Re: DIS: Re: BUS: CFJ 3509 Judgement (Dismissed, insufficient information)

[Gaelan Steele]

I resolve this intent.
> On May 31, 2017, at 6:02 PM, Gaelan Steele  wrote:
> 
> I intend with 2 support to enter this into Moot. This does not address the 
> issue in the CFJ, which is whether there were any CAN NOTs violated in the 
> issuing of the slip.
> 
> Gaelan
>> On May 31, 2017, at 5:50 PM, CuddleBeam > > wrote:
>> 
>> This is my Judgement on "“Any player may take the office of Rulekeepor with
>> 2 support.”
>> 
>> 
>> The Pink Slip was issued against you.
>> 
>> R2476: "When a Pink Slip is issued, as a penalty, within the next 7 days,
>> any player CAN, with 2 Support, become the holder of one or more of those
>> offices still held by the bad sport."
>> 
>> Therefore, the statement (in the current context) is TRUE.
>> 
>> 
> 



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

Re: DIS: Distribution of a proposal [By the powers of PM]

[Quazie]

And I failed - darn you utc.
On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 13:42 Quazie  wrote:

> Proto-Proposal that I aim to distribute before the end of May:
>
> Proposal: "Gentle Judicial Updates" AI=1.7, co-author='grok'
> {{{
>   Create a new rule entitled 'Recusal' Power = 1 with the following text
>   {{{
> A judge may recuse emself from a CFJ they are assigned to.
>
> When a judge recuses emself from a CFJ the following happens:
>   1 - The CFJ becomes unassigned
>   2 - The recused judge becomes ineligible to be assigned as a judge
>   for a week.
>   3 - The recused judge SHOULD suggest another judge for the CFJ to
>   make the Arbitor's job easier.
>   }}}
>
>   Update rule 591 by replacing:
>   {{{
>   The valid judgements, based on the facts of the case at the time
>   the CFJ was initiated, are TRUE, FALSE, and DISMISS.  DISMISS is
>   appropriate if the statement is malformed, undecidable,
>   irrelevant to the game, if insufficient information exists to
>   make a judgement with reasonable effort, or the statement is
>   otherwise not able to be answered TRUE or FALSE.
>
>   }}}
>   with
>   {{{
>   The valid judgements for an inquiry case are as follows, based
>   on the truth or falsity of the statement at the time the inquiry
>   case was initiated (if its truth value changed at that time,
>   then its initial truth value is used):
>
>   * FALSE, appropriate if the statement was factually and
> logically false
>
>   * TRUE, appropriate if the statement was factually and logically
> true
>
>   * IRRELEVANT, appropriate if the veracity of the statement is
> not relevant to the game or is an overly hypothetical
> extrapolation of the game or its rules to conditions that
> don't actually exist, or if it can be trivially determined
> from the outcome of another (possibly still undecided)
> judicial case that was not itself judged IRRELEVANT
>
>   * INSUFFICIENT, appropriate if the statement does not come with
> supporting arguments or evidence, and the judge feels as if an
> undue burden is being placed on em by the lack of arguments and
> evidence.  A CFJ judged INSUFFICIENT CAN and SHOULD be asked
> again with sufficient arguments/evidence.
>
>   * DISMISS, appropriate if the statement is malformed, undecidable,
> if insufficient information exists to make a judgement with
> reasonable effort, or the statement is otherwise not able to be
> answered with another valid judgement.
>   }}}
> }}}
>
>
> On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 11:11 AM Quazie  wrote:
>
>> Hey y'all, it's the end of the month, and I would hate to waste my PM
>> powers - SO, does anyone have a particular proposal in the proposal pool
>> they believe should be distributed?
>>
>> If not, I'm going to submit, and distribute, a proposal that addes
>> Recusal and a couple of flavors of DISMISSAL to the judiciary.
>>
>

Re: DIS: Done!

[Nic Evans]

On 05/31/2017 09:01 PM, Gaelan Steele wrote:

This email is signed with a new cert - does it appear as valid now?

Gaelan



My client accepts the cert.

DIS: Done!

[Gaelan Steele]

This email is signed with a new cert - does it appear as valid now?

Gaelan

smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

Re: Re: DIS: Re: BUS: CFJ 3509 Judgement (Dismissed, insufficient information)

[Quazie]

Just reconsider the CFJ yourself and save us all from the moot.

On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 18:47 CuddleBeam  wrote:

> goddamnit I mixed my two CFJs in the rush.
>
> I support the Moot.
>
>

DIS: FYI: Cert change incoming

[Gaelan Steele]

I’m switching to a proper signed cert for S/MIME, and unfortunately I am unable 
to keep my old keypair, so my email will be signed with a new key from now on.

Gaelan

smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] CFJ 3516 assigned to Quazie

[Kerim Aydin]

On Wed, 31 May 2017, Gaelan Steele wrote:
> > On May 31, 2017, at 2:34 PM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >> On Wed, 31 May 2017, Quazie wrote:
> >> Thus switches are regulated to being defined by the rules.
> >> 
> >> Thus switches can only be defined by the rules.
> >> 
> >> Thus switches can't exist on Agencies and Organizations as the 
> >> rules don't define them to exist within those constructs.
> > 
> > In the old contract era, we used to have some rule that said definitions
> > within contracts (currencies, switches, etc.) generally follow some kind
> > of common-sense mapping to rules definitions (in terms of function, not
> > tracking).
> 
> I was thinking of adding this to State of the Union. Do you have the old 
> wording handy?

Hmm, looks like I might have been wrong about switches (or I can't find a 
ruleset 
version that has it at a quick look).

In fact, now that I think of it, it may have been the other way around, 
happening
on the contract end.  I now remember I wrote in a Contract once, something like 
"A
switch in this contract behaves the same as the switch in the rules, with 
[Party A]
as the recordkeepor".

But here's how we handled it for assets, we generalized it by "backing 
document",
and then later said "as described by its backing document" instead of "as 
described
by the rules":

   An asset is an entity defined as such by a rule or contract
   (hereafter its backing document), and existing solely because
   its backing document defines its existence.

   The recordkeepor of a class of assets is the entity (if any)
   defined as such by, and bound by, its backing document.

   [Etc.]

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] CFJ 3516 assigned to Quazie

[Gaelan Steele]

> On May 31, 2017, at 2:34 PM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> On Wed, 31 May 2017, Quazie wrote:
>> Thus switches are regulated to being defined by the rules.
>> 
>> Thus switches can only be defined by the rules.
>> 
>> Thus switches can't exist on Agencies and Organizations as the 
>> rules don't define them to exist within those constructs.
> 
> In the old contract era, we used to have some rule that said definitions
> within contracts (currencies, switches, etc.) generally follow some kind
> of common-sense mapping to rules definitions (in terms of function, not
> tracking).

I was thinking of adding this to State of the Union. Do you have the old 
wording handy?

Gaelan

> 
>> Thus the switches in question don't exist, or at least aren't switches.
> 
> They aren't *rules defined* switches.  They may be Agency-defined 
> switches which might have a common-sense mapping (even if the above
> contract rule no longer exists), or might have some tortured
> relationship to the real-world definition of switch.
> 
> Just ideas for consideration here; I think your overall analysis is 
> sound.
> 
>> Thus there are no switches for the Registrar to track.
> 
> This part in particular is spot-on.  However those other switches 
> function (if they do), I think the Registrar tracking is only true for
> rules-defined ones.
> 
> 
> 

DIS: Re: BUS: CFJ 3509 Judgement (Dismissed, insufficient information)

[Kerim Aydin]

On Thu, 25 May 2017, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
> I hereby file a Motion to Reconsider with 2 Support.

In looking at CFJ 3509, I find that P.S.S. sent the above message
seemingly declaring intent, but not saying so (the message as if
e already had support and was doing it).  Following that, Gaelan
and CuddleBeam supported, but I can't find that anyone followed
through and filed.

There is a fairly short amount of time to resolve this before the
7 day deadline.

As always, let me know if I missed something.

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] CFJ 3516 assigned to Quazie

[Kerim Aydin]

On Wed, 31 May 2017, Quazie wrote:
> Thus switches are regulated to being defined by the rules.
> 
> Thus switches can only be defined by the rules.
>
> Thus switches can't exist on Agencies and Organizations as the 
> rules don't define them to exist within those constructs.

In the old contract era, we used to have some rule that said definitions
within contracts (currencies, switches, etc.) generally follow some kind
of common-sense mapping to rules definitions (in terms of function, not
tracking).

> Thus the switches in question don't exist, or at least aren't switches.

They aren't *rules defined* switches.  They may be Agency-defined 
switches which might have a common-sense mapping (even if the above
contract rule no longer exists), or might have some tortured
relationship to the real-world definition of switch.

Just ideas for consideration here; I think your overall analysis is 
sound.

> Thus there are no switches for the Registrar to track.

This part in particular is spot-on.  However those other switches 
function (if they do), I think the Registrar tracking is only true for
rules-defined ones.

DIS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] CFJ 3516 assigned to Quazie

[Quazie]

Heads up: I'm unsure the implications of my eventual judgment (it's coming
soon) but the gist of the judgement is going to be:

By Rule 2162
{{{
  A type of switch is a property that the rules define as a
  switch, and specify the following:
}}}

Thus switches are regulated to being defined by the rules.

Thus switches can only be defined by the rules.

Thus switches can't exist on Agencies and Organizations as the rules don't
define them to exist within those constructs.

Thus the switches in question don't exist, or at least aren't switches.

Thus there are no switches for the Registrar to track.

On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 4:19 PM Alex Smith  wrote:

> On Sat, 2017-05-27 at 16:14 -0400, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> wrote:
> > CFJ: "The Registrar must track any switches defined in Agencies or
> > Organizations."
>
> This is CFJ 3516. I assign it to Quazie.
>
> > Caller's arguments:
> > Rule 2139 states, "The Registrar is also responsible for tracking any
> > switches that would otherwise lack an officer to track them, unless the
> > switch is defined as untracked." Nowhere is this limited to rule-defined
> > switches and nowhere is it stated that non-rule-defined switches are
> > untracked.
> >
> >
> > 
> > Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> >
> > > On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 12:32 PM, Quazie 
> wrote:
> >
> > > Note: the Superintendent does not need to, and isn't immediately
> > > interested in attempting to, track this or any switch embedded in an
> Agency.
> > >
> > > > > On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 08:14 caleb vines 
> wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 9:50 AM, caleb vines <
> grokag...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I just realized that this is an illegal action because I'm missing
> a
> > > > > list of agents. I withdraw the intent above and announce intent to
> > > > > establish the following Agency in 24 hours:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Name: grok's Favorite Player (gFP)
> > > > >
> > > > > Agents: All players
> > > > >
> > > > > Powers:
> > > > > 1) gFP has a single Name switch. gFP's Name switch can only be
> flipped
> > > > > by the Director of gFP. The legal values for the Name switch are
> the name
> > > > > of any single registered Player as defined by Rule 869. If the
> text of a
> > > > > player's name includes the words "deregister," "de-register,"
> "announce,"
> > > > > "intend," or any conjugation of or direct variation on those
> words, it is
> > > > > not a legal value.
> > > > >
> > > > > 2) Once per Agoran week, if an agent either writes a Kind Message
> about
> > > > > grok in any public forum or gives grok 3 shinies, that agent may
> act on
> > > > > behalf of grok to flip gFP's Name switch to any legal position.
> > > > >
> > > > > 3) If a player that has never given grok a Trust Token gives grok a
> > > > > Trust Token, that player may act on behalf of grok to flip gFP's
> Name
> > > > > switch to any legal position once.
> > > > >
> > > > > 4) grok is the Director and Head of gFP.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > -grok
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > I perform the following three actions in order:
> > > >
> > > > I resolve my intent to establish gFP.
> > > >
> > > > I flip gFP's Name switch to "grok"
> > > >
> > > > I pledge that for the next two weeks, I will only flip gFP's name
> switch
> > > > if another player is acting on my behalf to do so.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -grok
>
> --
> ais523
> Arbitor
>

Re: DIS: Distribution of a proposal [By the powers of PM]

[Quazie]

Proto-Proposal that I aim to distribute before the end of May:

Proposal: "Gentle Judicial Updates" AI=1.7, co-author='grok'
{{{
  Create a new rule entitled 'Recusal' Power = 1 with the following text
  {{{
A judge may recuse emself from a CFJ they are assigned to.

When a judge recuses emself from a CFJ the following happens:
  1 - The CFJ becomes unassigned
  2 - The recused judge becomes ineligible to be assigned as a judge
  for a week.
  3 - The recused judge SHOULD suggest another judge for the CFJ to
  make the Arbitor's job easier.
  }}}

  Update rule 591 by replacing:
  {{{
  The valid judgements, based on the facts of the case at the time
  the CFJ was initiated, are TRUE, FALSE, and DISMISS.  DISMISS is
  appropriate if the statement is malformed, undecidable,
  irrelevant to the game, if insufficient information exists to
  make a judgement with reasonable effort, or the statement is
  otherwise not able to be answered TRUE or FALSE.

  }}}
  with
  {{{
  The valid judgements for an inquiry case are as follows, based
  on the truth or falsity of the statement at the time the inquiry
  case was initiated (if its truth value changed at that time,
  then its initial truth value is used):

  * FALSE, appropriate if the statement was factually and
logically false

  * TRUE, appropriate if the statement was factually and logically
true

  * IRRELEVANT, appropriate if the veracity of the statement is
not relevant to the game or is an overly hypothetical
extrapolation of the game or its rules to conditions that
don't actually exist, or if it can be trivially determined
from the outcome of another (possibly still undecided)
judicial case that was not itself judged IRRELEVANT

  * INSUFFICIENT, appropriate if the statement does not come with
supporting arguments or evidence, and the judge feels as if an
undue burden is being placed on em by the lack of arguments and
evidence.  A CFJ judged INSUFFICIENT CAN and SHOULD be asked
again with sufficient arguments/evidence.

  * DISMISS, appropriate if the statement is malformed, undecidable,
if insufficient information exists to make a judgement with
reasonable effort, or the statement is otherwise not able to be
answered with another valid judgement.
  }}}
}}}


On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 11:11 AM Quazie  wrote:

> Hey y'all, it's the end of the month, and I would hate to waste my PM
> powers - SO, does anyone have a particular proposal in the proposal pool
> they believe should be distributed?
>
> If not, I'm going to submit, and distribute, a proposal that addes Recusal
> and a couple of flavors of DISMISSAL to the judiciary.
>

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Judicial Reform

[Ørjan Johansen]

On Wed, 31 May 2017, Gaelan Steele wrote:


On May 31, 2017, at 12:03 PM, Ørjan Johansen  wrote:

Probably. The error message doesn't say _why_ it doesn't verify, so it 
might also be some mismatch with the message I guess (does the data 
include the Subject:?). Your certificate is saved to 
.alpine-smime/public/ but Alpine has no way to maintain those data 
files and no obvious way to declare one as trusted without being from a 
CA.


This better? Intentionally putting a blank line above my reply here. 
(Replying to the wrong paragraph for demonstration)




Yep. Although ideally you'd put one after as well.

Greetings,
Ørjan.

DIS: Re: OFF: [CotC] CFJ 3503 Judged TRUE by o

[Kerim Aydin]

On Wed, 31 May 2017, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> would be represented most accurately in the Cyrillic alphabet. Such a
> word would most obviously be abbreviated for the Agency???s acronym by

Hey folks,

I've noticed a sudden explosion of the use of smart quotes in judgements,
these also get caught in unicode-trouble land - I've corrected many but
watching out on your end much appreciated.

(and yes, noticed the actual Japanese character problem in this one, too...)

-G.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Judicial Reform

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

I also experience a signature error in regards to Gaelan’s messages.

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com



> On May 31, 2017, at 2:14 PM, Ørjan Johansen  wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 31 May 2017, Gaelan Steele wrote:
> 
>> I'm not causing any trouble, am I? I'm using Apple Mail.
> 
> You seem to top post, which makes it harder to break things _too_ horribly - 
> and I say this despite preferring inline commenting when it's properly 
> formatted.
> 
> However, your messages curiously often makes Alpine give a loud beep and a 
> complaint that their signature doesn't verify...
> 
> Admittedly, my terminal mail reader Alpine itself has major problems (maybe 
> the version here is just too old? 2.11.) It does not copy quote marks when 
> wrapping quoted lines. It has a _heap_ of options, but no way to enable that 
> which I can see... instead it supports a "flowed text" standard which would 
> provide a similar feature - but it requires the email _sender_ to support it.
> 
> I just tried to see if enabling colors in Alpine would help - supposedly it 
> can color quoted text differently from normal. It seems to work for lines 
> quoted with "> ". But enabling the colors sets them to an absolutely 
> revolting default that then needs to be changed for each of another heap of 
> options, rather than starting with anything similar to the monochrome 
> display, so I gave up.
> 
> Greetings,
> Ørjan.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Judicial Reform

[Gaelan Steele]

> On May 31, 2017, at 12:03 PM, Ørjan Johansen  wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 31 May 2017, Gaelan Steele wrote:
> 
>>> However, your messages curiously often makes Alpine give a loud beep and a 
>>> complaint that their signature doesn't verify...
>> I sign my messages with a self-signed cert, which probably doesn't help.
> 
> Probably. The error message doesn't say _why_ it doesn't verify, so it might 
> also be some mismatch with the message I guess (does the data include the 
> Subject:?). Your certificate is saved to .alpine-smime/public/ but Alpine has 
> no way to maintain those data files and no obvious way to declare one as 
> trusted without being from a CA.

This better? Intentionally putting a blank line above my reply here. (Replying 
to the wrong paragraph for demonstration)
> 
> Now you replied inline and _that_ looks confusing in my client right after a 
> long wrapped quoted line - took me a while to find where your comment was.
> 
>> Gaelan
>> 
>> P.S. this message isn't signed, because I'm sending it from my phone. I 
>> still need to figure out how to get the cert onto my phone
> 
> Greetings,
> Ørjan.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Judicial Reform

[Ørjan Johansen]

On Wed, 31 May 2017, Gaelan Steele wrote:


However, your messages curiously often makes Alpine give a loud beep and a 
complaint that their signature doesn't verify...

I sign my messages with a self-signed cert, which probably doesn't help.


Probably. The error message doesn't say _why_ it doesn't verify, so it 
might also be some mismatch with the message I guess (does the data 
include the Subject:?). Your certificate is saved to .alpine-smime/public/ 
but Alpine has no way to maintain those data files and no obvious way to 
declare one as trusted without being from a CA.


Now you replied inline and _that_ looks confusing in my client right after 
a long wrapped quoted line - took me a while to find where your comment 
was.



Gaelan

P.S. this message isn't signed, because I'm sending it from my phone. I 
still need to figure out how to get the cert onto my phone


Greetings,
Ørjan.

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [CotC] CFJ 3498 Judged FALSE by Gaelan

[Kerim Aydin]

On Wed, 31 May 2017, Gaelan Steele wrote:
> Unicode bug—I see the name as "?"

thanks!  My system's automatic database -> email code still doesn't 
keep the unicode, I have to catch those and send by hand.

Also, apologies for the reposts of the some of the 3490s cases, 
forgot to set a flag last week.

DIS: Re: OFF: [CotC] CFJ 3498 Judged FALSE by Gaelan

[Gaelan Steele]

Unicode bug—I see the name as "?"

Gaelan

> On May 31, 2017, at 11:32 AM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
> 
> status: https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/#3498
> (This document is informational only and contains no game actions).
> 
> ==  CFJ 3498  ==
> 
>   Every statement is ambiguous.
> 
> 
> 
> Caller:   ?
> 
> Judge:Gaelan
> Judgement:FALSE
> 
> 
> 
> History:
> 
> Called by ?: 19 May 2017
> Assigned to Gaelan:   19 May 2017
> Judged FALSE by Gaelan:   26 May 2017
> 
> 
> 
> Caller's Arguments:
> 
>* Every statement is written in one language.
>* Translation between any two languages is inherently ambiguous.
>* Therefore, every statement is ambiguous at least in every language
>  the statement was not originally written in.
>* Agora does not formally make preference to any one language, and
>  recognizes differences in dialect (CFJ 1439).
>* Thus, every statement is ambiguous.
> 
> 
> 
> Judge's Arguments
> 
> Rule 1698/4:
>   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.
> 
>   If, but for this rule, the net effect of a proposal would cause
>   Agora to become ossified, or would cause Agora to cease to
>   exist, it cannot take effect, rules to the contrary
>   notwithstanding.  If any other single change to the gamestate
>   would cause Agora to become ossified, or would cause Agora to
>   cease to exist, it is cancelled and does not occur, rules to the
>   contrary notwithstanding.
> 
> Judging this as TRUE would cause Agora to become ossified (proposals are
> created by announcement, announcements must be unambiguous). Therefore,
> it is IMPOSSIBLE to judge this CFJ as TRUE. Therefore, I judge as FALSE.
> 
> Additional argument: ambiguous is a relative term, but it is clear from
> game precedent that in this context it means ???reasonably unambiguous to
> the players of Agora."
> 
> 
> 
> 

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Judicial Reform

[Gaelan Steele]

> On May 31, 2017, at 11:14 AM, Ørjan Johansen  wrote:
> 
>> On Wed, 31 May 2017, Gaelan Steele wrote:
>> 
>> I'm not causing any trouble, am I? I'm using Apple Mail.
> 
> You seem to top post, which makes it harder to break things _too_ horribly - 
> and I say this despite preferring inline commenting when it's properly 
> formatted.
> 
> However, your messages curiously often makes Alpine give a loud beep and a 
> complaint that their signature doesn't verify...
I sign my messages with a self-signed cert, which probably doesn't help.
> 
> Admittedly, my terminal mail reader Alpine itself has major problems (maybe 
> the version here is just too old? 2.11.) It does not copy quote marks when 
> wrapping quoted lines. It has a _heap_ of options, but no way to enable that 
> which I can see... instead it supports a "flowed text" standard which would 
> provide a similar feature - but it requires the email _sender_ to support it.
> 
> I just tried to see if enabling colors in Alpine would help - supposedly it 
> can color quoted text differently from normal. It seems to work for lines 
> quoted with "> ". But enabling the colors sets them to an absolutely 
> revolting default that then needs to be changed for each of another heap of 
> options, rather than starting with anything similar to the monochrome 
> display, so I gave up.
> 
> Greetings,
> Ørjan.

Gaelan 

P.S. this message isn't signed, because I'm sending it from my phone. I still 
need to figure out how to get the cert onto my phone

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Judicial Reform

[Ørjan Johansen]

On Wed, 31 May 2017, grok (caleb vines) wrote:


On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 4:23 AM, Ørjan Johansen  wrote:


On Tue, 30 May 2017, grok (caleb vines) wrote:


I did write that message on mobile--happily willing to blame my phone
assuming this email looks correct.


Definitely much better.

Greetings,
Ørjan.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Judicial Reform

[grok (caleb vines)]

On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 4:23 AM, Ørjan Johansen  wrote:

> On Tue, 30 May 2017, grok (caleb vines) wrote:
>
> And lots of the other things G. mentioned earlier in this thread.
>>
>
> [No distinction between quoted and unquoted parts, whatsoever, in either
> version]
>
> A minor suggestion from an observer: you could use slightly kinder language
>> on those dismissal ideas. Like DISMISSED WITHOUT STANDING if a CFJ has no
>> apparent or impending impact on the game state, and DISMISSED WITHOUT
>> EVIDENCE if the caller or another player do not provide enough evidence or
>> argument to adjudicate.
>>
>
> Someone nuke gmail headquarters, please.
>
> Greetings,
> Ørjan.



I did write that message on mobile--happily willing to blame my phone
assuming this email looks correct.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Judicial Reform

[Ørjan Johansen]

On Wed, 31 May 2017, Gaelan Steele wrote:


I'm not causing any trouble, am I? I'm using Apple Mail.


You seem to top post, which makes it harder to break things _too_ horribly 
- and I say this despite preferring inline commenting when it's properly 
formatted.


However, your messages curiously often makes Alpine give a loud beep and a 
complaint that their signature doesn't verify...


Admittedly, my terminal mail reader Alpine itself has major problems 
(maybe the version here is just too old? 2.11.) It does not copy quote 
marks when wrapping quoted lines. It has a _heap_ of options, but no way 
to enable that which I can see... instead it supports a "flowed text" 
standard which would provide a similar feature - but it requires the email 
_sender_ to support it.


I just tried to see if enabling colors in Alpine would help - supposedly 
it can color quoted text differently from normal. It seems to work for 
lines quoted with "> ". But enabling the colors sets them to an absolutely 
revolting default that then needs to be changed for each of another heap 
of options, rather than starting with anything similar to the monochrome 
display, so I gave up.


Greetings,
Ørjan.

DIS: Distribution of a proposal [By the powers of PM]

[Quazie]

Hey y'all, it's the end of the month, and I would hate to waste my PM
powers - SO, does anyone have a particular proposal in the proposal pool
they believe should be distributed?

If not, I'm going to submit, and distribute, a proposal that addes Recusal
and a couple of flavors of DISMISSAL to the judiciary.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Judicial Reform

[Kerim Aydin]

On Tue, 30 May 2017, Aris Merchant wrote:
> On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 6:39 PM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
> > I think splitting the "assigner" and the "recordkeepor" is a good split to
> > keep, whether informally or formally (I plan to keep up the recordkeeping
> > for a bit, anyway).  Maybe the assigner could become a "fun" office, with
> > expanded powers as well as duties, to make it a plum position (and then
> > picking a judicial assignment method would actually be an election issue
> > in exchange for the powers).
> 
> I like power to come with responsibility, and vice versa.

Boring, eh? - this is still a game you know.  Some of the best negotiations 
and game play have come from offices that have been seen as "perks" without
burdensome responsibilities.  We have one vaguely interesting election now
the P.M., all the others we have to beg someone to take.  It wouldn't hurt
to have another one or two, especially, again, as we're struggling to make
things worth earning.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Judicial Reform

[Gaelan Steele]

I'm not causing any trouble, am I? I'm using Apple Mail. 

Gaelan

> On May 31, 2017, at 2:47 AM, Ørjan Johansen  wrote:
> 
>> On Wed, 31 May 2017, Ørjan Johansen wrote:
>> 
>> Someone nuke gmail headquarters, please.
> 
> Sorry I snapped, but it looks to me like half of the gmail-users have 
> individually different garbled email formats, with my strategy for finding 
> the unquoted parts of each of them failing on the next, my eyes are getting 
> very tired, and I'm on the verge of unsubscribing because of the 
> unreadability.
> 
> Greetings,
> Ørjan.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Cleanup on Aisle 869

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

Are you going to resolve this?


Publius Scribonius Scholasticus

On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 11:30 PM, Gaelan Steele  wrote:

> Remind me not to sign the message where I resolve this.
>
> Gaelan
>
> On May 23, 2017, at 8:27 PM, Owen Jacobson  wrote:
>
>
> On May 23, 2017, at 2:38 PM, Gaelan Steele  wrote:
>
> Fast Resolution doesn’t work if there are lots of non-voting players
> sitting around.
>
> For each player below, I intend to deregister them without objection:
>
> aranea
> Charles
> Henri
> omd
> Sci_Guy12
> Tekneek
> The Warrigal
> Yally
>
> Gaelan
>
>
> I object to the deregistration of omd and to the deregistration of Gaelan.
>
> -o
>
>
>

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Judicial Reform

[Ørjan Johansen]

On Wed, 31 May 2017, Ørjan Johansen wrote:


Someone nuke gmail headquarters, please.


Sorry I snapped, but it looks to me like half of the gmail-users have 
individually different garbled email formats, with my strategy for finding 
the unquoted parts of each of them failing on the next, my eyes are 
getting very tired, and I'm on the verge of unsubscribing because of the 
unreadability.


Greetings,
Ørjan.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Judicial Reform

[Ørjan Johansen]

On Tue, 30 May 2017, grok (caleb vines) wrote:


And lots of the other things G. mentioned earlier in this thread.


[No distinction between quoted and unquoted parts, whatsoever, in either 
version]



A minor suggestion from an observer: you could use slightly kinder language
on those dismissal ideas. Like DISMISSED WITHOUT STANDING if a CFJ has no
apparent or impending impact on the game state, and DISMISSED WITHOUT
EVIDENCE if the caller or another player do not provide enough evidence or
argument to adjudicate.


Someone nuke gmail headquarters, please.

Greetings,
Ørjan.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Judicial Reform

[Aris Merchant]

The previous version of my Massive Reform Plan™ is here [1]. I'm still
caught on step 1, partly because I'm slow and partly because people
keep coming up with objections to every version of my draft :) (next
version will be v5, but it's probably more like v7 or v8 in reality).
Here is the current Plan:

1. Bring back assets.
2.* Introduce regulations. [2]
3. Reform the judicial system. Probably by reintroducing
criminal/equity trials. My current thinking is that it would be easier
to have them be same thing, and I can explain more details later if
anyone's interested.
4. Reintroduce contracts.
5. Reintroduce second class persons? Merge orgs, contracts, and
agencies, either partially or fully.
6. Introduce accounts and appropriations. These are such weird edge
cases that no one is likely to care, and hopefully I can push it
through on good faith.
7. ??? Implement Top Secret Project Ω (that's not really what it's
called, just to sound cool). I'm not going to give details, but it has
something to do with a minigame and everything else needs to be done
first.

* 2 is kind of free-floating, but there was some demand for it in
order to help the economy? Realistically it could be moved below 5 or
6 without messing anything up.

I'm currently working on 1, and am probably the only person who
wants/is able to implement 2. Realistically anyone who wants to can do
3-5, but I have some ideas and might like to try 4 myself. If you want
to help, 3 is probably the best place to start. The thread at [1] has
some ideas.  I'm not particularly good at 3, nor do I care much about
it. I just needs to get done in order to move on to 4. I'm likely the
only one who cares about 6 and up.


[1] https://www.mail-archive.com/agora-discussion@agoranomic.org/msg34240.html
[2] Latest public draft:
https://www.mail-archive.com/agora-discussion@agoranomic.org/msg34536.html


-Aris

On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 5:40 PM, Aris Merchant
 wrote:
> I will in a few hours, but I really do have to go right now.
>
> -Aris
>
> On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 5:37 PM Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
>  wrote:
>>
>> Could you share what is involved in your Massive Reform Plan and how you
>> would allow others to help?
>> 
>> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
>> p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Judicial Reform

[Aris Merchant]

On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 6:39 PM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, 30 May 2017, Quazie wrote:
>> If the judiciary calms down, or we get lucky enough that G. comes back
>> and wants eir post
>
> I think splitting the "assigner" and the "recordkeepor" is a good split to
> keep, whether informally or formally (I plan to keep up the recordkeeping
> for a bit, anyway).  Maybe the assigner could become a "fun" office, with
> expanded powers as well as duties, to make it a plum position (and then
> picking a judicial assignment method would actually be an election issue
> in exchange for the powers).

I like power to come with responsibility, and vice versa.

> On Tue, 30 May 2017, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
>> How would people feel about reimplementing a formal criminal and civil
>> court system in addition to CFJs?
>
> It's not bad in principle, but this (or suggestions for public defender,
> etc) requires yet more officers.  That would be my only concern, I like
> the idea of official true/false arguments!

My thinking would be an office who's job it would be to help each side
do their research and lay out their arguments. In some cases arguing
for each side doesn't make much sense. On the other hand, supplying
precedents to back people's arguments when applicable is always
helpful.

-Aris