DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Resolving proposals 7859-7864

[Aris Merchant]

On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 8:40 PM, Gaelan Steele  wrote:
>
>> On Jun 26, 2017, at 6:34 PM, Quazie  wrote:
>>
>>
>> I resolve the decision(s) to adopt proposal(s) 7864, 7859, 7860, 7861, 7862, 
>> and 7863 as below.
>>
>> 
>>
>> [This notice resolves the Agoran decisions of whether to adopt the
>>  following proposals.  For each decision, the options available to
>>  Agora are ADOPTED (*), REJECTED (x), and FAILED QUORUM (!). If a
>>  decision's voting period is still ongoing, I end it immediately
>>  before resolving it and after resolving the previous decision.]
>>
>> ID Author(s)   AI   Title
>> 
>> *7864  Aris3.0  Assets v7
>
> Aris: do you have the history of this rule handy? As it is a reenaction, I 
> believe I am required to list the history of this rule prior to its appeal.

I dug it up for you. While I like the idea of reenactment, it might be
more fair to make the proposal's author dig up the last version of the
FLR it appeared in and the proposal that repealed it. This rule last
appeared in the FLR here [1] and was repealed by proposal 7629,
distributed here [2]. I'd give you the date it was assessed, but I
can't find the assessment, even after much searching. I could be in
error, or it could be that the proposal only took effect because of
the ratification of the SLR (which I think was published on the
supposed date of its assessment)? I would appreciate some help in
understanding this, as it's really freaking me out. In any case, the
date given in the current FLR is "Proposal 7629 (scshunt), 7 April
2014".

[1] 
https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-official/2014-February/010621.html
[2] 
https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-official/2014-March/010655.html


-Aris

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [ADoP] Resolving elections for Secretary, Superintendent, and Tailor

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

I am also honoured to be serving in another office, for which I will publish 
the first report on Thursday, if I have internet. However, I must warn that I 
may end up off grid making it delayed until Saturday.

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



> On Jun 26, 2017, at 8:59 PM, Owen Jacobson  wrote:
> 
> 
>> On Jun 26, 2017, at 8:57 PM, Quazie  wrote:
>> 
>> I resolve the Agoran Decisions for Secretary, Superintendent, and Tailor:
>> 
>> Secretary: o is the winner, and remains holder of the office.
> 
> I am honoured to serve.
> 
>> Superintendent: Publius Scribonius Scholasticus is the winner, and becomes 
>> holder of the office
>> Tailor: ais523 is the winner, and remains holder of the office.
> 
> Congratulations to P.S.S. and to ais523!
> 
> -o
> 
> 



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

DIS: Re: OFF: [ADoP] Resolving elections for Secretary, Superintendent, and Tailor

[Owen Jacobson]

> On Jun 26, 2017, at 8:57 PM, Quazie  wrote:
> 
> I resolve the Agoran Decisions for Secretary, Superintendent, and Tailor:
> 
> Secretary: o is the winner, and remains holder of the office.

I am honoured to serve.

> Superintendent: Publius Scribonius Scholasticus is the winner, and becomes 
> holder of the office
> Tailor: ais523 is the winner, and remains holder of the office.

Congratulations to P.S.S. and to ais523!

-o




signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Resolving proposals 7859-7864

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

Could you clarify this message?

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



> On Jun 26, 2017, at 8:48 PM, Quazie  wrote:
> 
> I am sorry for formating I properly.  I'll confronted to the ruleset next 
> time.
> 
> On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 20:41 Gaelan Steele  wrote:
> 
> > On Jun 26, 2017, at 6:34 PM, Quazie  wrote:
> >
> >
> > I resolve the decision(s) to adopt proposal(s) 7864, 7859, 7860, 7861, 
> > 7862, and 7863 as below.
> >
> > 
> >
> > [This notice resolves the Agoran decisions of whether to adopt the
> >  following proposals.  For each decision, the options available to
> >  Agora are ADOPTED (*), REJECTED (x), and FAILED QUORUM (!). If a
> >  decision's voting period is still ongoing, I end it immediately
> >  before resolving it and after resolving the previous decision.]
> >
> > ID Author(s)   AI   Title
> > 
> > *7864  Aris3.0  Assets v7
> 
> Aris: do you have the history of this rule handy? As it is a reenaction, I 
> believe I am required to list the history of this rule prior to its appeal.
> 
> > *7859  Quazie  1.7  Gentle Judicial Updates
> 
> I intend to, without Objection, cause “Cleanup Time” to replace “1 -“ with 
> “1.” and so on in the rule “Recusal.”
> 
> > *7860  Quazie  1.7  Cards are power 1.7
> > x7861  Quazie  3.0  Trivia(l)
> > *7862  Quazie  1.7  Betterer Pledges
> > x7863  Quazie  1.2  Why should outsiders be able to Object?
> 
> Gaelan



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [ADoP] Metareport

[Owen Jacobson]

I meant in the technical sense - should I make a claim of error, and if so, 
what is the nature of the error?

I can’t see any reason simple duplication wouldn’t be formally acceptable, even 
if it is messy, but the ratification parts of the rules aren’t my forté.

-o

> On Jun 26, 2017, at 11:33 PM, Quazie  wrote:
> 
> Gah - i'll republish the single correct body shortly
> On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 20:31 Owen Jacobson  > wrote:
> Is the duplicated report body an error?
> 
> -o
> 
>> On Jun 26, 2017, at 9:05 PM, Quazie > > wrote:
>> 
>> See https://agoranomic.github.io/ADoP/  
>> for past, current, and future
>> reports.
>> 
>> <-->
>> 
>> Offices and Reports
>> Date of this report: 2017-06-27
>> Date of last report: 2017-06-10
>> 
>> Informal measures
>> -
>> Administrative Health [1]: 93.33%
>> Consolidation [2]: 2.14
>> 
>> [1] Calculated by the weighted average of # of offices filled/total and
>> # of reports not late/total. A higher Administrative Health % indicates
>> a more active bureaucracy.
>> 
>> [2] Calculated by dividing the # of filled offices by the number of
>> unique officeholders. A higher consolidation rating is not necessarily
>> bad, but means Agora is putting more power & responsibility in a small
>> group's hands.
>> 
>> NB: The "PR|RR" and "Holder" columns of this report are
>> self-ratifying.
>> 
>> 
>> Office  PR|RR[1]  Holder  Since   Last Election  Can Elect[2]
>> ---
>> Arbitor  2|2  ais523  2017-05-15  2017-05-26
>> Assessor 2|2  Quazie  2017-06-05  2017-05-26
>> ADoP[3]  2|2  Quazie  2017-06-05  2017-06-09
>> Herald   2|2  PSS[4]  2017-05-20  2015-07-02 Y
>> Prime Minister   2|2  Quazie  2017-05-21  2016-10-22 Y
>> Promotor 2|2  Aris2016-10-21  2017-05-26
>> Referee  2|2  o   2017-04-17  2017-06-09
>> Registrar2|2  PSS[4]  2017-04-18  2017-06-09
>> Reportor 2|2  V[5]2017-06-05  2016-08-30 Y
>> Rulekeepor   2|2  Gaelan  2017-05-17  2017-05-26
>> Secretary2|2  o   2016-11-06  2017-06-27
>> Speaker  2|2  ais523  2017-06-01  2014-04-21 Never
>> Superintendent   2|2  PSS[4]  2017-06-27  2017-06-27
>> Surveyor 2|2  o   2017-05-08  2017-05-10
>> Tailor   2|2  ais523  2017-05-17  2017-06-27
>> ---
>> [1] Payrate and Report Rate
>> [2] Whether an election for this position can be initiated by
>> announcement, as per R2154(1). Note any player can initiate an
>> election for any office with 4 Support per R2154(2).
>> [3] Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
>> [4] Associate Director of Personnel
>> [5] Veggiekeks
>> 
>> 
>> Office  M[1]  Report  Last Published  Late[2]
>> ---
>> ADoP[3]   Offices 2017-06-27
>> Herald  Y Patent titles   2017-05-20
>> Promotor  Proposal pool   2017-06-19
>> Referee   Rule violations 2017-06-19
>> Registrar Players, Fora   2017-06-26
>> Registrar   Y Player history  2017-05-31
>> Reportor  The Agoran Newspaper2017-06-18  !
>> RulekeeporShort Logical Ruleset   2017-06-23
>> Rulekeepor  Y Full Logical Ruleset2017-06-23
>> Secretary OLEaB[4]2017-06-19
>> Secretary   Y Charters2017-06-02
>> SuperintendentAgencies (incremental)  2017-06-05  !!
>> Superintendent  Y Agencies (Full) 2017-05-18
>> Surveyor  Estates 2017-06-19
>> Tailor  Y Ribbons 2017-06-06
>> ---
>> [1] Monthly
>> [2] ! = 1 period missed. !! = 2 periods missed. !!! = 3+ periods missed.
>> [3] Associate Director of Personnel
>> [4] Organizations, Lockout, Expediture, and Balances
>> 
>> EVENTS
>> --
>> 2016-07-19 nichdel deputizes to become Assessor
>> 2016-09-10 nichdel deputizes to become Reportor
>> 2016-10-21 Aris deputizes to become Promotor
>> 2016-11-06 o deputizes to become Secretary
>> 2017-04-16 Quazie deputizes to become Superintendent
>> 2017-04-17 o deputizes to become Referee
>> 2017-04-18 PSS deputizes to become Registrar
>> 2017-05-01 o publishes monthly Secretary report
>> 2017-05-08 o deputizes to become Surveyor
>> 2017-05-10 o elected to Surveyor
>> 2017-05-15 ais523 deputizes to become Arbitor
>> 2017-05-16 Aris publishes weekly Promotor report

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Resolving proposals 7859-7864

[Quazie]

I am sorry for formating I properly.  I'll confronted to the ruleset next
time.

On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 20:41 Gaelan Steele  wrote:

>
> > On Jun 26, 2017, at 6:34 PM, Quazie  wrote:
> >
> >
> > I resolve the decision(s) to adopt proposal(s) 7864, 7859, 7860, 7861,
> 7862, and 7863 as below.
> >
> > 
> >
> > [This notice resolves the Agoran decisions of whether to adopt the
> >  following proposals.  For each decision, the options available to
> >  Agora are ADOPTED (*), REJECTED (x), and FAILED QUORUM (!). If a
> >  decision's voting period is still ongoing, I end it immediately
> >  before resolving it and after resolving the previous decision.]
> >
> > ID Author(s)   AI   Title
> > 
> > *7864  Aris3.0  Assets v7
>
> Aris: do you have the history of this rule handy? As it is a reenaction, I
> believe I am required to list the history of this rule prior to its appeal.
>
> > *7859  Quazie  1.7  Gentle Judicial Updates
>
> I intend to, without Objection, cause “Cleanup Time” to replace “1 -“ with
> “1.” and so on in the rule “Recusal.”
>
> > *7860  Quazie  1.7  Cards are power 1.7
> > x7861  Quazie  3.0  Trivia(l)
> > *7862  Quazie  1.7  Betterer Pledges
> > x7863  Quazie  1.2  Why should outsiders be able to Object?
>
> Gaelan

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [ADoP] Metareport

[Quazie]

Gah - i'll republish the single correct body shortly
On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 20:31 Owen Jacobson  wrote:

> Is the duplicated report body an error?
>
> -o
>
> On Jun 26, 2017, at 9:05 PM, Quazie  wrote:
>
> See https://agoranomic.github.io/ADoP/ for past, current, and future
> reports.
>
> <-->
>
> Offices and Reports
> Date of this report: 2017-06-27
> Date of last report: 2017-06-10
>
> Informal measures
> -
> Administrative Health [1]: 93.33%
> Consolidation [2]: 2.14
>
> [1] Calculated by the weighted average of # of offices filled/total and
> # of reports not late/total. A higher Administrative Health % indicates
> a more active bureaucracy.
>
> [2] Calculated by dividing the # of filled offices by the number of
> unique officeholders. A higher consolidation rating is not necessarily
> bad, but means Agora is putting more power & responsibility in a small
> group's hands.
>
> NB: The "PR|RR" and "Holder" columns of this report are
> self-ratifying.
>
>
> Office  PR|RR[1]  Holder  Since   Last Election  Can Elect[2]
> ---
> Arbitor  2|2  ais523  2017-05-15  2017-05-26
> Assessor 2|2  Quazie  2017-06-05  2017-05-26
> ADoP[3]  2|2  Quazie  2017-06-05  2017-06-09
> Herald   2|2  PSS[4]  2017-05-20  2015-07-02 Y
> Prime Minister   2|2  Quazie  2017-05-21  2016-10-22 Y
> Promotor 2|2  Aris2016-10-21  2017-05-26
> Referee  2|2  o   2017-04-17  2017-06-09
> Registrar2|2  PSS[4]  2017-04-18  2017-06-09
> Reportor 2|2  V[5]2017-06-05  2016-08-30 Y
> Rulekeepor   2|2  Gaelan  2017-05-17  2017-05-26
> Secretary2|2  o   2016-11-06  2017-06-27
> Speaker  2|2  ais523  2017-06-01  2014-04-21 Never
> Superintendent   2|2  PSS[4]  2017-06-27  2017-06-27
> Surveyor 2|2  o   2017-05-08  2017-05-10
> Tailor   2|2  ais523  2017-05-17  2017-06-27
> ---
> [1] Payrate and Report Rate
> [2] Whether an election for this position can be initiated by
> announcement, as per R2154(1). Note any player can initiate an
> election for any office with 4 Support per R2154(2).
> [3] Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> [4] Associate Director of Personnel
> [5] Veggiekeks
>
>
> Office  M[1]  Report  Last Published  Late[2]
> ---
> ADoP[3]   Offices 2017-06-27
> Herald  Y Patent titles   2017-05-20
> Promotor  Proposal pool   2017-06-19
> Referee   Rule violations 2017-06-19
> Registrar Players, Fora   2017-06-26
> Registrar   Y Player history  2017-05-31
> Reportor  The Agoran Newspaper2017-06-18  !
> RulekeeporShort Logical Ruleset   2017-06-23
> Rulekeepor  Y Full Logical Ruleset2017-06-23
> Secretary OLEaB[4]2017-06-19
> Secretary   Y Charters2017-06-02
> SuperintendentAgencies (incremental)  2017-06-05  !!
> Superintendent  Y Agencies (Full) 2017-05-18
> Surveyor  Estates 2017-06-19
> Tailor  Y Ribbons 2017-06-06
> ---
> [1] Monthly
> [2] ! = 1 period missed. !! = 2 periods missed. !!! = 3+ periods missed.
> [3] Associate Director of Personnel
> [4] Organizations, Lockout, Expediture, and Balances
>
> EVENTS
> --
> 2016-07-19 nichdel deputizes to become Assessor
> 2016-09-10 nichdel deputizes to become Reportor
> 2016-10-21 Aris deputizes to become Promotor
> 2016-11-06 o deputizes to become Secretary
> 2017-04-16 Quazie deputizes to become Superintendent
> 2017-04-17 o deputizes to become Referee
> 2017-04-18 PSS deputizes to become Registrar
> 2017-05-01 o publishes monthly Secretary report
> 2017-05-08 o deputizes to become Surveyor
> 2017-05-10 o elected to Surveyor
> 2017-05-15 ais523 deputizes to become Arbitor
> 2017-05-16 Aris publishes weekly Promotor report
> 2017-05-17 Gaelan deputizes to become Rulekeepor
> 2017-05-17 Gaelan publishes weekly Rulekeepor report
> 2017-05-17 ais523 deputizes to become Tailor
> 2017-05-18 nichdel deputizes to become ADoP
> 2017-05-18 PSS publishes weekly Registrar report
> 2017-05-18 Quazie publishes monthly Superintendent report
> 2017-05-18 ais523 publishes monthly Tailor report
> 2017-05-20 PSS deputizes to become Herald
> 2017-05-20 PSS publishes monthly Herald report
> 2017-05-21 Quazie deputizes to become Prime Minister
> 2017-05-21 Aris publishes weekly Promotor 

DIS: Re: OFF: [ADoP] Metareport

[Owen Jacobson]

Is the duplicated report body an error?

-o

> On Jun 26, 2017, at 9:05 PM, Quazie  wrote:
> 
> See https://agoranomic.github.io/ADoP/  
> for past, current, and future
> reports.
> 
> <-->
> 
> Offices and Reports
> Date of this report: 2017-06-27
> Date of last report: 2017-06-10
> 
> Informal measures
> -
> Administrative Health [1]: 93.33%
> Consolidation [2]: 2.14
> 
> [1] Calculated by the weighted average of # of offices filled/total and
> # of reports not late/total. A higher Administrative Health % indicates
> a more active bureaucracy.
> 
> [2] Calculated by dividing the # of filled offices by the number of
> unique officeholders. A higher consolidation rating is not necessarily
> bad, but means Agora is putting more power & responsibility in a small
> group's hands.
> 
> NB: The "PR|RR" and "Holder" columns of this report are
> self-ratifying.
> 
> 
> Office  PR|RR[1]  Holder  Since   Last Election  Can Elect[2]
> ---
> Arbitor  2|2  ais523  2017-05-15  2017-05-26
> Assessor 2|2  Quazie  2017-06-05  2017-05-26
> ADoP[3]  2|2  Quazie  2017-06-05  2017-06-09
> Herald   2|2  PSS[4]  2017-05-20  2015-07-02 Y
> Prime Minister   2|2  Quazie  2017-05-21  2016-10-22 Y
> Promotor 2|2  Aris2016-10-21  2017-05-26
> Referee  2|2  o   2017-04-17  2017-06-09
> Registrar2|2  PSS[4]  2017-04-18  2017-06-09
> Reportor 2|2  V[5]2017-06-05  2016-08-30 Y
> Rulekeepor   2|2  Gaelan  2017-05-17  2017-05-26
> Secretary2|2  o   2016-11-06  2017-06-27
> Speaker  2|2  ais523  2017-06-01  2014-04-21 Never
> Superintendent   2|2  PSS[4]  2017-06-27  2017-06-27
> Surveyor 2|2  o   2017-05-08  2017-05-10
> Tailor   2|2  ais523  2017-05-17  2017-06-27
> ---
> [1] Payrate and Report Rate
> [2] Whether an election for this position can be initiated by
> announcement, as per R2154(1). Note any player can initiate an
> election for any office with 4 Support per R2154(2).
> [3] Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> [4] Associate Director of Personnel
> [5] Veggiekeks
> 
> 
> Office  M[1]  Report  Last Published  Late[2]
> ---
> ADoP[3]   Offices 2017-06-27
> Herald  Y Patent titles   2017-05-20
> Promotor  Proposal pool   2017-06-19
> Referee   Rule violations 2017-06-19
> Registrar Players, Fora   2017-06-26
> Registrar   Y Player history  2017-05-31
> Reportor  The Agoran Newspaper2017-06-18  !
> RulekeeporShort Logical Ruleset   2017-06-23
> Rulekeepor  Y Full Logical Ruleset2017-06-23
> Secretary OLEaB[4]2017-06-19
> Secretary   Y Charters2017-06-02
> SuperintendentAgencies (incremental)  2017-06-05  !!
> Superintendent  Y Agencies (Full) 2017-05-18
> Surveyor  Estates 2017-06-19
> Tailor  Y Ribbons 2017-06-06
> ---
> [1] Monthly
> [2] ! = 1 period missed. !! = 2 periods missed. !!! = 3+ periods missed.
> [3] Associate Director of Personnel
> [4] Organizations, Lockout, Expediture, and Balances
> 
> EVENTS
> --
> 2016-07-19 nichdel deputizes to become Assessor
> 2016-09-10 nichdel deputizes to become Reportor
> 2016-10-21 Aris deputizes to become Promotor
> 2016-11-06 o deputizes to become Secretary
> 2017-04-16 Quazie deputizes to become Superintendent
> 2017-04-17 o deputizes to become Referee
> 2017-04-18 PSS deputizes to become Registrar
> 2017-05-01 o publishes monthly Secretary report
> 2017-05-08 o deputizes to become Surveyor
> 2017-05-10 o elected to Surveyor
> 2017-05-15 ais523 deputizes to become Arbitor
> 2017-05-16 Aris publishes weekly Promotor report
> 2017-05-17 Gaelan deputizes to become Rulekeepor
> 2017-05-17 Gaelan publishes weekly Rulekeepor report
> 2017-05-17 ais523 deputizes to become Tailor
> 2017-05-18 nichdel deputizes to become ADoP
> 2017-05-18 PSS publishes weekly Registrar report
> 2017-05-18 Quazie publishes monthly Superintendent report
> 2017-05-18 ais523 publishes monthly Tailor report
> 2017-05-20 PSS deputizes to become Herald
> 2017-05-20 PSS publishes monthly Herald report
> 2017-05-21 Quazie deputizes to become Prime Minister
> 2017-05-21 Aris publishes weekly Promotor report
> 2017-05-21 o publishes weekly Referee report
> 2017-05-21 Gaelan 

Re: Re: Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Birthday Tournament

[CuddleBeam]

>No, it only allows me to limit eir game actions because it only allows

internal actions, if you look at the rules.


...I don't see that. Maybe I'm missing something though - in which
case, please point out what I'm missing. What I'm finding is:


"However, the Herald may remove participants or limit eir actions at eir

discretion"


without any explicit limitations to what those actions are.

Re: Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Birthday Tournament

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

No, it only allows me to limit eir game actions because it only allows
internal actions, if you look at the rules.


Publius Scribonius Scholasticus

On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 4:30 PM, CuddleBeam 
wrote:

> "limit eir actions"
>
> While I endorse that PSS can do well as a sole Judge for the Tourney,
> t-that provision is way too much power for a mere mortal imo.
>
> Limiting the ability to propose! To comment! To vote! To register! To *do*
> *anything*.
>
> Too much!
>
> But the rest looks solid and better, although communication-proxying and
> similar stuff is still a thing (maybe intentional?).
>
> I'd accept a payment of 1 shinies to act as someone's public communication
> proxy for 3 messages. (For example, posting "Mr. Squigglesworth (pseudonym)
> will like to trade Bananas for Karma. Please privately contact me to
> arrange your contact with Mr.Squigglesworth").
>

Re: Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Birthday Tournament

[CuddleBeam]

"limit eir actions"

While I endorse that PSS can do well as a sole Judge for the Tourney,
t-that provision is way too much power for a mere mortal imo.

Limiting the ability to propose! To comment! To vote! To register! To *do*
*anything*.

Too much!

But the rest looks solid and better, although communication-proxying and
similar stuff is still a thing (maybe intentional?).

I'd accept a payment of 1 shinies to act as someone's public communication
proxy for 3 messages. (For example, posting "Mr. Squigglesworth (pseudonym)
will like to trade Bananas for Karma. Please privately contact me to
arrange your contact with Mr.Squigglesworth").

Re: DIS: on privacy

[Quazie]

On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 11:48 AM Kerim Aydin  wrote:

>
>
> On Mon, 26 Jun 2017, CuddleBeam wrote:
> > We could define "privacy" in the tourney's rules.
>
> Yes, I agree, it's simple to add an asterisk to the tourney regulations
> with a statement: "a message is private if and only if ...(whatever)".
> Doesn't matter if it's arbitrary ("a message to everyone's registered
> email is private while a message to the discussion forum is not") as
> long as it's clearly defined.
>
> > Keeping information secret or not will be hard imo, unless there's a
> > clear reward to follow what the game intends you to do.
>
> This is the deepest issue I think.  Past experience agrees with this
> for me: "don't say X" speech prohibitions are hard to regulate and
> cause all kinds of arguments when there's a clear game advantage for
> breaking them - there's just too many ways to communicate something
> without saying it.  Better to design a tourney that doesn't need them
> at all. (*encourage* secret communication rather than *requiring* it).
>
> -G.
>

I was planning on immediately posting "I have made no Karma trades" when
the tournament started, just to see if stating i've done no actions counted
as talking about actions I have taken, just to start this sort of argument.

RE: DIS: on privacy

[Kerim Aydin]

On Mon, 26 Jun 2017, CuddleBeam wrote:
> We could define "privacy" in the tourney's rules.

Yes, I agree, it's simple to add an asterisk to the tourney regulations 
with a statement: "a message is private if and only if ...(whatever)".
Doesn't matter if it's arbitrary ("a message to everyone's registered
email is private while a message to the discussion forum is not") as
long as it's clearly defined.

> Keeping information secret or not will be hard imo, unless there's a
> clear reward to follow what the game intends you to do.

This is the deepest issue I think.  Past experience agrees with this
for me: "don't say X" speech prohibitions are hard to regulate and
cause all kinds of arguments when there's a clear game advantage for
breaking them - there's just too many ways to communicate something
without saying it.  Better to design a tourney that doesn't need them 
at all. (*encourage* secret communication rather than *requiring* it).

-G.

RE: DIS: on privacy

[CuddleBeam]

We could define "privacy" in the tourney's rules.

I also find the private/public dichotomy to be weak. I can, instead of
posting to the public fora, just get everyone's emails and send them an
email straight to them individually but with the same message. It's private!

Keeping information secret or not will be hard imo, unless there's a clear
reward to follow what the game intends you to do. Just saying "No don't do
this lol" won't do it imo, because that's likely in place to prevent
players from shortcutting the game, and if that's the case, it will be
extremely succulent to try to shortcut it through that method (but a
loophole variant of it to make it legal) anyway.

DIS: on privacy

[Kerim Aydin]

On Mon, 26 Jun 2017, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
> Giving karma to another person may be done by sending a private 
> notification to them ...

Proto-CFJs for discussion:

1.  A message sent via a Discussion forum, addressing (in the message text)
a player known to post to the Discussion forum, is a private notification
to that player.

2.  A message sent to a player's registered email address, cc'd to the
discussion forum, is a private message to em.

Discussion points:

- "Private" is not defined by the rules.

- It's not necessarily the opposite of "public" as the rules define public,
   though that can be somewhat weakly inferred in common language.

- There's no guarantee that all players are part of the Discussion list.

- Definition of private:  "belonging to or for the use of one particular
   person or group of people only."  For the "group of people" part, the
   fact that we have to register to the mailing lists to use them would lead
   most reasonable non-Agorans to say this is a "private" game for members
   and guests (where even the "public" lists are "private" - I mean,
   "private" is even a part of the mailman archive URL!).

Note:  we don't have to resolve all this to play the nice Tournament - I
don't want to get bogged down - this just points out the difficulty of
interpreting and enforcing the "shall not talk about this" mechanic -
maybe that should just be dropped.

Re: Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Birthday Tournament

[CuddleBeam]

Imo the metagame of how I think the tournament is supposed to work will be
something like this:

You give 3 daily Karma and gain 3 daily Karma due to symmetric trades
("Aiyo I give u a Karma for a Karma" "ok sounds cool, ty") and end up with
a huge tie with everyone else who has done the same (diligently, for weeks).

So the only way to get an edge over that is to get deals external to the
competition itself to get Karma from people who aren't aiming to actually
win the tournament - which I find to be super interesting (and why I've
went straight to publicly asking for commerce before the tournament is a
real thing, and even then, those who ALREADY HAVE contacts for stuff like
this have a huge edge because they're already got large pool of potential
clients to barter with in private, which I don't, so I don't think anyone
new has much of a chance to win anyway).

For example, trading currency/favors for becoming a Karma peon or agreeing
to a coin-flip victory of a sort (if you win the coinflip, they're your
puppet, if they win, you're their puppet).

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Birthday Tournament

[Kerim Aydin]

On Mon, 26 Jun 2017, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
> The winner of this tournament shall be the person who is able to gain 
> the most karma, described below, over the course of the 4 week game.

What if there's a tie?  If you want ties to have multiple winners, typical
is to use "person(s) who are able".  The way it's written, if there's a
tie, then no person gains the most thus there is no winner (which is fine -
if that's what you intend!)

How you deal with a tie is important, as it's possible for a large-enough 
coalition to trade karma to all come up with a tie.  Again, either way is
fine, but it should be clear.

> no participant shall state in any publicly visible manner and actions that 
> they have taken in regards to the game.

If this SHALL is intended to be enforced by Cards, it gives non-players an
advantage :).  Maybe put in a karma-penalty for breaking regulations?  
(though that has enforcement difficulties if you're required to adjudicate, 
especially as your wording leaves several loopholes).

One loophole has already been pointed out by CuddleBeam.  When does one
become a participant?  All participants get a Badge.  You're not going to
extend it to all persons everywhere.  So what makes someone a participant?
Not just receiving an offer - no consent there, and it opens up spam
possibilities.  Probably sending the code words to the Herald (that seems 
most logical). So that means that you can talk about your actions freely up
until you send a code word to the Herald, because you're not a participant
until then?

Personally I'd fix this by taking out the Shall, just too many cans of
worms with punishments.  Just say "actual exchanges (code words) are 
ineffective if done publicly."  You can talk about it all you want that way,
but there's never any public proof of what trades were made.

-G.

Re: Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Birthday Tournament

[CuddleBeam]

For 10 shinies (or a similar favor) I'm up for being someone's meatpuppet
for purposes of winning the tournament (You can't publicly post about your
actions, but I could publicly post them for you, for example, as well as
feed you Karma).

Please contact me privately to cuddleb...@gmail.com if you're interested!

I'll only go with the first person who accepts.

Thank you in advance.

(The tournament isn't official yet not has it started, so I believe I won't
be retroactively punished for publicly posting this.)