Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Prime Minister] Speaker & Card

[Quazie]

I would if i'm the speaker
On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 22:14 Aris Merchant <
thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I presume then that you wouldn't object to a "Make G. the Speaker"
> proposal?
>
> -Aris
>
> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 9:46 PM Quazie  wrote:
>
>> Cuz wins shouldn't be that easy, wins by proposal are only interesting if
>> you've broken voting and scammed a win.
>> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 21:42 Aris Merchant <
>> thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Why would you vote against? Other than the extra rule?
>>>
>>> -Aris
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 9:30 PM Quazie  wrote:
>>>
 You don't need anything but 'g wins the game' for it to work - and the
 rule itself isn't interesting, so even though I'd vote against it anyways,
 I'd vote extra against it because the rule is totally unnecessary -
 proposals can already do whatever they want.



 On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 21:21 Aris Merchant <
 thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Comments appreciated on the following. I'll remove the last paragraph
> if everyone agrees it's not needed. Does anyone object to giving G.
> the win?
>
> -Aris
>
> Title: All hail the Speaker!
> Adoption index: 1.0
> Author: Aris
> Co-authors:
>
> Enact a new rule, entitled "Victory by Proposal", Power = 1.0:
>   If a proposal of at least AI 1.0 is adopted, and it clearly and
> unambiguously
>   specifies that a person or set of persons win the game, they win
>   the game.
>
>   This rule is retroactive to immediately before the resolution of the
> proposal
>   that adopted it. If this rule has existed for any non infinitesimal
> period of
>   time, any player CAN cause it to amend itself by removing this
> paragraph.
>
> G. wins the game.
>
> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 8:44 PM, Kerim Aydin 
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > First, yes pls give me a win - Kicking myself for missing apathy :).
> >
> > In the past, I've personally been a very "political" player, by that
> I mean into
> > gaming political systems - checks and balances, proposal procedure,
> ministerial
> > positions with different powers that make for good combos,
> interesting incentives
> > (e.g. reward structures) for proposals that invite competition etc.
> I actually
> > prefer that to economic games, though I don't mind those either - in
> a game play
> > sense, I *liked* the fact that I could use a must-pass bugfix
> proposal as leverage
> > to seek a minimum income, for example.
> >
> > And it's been a while since we've had a "complicated" (read:
> playable) political
> > system.  So I'm actually in support of a muscular speaker using eir
> > powers in general, even to the level of "overdoing" it a bit.  We
> could use a
> > little more BlogNomic, in that it would be fun if the Speaker had
> enough power
> > to give a "flavor" to eir dynasty (in a limited and wholly Agoran
> way, of course,
> > there's the rub).
> >
> > As long as it's done generally politely... the main disadvantage is
> that people
> > put a lot of effort into the proposals they write, and prefer them
> to be voted on
> > their merits, so having good proposals go down when they get caught
> up in "politics"
> > causes bad feelings - that definitely worries me.
> >
> > That said, I'm in support of a muscular speaker for good or ill, I'm
> in support of
> > adding "political" systems like impeachment.  The Speaker has
> variously been a
> > prize for winning, but has also been elected at times (though we
> didn't have the
> > PM, which fills the "elected for power" role).  With the PM
> existing, I think it's
> > a bit boring to make the Speaker "just another election", but it
> would be good to
> > explore some kinds of checks and balances - if the PM and Speaker
> together are
> > ne'er-do-wells, what procedural games can we add to have factions
> and the like as
> > a balance?
> >
> > Of course - one shouldn't go for re-envisioning a whole political
> system when the
> > economy is so fragile - one form of chaos at a time please - but
> food for thought.
> >
> > On Thu, 14 Sep 2017, Cuddle Beam wrote:
> >> Works the same imo. Voting them in because they're wanted or voting
> them out because
> >> they're not wanted gives similar result I believe, it's just a
> matter of adding democracy
> >> into the mix.
> >>
> >> On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 4:20 AM, Aris Merchant <
> thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>   Maybe add impeachment proceedings? That seems generally
> advisable,
> >>   past this specific occasion.
> >>

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Prime Minister] Speaker & Card

[Aris Merchant]

I presume then that you wouldn't object to a "Make G. the Speaker" proposal?

-Aris

On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 9:46 PM Quazie  wrote:

> Cuz wins shouldn't be that easy, wins by proposal are only interesting if
> you've broken voting and scammed a win.
> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 21:42 Aris Merchant <
> thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Why would you vote against? Other than the extra rule?
>>
>> -Aris
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 9:30 PM Quazie  wrote:
>>
>>> You don't need anything but 'g wins the game' for it to work - and the
>>> rule itself isn't interesting, so even though I'd vote against it anyways,
>>> I'd vote extra against it because the rule is totally unnecessary -
>>> proposals can already do whatever they want.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 21:21 Aris Merchant <
>>> thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 Comments appreciated on the following. I'll remove the last paragraph
 if everyone agrees it's not needed. Does anyone object to giving G.
 the win?

 -Aris

 Title: All hail the Speaker!
 Adoption index: 1.0
 Author: Aris
 Co-authors:

 Enact a new rule, entitled "Victory by Proposal", Power = 1.0:
   If a proposal of at least AI 1.0 is adopted, and it clearly and
 unambiguously
   specifies that a person or set of persons win the game, they win
   the game.

   This rule is retroactive to immediately before the resolution of the
 proposal
   that adopted it. If this rule has existed for any non infinitesimal
 period of
   time, any player CAN cause it to amend itself by removing this
 paragraph.

 G. wins the game.

 On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 8:44 PM, Kerim Aydin 
 wrote:
 >
 >
 > First, yes pls give me a win - Kicking myself for missing apathy :).
 >
 > In the past, I've personally been a very "political" player, by that
 I mean into
 > gaming political systems - checks and balances, proposal procedure,
 ministerial
 > positions with different powers that make for good combos,
 interesting incentives
 > (e.g. reward structures) for proposals that invite competition etc.
 I actually
 > prefer that to economic games, though I don't mind those either - in
 a game play
 > sense, I *liked* the fact that I could use a must-pass bugfix
 proposal as leverage
 > to seek a minimum income, for example.
 >
 > And it's been a while since we've had a "complicated" (read:
 playable) political
 > system.  So I'm actually in support of a muscular speaker using eir
 > powers in general, even to the level of "overdoing" it a bit.  We
 could use a
 > little more BlogNomic, in that it would be fun if the Speaker had
 enough power
 > to give a "flavor" to eir dynasty (in a limited and wholly Agoran
 way, of course,
 > there's the rub).
 >
 > As long as it's done generally politely... the main disadvantage is
 that people
 > put a lot of effort into the proposals they write, and prefer them to
 be voted on
 > their merits, so having good proposals go down when they get caught
 up in "politics"
 > causes bad feelings - that definitely worries me.
 >
 > That said, I'm in support of a muscular speaker for good or ill, I'm
 in support of
 > adding "political" systems like impeachment.  The Speaker has
 variously been a
 > prize for winning, but has also been elected at times (though we
 didn't have the
 > PM, which fills the "elected for power" role).  With the PM existing,
 I think it's
 > a bit boring to make the Speaker "just another election", but it
 would be good to
 > explore some kinds of checks and balances - if the PM and Speaker
 together are
 > ne'er-do-wells, what procedural games can we add to have factions and
 the like as
 > a balance?
 >
 > Of course - one shouldn't go for re-envisioning a whole political
 system when the
 > economy is so fragile - one form of chaos at a time please - but food
 for thought.
 >
 > On Thu, 14 Sep 2017, Cuddle Beam wrote:
 >> Works the same imo. Voting them in because they're wanted or voting
 them out because
 >> they're not wanted gives similar result I believe, it's just a
 matter of adding democracy
 >> into the mix.
 >>
 >> On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 4:20 AM, Aris Merchant <
 thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
 >>   Maybe add impeachment proceedings? That seems generally
 advisable,
 >>   past this specific occasion.
 >>
 >>   -Aris
 >>
 >>   On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 7:19 PM, Cuddle Beam <
 cuddleb...@gmail.com> wrote:
 >>   > That can be cool too. Although if people dereg each time I
 may win in future
 >>   > 

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Prime Minister] Speaker & Card

[Quazie]

Cuz wins shouldn't be that easy, wins by proposal are only interesting if
you've broken voting and scammed a win.
On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 21:42 Aris Merchant <
thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Why would you vote against? Other than the extra rule?
>
> -Aris
>
> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 9:30 PM Quazie  wrote:
>
>> You don't need anything but 'g wins the game' for it to work - and the
>> rule itself isn't interesting, so even though I'd vote against it anyways,
>> I'd vote extra against it because the rule is totally unnecessary -
>> proposals can already do whatever they want.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 21:21 Aris Merchant <
>> thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Comments appreciated on the following. I'll remove the last paragraph
>>> if everyone agrees it's not needed. Does anyone object to giving G.
>>> the win?
>>>
>>> -Aris
>>>
>>> Title: All hail the Speaker!
>>> Adoption index: 1.0
>>> Author: Aris
>>> Co-authors:
>>>
>>> Enact a new rule, entitled "Victory by Proposal", Power = 1.0:
>>>   If a proposal of at least AI 1.0 is adopted, and it clearly and
>>> unambiguously
>>>   specifies that a person or set of persons win the game, they win
>>>   the game.
>>>
>>>   This rule is retroactive to immediately before the resolution of the
>>> proposal
>>>   that adopted it. If this rule has existed for any non infinitesimal
>>> period of
>>>   time, any player CAN cause it to amend itself by removing this
>>> paragraph.
>>>
>>> G. wins the game.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 8:44 PM, Kerim Aydin 
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > First, yes pls give me a win - Kicking myself for missing apathy :).
>>> >
>>> > In the past, I've personally been a very "political" player, by that I
>>> mean into
>>> > gaming political systems - checks and balances, proposal procedure,
>>> ministerial
>>> > positions with different powers that make for good combos, interesting
>>> incentives
>>> > (e.g. reward structures) for proposals that invite competition etc.  I
>>> actually
>>> > prefer that to economic games, though I don't mind those either - in a
>>> game play
>>> > sense, I *liked* the fact that I could use a must-pass bugfix proposal
>>> as leverage
>>> > to seek a minimum income, for example.
>>> >
>>> > And it's been a while since we've had a "complicated" (read: playable)
>>> political
>>> > system.  So I'm actually in support of a muscular speaker using eir
>>> > powers in general, even to the level of "overdoing" it a bit.  We
>>> could use a
>>> > little more BlogNomic, in that it would be fun if the Speaker had
>>> enough power
>>> > to give a "flavor" to eir dynasty (in a limited and wholly Agoran way,
>>> of course,
>>> > there's the rub).
>>> >
>>> > As long as it's done generally politely... the main disadvantage is
>>> that people
>>> > put a lot of effort into the proposals they write, and prefer them to
>>> be voted on
>>> > their merits, so having good proposals go down when they get caught up
>>> in "politics"
>>> > causes bad feelings - that definitely worries me.
>>> >
>>> > That said, I'm in support of a muscular speaker for good or ill, I'm
>>> in support of
>>> > adding "political" systems like impeachment.  The Speaker has
>>> variously been a
>>> > prize for winning, but has also been elected at times (though we
>>> didn't have the
>>> > PM, which fills the "elected for power" role).  With the PM existing,
>>> I think it's
>>> > a bit boring to make the Speaker "just another election", but it would
>>> be good to
>>> > explore some kinds of checks and balances - if the PM and Speaker
>>> together are
>>> > ne'er-do-wells, what procedural games can we add to have factions and
>>> the like as
>>> > a balance?
>>> >
>>> > Of course - one shouldn't go for re-envisioning a whole political
>>> system when the
>>> > economy is so fragile - one form of chaos at a time please - but food
>>> for thought.
>>> >
>>> > On Thu, 14 Sep 2017, Cuddle Beam wrote:
>>> >> Works the same imo. Voting them in because they're wanted or voting
>>> them out because
>>> >> they're not wanted gives similar result I believe, it's just a matter
>>> of adding democracy
>>> >> into the mix.
>>> >>
>>> >> On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 4:20 AM, Aris Merchant <
>>> thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>   Maybe add impeachment proceedings? That seems generally
>>> advisable,
>>> >>   past this specific occasion.
>>> >>
>>> >>   -Aris
>>> >>
>>> >>   On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 7:19 PM, Cuddle Beam <
>>> cuddleb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>   > That can be cool too. Although if people dereg each time I
>>> may win in future
>>> >>   > circumstances (or someone else they may disagree enough
>>> with), I suggest
>>> >>   > amending the Speaker position to an elected office.
>>> >>   >
>>> >>   > On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 4:09 AM, Aris Merchant
>>> >>   >  wrote:
>>> >>   >>

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Prime Minister] Speaker & Card

[Aris Merchant]

Why would you vote against? Other than the extra rule?

-Aris

On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 9:30 PM Quazie  wrote:

> You don't need anything but 'g wins the game' for it to work - and the
> rule itself isn't interesting, so even though I'd vote against it anyways,
> I'd vote extra against it because the rule is totally unnecessary -
> proposals can already do whatever they want.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 21:21 Aris Merchant <
> thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Comments appreciated on the following. I'll remove the last paragraph
>> if everyone agrees it's not needed. Does anyone object to giving G.
>> the win?
>>
>> -Aris
>>
>> Title: All hail the Speaker!
>> Adoption index: 1.0
>> Author: Aris
>> Co-authors:
>>
>> Enact a new rule, entitled "Victory by Proposal", Power = 1.0:
>>   If a proposal of at least AI 1.0 is adopted, and it clearly and
>> unambiguously
>>   specifies that a person or set of persons win the game, they win
>>   the game.
>>
>>   This rule is retroactive to immediately before the resolution of the
>> proposal
>>   that adopted it. If this rule has existed for any non infinitesimal
>> period of
>>   time, any player CAN cause it to amend itself by removing this
>> paragraph.
>>
>> G. wins the game.
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 8:44 PM, Kerim Aydin 
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > First, yes pls give me a win - Kicking myself for missing apathy :).
>> >
>> > In the past, I've personally been a very "political" player, by that I
>> mean into
>> > gaming political systems - checks and balances, proposal procedure,
>> ministerial
>> > positions with different powers that make for good combos, interesting
>> incentives
>> > (e.g. reward structures) for proposals that invite competition etc.  I
>> actually
>> > prefer that to economic games, though I don't mind those either - in a
>> game play
>> > sense, I *liked* the fact that I could use a must-pass bugfix proposal
>> as leverage
>> > to seek a minimum income, for example.
>> >
>> > And it's been a while since we've had a "complicated" (read: playable)
>> political
>> > system.  So I'm actually in support of a muscular speaker using eir
>> > powers in general, even to the level of "overdoing" it a bit.  We could
>> use a
>> > little more BlogNomic, in that it would be fun if the Speaker had
>> enough power
>> > to give a "flavor" to eir dynasty (in a limited and wholly Agoran way,
>> of course,
>> > there's the rub).
>> >
>> > As long as it's done generally politely... the main disadvantage is
>> that people
>> > put a lot of effort into the proposals they write, and prefer them to
>> be voted on
>> > their merits, so having good proposals go down when they get caught up
>> in "politics"
>> > causes bad feelings - that definitely worries me.
>> >
>> > That said, I'm in support of a muscular speaker for good or ill, I'm in
>> support of
>> > adding "political" systems like impeachment.  The Speaker has variously
>> been a
>> > prize for winning, but has also been elected at times (though we didn't
>> have the
>> > PM, which fills the "elected for power" role).  With the PM existing, I
>> think it's
>> > a bit boring to make the Speaker "just another election", but it would
>> be good to
>> > explore some kinds of checks and balances - if the PM and Speaker
>> together are
>> > ne'er-do-wells, what procedural games can we add to have factions and
>> the like as
>> > a balance?
>> >
>> > Of course - one shouldn't go for re-envisioning a whole political
>> system when the
>> > economy is so fragile - one form of chaos at a time please - but food
>> for thought.
>> >
>> > On Thu, 14 Sep 2017, Cuddle Beam wrote:
>> >> Works the same imo. Voting them in because they're wanted or voting
>> them out because
>> >> they're not wanted gives similar result I believe, it's just a matter
>> of adding democracy
>> >> into the mix.
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 4:20 AM, Aris Merchant <
>> thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>   Maybe add impeachment proceedings? That seems generally
>> advisable,
>> >>   past this specific occasion.
>> >>
>> >>   -Aris
>> >>
>> >>   On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 7:19 PM, Cuddle Beam <
>> cuddleb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>   > That can be cool too. Although if people dereg each time I may
>> win in future
>> >>   > circumstances (or someone else they may disagree enough with),
>> I suggest
>> >>   > amending the Speaker position to an elected office.
>> >>   >
>> >>   > On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 4:09 AM, Aris Merchant
>> >>   >  wrote:
>> >>   >>
>> >>   >> Oh dear. I recommend we install a new speaker by proposal.
>> How about
>> >>   >> G.? We don't even have to give em a win, although we could if
>> people
>> >>   >> wanted to do that.
>> >>   >>
>> >>   >> -Aris
>> >>   >>
>> >>   >> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 6:51 PM, Nic Evans 

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Prime Minister] Speaker & Card

[Quazie]

You don't need anything but 'g wins the game' for it to work - and the rule
itself isn't interesting, so even though I'd vote against it anyways, I'd
vote extra against it because the rule is totally unnecessary - proposals
can already do whatever they want.



On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 21:21 Aris Merchant <
thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Comments appreciated on the following. I'll remove the last paragraph
> if everyone agrees it's not needed. Does anyone object to giving G.
> the win?
>
> -Aris
>
> Title: All hail the Speaker!
> Adoption index: 1.0
> Author: Aris
> Co-authors:
>
> Enact a new rule, entitled "Victory by Proposal", Power = 1.0:
>   If a proposal of at least AI 1.0 is adopted, and it clearly and
> unambiguously
>   specifies that a person or set of persons win the game, they win
>   the game.
>
>   This rule is retroactive to immediately before the resolution of the
> proposal
>   that adopted it. If this rule has existed for any non infinitesimal
> period of
>   time, any player CAN cause it to amend itself by removing this paragraph.
>
> G. wins the game.
>
> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 8:44 PM, Kerim Aydin 
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > First, yes pls give me a win - Kicking myself for missing apathy :).
> >
> > In the past, I've personally been a very "political" player, by that I
> mean into
> > gaming political systems - checks and balances, proposal procedure,
> ministerial
> > positions with different powers that make for good combos, interesting
> incentives
> > (e.g. reward structures) for proposals that invite competition etc.  I
> actually
> > prefer that to economic games, though I don't mind those either - in a
> game play
> > sense, I *liked* the fact that I could use a must-pass bugfix proposal
> as leverage
> > to seek a minimum income, for example.
> >
> > And it's been a while since we've had a "complicated" (read: playable)
> political
> > system.  So I'm actually in support of a muscular speaker using eir
> > powers in general, even to the level of "overdoing" it a bit.  We could
> use a
> > little more BlogNomic, in that it would be fun if the Speaker had enough
> power
> > to give a "flavor" to eir dynasty (in a limited and wholly Agoran way,
> of course,
> > there's the rub).
> >
> > As long as it's done generally politely... the main disadvantage is that
> people
> > put a lot of effort into the proposals they write, and prefer them to be
> voted on
> > their merits, so having good proposals go down when they get caught up
> in "politics"
> > causes bad feelings - that definitely worries me.
> >
> > That said, I'm in support of a muscular speaker for good or ill, I'm in
> support of
> > adding "political" systems like impeachment.  The Speaker has variously
> been a
> > prize for winning, but has also been elected at times (though we didn't
> have the
> > PM, which fills the "elected for power" role).  With the PM existing, I
> think it's
> > a bit boring to make the Speaker "just another election", but it would
> be good to
> > explore some kinds of checks and balances - if the PM and Speaker
> together are
> > ne'er-do-wells, what procedural games can we add to have factions and
> the like as
> > a balance?
> >
> > Of course - one shouldn't go for re-envisioning a whole political system
> when the
> > economy is so fragile - one form of chaos at a time please - but food
> for thought.
> >
> > On Thu, 14 Sep 2017, Cuddle Beam wrote:
> >> Works the same imo. Voting them in because they're wanted or voting
> them out because
> >> they're not wanted gives similar result I believe, it's just a matter
> of adding democracy
> >> into the mix.
> >>
> >> On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 4:20 AM, Aris Merchant <
> thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>   Maybe add impeachment proceedings? That seems generally advisable,
> >>   past this specific occasion.
> >>
> >>   -Aris
> >>
> >>   On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 7:19 PM, Cuddle Beam <
> cuddleb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>   > That can be cool too. Although if people dereg each time I may
> win in future
> >>   > circumstances (or someone else they may disagree enough with),
> I suggest
> >>   > amending the Speaker position to an elected office.
> >>   >
> >>   > On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 4:09 AM, Aris Merchant
> >>   >  wrote:
> >>   >>
> >>   >> Oh dear. I recommend we install a new speaker by proposal. How
> about
> >>   >> G.? We don't even have to give em a win, although we could if
> people
> >>   >> wanted to do that.
> >>   >>
> >>   >> -Aris
> >>   >>
> >>   >> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 6:51 PM, Nic Evans 
> wrote:
> >>   >> > On 09/13/17 16:58, VJ Rada wrote:
> >>   >> >> Because we currently have no speaker if Cuddlebeam was not
> the
> >>   >> >> speaker, and because e is in both sets of possible recent
> winners, I
> >>   >> >> appoint Cuddlebeam speaker.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Prime Minister] Speaker & Card

[Aris Merchant]

Correction: one card a month.

-Aris

On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 6:33 PM, VJ Rada  wrote:
> Executive order: The PM has several powers including the ability to
> give one card a week, for any and no reason.
>
> On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 11:17 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
>  wrote:
>> How do you card yourself?
>> 
>> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
>> p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Sep 13, 2017, at 5:58 PM, VJ Rada  wrote:
>>>
>>> Because we currently have no speaker if Cuddlebeam was not the
>>> speaker, and because e is in both sets of possible recent winners, I
>>> appoint Cuddlebeam speaker.
>>>
>>> I also yellow card myself for being bad in several ways.
>>>
>>> --
>>> From V.J Rada
>>
>
>
>
> --
> From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Prime Minister] Speaker & Card

[Aris Merchant]

Comments appreciated on the following. I'll remove the last paragraph
if everyone agrees it's not needed. Does anyone object to giving G.
the win?

-Aris

Title: All hail the Speaker!
Adoption index: 1.0
Author: Aris
Co-authors:

Enact a new rule, entitled "Victory by Proposal", Power = 1.0:
  If a proposal of at least AI 1.0 is adopted, and it clearly and unambiguously
  specifies that a person or set of persons win the game, they win
  the game.

  This rule is retroactive to immediately before the resolution of the proposal
  that adopted it. If this rule has existed for any non infinitesimal period of
  time, any player CAN cause it to amend itself by removing this paragraph.

G. wins the game.

On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 8:44 PM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
>
>
> First, yes pls give me a win - Kicking myself for missing apathy :).
>
> In the past, I've personally been a very "political" player, by that I mean 
> into
> gaming political systems - checks and balances, proposal procedure, 
> ministerial
> positions with different powers that make for good combos, interesting 
> incentives
> (e.g. reward structures) for proposals that invite competition etc.  I 
> actually
> prefer that to economic games, though I don't mind those either - in a game 
> play
> sense, I *liked* the fact that I could use a must-pass bugfix proposal as 
> leverage
> to seek a minimum income, for example.
>
> And it's been a while since we've had a "complicated" (read: playable) 
> political
> system.  So I'm actually in support of a muscular speaker using eir
> powers in general, even to the level of "overdoing" it a bit.  We could use a
> little more BlogNomic, in that it would be fun if the Speaker had enough power
> to give a "flavor" to eir dynasty (in a limited and wholly Agoran way, of 
> course,
> there's the rub).
>
> As long as it's done generally politely... the main disadvantage is that 
> people
> put a lot of effort into the proposals they write, and prefer them to be 
> voted on
> their merits, so having good proposals go down when they get caught up in 
> "politics"
> causes bad feelings - that definitely worries me.
>
> That said, I'm in support of a muscular speaker for good or ill, I'm in 
> support of
> adding "political" systems like impeachment.  The Speaker has variously been a
> prize for winning, but has also been elected at times (though we didn't have 
> the
> PM, which fills the "elected for power" role).  With the PM existing, I think 
> it's
> a bit boring to make the Speaker "just another election", but it would be 
> good to
> explore some kinds of checks and balances - if the PM and Speaker together are
> ne'er-do-wells, what procedural games can we add to have factions and the 
> like as
> a balance?
>
> Of course - one shouldn't go for re-envisioning a whole political system when 
> the
> economy is so fragile - one form of chaos at a time please - but food for 
> thought.
>
> On Thu, 14 Sep 2017, Cuddle Beam wrote:
>> Works the same imo. Voting them in because they're wanted or voting them out 
>> because
>> they're not wanted gives similar result I believe, it's just a matter of 
>> adding democracy
>> into the mix.
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 4:20 AM, Aris Merchant 
>>  wrote:
>>   Maybe add impeachment proceedings? That seems generally advisable,
>>   past this specific occasion.
>>
>>   -Aris
>>
>>   On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 7:19 PM, Cuddle Beam  
>> wrote:
>>   > That can be cool too. Although if people dereg each time I may win 
>> in future
>>   > circumstances (or someone else they may disagree enough with), I 
>> suggest
>>   > amending the Speaker position to an elected office.
>>   >
>>   > On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 4:09 AM, Aris Merchant
>>   >  wrote:
>>   >>
>>   >> Oh dear. I recommend we install a new speaker by proposal. How about
>>   >> G.? We don't even have to give em a win, although we could if people
>>   >> wanted to do that.
>>   >>
>>   >> -Aris
>>   >>
>>   >> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 6:51 PM, Nic Evans  
>> wrote:
>>   >> > On 09/13/17 16:58, VJ Rada wrote:
>>   >> >> Because we currently have no speaker if Cuddlebeam was not the
>>   >> >> speaker, and because e is in both sets of possible recent 
>> winners, I
>>   >> >> appoint Cuddlebeam speaker.
>>   >> >
>>   >> > After consideration, it strikes me as flagrantly beligerent to 
>> make CB
>>   >> > the Speaker. From a mechanical standpoint, e has a tendency to 
>> object to
>>   >> > things for no good reason and now has full veto power. From a
>>   >> > 'figurehead leader of Agora' standpoint, I have no intent of 
>> being part
>>   >> > of a community represented by someone prone to sexism, racism, and
>>   >> > misgendering.
>>   >> >
>>   >> > If CB is the 

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Prime Minister] Speaker & Card

[Kerim Aydin]

First, yes pls give me a win - Kicking myself for missing apathy :).

In the past, I've personally been a very "political" player, by that I mean into
gaming political systems - checks and balances, proposal procedure, ministerial
positions with different powers that make for good combos, interesting 
incentives
(e.g. reward structures) for proposals that invite competition etc.  I actually
prefer that to economic games, though I don't mind those either - in a game play
sense, I *liked* the fact that I could use a must-pass bugfix proposal as 
leverage
to seek a minimum income, for example.

And it's been a while since we've had a "complicated" (read: playable) political
system.  So I'm actually in support of a muscular speaker using eir
powers in general, even to the level of "overdoing" it a bit.  We could use a
little more BlogNomic, in that it would be fun if the Speaker had enough power
to give a "flavor" to eir dynasty (in a limited and wholly Agoran way, of 
course,
there's the rub).

As long as it's done generally politely... the main disadvantage is that people
put a lot of effort into the proposals they write, and prefer them to be voted 
on
their merits, so having good proposals go down when they get caught up in 
"politics"
causes bad feelings - that definitely worries me.

That said, I'm in support of a muscular speaker for good or ill, I'm in support 
of
adding "political" systems like impeachment.  The Speaker has variously been a
prize for winning, but has also been elected at times (though we didn't have the
PM, which fills the "elected for power" role).  With the PM existing, I think 
it's
a bit boring to make the Speaker "just another election", but it would be good 
to
explore some kinds of checks and balances - if the PM and Speaker together are
ne'er-do-wells, what procedural games can we add to have factions and the like 
as
a balance?

Of course - one shouldn't go for re-envisioning a whole political system when 
the
economy is so fragile - one form of chaos at a time please - but food for 
thought.

On Thu, 14 Sep 2017, Cuddle Beam wrote:
> Works the same imo. Voting them in because they're wanted or voting them out 
> because 
> they're not wanted gives similar result I believe, it's just a matter of 
> adding democracy
> into the mix. 
> 
> On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 4:20 AM, Aris Merchant 
>  wrote:
>   Maybe add impeachment proceedings? That seems generally advisable,
>   past this specific occasion.
> 
>   -Aris
> 
>   On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 7:19 PM, Cuddle Beam  
> wrote:
>   > That can be cool too. Although if people dereg each time I may win in 
> future
>   > circumstances (or someone else they may disagree enough with), I 
> suggest
>   > amending the Speaker position to an elected office.
>   >
>   > On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 4:09 AM, Aris Merchant
>   >  wrote:
>   >>
>   >> Oh dear. I recommend we install a new speaker by proposal. How about
>   >> G.? We don't even have to give em a win, although we could if people
>   >> wanted to do that.
>   >>
>   >> -Aris
>   >>
>   >> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 6:51 PM, Nic Evans  wrote:
>   >> > On 09/13/17 16:58, VJ Rada wrote:
>   >> >> Because we currently have no speaker if Cuddlebeam was not the
>   >> >> speaker, and because e is in both sets of possible recent 
> winners, I
>   >> >> appoint Cuddlebeam speaker.
>   >> >
>   >> > After consideration, it strikes me as flagrantly beligerent to 
> make CB
>   >> > the Speaker. From a mechanical standpoint, e has a tendency to 
> object to
>   >> > things for no good reason and now has full veto power. From a
>   >> > 'figurehead leader of Agora' standpoint, I have no intent of being 
> part
>   >> > of a community represented by someone prone to sexism, racism, and
>   >> > misgendering.
>   >> >
>   >> > If CB is the Speaker, I submit the above as a Cantus Cygneus.
>   >> >
>   >> >>
>   >> >> I also yellow card myself for being bad in several ways.
>   >> >>
>   >> >
>   >> >
>   >
>   >
> 
> 
> 
>

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Prime Minister] Speaker & Card

[Kerim Aydin]

On Wed, 13 Sep 2017, Nic Evans wrote:
> On 09/13/17 20:55, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> >
> > Without meaning to take away from the sentiment expressed in any way
> > or anyone's right to express it, this little bit of win uncertainty is now 
> > *really*
> > propagating into the game state.  When VJ Rada made this appointment 
> > attempt,
> > I almost CFJd on whether a conditional built on a conditional built on a 
> > conditional was beyond a reasonable effort to allow, now we're a level 
> > deeper...
> 
> This is part of the reason I did a CC instead of immediate
> deregistration. I can continue normal actions until the Registrar
> deregisters me, so there's no chance of causing more reversion and
> uncertainty in the meantime.

Thanks for the thoughtfulness!  I mean, I knew CC's weren't instant, but didn't 
guess you were purposefully thinking of that.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Prime Minister] Speaker & Card

[Cuddle Beam]

Works the same imo. Voting them in because they're wanted or voting them
out because they're not wanted gives similar result I believe, it's just a
matter of adding democracy into the mix.

On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 4:20 AM, Aris Merchant <
thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Maybe add impeachment proceedings? That seems generally advisable,
> past this specific occasion.
>
> -Aris
>
> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 7:19 PM, Cuddle Beam  wrote:
> > That can be cool too. Although if people dereg each time I may win in
> future
> > circumstances (or someone else they may disagree enough with), I suggest
> > amending the Speaker position to an elected office.
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 4:09 AM, Aris Merchant
> >  wrote:
> >>
> >> Oh dear. I recommend we install a new speaker by proposal. How about
> >> G.? We don't even have to give em a win, although we could if people
> >> wanted to do that.
> >>
> >> -Aris
> >>
> >> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 6:51 PM, Nic Evans  wrote:
> >> > On 09/13/17 16:58, VJ Rada wrote:
> >> >> Because we currently have no speaker if Cuddlebeam was not the
> >> >> speaker, and because e is in both sets of possible recent winners, I
> >> >> appoint Cuddlebeam speaker.
> >> >
> >> > After consideration, it strikes me as flagrantly beligerent to make CB
> >> > the Speaker. From a mechanical standpoint, e has a tendency to object
> to
> >> > things for no good reason and now has full veto power. From a
> >> > 'figurehead leader of Agora' standpoint, I have no intent of being
> part
> >> > of a community represented by someone prone to sexism, racism, and
> >> > misgendering.
> >> >
> >> > If CB is the Speaker, I submit the above as a Cantus Cygneus.
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> I also yellow card myself for being bad in several ways.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >
> >
>

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Prime Minister] Speaker & Card

[Cuddle Beam]

That can be cool too. Although if people dereg each time I may win in
future circumstances (or someone else they may disagree enough with), I
suggest amending the Speaker position to an elected office.

On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 4:09 AM, Aris Merchant <
thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Oh dear. I recommend we install a new speaker by proposal. How about
> G.? We don't even have to give em a win, although we could if people
> wanted to do that.
>
> -Aris
>
> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 6:51 PM, Nic Evans  wrote:
> > On 09/13/17 16:58, VJ Rada wrote:
> >> Because we currently have no speaker if Cuddlebeam was not the
> >> speaker, and because e is in both sets of possible recent winners, I
> >> appoint Cuddlebeam speaker.
> >
> > After consideration, it strikes me as flagrantly beligerent to make CB
> > the Speaker. From a mechanical standpoint, e has a tendency to object to
> > things for no good reason and now has full veto power. From a
> > 'figurehead leader of Agora' standpoint, I have no intent of being part
> > of a community represented by someone prone to sexism, racism, and
> > misgendering.
> >
> > If CB is the Speaker, I submit the above as a Cantus Cygneus.
> >
> >>
> >> I also yellow card myself for being bad in several ways.
> >>
> >
> >
>

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Prime Minister] Speaker & Card

[Aris Merchant]

Maybe add impeachment proceedings? That seems generally advisable,
past this specific occasion.

-Aris

On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 7:19 PM, Cuddle Beam  wrote:
> That can be cool too. Although if people dereg each time I may win in future
> circumstances (or someone else they may disagree enough with), I suggest
> amending the Speaker position to an elected office.
>
> On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 4:09 AM, Aris Merchant
>  wrote:
>>
>> Oh dear. I recommend we install a new speaker by proposal. How about
>> G.? We don't even have to give em a win, although we could if people
>> wanted to do that.
>>
>> -Aris
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 6:51 PM, Nic Evans  wrote:
>> > On 09/13/17 16:58, VJ Rada wrote:
>> >> Because we currently have no speaker if Cuddlebeam was not the
>> >> speaker, and because e is in both sets of possible recent winners, I
>> >> appoint Cuddlebeam speaker.
>> >
>> > After consideration, it strikes me as flagrantly beligerent to make CB
>> > the Speaker. From a mechanical standpoint, e has a tendency to object to
>> > things for no good reason and now has full veto power. From a
>> > 'figurehead leader of Agora' standpoint, I have no intent of being part
>> > of a community represented by someone prone to sexism, racism, and
>> > misgendering.
>> >
>> > If CB is the Speaker, I submit the above as a Cantus Cygneus.
>> >
>> >>
>> >> I also yellow card myself for being bad in several ways.
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>
>

DIS: Re: BUS: [Prime Minister] Speaker & Card

[Aris Merchant]

Oh dear. I recommend we install a new speaker by proposal. How about
G.? We don't even have to give em a win, although we could if people
wanted to do that.

-Aris

On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 6:51 PM, Nic Evans  wrote:
> On 09/13/17 16:58, VJ Rada wrote:
>> Because we currently have no speaker if Cuddlebeam was not the
>> speaker, and because e is in both sets of possible recent winners, I
>> appoint Cuddlebeam speaker.
>
> After consideration, it strikes me as flagrantly beligerent to make CB
> the Speaker. From a mechanical standpoint, e has a tendency to object to
> things for no good reason and now has full veto power. From a
> 'figurehead leader of Agora' standpoint, I have no intent of being part
> of a community represented by someone prone to sexism, racism, and
> misgendering.
>
> If CB is the Speaker, I submit the above as a Cantus Cygneus.
>
>>
>> I also yellow card myself for being bad in several ways.
>>
>
>

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Prime Minister] Speaker & Card

[Nic Evans]

On 09/13/17 20:55, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> Without meaning to take away from the sentiment expressed in any way
> or anyone's right to express it, this little bit of win uncertainty is now 
> *really*
> propagating into the game state.  When VJ Rada made this appointment attempt,
> I almost CFJd on whether a conditional built on a conditional built on a 
> conditional was beyond a reasonable effort to allow, now we're a level 
> deeper...

This is part of the reason I did a CC instead of immediate
deregistration. I can continue normal actions until the Registrar
deregisters me, so there's no chance of causing more reversion and
uncertainty in the meantime.

> this little bit of Win uncertainty is *really* stre
> On Wed, 13 Sep 2017, Nic Evans wrote:
>> On 09/13/17 16:58, VJ Rada wrote:
>>> Because we currently have no speaker if Cuddlebeam was not the
>>> speaker, and because e is in both sets of possible recent winners, I
>>> appoint Cuddlebeam speaker.
>> After consideration, it strikes me as flagrantly beligerent to make CB
>> the Speaker. From a mechanical standpoint, e has a tendency to object to
>> things for no good reason and now has full veto power. From a
>> 'figurehead leader of Agora' standpoint, I have no intent of being part
>> of a community represented by someone prone to sexism, racism, and
>> misgendering.
>>
>> If CB is the Speaker, I submit the above as a Cantus Cygneus.
>>
>>> I also yellow card myself for being bad in several ways.
>>>
>>
>>




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

DIS: Re: BUS: [Prime Minister] Speaker & Card

[Kerim Aydin]

Without meaning to take away from the sentiment expressed in any way
or anyone's right to express it, this little bit of win uncertainty is now 
*really*
propagating into the game state.  When VJ Rada made this appointment attempt,
I almost CFJd on whether a conditional built on a conditional built on a 
conditional was beyond a reasonable effort to allow, now we're a level deeper...

this little bit of Win uncertainty is *really* stre
On Wed, 13 Sep 2017, Nic Evans wrote:
> On 09/13/17 16:58, VJ Rada wrote:
> > Because we currently have no speaker if Cuddlebeam was not the
> > speaker, and because e is in both sets of possible recent winners, I
> > appoint Cuddlebeam speaker.
> 
> After consideration, it strikes me as flagrantly beligerent to make CB
> the Speaker. From a mechanical standpoint, e has a tendency to object to
> things for no good reason and now has full veto power. From a
> 'figurehead leader of Agora' standpoint, I have no intent of being part
> of a community represented by someone prone to sexism, racism, and
> misgendering.
> 
> If CB is the Speaker, I submit the above as a Cantus Cygneus.
> 
> >
> > I also yellow card myself for being bad in several ways.
> >
> 
> 
>

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Prime Minister] Speaker & Card

[Cuddle Beam]

honorabu sudoku

On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 3:33 AM, VJ Rada  wrote:

> Executive order: The PM has several powers including the ability to
> give one card a week, for any and no reason.
>
> On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 11:17 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
>  wrote:
> > How do you card yourself?
> > 
> > Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> > p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com
> >
> >
> >
> >> On Sep 13, 2017, at 5:58 PM, VJ Rada  wrote:
> >>
> >> Because we currently have no speaker if Cuddlebeam was not the
> >> speaker, and because e is in both sets of possible recent winners, I
> >> appoint Cuddlebeam speaker.
> >>
> >> I also yellow card myself for being bad in several ways.
> >>
> >> --
> >> From V.J Rada
> >
>
>
>
> --
> From V.J. Rada
>

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Prime Minister] Speaker & Card

[Quazie]

It is possible for em to do so via prime minister - but I'm uncertain if
this worked as e didn't indicate as such
On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 18:17 Publius Scribonius Scholasticus <
p.scribonius.scholasti...@googlemail.com> wrote:

> How do you card yourself?
> 
> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com
>
>
>
> > On Sep 13, 2017, at 5:58 PM, VJ Rada  wrote:
> >
> > Because we currently have no speaker if Cuddlebeam was not the
> > speaker, and because e is in both sets of possible recent winners, I
> > appoint Cuddlebeam speaker.
> >
> > I also yellow card myself for being bad in several ways.
> >
> > --
> > From V.J Rada
>
>

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Prime Minister] Speaker & Card

[VJ Rada]

Executive order: The PM has several powers including the ability to
give one card a week, for any and no reason.

On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 11:17 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
 wrote:
> How do you card yourself?
> 
> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com
>
>
>
>> On Sep 13, 2017, at 5:58 PM, VJ Rada  wrote:
>>
>> Because we currently have no speaker if Cuddlebeam was not the
>> speaker, and because e is in both sets of possible recent winners, I
>> appoint Cuddlebeam speaker.
>>
>> I also yellow card myself for being bad in several ways.
>>
>> --
>> From V.J Rada
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [ADoP] You thought there was a lot of elections last time. Initiating 8 (!) elections.

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

I vote for myself for the Registrar and endorse the incumbent in all other 
elections.

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



> On Sep 13, 2017, at 7:31 PM, Quazie  wrote:
> 
> In all elections opened in the quoted message I vote [Present]
> 
> In all elections opened in the quoted message I vote :
> {
>   [
>The Incumbent, unless the Incumbent is VJ Rada,
>Whoever first votes for emself, unless that player is VJ Rada,
>Endorse G, unless that leads to voting for VJ Rada
>   ]
> }
> 
> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 4:22 PM VJ Rada  wrote:
> Please note the already ongoing election for agronomist.
> 
> I initiate the elections for and the agoran decisions for the
> determination of the Arbitor, the Superintendent, the Tailor, the
> Promotor, the Referee, the Registrar, the Surveyor, and the
> Rulekeepor. These elections are either legal under the 90 day rule or
> are vacant offices. The vote collector is the ADoP and the quorum is
> 2.0.
> 
> --
> From V.J Rada



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

DIS: Re: BUS: [Prime Minister] Speaker & Card

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

How do you card yourself?

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



> On Sep 13, 2017, at 5:58 PM, VJ Rada  wrote:
> 
> Because we currently have no speaker if Cuddlebeam was not the
> speaker, and because e is in both sets of possible recent winners, I
> appoint Cuddlebeam speaker.
> 
> I also yellow card myself for being bad in several ways.
> 
> --
> From V.J Rada



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

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

[VJ Rada]

Accepted, although that does not self-ratify I don't think.

On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 10:13 AM, Josh T  wrote:
> CoE: I don't think I've held my office since August.
>
> 天火狐
>
> On 13 September 2017 at 19:52, VJ Rada  wrote:
>>
>> I publish the following ADoP weekly report.
>> Informal Measures
>> Consolidation (number of filled offices over number of officeholders):
>> 1.556
>> Late reports: (number of late reports as a percentage of reports): 23.53%
>> Empty offices (Empty offices as a percentage of offices): 17.64%
>>
>> This report is effective as of 11pm GMT on 13 Sep
>> Date of Last Report: 2017-09-06
>>
>> Note: The "holder" column self-ratifies
>> Office  Holder  Since   Last Election  Can Elect
>> -
>> Arbitor  Y
>> Assessornichdel  2017-06-05  2017-07-16
>> ADoP[1] V.J. Rada  2017-06-05  2017-09-13
>> Herald  G. 2017-09-06   2017-09-13
>> Prime Minister VJ[2] 2017-09-13   2017-09-13
>> PromotorAris2016-10-21   2017-05-26  Y
>> Referee o   2017-04-172017-06-09   Y
>> Registrar   PSS[3]  2017-04-18  2017-06-09  Y
>> Regkeepor   Aris  2017-09-13[4] 2017-09-13
>> Reportor 天火狐2017-08-10 2017-09-13
>> Rulekeepor  Gaelan  2017-05-17 2017-05-26 Y
>> Secretary   o   2016-11-06  2017-06-27
>> Speaker   CB[5]   2017-09-13[6]  2014-04-21  Never
>> SuperintendentY
>> Surveyoro   2017-05-08 2017-05-10   Y
>> Tailor  Y
>> Agronimist   Babelien 2017-09-13  Never   Y
>>
>> [1]Associate Director of Personnel
>> [2]V.J. Rada
>> [3]Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
>> [4]Disputed, although Aris is the regkeepor, he may have held the
>> office earlier.
>> [5]Super disputed and does not self-ratify. Stands for Cuddlebeam
>> [6]Also disputed
>>
>> Office  M[1]  Report  Last Published  Late[2]
>> ---
>> ADoP[3]   Offices 2017-09-13   if i get
>> this done fast, no
>> Herald  Y Patent titles   2017-09-04
>> Promotor  Proposal pool   2017-09-11
>> Referee   Rule violations 2017-09-12
>> Registrar Players, Fora   2017-09-03   !
>> Registrar   Y Player history  2017-08-01!
>> Regkeepor Regulations 2017-09-07[4]
>> Reportor  The Agoran Newspaper2017-09-13
>> RulekeeporShort Logical Ruleset   2017-09-11
>> Rulekeepor  Y Full Logical Ruleset2017-08-25
>> Secretary OLEBaS[5]   2017-09-12
>> Secretary   Y Charters2017-09-02
>> SuperintendentAgencies (incremental) 2017-08-28 !!
>> Superintendent  Y Agencies (Full) 2017-08-01  !
>> Surveyor  Estates   2017-09-13
>> Tailor  Y Ribbons 2017-08-24
>> Agronomist   FarmsNever
>> ---
>> [1] Monthly
>> [2] ! = 1 period missed. !! = 2 periods missed. !!! = 3+ periods missed.
>> [3] Associate Director of Personnel
>> [4] Disputed
>> [5] Organizations, Lockout, Expenditure, Balances, and Shinies
>>
>> ===Events===
>> Not this week! I was considering breaking the tie in favour of o. for
>> this reason but I wanted regular elections to be ensured. I apologize
>> for my inefficiency in this regard.
>>
>> --
>> From V.J Rada
>
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

DIS: Re: BUS: [Prime Minister] Speaker & Card

[Cuddle Beam]

>I award myself a Platinum Ribbon - cuz I think I'm the speaker.  BOOM.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mlWpE-9TH1s=youtu.be=56s

On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 1:18 AM, Quazie  wrote:

> I award myself a Platinum Ribbon - cuz I think I'm the speaker.  BOOM.
>
> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 16:17 Cuddle Beam  wrote:
>
>> Woo!
>>
>> I award myself a Platinum Ribbon.
>>
>> Speaker in Agora and Emperor at Blognomic at the same time, hurrah!
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 11:58 PM, VJ Rada  wrote:
>>
>>> Because we currently have no speaker if Cuddlebeam was not the
>>> speaker, and because e is in both sets of possible recent winners, I
>>> appoint Cuddlebeam speaker.
>>>
>>> I also yellow card myself for being bad in several ways.
>>>
>>> --
>>> From V.J Rada
>>>
>>
>>

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Prime Minister] Speaker & Card

[Cuddle Beam]

>Recent messages

Oh snap lol. Oh well, at least in one timeline I might be Emp+Speaker.

On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 12:53 AM, Aris Merchant <
thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I know mine is slightly overdue, but I think I'll be able to get it done
> today.
>
> -Aris
>
> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 3:07 PM, Kerim Aydin 
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Cuddlebeam certainly *wasn't* in the first set of winners, because e
> > wasn't a player at the time of Apathy.
> >
> > [only a few more hours until I can re-assign the darn CFJs...]
> >
> > On Wed, 13 Sep 2017, Quazie wrote:
> >> There exists a possibility that Cuddlebeam didn't win the 2nd time
> (though I think he
> >> did) and in that case I'm speaker as I would've deputized for PM and
> became it, and
> >> this failed - just to make matters confusing.
> >>
> >> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 2:58 PM VJ Rada  wrote:
> >>   Because we currently have no speaker if Cuddlebeam was not the
> >>   speaker, and because e is in both sets of possible recent
> winners, I
> >>   appoint Cuddlebeam speaker.
> >>
> >>   I also yellow card myself for being bad in several ways.
> >>
> >>   --
> >>   From V.J Rada
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
>

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Prime Minister] Speaker & Card

[Aris Merchant]

I know mine is slightly overdue, but I think I'll be able to get it done today.

-Aris

On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 3:07 PM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
>
>
> Cuddlebeam certainly *wasn't* in the first set of winners, because e
> wasn't a player at the time of Apathy.
>
> [only a few more hours until I can re-assign the darn CFJs...]
>
> On Wed, 13 Sep 2017, Quazie wrote:
>> There exists a possibility that Cuddlebeam didn't win the 2nd time (though I 
>> think he
>> did) and in that case I'm speaker as I would've deputized for PM and became 
>> it, and
>> this failed - just to make matters confusing.
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 2:58 PM VJ Rada  wrote:
>>   Because we currently have no speaker if Cuddlebeam was not the
>>   speaker, and because e is in both sets of possible recent winners, I
>>   appoint Cuddlebeam speaker.
>>
>>   I also yellow card myself for being bad in several ways.
>>
>>   --
>>   From V.J Rada
>>
>>
>>
>

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Prime Minister] Speaker & Card

[Kerim Aydin]

Cuddlebeam certainly *wasn't* in the first set of winners, because e 
wasn't a player at the time of Apathy.

[only a few more hours until I can re-assign the darn CFJs...]

On Wed, 13 Sep 2017, Quazie wrote:
> There exists a possibility that Cuddlebeam didn't win the 2nd time (though I 
> think he 
> did) and in that case I'm speaker as I would've deputized for PM and became 
> it, and 
> this failed - just to make matters confusing.
> 
> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 2:58 PM VJ Rada  wrote:
>   Because we currently have no speaker if Cuddlebeam was not the
>   speaker, and because e is in both sets of possible recent winners, I
>   appoint Cuddlebeam speaker.
> 
>   I also yellow card myself for being bad in several ways.
> 
>   --
>   From V.J Rada
> 
> 
>

DIS: Re: BUS: [Prime Minister] Speaker & Card

[Quazie]

There exists a possibility that Cuddlebeam didn't win the 2nd time (though
I think he did) and in that case I'm speaker as I would've deputized for PM
and became it, and this failed - just to make matters confusing.

On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 2:58 PM VJ Rada  wrote:

> Because we currently have no speaker if Cuddlebeam was not the
> speaker, and because e is in both sets of possible recent winners, I
> appoint Cuddlebeam speaker.
>
> I also yellow card myself for being bad in several ways.
>
> --
> From V.J Rada
>

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Apology take two

[Quazie]

As the prime minister you can card anyone for any reason
On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 14:10 VJ Rada  wrote:

> I apologise for pointing the finger at you. I expected a green card,
> and I also apologise for taking advantage of your yellow card to win
> office. I'm sorry for trying to take full control of you without
> notifying you. I'm sorry that I didn't apologise earlier: I
> misinterpreted your tone in comments such as "not VJ Rada, e is a jerk
> and is not an agent" as made in a joking tone, I didn't realise until
> now my actions were genuinely hurtful. If I could, I would point the
> finger at myself for a guaranteed card. I will likely do so next week.
>
> On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 4:35 AM, Quazie  wrote:
> > I'm sorry I didn't properly restrict my agency up front.  I apologize for
> > expecting my fellow agorans to only exploit me a little bit.  I apologize
> > for stopping VJ Rada's obvious greed when it came to exploiting me in a
> > non-consentual way.  I do NOT apologize for taking control of my own
> body,
> > my own person, and preventing someone from using it in a way that I do
> not
> > consent to.  I wish I could point my finger at VJ Rada for abusing me in
> a
> > non-conentual manner, and then having the FUCKING GAUL to ensure I would
> > have to apologize for it.  I'm considering deregistering as a result of
> > these strong feelings I have, the fact that consent could so easily be
> taken
> > from me, and i have to apologize for it.  I made a silly agency to allow
> me
> > and others to fight over me as a limited resource - i realize agora isn't
> > the real world, I realize that I did something a bit silly, but the main
> > remorse i'm experiencing is that Agora can allow for such an experience
> to
> > happen.  I've learned my lesson - I'll never let VJ Rada perform any
> actions
> > on my behalf again that's for certain, and i guess i'm sorry i broke a
> > pledge e wrote for me, but I feel very very dirty writing this apology
> out,
> > it feels vile, it feels exploitive, and I hope that VJ Rada feels bad
> about
> > it too.
>
>
>
> --
> From V.J Rada
>

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Come What May

[Ørjan Johansen]

On Thu, 14 Sep 2017, VJ Rada wrote:


Sorry I was wondering whether to use it for elections or just for
reports. I pledge to do what Orjan said.


Thank you.

Greetings,
Ørjan.

Re: DIS: [Draft] Make Your Home Shine, or, Contracts On The Cheap

[Ørjan Johansen]

On Wed, 13 Sep 2017, Owen Jacobson wrote:


Title: Make Your Home Shine
Author: o
Co-authors: CuddleBeam
AI: 1.7

For the purposes of clarity, no existing pledge is intended to carry 
over into this system, and this proposal does not imply the creation of 
any assets corresponding to existing pledges.


For even more clarity, say it directly:

All previously existing pledges are hereby destroyed and do not carry over 
in any way into the system created by this proposal.


Greetings,
Ørjan.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Come What May

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

I concur.

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



> On Sep 13, 2017, at 5:06 PM, Ørjan Johansen  wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 13 Sep 2017, VJ Rada wrote:
> 
 I initiate an election for the office of Agronomist, as no election for 
 this office has happened in the last 90 days (r. 2145). I stand for 
 >>election for this office, but if a player who has no offices would like 
 the job, I would prefer that Agorans vote for them before me.
>> 
>> I initiate the Agoran decision for the determination of Agronomist.
>> The quorum is 2.0 and the vote collector is the ADoP. I vote by
>> endorsing o.
> 
> I'd like to ask you to _please_ use the customary [ADoP] etc. tag for (at 
> least bigger) officer actions.  It's how I search for them in my mailbox...
> 
> Greetings,
> Ørjan.



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

DIS: Re: BUS: Apology take two

[VJ Rada]

I apologise for pointing the finger at you. I expected a green card,
and I also apologise for taking advantage of your yellow card to win
office. I'm sorry for trying to take full control of you without
notifying you. I'm sorry that I didn't apologise earlier: I
misinterpreted your tone in comments such as "not VJ Rada, e is a jerk
and is not an agent" as made in a joking tone, I didn't realise until
now my actions were genuinely hurtful. If I could, I would point the
finger at myself for a guaranteed card. I will likely do so next week.

On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 4:35 AM, Quazie  wrote:
> I'm sorry I didn't properly restrict my agency up front.  I apologize for
> expecting my fellow agorans to only exploit me a little bit.  I apologize
> for stopping VJ Rada's obvious greed when it came to exploiting me in a
> non-consentual way.  I do NOT apologize for taking control of my own body,
> my own person, and preventing someone from using it in a way that I do not
> consent to.  I wish I could point my finger at VJ Rada for abusing me in a
> non-conentual manner, and then having the FUCKING GAUL to ensure I would
> have to apologize for it.  I'm considering deregistering as a result of
> these strong feelings I have, the fact that consent could so easily be taken
> from me, and i have to apologize for it.  I made a silly agency to allow me
> and others to fight over me as a limited resource - i realize agora isn't
> the real world, I realize that I did something a bit silly, but the main
> remorse i'm experiencing is that Agora can allow for such an experience to
> happen.  I've learned my lesson - I'll never let VJ Rada perform any actions
> on my behalf again that's for certain, and i guess i'm sorry i broke a
> pledge e wrote for me, but I feel very very dirty writing this apology out,
> it feels vile, it feels exploitive, and I hope that VJ Rada feels bad about
> it too.



-- 
>From V.J Rada

Re: DIS: Proto: Banking and Bonds

[Ørjan Johansen]

On Wed, 13 Sep 2017, Cuddle Beam wrote:


As a suggestion, it might be good to add that there is a Newbie Funding
reserve, something like this?:

The Newbie Funding Reserve are the shinies that are contained within
Agora's balance level of 0 and 50.

Agora cannot make any transfer to grant shinies to others except grant
Welcome Packages if the Newbie Funding Reserve isn't full.


Slightly buggy: It should be "if it would cause the Newbie Funding Reserve 
to become less than full", or else the balance is probably going to end 
up hovering in the 40s.


Greetings,
Ørjan.

DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Come What May

[Ørjan Johansen]

On Wed, 13 Sep 2017, VJ Rada wrote:


I initiate an election for the office of Agronomist, as no election for this office 
has happened in the last 90 days (r. 2145). I stand for >>election for this 
office, but if a player who has no offices would like the job, I would prefer that 
Agorans vote for them before me.


I initiate the Agoran decision for the determination of Agronomist.
The quorum is 2.0 and the vote collector is the ADoP. I vote by
endorsing o.


I'd like to ask you to _please_ use the customary [ADoP] etc. tag for (at 
least bigger) officer actions.  It's how I search for them in my 
mailbox...


Greetings,
Ørjan.

DIS: Re: BUS: Retracting my CoE

[Ørjan Johansen]

On Wed, 13 Sep 2017, VJ Rada wrote:


I retract my recent CoE. The latest secretary's report is NOT a tissue
of lies. Carry on.


As far as I can tell, there is still no general allowance for retracting 
actions.


Greegins,
Ørjan.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Guaranteed Stamp Income

[Cuddle Beam]

Proto: Rename Agora to Agor

On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 10:29 PM, Kerim Aydin 
wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, 13 Sep 2017, Nic Evans wrote:
> > On 09/13/17 15:21, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, 13 Sep 2017, Nic Evans wrote:
> > >>>player CAN, by announcement, create a Stamp with Agora as the
> Creater
> > > "Creator" is actually a correct word in this case!
> >
> > I'm aware, and avoided it so it didn't look like an office title.
>
> We've used "Mintor" (or "Minter") as "creater of an asset/currency"
> before, if
> it stands out better.
>
>
>
>

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Guaranteed Stamp Income

[Kerim Aydin]

On Wed, 13 Sep 2017, Nic Evans wrote:
> On 09/13/17 15:21, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 13 Sep 2017, Nic Evans wrote:
> >>>player CAN, by announcement, create a Stamp with Agora as the Creater
> > "Creator" is actually a correct word in this case!
> 
> I'm aware, and avoided it so it didn't look like an office title.

We've used "Mintor" (or "Minter") as "creater of an asset/currency" before, if
it stands out better.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Guaranteed Stamp Income

[Nic Evans]

On 09/13/17 15:21, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> On Wed, 13 Sep 2017, Nic Evans wrote:
>>>player CAN, by announcement, create a Stamp with Agora as the Creater
> "Creator" is actually a correct word in this case!

I'm aware, and avoided it so it didn't look like an office title.

>
> I'd put "2 stamps" rather than 1 as the welcome package.  = 4 proposals, 1
> per week when you first join.  Also gives you options (cash one, hold one).

Stamps are 4x the value of the cost to pend. 1/20th vs 1/5th.

>
> My overall question is whether this interfaces well with the Bond proposal -
> should those concepts be coordinated?  Otherwise looks like a good mechanism.
>
>
>

I was thinking of this as a somewhat lighter version of Bonds, including
the possibility of later adding other ways to get Agora Stamps. But I
haven't scrutinized that proposal too much yet.



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Guaranteed Stamp Income

[Kerim Aydin]

On Wed, 13 Sep 2017, Nic Evans wrote:
> >player CAN, by announcement, create a Stamp with Agora as the Creater

"Creator" is actually a correct word in this case!

I'd put "2 stamps" rather than 1 as the welcome package.  = 4 proposals, 1
per week when you first join.  Also gives you options (cash one, hold one).

My overall question is whether this interfaces well with the Bond proposal -
should those concepts be coordinated?  Otherwise looks like a good mechanism.

DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Guaranteed Stamp Income

[Cuddle Beam]

Stamp income instead of shinies is actually a pretty good idea. I wonder if
Stamps become the de facto coin instead of shinies, though, although that
might actually be a good thing if a shiny monopoly ever happens (disregard
shinies, do business with Stamps instead so that the game can continue
without being on the leash of the would-be monopolizer/s).

On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 10:19 PM, Nic Evans  wrote:

>
>
> On 09/13/17 15:13, Nic Evans wrote:
> > A more indirect guaranteed income. Less immediate impact on the economy,
> > and more protection from bad timing.
> >
> > title: Agora Stamps
> > ai: 1
> > author: nichdel
> > co-authors:
> >
> > Amend 2499 "Welcome Packages" to read in full:
> >
> >If a player has not received one since e became a player, any other
> >player CAN, by announcement, create a Stamp with Agora as the Creater
> >in first players' possession.
>
> Ok so I wrote this on a crunch between chores and see a couple clear
> errors here. I withdraw this proposal for now but would still like
> feedback on it.
>
> >
> > Amend R2498 to be titled "Stamps" and to read in full:
> >
> >Stamps are an asset. The Secretary is the recordkeepor of Stamps.
> >
> >Each Stamp has an associated Creater, which SHOULD be noted whenever
> >the Stamp is mentioned and MUST be noted whenever the Stamp is
> >transfered. Stamps with the same creater are fungible.
> >
> >Once per month a player CAN, by announcement, create a Stamp with
> >themselves as the Creater by transferring the Stamp Value, in
> >shinies, to Agora.
> >
> >If Agora owns at least as many Shinies as the current Stamp Value, a
> >player CAN, by announcement, destroy a Stamp e owns to cause Agora to
> >transfer the Stamp Value, in shinies, to emself.
> >
> > Enact a Power 1 rule titled "Stamp Wins" with the following text:
> >
> >If a player owns 10 stamps with different Creaters, none of which
> >have Agora as its Creater, e CAN win by announcement. Doing so
> >destroys the specified stamps.
> >
> > Enact a Power 1 rule titled "Basic Stamp Income" with the following
> > text:
> >
> >When the Secretary publishes the first Weekly Report of an Agoran
> >Month, e CAN and SHALL, by announcement, create Stamps with Agora as
> >the Creater and transfer them to any player who has no stamps and
> >less than the Stamp Value in shinies at the time of publication.
> >
> >
>
>
>

Re: DIS: a relief valve

[Cuddle Beam]

On a related note for thematics, the Shogun was a warlord who was in power
because of military-into-political might, not really because of honor or
anything. The "formal" ruler was the Emperor but he kinda didn't do
anything. The Shogun was the real person in control.

On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 9:58 PM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:

>
>
> Thanks!  If you were picking one, which would you pick?  (And what's the
> singular
> version of that, does it match "is a Samurai" as both singular and plural)
>
> On Wed, 13 Sep 2017, Josh T wrote:
> > The Japanese term for a (western) serf is *noudo*, literally meaning
> farm servant. If you want something from the historical Japanese caste
> system, since they took after Confucian ideas, peasant was was actually
> > the highest commoner class (above craftsmen and merchants); the outcasts
> of the Japanese feudal system were the *eta* (historical name, somewhat
> derogatory today, means "full of defilement"), *hinin*
> > ("non-humans"), or the modern politically correct term in English,
> *burakumin* ("hamlet people", referring to how they were exiled from towns
> and cities to have their own hamlets). Hopefully that helped.
> > 天火狐
> >
> > On 13 September 2017 at 15:38, Kerim Aydin 
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >   On Wed, 13 Sep 2017, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> >   >   - Any player with a karma of -5 or less is a (Japanese
> term for serf?).
> >
> >   Just as an addendum, if 天火狐 or anyone with better knowledge of
> Japanese
> >   feudal/cultural terms than me wants to suggest flavor improvements
> (in English
> >   alphabet please), I'd gratefully add them.  Maybe we should call
> the whole
> >   thing a tea ceremony...
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

Re: DIS: a relief valve

[Josh T]

Japanese as a general rule doesn't distinguish between singular and plural,
and English tends to keep the original language's plurals. It's one piece
of sushi, two pieces of sushi etc.; one samurai, two samurai, etc.

I'd probably pick eta because it's historical and short. We can pretend
people are Greek letters if some future person gets offended.

I do agree there should be some way to "recenter" the karma spread. I don't
have a good suggestion at the moment as to how to accomplish this.

天火狐

On 13 September 2017 at 15:58, Kerim Aydin  wrote:

>
>
> Thanks!  If you were picking one, which would you pick?  (And what's the
> singular
> version of that, does it match "is a Samurai" as both singular and plural)
>
> On Wed, 13 Sep 2017, Josh T wrote:
> > The Japanese term for a (western) serf is *noudo*, literally meaning
> farm servant. If you want something from the historical Japanese caste
> system, since they took after Confucian ideas, peasant was was actually
> > the highest commoner class (above craftsmen and merchants); the outcasts
> of the Japanese feudal system were the *eta* (historical name, somewhat
> derogatory today, means "full of defilement"), *hinin*
> > ("non-humans"), or the modern politically correct term in English,
> *burakumin* ("hamlet people", referring to how they were exiled from towns
> and cities to have their own hamlets). Hopefully that helped.
> > 天火狐
> >
> > On 13 September 2017 at 15:38, Kerim Aydin 
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >   On Wed, 13 Sep 2017, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> >   >   - Any player with a karma of -5 or less is a (Japanese
> term for serf?).
> >
> >   Just as an addendum, if 天火狐 or anyone with better knowledge of
> Japanese
> >   feudal/cultural terms than me wants to suggest flavor improvements
> (in English
> >   alphabet please), I'd gratefully add them.  Maybe we should call
> the whole
> >   thing a tea ceremony...
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

Re: DIS: a relief valve

[Kerim Aydin]

Thanks!  If you were picking one, which would you pick?  (And what's the 
singular
version of that, does it match "is a Samurai" as both singular and plural)

On Wed, 13 Sep 2017, Josh T wrote:
> The Japanese term for a (western) serf is *noudo*, literally meaning farm 
> servant. If you want something from the historical Japanese caste system, 
> since they took after Confucian ideas, peasant was was actually
> the highest commoner class (above craftsmen and merchants); the outcasts of 
> the Japanese feudal system were the *eta* (historical name, somewhat 
> derogatory today, means "full of defilement"), *hinin*
> ("non-humans"), or the modern politically correct term in English, 
> *burakumin* ("hamlet people", referring to how they were exiled from towns 
> and cities to have their own hamlets). Hopefully that helped. 
> 天火狐
> 
> On 13 September 2017 at 15:38, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
> 
> 
>   On Wed, 13 Sep 2017, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>   >       - Any player with a karma of -5 or less is a (Japanese term for 
> serf?).
> 
>   Just as an addendum, if 天火狐 or anyone with better knowledge of Japanese
>   feudal/cultural terms than me wants to suggest flavor improvements (in 
> English
>   alphabet please), I'd gratefully add them.  Maybe we should call the 
> whole
>   thing a tea ceremony...
> 
> 
> 
> 
>

Re: DIS: a relief valve

[Quazie]

The Karmaster [Or whoever tracks these switches] Should be able to prune
from the top/bottom if: Total karma abs([Positive - Negative]) Exceeds some
threshold - that way you don't need a proposal to fix it later.

On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 12:56 PM Kerim Aydin  wrote:

>
>
> Thought about that a bit... technically it's always 0 sum among *persons*,
> to have
> an average go that high you'd need a lot of low-karma players to
> deregister.  I think
> that's a case of "let's re-center by proposal if it proved later that we
> need to".
>
> I also thought about linking Samurai, etc. to standard deviations from the
> mean
> rather than set values, but that's the sort of calculation that would
> require exact
> full knowledge all the time, so that's a bit of a pain.
>
> On Wed, 13 Sep 2017, Cuddle Beam wrote:
> > I suggest Karma rubber-banding of some sort so that Karma just doesn't
> continuously drift upwards. Otherwise we may have for example:
> > [Current Date]: Newcomer arrives with 0 Karma, General populace has an
> average of 20 Karma.
> > [Current Date + 2 months]: Newcomer arrives with 0 Karma, General
> populace has an average of 40 Karma.
> > [Current Date + 1 year]: Newcomer arrives with 0 Karma, General populace
> has an average of 140 Karma.
> >
> > And then gerontocracy, yadda yadda, what have you.
> >
> > I suggest a social ranking. Gaining Karma swaps you with the person
> above who has been in that position for the most time. Losing Karma does
> the opposite. Like that, it's always "relative" and we don't get into
> > problems of drift.
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 9:39 PM, Josh T 
> wrote:
> >   The Japanese term for a (western) serf is *noudo*, literally
> meaning farm servant. If you want something from the historical Japanese
> caste system, since they took after Confucian ideas, peasant was
> >   was actually the highest commoner class (above craftsmen and
> merchants); the outcasts of the Japanese feudal system were the *eta*
> (historical name, somewhat derogatory today, means "full of
> >   defilement"), *hinin* ("non-humans"), or the modern politically
> correct term in English, *burakumin* ("hamlet people", referring to how
> they were exiled from towns and cities to have their own
> >   hamlets). Hopefully that helped.
> > 天火狐
> >
> > On 13 September 2017 at 15:38, Kerim Aydin 
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >   On Wed, 13 Sep 2017, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> >   >   - Any player with a karma of -5 or less is a (Japanese
> term for serf?).
> >
> >   Just as an addendum, if 天火狐 or anyone with better knowledge of
> Japanese
> >   feudal/cultural terms than me wants to suggest flavor improvements
> (in English
> >   alphabet please), I'd gratefully add them.  Maybe we should call
> the whole
> >   thing a tea ceremony...
>
>

Re: DIS: a relief valve

[Quazie]

Sorry - Karmastor

On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 12:58 PM Quazie  wrote:

> The Karmaster [Or whoever tracks these switches] Should be able to prune
> from the top/bottom if: Total karma abs([Positive - Negative]) Exceeds some
> threshold - that way you don't need a proposal to fix it later.
>
> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 12:56 PM Kerim Aydin 
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Thought about that a bit... technically it's always 0 sum among
>> *persons*, to have
>> an average go that high you'd need a lot of low-karma players to
>> deregister.  I think
>> that's a case of "let's re-center by proposal if it proved later that we
>> need to".
>>
>> I also thought about linking Samurai, etc. to standard deviations from
>> the mean
>> rather than set values, but that's the sort of calculation that would
>> require exact
>> full knowledge all the time, so that's a bit of a pain.
>>
>> On Wed, 13 Sep 2017, Cuddle Beam wrote:
>> > I suggest Karma rubber-banding of some sort so that Karma just doesn't
>> continuously drift upwards. Otherwise we may have for example:
>> > [Current Date]: Newcomer arrives with 0 Karma, General populace has an
>> average of 20 Karma.
>> > [Current Date + 2 months]: Newcomer arrives with 0 Karma, General
>> populace has an average of 40 Karma.
>> > [Current Date + 1 year]: Newcomer arrives with 0 Karma, General
>> populace has an average of 140 Karma.
>> >
>> > And then gerontocracy, yadda yadda, what have you.
>> >
>> > I suggest a social ranking. Gaining Karma swaps you with the person
>> above who has been in that position for the most time. Losing Karma does
>> the opposite. Like that, it's always "relative" and we don't get into
>> > problems of drift.
>> >
>> > On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 9:39 PM, Josh T 
>> wrote:
>> >   The Japanese term for a (western) serf is *noudo*, literally
>> meaning farm servant. If you want something from the historical Japanese
>> caste system, since they took after Confucian ideas, peasant was
>> >   was actually the highest commoner class (above craftsmen and
>> merchants); the outcasts of the Japanese feudal system were the *eta*
>> (historical name, somewhat derogatory today, means "full of
>> >   defilement"), *hinin* ("non-humans"), or the modern politically
>> correct term in English, *burakumin* ("hamlet people", referring to how
>> they were exiled from towns and cities to have their own
>> >   hamlets). Hopefully that helped.
>> > 天火狐
>> >
>> > On 13 September 2017 at 15:38, Kerim Aydin 
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >   On Wed, 13 Sep 2017, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>> >   >   - Any player with a karma of -5 or less is a (Japanese
>> term for serf?).
>> >
>> >   Just as an addendum, if 天火狐 or anyone with better knowledge of
>> Japanese
>> >   feudal/cultural terms than me wants to suggest flavor
>> improvements (in English
>> >   alphabet please), I'd gratefully add them.  Maybe we should call
>> the whole
>> >   thing a tea ceremony...
>>
>>

Re: DIS: a relief valve

[Kerim Aydin]

Thought about that a bit... technically it's always 0 sum among *persons*, to 
have
an average go that high you'd need a lot of low-karma players to deregister.  I 
think
that's a case of "let's re-center by proposal if it proved later that we need 
to".

I also thought about linking Samurai, etc. to standard deviations from the mean
rather than set values, but that's the sort of calculation that would require 
exact
full knowledge all the time, so that's a bit of a pain.

On Wed, 13 Sep 2017, Cuddle Beam wrote:
> I suggest Karma rubber-banding of some sort so that Karma just doesn't 
> continuously drift upwards. Otherwise we may have for example:
> [Current Date]: Newcomer arrives with 0 Karma, General populace has an 
> average of 20 Karma.
> [Current Date + 2 months]: Newcomer arrives with 0 Karma, General populace 
> has an average of 40 Karma.
> [Current Date + 1 year]: Newcomer arrives with 0 Karma, General populace has 
> an average of 140 Karma.
> 
> And then gerontocracy, yadda yadda, what have you.
> 
> I suggest a social ranking. Gaining Karma swaps you with the person above who 
> has been in that position for the most time. Losing Karma does the opposite. 
> Like that, it's always "relative" and we don't get into
> problems of drift.
> 
> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 9:39 PM, Josh T  wrote:
>   The Japanese term for a (western) serf is *noudo*, literally meaning 
> farm servant. If you want something from the historical Japanese caste 
> system, since they took after Confucian ideas, peasant was
>   was actually the highest commoner class (above craftsmen and 
> merchants); the outcasts of the Japanese feudal system were the *eta* 
> (historical name, somewhat derogatory today, means "full of
>   defilement"), *hinin* ("non-humans"), or the modern politically correct 
> term in English, *burakumin* ("hamlet people", referring to how they were 
> exiled from towns and cities to have their own
>   hamlets). Hopefully that helped. 
> 天火狐
> 
> On 13 September 2017 at 15:38, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
> 
> 
>   On Wed, 13 Sep 2017, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>   >       - Any player with a karma of -5 or less is a (Japanese term for 
> serf?).
> 
>   Just as an addendum, if 天火狐 or anyone with better knowledge of Japanese
>   feudal/cultural terms than me wants to suggest flavor improvements (in 
> English
>   alphabet please), I'd gratefully add them.  Maybe we should call the 
> whole
>   thing a tea ceremony...

Re: DIS: a relief valve

[Kerim Aydin]

Not optional, IMO.

If your primary goal is to be negative about someone, you have to find someone 
other
than yourself to be positive about.

If your primary goal is to be positive, you can (1) donate it from yourself, and
feel good about it, or (2) if there's some non-participant players hanging
around refusing to be deregistered, ding them on principle, (3) for balance, 
pick
someone with lots of karma who won't miss it too much, or of course (4) find
someone to be negative about.

Requiring people to "give reasons" is an additional (though minor) social 
barrier
to misuse, and to explain (e.g. if you're taking from someone with lots, to say
"nothing personal").

On Wed, 13 Sep 2017, Quazie wrote:
> What if I don't like anyone?  Can i Honor myself?  Can 2) or 3) be optinal?
> 
> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 12:38 PM Kerim Aydin  wrote:
> 
> 
>   On Wed, 13 Sep 2017, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>   >       - Any player with a karma of -5 or less is a (Japanese term for 
> serf?).
> 
>   Just as an addendum, if 天火狐 or anyone with better knowledge of Japanese
>   feudal/cultural terms than me wants to suggest flavor improvements (in 
> English
>   alphabet please), I'd gratefully add them.  Maybe we should call the 
> whole
>   thing a tea ceremony...
> 
> 
> 
>

Re: DIS: a relief valve

[Cuddle Beam]

I suggest Karma rubber-banding of some sort so that Karma just doesn't
continuously drift upwards. Otherwise we may have for example:

[Current Date]: Newcomer arrives with 0 Karma, General populace has an
average of 20 Karma.
[Current Date + 2 months]: Newcomer arrives with 0 Karma, General populace
has an average of 40 Karma.
[Current Date + 1 year]: Newcomer arrives with 0 Karma, General populace
has an average of 140 Karma.

And then gerontocracy, yadda yadda, what have you.

I suggest a social ranking. Gaining Karma swaps you with the person above
who has been in that position for the most time. Losing Karma does the
opposite. Like that, it's always "relative" and we don't get into problems
of drift.

On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 9:39 PM, Josh T  wrote:

> The Japanese term for a (western) serf is *noudo*, literally meaning farm
> servant. If you want something from the historical Japanese caste system,
> since they took after Confucian ideas, peasant was was actually the highest
> commoner class (above craftsmen and merchants); the outcasts of the
> Japanese feudal system were the *eta* (historical name, somewhat derogatory
> today, means "full of defilement"), *hinin* ("non-humans"), or the modern
> politically correct term in English, *burakumin* ("hamlet people",
> referring to how they were exiled from towns and cities to have their own
> hamlets). Hopefully that helped.
>
> 天火狐
>
> On 13 September 2017 at 15:38, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, 13 Sep 2017, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>> >   - Any player with a karma of -5 or less is a (Japanese term for
>> serf?).
>>
>> Just as an addendum, if 天火狐 or anyone with better knowledge of Japanese
>> feudal/cultural terms than me wants to suggest flavor improvements (in
>> English
>> alphabet please), I'd gratefully add them.  Maybe we should call the whole
>> thing a tea ceremony...
>>
>>
>>
>

Re: DIS: a relief valve

[Josh T]

The Japanese term for a (western) serf is *noudo*, literally meaning farm
servant. If you want something from the historical Japanese caste system,
since they took after Confucian ideas, peasant was was actually the highest
commoner class (above craftsmen and merchants); the outcasts of the
Japanese feudal system were the *eta* (historical name, somewhat derogatory
today, means "full of defilement"), *hinin* ("non-humans"), or the modern
politically correct term in English, *burakumin* ("hamlet people",
referring to how they were exiled from towns and cities to have their own
hamlets). Hopefully that helped.

天火狐

On 13 September 2017 at 15:38, Kerim Aydin  wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, 13 Sep 2017, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> >   - Any player with a karma of -5 or less is a (Japanese term for
> serf?).
>
> Just as an addendum, if 天火狐 or anyone with better knowledge of Japanese
> feudal/cultural terms than me wants to suggest flavor improvements (in
> English
> alphabet please), I'd gratefully add them.  Maybe we should call the whole
> thing a tea ceremony...
>
>
>

Re: DIS: a relief valve

[Quazie]

What if I don't like anyone?  Can i Honor myself?  Can 2) or 3) be optinal?

On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 12:38 PM Kerim Aydin  wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, 13 Sep 2017, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> >   - Any player with a karma of -5 or less is a (Japanese term for
> serf?).
>
> Just as an addendum, if 天火狐 or anyone with better knowledge of Japanese
> feudal/cultural terms than me wants to suggest flavor improvements (in
> English
> alphabet please), I'd gratefully add them.  Maybe we should call the whole
> thing a tea ceremony...
>
>
>

Re: DIS: a relief valve

[Kerim Aydin]

On Wed, 13 Sep 2017, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>   - Any player with a karma of -5 or less is a (Japanese term for serf?).

Just as an addendum, if 天火狐 or anyone with better knowledge of Japanese
feudal/cultural terms than me wants to suggest flavor improvements (in English
alphabet please), I'd gratefully add them.  Maybe we should call the whole
thing a tea ceremony...

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: Agora Sky News, vol. ½

[Cuddle Beam]

Worked well for me too

On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 9:10 PM, Josh T  wrote:

> I mostly didn't expect that my editor uses different sized tabs compared
> to my client after it gets sent. I'll need to change to space-tabulated
> manual spacing for next issue.
>
> @Aris Thank you.
>
> 天火狐
>
> On 13 September 2017 at 15:03, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, 13 Sep 2017, Josh T wrote:
>> > I do apologize if the formatting is wonky, there are some teething
>> issues at present
>> > and I hope to get it resolved by next week.
>>
>> Format looked perfect to me!  (or if not "perfect", very readable).  +1
>> like overall.
>>
>>
>>
>

Re: DIS: a relief valve

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

I like this.

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



> On Sep 13, 2017, at 3:25 PM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> [Talked about several times recently, but inspired by Quazie's apology - we 
> need a
> formal way to express approval/disapproval short of deregistration and 
> crimes, IMO].
> 
> Proposal draft
> 
> Create the following Rule, Karma:
> 
>  Karma is a person switch tracked by the Herald, with a default of 0 and
>  with any integer being a possible value.
> 
>  A Player CAN publish a Notice of Honour.  For a Notice of Honour to be
>  valid, it must:
>   1.  Be the first Notice of Honour that player has published in the
>   current week;
>   2.  Specify any other player to gain karma, and provide a reason for
>   specifying that player; and
>   3.  Specify any player to lose karma, and provide a reason for
>   specifying that player.
> 
>  When a valid Notice of Honour is published, the player specified to gain
>  karma has eir karma flipped to be one integer higher than it was, and the
>  player specified to lose karma has eir karma flipped to be one integer
>  lower than it was.
> 
> [can't remember, can we use natural language like "increase by 1" and 
> "decrease
> by 1" for integer/natural switches?]
> 
>  - Any player with a karma of 5 or greater is a Samurai.
> 
>  - Any player with a karma of -5 or less is a (Japanese term for serf?).
> 
>  - The player with the highest karma (if any) is the Shogun.
> 
>  - The player with the lowest karma (if any) is the Honourless Worm.
> 
> 
> [Future rewards for holding these positions possible].
> 
> [Once per week allows people to express satisfaction/dissatisfaction in a 
> meaningful
> way without it being a true "piling on"].
> 
> 
> 



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

Re: DIS: Proto: Banking and Bonds

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

No, that isn’t my intent. My main intent is to ensure that Agora is never left 
without the money needed to transact normal business.

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



> On Sep 13, 2017, at 12:14 AM, Cuddle Beam  wrote:
> 
> As a suggestion, it might be good to add that there is a Newbie Funding 
> reserve, something like this?:
> 
> The Newbie Funding Reserve are the shinies that are contained within Agora's 
> balance level of 0 and 50.
> 
> Agora cannot make any transfer to grant shinies to others except grant 
> Welcome Packages if the Newbie Funding Reserve isn't full.
> 
> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 6:06 AM, Owen Jacobson  wrote:
> 
> > On Sep 12, 2017, at 3:53 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus 
> >  wrote:
> >
> > Two versions of this proposal are offered. The first is the form to be 
> > submitted and the second is a git diff.
> > {
> > Replace in the rule “Assets”, the line:
> > “restricted to Agora, persons, and organizations."
> > with:
> > "restricted to Agora, persons, organizations, and Agoran Institutions.”
> >
> > Create a rule, called “Banking”, with the following text:
> > "A Bank is an Agoran Institution. A Bank shall have a charter, a length, 
> > and a
> > banker. The Central Bank of Agora is the bank who is responsible for the
> > conduct of business and issuance of bonds on behalf of Agora. If at any 
> > time,
> > a Central Bank of Agora is not declared, then the Secretary CAN and SHALL
> > declare a bank to be the Central Bank of Agora.
> >
> > A Bank shall be able to issue a currency and issue bonds. The charter of a
> > bank shall establish the method by which a bond or currency can be issued.
> >
> > Any player CAN create a Bank without objection by specifying its charter, 
> > its
> > length and recommending a banker. The Secretary CAN create a bank with 
> > Agoran
> > Consent by specifying its charter, its length and appointing a banker. The
> > charter of a bank SHALL state its purpose, and its governance structure. If 
> > at
> > any time, a Bank lacks a Banker, the Secretary CAN and SHALL appoint a 
> > Banker
> > in accordanence with the charter of the Bank.”
> 
> I would feel more comfortable if the Secretary could opt to destroy the bank, 
> instead, if only because otherwise this binds the Secretary to take official 
> action based on non-rules-governed documents. The consent elements of 
> creating a bank are a rather weak safety net against this compulsion.
> 
> > Bonds are a type of asset. Bonds CAN be converted according to their 
> > issuance
> > document. Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, bonds may only be issued by
> > a bank. The Banker of the issuing bank is the recordkeepor for Bonds.
> 
> Rather than amending the Shinies rule, split this into its own rule. 
> (Separately, the “Economics” rule really ought to be “Shinies”.)
> 
> > Add to the end of list of Executive Orders in “Executive Orders”:
> >
> > - Kickbacks (Secretary): The Prime Minister issues a bond from
> >  the Central Bank of a class or series previously issued for
> >  an amount less than or equal to 50 shinies and specifies a
> >  class of purchasers.
> 
> A+.
> 
> > Create a rule, “The First Bank of Agora”, with the below text:
> >
> > The First Bank of Agora shall be a Bank.
> 
> I’m not clear on why this is necessary if the Secretary must create a bank 
> any time there aren’t any, but if we’re going to have it, I’d prefer this 
> read “is a Bank” to declare its permanent existence. The same remark applies 
> throughout the text of this rule.
> 
> > The banker of The First Bank of Agora
> > shall be the Secretary. This rule shall be the charter of The First Bank of
> > Agora. The First Bank of Agora shall have a term of nine months, which shall
> > be automatically renewed for succeeding intervals of nine months, if The
> > Second Bank of Agora has not been founded.
> >
> > The First Bank of Agora shall have administration over the balance of Agora
> > in excess of 50 shinies. The First Bank of Agora shall be led by the Board
> > of Overseers. Their shall be two overseers elected once every two months in
> > alternating months. The Banker of The First Bank of Agora shall also serve
> > on the board ex officio. The Board of Overseers shall have authorization to
> > when Agora has a balance of less than 50 shinies issue bonds, with a total
> > value of up to 100 shinies. The terms of these bonds shall be determined by
> > the Board of Overseers. The Board of Overseers SHALL NOT issue any bond 
> > with a
> > with terms precluding their sale on the open market or with any provision
> > allowing the conversion of the bond to currency before the passage of two
> > weeks after sale. The Board of Overseers shall also be allowed to offer
> > consumer banking services, such as money holdings, check clearance, the
> > keeping of a ledger for fractional shiny banking, 

DIS: a relief valve

[Kerim Aydin]

[Talked about several times recently, but inspired by Quazie's apology - we 
need a 
formal way to express approval/disapproval short of deregistration and crimes, 
IMO].

Proposal draft

Create the following Rule, Karma:

  Karma is a person switch tracked by the Herald, with a default of 0 and 
  with any integer being a possible value.

  A Player CAN publish a Notice of Honour.  For a Notice of Honour to be
  valid, it must:
   1.  Be the first Notice of Honour that player has published in the
   current week;
   2.  Specify any other player to gain karma, and provide a reason for
   specifying that player; and
   3.  Specify any player to lose karma, and provide a reason for
   specifying that player.

  When a valid Notice of Honour is published, the player specified to gain
  karma has eir karma flipped to be one integer higher than it was, and the
  player specified to lose karma has eir karma flipped to be one integer
  lower than it was.

[can't remember, can we use natural language like "increase by 1" and "decrease
by 1" for integer/natural switches?]

  - Any player with a karma of 5 or greater is a Samurai.

  - Any player with a karma of -5 or less is a (Japanese term for serf?).

  - The player with the highest karma (if any) is the Shogun.

  - The player with the lowest karma (if any) is the Honourless Worm.


[Future rewards for holding these positions possible].

[Once per week allows people to express satisfaction/dissatisfaction in a 
meaningful
way without it being a true "piling on"].

DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Basic Guaranteed Income

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

Why?

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



> On Sep 13, 2017, at 2:30 PM, Gaelan Steele  wrote:
> 
> I pledge to, for at least the next month, vote AGAINST any proposal that 
> amends rules by providing new text in full unless the text of the rule is 
> nearly entirely changed.
> 
> Gaelan
> 
>> On Sep 13, 2017, at 11:25 AM, Nic Evans  wrote:
>> 
>> Here's my take on a basic income. Note that it's a form of guaranteed,
>> rather than universal, income in the sense that it only brings you up
>> to an appropriate level.
>> 
>> I submit the following proposal:
>> 
>> title: Basic Income
>> ai: 2
>> author: nichdel
>> co-authors:
>> 
>> Repeal R2500 "Action Points"
>> 
>> Amend R2445 "How to Pend a Proposal" to read in full:
>> 
>>  Imminence is a switch, tracked by the Promotor, possessed by
>>  proposals in the Proposal Pool, whose value is either "pending" or
>>  "not pending" (default).
>> 
>>  Any player CAN flip a specified proposal's imminence to "pending" by
>>  announcement by spending the current Pend Cost in shinies.
>> 
>> Amend R991 "Calls for Judgement" by removing point "a)" in the first
>> list and changing points "b)" and "c)" to "a)" and "b)" respectively.
>> 
>> Amend R2497 "Floating Value" by adding to the end of the list of
>> Floating Derived Values:
>> 
>>  * Income Floor: 1/10th the Floating Value, rounded up.
>> 
>> Amend R2499 "Welcome Packages" to read in full:
>> 
>>  Within an Agoran Week after a person registers, any player CAN and
>>  MAY cause Agora to pay the new player the Income Floor in shinies by
>>  announcement.
>> 
>> Create a new Power 1 rule titled "Basic Income" with the following text:
>> 
>>  Within an Agoran Week after the first Secretary Weekly Report is
>>  published in an Agoran Month, any player CAN and MAY cause Agora,
>>  by announcement to pay em the Income Floor minus eir Balance at time
>>  of the Weekly Report's publication if e has less than the Income
>>  Floor in shinies and has 0 stamps.
>> 
>> 



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Basic Guaranteed Income

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

I like this.

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



> On Sep 13, 2017, at 2:25 PM, Nic Evans  wrote:
> 
> Here's my take on a basic income. Note that it's a form of guaranteed,
> rather than universal, income in the sense that it only brings you up
> to an appropriate level.
> 
> I submit the following proposal:
> 
> title: Basic Income
> ai: 2
> author: nichdel
> co-authors:
> 
> Repeal R2500 "Action Points"
> 
> Amend R2445 "How to Pend a Proposal" to read in full:
> 
>Imminence is a switch, tracked by the Promotor, possessed by
>proposals in the Proposal Pool, whose value is either "pending" or
>"not pending" (default).
> 
>Any player CAN flip a specified proposal's imminence to "pending" by
>announcement by spending the current Pend Cost in shinies.
> 
> Amend R991 "Calls for Judgement" by removing point "a)" in the first
> list and changing points "b)" and "c)" to "a)" and "b)" respectively.
> 
> Amend R2497 "Floating Value" by adding to the end of the list of
> Floating Derived Values:
> 
>* Income Floor: 1/10th the Floating Value, rounded up.
> 
> Amend R2499 "Welcome Packages" to read in full:
> 
>Within an Agoran Week after a person registers, any player CAN and
>MAY cause Agora to pay the new player the Income Floor in shinies by
>announcement.
> 
> Create a new Power 1 rule titled "Basic Income" with the following text:
> 
>Within an Agoran Week after the first Secretary Weekly Report is
>published in an Agoran Month, any player CAN and MAY cause Agora,
>by announcement to pay em the Income Floor minus eir Balance at time
>of the Weekly Report's publication if e has less than the Income
>Floor in shinies and has 0 stamps.
> 
> 



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Solvency

[Owen Jacobson]

I'll do a more thorough response when I'm off work, but please don't pend this 
as is. It's a good idea and I want it to function when it passes.

Have a look at my explanation of the problems with "increasing" and 
"decreasing" balances in response to Shiny Weather.

-o

> On Sep 13, 2017, at 2:28 PM, Nic Evans  wrote:
> 
> I don't really like changing the supply level. But if we're going to do
> it here's how I would do it. It takes about 2 weeks of problems to
> happen, which is about the speed of a proposal anyway. It should also
> provide players an incentive to prevent it from happening, since a
> supply increase lowers the value of eir shinies.
> 
> I submit the following proposal.
> 
> title: Solvency
> ai: 2
> author: nichdel
> co-authors:
> 
> Amend R2487 "Shiny Supply Level" to read in full:
> 
>The Supply Level is a singleton switch with possible values integers
>and a default value of 1000.
> 
>When a Shiny Releveling event occurs, Agora's Balance is increased or
>decreased such that all Balances add up to the Supply Level.
> 
>When the Supply level Changes, a Shiny Releveling event occurs.
> 
>The Secretary may cause a Shiny Releveling event to occur without 3
>Objections.
> 
> Create a new Power 1 rule titled "Solvency" with the following text:
> 
>Solvency is a singleton switch with possible values in the ordered
>set [Solvent, Borderline, Insolvent], with a default value of
>Solvent, and which is tracked by the Secretary
> 
>An Insolvent Week is an Agoran week where at least one player has
>attempted to receive a reward or stamp value and failed because Agora
>did not have enough shinies. All other weeks are Solvent Weeks.
> 
>As part of eir Weekly Report the Secretary CAN and SHALL set the
>Solvency switch as defined:
> 
>   * If the previous week was an Insolvent Week, increase the value
> by one step, if possible.
> 
>   * If the previous week was a Solvent Week, decrease the value by
> one step, if possible.
> 
>If Solvency is Insolvent, the Secretary CAN and SHALL increase the
>Shiny Supply by announcement by 10%. When the Secretary does so,
>Solvency is set to Solvent.
> 
> 

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Basic Guaranteed Income

[Nic Evans]

On 09/13/17 14:01, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> So some thoughts then:
>
> - Do away with AP, but just allow 1 free CFJ/week for everyone?
>
> - I think "new" players should get an extra bonus so they can jump in, with 
> the 
> understanding that "once that first stake is gone, you'll be operating on a 
> much
> lower level."  My thought is to give them each 2 stamps, that way they can
> immediately try to game the stamp (hold onto it if it's too low).

I was thinking that a simple solution to the want for bonds/speculation
might be to create Agora Stamps, which don't count for wins but can be
created more freely. If we did that, I'd support giving new players one
or two. I don't want to too easily flood the market with win tokens though.

>
> - I'd be tempted to just keep quiet and use this, but let's try to get it 
> right
> first time:  how do you defend against the following avoidance scheme:  "If 
> people
> transfer shinies and stamps to me before the beginning of the month for the 
> purpose
> of claiming basic income, I pledge/(Agency) to return them after the income is
> claimed".  Seems like a very natural thing that people would set up.

In either the case of agencies or pledges you could potentially go back
on your word, and in many cases that'd be more fruitful than the
punishments a pledge would give. I'd also assume most people would want
a cut of the claimed money, meaning there's competition, meaning the
money is getting moved around the market, which is generally good. If
two people offer equally good deals, people will gravitate towards the
most trustworthy or the least threatening as well.

>
> On Wed, 13 Sep 2017, Nic Evans wrote:
>> On 09/13/17 13:38, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>>> Mechanism aside (which looks generally fine), how many (proposals+CFJs) do 
>>> you
>>> think a "casual" (non-office holding) player should be permitted to perform
>>> regularly?  This is 2 total per month if the Floating Value is constant, 
>>> plus
>>> a person is screwed if the beginning of the month falls on a low shiny 
>>> period
>>> like last week.
>>>
>>> I think this can work with small adjustments, I'm just trying to get a 
>>> handle
>>> for what baseline activity level people feel is appropriate, and work 
>>> backwards
>>> to ensure basic income, on average, would allow for that.  I think 2 per 
>>> month
>>> is low, personally (though wouldn't be low if it were proposals only).
>>>
>>> For CFJs in particular, I'd really hate to think of someone joining, 
>>> getting 2
>>> shinies (last week's level), then this week and thereafter being unable to 
>>> call any
>>> CFJs (e.g. about eir playerhood or other problems) for a full month 
>>> following.  
>>> That would be enough for me personally to judge that the player is 
>>> unreasonably
>>> blocked from initiating a CFJ (for R217 purposes).
>> When it comes to CFJs I expect players to cover each other pretty well.
>> But the mechanics shouldn't rely entirely on good will, you're right.
>>
>> I'm hesitant to set it higher right now for a few reasons. One is that I
>> think there's a couple scammy interactions with other subsystems here,
>> and I'm hesitant to make them payoff more. Another is that the economy
>> is currently very unstable, and probably not representative of what
>> it'll be when/if certain changes pass. I also want to add more easily
>> obtained rewards that new players could approach. Finally, Solvency
>> should fix the specific case of hitting rock-bottom with FV, which
>> should make things a bit smoother overall.
>>
>>> On Wed, 13 Sep 2017, Nic Evans wrote:
 Here's my take on a basic income. Note that it's a form of guaranteed,
 rather than universal, income in the sense that it only brings you up
 to an appropriate level.

 I submit the following proposal:

 title: Basic Income
 ai: 2
 author: nichdel
 co-authors:

 Repeal R2500 "Action Points"

 Amend R2445 "How to Pend a Proposal" to read in full:

    Imminence is a switch, tracked by the Promotor, possessed by
    proposals in the Proposal Pool, whose value is either "pending" or
    "not pending" (default).

    Any player CAN flip a specified proposal's imminence to "pending" by
    announcement by spending the current Pend Cost in shinies.

 Amend R991 "Calls for Judgement" by removing point "a)" in the first
 list and changing points "b)" and "c)" to "a)" and "b)" respectively.

 Amend R2497 "Floating Value" by adding to the end of the list of
 Floating Derived Values:

    * Income Floor: 1/10th the Floating Value, rounded up.

 Amend R2499 "Welcome Packages" to read in full:

    Within an Agoran Week after a person registers, any player CAN and
    MAY cause Agora to pay the new player the Income Floor in shinies by
    announcement.

 Create a new Power 1 rule titled "Basic Income" with the following text:

    Within 

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: Agora Sky News, vol. ½

[Josh T]

I mostly didn't expect that my editor uses different sized tabs compared to
my client after it gets sent. I'll need to change to space-tabulated manual
spacing for next issue.

@Aris Thank you.

天火狐

On 13 September 2017 at 15:03, Kerim Aydin  wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, 13 Sep 2017, Josh T wrote:
> > I do apologize if the formatting is wonky, there are some teething
> issues at present
> > and I hope to get it resolved by next week.
>
> Format looked perfect to me!  (or if not "perfect", very readable).  +1
> like overall.
>
>
>

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: Agora Sky News, vol. ½

[Kerim Aydin]

On Wed, 13 Sep 2017, Josh T wrote:
> I do apologize if the formatting is wonky, there are some teething issues at 
> present 
> and I hope to get it resolved by next week.

Format looked perfect to me!  (or if not "perfect", very readable).  +1 like 
overall.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Basic Guaranteed Income

[Kerim Aydin]

So some thoughts then:

- Do away with AP, but just allow 1 free CFJ/week for everyone?

- I think "new" players should get an extra bonus so they can jump in, with the 
understanding that "once that first stake is gone, you'll be operating on a much
lower level."  My thought is to give them each 2 stamps, that way they can
immediately try to game the stamp (hold onto it if it's too low).

- I'd be tempted to just keep quiet and use this, but let's try to get it right
first time:  how do you defend against the following avoidance scheme:  "If 
people
transfer shinies and stamps to me before the beginning of the month for the 
purpose
of claiming basic income, I pledge/(Agency) to return them after the income is
claimed".  Seems like a very natural thing that people would set up.

On Wed, 13 Sep 2017, Nic Evans wrote:
> On 09/13/17 13:38, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> >
> > Mechanism aside (which looks generally fine), how many (proposals+CFJs) do 
> > you
> > think a "casual" (non-office holding) player should be permitted to perform
> > regularly?  This is 2 total per month if the Floating Value is constant, 
> > plus
> > a person is screwed if the beginning of the month falls on a low shiny 
> > period
> > like last week.
> >
> > I think this can work with small adjustments, I'm just trying to get a 
> > handle
> > for what baseline activity level people feel is appropriate, and work 
> > backwards
> > to ensure basic income, on average, would allow for that.  I think 2 per 
> > month
> > is low, personally (though wouldn't be low if it were proposals only).
> >
> > For CFJs in particular, I'd really hate to think of someone joining, 
> > getting 2
> > shinies (last week's level), then this week and thereafter being unable to 
> > call any
> > CFJs (e.g. about eir playerhood or other problems) for a full month 
> > following.  
> > That would be enough for me personally to judge that the player is 
> > unreasonably
> > blocked from initiating a CFJ (for R217 purposes).
> 
> When it comes to CFJs I expect players to cover each other pretty well.
> But the mechanics shouldn't rely entirely on good will, you're right.
> 
> I'm hesitant to set it higher right now for a few reasons. One is that I
> think there's a couple scammy interactions with other subsystems here,
> and I'm hesitant to make them payoff more. Another is that the economy
> is currently very unstable, and probably not representative of what
> it'll be when/if certain changes pass. I also want to add more easily
> obtained rewards that new players could approach. Finally, Solvency
> should fix the specific case of hitting rock-bottom with FV, which
> should make things a bit smoother overall.
> 
> >
> > On Wed, 13 Sep 2017, Nic Evans wrote:
> >> Here's my take on a basic income. Note that it's a form of guaranteed,
> >> rather than universal, income in the sense that it only brings you up
> >> to an appropriate level.
> >>
> >> I submit the following proposal:
> >>
> >> title: Basic Income
> >> ai: 2
> >> author: nichdel
> >> co-authors:
> >>
> >> Repeal R2500 "Action Points"
> >>
> >> Amend R2445 "How to Pend a Proposal" to read in full:
> >>
> >>    Imminence is a switch, tracked by the Promotor, possessed by
> >>    proposals in the Proposal Pool, whose value is either "pending" or
> >>    "not pending" (default).
> >>
> >>    Any player CAN flip a specified proposal's imminence to "pending" by
> >>    announcement by spending the current Pend Cost in shinies.
> >>
> >> Amend R991 "Calls for Judgement" by removing point "a)" in the first
> >> list and changing points "b)" and "c)" to "a)" and "b)" respectively.
> >>
> >> Amend R2497 "Floating Value" by adding to the end of the list of
> >> Floating Derived Values:
> >>
> >>    * Income Floor: 1/10th the Floating Value, rounded up.
> >>
> >> Amend R2499 "Welcome Packages" to read in full:
> >>
> >>    Within an Agoran Week after a person registers, any player CAN and
> >>    MAY cause Agora to pay the new player the Income Floor in shinies by
> >>    announcement.
> >>
> >> Create a new Power 1 rule titled "Basic Income" with the following text:
> >>
> >>    Within an Agoran Week after the first Secretary Weekly Report is
> >>    published in an Agoran Month, any player CAN and MAY cause Agora,
> >>    by announcement to pay em the Income Floor minus eir Balance at time
> >>    of the Weekly Report's publication if e has less than the Income
> >>    Floor in shinies and has 0 stamps.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> 
> 
>

DIS: Re: BUS: Apology take two

[Kerim Aydin]

On Wed, 13 Sep 2017, Quazie wrote:
> then having the FUCKING GAUL to ensure I would have to apologize for it. 

Asterix doesn't do that kind of thing.  It's a family comic.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Basic Guaranteed Income

[Nic Evans]

On 09/13/17 13:38, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> Mechanism aside (which looks generally fine), how many (proposals+CFJs) do you
> think a "casual" (non-office holding) player should be permitted to perform
> regularly?  This is 2 total per month if the Floating Value is constant, plus
> a person is screwed if the beginning of the month falls on a low shiny period
> like last week.
>
> I think this can work with small adjustments, I'm just trying to get a handle
> for what baseline activity level people feel is appropriate, and work 
> backwards
> to ensure basic income, on average, would allow for that.  I think 2 per month
> is low, personally (though wouldn't be low if it were proposals only).
>
> For CFJs in particular, I'd really hate to think of someone joining, getting 2
> shinies (last week's level), then this week and thereafter being unable to 
> call any
> CFJs (e.g. about eir playerhood or other problems) for a full month 
> following.  
> That would be enough for me personally to judge that the player is 
> unreasonably
> blocked from initiating a CFJ (for R217 purposes).

When it comes to CFJs I expect players to cover each other pretty well.
But the mechanics shouldn't rely entirely on good will, you're right.

I'm hesitant to set it higher right now for a few reasons. One is that I
think there's a couple scammy interactions with other subsystems here,
and I'm hesitant to make them payoff more. Another is that the economy
is currently very unstable, and probably not representative of what
it'll be when/if certain changes pass. I also want to add more easily
obtained rewards that new players could approach. Finally, Solvency
should fix the specific case of hitting rock-bottom with FV, which
should make things a bit smoother overall.

>
> On Wed, 13 Sep 2017, Nic Evans wrote:
>> Here's my take on a basic income. Note that it's a form of guaranteed,
>> rather than universal, income in the sense that it only brings you up
>> to an appropriate level.
>>
>> I submit the following proposal:
>>
>> title: Basic Income
>> ai: 2
>> author: nichdel
>> co-authors:
>>
>> Repeal R2500 "Action Points"
>>
>> Amend R2445 "How to Pend a Proposal" to read in full:
>>
>>    Imminence is a switch, tracked by the Promotor, possessed by
>>    proposals in the Proposal Pool, whose value is either "pending" or
>>    "not pending" (default).
>>
>>    Any player CAN flip a specified proposal's imminence to "pending" by
>>    announcement by spending the current Pend Cost in shinies.
>>
>> Amend R991 "Calls for Judgement" by removing point "a)" in the first
>> list and changing points "b)" and "c)" to "a)" and "b)" respectively.
>>
>> Amend R2497 "Floating Value" by adding to the end of the list of
>> Floating Derived Values:
>>
>>    * Income Floor: 1/10th the Floating Value, rounded up.
>>
>> Amend R2499 "Welcome Packages" to read in full:
>>
>>    Within an Agoran Week after a person registers, any player CAN and
>>    MAY cause Agora to pay the new player the Income Floor in shinies by
>>    announcement.
>>
>> Create a new Power 1 rule titled "Basic Income" with the following text:
>>
>>    Within an Agoran Week after the first Secretary Weekly Report is
>>    published in an Agoran Month, any player CAN and MAY cause Agora,
>>    by announcement to pay em the Income Floor minus eir Balance at time
>>    of the Weekly Report's publication if e has less than the Income
>>    Floor in shinies and has 0 stamps.
>>
>>
>>




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Basic Guaranteed Income

[Kerim Aydin]

Mechanism aside (which looks generally fine), how many (proposals+CFJs) do you
think a "casual" (non-office holding) player should be permitted to perform
regularly?  This is 2 total per month if the Floating Value is constant, plus
a person is screwed if the beginning of the month falls on a low shiny period
like last week.

I think this can work with small adjustments, I'm just trying to get a handle
for what baseline activity level people feel is appropriate, and work backwards
to ensure basic income, on average, would allow for that.  I think 2 per month
is low, personally (though wouldn't be low if it were proposals only).

For CFJs in particular, I'd really hate to think of someone joining, getting 2
shinies (last week's level), then this week and thereafter being unable to call 
any
CFJs (e.g. about eir playerhood or other problems) for a full month following.  
That would be enough for me personally to judge that the player is unreasonably
blocked from initiating a CFJ (for R217 purposes).

On Wed, 13 Sep 2017, Nic Evans wrote:
> Here's my take on a basic income. Note that it's a form of guaranteed,
> rather than universal, income in the sense that it only brings you up
> to an appropriate level.
> 
> I submit the following proposal:
> 
> title: Basic Income
> ai: 2
> author: nichdel
> co-authors:
> 
> Repeal R2500 "Action Points"
> 
> Amend R2445 "How to Pend a Proposal" to read in full:
> 
>    Imminence is a switch, tracked by the Promotor, possessed by
>    proposals in the Proposal Pool, whose value is either "pending" or
>    "not pending" (default).
> 
>    Any player CAN flip a specified proposal's imminence to "pending" by
>    announcement by spending the current Pend Cost in shinies.
> 
> Amend R991 "Calls for Judgement" by removing point "a)" in the first
> list and changing points "b)" and "c)" to "a)" and "b)" respectively.
> 
> Amend R2497 "Floating Value" by adding to the end of the list of
> Floating Derived Values:
> 
>    * Income Floor: 1/10th the Floating Value, rounded up.
> 
> Amend R2499 "Welcome Packages" to read in full:
> 
>    Within an Agoran Week after a person registers, any player CAN and
>    MAY cause Agora to pay the new player the Income Floor in shinies by
>    announcement.
> 
> Create a new Power 1 rule titled "Basic Income" with the following text:
> 
>    Within an Agoran Week after the first Secretary Weekly Report is
>    published in an Agoran Month, any player CAN and MAY cause Agora,
>    by announcement to pay em the Income Floor minus eir Balance at time
>    of the Weekly Report's publication if e has less than the Income
>    Floor in shinies and has 0 stamps.
> 
> 
>

DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Basic Guaranteed Income

[Nic Evans]

On 09/13/17 13:30, Gaelan Steele wrote:
> I pledge to, for at least the next month, vote AGAINST any proposal that 
> amends rules by providing new text in full unless the text of the rule is 
> nearly entirely changed. 
>
> Gaelan 

Unfortunately I can't predict what R2445's text will be until I assess
votes for the current round, so I didn't think it prudent to try to do a
bunch of relative clauses.

>
>> On Sep 13, 2017, at 11:25 AM, Nic Evans  wrote:
>>
>> Here's my take on a basic income. Note that it's a form of guaranteed,
>> rather than universal, income in the sense that it only brings you up
>> to an appropriate level.
>>
>> I submit the following proposal:
>>
>> title: Basic Income
>> ai: 2
>> author: nichdel
>> co-authors:
>>
>> Repeal R2500 "Action Points"
>>
>> Amend R2445 "How to Pend a Proposal" to read in full:
>>
>>   Imminence is a switch, tracked by the Promotor, possessed by
>>   proposals in the Proposal Pool, whose value is either "pending" or
>>   "not pending" (default).
>>
>>   Any player CAN flip a specified proposal's imminence to "pending" by
>>   announcement by spending the current Pend Cost in shinies.
>>
>> Amend R991 "Calls for Judgement" by removing point "a)" in the first
>> list and changing points "b)" and "c)" to "a)" and "b)" respectively.
>>
>> Amend R2497 "Floating Value" by adding to the end of the list of
>> Floating Derived Values:
>>
>>   * Income Floor: 1/10th the Floating Value, rounded up.
>>
>> Amend R2499 "Welcome Packages" to read in full:
>>
>>   Within an Agoran Week after a person registers, any player CAN and
>>   MAY cause Agora to pay the new player the Income Floor in shinies by
>>   announcement.
>>
>> Create a new Power 1 rule titled "Basic Income" with the following text:
>>
>>   Within an Agoran Week after the first Secretary Weekly Report is
>>   published in an Agoran Month, any player CAN and MAY cause Agora,
>>   by announcement to pay em the Income Floor minus eir Balance at time
>>   of the Weekly Report's publication if e has less than the Income
>>   Floor in shinies and has 0 stamps.
>>
>>




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Basic Guaranteed Income

[Gaelan Steele]

If only there was a currently pended proposal disincentivising stockpiling 
shinies. 

Gaelan
> On Sep 13, 2017, at 11:30 AM, Cuddle Beam  wrote:
> 
> I enjoy the basic idea but Im very much against removing Action Points 
> because of how it guarantees gameplay - you've got two CFJs/Proposals per 
> week, and if you dont spend those during the week, you lose them forever, so 
> it's better to use them. That results in people being inclined to use them 
> each week, resulting in more activity which is good - although capped because 
> AP is limited, which is also good.
> 
> A basic shiny income is nice but I fear it will incentive just stockpiling 
> shinies for contingency instead of being used as liberally as we use AP 
> (which I believe is a healthy thing to keep things moving). 
> 
> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 8:25 PM, Nic Evans  wrote:
>> Here's my take on a basic income. Note that it's a form of guaranteed,
>> rather than universal, income in the sense that it only brings you up
>> to an appropriate level.
>> 
>> I submit the following proposal:
>> 
>> title: Basic Income
>> ai: 2
>> author: nichdel
>> co-authors:
>> 
>> Repeal R2500 "Action Points"
>> 
>> Amend R2445 "How to Pend a Proposal" to read in full:
>> 
>>Imminence is a switch, tracked by the Promotor, possessed by
>>proposals in the Proposal Pool, whose value is either "pending" or
>>"not pending" (default).
>> 
>>Any player CAN flip a specified proposal's imminence to "pending" by
>>announcement by spending the current Pend Cost in shinies.
>> 
>> Amend R991 "Calls for Judgement" by removing point "a)" in the first
>> list and changing points "b)" and "c)" to "a)" and "b)" respectively.
>> 
>> Amend R2497 "Floating Value" by adding to the end of the list of
>> Floating Derived Values:
>> 
>>* Income Floor: 1/10th the Floating Value, rounded up.
>> 
>> Amend R2499 "Welcome Packages" to read in full:
>> 
>>Within an Agoran Week after a person registers, any player CAN and
>>MAY cause Agora to pay the new player the Income Floor in shinies by
>>announcement.
>> 
>> Create a new Power 1 rule titled "Basic Income" with the following text:
>> 
>>Within an Agoran Week after the first Secretary Weekly Report is
>>published in an Agoran Month, any player CAN and MAY cause Agora,
>>by announcement to pay em the Income Floor minus eir Balance at time
>>of the Weekly Report's publication if e has less than the Income
>>Floor in shinies and has 0 stamps.
>> 
>> 
> 

DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Basic Guaranteed Income

[Cuddle Beam]

I enjoy the basic idea but Im very much against removing Action Points
because of how it guarantees gameplay - you've got two CFJs/Proposals per
week, and if you dont spend those during the week, you lose them forever,
so it's better to use them. That results in people being inclined to use
them each week, resulting in more activity which is good - although capped
because AP is limited, which is also good.

A basic shiny income is nice but I fear it will incentive just stockpiling
shinies for contingency instead of being used as liberally as we use AP
(which I believe is a healthy thing to keep things moving).

On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 8:25 PM, Nic Evans  wrote:

> Here's my take on a basic income. Note that it's a form of guaranteed,
> rather than universal, income in the sense that it only brings you up
> to an appropriate level.
>
> I submit the following proposal:
>
> title: Basic Income
> ai: 2
> author: nichdel
> co-authors:
>
> Repeal R2500 "Action Points"
>
> Amend R2445 "How to Pend a Proposal" to read in full:
>
>Imminence is a switch, tracked by the Promotor, possessed by
>proposals in the Proposal Pool, whose value is either "pending" or
>"not pending" (default).
>
>Any player CAN flip a specified proposal's imminence to "pending" by
>announcement by spending the current Pend Cost in shinies.
>
> Amend R991 "Calls for Judgement" by removing point "a)" in the first
> list and changing points "b)" and "c)" to "a)" and "b)" respectively.
>
> Amend R2497 "Floating Value" by adding to the end of the list of
> Floating Derived Values:
>
>* Income Floor: 1/10th the Floating Value, rounded up.
>
> Amend R2499 "Welcome Packages" to read in full:
>
>Within an Agoran Week after a person registers, any player CAN and
>MAY cause Agora to pay the new player the Income Floor in shinies by
>announcement.
>
> Create a new Power 1 rule titled "Basic Income" with the following text:
>
>Within an Agoran Week after the first Secretary Weekly Report is
>published in an Agoran Month, any player CAN and MAY cause Agora,
>by announcement to pay em the Income Floor minus eir Balance at time
>of the Weekly Report's publication if e has less than the Income
>Floor in shinies and has 0 stamps.
>
>
>

Re: DIS: Another Antitelepathy Attempt

[Kerim Aydin]

Is this a tautology for any restricted action?

"Unless the Rules allow the gamestate to change by method X, the gamestate 
CANNOT change by X"

Also, as per recent conversation, is "time passing" or "a time limit expiring" 
external 
or internal?

Maybe the big problem for me with this is I'm trying to see the use case?  
What's an
explicit example of a thing you're trying to defend against?  If it's something 
like the
Invisibilitating example, that's solved by not allowing bad instruments to come 
into
effect (and zeroing out any past ones, rules excepted).

Also, one note:  the reason Town Fountain exists is because people tried very 
very hard to 
make everything in that Currency system happen by explicit message only, and 
the near-
impossibility of doing so caused an exploitable gap.


On Wed, 13 Sep 2017, Gaelan Steele wrote:
> {{{ Except where the rules or other documents given influence by the rules 
> explicitly depend on external influences, it is IMPOSSIBLE for the gamestate 
> to change except via a public message. }}}
> 
> Notes: 
> - catch-all exception to avoid breaking things
> - “other documents” refers to promises, contracts, etc
> - I use the IMPOSSIBLE wording instead of the 
> gamestate-as-function-of-messages wording because the latter could 
> re-evaluate the entire history of Agora under the new rule, which has a very 
> high chance of going wrong. 
> 
> Gaelan

DIS: Another Antitelepathy Attempt

[Gaelan Steele]

{{{ Except where the rules or other documents given influence by the rules 
explicitly depend on external influences, it is IMPOSSIBLE for the gamestate to 
change except via a public message. }}}

Notes: 
- catch-all exception to avoid breaking things
- “other documents” refers to promises, contracts, etc
- I use the IMPOSSIBLE wording instead of the gamestate-as-function-of-messages 
wording because the latter could re-evaluate the entire history of Agora under 
the new rule, which has a very high chance of going wrong. 

Gaelan

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Resolution of Proposals 7872-7875

[Nicholas Evans]

On Sep 12, 2017 10:00 PM, "Owen Jacobson"  wrote:

> On Sep 12, 2017, at 1:27 PM, Nic Evans  wrote:
>
> I resolve the decision(s) to adopt proposal(s) 78572-7875 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   Pender  Pend fee
> 
---
> 7872*  o 2.0  Estate Auction Cleanup  o   1 AP
> 7873*  o, babelian   2.0  Agoracultureo   1 AP
> 7874*  o 2.0  Shorter Apologies   o   3 sh.
> 7875*  nichdel   1.0  Better Accounting   o   1 AP
>
> || 7872 | 7873 | 7874 | 7875 |
> |+--+--+--+--+
> |Aris| F| P| F| F|
> |nichdel | P| P| F| F|
> |o   | F| F| F| F|
> |+--+--+--+--+
> |F/A | 2/0  | 1/0  | 3/0  | 3/0  |
> |AI  | 2.0  | 2.0  | 2.0  | 1.0  |
> |V   | 3| 3| 3| 3|
> |Q   | 3| 3| 3| 3|
> |P   | T| T| T| T|
>
>
> The full text of the adopted proposal(s) is included below.

If this portion of your report is self-ratifying, then I challenge the
veracity of this report.


It's not, but I'd also suggest that the list doesn't claim to be only
adopted proposals.


> //
> ID: pp1
> Title: Organization Repeal

This proposal was not adopted.

If it is still in the proposal pool, I retract the proposal Organization
Repeal.

-o

Re: DIS: No Telepathy v2

[Kerim Aydin]

Rule changes have to be sequential.  Ossification aside, you need both
Instrument definitions and some kind of combination of r105/106 or the
Proposal stops functioning mid-way.  I'm not sure there's a repeal order that 
wouldn't leave at least one rule as a broken remnant.
(Assuming there was a meta-agreement that you didn't suddenly start
ignoring precedent on things like rule change order when the judicial
system was repealed).

On Wed, 13 Sep 2017, Owen Jacobson wrote:
> > On Sep 13, 2017, at 2:21 AM, VJ Rada  wrote:
> > 
> > any proposal doing that would get failed bc of ossifying agora though right?
> 
> That proposal could repeal that rule.
> 
> -o
> 
> 

Re: DIS: No Telepathy v2

[Aris Merchant]

We can also determine that Agora platonically ended, and recreate the
game the same way we did it in the first place, with whatever ruleset
and gamestate we feel like.

-Aris

On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 11:25 PM, VJ Rada  wrote:
> I guess if that happened we could uh... start calling CFJs, pretending
> that the mechanism still existed. And then establish common law rules
> that way (eg we could have proposal voting as a matter of common law
> and then bring back the rules)
>
> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 4:22 PM, Aris Merchant
>  wrote:
>> Technically, it would "cause Agora to cease to exist." So yes.
>>
>> -Aris
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 11:21 PM, VJ Rada  wrote:
>>> any proposal doing that would get failed bc of ossifying agora though right?
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 4:19 PM, Aris Merchant
>>>  wrote:
 Agora would stop existing. It would therfore have no state. Arguably
 though, if we made a meta-descision to recreate it, it would start
 existing again. The Paradox of Self-Amendment has some stuff on this.


 -Aris

 On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 10:54 PM, Owen Jacobson  wrote:
> As a thought experiment (only), what is the state of Agora if we repeal 
> every rule?
>
> -o
>
>> On Sep 13, 2017, at 1:30 AM, Aris Merchant 
>>  wrote:
>>
>> Ahh! Don't do that. All rules are instruments.
>>
>> -Aris
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 8:55 PM, Cuddle Beam  
>> wrote:
>>> Proto:
>>>
>>> Title: Spring Cleaning
>>>
>>> Content: Remove all Historic Instruments [replace that with a proper
>>> definition for cleanup] that are older than 1 year old.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 5:39 AM, Owen Jacobson  wrote:


> On Sep 12, 2017, at 1:26 PM, Kerim Aydin  
> wrote:
>
>
>
> This whole conversation rung a memory bell for me, something Old (12+
> years old) that might be
> still in effect!
>
> There was a Proposal, that read something like the following:
>
>  Be it Hereby Proclaimed that from this moment forward, anyone who
> causes gamestate
>  changes without creating a public record is Guilty of the Crime of
> Invisibilitating.
>
> Note that Instruments don't lose power (they just reach the end of 
> their
> effects).  So
> if a Proposal defines an effect as ongoing, there's still a Powered
> instrument out there
> proclaiming people guilty of this crime whenever they do it…

 fx: pained sigh

 As a practical matter, it’s not realistic for the Referee to keep 
 track of
 every infraction-bearing document indefinitely. The current rules to 
 appear
 to require it anyways, so I make an effort: I have a massive folder of
 pledges, for example. However, at the end of the day, I (and, I think, 
 my
 inevitable successor) is only human, and can only account for so much.

 If I miss a card due to a historic Instrument, please bring it up.

 -o
>>>
>>>
>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> From V.J Rada
>
>
>
> --
> From V.J Rada

DIS: Re: BUS: Existence (and votes)

[Aris Merchant]

On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 8:01 AM, Byron Krane  wrote:
> If I am a player, I object to all pending attempts to deregister me.
> If I am not a player, I register.
>
> If I can, I vote as follows on each listed proposal: (Text after two
> forward slashes on the same line is not part of any vote or action.)
> Flat On - FOR.
> Monsters - AGAINST.  // Prefer assets that do things.
> Not So Cuddly Now - AGAINST.  // As far as I can tell, this might
> allow a player to be deregistered against eir will if e has been
> inactive.

Not a problem. If they send a message to a public forum, including to
object, it stops the process. This stops other players from frivolusly
objecting without a good reason.

-Aris

Re: DIS: Shinies and Stamps Omnibus Fix Thread

[Aris Merchant]

On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 11:25 PM, Owen Jacobson  wrote:
>
>> On Sep 13, 2017, at 2:17 AM, Aris Merchant 
>>  wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 8:24 PM, Owen Jacobson  wrote:
>>
>>> Having slept on this a bit, and understanding the ratification process a 
>>> bit better, I think this proposal will comprise two parts:
>>>
>>> 1. A condition that matches only the prior actions that would fall under 
>>> principle 1 and ratifies them in place with the rules retroactively 
>>> changed, and
>>>
>>> 2. A list of all such actions known at the time of writing for the 
>>> proposal, by reference (through links into the archives).
>>>
>>> The latter acts as a fallback in case the former is inadequate in some way, 
>>> while the former allows players to continue transacting nominal shinies 
>>> without losing those transactions when ratification happens.
>>>
>>> Does this seem reasonable
>>
>> We have to walk a thin line of ratifying the effect of diffrent rules
>> without ratifying the rules themselves. Honestly, I'd be tempted just
>> to ratify a secreatary's report with all the "correct" info.
>
> I thought about that, and I’m not at all sure it’s sufficient. I would want 
> to make sure every action that “should” have happened actually did happen - 
> and many of those actions have effects beyond the Secretary’s report. The 
> biggie is proposals: anything that threatens the validity of submitting or 
> pending proposals threatens the validity of the rules, and - as things stand 
> - we _definitely_ have some actions in the state where their intended effects 
> on the rules are not their actual effects on the rules.

Really not a problem. Players can submit proposals for free. The
promotor CAN distribute proposals, but SHALL NOT do so unless they're
pending (R2350). Thus the worst thing that could happen is that I
could get a finger pointed at me.

-Aris

Re: DIS: No Telepathy v2

[Aris Merchant]

It would have to be two seperate proposals. Rule 1698 looks at the
"net effect" of a proposal, and so would see that the proposal would
stop Agora existing and block it from having any effect at all.

-Aris

On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 11:22 PM, Owen Jacobson  wrote:
>
>> On Sep 13, 2017, at 2:21 AM, VJ Rada  wrote:
>>
>> any proposal doing that would get failed bc of ossifying agora though right?
>
> That proposal could repeal that rule.
>
> -o
>

Re: DIS: Shinies and Stamps Omnibus Fix Thread

[Owen Jacobson]

> On Sep 13, 2017, at 2:17 AM, Aris Merchant 
>  wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 8:24 PM, Owen Jacobson  wrote:
> 
>> Having slept on this a bit, and understanding the ratification process a bit 
>> better, I think this proposal will comprise two parts:
>> 
>> 1. A condition that matches only the prior actions that would fall under 
>> principle 1 and ratifies them in place with the rules retroactively changed, 
>> and
>> 
>> 2. A list of all such actions known at the time of writing for the proposal, 
>> by reference (through links into the archives).
>> 
>> The latter acts as a fallback in case the former is inadequate in some way, 
>> while the former allows players to continue transacting nominal shinies 
>> without losing those transactions when ratification happens.
>> 
>> Does this seem reasonable
> 
> We have to walk a thin line of ratifying the effect of diffrent rules
> without ratifying the rules themselves. Honestly, I'd be tempted just
> to ratify a secreatary's report with all the "correct" info.

I thought about that, and I’m not at all sure it’s sufficient. I would want to 
make sure every action that “should” have happened actually did happen - and 
many of those actions have effects beyond the Secretary’s report. The biggie is 
proposals: anything that threatens the validity of submitting or pending 
proposals threatens the validity of the rules, and - as things stand - we 
_definitely_ have some actions in the state where their intended effects on the 
rules are not their actual effects on the rules.

It’s hard to overstate just how fragile Agora is at this moment.

-o



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: DIS: No Telepathy v2

[VJ Rada]

I guess if that happened we could uh... start calling CFJs, pretending
that the mechanism still existed. And then establish common law rules
that way (eg we could have proposal voting as a matter of common law
and then bring back the rules)

On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 4:22 PM, Aris Merchant
 wrote:
> Technically, it would "cause Agora to cease to exist." So yes.
>
> -Aris
>
> On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 11:21 PM, VJ Rada  wrote:
>> any proposal doing that would get failed bc of ossifying agora though right?
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 4:19 PM, Aris Merchant
>>  wrote:
>>> Agora would stop existing. It would therfore have no state. Arguably
>>> though, if we made a meta-descision to recreate it, it would start
>>> existing again. The Paradox of Self-Amendment has some stuff on this.
>>>
>>>
>>> -Aris
>>>
>>> On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 10:54 PM, Owen Jacobson  wrote:
 As a thought experiment (only), what is the state of Agora if we repeal 
 every rule?

 -o

> On Sep 13, 2017, at 1:30 AM, Aris Merchant 
>  wrote:
>
> Ahh! Don't do that. All rules are instruments.
>
> -Aris
>
> On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 8:55 PM, Cuddle Beam  wrote:
>> Proto:
>>
>> Title: Spring Cleaning
>>
>> Content: Remove all Historic Instruments [replace that with a proper
>> definition for cleanup] that are older than 1 year old.
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 5:39 AM, Owen Jacobson  wrote:
>>>
>>>
 On Sep 12, 2017, at 1:26 PM, Kerim Aydin  
 wrote:



 This whole conversation rung a memory bell for me, something Old (12+
 years old) that might be
 still in effect!

 There was a Proposal, that read something like the following:

  Be it Hereby Proclaimed that from this moment forward, anyone who
 causes gamestate
  changes without creating a public record is Guilty of the Crime of
 Invisibilitating.

 Note that Instruments don't lose power (they just reach the end of 
 their
 effects).  So
 if a Proposal defines an effect as ongoing, there's still a Powered
 instrument out there
 proclaiming people guilty of this crime whenever they do it…
>>>
>>> fx: pained sigh
>>>
>>> As a practical matter, it’s not realistic for the Referee to keep track 
>>> of
>>> every infraction-bearing document indefinitely. The current rules to 
>>> appear
>>> to require it anyways, so I make an effort: I have a massive folder of
>>> pledges, for example. However, at the end of the day, I (and, I think, 
>>> my
>>> inevitable successor) is only human, and can only account for so much.
>>>
>>> If I miss a card due to a historic Instrument, please bring it up.
>>>
>>> -o
>>
>>

>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> From V.J Rada



-- 
>From V.J Rada

Re: DIS: No Telepathy v2

[Aris Merchant]

Technically, it would "cause Agora to cease to exist." So yes.

-Aris

On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 11:21 PM, VJ Rada  wrote:
> any proposal doing that would get failed bc of ossifying agora though right?
>
> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 4:19 PM, Aris Merchant
>  wrote:
>> Agora would stop existing. It would therfore have no state. Arguably
>> though, if we made a meta-descision to recreate it, it would start
>> existing again. The Paradox of Self-Amendment has some stuff on this.
>>
>>
>> -Aris
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 10:54 PM, Owen Jacobson  wrote:
>>> As a thought experiment (only), what is the state of Agora if we repeal 
>>> every rule?
>>>
>>> -o
>>>
 On Sep 13, 2017, at 1:30 AM, Aris Merchant 
  wrote:

 Ahh! Don't do that. All rules are instruments.

 -Aris

 On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 8:55 PM, Cuddle Beam  wrote:
> Proto:
>
> Title: Spring Cleaning
>
> Content: Remove all Historic Instruments [replace that with a proper
> definition for cleanup] that are older than 1 year old.
>
> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 5:39 AM, Owen Jacobson  wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On Sep 12, 2017, at 1:26 PM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> This whole conversation rung a memory bell for me, something Old (12+
>>> years old) that might be
>>> still in effect!
>>>
>>> There was a Proposal, that read something like the following:
>>>
>>>  Be it Hereby Proclaimed that from this moment forward, anyone who
>>> causes gamestate
>>>  changes without creating a public record is Guilty of the Crime of
>>> Invisibilitating.
>>>
>>> Note that Instruments don't lose power (they just reach the end of their
>>> effects).  So
>>> if a Proposal defines an effect as ongoing, there's still a Powered
>>> instrument out there
>>> proclaiming people guilty of this crime whenever they do it…
>>
>> fx: pained sigh
>>
>> As a practical matter, it’s not realistic for the Referee to keep track 
>> of
>> every infraction-bearing document indefinitely. The current rules to 
>> appear
>> to require it anyways, so I make an effort: I have a massive folder of
>> pledges, for example. However, at the end of the day, I (and, I think, my
>> inevitable successor) is only human, and can only account for so much.
>>
>> If I miss a card due to a historic Instrument, please bring it up.
>>
>> -o
>
>
>>>
>
>
>
> --
> From V.J Rada

Re: DIS: No Telepathy v2

[Owen Jacobson]

> On Sep 13, 2017, at 2:21 AM, VJ Rada  wrote:
> 
> any proposal doing that would get failed bc of ossifying agora though right?

That proposal could repeal that rule.

-o



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: DIS: No Telepathy v2

[VJ Rada]

any proposal doing that would get failed bc of ossifying agora though right?

On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 4:19 PM, Aris Merchant
 wrote:
> Agora would stop existing. It would therfore have no state. Arguably
> though, if we made a meta-descision to recreate it, it would start
> existing again. The Paradox of Self-Amendment has some stuff on this.
>
>
> -Aris
>
> On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 10:54 PM, Owen Jacobson  wrote:
>> As a thought experiment (only), what is the state of Agora if we repeal 
>> every rule?
>>
>> -o
>>
>>> On Sep 13, 2017, at 1:30 AM, Aris Merchant 
>>>  wrote:
>>>
>>> Ahh! Don't do that. All rules are instruments.
>>>
>>> -Aris
>>>
>>> On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 8:55 PM, Cuddle Beam  wrote:
 Proto:

 Title: Spring Cleaning

 Content: Remove all Historic Instruments [replace that with a proper
 definition for cleanup] that are older than 1 year old.

 On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 5:39 AM, Owen Jacobson  wrote:
>
>
>> On Sep 12, 2017, at 1:26 PM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> This whole conversation rung a memory bell for me, something Old (12+
>> years old) that might be
>> still in effect!
>>
>> There was a Proposal, that read something like the following:
>>
>>  Be it Hereby Proclaimed that from this moment forward, anyone who
>> causes gamestate
>>  changes without creating a public record is Guilty of the Crime of
>> Invisibilitating.
>>
>> Note that Instruments don't lose power (they just reach the end of their
>> effects).  So
>> if a Proposal defines an effect as ongoing, there's still a Powered
>> instrument out there
>> proclaiming people guilty of this crime whenever they do it…
>
> fx: pained sigh
>
> As a practical matter, it’s not realistic for the Referee to keep track of
> every infraction-bearing document indefinitely. The current rules to 
> appear
> to require it anyways, so I make an effort: I have a massive folder of
> pledges, for example. However, at the end of the day, I (and, I think, my
> inevitable successor) is only human, and can only account for so much.
>
> If I miss a card due to a historic Instrument, please bring it up.
>
> -o


>>



-- 
>From V.J Rada

Re: DIS: No Telepathy v2

[Aris Merchant]

Agora would stop existing. It would therfore have no state. Arguably
though, if we made a meta-descision to recreate it, it would start
existing again. The Paradox of Self-Amendment has some stuff on this.


-Aris

On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 10:54 PM, Owen Jacobson  wrote:
> As a thought experiment (only), what is the state of Agora if we repeal every 
> rule?
>
> -o
>
>> On Sep 13, 2017, at 1:30 AM, Aris Merchant 
>>  wrote:
>>
>> Ahh! Don't do that. All rules are instruments.
>>
>> -Aris
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 8:55 PM, Cuddle Beam  wrote:
>>> Proto:
>>>
>>> Title: Spring Cleaning
>>>
>>> Content: Remove all Historic Instruments [replace that with a proper
>>> definition for cleanup] that are older than 1 year old.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 5:39 AM, Owen Jacobson  wrote:


> On Sep 12, 2017, at 1:26 PM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
>
>
>
> This whole conversation rung a memory bell for me, something Old (12+
> years old) that might be
> still in effect!
>
> There was a Proposal, that read something like the following:
>
>  Be it Hereby Proclaimed that from this moment forward, anyone who
> causes gamestate
>  changes without creating a public record is Guilty of the Crime of
> Invisibilitating.
>
> Note that Instruments don't lose power (they just reach the end of their
> effects).  So
> if a Proposal defines an effect as ongoing, there's still a Powered
> instrument out there
> proclaiming people guilty of this crime whenever they do it…

 fx: pained sigh

 As a practical matter, it’s not realistic for the Referee to keep track of
 every infraction-bearing document indefinitely. The current rules to appear
 to require it anyways, so I make an effort: I have a massive folder of
 pledges, for example. However, at the end of the day, I (and, I think, my
 inevitable successor) is only human, and can only account for so much.

 If I miss a card due to a historic Instrument, please bring it up.

 -o
>>>
>>>
>

Re: DIS: Shinies and Stamps Omnibus Fix Thread

[Aris Merchant]

On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 8:24 PM, Owen Jacobson  wrote:
> An update on this project:
>
>> Some basic principles:
>>
>> 1. The actions undertaken so far were undertaken in broadly good faith with 
>> respect to the transactional nature of the current economic rules, and 
>> performed with the mistaken understanding that several key rules made 
>> actions POSSIBLE instead of making them PERMISSIBLE. These actions should 
>> not be invalidated over a simple rule defect, even where those actions were 
>> clearly scams in other ways. (Quazie, I’m trying to let you and CuddleBeam 
>> keep your ill-gotten stamp winnings.)
>>
>
>> 1a. Whatever fix we undertake should _not_ somehow resurrect actions we had 
>> all understood, within the context of that mistaken reading of the rules, to 
>> be ineffective or impossible at the time they were performed.
>>
>> 2. Whatever solution we apply to permit those actions must also protect 
>> their side effects. It does Agora no good to enforce our intended 
>> understanding of shinies, stamps, and the floating value if we still have to 
>> throw away several proposals, both passed and in flight, and several CFJs.
>>
>> 3. The solution should be robust against additional actions performed in the 
>> potentially substantial time between its initial submission as a proposal, 
>> and its final enactment.
>
> In the absence of criticism, I have to assume y’all think these are 
> reasonable principles to apply, and I’m proceeding accordingly. They seem to 
> be working out okay, and it’s kept the recordkeeping reasonably simple, 
> though I would appreciate if players would avoid hedging their shiny-driven 
> actions. You may cause an action you intend to fall under principle 1 to fall 
> under principle 1a, instead.
>
>> With that in mind, here are the things I believe need to happen:
>>
>> 1. The proposals fixing the stamps, welcome package, and floating value 
>> rules need to pass. If there are any lingering bugs you’re aware of that 
>> would perpetuate our shiny problems, please share them so that we can get 
>> those fixed, too.
>
> The proposals for this are distributed, other than one late-breaking bugfix 
> for Agoraculture. As Agoraculture has only just been enacted
>
> PLEASE DO NOT PERFORM ACTIONS FROM THE AGORACULTURE RULES UNTIL THE MAY/CAN 
> BUGS IN THEM ARE FIXED.
>
> Let’s not have a repeat quite that quickly. To the Agronomist: I recommend 
> adjudicating these rules, and these rules only, as if they mean exactly what 
> they say, which I believe means that it is presently impossible to create 
> Comestibles.
>
>> 2. I need to draft a proposal that, somehow, ratifies the results of all 
>> shiny-related and stamp-related actions since July 30th, when nichdel 
>> attempted to create the first stamp. This proposal also needs a catch-all 
>> clause to cause it to ratify shiny actions taken after this proposal is 
>> submitted but before it passes, or we need a gentleagorans’ agreement not to 
>> do anything with shinies or stamps for the duration.
>
> Having slept on this a bit, and understanding the ratification process a bit 
> better, I think this proposal will comprise two parts:
>
> 1. A condition that matches only the prior actions that would fall under 
> principle 1 and ratifies them in place with the rules retroactively changed, 
> and
>
> 2. A list of all such actions known at the time of writing for the proposal, 
> by reference (through links into the archives).
>
> The latter acts as a fallback in case the former is inadequate in some way, 
> while the former allows players to continue transacting nominal shinies 
> without losing those transactions when ratification happens.
>
> Does this seem reasonable

We have to walk a thin line of ratifying the effect of diffrent rules
without ratifying the rules themselves. Honestly, I'd be tempted just
to ratify a secreatary's report with all the "correct" info.

-Aris