuddlebeam  3.0   A Very Merry Unvictory to Me! [1]


AGAINST.

--
Trigon

 ¸¸.•*¨*• Play AGORA QUEST





I’m always happy to become a party to contracts.
I LOVE SPAGHETTI
transfer Jason one coin
nch was here
I hereby
don't... trust... the dragon...
don't... trust... the dragon...
Do not Construe Jason's message with subject TRIGON as extending this

BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8607-8629

[Falsifian via agora-business]

I vote as follows:

> ID  Author(s)   AITitle
> ---
> 8607*   Telna, ais523, Alexis   3.0   Asset Self-Ratification Fix
endorse Telna

> 8608*   Telna, Jason, G., [1]   3.0   Powering Up
AGAINST

> 8609&   Jason   1.0   Axiom of Limitations
endorse Jason

> 8610&   Jason   1.7   No Immediate Shenanigans
PRESENT

> 8611&   Jason, Trigon   1.0   Reasonably Responsive Reactivation
AGAINST. (Conflicts with 8618, which looks more important.)

> 8612&   Jason, G., Ørjan1.0   Tournament Conclusion Fixes v2
AGAINST. (It sounds like one one person could win multiple times from the same
tournament, if it's determined multiple times that they won the tournament.)

> 8613*   Jason, Trigon   3.0   The Name of the Win Cards v2
AGAINST. It's unclear whether this affects plural words.

> 8614*   Jason   3.0   Simultaneity Security
PRESENT

> 8615*   Jason   3.0   Supporter/Objector clarification v2
AGAINST. Too much going on right now.

> 8616&   nix, Telna, Trigon  1.0   Narrowing Margins
AGAINST. (This would pretty much ensure economic victories every four months,
which seems too frequent to me. My personal preference would be for victories
in general to be somewhat rarer than they are now.)

> 8617&   nix, G. 1.0   Forgiveness
PRESENT

> 8618&   nix, Jason  1.0   Solo Acitivity
endorse nix

> 8619&   ATMunn  1.0   The Bottomless Pit
AGAINST. (Unnecessary. If you want to meta-game, find a way to do it that
doesn't add rule text.)

> 8620&   R. Lee  1.0   Im coolxa
AGAINST

> 8621*   R. Lee  3.0   Proposal spreading
PRESENT

> 8622*   R. Lee  3.0   [2]
AGAINST

> 8623&   Trigon  1.0   No prizeless victory auctions
endorse Trigon

> 8624&   Trigon  1.0   I'd like to thank the academy
AGAINST, per nix. (I like the idea, though!)

> 8625&   Trigon  1.0   giving the gift of an amendment
AGAINST, per Ørjan

> 8626*   Trigon, Jason, ais523   3.0   pledge(2)(2)
AGAINST, per G.. (Comment: "Economic scope" seems to be missing an "only".)

> 8627&   G.  1.0   INSANITY CLAUSES
AGAINST

> 8628&   G.  2.0   tacking into the win
endorse G.

> 8629*   G., Telna, nix, [3] 3.0   Independence Day
AGAINST. Too much going on right now.


-- 
Falsifian

BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8607-8629

[Gaelan Steele via agora-business]

> On Oct 4, 2021, at 5:26 AM, Aspen via agora-official 
>  wrote:
> 
> ID  Author(s)   AITitle
> ---
> 8607*   Telna, ais523, Alexis   3.0   Asset Self-Ratification Fix
PRESENT. Can’t form an opinion about this without digging through the
archives to figure out what it’s trying to fix.
> 8608*   Telna, Jason, G., [1]   3.0   Powering Up
CONDITIONAL: FOR if the Rulekeepor and G. vote FOR; else AGAINST
> 8609&   Jason   1.0   Axiom of Limitations
FOR
> 8610&   Jason   1.7   No Immediate Shenanigans
PRESENT. Harmless, but why isn’t this a CANNOT?
> 8611&   Jason, Trigon   1.0   Reasonably Responsive Reactivation
FOR. I disagree with G here: people reactivating are often new-ish (they
may have shown up briefly, and then come back for a second attempt).
> 8612&   Jason, G., Ørjan1.0   Tournament Conclusion Fixes v2
FOR
> 8613*   Jason, Trigon   3.0   The Name of the Win Cards v2
PRESENT. Don’t the continuity-of-entities rules handle the name change?
> 8614*   Jason   3.0   Simultaneity Security
FOR
> 8615*   Jason   3.0   Supporter/Objector clarification v2
CONDITIONAL: FOR if Independence Day has not been and will not be adopted;
else AGAINST
> 8616&   nix, Telna, Trigon  1.0   Narrowing Margins
AGAINST. I’m worried that this doesn’t explicitly specify whether it means
whole months or fractional months. Maybe I’m forgetting some general rule
that says “math uses integers unless otherwise specified”.
> 8617&   nix, G. 1.0   Forgiveness
PRESENT: Need context.
> 8618&   nix, Jason  1.0   Solo Acitivity
FOR
> 8619&   ATMunn  1.0   The Bottomless Pit
FOR
> 8620&   R. Lee  1.0   Im coolxa
CONDITIONAL: If this proposal would pass if I voted AGAINST, FOR. Else
AGAINST. If the above is inextricable, AGAINST.
> 8621*   R. Lee  3.0   Proposal spreading
ENDORSE the Promotor
> 8622*   R. Lee  3.0   [2]

CONDITIONAL:  FOR if Independence Day has been or will be adopted, else
PRESENT. Seems like a reasonable restriction to lift, but I’m wary of
dramatically rewording the old dependent action rules without very
careful consideration, like what went into Independence Day (which
may have happened! I wasn’t there).
> 8623&   Trigon  1.0   No prizeless victory auctions
FOR
> 8624&   Trigon  1.0   I'd like to thank the academy
AGAINST. This is wonderful and wonderfully Agoran, and I’d love to
have it, but unless I’m missing something, "post a Champion's Address”
needs a requirement to be public.
> 8625&   Trigon  1.0   giving the gift of an amendment
AGAINST. Missing “by announcement"
> 8626*   Trigon, Jason, ais523   3.0   pledge(2)(2)
AGAINST. G thinks there’s a bug, and I trust em. But this does look
like a good idea.
> 8627&   G.  1.0   INSANITY CLAUSES
AGAINST. Scam risk seems way too high.
> 8628&   G.  2.0   tacking into the win
ENDORSE the Treasuror
> 8629*   G., Telna, nix, [3] 3.0   Independence Day
FOR

Additionally, I vote AGAINST 8630.


Gaelan

BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8607-8629

[ais523 via agora-business]

On Sun, 2021-10-03 at 21:26 -0700, Aspen via agora-official wrote:
> ID  Author(s)   AITitle
I vote as follows:
> 8607*   Telna, ais523, Alexis   3.0   Asset Self-Ratification Fix
FOR
> 8608*   Telna, Jason, G., [1]   3.0   Powering Up
AGAINST. The "potentially interesting" versus "might break the game"
tradeoff here isn't high enough, and this is the sort of rule which
would normally only be created (and historically normally only has been
created) as a scam reward.
> 8609&   Jason   1.0   Axiom of Limitations
FOR
> 8610&   Jason   1.7   No Immediate Shenanigans
FOR
> 8611&   Jason, Trigon   1.0   Reasonably Responsive Reactivation
PRESENT. I'm torn over this one - some players never do anything other
than reactivate themselves when reminded, and often don't know the
right syntax for doing that, but in a sense, are these players really
active at all?
> 8612&   Jason, G., Ørjan1.0   Tournament Conclusion Fixes v2
PRESENT. The "each time" wording seems a little sloppy/imprecise to me
(might it cause earlier winners to win a second time when later winners
are selected)?
> 8613*   Jason, Trigon   3.0   The Name of the Win Cards v2
AGAINST (just a personal preference vote, I don't think this breaks
anything, and think new names might be helpful to avoid the "V" clash,
but don't like the choice of names here)
> 8614*   Jason   3.0   Simultaneity Security
FOR
> 8615*   Jason   3.0   Supporter/Objector clarification v2
FOR
> 8616&   nix, Telna, Trigon  1.0   Narrowing Margins
AGAINST; Victory Product wins have a tendency to catch people off guard
as it is, and this seems like it'd just increase that.
> 8617&   nix, G. 1.0   Forgiveness
AGAINST. We used to keep a list of Fugitives around for years, despite
it not doing anything (nothing Blot-like existed at the time).
Eventually, when we re-implemented a Blot-like system, we converted the
list of Fugitives to Blots, again not expecting it to do anything. Some
time later, one of the players in question re-registered and was able
to expunge it (Blot decay had made it trivial to do so by that point).

I think this is fun gameplay, and an improvement over not having it.
> 8618&   nix, Jason  1.0   Solo Acitivity
FOR
> 8619&   ATMunn  1.0   The Bottomless Pit
AGAINST
> 8620&   R. Lee  1.0   Im coolxa
Conditional vote: If the outcome of this referendum would be ADOPTED
regardless of my vote on it, then I vote FOR; otherwise, I vote
AGAINST.
> 8621*   R. Lee  3.0   Proposal spreading
PRESENT. I'm neutral on the mechanic, and although I'm not a huge fan
of the wording, it isn't actually broken (although it does seem weird
to create a Cretans situation).
> 8622*   R. Lee  3.0   [2]
AGAINST
> 8623&   Trigon  1.0   No prizeless victory auctions
FOR
> 8624&   Trigon  1.0   I'd like to thank the academy
FOR, although I'd prefer to focus more heavily on the "win recap"
section of this. (Records of how wins were achieved can historically
become quite hard to come by.) This also doesn't work all that well in
situations where everyone ends up winning simultaneously, but it's
mostly based on SHOULDs anyway.
> 8625&   Trigon  1.0   giving the gift of an amendment
AGAINST, broken (no mechanism).
> 8626*   Trigon, Jason, ais523   3.0   pledge(2)(2)
AGAINST; I think this is one of those occasions where the mechanic
isn't worth the extra complexity it's adding to the ruleset.
> 8627&   G.  1.0   INSANITY CLAUSES
AGAINST. Rule 105 only locks the timing of the rule change itself, not
of the voting process; so collusion between G. and the Assessor could
make it trivially possible for them to gain a power-1 dictatorship for
themselves, by delaying the assessment of the proposal for 4 days after
voting ends.
> 8628&   G.  2.0   tacking into the win
PRESENT
> 8629*   G., Telna, nix, [3] 3.0   Independence Day
A first note: this breaks in a minor (but subsequently fixable) way if
this is enacted before 8622 is. I can't see any reason for the Assessor
to enact in that order, though, not even as part of a scam.

After thoroughly reading it, I don't think it breaks anything (although
as usual I may have missed something). In particular, I believe that
the effect on dependent actions that started before the change
(something that people have questioned recently) is that the intents
become invalid and need to be repeated, which is a little annoying but
doesn't break anything. As such, I vote FOR on this - this is an AI 3
proposal, so it may need help to pass.

One other thing to note is that golfed rule text can be quite hard to
read and understand, which might not be great for easing new players
into the game; but the existing rules aren't all that much better in
that regard.

On Mon, 2021-10-04 at 00:31 

BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8607-8629

[nix via agora-business]

On 10/3/21 11:26 PM, Aspen via agora-official wrote:
> ID  Author(s)   AITitle
> ---
> 8607*   Telna, ais523, Alexis   3.0   Asset Self-Ratification Fix
FOR
> 8608*   Telna, Jason, G., [1]   3.0   Powering Up
Endorse ais523
> 8609&   Jason   1.0   Axiom of Limitations
FOR
> 8610&   Jason   1.7   No Immediate Shenanigans
FOR, though a nicer solution might be a time limit
> 8611&   Jason, Trigon   1.0   Reasonably Responsive Reactivation
AGAINST; Interferes with a more important fix to this rule in 8618.
> 8612&   Jason, G., Ørjan1.0   Tournament Conclusion Fixes v2
FOR, tho we now have to be mindful that winners must be declared before
the tournament is over (which seems a bit unintuitive)
> 8613*   Jason, Trigon   3.0   The Name of the Win Cards v2
FOR
> 8614*   Jason   3.0   Simultaneity Security
PRESENT
> 8615*   Jason   3.0   Supporter/Objector clarification v2
AGAINST because Jason is currently attempting to scam objections,
possibly through clever proposal resolution.
> 8616&   nix, Telna, Trigon  1.0   Narrowing Margins
FOR
> 8617&   nix, G. 1.0   Forgiveness
FOR
> 8618&   nix, Jason  1.0   Solo Acitivity
FOR
> 8619&   ATMunn  1.0   The Bottomless Pit
PRESENT
> 8620&   R. Lee  1.0   Im coolxa
I vote for the adoption of this by voting PRESENT.
> 8621*   R. Lee  3.0   Proposal spreading
FOR, sure why not
> 8622*   R. Lee  3.0   [2]
AGAINST for the same reasons as 8615
> 8623&   Trigon  1.0   No prizeless victory auctions
FOR; nice clear fix
> 8624&   Trigon  1.0   I'd like to thank the academy
AGAINST; This is really cool but I didn't read it previously. I think it
would actually be better as a single patent title like "Assistant" or
something. It'd be fun to rack up assists. The language of "awardable
to" also makes it seem like you could challenge in a CFJ whether the
title was successfully awarded if the conditions weren't met (or were
ambiguous).
> 8625&   Trigon  1.0   giving the gift of an amendment
FOR
> 8626*   Trigon, Jason, ais523   3.0   pledge(2)(2)
Endorse G if G and Aspen's votes are equivalent, else AGAINST; I don't
have any substantial critique right now but I'm hesitant to apply such a
large change on top of all these other changes.
> 8627&   G.  1.0   INSANITY CLAUSES
AGAINST
> 8628&   G.  2.0   tacking into the win
FOR; cute keyword
> 8629*   G., Telna, nix, [3] 3.0   Independence Day
FOR

--
nix
Herald

BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8607-8629

[Kerim Aydin via agora-business]

On 10/4/2021 11:25 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>> 8626*   Trigon, Jason, ais523   3.0   pledge(2)(2)
> PRESENT.  Need to read this through a few times.


I change my vote on 8626 to AGAINST.

The opening paragraph seems very problematic.

>   Players CAN take actions in a specific scope. When a player does
>   so, e must either clearly and unambiguously describe a list of
>   allowed actions or a list of prohibited actions for that scope, or
>   e must refer to a source which clearly and unambiguously defines
>   such a list. E must also clearly and unambiguously specify when e
>   begins acting in that scope and when e finishes acting in that
>   scope.

First, the proposal nowhere contains the words "public" "announce" etc.  I
*think* there's a precedent on the books that if something needs be
specified, described etc. but "public" isn't mentioned, that it can be
specified anywhere (private, DIS).

Second, nothing's limiting the scope to a single message.  In fact, it's
pretty clear that specifying start/end of scope are separate, and nothing
limiting the scope of the scope.  That means all officers pretty much have
to track everyones' scopes, which seems like a nightmare.  (also think I
see a paradox or two in there - a lesser issue is limiting the nesting of
scopes).

Finally, it's a high-level open-ended CAN, where it probably should be
MAY.  The way we use CAN without method, this may enable all sorts of
stuff being done, especially coupled with:

>  * Global scope: all actions are allowed in this scope.

It means literally: all actions.  CAN be taken.  And possibly, not needing
them to be done in public.  Yikes.

-G.

[ps. I think this is a great concept overall and would commit to having a
good look at a future proto].

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8607-8629

[Kerim Aydin via agora-business]

On 10/4/2021 4:50 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion wrote:
> On 10/4/21 14:25, Kerim Aydin via agora-business wrote:
>>> 8612&   Jason, G., Ørjan1.0   Tournament Conclusion Fixes v2
>> AGAINST.  It's a reasonable limit, and this tournament was abandoned as
>> evidenced by the complete lack of finale activity - no win is deserved
>> here (if anyone had performed, I'd have voted for it, but the contestants
>> literally ignored it all).
>>
> 
> The version up for vote doesn't include the extension, only the changes
> that ensure tournaments always actually conclude.
> 

Sorry, I misparsed what the 'except the 2 July tournament' clause was doing.

I change my vote on 8612 to FOR.

-G.

BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8607-8629

[Jason Cobb via agora-business]

On 10/4/21 00:26, Aspen via agora-official wrote:
> 8607*   Telna, ais523, Alexis   3.0   Asset Self-Ratification Fix

FOR


> 8608*   Telna, Jason, G., [1]   3.0   Powering Up

FOR, of course


> 8609&   Jason   1.0   Axiom of Limitations

FOR


> 8610&   Jason   1.7   No Immediate Shenanigans

FOR


> 8611&   Jason, Trigon   1.0   Reasonably Responsive Reactivation

AGAINST, because conflict with P8618


> 8612&   Jason, G., Ørjan1.0   Tournament Conclusion Fixes v2

FOR


> 8613*   Jason, Trigon   3.0   The Name of the Win Cards v2

FOR


> 8614*   Jason   3.0   Simultaneity Security

FOR


> 8615*   Jason   3.0   Supporter/Objector clarification v2

FOR


> 8616&   nix, Telna, Trigon  1.0   Narrowing Margins

AGAINST


> 8617&   nix, G. 1.0   Forgiveness

FOR


> 8618&   nix, Jason  1.0   Solo Acitivity

FOR


> 8619&   ATMunn  1.0   The Bottomless Pit

FOR


> 8620&   R. Lee  1.0   Im coolxa

AGAINST


> 8621*   R. Lee  3.0   Proposal spreading

ENDORSE Aspen, or AGAINST if that is inextricable


> 8622*   R. Lee  3.0   [2]

AGAINST


> 8623&   Trigon  1.0   No prizeless victory auctions

FOR


> 8624&   Trigon  1.0   I'd like to thank the academy

ENDORSE nix


> 8625&   Trigon  1.0   giving the gift of an amendment

AGAINST because missing by announcement


> 8626*   Trigon, Jason, ais523   3.0   pledge(2)(2)

ENDORSE G.


> 8627&   G.  1.0   INSANITY CLAUSES

AGAINST. I may change my vote if the clauses are published during the
voting period.


> 8628&   G.  2.0   tacking into the win

FOR


> 8629*   G., Telna, nix, [3] 3.0   Independence Day

ENDORSE G.

-- 
Jason Cobb

Assessor, Rulekeepor, S​tonemason

BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8607-8629

[Kerim Aydin via agora-business]

On 10/4/2021 11:25 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> 
> I vote:
> 
>> 8607*   Telna, ais523, Alexis   3.0   Asset Self-Ratification Fix
>> 8608*   Telna, Jason, G., [1]   3.0   Powering Up
>> 8609&   Jason   1.0   Axiom of Limitations
>> 8610&   Jason   1.7   No Immediate ShenanigansFOR each of 
>> the above 4.


The above mangled quote may have been confusing: I vote FOR 8607, 8608,
8609, and 8610.  (may fail if done already).  -G.

BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8607-8629

[Kerim Aydin via agora-business]

I vote:

> 8607*   Telna, ais523, Alexis   3.0   Asset Self-Ratification Fix
> 8608*   Telna, Jason, G., [1]   3.0   Powering Up
> 8609&   Jason   1.0   Axiom of Limitations
> 8610&   Jason   1.7   No Immediate ShenanigansFOR each of the 
> above 4.

> 8611&   Jason, Trigon   1.0   Reasonably Responsive Reactivation
AGAINST.  The looseness of registration makes it a target for CFJs, as
well as being good for first-time registrants.  I don't think we want to
extend that looseness and the CFJs it engenders to activity.

> 8612&   Jason, G., Ørjan1.0   Tournament Conclusion Fixes v2
AGAINST.  It's a reasonable limit, and this tournament was abandoned as
evidenced by the complete lack of finale activity - no win is deserved
here (if anyone had performed, I'd have voted for it, but the contestants
literally ignored it all).

> 8613*   Jason, Trigon   3.0   The Name of the Win Cards v2
> 8614*   Jason   3.0   Simultaneity Security
> 8615*   Jason   3.0   Supporter/Objector clarification v2
FOR each of the above 3.

> 8616&   nix, Telna, Trigon  1.0   Narrowing Margins
AGAINST.  I like the current play.

> 8617&   nix, G. 1.0   Forgiveness
> 8618&   nix, Jason  1.0   Solo Acitivity
FOR each of the above 2.

> 8619&   ATMunn  1.0   The Bottomless Pit
AGAINST.  Coins can already be destroyed, and having a legal rule say
"these exist but no one is tracking them" is directly against the records
self-ratifying and seems like a mess to clean up, potentially.

> 8620&   R. Lee  1.0   Im coolxa
AGAINST.  A proposal win is one thing - a free anytime win under the
control of several players is too much.

> 8621*   R. Lee  3.0   Proposal spreading
Endorse the Promotor.

> 8622*   R. Lee  3.0   [2]
AGAINST.  For game balance.

> 8623&   Trigon  1.0   No prizeless victory auctions
FOR.

> 8624&   Trigon  1.0   I'd like to thank the academy
Endorse Herald.

> 8625&   Trigon  1.0   giving the gift of an amendment
AGAINST (broken)

> 8626*   Trigon, Jason, ais523   3.0   pledge(2)(2)
PRESENT.  Need to read this through a few times.

> 8627&   G.  1.0   INSANITY CLAUSES
FOR.

> 8628&   G.  2.0   tacking into the win
FOR

> 8629*   G., Telna, nix, [3] 3.0   Independence Day
endorse ais523.

-G.

BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8607-8629

[ATMunn via agora-business]

I vote as follows:



ID  Author(s)   AITitle
---
8607*   Telna, ais523, Alexis   3.0   Asset Self-Ratification Fix

FOR

8608*   Telna, Jason, G., [1]   3.0   Powering Up

FOR

8609&   Jason   1.0   Axiom of Limitations

FOR

8610&   Jason   1.7   No Immediate Shenanigans

ENDORSE Jason

8611&   Jason, Trigon   1.0   Reasonably Responsive Reactivation

FOR

8612&   Jason, G., Ørjan1.0   Tournament Conclusion Fixes v2

FOR

8613*   Jason, Trigon   3.0   The Name of the Win Cards v2

FOR

8614*   Jason   3.0   Simultaneity Security

FOR

8615*   Jason   3.0   Supporter/Objector clarification v2

FOR

8616&   nix, Telna, Trigon  1.0   Narrowing Margins

PRESENT - I'm a little concerned about the sentence "If it would be
less, the Victory Threshold is instead 1." If it would be less than
what?

8617&   nix, G. 1.0   Forgiveness

FOR

8618&   nix, Jason  1.0   Solo Acitivity

FOR

8619&   ATMunn  1.0   The Bottomless Pit

PRESENT - as pointed out by others, the Infinite Nomic round this was
intended for has ended. I'm still fine if it passes though; we might be
able to use it for something else.

8620&   R. Lee  1.0   Im coolxa

AGAINST - I'm not against the idea of winning by proposal, but I don't
like the idea that it'll leave a useless rule left over after everyone
claims their wins.

8621*   R. Lee  3.0   Proposal spreading

ENDORSE Aspen

8622*   R. Lee  3.0   [2]

PRESENT

8623&   Trigon  1.0   No prizeless victory auctions

FOR

8624&   Trigon  1.0   I'd like to thank the academy

FOR, this is a really fun idea

8625&   Trigon  1.0   giving the gift of an amendment

AGAINST, as Ørjan pointed out, this proposal is broken.

8626*   Trigon, Jason, ais523   3.0   pledge(2)(2)

PRESENT. I really like the idea, but since it's so long, it could have
bugs. I don't really have the time or the eye to sort through it.

8627&   G.  1.0   INSANITY CLAUSES

FOR

8628&   G.  2.0   tacking into the win

FOR

8629*   G., Telna, nix, [3] 3.0   Independence Day

FOR





--
ATMunn
friendly neighborhood notary :)

BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8607-8629

[Trigon via agora-business]

I vote as follows:

El 04/10/2021 a las 04:26, Aspen via agora-official escribió:

ID  Author(s)   AITitle
---
8607*   Telna, ais523, Alexis   3.0   Asset Self-Ratification Fix


FOR


8608*   Telna, Jason, G., [1]   3.0   Powering Up


FOR


8609&   Jason   1.0   Axiom of Limitations


FOR


8610&   Jason   1.7   No Immediate Shenanigans


FOR


8611&   Jason, Trigon   1.0   Reasonably Responsive Reactivation


FOR


8612&   Jason, G., Ørjan1.0   Tournament Conclusion Fixes v2


FOR


8613*   Jason, Trigon   3.0   The Name of the Win Cards v2


FOR


8614*   Jason   3.0   Simultaneity Security


ENDORSE G.


8615*   Jason   3.0   Supporter/Objector clarification v2


PRESENT


8616&   nix, Telna, Trigon  1.0   Narrowing Margins


FOR


8617&   nix, G. 1.0   Forgiveness


FOR, why not?


8618&   nix, Jason  1.0   Solo Acitivity


FOR


8619&   ATMunn  1.0   The Bottomless Pit


AGAINST for now. The Infinite Nomic Cycle this was meant to affect has 
ended now, so I'm not going to vote anything else until new plans surface.



8620&   R. Lee  1.0   Im coolxa


AGAINST. I'm only really in favor of the "vote for a winner" proposals 
if they're done cleverly.



8621*   R. Lee  3.0   Proposal spreading


PRESENT, I guess. I don't know what this one's supposed to do.


8622*   R. Lee  3.0   [2]


AGAINST. No. Bad.


8623&   Trigon  1.0   No prizeless victory auctions


FOR


8624&   Trigon  1.0   I'd like to thank the academy


FOR


8625&   Trigon  1.0   giving the gift of an amendment


AGAINST. This one's broken.


8626*   Trigon, Jason, ais523   3.0   pledge(2)(2)


FOR, but please don't endorse me. I don't know if this is remotely safe.


8627&   G.  1.0   INSANITY CLAUSES


No vote for now. I want to see what this proposal's document contains 
before doing anything here.



8628&   G.  2.0   tacking into the win


FOR


8629*   G., Telna, nix, [3] 3.0   Independence Day


FOR

--
Trigon

 ¸¸.•*¨*• Play AGORA QUEST





I’m always happy to become a party to contracts.
I LOVE SPAGHETTI
transfer Jason one coin
nch was here
I hereby
don't... trust... the dragon...
don't... trust... the dragon...
Do not Construe Jason's message with subject TRIGON as extending this