BUS: A Promise to Quine
I grant the library the following promise, entitled “A Promise to
Quine”:
{
Cashing conditions: the bearer has granted the Library – in
the same message e cashes this promise, but before so – a
promise with the same text and title as this promise.
I grant the library a promise with the same text as this promise.
I take the bearer's promise from the library and cash it.
}
--
juan
@Treasuror, @Promotor Re: BUS: [Proposa] Speak Like People
On 3/23/22 11:20, nix via agora-business wrote: > Title: Speak Like People > AI: 3 > Author: nix > Co-Author(s): G., secretsnail I pay 1 pendant to pend this proposal. -- nix Herald
BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8655-8656
On Sun, 2022-03-20 at 03:03 -0700, Aspen via agora-official wrote: > ID Author(s) AITitle > -- I vote as follows: > 8655& Jason, nix 1.0 Restricted Petitions FOR > 8656& Jason 1.0 Mathematical de-notation AGAINST -- ais523
[CFJ 3951 judgement, @Arbitor] Re: BUS: Black List Clean-Up
On Sun, 2022-03-20 at 18:08 -0500, secretsnail9 via agora-official wrote: > > I CFJ, barring Jason: secretsnail transferred 5000 coins and 6 wincards in > > the above message. > > I number the above CFJ 3951 and assign it to ais523. This CFJ is, in effect, a CFJ about what "table an intent" means – it comes down to establishing what specific actions rule 1728 is permitting. The two main potential readings appear to be as follows: a) To "table an intent" is a method of creating a "tabled intent", which is an Agoran-legal construct (and a specific type of intent). This is an action comparable to creating a proposal or initiating a CFJ; it causes a new tabled intent to be created, and specifies its properties. b) To "table an intent" is an action that is applied to an existing intent, causing it to become "tabled". Intents are created by some other mechanism (presumably because they aren't Agoran-legal constructs, and thus can be recognised by Agora as a consequence of rule 2125; if rule 1728 isn't providing a mechanism of creating intents, then creating them is unregulated). The relevant meaning of "table" as a verb, in British English, is along the lines of "to propose, or put on the agenda". (American English has a similar verb, but with the opposite meaning, which is probably irrelevant here as it makes no sense in context.) This is compatible with both meanings: "propose" fits reading a), and "put on the agenda" fits reading b). It does seem to fit reading b) a little better, though. We can split reading b) into two sub-readings: b1) When discussing the tabling of an intent, the rules are talking about the moment from which it went from being untabled to being tabled. Thus, attempting to table an intent twice has no real effect – the intent was already tabled, so when a rule looks at the circumstances surrounding its tabling, it sees only the first instance. b2) Because "tabling an intent" is an action, rules that check for tablings of intents check for times at which the action was performed; an intent can be tabled twice, and when checking for the circumstances surrounding the tabling of an intent, the rules therefore see every instance of tabling of the intent simultaneously. However, there are a number of points in the rules for which reading b2) is incompatible with the reading of the rule: * Rule 1728 requires, when tabling an intent, that the intent's action and method are specified, and permits specifying conditions. In reading a), this serves as a method to specify the properties of the new tabled intent. In reading b), this would only serve as a method of *identifying* the intent (or of confirming the relevant properties, in much the same way that the Promotor has to specify the author of a proposal when distributing it). However, the wording of the rule strongly implies that the conditions are something that are specified by the tabler, rather than something pre-existing in the intent. Meanwhile, rule 2124 simply just refers to "[the intent's] conditions", rather than the conditions surrounding a particular tabling. This points strongly towards reading a), and favours reading b1) over b2). * Rule 1728 talks about "the person who tabled [an intent]", implying that only one person can table any given intent. It's just about possible that the text in question applies only to intents that were tabled by exactly 1 person, with the rest of the rule nonetheless applying also to intents that were tabled by multiple people, but this is not a natural reading of the rule. * Rule 1728 defines "intend" as a synonym for "table an intent". Even if "table" can be interpreted as a way to change the state of an existing intent, "intend" can't be – it's incompatible with the language of the rule for someone to have an intent to do something, someone (else?) to perform the action of intending to do it, and then for the original intent to still remain but to have changed state somehow. This again strongly points towards reading a). Again, I can just about see reading b1) applying here (the idea would be that the intent existed all along, and the "tabling" action is announcing the fact so that other players can take notice of it), but reading b2) doesn't make sense. Under reading b) here, the tabling action would also be inconsistent with other actions by announcement, in that the action has to be read as a statement of fact rather than as a speech act (i.e. "I intend to do X" would be read as a report that the intent exists). As such, the wording of the rule leans towards reading a), although reading b1) may not be entirely inconsistent with it. This does definitely mean, though, that either reading a) is the only viable reading, or else that we need a rule 217 tiebreak between the readings. Looking at the rule 217 tests: Game custom: It is definitely game custom that tabling an intent creates a new
BUS: [Proposal] The End of Sets
I submit the following proposal. Please give feedback, it's a bit
important this works correctly.
The basic idea is that the next time someone wins Sets, all of the
references to sets are cleanly removed from the rules (except the
devices' references because lol).
All mechanics, except blots, work post-removal. Blots will have no
removal method. I chose to not solve that because there's several ways
people may prefer and that can be its own proposal. Proposals will be
entirely free and just submitted without a pending system.
Another advantage here is that it's pretty easy to work with this system
while writing proposals. So this doesn't rely on a specific version of
the rules or anything that might break before it's triggered.
I plan to pend this tomorrow if no major issues are found.
{
Title: The End of Sets
AI: 3
Author: nix
Amend R2621 "VP Wins" by replacing:
Then, the winds change, following which each active player gains 1
card of each type and eir grant (if any).
with:
Then, the winds die down.
Add a new P=3 rule titled "The Winds Die Down" with the following text:
When the winds die down repeal R2620 "Cards & Sets", R2623 "Popular
Proposal Proposer Privilege", R2629 "Victory Auctions", R2624 "Card
Administration", R2622 "Pending Proposals", R2651 "Proposal
Recycling", and R2653 "Buying Strength".
When the winds die down, remove all text inbetween ~~ (including the
~s) from all rules.
When the winds die down, repeal this rule.
Amend R2478 "Vigilante Justice" to replace:
The player who initiated the most Finger Pointings that resulted in
a Warning, Indictment, or Cold Hand of Justice in the previous
Agoran Week CAN once grant emself a Justice Card by announcement.
with:
~The player who initiated the most Finger Pointings that resulted in
a Warning, Indictment, or Cold Hand of Justice in the previous
Agoran Week CAN once grant emself a Justice Card by announcement.~
Amend R2499 "Welcome Packages" to replace:
* 10 boatloads of coins, AND
* 1 of each type of card defined in the rules.
with:
* 10 boatloads of coins~, AND~
~* 1 of each type of card defined in the rules.~
Amend 2645 "The Stones" by replacing:
- Alchemy Stone (weekly, 70%): Destroy four cards you own. If four
cards were destroyed this way, gain 7 products of your choice.
with:
~- Alchemy Stone (weekly, 70%): Destroy four cards you own. If four
cards were destroyed this way, gain 7 products of your choice.~
Amend R1607 "Distribution" by replacing:
The Promotor CAN distribute a proposal which is in the Proposal Pool
at any time, but SHALL NOT do so unless it is pending.
In a given Agoran week, the Promotor SHALL distribute each proposal
that was in the Proposal Pool and pending at the beginning of that
week, except for those excepted from automatic distribution by other
rules, or those that are otherwise removed from the Pool. If there
are ten or more pending undistributed proposals in the proposal
pool, the promotor MAY refrain from distributing the most recently
added 5 proposals if e distributes each other pending proposal in
that Agoran week.
If a proposal has been in the proposal pool for more than 7 days and
is not pending, the Promotor CAN and SHOULD remove it from the Pool
by announcement.
with:
The Promotor CAN distribute a proposal which is in the Proposal Pool
at any time~, but SHALL NOT do so unless it is pending~.
In a given Agoran week, the Promotor SHALL distribute each proposal
that was in the Proposal Pool ~and pending~ at the beginning of that
week, except for those excepted from automatic distribution by other
rules, or those that are otherwise removed from the Pool. If there
are ten or more ~pending~ undistributed proposals in the proposal
pool, the promotor MAY refrain from distributing the most recently
added 5 proposals if e distributes each other ~pending~ proposal in
that Agoran week.
If a proposal has been in the proposal pool for more than 7 days
~and is not pending~, the Promotor CAN and SHOULD remove it from the
Pool by announcement.
Amend R2481 "Festival Restrictions" by replacing:
4. Non-Festive players CANNOT cause proposals to become Pended.
with:
~4. Non-Festive players CANNOT cause proposals to become Pended.~
Amend R2555 "Blots" by replacing:
Any player CAN expunge a blot from a specified person (or emself if
no one is specified) by paying a fee of one Blot-B-Gone.
Any player CAN levy a fine of one blot on a specified person by
paying a fee of two Blot-B-Gones, provided the specified person has
not already gained two blots or more in the current week.
with:
~Any player CAN expunge a blot from a specified person (or emself if
no one is specified) by
@Promotor Re: BUS: [Proposal] Stamps
On 3/24/22 13:46, nix via agora-business wrote:
> Title: Stamps
> AI: 1
> Author: nix
I withdraw this proposal. I submit and pend with a pendant the following
proposal:
{
Title: Stamps v1.1
AI: 1
Author: nix
Co-Author: G.
Enact a new Power=1 rule titled "Stamps" with the following text:
Stamps are a category of asset ownable by players and Agora. The
Collector is an office. The Collector tracks Stamps in eir weekly
report.
For each person there is a corresponsing type of stamp.
Any player CAN pay 3 boatloads of coins to grant emself 1 Stamp of
eir own type.
Any player CAN pay 1 Stamp of eir own type to grant emself 1
boatload of coins.
Any player CAN pay 1 Stamp of another person's type to grant emself
2 boatloads of coins.
Any player CAN win by paying N Stamps, where N is the current number
of active players and each specified Stamp is of a different type.
nix becomes the Collector
}
--
nix
Herald
BUS: [Obstructive Pooling] Deposit
I transfer all of my win cards and winsomes to ais523 for the sole purpose of depositing them into Obstructive Pooling. -- Jason Cobb Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
Re: BUS: A non-obfuscated intent
On 3/24/22 15:55, secretsnail9 via agora-business wrote: > On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 2:51 PM Jason Cobb via agora-business < > agora-business@agoranomic.org> wrote: > >> I object. >> > :( > > I intend, without objection, to transfer 1 coin from the Lost and Found > department to myself. I beg of you > -- > secretsnail Also, the scam here: the intent can be resolved multiple times. -- Jason Cobb Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
BUS: [Proposal] Stamps
I was going to wait on this, but since glitter is already gone I'll go
for it. I submit the following proposal:
{
Title: Stamps
AI: 1
Author: nix
Enact a new Power=1 rule titled "Stamps" with the following text:
Stamps are a category of asset ownable by players and Agora. The
Collector is an office. The Collector tracks Stamps in eir weekly
report.
For each person there is a type of stamp named X Stamp, where X is
that person's name.
Any player CAN pay 3 boatloads of coins to grant emself 1 X Stamp,
where X is emself.
Any player CAN pay 1 X Stamp, where X is emself, to grant emself 1
boatload of coins.
Any player CAN pay 1 X Stamp, where x is not emself, to grant emself
2 boatloads of coins.
Any player CAN win by paying N Stamps, where N is the current number
of registered players and each specified Stamp is a different type.
nix becomes the Collector.
}
--
nix
Herald
BUS: The Revenge of Quine
Time to complicate things.
I grant the Library the following promise, entitled “The Revenge of
Quine #0”:
{
Cashing conditions: the bearer has granted the Library – in the
same message e cashes this promise, but before so – a promise
with the same text as this promise.
I grant the library a promise with the same text as this
promise, but whose title is this promise's title with each
occurence of a number replaced by its natural successor.
I take the bearer's promise from the library and cash it.
}
I take the above promise from the Library and cash it.
I CFJ on: "There is a number N for which the Library owns a promise with
title 'The Revenge of Quine #N'".
--
juan
@Promotor Re: @Promotor Re: BUS: [Proposal] Stamps
On 3/24/22 14:39, nix via agora-business wrote:
> I withdraw this proposal. I submit and pend with a pendant the following
> proposal:
>
> {
> Title: Stamps v1.1
> AI: 1
> Author: nix
> Co-Author: G.
>
> Enact a new Power=1 rule titled "Stamps" with the following text:
>
> Stamps are a category of asset ownable by players and Agora. The
> Collector is an office. The Collector tracks Stamps in eir weekly
> report.
>
> For each person there is a corresponsing type of stamp.
>
> Any player CAN pay 3 boatloads of coins to grant emself 1 Stamp of
> eir own type.
>
> Any player CAN pay 1 Stamp of eir own type to grant emself 1
> boatload of coins.
>
> Any player CAN pay 1 Stamp of another person's type to grant emself
> 2 boatloads of coins.
>
> Any player CAN win by paying N Stamps, where N is the current number
> of active players and each specified Stamp is of a different type.
>
> nix becomes the Collector
> }
Darn, there's a typo and I forgot to add some co-authors. I withdraw the
above and submit and pend (with a pendant) the following:
{
Title: Stamps v1.2
AI: 1
Author: nix
Co-Author: G., Jason, Trigon
Enact a new Power=1 rule titled "Stamps" with the following text:
Stamps are a category of asset ownable by players and Agora. The
Collector is an office. The Collector tracks Stamps in eir weekly
report.
For each person there is a corresponding type of stamp.
Any player CAN pay 3 boatloads of coins to grant emself 1 Stamp of
eir own type.
Any player CAN pay 1 Stamp of eir own type to grant emself 1
boatload of coins.
Any player CAN pay 1 Stamp of another person's type to grant emself
2 boatloads of coins.
Any player CAN win by paying N Stamps, where N is the current
number of active players and each specified Stamp is of a different
type.
nix becomes the Collector
}
--
nix
Herald
[CFJ] Re: BUS: A Promise to Quine
Time to break things I guess.
I grant the library the following promise, entitled “A Promise to
Quine”:
{
Cashing conditions: the bearer has granted the Library – in
the same message e cashes this promise, but before so – a
promise with the same text and title as this promise.
I grant the library a promise with the same text as this promise.
I take the bearer's promise from the library and cash it.
}
On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 11:35 AM juan via agora-business <
agora-business@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> I grant the library the following promise, entitled “A Promise to
> Quine”:
>
> {
> Cashing conditions: the bearer has granted the Library – in
> the same message e cashes this promise, but before so – a
> promise with the same text and title as this promise.
>
> I grant the library a promise with the same text as this promise.
>
> I take the bearer's promise from the library and cash it.
> }
>
I take the above promise (the one with juan as a creator) from the library
and cash it.
CFJ: The library owns a promise with the title " A Promise to Quine" and
with secretsnail as its creator.
--
secretsnail
BUS: A non-obfuscated intent
I intend to, without objection, transfer a Win Card from the Lost and Found department to myself. Just one would be nice... -- secretsnail
@Promotor Re: BUS: [Proposal] The End of Sets
On 3/24/22 11:21, nix via agora-business wrote:
> Title: The End of Sets
> AI: 3
> Author: nix
I withdraw this proposal.
I submit and pend with a pendant the following proposal:
{
Changes:
* Rule changes are properly ordered (thanks Jason)
* Specified text to remove is more clear (thanks G.)
* Added a clause to expunge blot by announcement that only works after
the wind dies down (thanks Jason)
* Better clean-up of promotor things (thanks secretsnail)
Title: The End of Sets
AI: 3
Author: nix
Co-Authors: G., Jason, secretsnail
Amend R2621 "VP Wins" by replacing:
Then, the winds change, following which each active player gains 1
card of each type and eir grant (if any).
with:
Then, the winds die down.
Add a new Power=3 rule titled "The Winds Die Down" with the following
text:
When the wind dies down, the following happen in order:
* The following rules are repealed in order: R2620 "Cards & Sets",
R2623 "Popular Proposal Proposer Privilege", R2629 "Victory
Auctions", R2624 "Card Administration", R2622 "Pending Proposals",
R2651 "Proposal Recycling", and R2653 "Buying Strength".
* All rules including the text "~>" and "<~" are amended in
ascending numerical order by removing all text between and
including each "~>" and the first following "<~".
* This rule is repealed.
Amend R2478 "Vigilante Justice" to replace:
The player who initiated the most Finger Pointings that resulted in
a Warning, Indictment, or Cold Hand of Justice in the previous
Agoran Week CAN once grant emself a Justice Card by announcement.
with:
~>The player who initiated the most Finger Pointings that resulted
in a Warning, Indictment, or Cold Hand of Justice in the previous
Agoran Week CAN once grant emself a Justice Card by announcement.<~
Amend R2499 "Welcome Packages" to replace:
* 10 boatloads of coins, AND
* 1 of each type of card defined in the rules.
with:
* 10 boatloads of coins~>, AND<~
~>* 1 of each type of card defined in the rules.<~
Amend 2645 "The Stones" by replacing:
- Alchemy Stone (weekly, 70%): Destroy four cards you own. If four
cards were destroyed this way, gain 7 products of your choice.
with:
~>- Alchemy Stone (weekly, 70%): Destroy four cards you own. If four
cards were destroyed this way, gain 7 products of your choice.<~
Amend R1607 "Distribution" by replacing:
The Promotor CAN distribute a proposal which is in the Proposal Pool
at any time, but SHALL NOT do so unless it is pending.
In a given Agoran week, the Promotor SHALL distribute each proposal
that was in the Proposal Pool and pending at the beginning of that
week, except for those excepted from automatic distribution by other
rules, or those that are otherwise removed from the Pool. If there
are ten or more pending undistributed proposals in the proposal
pool, the promotor MAY refrain from distributing the most recently
added 5 proposals if e distributes each other pending proposal in
that Agoran week.
If a proposal has been in the proposal pool for more than 7 days and
is not pending, the Promotor CAN and SHOULD remove it from the Pool
by announcement.
with:
The Promotor CAN distribute a proposal which is in the Proposal Pool
at any time~>, but SHALL NOT do so unless it is pending<~.
In a given Agoran week, the Promotor SHALL distribute each proposal
that was in the Proposal Pool ~>and pending<~ at the beginning of
that week, except for those excepted from automatic distribution by
other rules, or those that are otherwise removed from the Pool. If
there are ten or more ~>pending<~ undistributed proposals in the
proposal pool, the promotor MAY refrain from distributing the most
recently added 5 proposals if e distributes each other ~>pending<~
proposal in that Agoran week.
~>If a proposal has been in the proposal pool for more than 7 days
and is not pending, the Promotor CAN and SHOULD remove it from the
Pool by announcement.<~
Amend R2481 "Festival Restrictions" by replacing:
4. Non-Festive players CANNOT cause proposals to become Pended.
with:
~>4. Non-Festive players CANNOT cause proposals to become Pended.<~
Amend R2555 "Blots" by replacing:
Any player CAN expunge a blot from a specified person (or emself if
no one is specified) by paying a fee of one Blot-B-Gone.
Any player CAN levy a fine of one blot on a specified person by
paying a fee of two Blot-B-Gones, provided the specified person has
not already gained two blots or more in the current week.
with:
~>Any player CAN expunge a blot from a specified person (or emself
if no one is specified) by paying a fee of one Blot-B-Gone.<~
~>Any player CAN levy a fine of one blot on a specified person by
paying a fee of
Re: BUS: The Revenge of Quine
On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 2:16 PM juan via agora-business <
agora-business@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> Time to complicate things.
>
> I grant the Library the following promise, entitled “The Revenge of
> Quine #0”:
>
> {
>
> Cashing conditions: the bearer has granted the Library – in the
> same message e cashes this promise, but before so – a promise
> with the same text as this promise.
>
> I grant the library a promise with the same text as this
> promise, but whose title is this promise's title with each
> occurence of a number replaced by its natural successor.
>
> I take the bearer's promise from the library and cash it.
> }
>
> I take the above promise from the Library and cash it.
>
> I CFJ on: "There is a number N for which the Library owns a promise with
> title 'The Revenge of Quine #N'".
>
This is the same issue as before. #0 gets cached and starts executing, #1
is created, but then #1 cannot be cached because it was not created before
the execution of #0. I politely suggest you retract the cfj.
Re: BUS: A non-obfuscated intent
On 3/24/22 15:08, secretsnail9 via agora-business wrote: > I intend to, without objection, transfer a Win Card from the Lost and Found > department to myself. Just one would be nice... > -- > secretsnail I object. -- Jason Cobb Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
Re: BUS: A non-obfuscated intent
On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 2:51 PM Jason Cobb via agora-business < agora-business@agoranomic.org> wrote: > I object. > :( I intend, without objection, to transfer 1 coin from the Lost and Found department to myself. I beg of you -- secretsnail
Re: [CFJ] Re: BUS: A Promise to Quine
On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 1:38 PM secretsnail9 wrote:
> CFJ: The library owns a promise with the title " A Promise to Quine" and
> with secretsnail as its creator.
>
I retract the above CFJ. I believe what has occured is as follows:
{
juan created promise 1.
secretsnail created promise 2.
secretsnail cashed promise 1, starting its execution.
juan created promise 3.
juan cashed promise 2, starting its execution.
secretsnail created promise 4.
secretsnail attempted to cash promise 3, but this fails because it was not
created before promise 1 started executing.
The acting behalf clause for promises makes it clear enough that the
execution of promise 1 had not yet ended before this point, as the acting
on behalf is an action being taken by the creator and therefore the bearer
is taking it on behalf of em.
}
Therefore promises 3 and 4 still exist in the library. I revoke the promise
with myself as a creator titled "A Promise to
Quine" from the library. This should leave things as they were before I did
anything.
Relevant rule text:
A promise's bearer CAN, by announcement, cash the promise,
provided that any conditions for cashing it specified by its text
are unambiguously met. By doing so, *e acts on the creator of the
promise's behalf, causing the creator to act as if e published the
promise's text, and destroys the promise. However, to limit
recursion, no promise can be cashed during the execution of
another promise unless it existed before the execution of that
promise began.* The bearer SHOULD recite the promise's essential
attributes in the same message e cashes it.
--
secretsnail
@Promotor Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8655-8656
On 3/20/22 20:48, nix via agora-business wrote: > On 3/20/22 05:03, Aspen via agora-official wrote: >> ID Author(s) AITitle >> --- >> 8655& Jason, nix 1.0 Restricted Petitions >> 8656& Jason 1.0 Mathematical de-notation > > On both proposals I vote: FOR unless someone has voted unconditionally > against, in which case I unconditionally vote AGAINST. > > -- > nix > Herald > > I change my votes to both be: FOR unless someone has voted unconditionally AGAINST, in which case I vote AGAINST. -- nix Herald
Re: BUS: A non-obfuscated intent
On 3/24/22 15:55, secretsnail9 via agora-business wrote: > On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 2:51 PM Jason Cobb via agora-business < > agora-business@agoranomic.org> wrote: > >> I object. >> > :( > > I intend, without objection, to transfer 1 coin from the Lost and Found > department to myself. I beg of you > -- > secretsnail I object. -- Jason Cobb Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
BUS: General objection
I object to all intents to declare apathy. I object to all intents to transfer assets from the Lost and Found department. -- Jason Cobb Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
BUS: (@Treasuror) Wealth Stone and geocaching
I transfer a winsome from the contract "Geocache" to myself by paying a fee of 2 pendants to the contract "Geocache". I transfer a winsome from the contract "Geocache" to myself by paying a fee of 2 pendants to the contract "Geocache". I wield the wealth stone. I transfer 1 votive to the Geocache contract. -- secretsnail
BUS: Re: OFF: [Treasuror] Weekly Report 400
COE: Jason should have 6 votives, not 12:
https://www.mail-archive.com/agora-business@agoranomic.org/msg42008.html
COE: I should have 17216 coins because:
{
You missed the wealth stone wield in:
https://www.mail-archive.com/agora-business@agoranomic.org/msg42039.html
> [19:17] Jason: + 935cn (Transfer snail)
> [19:17] snail: - 935cn (Transfer Jason)
These should be 925cn, see below:
https://www.mail-archive.com/agora-business@agoranomic.org/msg41930.html
}
This should account for the 420 coin difference, and Jason probably has 10
more coins than e should.
Everything else regarding me looks good.
--
secretsnail
Re: BUS: [Proposal] Away with the against points
On Sun, Mar 20, 2022 at 5:19 PM secretsnail9 wrote:
> I submit the following proposal and intend to, without objection, flip its
> Pended switch to true:
>
> Title: Away with the massive points
> AI: 1.0
> Author: secretsnail
> Coauthors:
>
> Amend Rule 2657 (Scoring) by deleting the text:
> {
>
> * Having submitted an unconditional ballot AGAINST a referendum
> on a sponsored proposal, provided that the ballot is valid at
> the time the referendum is assessed, and provided that the
> outcome of that assessment is ADOPTED: points equal to the
> voting player's voting strength on the referendum (Assessor).
>
> }
>
With no objections, I do so. (I flipped the above proposal's Pended switch
to true.)
--
secretsnail
BUS: (@Referee) digits directed
I point my finger at nix for violating rule 2143, committing the Class 2 Crime of Tardiness, via failing to perform the Herald's weekly duties in the week of 7 March 2022. (No update on scores) I point my finger at Trigon for violating rule 2143, committing the Class 2 Crime of Tardiness, via failing to perform the Treasuror's weekly duties in the week of 7 March 2022. (No Forbes which hurt my head) Both of these crimes are probably forgivable. Especially nix's, nothing much happened because it was missed. -- secretsnail
BUS: (@Notary) win card promise moment
I grant nix the following promise:
{
Cashing conditions: The bearer has transferred secretsnail one
Win Card in the same
message as which e cashes this promise, and has not cashed any other
promise between doing so and cashing this promise, and secretsnail has at
least 3350 coins.
I transfer 3350 coins to the bearer.
}
--
secretsnail
Re: BUS: (@Notary) win card promise moment
On 3/24/22 17:08, secretsnail9 via agora-business wrote:
> I grant nix the following promise:
> {
> Cashing conditions: The bearer has transferred secretsnail one
> Win Card in the same
> message as which e cashes this promise, and has not cashed any other
> promise between doing so and cashing this promise, and secretsnail has at
> least 3350 coins.
>
>
> I transfer 3350 coins to the bearer.
> }
> --
> secretsnail
I transfer a win card to secretsnail and cash this promise, causing
secretsnail to transfer 3350 coins to me.
--
nix
Herald
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: The Revenge of Quine
On March 24, 2022 5:31:56 PM GMT-03:00, juan via agora-discussion wrote: >On 2022-03-24 14:22, secretsnail9 via agora-business wrote: >> This is the same issue as before. #0 gets cached and starts executing, #1 >> is created, but then #1 cannot be cached because it was not created before >> the execution of #0. I politely suggest you retract the cfj. > >I most likely will. I'll think about it today and answer later. Yeah, I agree with secretsnail. I retract the CFJ. -- Juan
