Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Resignation, favours, and pledge

[VJ Rada]

I've actually been meaning to ask you this for a while Ørjan, and now
seems like a decent time to do so (i don't mean to be rude or w/e
obv). What's the story behind your watching of Agora? Because it seems
like you were around in like 1993 and have been watching quite
actively for several years? I actually don't know the story behind
that.

On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 5:40 PM, Ørjan Johansen  wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Nov 2017, Madeline wrote:
>
>> Can we just never give you any in-game power ever again
>
>
> But it's so fun to watch!
>
> Greetings,
> Ørjan.



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Resignation, favours, and pledge

[Ørjan Johansen]

On Wed, 22 Nov 2017, Madeline wrote:


Can we just never give you any in-game power ever again


But it's so fun to watch!

Greetings,
Ørjan.

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Resolution of Proposals 7965-7972

[Ørjan Johansen]

On Wed, 22 Nov 2017, VJ Rada wrote:


immediately after". And participation favours are misspelled, so I
believe they are unawardable at this time.


I don't believe Agora cares about trivial spelling errors.

(May also apply to Trigon's Æther comment.)

Greetings,
Ørjan.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Resignation, favours, and pledge

[VJ Rada]

yea don't award me a patent title for being a bad player. only diff
between me and cuddlebeam is that most of my scams are non-frivolous.
i mean if i won more than once (i have won once with the "with
objection" stuff), with stuff like this, maybe.

@aris: nah i'm actually cool w/ everything right now lmao. sorry for
swearing and stuff, know it's not agoran norm and all that. but yea
i'm totally fine.

On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 5:47 PM, Ørjan Johansen  wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Nov 2017, Aris Merchant wrote:
>
>> I pay V.J. Rada 10 shinies for the clever scam. H. Herald candidates,
>> would you consider giving out Scamster for this? I don't think e ever
>> actually won off a scam, but e's come close so many times that e
>> deserves the accolade.
>
>
> Petard hoister.
>
> Greetings,
> Ørjan.



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Resignation, favours, and pledge

[Ørjan Johansen]

On Tue, 21 Nov 2017, Aris Merchant wrote:


I pay V.J. Rada 10 shinies for the clever scam. H. Herald candidates,
would you consider giving out Scamster for this? I don't think e ever
actually won off a scam, but e's come close so many times that e
deserves the accolade.


Petard hoister.

Greetings,
Ørjan.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Resignation, favours, and pledge

[Madeline]

(I should probably stop being a jerk, sorry)


On 2017-11-22 17:28, Madeline wrote:

Well you're not the referee anymore :3


On 2017-11-22 17:24, VJ Rada wrote:

I'm the referee, that would be illegal, I could card y'all etc.

obviously the correct play would have been to do this JUST before the
beginning of an agoran week. but the message seemingly STILL hasn't
sent, so that would have been hard.

On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 5:10 PM, Madeline  wrote:
In addition, any other favour-granting officer (such as me) could do 
EXACTLY

the same thing to stop you from becoming the advisor of anyone.



On 2017-11-22 17:04, VJ Rada wrote:

Expedition is still 7 day voting period! Balloons automatically are
created at the beginning of each agoran week (next monday). So it
would have worked.

On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 5:01 PM, Madeline  wrote:
For the record, it wouldn't have worked. None of favours, 
influence, or
advising are secured, and with the power of expedition we could 
get the

proposal through before you won on balloons.



On 2017-11-22 16:58, VJ Rada wrote:

i'm s pissed that i lost the easiest win in the history of
easy wins because of emails.

On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 4:58 PM, VJ Rada  wrote:

i mean yeah ok. not exactly standing for re-election here.

On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 4:56 PM, Madeline  
wrote:

Can we just never give you any in-game power ever again



On 2017-11-22 16:52, VJ Rada wrote:

Ah... the favours don't work because it looks like agora hasn't
received the message causing them yet. No surprise, it's _very 
long.

Unfortunately, I can't award them again when the message DOES go
through because I'M NOT THE FUCKING REFEREE.

CLAAASSIC RADA LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. RESIGNING EIR 
WAY

OUT
OF EIR OWN SCAM

On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 4:49 PM, VJ Rada  
wrote:
I award myself 3,000 justice favours for successfully 
pointing 3,000
fingers. I resign as referee. I intend to call in the pledge, 
with

agoran consent, that states "I pledge to not point fingers" (or
similar)

--
    From V.J. Rada




--
   From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Resignation, favours, and pledge

[Madeline]

Well you're not the referee anymore :3


On 2017-11-22 17:24, VJ Rada wrote:

I'm the referee, that would be illegal, I could card y'all etc.

obviously the correct play would have been to do this JUST before the
beginning of an agoran week. but the message seemingly STILL hasn't
sent, so that would have been hard.

On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 5:10 PM, Madeline  wrote:

In addition, any other favour-granting officer (such as me) could do EXACTLY
the same thing to stop you from becoming the advisor of anyone.



On 2017-11-22 17:04, VJ Rada wrote:

Expedition is still 7 day voting period! Balloons automatically are
created at the beginning of each agoran week (next monday). So it
would have worked.

On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 5:01 PM, Madeline  wrote:

For the record, it wouldn't have worked. None of favours, influence, or
advising are secured, and with the power of expedition we could get the
proposal through before you won on balloons.



On 2017-11-22 16:58, VJ Rada wrote:

i'm s pissed that i lost the easiest win in the history of
easy wins because of emails.

On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 4:58 PM, VJ Rada  wrote:

i mean yeah ok. not exactly standing for re-election here.

On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 4:56 PM, Madeline  wrote:

Can we just never give you any in-game power ever again



On 2017-11-22 16:52, VJ Rada wrote:

Ah... the favours don't work because it looks like agora hasn't
received the message causing them yet. No surprise, it's _very long.
Unfortunately, I can't award them again when the message DOES go
through because I'M NOT THE FUCKING REFEREE.

CLAAASSIC RADA LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. RESIGNING EIR WAY
OUT
OF EIR OWN SCAM

On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 4:49 PM, VJ Rada  wrote:

I award myself 3,000 justice favours for successfully pointing 3,000
fingers. I resign as referee. I intend to call in the pledge, with
agoran consent, that states "I pledge to not point fingers" (or
similar)

--
From V.J. Rada




--
   From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Resignation, favours, and pledge

[VJ Rada]

you know what else? you know what the hell else?

this is one day before i would have got a green ribbon for referee.
ugh. most of my horrible scam attempts are come up with on my really
boring busride home, maybe i should take up drawing or something.

On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 5:24 PM, VJ Rada  wrote:
> I'm the referee, that would be illegal, I could card y'all etc.
>
> obviously the correct play would have been to do this JUST before the
> beginning of an agoran week. but the message seemingly STILL hasn't
> sent, so that would have been hard.
>
> On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 5:10 PM, Madeline  wrote:
>> In addition, any other favour-granting officer (such as me) could do EXACTLY
>> the same thing to stop you from becoming the advisor of anyone.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 2017-11-22 17:04, VJ Rada wrote:
>>>
>>> Expedition is still 7 day voting period! Balloons automatically are
>>> created at the beginning of each agoran week (next monday). So it
>>> would have worked.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 5:01 PM, Madeline  wrote:

 For the record, it wouldn't have worked. None of favours, influence, or
 advising are secured, and with the power of expedition we could get the
 proposal through before you won on balloons.



 On 2017-11-22 16:58, VJ Rada wrote:
>
> i'm s pissed that i lost the easiest win in the history of
> easy wins because of emails.
>
> On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 4:58 PM, VJ Rada  wrote:
>>
>> i mean yeah ok. not exactly standing for re-election here.
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 4:56 PM, Madeline  wrote:
>>>
>>> Can we just never give you any in-game power ever again
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2017-11-22 16:52, VJ Rada wrote:

 Ah... the favours don't work because it looks like agora hasn't
 received the message causing them yet. No surprise, it's _very long.
 Unfortunately, I can't award them again when the message DOES go
 through because I'M NOT THE FUCKING REFEREE.

 CLAAASSIC RADA LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. RESIGNING EIR WAY
 OUT
 OF EIR OWN SCAM

 On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 4:49 PM, VJ Rada  wrote:
>
> I award myself 3,000 justice favours for successfully pointing 3,000
> fingers. I resign as referee. I intend to call in the pledge, with
> agoran consent, that states "I pledge to not point fingers" (or
> similar)
>
> --
>From V.J. Rada



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



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Resignation, favours, and pledge

[VJ Rada]

I'm the referee, that would be illegal, I could card y'all etc.

obviously the correct play would have been to do this JUST before the
beginning of an agoran week. but the message seemingly STILL hasn't
sent, so that would have been hard.

On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 5:10 PM, Madeline  wrote:
> In addition, any other favour-granting officer (such as me) could do EXACTLY
> the same thing to stop you from becoming the advisor of anyone.
>
>
>
> On 2017-11-22 17:04, VJ Rada wrote:
>>
>> Expedition is still 7 day voting period! Balloons automatically are
>> created at the beginning of each agoran week (next monday). So it
>> would have worked.
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 5:01 PM, Madeline  wrote:
>>>
>>> For the record, it wouldn't have worked. None of favours, influence, or
>>> advising are secured, and with the power of expedition we could get the
>>> proposal through before you won on balloons.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2017-11-22 16:58, VJ Rada wrote:

 i'm s pissed that i lost the easiest win in the history of
 easy wins because of emails.

 On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 4:58 PM, VJ Rada  wrote:
>
> i mean yeah ok. not exactly standing for re-election here.
>
> On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 4:56 PM, Madeline  wrote:
>>
>> Can we just never give you any in-game power ever again
>>
>>
>>
>> On 2017-11-22 16:52, VJ Rada wrote:
>>>
>>> Ah... the favours don't work because it looks like agora hasn't
>>> received the message causing them yet. No surprise, it's _very long.
>>> Unfortunately, I can't award them again when the message DOES go
>>> through because I'M NOT THE FUCKING REFEREE.
>>>
>>> CLAAASSIC RADA LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. RESIGNING EIR WAY
>>> OUT
>>> OF EIR OWN SCAM
>>>
>>> On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 4:49 PM, VJ Rada  wrote:

 I award myself 3,000 justice favours for successfully pointing 3,000
 fingers. I resign as referee. I intend to call in the pledge, with
 agoran consent, that states "I pledge to not point fingers" (or
 similar)

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



>>
>>
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Resignation, favours, and pledge

[Madeline]

It's not even that clever, we talked about it before the proposal was 
officially submitted and agreed that as it would never actually work, 
hopefully no one would waste their time attempting it.
I support the intent to call in the pledge, as fingers were indeed 
pointed explicitly contrary to the pledge, and with the intent of 
personal gain no less.



On 2017-11-22 17:07, Aris Merchant wrote:

I support the intent to call in the pledge; or, if it was invalid,
intend with Agoran consent to call in the pledge. My basis for doing
so is that the notorious scamster E.E. Rafa has willfully intended,
contrived, and conspired (with emself; totally actual conspiracy) to
abuse eir official powers for personal gain, to defy a pledge of eir
own making, and to abuse a new game system in a destructive manner
without regard for the consequences.

I pay V.J. Rada 10 shinies for the clever scam. H. Herald candidates,
would you consider giving out Scamster for this? I don't think e ever
actually won off a scam, but e's come close so many times that e
deserves the accolade.

-Aris

On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 9:52 PM, VJ Rada  wrote:

Ah... the favours don't work because it looks like agora hasn't
received the message causing them yet. No surprise, it's _very long.
Unfortunately, I can't award them again when the message DOES go
through because I'M NOT THE FUCKING REFEREE.

CLAAASSIC RADA LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. RESIGNING EIR WAY OUT
OF EIR OWN SCAM

On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 4:49 PM, VJ Rada  wrote:

I award myself 3,000 justice favours for successfully pointing 3,000
fingers. I resign as referee. I intend to call in the pledge, with
agoran consent, that states "I pledge to not point fingers" (or
similar)

--
 From V.J. Rada



--
 From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Resignation, favours, and pledge

[Madeline]

In addition, any other favour-granting officer (such as me) could do 
EXACTLY the same thing to stop you from becoming the advisor of anyone.



On 2017-11-22 17:04, VJ Rada wrote:

Expedition is still 7 day voting period! Balloons automatically are
created at the beginning of each agoran week (next monday). So it
would have worked.

On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 5:01 PM, Madeline  wrote:

For the record, it wouldn't have worked. None of favours, influence, or
advising are secured, and with the power of expedition we could get the
proposal through before you won on balloons.



On 2017-11-22 16:58, VJ Rada wrote:

i'm s pissed that i lost the easiest win in the history of
easy wins because of emails.

On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 4:58 PM, VJ Rada  wrote:

i mean yeah ok. not exactly standing for re-election here.

On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 4:56 PM, Madeline  wrote:

Can we just never give you any in-game power ever again



On 2017-11-22 16:52, VJ Rada wrote:

Ah... the favours don't work because it looks like agora hasn't
received the message causing them yet. No surprise, it's _very long.
Unfortunately, I can't award them again when the message DOES go
through because I'M NOT THE FUCKING REFEREE.

CLAAASSIC RADA LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. RESIGNING EIR WAY OUT
OF EIR OWN SCAM

On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 4:49 PM, VJ Rada  wrote:

I award myself 3,000 justice favours for successfully pointing 3,000
fingers. I resign as referee. I intend to call in the pledge, with
agoran consent, that states "I pledge to not point fingers" (or
similar)

--
   From V.J. Rada





--
  From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Resignation, favours, and pledge

[VJ Rada]

Expedition is still 7 day voting period! Balloons automatically are
created at the beginning of each agoran week (next monday). So it
would have worked.

On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 5:01 PM, Madeline  wrote:
> For the record, it wouldn't have worked. None of favours, influence, or
> advising are secured, and with the power of expedition we could get the
> proposal through before you won on balloons.
>
>
>
> On 2017-11-22 16:58, VJ Rada wrote:
>>
>> i'm s pissed that i lost the easiest win in the history of
>> easy wins because of emails.
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 4:58 PM, VJ Rada  wrote:
>>>
>>> i mean yeah ok. not exactly standing for re-election here.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 4:56 PM, Madeline  wrote:

 Can we just never give you any in-game power ever again



 On 2017-11-22 16:52, VJ Rada wrote:
>
> Ah... the favours don't work because it looks like agora hasn't
> received the message causing them yet. No surprise, it's _very long.
> Unfortunately, I can't award them again when the message DOES go
> through because I'M NOT THE FUCKING REFEREE.
>
> CLAAASSIC RADA LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. RESIGNING EIR WAY OUT
> OF EIR OWN SCAM
>
> On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 4:49 PM, VJ Rada  wrote:
>>
>> I award myself 3,000 justice favours for successfully pointing 3,000
>> fingers. I resign as referee. I intend to call in the pledge, with
>> agoran consent, that states "I pledge to not point fingers" (or
>> similar)
>>
>> --
>>   From V.J. Rada
>
>
>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>  From V.J. Rada
>>
>>
>>
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Resignation, favours, and pledge

[Madeline]

For the record, it wouldn't have worked. None of favours, influence, or 
advising are secured, and with the power of expedition we could get the 
proposal through before you won on balloons.



On 2017-11-22 16:58, VJ Rada wrote:

i'm s pissed that i lost the easiest win in the history of
easy wins because of emails.

On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 4:58 PM, VJ Rada  wrote:

i mean yeah ok. not exactly standing for re-election here.

On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 4:56 PM, Madeline  wrote:

Can we just never give you any in-game power ever again



On 2017-11-22 16:52, VJ Rada wrote:

Ah... the favours don't work because it looks like agora hasn't
received the message causing them yet. No surprise, it's _very long.
Unfortunately, I can't award them again when the message DOES go
through because I'M NOT THE FUCKING REFEREE.

CLAAASSIC RADA LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. RESIGNING EIR WAY OUT
OF EIR OWN SCAM

On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 4:49 PM, VJ Rada  wrote:

I award myself 3,000 justice favours for successfully pointing 3,000
fingers. I resign as referee. I intend to call in the pledge, with
agoran consent, that states "I pledge to not point fingers" (or
similar)

--
  From V.J. Rada






--
 From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Resignation, favours, and pledge

[VJ Rada]

i'm s pissed that i lost the easiest win in the history of
easy wins because of emails.

On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 4:58 PM, VJ Rada  wrote:
> i mean yeah ok. not exactly standing for re-election here.
>
> On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 4:56 PM, Madeline  wrote:
>> Can we just never give you any in-game power ever again
>>
>>
>>
>> On 2017-11-22 16:52, VJ Rada wrote:
>>>
>>> Ah... the favours don't work because it looks like agora hasn't
>>> received the message causing them yet. No surprise, it's _very long.
>>> Unfortunately, I can't award them again when the message DOES go
>>> through because I'M NOT THE FUCKING REFEREE.
>>>
>>> CLAAASSIC RADA LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. RESIGNING EIR WAY OUT
>>> OF EIR OWN SCAM
>>>
>>> On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 4:49 PM, VJ Rada  wrote:

 I award myself 3,000 justice favours for successfully pointing 3,000
 fingers. I resign as referee. I intend to call in the pledge, with
 agoran consent, that states "I pledge to not point fingers" (or
 similar)

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



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Resignation, favours, and pledge

[VJ Rada]

i mean yeah ok. not exactly standing for re-election here.

On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 4:56 PM, Madeline  wrote:
> Can we just never give you any in-game power ever again
>
>
>
> On 2017-11-22 16:52, VJ Rada wrote:
>>
>> Ah... the favours don't work because it looks like agora hasn't
>> received the message causing them yet. No surprise, it's _very long.
>> Unfortunately, I can't award them again when the message DOES go
>> through because I'M NOT THE FUCKING REFEREE.
>>
>> CLAAASSIC RADA LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. RESIGNING EIR WAY OUT
>> OF EIR OWN SCAM
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 4:49 PM, VJ Rada  wrote:
>>>
>>> I award myself 3,000 justice favours for successfully pointing 3,000
>>> fingers. I resign as referee. I intend to call in the pledge, with
>>> agoran consent, that states "I pledge to not point fingers" (or
>>> similar)
>>>
>>> --
>>>  From V.J. Rada
>>
>>
>>
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Resignation, favours, and pledge

[Madeline]

Can we just never give you any in-game power ever again


On 2017-11-22 16:52, VJ Rada wrote:

Ah... the favours don't work because it looks like agora hasn't
received the message causing them yet. No surprise, it's _very long.
Unfortunately, I can't award them again when the message DOES go
through because I'M NOT THE FUCKING REFEREE.

CLAAASSIC RADA LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. RESIGNING EIR WAY OUT
OF EIR OWN SCAM

On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 4:49 PM, VJ Rada  wrote:

I award myself 3,000 justice favours for successfully pointing 3,000
fingers. I resign as referee. I intend to call in the pledge, with
agoran consent, that states "I pledge to not point fingers" (or
similar)

--
 From V.J. Rada

DIS: Re: BUS: Resignation, favours, and pledge

[VJ Rada]

Ah... the favours don't work because it looks like agora hasn't
received the message causing them yet. No surprise, it's _very long.
Unfortunately, I can't award them again when the message DOES go
through because I'M NOT THE FUCKING REFEREE.

CLAAASSIC RADA LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. RESIGNING EIR WAY OUT
OF EIR OWN SCAM

On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 4:49 PM, VJ Rada  wrote:
> I award myself 3,000 justice favours for successfully pointing 3,000
> fingers. I resign as referee. I intend to call in the pledge, with
> agoran consent, that states "I pledge to not point fingers" (or
> similar)
>
> --
> From V.J. Rada



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 7973-7880

[Alexis Hunt]

On Wed, 22 Nov 2017 at 00:20 Ørjan Johansen  wrote:

> On Tue, 21 Nov 2017, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> >> 7880*  ATMunn, [5]  1.0  [6]  Alexis  1
> AP
> > AGAINST.  If you deserve it, claim it right away.
>
> Three of the reward conditions may be triggered by _other_ people's
> actions, so this is not always possible, and Agora has a tradition of
> avoiding having less than 4 days to respond to other people's actions.
>
> Greetings,
> Ørjan.
>

Yeah, the main reason I support this is that it's not fair for someone to
have to respond within 24 hours of a proposal resolution, in particular, to
gain rewards.

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 7973-7880

[Ørjan Johansen]

On Tue, 21 Nov 2017, Kerim Aydin wrote:


7880*  ATMunn, [5]  1.0  [6]  Alexis  1 AP

AGAINST.  If you deserve it, claim it right away.


Three of the reward conditions may be triggered by _other_ people's 
actions, so this is not always possible, and Agora has a tradition of 
avoiding having less than 4 days to respond to other people's actions.


Greetings,
Ørjan.

Re: DIS: PAoaM v3: Not rushed this time and also better in general

[Aris Merchant]

If we made it a few a month, I think existing systems (zombies,
deregistration) would be able to handle the wealth collection problem.
It's worse to have a few people exploiting a system than to have the
off chance that a few people might slip through. I agree with G. that
2 a week is way too high, although 2 a month seems draconian. I'd tend
to go with 3 or 4 per month flat.

 Have you considered the advantages and disadvantages of having
combined vs. separate proposal and CFJ currencies? Many systems I've
seen separate the two. In fact The Economic System from a few years
back (see G.'s thesis) had three usable currencies: one for proposals,
one for increasing votes, and one for removing blots (I'd like a slot
somewhere to stick a currency for that). You may want to get something
like that going in your proposal, because it encourages
specialization. One of the problems in the draft is that only two of
the currencies have uses in the main game: coins and paper. That's
good, but it means that people are going to be focused mainly on those
resources. If you add 1 for CFJs (or reuse an existing one) and we add
one for blots, as soon as that's ready, then there will be four
mini-game currencies with game purposes, three specialized and one
general. The monthly allowance would probably give out 1 (2 max) of
each.

Another thing that you're currently lacking is any currency auctions.
I admit that you can't go as far as [1], but perhaps they can be
useful somehow. Specifically, the idea of auctioning off a players
estate in coins is worth considering, because it will suck up a lot of
the excess coinage in circulation and create some interesting bidding
wars.

Some reading I strongly recommend for any new players interested in the economy:
G.'s currency thesis (A Multi-Tiered, Multi-Controlled Currency
System, see above) [1]
The Idea Grind (a quick analysis by G. of past mini-games that
prompted the current economy; entire thread worth reading) [2]
Services Rendered (an analysis by nichdel of the goals of an Agoran economy) [3]
Considering our Economic Options (an analysis by nichdel of our
current problems and proposed reforms; some were adopted, some failed,
some even helped a bit, but none of them fixed the underlying
problems) [4]


[1] https://www.mail-archive.com/agora-business@agoranomic.org/msg28360.html
[2] https://www.mail-archive.com/agora-discussion@agoranomic.org/msg33637.html
[3] https://www.mail-archive.com/agora-discussion@agoranomic.org/msg34236.html
[4] https://www.mail-archive.com/agora-discussion@agoranomic.org/msg34533.html

-Aris

On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 12:54 PM, Reuben Staley  wrote:
> My problem with having fixed assets per player per week is that that
> will cause massive accumulation of wealth on the part of inactive
> players. I believe I've mentioned this before in this thread,
> actually. I did want to give everyone the same amount of assets a
> week, but I was scared that inactive people would get a ton of wealth
> and, if they ever decided to rejoin the game, they would be much more
> wealthy than the active people, so that makes no sense.
>
> On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 8:49 AM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Sun, 19 Nov 2017, Aris Merchant wrote:
>>> On Sun, Nov 19, 2017 at 4:19 PM, Reuben Staley  
>>> wrote:
>>> >   1. every player with an amount of papers less than 2 an amount of
>>> >  papers so that eir paper balance is equal to 2.
>>> >
>>> > [ This makes it so that impoverished players can move a little each week
>>> >   and make some proposals. ]
>>>
>>> I now present the Aris Asset Holding Contract (AAHC):
>>>
>>> {Aris CAN amend, repeal, or retitle this contract by announcement.
>>> This contract accepts all assets. Aris can cause this contract to
>>> transfer any asset in its possession by announcement.}
>>>
>>> Then I transfer all of my papers and apples to the AAHC every week.
>>> I'm not really sure how to get around this problem without using
>>> something along the lines of effective control (see the blue cards
>>> rule).
>>
>> Needs-based supply for the "poor" is one of the big failings of the
>> current system, to get rid of.  Just give everyone something each X,
>> but less (e.g. 2/month, not 2/week).
>>
>> Even without the hole you mention, this ends the economy in terms
>> of playing it.  2 paper/week is more than I need, you give it back
>> when I use it, I never have to participate.  Give everyone 2/month,
>> regardless of need, and they need to budget, and then to earn
>> more they need to participate.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Trigon

DIS: Re: BUS: (no subject)

[Ørjan Johansen]

Doesn't Rule 2240 imply the opposite of your argument?

  In a conflict between clauses of the same Rule, if exactly one
  claims precedence over the other, then it takes precedence;
  otherwise, the later clause takes precedence.

Greetings,
Ørjan.

On Tue, 21 Nov 2017, Kerim Aydin wrote:


I shiny-CFJ on the following statement:

   G. CAN assign this CFJ to emself by announcement.


ARGUMENTS

Rule 991 last paragraph paraphrases as following (full text in evidence).

- Sentence 1 unequivocally states that the Arbitor CAN assign any
 player to be its judge by announcement.

- Sentence 2 states that the Caller is not "eligible to be assigned".

- Sentence 3 is about "interested players having equal opportunity".

- Sentence 4 states that only eligible players CAN assign cases to
 themselves w/o 3 objections.

The question is whether sentence 2's "eligibility" limitation applies
backwards to the Arbitor's ability to assign judgement, or if it only
applies forward (and limits self-assignment, but still allows the
Arbitor to assign anyone).

My personal feeling is that sentence 2 applies forward, but does not
limit the Arbitor's ability to assign, literally, any player.  This
case occurred to me when I noticed that at least one player was not
getting "equal opportunity to judge" (sentence 3) because e also called
a lot of CFJs.  So in the case where I (as Arbitor) can't occasionally
(in rare circumstances) self-assign, I am at risk of breaking that SHALL.


EVIDENCE

Rule 991/23 (Power=2.0)
Calls for Judgement

 Any person (the initiator) can initiate a Call for Judgement (CFJ,
 syn. Judicial Case), specifying a statement to be inquired into:

 a) by announcement, and spending 1 Action Point, OR

 b) by announcement, and spending the current CFJ cost in shinies,
OR

 c) by announcement if e is not a player.

 When a person initiates a Call for Judgment, e CAN optionally bar
 one person from the case by announcement.

 At any time, each CFJ is either open (default), suspended, or
 assigned exactly one judgement.

 The Arbitor is an office, responsible for the administration of
 justice in a manner that is fair for emself, if not for the rest
 of Agora.

 When a CFJ has no judge assigned, the Arbitor CAN assign any
 player to be its judge by announcement, and SHALL do so within a
 week. The players eligible to be assigned as judge are all players
 except the initiator and the person barred (if any). The Arbitor
 SHALL assign judges over time such that all interested players
 have reasonably equal opportunities to judge. If a CFJ has no
 judge assigned, then any player eligible to judge that CFJ CAN
 assign it to emself Without 3 Objections.

 The Arbitor's weekly report includes a summary of recent judicial
 case activity, including open and recently-judged cases, recent
 judicial assignments, and a list of players interested in judging.

Re: DIS: PAoaM v3: Not rushed this time and also better in general

[Reuben Staley]

I should mention: while using the Æ symbol is cute and all, it's likely 
that it would rack up a few CFJs about whether you're referring to 
Aether or something else entirely that doesn't exist.


On 11/21/2017 1:38 PM, Corona wrote:

Sorry for the walls of text; if you don't understand anything,  I'll
be happy to clarify.

About it being rushed - A reform that could singlehandedly determine
the (un)balance of Agora will never be prepared enough, if we want to
release it in a (kind of) timely manner.

That's why we should partially leave it to the Agoran legislative
process, fixing it as we go.

After all, it is impossible for this law to introduce a complete
economy, as that depends on all the assets one can buy, and not only
would the reform get bogged down by writing out every asset to be
available for purchase, it will also be easier to imagine how will a
new asset interact with the rest of the economy if one can see that
economy in practice.

Anyways, here are my thoughts:

On 11/19/17, Reuben Staley  wrote:

This is still pretty rough around the edges with the new mechanics.

Title: Putting Agora on a Map v3
Author: Trigon
Co-Authors: Aris, ATMunn, G., o, VJ Rada
AI: 2

[ Version 3: So this is Go + Settlers of Catan + some RPG mechanics now.
It'll be interesting to see how this all plays out. Also: two drafts
in one day YEET! ]

[ PART I: Removing and Changing Stuff ]

Repeal rules 2488, 2489, 2490, and 2491.

[ I honestly tried to keep the estates, but these changes are so radical
that it wouldn't be compatible. ]

Repeal rule 2500.

Amend rule 2445 by replacing the second paragraph and subsequent list
with:

Any player CAN flip a specified proposal's imminence to "pending"
by announcement by spending 1 paper.

Amend rule 991 by removing the first two items of the list directly
following the first paragraph, and replacing them with the following
list item:

a) by announcement by spending 1 paper, OR

[ Everyone wants to get rid of these so okay, let's do it. ]

Repeal rules 2483, 2487, and 2497.

[ No more shinies, everybody! ]

Amend rule 2516 by replacing it in full with:

At the beginning of the Agoran week, the Treasuror CAN and SHALL
cause Agora to create in:

1. every player with an amount of papers less than 2 an amount of
papers so that eir paper balance is equal to 2.

2. every player with an amount of apples less than 4 an amount of
apples so that eir apple balance is equal to 4.

[ This makes it so that impoverished players can move a little each week
and make some proposals. ]



*I'd wager that players will set up contracts, allowing them to
receive state aid even when they are fabulously wealthy, and it's not
like you can just raise the price of contracts, which should be cheap.
To avoid cluttering up reports with such contracts, you might as well
give every player a flat 2 paper & 4 apples/week.


Aris already pointed this out and flat rates were also discussed.


It is never a bad thing to have more poverty/powerlessness prevention
mechanisms, and one occured to me, "scavenging for apples":

A player can, on any Land Unit, start scavenging for apples by
announcement. While scavenging for apples, e gains one apple after
every 24 hours of scavenging. A player ceases scavenging if:
-E changes location or takes any other map-altering action (building
facilities etc.)
-E has been scavenging for 7 days (to discourage idling).

Maybe there should also be an indestructible lv1 mine or orchard at
0,0 so that impoverished players can get lumber/stone, with which they
can build a facility to create the other.
As I've already said in this thread, hopefully there will be a whole 
list of Land Units that are protected from the normal Land Unit 
effecting processes.





Amend rule 2599 by replacing the second paragraph with:

When a player receives a Welcome Package, Agora creates the
following assets in eir possession:

1. 20 coins
2. 5 lumber
3. 5 stones
4. 10 apples
5. 5 papers

[PART II: Making Land]

Re-enact rule 1993/1 (Power=2) "The Land of Arcadia" with the text:

Arcadia is a land entirely defined by the Arcadian Map (the Map).
The Map is the term for the set of all Land Units.

The Map divides Arcadia into a finite, discrete number of Units of
Land, or simply Land. Each Unit of Land is an indestructible asset
specified by an ordered pair of integers known as its Latitude and
Longitude.

Every unique ordered pair of integers within the limits defined in
the Rules for Latitude and Longitude signifies an existent Unit of
Land. No other Units of Land exist. Units of Land CAN only be
created or destroyed by changing the limits of Latitude and
Longitude defined in the Rules.

All values for Latitude and Longitude MUST lie between -9 and +9,
inclusive.

The Total Land Area of Arcadia is the number of existent Units of
Land defined by permissible Latitude and Longitude pairs.


*That is _361_ ! There is a reason why Go is often played (when
practicing) on smaller 

Re: DIS: PAoaM v3: Not rushed this time and also better in general

[Reuben Staley]

On 11/21/2017 8:12 PM, Owen Jacobson wrote:



On Nov 21, 2017, at 4:06 PM, Reuben Staley  wrote:

On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 1:28 AM, Owen Jacobson > wrote:


On Nov 19, 2017, at 7:19 PM, Reuben Staley  wrote:


Re-enact rule 1994/0 (Power=2) "Ownership of Land" with the text:

 Any existent Land for which ownership has not been explicitly
 changed belongs to Agora.

 Land belonging to Agora is called Public Land. Land belonging to
 a contract is called Communal Land. Land belonging to any other
 entity is called Private Land. Together, Communal Land and Private
 Land are called Proprietary Land.


Each Unit of Land has an Owner switch, tracked by the Cartographer, whose 
values are any player, any Contract, or Agora (the default).


Why would Land Units have an owner switch? Land Units are assets, and
players can own assets, so it makes sense that you'd just refer to the
owner of a Land Unit as its owner.


I had missed that they were assets. Entirely my mistake - obviously we don’t 
need to duplicate that information.


Re-enact rule 1996/3 (Power=1), renaming it to "The Cartographor" with
the text:

 The Cartographor is an office; its holder is recordkeepor for the
 Land of Arcadia.

 The Cartographor's Weekly Report shall include:

 1. the ownership and land type of all existing land;
 2. all changes in the ownership and land type of existing land
since the most recent report;
 3. the location for the previous week and the current week of each
entity or instrument with a defined location;
 4. all patches and their constituents; and
 5. all facilities and their parent patches.


I volunteer, but as the primary designer, I believe you should have priority. 
This seems like a good chance to flex my registry system a bit, and with 361 
distinct land units to worry about (plus the current alternating state and the 
locations of players), this is an office where automation will pay dividends.


I don't know how your registry system works, but I think it would be a
good opportunity to try it. As long as I can access it with Python --
since that's what I'll probably be using -- it should be good.


Actually, I’d like to get some not-me users on it sooner rather than later. The 
code’s all Python and the only extant client is also Python, right now, so at 
least that’s the first language - though the annotation language is (for 
implementation reasons, mostly) a Scheme variant. Polishing this down to 
something actually usable (and actually well-documented) is, as they say, an 
ongoing effort.

I’ll contact you off-list, if you’re comfortable beating on some Very Much Beta 
software with me.


I'm down for it.


On Nov 20, 2017, at 2:38 AM, Aris Merchant > wrote:


Create a new rule (Power=2) "Varieties of Facilities" with the text:


You might split this into two rules, one for production facilities and
one for processing facilities. This isn't that big a deal right now,
but it will be if we bring in more facilities and possibly more types
of facilities it will become one.


Is this an appropriate situation to suggest a Regulation?


I don't understand what purposes it would serve; can you clarify?



My thinking was broadly this:

Giving an Officer (the Cartographor, likely) the ability to amend some of the 
controlling values for facilities by Promulgating a Regulation provides a 
limited way to rebalance things without needing to go through the full proposal 
cycle. Obviously, that comes with tradeoffs - a malicious Cartographor can 
manipulate the values for their own gain more easily, too - but it still 
requires notice and gives players a chance to raise a stink about it (or to 
assemble a proposal to correct it). Given that these values, specifically, are 
the ones most core to this mechanic’s integration with the rest of the rules, 
being able to adjust them early on might be useful.


Perhaps this situation would be appropriate for such actions.


-o



--
Trigon

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Clork] Weekly Report

[Aris Merchant]

On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 7:25 PM Kerim Aydin  wrote:

>
>
> On Tue, 21 Nov 2017, ATMunn wrote:
> > I (or anyone else, really) can invite you to the AgoraNomic GitHub org,
> but
> > from there it might be kind of difficult.
>
> Have I been invited?  (kaydin).
>
> If I'm already got a github repo of the CFJ website up, is it simple matter
> to have it show up as agoranomic.org/cases ?


You were invited a while ago, but you never aceepted. Just go to the page
for the AgoraNomic org and it should show up.

-Aris


>

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Clork] Weekly Report

[Kerim Aydin]

On Tue, 21 Nov 2017, ATMunn wrote:
> I (or anyone else, really) can invite you to the AgoraNomic GitHub org, but
> from there it might be kind of difficult.

Have I been invited?  (kaydin).

If I'm already got a github repo of the CFJ website up, is it simple matter
to have it show up as agoranomic.org/cases ?
 

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: Re: BUS: Informal Reportor Report (per contract)

[VJ Rada]

y'all can just pay agora one shiny before you publish your weekly
report to avert this.

On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 2:14 PM, Owen Jacobson  wrote:
>
>> On Nov 21, 2017, at 9:11 PM, Ørjan Johansen  wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 20 Nov 2017, Josh T wrote:
>>
 Economic Chaos
 The supply value massively increased due to a money printing proposal, but
 something else went up as well. That thing: the floating value. Now
 everything is 1: horrifically expensive and 2: Agora has no money because
 of stamps. Will Agora's monetary problems ever end?
>>
>> Hm... what happens if next the floating value becomes exactly zero?
>
> 0/n is 0 for all values of n. Proposals become free. CFJs become free for 
> players. Stamps become worthless (or free, depending on your perspective). 
> Cats lie down with dogs. Chaos in the streets.
>
> I’ve actually been exercising a certain amount of discretion to prevent this, 
> ordering actions so that Agora happens to not be completely broke at the 
> moment I set the FV. That’s likely to be impossible now that I’ve created a 
> money-eater contract, though.
>
> I’ve been contemplating removing the ability to pay Agora at will - it’s only 
> ever been used to manipulate the rules.
>
> -o
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: Re: BUS: Informal Reportor Report (per contract)

[Owen Jacobson]

> On Nov 21, 2017, at 9:11 PM, Ørjan Johansen  wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 20 Nov 2017, Josh T wrote:
> 
>>> Economic Chaos
>>> The supply value massively increased due to a money printing proposal, but
>>> something else went up as well. That thing: the floating value. Now
>>> everything is 1: horrifically expensive and 2: Agora has no money because
>>> of stamps. Will Agora's monetary problems ever end?
> 
> Hm... what happens if next the floating value becomes exactly zero?

0/n is 0 for all values of n. Proposals become free. CFJs become free for 
players. Stamps become worthless (or free, depending on your perspective). Cats 
lie down with dogs. Chaos in the streets.

I’ve actually been exercising a certain amount of discretion to prevent this, 
ordering actions so that Agora happens to not be completely broke at the moment 
I set the FV. That’s likely to be impossible now that I’ve created a 
money-eater contract, though.

I’ve been contemplating removing the ability to pay Agora at will - it’s only 
ever been used to manipulate the rules.

-o



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: DIS: PAoaM v3: Not rushed this time and also better in general

[Owen Jacobson]

> On Nov 21, 2017, at 4:06 PM, Reuben Staley  wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 1:28 AM, Owen Jacobson  > wrote:
>> 
>> On Nov 19, 2017, at 7:19 PM, Reuben Staley  wrote:
>> 
>>> Re-enact rule 1994/0 (Power=2) "Ownership of Land" with the text:
>>> 
>>> Any existent Land for which ownership has not been explicitly
>>> changed belongs to Agora.
>>> 
>>> Land belonging to Agora is called Public Land. Land belonging to
>>> a contract is called Communal Land. Land belonging to any other
>>> entity is called Private Land. Together, Communal Land and Private
>>> Land are called Proprietary Land.
>> 
>> Each Unit of Land has an Owner switch, tracked by the Cartographer, whose 
>> values are any player, any Contract, or Agora (the default).
> 
> Why would Land Units have an owner switch? Land Units are assets, and
> players can own assets, so it makes sense that you'd just refer to the
> owner of a Land Unit as its owner.

I had missed that they were assets. Entirely my mistake - obviously we don’t 
need to duplicate that information.

>>> Re-enact rule 1996/3 (Power=1), renaming it to "The Cartographor" with
>>> the text:
>>> 
>>> The Cartographor is an office; its holder is recordkeepor for the
>>> Land of Arcadia.
>>> 
>>> The Cartographor's Weekly Report shall include:
>>> 
>>> 1. the ownership and land type of all existing land;
>>> 2. all changes in the ownership and land type of existing land
>>>since the most recent report;
>>> 3. the location for the previous week and the current week of each
>>>entity or instrument with a defined location;
>>> 4. all patches and their constituents; and
>>> 5. all facilities and their parent patches.
>> 
>> I volunteer, but as the primary designer, I believe you should have 
>> priority. This seems like a good chance to flex my registry system a bit, 
>> and with 361 distinct land units to worry about (plus the current 
>> alternating state and the locations of players), this is an office where 
>> automation will pay dividends.
> 
> I don't know how your registry system works, but I think it would be a
> good opportunity to try it. As long as I can access it with Python --
> since that's what I'll probably be using -- it should be good.

Actually, I’d like to get some not-me users on it sooner rather than later. The 
code’s all Python and the only extant client is also Python, right now, so at 
least that’s the first language - though the annotation language is (for 
implementation reasons, mostly) a Scheme variant. Polishing this down to 
something actually usable (and actually well-documented) is, as they say, an 
ongoing effort.

I’ll contact you off-list, if you’re comfortable beating on some Very Much Beta 
software with me.

>> On Nov 20, 2017, at 2:38 AM, Aris Merchant 
>> > > wrote:
>> 
 Create a new rule (Power=2) "Varieties of Facilities" with the text:
>>> 
>>> You might split this into two rules, one for production facilities and
>>> one for processing facilities. This isn't that big a deal right now,
>>> but it will be if we bring in more facilities and possibly more types
>>> of facilities it will become one.
>> 
>> Is this an appropriate situation to suggest a Regulation?
> 
> I don't understand what purposes it would serve; can you clarify?


My thinking was broadly this:

Giving an Officer (the Cartographor, likely) the ability to amend some of the 
controlling values for facilities by Promulgating a Regulation provides a 
limited way to rebalance things without needing to go through the full proposal 
cycle. Obviously, that comes with tradeoffs - a malicious Cartographor can 
manipulate the values for their own gain more easily, too - but it still 
requires notice and gives players a chance to raise a stink about it (or to 
assemble a proposal to correct it). Given that these values, specifically, are 
the ones most core to this mechanic’s integration with the rest of the rules, 
being able to adjust them early on might be useful.

-o



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Referee] Weekly Report

[VJ Rada]

Luckily they're not meaningfully different and the 2nd version will
ratify minutes after the first then!

On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 1:49 PM, Ørjan Johansen  wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Nov 2017, VJ Rada wrote:
>
>> I made a fixed version. CoE denied.
>
>
> This too may cause the original version to self-ratify, since there's no
> longer a doubt tied to it.
>
> Greetings,
> Ørjan.



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Referee] Weekly Report

[Ørjan Johansen]

On Tue, 21 Nov 2017, VJ Rada wrote:


I made a fixed version. CoE denied.


This too may cause the original version to self-ratify, since there's no 
longer a doubt tied to it.


Greetings,
Ørjan.

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Referee] Weekly Report

[Ørjan Johansen]

On Tue, 21 Nov 2017, VJ Rada wrote:


first of all, in my next ADoP report, should I just note this as one report or 
a report and a revision?


There was no formal CoE or anything so probably just one.


If you don't formally CoE it, then the first version could self-ratify, 
with the formatting errors.


Greetings,
Ørjan.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Clork] Weekly Report

[Alex Smith]

On Tue, 2017-11-21 at 21:41 -0500, Owen Jacobson wrote:
> > On Nov 21, 2017, at 9:37 PM, ATMunn 
> > wrote:
> > 
> > Clinton isn't even a first name. When I came up with that name, I
> > wasn't specifically referring to Hillary.
> > So yeah, Spivak would be better here.
> 
> As the Politicians are legal fictions and not persons, wouldn’t
> singular-“they” (or “it”, but they’re person-like enough that using
> “it” makes me uncomfortable) be more appropriate?

One of the big advantages of Spivak is that it works for legal fictions
too.

We've used it for legal fictions frequently in the past. (I think Slave
Golems might have been the most recent example? or possibly The
President.)

-- 
ais523

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Clork] Weekly Report

[Owen Jacobson]

> On Nov 21, 2017, at 9:37 PM, ATMunn  wrote:
> 
> Clinton isn't even a first name. When I came up with that name, I wasn't 
> specifically referring to Hillary.
> So yeah, Spivak would be better here.

As the Politicians are legal fictions and not persons, wouldn’t singular-“they” 
(or “it”, but they’re person-like enough that using “it” makes me 
uncomfortable) be more appropriate?

-o



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Clork] Weekly Report

[ATMunn]

Clinton isn't even a first name. When I came up with that name, I wasn't 
specifically referring to Hillary.
So yeah, Spivak would be better here.

On 11/21/2017 9:01 PM, VJ Rada wrote:

I spend my five Participation favours (which are SUL favours) to
influence The Drunk Clinton. I become her (interesting question of
pronoun use for those who care about it) advisor.

On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 11:29 AM, Telnaior  wrote:

PARTIES AND FAVOURS
---

PLA - Platonic Isolationists   (4 Politicians, Economy)
NPR - New Punchbowl Reformers  (4 Politicians, Justice)
COS - Costume Conservatives(4 Politicians, Efficiency)
SUL - Substance Use Liberals   (4 Politicians, Legislation)
MLP - Official Raving Monster Looney Party (4 Politicians, Participation)

+--+-+-+-+-+-+
|  Player  | PLA | NPR | COS | SUL | MLP |
+--+-+-+-+-+-+
| Telnaior |   0 |   0 |   0 |   0 |   0 |
+--+-+-+-+-+-+


RANKS AND POLITICIANS
-

CHAMBER OF POWER[Rank 5]
Host  - Mad Cap'n Tom (NPR, 10 Stress, No Advisor)
Break Election Ties
 No Influencers

UPPER ECHELON   [Rank 3]
Planner   - Joseph "Stealin'" McCarthy (PLA, 06 Stress, No Advisor)
Decide Party Policies
 No Influencers
Enforcer  - Xi Kingpin (PLA, 06 Stress, No Advisor)
Remove Row Echelon Politicians
 No Influencers
Organiser - Mad "Max" Robespierre (COS, 06 Stress, No Advisor)
Extra Voting Power
 No Influencers
Creep - Politician McPoliticianface (NPR, 06 Stress, No Advisor)
Increase Politician Stress
 No Influencers

ROW ECHELON [Rank 1]
Schmoozer - The Drunk Clinton (SUL, 02 Stress, No Advisor)
Change Politician Parties
 No Influencers
Decorator - John Johnson (MLP, 02 Stress, No Advisor)
Extra Balloon
 No Influencers
Loner - Pinocchio (COS, 02 Stress, No Advisor)
PLA Favours
 No Influencers
Drunk - Aristotle (PLA, 02 Stress, No Advisor)
NPR Favours
 No Influencers
Mystery   - Mickey Joker (NPR, 02 Stress, No Advisor)
COS Favours
 No Influencers
Wild One  - Malcolm Turncoat (COS, 02 Stress, No Advisor)
SUL Favours
 No Influencers
Hat Rack  - Nick P. Ronald (NPR, 02 Stress, No Advisor)
MLP Favours
 No Influencers

ROW-REDUCED ECHELON [Rank 0]
No Post   - Nikolai Shootemdedsky (SUL, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
 No Influencers
No Post   - Bob (SUL, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
 No Influencers
No Post   - Natasha Nogoodnik (SUL, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
 No Influencers
No Post   - Weird Al (MLP, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
 No Influencers
No Post   - Rob Boss (COS, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
 No Influencers
No Post   - Cookie Monster (MLP, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
 No Influencers
No Post   - Screaming Lord Sutch (MLP, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
 No Influencers
No Post   - Boris Eatstumuch (PLA, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
 No Influencers


RETIREMENT AND ELECTIONS

Announcing Retirement:
No One

Recently Retired:
No One


BALLOONS


+--+---+---+---+
|  Player  | Last Week | This Week | Total |
+--+---+---+---+
| Telnaior | 0 | 0 | 0 |
+--+---+---+---+

DIS: Here we go again (was Re: BUS: Ayyyyy favours)

[Owen Jacobson]

> On Nov 21, 2017, at 7:49 PM, VJ Rada  wrote:
> 
> Economic favours cost 1 shiny right now. I believe I currently hold 5
> shinies and 560 bills. I trade 200 of those bills for 20 shinies and
> use those 20 shinies to buy 20 economic favours.
> 
> I also trade the other 5 of my shinies for bills using ACU.

What does the word “spend,” which appears only in the new Party rules, actually 
mean?

I’m accounting for this as if it meant “pay to Agora” since that’s the least 
obviously-problematic interpretation. If they’re instead destroyed, then I 
think we’d best work it out quickly. I’m happy to call a CFJ, but I wanted to 
check if there’s an obvious resolution I missed.

-o



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Clork] Weekly Report

[VJ Rada]

I spend 4 legislation favours to influence Clinton. I spend 1 favour
to influence Bob. I advice both Clinton and Bob.

On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 1:17 PM, Madeline  wrote:
> Defaulting to Spivak is probably the best choice.
> Two issues:
> 1) SUL favours are Legislation favours (though you do indeed have five of
> them)
> 2) You can only spend favours on Row Echelon politicians in even amounts.
>
>
> On 2017-11-22 13:01, VJ Rada wrote:
>>
>> I spend my five Participation favours (which are SUL favours) to
>> influence The Drunk Clinton. I become her (interesting question of
>> pronoun use for those who care about it) advisor.
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 11:29 AM, Telnaior  wrote:
>>>
>>> PARTIES AND FAVOURS
>>> ---
>>>
>>> PLA - Platonic Isolationists   (4 Politicians, Economy)
>>> NPR - New Punchbowl Reformers  (4 Politicians, Justice)
>>> COS - Costume Conservatives(4 Politicians, Efficiency)
>>> SUL - Substance Use Liberals   (4 Politicians, Legislation)
>>> MLP - Official Raving Monster Looney Party (4 Politicians, Participation)
>>>
>>> +--+-+-+-+-+-+
>>> |  Player  | PLA | NPR | COS | SUL | MLP |
>>> +--+-+-+-+-+-+
>>> | Telnaior |   0 |   0 |   0 |   0 |   0 |
>>> +--+-+-+-+-+-+
>>>
>>>
>>> RANKS AND POLITICIANS
>>> -
>>>
>>> CHAMBER OF POWER[Rank 5]
>>> Host  - Mad Cap'n Tom (NPR, 10 Stress, No Advisor)
>>> Break Election Ties
>>>  No Influencers
>>>
>>> UPPER ECHELON   [Rank 3]
>>> Planner   - Joseph "Stealin'" McCarthy (PLA, 06 Stress, No Advisor)
>>> Decide Party Policies
>>>  No Influencers
>>> Enforcer  - Xi Kingpin (PLA, 06 Stress, No Advisor)
>>> Remove Row Echelon Politicians
>>>  No Influencers
>>> Organiser - Mad "Max" Robespierre (COS, 06 Stress, No Advisor)
>>> Extra Voting Power
>>>  No Influencers
>>> Creep - Politician McPoliticianface (NPR, 06 Stress, No Advisor)
>>> Increase Politician Stress
>>>  No Influencers
>>>
>>> ROW ECHELON [Rank 1]
>>> Schmoozer - The Drunk Clinton (SUL, 02 Stress, No Advisor)
>>> Change Politician Parties
>>>  No Influencers
>>> Decorator - John Johnson (MLP, 02 Stress, No Advisor)
>>> Extra Balloon
>>>  No Influencers
>>> Loner - Pinocchio (COS, 02 Stress, No Advisor)
>>> PLA Favours
>>>  No Influencers
>>> Drunk - Aristotle (PLA, 02 Stress, No Advisor)
>>> NPR Favours
>>>  No Influencers
>>> Mystery   - Mickey Joker (NPR, 02 Stress, No Advisor)
>>> COS Favours
>>>  No Influencers
>>> Wild One  - Malcolm Turncoat (COS, 02 Stress, No Advisor)
>>> SUL Favours
>>>  No Influencers
>>> Hat Rack  - Nick P. Ronald (NPR, 02 Stress, No Advisor)
>>> MLP Favours
>>>  No Influencers
>>>
>>> ROW-REDUCED ECHELON [Rank 0]
>>> No Post   - Nikolai Shootemdedsky (SUL, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
>>>  No Influencers
>>> No Post   - Bob (SUL, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
>>>  No Influencers
>>> No Post   - Natasha Nogoodnik (SUL, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
>>>  No Influencers
>>> No Post   - Weird Al (MLP, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
>>>  No Influencers
>>> No Post   - Rob Boss (COS, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
>>>  No Influencers
>>> No Post   - Cookie Monster (MLP, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
>>>  No Influencers
>>> No Post   - Screaming Lord Sutch (MLP, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
>>>  No Influencers
>>> No Post   - Boris Eatstumuch (PLA, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
>>>  No Influencers
>>>
>>>
>>> RETIREMENT AND ELECTIONS
>>> 
>>> Announcing Retirement:
>>> No One
>>>
>>> Recently Retired:
>>> No One
>>>
>>>
>>> BALLOONS
>>> 
>>>
>>> +--+---+---+---+
>>> |  Player  | Last Week | This Week | Total |
>>> +--+---+---+---+
>>> | Telnaior | 0 | 0 | 0 |
>>> +--+---+---+---+
>>>
>>
>>
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

DIS: Re: BUS: Ayyyyy favours

[Owen Jacobson]

> On Nov 21, 2017, at 7:49 PM, VJ Rada  wrote:
> 
> Economic favours cost 1 shiny right now. I believe I currently hold 5
> shinies and 560 bills. I trade 200 of those bills for 20 shinies and
> use those 20 shinies to buy 20 economic favours.
> 
> I also trade the other 5 of my shinies for bills using ACU.

A quick note about “trade” - I’m accounting for these as “destroy”, since 
that’s the only sensible mechanic defined for bills here, but _please_ be more 
specific. A couple of people have set themselves up for potentially-painful 
CFJs.

-o



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Clork] Weekly Report

[Madeline]

Defaulting to Spivak is probably the best choice.
Two issues:
1) SUL favours are Legislation favours (though you do indeed have five 
of them)

2) You can only spend favours on Row Echelon politicians in even amounts.


On 2017-11-22 13:01, VJ Rada wrote:

I spend my five Participation favours (which are SUL favours) to
influence The Drunk Clinton. I become her (interesting question of
pronoun use for those who care about it) advisor.

On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 11:29 AM, Telnaior  wrote:

PARTIES AND FAVOURS
---

PLA - Platonic Isolationists   (4 Politicians, Economy)
NPR - New Punchbowl Reformers  (4 Politicians, Justice)
COS - Costume Conservatives(4 Politicians, Efficiency)
SUL - Substance Use Liberals   (4 Politicians, Legislation)
MLP - Official Raving Monster Looney Party (4 Politicians, Participation)

+--+-+-+-+-+-+
|  Player  | PLA | NPR | COS | SUL | MLP |
+--+-+-+-+-+-+
| Telnaior |   0 |   0 |   0 |   0 |   0 |
+--+-+-+-+-+-+


RANKS AND POLITICIANS
-

CHAMBER OF POWER[Rank 5]
Host  - Mad Cap'n Tom (NPR, 10 Stress, No Advisor)
Break Election Ties
 No Influencers

UPPER ECHELON   [Rank 3]
Planner   - Joseph "Stealin'" McCarthy (PLA, 06 Stress, No Advisor)
Decide Party Policies
 No Influencers
Enforcer  - Xi Kingpin (PLA, 06 Stress, No Advisor)
Remove Row Echelon Politicians
 No Influencers
Organiser - Mad "Max" Robespierre (COS, 06 Stress, No Advisor)
Extra Voting Power
 No Influencers
Creep - Politician McPoliticianface (NPR, 06 Stress, No Advisor)
Increase Politician Stress
 No Influencers

ROW ECHELON [Rank 1]
Schmoozer - The Drunk Clinton (SUL, 02 Stress, No Advisor)
Change Politician Parties
 No Influencers
Decorator - John Johnson (MLP, 02 Stress, No Advisor)
Extra Balloon
 No Influencers
Loner - Pinocchio (COS, 02 Stress, No Advisor)
PLA Favours
 No Influencers
Drunk - Aristotle (PLA, 02 Stress, No Advisor)
NPR Favours
 No Influencers
Mystery   - Mickey Joker (NPR, 02 Stress, No Advisor)
COS Favours
 No Influencers
Wild One  - Malcolm Turncoat (COS, 02 Stress, No Advisor)
SUL Favours
 No Influencers
Hat Rack  - Nick P. Ronald (NPR, 02 Stress, No Advisor)
MLP Favours
 No Influencers

ROW-REDUCED ECHELON [Rank 0]
No Post   - Nikolai Shootemdedsky (SUL, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
 No Influencers
No Post   - Bob (SUL, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
 No Influencers
No Post   - Natasha Nogoodnik (SUL, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
 No Influencers
No Post   - Weird Al (MLP, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
 No Influencers
No Post   - Rob Boss (COS, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
 No Influencers
No Post   - Cookie Monster (MLP, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
 No Influencers
No Post   - Screaming Lord Sutch (MLP, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
 No Influencers
No Post   - Boris Eatstumuch (PLA, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
 No Influencers


RETIREMENT AND ELECTIONS

Announcing Retirement:
No One

Recently Retired:
No One


BALLOONS


+--+---+---+---+
|  Player  | Last Week | This Week | Total |
+--+---+---+---+
| Telnaior | 0 | 0 | 0 |
+--+---+---+---+

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: Re: BUS: Informal Reportor Report (per contract)

[VJ Rada]

Everything is free! Free! Free economic favours leading to copy
and paste wars! Free stamps! Free...uh... yeah that's pretty much all
of consequence.

On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 1:11 PM, Ørjan Johansen  wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Nov 2017, Josh T wrote:
>
>>> Economic Chaos
>>> The supply value massively increased due to a money printing proposal,
>>> but
>>> something else went up as well. That thing: the floating value. Now
>>> everything is 1: horrifically expensive and 2: Agora has no money because
>>> of stamps. Will Agora's monetary problems ever end?
>
>
> Hm... what happens if next the floating value becomes exactly zero?
>
> Greetings,
> Ørjan.



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

DIS: Re: OFF: Re: BUS: Informal Reportor Report (per contract)

[Ørjan Johansen]

On Mon, 20 Nov 2017, Josh T wrote:


Economic Chaos
The supply value massively increased due to a money printing proposal, but
something else went up as well. That thing: the floating value. Now
everything is 1: horrifically expensive and 2: Agora has no money because
of stamps. Will Agora's monetary problems ever end?


Hm... what happens if next the floating value becomes exactly zero?

Greetings,
Ørjan.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Herald election

[Alexis Hunt]

On Tue, 21 Nov 2017 at 21:00 Ørjan Johansen  wrote:

> On Mon, 20 Nov 2017, Corona wrote:
>
> > Also, what is the point of campaign proposals? (Except for proposing
> > overpowered powers for yourself and ensuring nobody else gets them)
> > Seems like tying a proposal coming into force to your being elected
> > will lower the chances of either happening; players who like one, but
> > not the other are IMO more likely to vote against both than if you ran
> > for an election and submitted a proposal separately.
>
> This prompted me to look at the rules for those, and I noticed something
> subtly off:
>
> Rule 2513:
>
>When a Campaign Proposal is adopted, it CANNOT take effect until
>the associated election ends.
>
> Rule 2034:
>
>A public message purporting to resolve an Agoran decision
>constitutes self-ratifying claims that
> [...]
>3. (if the indicated outcome was to adopt a proposal) such a
>   proposal existed, was adopted, and took effect.
>
> I think 1551 saves the day:
>
>  Such a modification cannot add
>inconsistencies between the gamestate and the rules,
>
> although, does this mean a Campaign Proposal adoption never self-ratifies?
>
> Maybe that depends on whether the parts of 3. above are individual
> self-ratifying claims or not.
>
> Greetings,
> Ørjan.
>

This bug wasn't intentional, but I noticed it after the proposal was
adopted and felt like saving it. I think that the result is that the "took
effect" portion of a non-winning campaign proposal's self-ratification must
be CoEd. I don't think that the proposal taking effect adds an
inconsistency with the rules, since taking effect is not a part of the
gamestate; it's merely a series of changes applied to it.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Herald election

[Ørjan Johansen]

On Mon, 20 Nov 2017, Corona wrote:


Also, what is the point of campaign proposals? (Except for proposing
overpowered powers for yourself and ensuring nobody else gets them)
Seems like tying a proposal coming into force to your being elected
will lower the chances of either happening; players who like one, but
not the other are IMO more likely to vote against both than if you ran
for an election and submitted a proposal separately.


This prompted me to look at the rules for those, and I noticed something 
subtly off:


Rule 2513:

  When a Campaign Proposal is adopted, it CANNOT take effect until
  the associated election ends.

Rule 2034:

  A public message purporting to resolve an Agoran decision
  constitutes self-ratifying claims that
[...]
  3. (if the indicated outcome was to adopt a proposal) such a
 proposal existed, was adopted, and took effect.

I think 1551 saves the day:

Such a modification cannot add
  inconsistencies between the gamestate and the rules,

although, does this mean a Campaign Proposal adoption never self-ratifies?

Maybe that depends on whether the parts of 3. above are individual 
self-ratifying claims or not.


Greetings,
Ørjan.

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Notary] Weekly Report

[Owen Jacobson]

On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 10:29 PM Owen Jacobson  wrote:

> I intend, with Agoran Consent, to destroy the contract isnack 2.0.

On Nov 21, 2017, at 5:57 PM, ATMunn  wrote:

> I support and do so.

r. 2728 (“Dependent Actions”):

 2. If the action is to be performed Without N Objections, With N
Agoran Consent, or With Notice, if the intent was announced at
least 4 days earlier

Gotta wait for the four day timeout to tick down. The earliest this intent can 
be resolved is Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 10:29 PM EST.

-o



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Resolution of Proposals 7965-7972

[VJ Rada]

Oh fair fair point actually, yeah. The question then becomes: did you
break that rule.

Yeah, retract that CFJ.

On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 12:57 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
 wrote:
> I can through the "The following officers CAN by announcement award Favours 
> in the listed Parties" at the beginning of the rule.
> 
> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com
>
>
>
>> On Nov 21, 2017, at 8:48 PM, VJ Rada  wrote:
>>
>> I note two things.
>>
>> 1: It's a perverse incentive to award Justice Favours to those who
>> point fingers at themselves
>> 2: There's an immediacy requirement for legislation favours but not
>> participation favours. Why? Who knows!
>>
>> I actually don't believe either of these favours worked. They both use
>> SHALLS, which imply CANS by announcement. However, legislation favours
>> say "SHALL immediately after" which implies "CAN by announcement
>> immediately after". And participation favours are misspelled, so I
>> believe they are unawardable at this time.
>>
>> I issue PSS a green card for failing to distribute legislation
>> favours. I issue em a Justice favour for pointing the finger.
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Resolution of Proposals 7965-7972

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

I can through the "The following officers CAN by announcement award Favours in 
the listed Parties" at the beginning of the rule.

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



> On Nov 21, 2017, at 8:48 PM, VJ Rada  wrote:
> 
> I note two things.
> 
> 1: It's a perverse incentive to award Justice Favours to those who
> point fingers at themselves
> 2: There's an immediacy requirement for legislation favours but not
> participation favours. Why? Who knows!
> 
> I actually don't believe either of these favours worked. They both use
> SHALLS, which imply CANS by announcement. However, legislation favours
> say "SHALL immediately after" which implies "CAN by announcement
> immediately after". And participation favours are misspelled, so I
> believe they are unawardable at this time.
> 
> I issue PSS a green card for failing to distribute legislation
> favours. I issue em a Justice favour for pointing the finger.



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Resolution of Proposals 7965-7972

[VJ Rada]

You might want to do each seperately, as they are seperate issues.

On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 12:55 PM, ATMunn  wrote:
> I AP CFJ on the following statement:
>
> In the below quoted message, PSS awarded favours.
>
>
> On 11/21/2017 8:41 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
>>
>> I give 2 participation favours to each of Alexis, ATMunn, G., o, PSS,
>> Telnaior, and VJ Rada.
>>
>> I award to VJ Rada 5 legislation favours and to G. 2 legislation favours.
>>
>> I point the fingers at myself for not distributing favours immediately
>> after the resolutions.
>>
>>
>> On 11/21/2017 06:39 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
>>>
>>> I resolve the decision(s) to adopt proposal(s) 7965-7972 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   TitlePender  Pend
>>> fee
>>>
>>> ---
>>> 7965*  Trigon 3.0  One pronoun fix  Trigon  1 AP
>>> 7966x  ATMunn 1.0  But I already live there!o   1 AP
>>> 7967x  V.J. Rada  1.0  Rhyming sux tbh  V.J. Rada   1 AP
>>> 7968*  Alexis, [3]2.0  Backed Out the Door  Alexis  OP
>>> [1][2]
>>> 7969*  V.J. Rada, [4] 3.0  Obvious fix  V.J. Rada   2 sh.
>>> 7970*  V.J. Rada  2.0  Referee Minor FixV.J. Rada   2 sh.
>>> 7971x  V.J. Rada, [4] 3.0  Cleanup Time V.J. Rada   2 sh.
>>> 7972*  G. 2.0  Silly Tweaks G.  1 AP
>>>
>>> | | 7965 | 7966 | 7967 | 7968 | 7969 | 7970 | 7971 | 7972 |
>>> |-+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
>>> |Alexis   | FF   | P| AA   | P| FF   | FF   | FF   | FF   |
>>> |ATMunn   | F| F| A| F| F| P| P| F|
>>> |G.   | F| A| A| A| P| F| F| F|
>>> |o| F| F| F| F| F| F| A| F|
>>> |PSS  | F| A| A| F| A| F| A| F|
>>> |Telnaior | F| A| F| F| F| F| A| A|
>>> |VJ Rada  | F| A| F| F| F| F| F| F|
>>> |-+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
>>> |F/A  | 8/0  | 2/4  | 3/5  | 5/1  | 6/1  | 7/0  | 4/3  | 7/1  |
>>> |AI   | 3.0  | 1.0  | 1.0  | 2.0  | 3.0  | 2.0  | 3.0  | 2.0  |
>>> |V| 7| 7| 7| 7| 7| 7| 7| 7|
>>> |Q| 7| 7| 7| 7| 7| 7| 7| 7|
>>> |P| T| F| F| T| T| T| F| T|
>>>
>>> //
>>> ID: 7965
>>> Title: One pronoun fix
>>> Adoption index: 3.0
>>> Author: Trigon
>>> Co-authors:
>>>
>>>
>>> Replace the word "his" in the second paragraph of Rule 2438 ("Ribbons")
>>> with
>>> "eir".
>>>
>>> //
>>> ID: 7968
>>> Title: Backed Out the Door
>>> Adoption index: 2.0
>>> Author: Alexis
>>> Co-authors: Telnaior, ais523, Aris, G.
>>>
>>>
>>> Enact a new power-2 rule entitled "Political Parties", reading as
>>> follows:
>>>
>>>There are 5 Parties, in order:
>>>
>>>- Platonic Isolationists
>>>- New Punchbowl Reformers
>>>- Costume Conservatives
>>>- Substance Use Liberals
>>>- Official Raving Monster Looney Party
>>>
>>>Politicians are entities; each Politician has a name and an
>>>associated Party. Politicians exist only as specified by the
>>>rules. Creating, altering, or destroying Politicians is secured.
>>>
>>>If there are ever fewer than 20 Politicians, then the Clork CAN
>>>and SHALL, by announcement, create a new Politician, specifying
>>>eir Party and name. The Party must be selected at random from:
>>>
>>>- If any Party has fewer than 3 Politicans, the Party or Parties
>>>  with the fewest.
>>>- Otherwise, the Parties with fewer than 5 Politicians.
>>>
>>> Enact a new power-2 rule entitled "Clork", reading as follows:
>>>
>>>The Clork (pronounced "clark") is an office. The Clork's weekly
>>>report includes:
>>>- a list of all Politicans with their names and Parties.
>>>- the assignment of Policies to Parties.
>>>
>>>The portion of a document purporting to be a Clork's report
>>>containing the above information is self-ratifying.
>>>
>>> Enact a new power-2 rule entitled "Echelon Forms", reading as follows:
>>>
>>>A Post is a position which can be held by at most 

DIS: Re: BUS: I become a party to the Order of the Occult Hand

[Owen Jacobson]

> On Nov 21, 2017, at 3:40 PM, Corona  wrote:
> 
> What the subject says

There are fairly tight constraints on subject-line-only actions, and I believe 
that under CFJ 3590 this may not have succeeded:

>> 5.  Does the message text infer the type of action that can be made clear 
>> from the subject line?
> 
> Importantly, no. This is where ATMunn’s message fails the test: the message 
> body infers no actions at all.

-o



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Treasuror] Weekly Report

[ATMunn]

Ah, makes sense. Thanks for the clarifications.

On 11/21/2017 8:34 PM, Owen Jacobson wrote:



On Nov 21, 2017, at 8:30 PM, ATMunn  wrote:

So when publishing report revisions, even if things changed between the 
original report and the revision, all that has to be changed is the thing in 
the CoE?


In this case V.J pointed out the CoE close enough to the publication of the 
report that I corrected the error and republished it as-is. There’s no formal 
requirement that a revision either include or disregard subsequent actions; 
I’ve taken the approach of “eh, whatever’s easiest” but intend to tighten up my 
practice to revise the report in-place as soon as it’s practical for me to do 
so.

However, it’s irrelevant to your claim. You claimed that the Floating Value 
changed between report and revision. The Floating Value did not change between 
those two events, because no action occurred that would change it. The 
Treasuror can set the FV once per week, and must set it to exactly Agora’s 
balance when e does so, but the FV is otherwise an independent number from 
Agora’s balance. That’s all that happened there: a minor rules clarity issue 
around whether the FV in the revision was correct or not.

I very much appreciate the sanity checks!

-o

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Treasuror] Weekly Report

[Owen Jacobson]

> On Nov 21, 2017, at 8:30 PM, ATMunn  wrote:
> 
> So when publishing report revisions, even if things changed between the 
> original report and the revision, all that has to be changed is the thing in 
> the CoE?

In this case V.J pointed out the CoE close enough to the publication of the 
report that I corrected the error and republished it as-is. There’s no formal 
requirement that a revision either include or disregard subsequent actions; 
I’ve taken the approach of “eh, whatever’s easiest” but intend to tighten up my 
practice to revise the report in-place as soon as it’s practical for me to do 
so.

However, it’s irrelevant to your claim. You claimed that the Floating Value 
changed between report and revision. The Floating Value did not change between 
those two events, because no action occurred that would change it. The 
Treasuror can set the FV once per week, and must set it to exactly Agora’s 
balance when e does so, but the FV is otherwise an independent number from 
Agora’s balance. That’s all that happened there: a minor rules clarity issue 
around whether the FV in the revision was correct or not.

I very much appreciate the sanity checks!

-o



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Clork] Weekly Report

[ATMunn]

I really had no idea what I was doing either. I mostly just copied stuff from 
the old ADoP repo into a new one, changed some text, and had o help me with 
confusing Git stuff. :P

On 11/21/2017 8:29 PM, Madeline wrote:

I would have absolutely no idea what I'm doing, so~


On 2017-11-22 12:25, ATMunn wrote:

I (or anyone else, really) can invite you to the AgoraNomic GitHub org, but 
from there it might be kind of difficult.

You'd have to make your own repo for the Clork, make an index.md or index.html 
file, and then fiddle around with submodules to get the header to work. (if you 
do end up doing this, I suggest getting o to help you unless you know how that 
Git stuff works (which if you do, good for you, I don't :P))

You would also have to edit the Header repo in order to get a link to it in the 
header of all agoranomic pages.

So, if all that seems worth it, go for it.

Another thing is, although I do like having the reports on the website, if 
everyone did it for every office, the header would get crowded and we'd have to 
rework that. Not to say that's necessarily a bad thing, it would just mean more 
work.

...Although, that said, the Superintendent no longer exists, so you could take 
that spot on the header for Clork.

On 11/21/2017 8:16 PM, Madeline wrote:

I'm not entirely sure what the deal is with getting my reports published on the 
official website, but for now you can see my current upcoming report over at 
https://gist.github.com/Telnaior/9e4f8849878ec9c97eab18b9c7e9a6d9 if you need 
to see the status of how things are right now.


On 2017-11-22 11:29, Telnaior wrote:

PARTIES AND FAVOURS
---

PLA - Platonic Isolationists   (4 Politicians, Economy)
NPR - New Punchbowl Reformers  (4 Politicians, Justice)
COS - Costume Conservatives    (4 Politicians, Efficiency)
SUL - Substance Use Liberals   (4 Politicians, Legislation)
MLP - Official Raving Monster Looney Party (4 Politicians, Participation)

+--+-+-+-+-+-+
|  Player  | PLA | NPR | COS | SUL | MLP |
+--+-+-+-+-+-+
| Telnaior |   0 |   0 |   0 |   0 |   0 |
+--+-+-+-+-+-+


RANKS AND POLITICIANS
-

CHAMBER OF POWER    [Rank 5]
Host  - Mad Cap'n Tom (NPR, 10 Stress, No Advisor)
Break Election Ties
    No Influencers

UPPER ECHELON   [Rank 3]
Planner   - Joseph "Stealin'" McCarthy (PLA, 06 Stress, No Advisor)
Decide Party Policies
    No Influencers
Enforcer  - Xi Kingpin (PLA, 06 Stress, No Advisor)
Remove Row Echelon Politicians
    No Influencers
Organiser - Mad "Max" Robespierre (COS, 06 Stress, No Advisor)
Extra Voting Power
    No Influencers
Creep - Politician McPoliticianface (NPR, 06 Stress, No Advisor)
Increase Politician Stress
    No Influencers

ROW ECHELON [Rank 1]
Schmoozer - The Drunk Clinton (SUL, 02 Stress, No Advisor)
Change Politician Parties
    No Influencers
Decorator - John Johnson (MLP, 02 Stress, No Advisor)
Extra Balloon
    No Influencers
Loner - Pinocchio (COS, 02 Stress, No Advisor)
PLA Favours
    No Influencers
Drunk - Aristotle (PLA, 02 Stress, No Advisor)
NPR Favours
    No Influencers
Mystery   - Mickey Joker (NPR, 02 Stress, No Advisor)
COS Favours
    No Influencers
Wild One  - Malcolm Turncoat (COS, 02 Stress, No Advisor)
SUL Favours
    No Influencers
Hat Rack  - Nick P. Ronald (NPR, 02 Stress, No Advisor)
MLP Favours
    No Influencers

ROW-REDUCED ECHELON [Rank 0]
No Post   - Nikolai Shootemdedsky (SUL, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
    No Influencers
No Post   - Bob (SUL, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
    No Influencers
No Post   - Natasha Nogoodnik (SUL, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
    No Influencers
No Post   - Weird Al (MLP, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
    No Influencers
No Post   - Rob Boss (COS, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
    No Influencers
No Post   - Cookie Monster (MLP, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
    No Influencers
No Post   - Screaming Lord Sutch (MLP, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
    No Influencers
No Post   - Boris Eatstumuch (PLA, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
    No Influencers


RETIREMENT AND ELECTIONS

Announcing Retirement:
No One

Recently Retired:
No One


BALLOONS


+--+---+---+---+
|  Player  | Last Week | This Week | Total |
+--+---+---+---+
| Telnaior | 0 | 0 | 0 |
+--+---+---+---+

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Treasuror] Weekly Report

[ATMunn]

So when publishing report revisions, even if things changed between the 
original report and the revision, all that has to be changed is the thing in 
the CoE?

I was never really sure how this works.

On 11/21/2017 8:28 PM, Owen Jacobson wrote:

On Nov 21, 2017, at 9:25 AM, ATMunn  wrote:


CoE: Right before you published this revision, VJ Rada claimed a reward of 5 
shinies for eir recent report, bringing the Floating value down to 0.


The Floating Value doesn’t change on its own. I deny this claim of error.


  The Treasuror CAN flip the floating value once a week by
  announcement. As part of eir weekly duties, e SHALL flip the
  Floating Value to the number of Shinies owned by Agora; e SHALL
  NOT ever set it to a different value. E SHOULD do this while
  publishing eir weekly report.


I did this while publishing the initial report, correctly at that moment.

-o

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Clork] Weekly Report

[Madeline]

I would have absolutely no idea what I'm doing, so~


On 2017-11-22 12:25, ATMunn wrote:
I (or anyone else, really) can invite you to the AgoraNomic GitHub 
org, but from there it might be kind of difficult.


You'd have to make your own repo for the Clork, make an index.md or 
index.html file, and then fiddle around with submodules to get the 
header to work. (if you do end up doing this, I suggest getting o to 
help you unless you know how that Git stuff works (which if you do, 
good for you, I don't :P))


You would also have to edit the Header repo in order to get a link to 
it in the header of all agoranomic pages.


So, if all that seems worth it, go for it.

Another thing is, although I do like having the reports on the 
website, if everyone did it for every office, the header would get 
crowded and we'd have to rework that. Not to say that's necessarily a 
bad thing, it would just mean more work.


...Although, that said, the Superintendent no longer exists, so you 
could take that spot on the header for Clork.


On 11/21/2017 8:16 PM, Madeline wrote:
I'm not entirely sure what the deal is with getting my reports 
published on the official website, but for now you can see my current 
upcoming report over at 
https://gist.github.com/Telnaior/9e4f8849878ec9c97eab18b9c7e9a6d9 if 
you need to see the status of how things are right now.



On 2017-11-22 11:29, Telnaior wrote:

PARTIES AND FAVOURS
---

PLA - Platonic Isolationists   (4 Politicians, Economy)
NPR - New Punchbowl Reformers  (4 Politicians, Justice)
COS - Costume Conservatives    (4 Politicians, Efficiency)
SUL - Substance Use Liberals   (4 Politicians, Legislation)
MLP - Official Raving Monster Looney Party (4 Politicians, 
Participation)


+--+-+-+-+-+-+
|  Player  | PLA | NPR | COS | SUL | MLP |
+--+-+-+-+-+-+
| Telnaior |   0 |   0 |   0 |   0 |   0 |
+--+-+-+-+-+-+


RANKS AND POLITICIANS
-

CHAMBER OF POWER    [Rank 5]
Host  - Mad Cap'n Tom (NPR, 10 Stress, No Advisor)
Break Election Ties
    No Influencers

UPPER ECHELON   [Rank 3]
Planner   - Joseph "Stealin'" McCarthy (PLA, 06 Stress, No Advisor)
Decide Party Policies
    No Influencers
Enforcer  - Xi Kingpin (PLA, 06 Stress, No Advisor)
Remove Row Echelon Politicians
    No Influencers
Organiser - Mad "Max" Robespierre (COS, 06 Stress, No Advisor)
Extra Voting Power
    No Influencers
Creep - Politician McPoliticianface (NPR, 06 Stress, No Advisor)
Increase Politician Stress
    No Influencers

ROW ECHELON [Rank 1]
Schmoozer - The Drunk Clinton (SUL, 02 Stress, No Advisor)
Change Politician Parties
    No Influencers
Decorator - John Johnson (MLP, 02 Stress, No Advisor)
Extra Balloon
    No Influencers
Loner - Pinocchio (COS, 02 Stress, No Advisor)
PLA Favours
    No Influencers
Drunk - Aristotle (PLA, 02 Stress, No Advisor)
NPR Favours
    No Influencers
Mystery   - Mickey Joker (NPR, 02 Stress, No Advisor)
COS Favours
    No Influencers
Wild One  - Malcolm Turncoat (COS, 02 Stress, No Advisor)
SUL Favours
    No Influencers
Hat Rack  - Nick P. Ronald (NPR, 02 Stress, No Advisor)
MLP Favours
    No Influencers

ROW-REDUCED ECHELON [Rank 0]
No Post   - Nikolai Shootemdedsky (SUL, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
    No Influencers
No Post   - Bob (SUL, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
    No Influencers
No Post   - Natasha Nogoodnik (SUL, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
    No Influencers
No Post   - Weird Al (MLP, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
    No Influencers
No Post   - Rob Boss (COS, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
    No Influencers
No Post   - Cookie Monster (MLP, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
    No Influencers
No Post   - Screaming Lord Sutch (MLP, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
    No Influencers
No Post   - Boris Eatstumuch (PLA, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
    No Influencers


RETIREMENT AND ELECTIONS

Announcing Retirement:
No One

Recently Retired:
No One


BALLOONS


+--+---+---+---+
|  Player  | Last Week | This Week | Total |
+--+---+---+---+
| Telnaior | 0 | 0 | 0 |
+--+---+---+---+

DIS: Re: BUS: (Unofficial) FLR COE

[ATMunn]

I received this message twice. You sent it to a-d, but Cc'd a-b, so that could 
have something to do with it.

On 11/21/2017 8:22 PM, Alexis Hunt wrote:

These were unrelated; PDCW was left out of the index which actually
generates the ruleset (I want to fix this, but haven't yet); 7934 for rule
2531 was just a typo, it was supposed to say 7964.

On Mon, 20 Nov 2017 at 20:37 Alexis Hunt  wrote:


On Mon, 20 Nov 2017 at 20:33 VJ Rada  wrote:


"Rule 2531/0 (Power=1.0)
Referee Accountability
History:
Enacted by Proposal 7934 "Poetry Duel Challenge Writ" (天火狐), Nov 06,
   2017"

Obviously, it was not enacted by that proposal. The actual rule
"Poetry Duel Challenge Writ" is listed nowhere in the FLR.



Huh. I'll dig into that one.

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Clork] Weekly Report

[ATMunn]

I (or anyone else, really) can invite you to the AgoraNomic GitHub org, but 
from there it might be kind of difficult.

You'd have to make your own repo for the Clork, make an index.md or index.html 
file, and then fiddle around with submodules to get the header to work. (if you 
do end up doing this, I suggest getting o to help you unless you know how that 
Git stuff works (which if you do, good for you, I don't :P))

You would also have to edit the Header repo in order to get a link to it in the 
header of all agoranomic pages.

So, if all that seems worth it, go for it.

Another thing is, although I do like having the reports on the website, if 
everyone did it for every office, the header would get crowded and we'd have to 
rework that. Not to say that's necessarily a bad thing, it would just mean more 
work.

...Although, that said, the Superintendent no longer exists, so you could take 
that spot on the header for Clork.

On 11/21/2017 8:16 PM, Madeline wrote:

I'm not entirely sure what the deal is with getting my reports published on the 
official website, but for now you can see my current upcoming report over at 
https://gist.github.com/Telnaior/9e4f8849878ec9c97eab18b9c7e9a6d9 if you need 
to see the status of how things are right now.


On 2017-11-22 11:29, Telnaior wrote:

PARTIES AND FAVOURS
---

PLA - Platonic Isolationists   (4 Politicians, Economy)
NPR - New Punchbowl Reformers  (4 Politicians, Justice)
COS - Costume Conservatives    (4 Politicians, Efficiency)
SUL - Substance Use Liberals   (4 Politicians, Legislation)
MLP - Official Raving Monster Looney Party (4 Politicians, Participation)

+--+-+-+-+-+-+
|  Player  | PLA | NPR | COS | SUL | MLP |
+--+-+-+-+-+-+
| Telnaior |   0 |   0 |   0 |   0 |   0 |
+--+-+-+-+-+-+


RANKS AND POLITICIANS
-

CHAMBER OF POWER    [Rank 5]
Host  - Mad Cap'n Tom (NPR, 10 Stress, No Advisor)
Break Election Ties
    No Influencers

UPPER ECHELON   [Rank 3]
Planner   - Joseph "Stealin'" McCarthy (PLA, 06 Stress, No Advisor)
Decide Party Policies
    No Influencers
Enforcer  - Xi Kingpin (PLA, 06 Stress, No Advisor)
Remove Row Echelon Politicians
    No Influencers
Organiser - Mad "Max" Robespierre (COS, 06 Stress, No Advisor)
Extra Voting Power
    No Influencers
Creep - Politician McPoliticianface (NPR, 06 Stress, No Advisor)
Increase Politician Stress
    No Influencers

ROW ECHELON [Rank 1]
Schmoozer - The Drunk Clinton (SUL, 02 Stress, No Advisor)
Change Politician Parties
    No Influencers
Decorator - John Johnson (MLP, 02 Stress, No Advisor)
Extra Balloon
    No Influencers
Loner - Pinocchio (COS, 02 Stress, No Advisor)
PLA Favours
    No Influencers
Drunk - Aristotle (PLA, 02 Stress, No Advisor)
NPR Favours
    No Influencers
Mystery   - Mickey Joker (NPR, 02 Stress, No Advisor)
COS Favours
    No Influencers
Wild One  - Malcolm Turncoat (COS, 02 Stress, No Advisor)
SUL Favours
    No Influencers
Hat Rack  - Nick P. Ronald (NPR, 02 Stress, No Advisor)
MLP Favours
    No Influencers

ROW-REDUCED ECHELON [Rank 0]
No Post   - Nikolai Shootemdedsky (SUL, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
    No Influencers
No Post   - Bob (SUL, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
    No Influencers
No Post   - Natasha Nogoodnik (SUL, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
    No Influencers
No Post   - Weird Al (MLP, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
    No Influencers
No Post   - Rob Boss (COS, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
    No Influencers
No Post   - Cookie Monster (MLP, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
    No Influencers
No Post   - Screaming Lord Sutch (MLP, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
    No Influencers
No Post   - Boris Eatstumuch (PLA, 00 Stress, No Advisor)
    No Influencers


RETIREMENT AND ELECTIONS

Announcing Retirement:
No One

Recently Retired:
No One


BALLOONS


+--+---+---+---+
|  Player  | Last Week | This Week | Total |
+--+---+---+---+
| Telnaior | 0 | 0 | 0 |
+--+---+---+---+

DIS: Re: BUS: (Unofficial) FLR COE

[Alexis Hunt]

These were unrelated; PDCW was left out of the index which actually
generates the ruleset (I want to fix this, but haven't yet); 7934 for rule
2531 was just a typo, it was supposed to say 7964.

On Mon, 20 Nov 2017 at 20:37 Alexis Hunt  wrote:

> On Mon, 20 Nov 2017 at 20:33 VJ Rada  wrote:
>
>> "Rule 2531/0 (Power=1.0)
>> Referee Accountability
>> History:
>> Enacted by Proposal 7934 "Poetry Duel Challenge Writ" (天火狐), Nov 06,
>>   2017"
>>
>> Obviously, it was not enacted by that proposal. The actual rule
>> "Poetry Duel Challenge Writ" is listed nowhere in the FLR.
>>
>
> Huh. I'll dig into that one.
>

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Favours

[Madeline]

Has to be explicit, and it trips at the end of the week.


On 2017-11-22 12:08, VJ Rada wrote:

Oh I have to explicitly advise? I thought the person w/ the most was
automatically the advisor. I advise Mccarthy, Kingpin and Aristotle.

On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 12:04 PM, Madeline  wrote:

On 2017-11-22 11:59, VJ Rada wrote:

I use 10 of my PLA favours on Joseph "Stealin'" Mccarthy, 8 PLA
favours on Xi Kingpin and 2 PLA favours on Aristotle.


Don't forget to Advise Politicians once you have the most influence over
them.

DIS: Re: BUS: Favours

[Madeline]

On 2017-11-22 11:59, VJ Rada wrote:

I use 10 of my PLA favours on Joseph "Stealin'" Mccarthy, 8 PLA
favours on Xi Kingpin and 2 PLA favours on Aristotle.

Don't forget to Advise Politicians once you have the most influence over 
them.

DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Somehow This Got Through

[Alexis Hunt]

The text in the proposal is correct, I believe. As it exists, the award is
for the first vote each week; as you have it, it would be for the second
and each subsequent vote each week.

On Tue, 21 Nov 2017 at 19:45 Telnaior  wrote:

> I create the following Proposal and spend an AP to pend it:
>
> Title: Somehow This Got Through
> Author: Telnaior
> Co-Author: Alexis
> AI: 1
> {
> Amend the Rule "Favour Awards" by changing "For each voter who has not
> voted on an Agoran decision" to "For each voter who has voted on an
> Agoran decision"
> }
>
> Yy one word fixes
>
>

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Let's get this party started!

[VJ Rada]

" e SHALL award that player 2 Favours in the Party holding Participaiton."

y'all spelled participation wrong. no comment on how or whether this
actually breaks participation favours.

On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 11:42 AM, VJ Rada  wrote:
> Haha awesome. Three favours a week in Justice for free: pretty powerful imo.
>
> On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 11:38 AM, ATMunn  wrote:
>> I like how Aristotle is Drunk.
>>
>> On 11/21/2017 7:26 PM, Telnaior wrote:
>>>
>>> In accordance with the rule "Get This Party Started", I do the following:
>>>
>>> I create 20 politicians as follows:
>>>
>>> PLA - Platonic Isolationists
>>> 1. Aristotle
>>> 2. Joseph "Stealin'" McCarthy
>>> 3. Boris Eatstumuch
>>> 4. Xi Kingpin
>>>
>>> NPR - New Punchbowl Reformers
>>> 1. Nick P. Ronald
>>> 2. Mickey Joker
>>> 3. Mad Cap'n Tom
>>> 4. Politician McPoliticianface
>>>
>>> COS - Costume Conservatives
>>> 1. Pinocchio
>>> 2. Malcolm Turncoat
>>> 3. Mad "Max" Robespierre
>>> 4. Rob Boss
>>>
>>> SUL - Substance Use Liberals
>>> 1. The Drunk Clinton
>>> 2. Bob
>>> 3. Natasha Nogoodnik
>>> 4. Nikolai Shootemdedsky
>>>
>>> MLP - Official Raving Monster Looney Party
>>> 1. Weird Al
>>> 2. Screaming Lord Sutch
>>> 3. Cookie Monster
>>> 4. John Johnson
>>>
>>> I assign these politicians to Posts as follows:
>>> Host - Mad Cap'n Tom
>>> Planner - Joseph "Stealin'" McCarthy
>>> Enforcer - Xi Kingpin
>>> Organiser - Mad "Max" Robespierre
>>> Creep - Politician McPoliticianface
>>> Schmoozer - The Drunk Clinton
>>> Decorator - John Johnson
>>> Loner - Pinocchio
>>> Drunk - Aristotle
>>> Mystery - Mickey Joker
>>> Wild One - Malcolm Turncoat
>>> Hat Rack - Nick P. Ronald
>>> No Post - Nikolai Shootemdedsky
>>> No Post - Bob
>>> No Post - Natasha Nogoodnik
>>> No Post - Weird Al
>>> No Post - Rob Boss
>>> No Post - Cookie Monster
>>> No Post - Screaming Lord Sutch
>>> No Post - Boris Eatstumuch
>>>
>>> The Random Number Goddess gave us a veeery unbalanced mix here, every
>>> single NPR member got into a post and three each for PLA and COS, but only
>>> one each for SUL and MLP!
>>>
>>> I also increase each Politician's Stress by twice eir rank.
>>>
>>> Finally, I assign Policies as follows:
>>> PLA - Economy
>>> NPR - Justice
>>> COS - Efficiency
>>> SUL - Legislation
>>> MLP - Participation
>>>
>>> I now cause the rule "Get This Party Started" to repeal itself.
>>>
>>>
>>> Now then, as a reward for coming up with Politician names, I transfer the
>>> following:
>>> 30 Bills to ATMunn
>>> 15 Bills to Alexis
>>> 5 Bills to G.
>>> 5 Bills to Cuddle Beam
>>> 5 Bills to Aris
>>>
>>> This offer will continue, as I expect a regular supply of Politician names
>>> to be needed. As the economy changes, I will change the reward currency
>>> accordingly.
>>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> From V.J. Rada



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Let's get this party started!

[VJ Rada]

Haha awesome. Three favours a week in Justice for free: pretty powerful imo.

On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 11:38 AM, ATMunn  wrote:
> I like how Aristotle is Drunk.
>
> On 11/21/2017 7:26 PM, Telnaior wrote:
>>
>> In accordance with the rule "Get This Party Started", I do the following:
>>
>> I create 20 politicians as follows:
>>
>> PLA - Platonic Isolationists
>> 1. Aristotle
>> 2. Joseph "Stealin'" McCarthy
>> 3. Boris Eatstumuch
>> 4. Xi Kingpin
>>
>> NPR - New Punchbowl Reformers
>> 1. Nick P. Ronald
>> 2. Mickey Joker
>> 3. Mad Cap'n Tom
>> 4. Politician McPoliticianface
>>
>> COS - Costume Conservatives
>> 1. Pinocchio
>> 2. Malcolm Turncoat
>> 3. Mad "Max" Robespierre
>> 4. Rob Boss
>>
>> SUL - Substance Use Liberals
>> 1. The Drunk Clinton
>> 2. Bob
>> 3. Natasha Nogoodnik
>> 4. Nikolai Shootemdedsky
>>
>> MLP - Official Raving Monster Looney Party
>> 1. Weird Al
>> 2. Screaming Lord Sutch
>> 3. Cookie Monster
>> 4. John Johnson
>>
>> I assign these politicians to Posts as follows:
>> Host - Mad Cap'n Tom
>> Planner - Joseph "Stealin'" McCarthy
>> Enforcer - Xi Kingpin
>> Organiser - Mad "Max" Robespierre
>> Creep - Politician McPoliticianface
>> Schmoozer - The Drunk Clinton
>> Decorator - John Johnson
>> Loner - Pinocchio
>> Drunk - Aristotle
>> Mystery - Mickey Joker
>> Wild One - Malcolm Turncoat
>> Hat Rack - Nick P. Ronald
>> No Post - Nikolai Shootemdedsky
>> No Post - Bob
>> No Post - Natasha Nogoodnik
>> No Post - Weird Al
>> No Post - Rob Boss
>> No Post - Cookie Monster
>> No Post - Screaming Lord Sutch
>> No Post - Boris Eatstumuch
>>
>> The Random Number Goddess gave us a veeery unbalanced mix here, every
>> single NPR member got into a post and three each for PLA and COS, but only
>> one each for SUL and MLP!
>>
>> I also increase each Politician's Stress by twice eir rank.
>>
>> Finally, I assign Policies as follows:
>> PLA - Economy
>> NPR - Justice
>> COS - Efficiency
>> SUL - Legislation
>> MLP - Participation
>>
>> I now cause the rule "Get This Party Started" to repeal itself.
>>
>>
>> Now then, as a reward for coming up with Politician names, I transfer the
>> following:
>> 30 Bills to ATMunn
>> 15 Bills to Alexis
>> 5 Bills to G.
>> 5 Bills to Cuddle Beam
>> 5 Bills to Aris
>>
>> This offer will continue, as I expect a regular supply of Politician names
>> to be needed. As the economy changes, I will change the reward currency
>> accordingly.
>>
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

DIS: Re: BUS: Let's get this party started!

[ATMunn]

I like how Aristotle is Drunk.

On 11/21/2017 7:26 PM, Telnaior wrote:

In accordance with the rule "Get This Party Started", I do the following:

I create 20 politicians as follows:

PLA - Platonic Isolationists
1. Aristotle
2. Joseph "Stealin'" McCarthy
3. Boris Eatstumuch
4. Xi Kingpin

NPR - New Punchbowl Reformers
1. Nick P. Ronald
2. Mickey Joker
3. Mad Cap'n Tom
4. Politician McPoliticianface

COS - Costume Conservatives
1. Pinocchio
2. Malcolm Turncoat
3. Mad "Max" Robespierre
4. Rob Boss

SUL - Substance Use Liberals
1. The Drunk Clinton
2. Bob
3. Natasha Nogoodnik
4. Nikolai Shootemdedsky

MLP - Official Raving Monster Looney Party
1. Weird Al
2. Screaming Lord Sutch
3. Cookie Monster
4. John Johnson

I assign these politicians to Posts as follows:
Host - Mad Cap'n Tom
Planner - Joseph "Stealin'" McCarthy
Enforcer - Xi Kingpin
Organiser - Mad "Max" Robespierre
Creep - Politician McPoliticianface
Schmoozer - The Drunk Clinton
Decorator - John Johnson
Loner - Pinocchio
Drunk - Aristotle
Mystery - Mickey Joker
Wild One - Malcolm Turncoat
Hat Rack - Nick P. Ronald
No Post - Nikolai Shootemdedsky
No Post - Bob
No Post - Natasha Nogoodnik
No Post - Weird Al
No Post - Rob Boss
No Post - Cookie Monster
No Post - Screaming Lord Sutch
No Post - Boris Eatstumuch

The Random Number Goddess gave us a veeery unbalanced mix here, every 
single NPR member got into a post and three each for PLA and COS, but only one 
each for SUL and MLP!

I also increase each Politician's Stress by twice eir rank.

Finally, I assign Policies as follows:
PLA - Economy
NPR - Justice
COS - Efficiency
SUL - Legislation
MLP - Participation

I now cause the rule "Get This Party Started" to repeal itself.


Now then, as a reward for coming up with Politician names, I transfer the 
following:
30 Bills to ATMunn
15 Bills to Alexis
5 Bills to G.
5 Bills to Cuddle Beam
5 Bills to Aris

This offer will continue, as I expect a regular supply of Politician names to 
be needed. As the economy changes, I will change the reward currency 
accordingly.

DIS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Resolution of Proposals 7965-7972

[Alexis Hunt]

On Tue, 21 Nov 2017 at 18:39 Publius Scribonius Scholasticus <
p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I resolve the decision(s) to adopt proposal(s) 7965-7972 below.
>

Note that you're required to award Favours for the proposals that passed
after the one that enacted them.

DIS: Re: BUS: What happened to this proposal

[VJ Rada]

It wasn't to public forum, it's all good. My fault.

On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 10:46 AM, VJ Rada  wrote:
> This was created and pended with shinies on 9 Nov, don't think it was
> ever distributed. If I didn't pend it or it was self-ratified away, I
> now pend and create the following. I pend it with shinies, trading 10
> notes to the ACU for one shiny.
> Title: Referee Reform Fix
> AI: 1.7
> Text: At the end of rule 2478 "Viglilante Justice", add a new
> paragraph with the text "The Referee CANNOT Point eir Finger. The
> Arbitor CANNOT Point eir Finger at the Referee".
>
> --
> From V.J. Rada



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Resolution of Proposals 7965-7972

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

nttpf

On 11/21/2017 06:43 PM, VJ Rada wrote:
> I award myself a Red Ribbon
> for 7969 and an Orange Ribbon for 7970
>
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 10:39 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
>  wrote:
>> I resolve the decision(s) to adopt proposal(s) 7965-7972 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   TitlePender  Pend fee
>> ---
>> 7965*  Trigon 3.0  One pronoun fix  Trigon  1 AP
>> 7966x  ATMunn 1.0  But I already live there!o   1 AP
>> 7967x  V.J. Rada  1.0  Rhyming sux tbh  V.J. Rada   1 AP
>> 7968*  Alexis, [3]2.0  Backed Out the Door  Alexis  OP [1][2]
>> 7969*  V.J. Rada, [4] 3.0  Obvious fix  V.J. Rada   2 sh.
>> 7970*  V.J. Rada  2.0  Referee Minor FixV.J. Rada   2 sh.
>> 7971x  V.J. Rada, [4] 3.0  Cleanup Time V.J. Rada   2 sh.
>> 7972*  G. 2.0  Silly Tweaks G.  1 AP
>>
>> | | 7965 | 7966 | 7967 | 7968 | 7969 | 7970 | 7971 | 7972 |
>> |-+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
>> |Alexis   | FF   | P| AA   | P| FF   | FF   | FF   | FF   |
>> |ATMunn   | F| F| A| F| F| P| P| F|
>> |G.   | F| A| A| A| P| F| F| F|
>> |o| F| F| F| F| F| F| A| F|
>> |PSS  | F| A| A| F| A| F| A| F|
>> |Telnaior | F| A| F| F| F| F| A| A|
>> |VJ Rada  | F| A| F| F| F| F| F| F|
>> |-+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
>> |F/A  | 8/0  | 2/4  | 3/5  | 5/1  | 6/1  | 7/0  | 4/3  | 7/1  |
>> |AI   | 3.0  | 1.0  | 1.0  | 2.0  | 3.0  | 2.0  | 3.0  | 2.0  |
>> |V| 7| 7| 7| 7| 7| 7| 7| 7|
>> |Q| 7| 7| 7| 7| 7| 7| 7| 7|
>> |P| T| F| F| T| T| T| F| T|
>>
>> //
>> ID: 7965
>> Title: One pronoun fix
>> Adoption index: 3.0
>> Author: Trigon
>> Co-authors:
>>
>>
>> Replace the word "his" in the second paragraph of Rule 2438 ("Ribbons") with
>> "eir".
>>
>> //
>> ID: 7968
>> Title: Backed Out the Door
>> Adoption index: 2.0
>> Author: Alexis
>> Co-authors: Telnaior, ais523, Aris, G.
>>
>>
>> Enact a new power-2 rule entitled "Political Parties", reading as
>> follows:
>>
>>   There are 5 Parties, in order:
>>
>>   - Platonic Isolationists
>>   - New Punchbowl Reformers
>>   - Costume Conservatives
>>   - Substance Use Liberals
>>   - Official Raving Monster Looney Party
>>
>>   Politicians are entities; each Politician has a name and an
>>   associated Party. Politicians exist only as specified by the
>>   rules. Creating, altering, or destroying Politicians is secured.
>>
>>   If there are ever fewer than 20 Politicians, then the Clork CAN
>>   and SHALL, by announcement, create a new Politician, specifying
>>   eir Party and name. The Party must be selected at random from:
>>
>>   - If any Party has fewer than 3 Politicans, the Party or Parties
>> with the fewest.
>>   - Otherwise, the Parties with fewer than 5 Politicians.
>>
>> Enact a new power-2 rule entitled "Clork", reading as follows:
>>
>>   The Clork (pronounced "clark") is an office. The Clork's weekly
>>   report includes:
>>   - a list of all Politicans with their names and Parties.
>>   - the assignment of Policies to Parties.
>>
>>   The portion of a document purporting to be a Clork's report
>>   containing the above information is self-ratifying.
>>
>> Enact a new power-2 rule entitled "Echelon Forms", reading as follows:
>>
>>   A Post is a position which can be held by at most one Politician.
>>   Each Politican can hold at most one Post at a time. Each Post is
>>   in an Echelon, which has an associated Rank. The Echelons, and
>>   their Posts and Ranks, are as follows:
>>
>>   Chamber of Power (Rank 5):
>>   - Host
>>   Upper Echelon (Rank 3):
>>   - Planner
>>   - Enforcer
>>   - Organizer
>>   - Creep
>>   Row Echelon (Rank 1):
>>   - Schmoozer
>>   - Decorator
>>   - Loner
>>   - Drunk
>>   - Mystery
>>   - Wild One
>>   - Hat Rack
>>
>>   Each Politician who holds a Post is in the Echelon of that post;
>>   other 

Re: DIS: PAoaM v3: Not rushed this time and also better in general

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

This could be resolved by making it be assets "controlled" by a player
and have that set by an officer with some appeals process.

On 11/21/2017 03:54 PM, Reuben Staley wrote:
> My problem with having fixed assets per player per week is that that
> will cause massive accumulation of wealth on the part of inactive
> players. I believe I've mentioned this before in this thread,
> actually. I did want to give everyone the same amount of assets a
> week, but I was scared that inactive people would get a ton of wealth
> and, if they ever decided to rejoin the game, they would be much more
> wealthy than the active people, so that makes no sense.
>
> On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 8:49 AM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, 19 Nov 2017, Aris Merchant wrote:
>>> On Sun, Nov 19, 2017 at 4:19 PM, Reuben Staley  
>>> wrote:
   1. every player with an amount of papers less than 2 an amount of
  papers so that eir paper balance is equal to 2.

 [ This makes it so that impoverished players can move a little each week
   and make some proposals. ]
>>> I now present the Aris Asset Holding Contract (AAHC):
>>>
>>> {Aris CAN amend, repeal, or retitle this contract by announcement.
>>> This contract accepts all assets. Aris can cause this contract to
>>> transfer any asset in its possession by announcement.}
>>>
>>> Then I transfer all of my papers and apples to the AAHC every week.
>>> I'm not really sure how to get around this problem without using
>>> something along the lines of effective control (see the blue cards
>>> rule).
>> Needs-based supply for the "poor" is one of the big failings of the
>> current system, to get rid of.  Just give everyone something each X,
>> but less (e.g. 2/month, not 2/week).
>>
>> Even without the hole you mention, this ends the economy in terms
>> of playing it.  2 paper/week is more than I need, you give it back
>> when I use it, I never have to participate.  Give everyone 2/month,
>> regardless of need, and they need to budget, and then to earn
>> more they need to participate.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: DIS: PAoaM v3: Not rushed this time and also better in general

[ATMunn]

On 11/21/2017 2:59 PM, Reuben Staley wrote:

[snip]

Amend rule 2516 by replacing it in full with:

   At the beginning of the Agoran week, the Treasuror CAN and SHALL
   cause Agora to create in:

"create in" is an awkward phrasing. Could you change it somehow?


Probably.




   1. every player with an amount of papers less than 2 an amount of
  papers so that eir paper balance is equal to 2.

   2. every player with an amount of apples less than 4 an amount of
  apples so that eir apple balance is equal to 4.

[ This makes it so that impoverished players can move a little each week
   and make some proposals. ]

Why not include a base salary even if you are not impoverished and just
have an impoverished salary on top?


Because doing so would allow inactive people to accumulate a ton of
wealth. If any of the inactive people ever decided to join again, e
would be far richer than anyone actually playing. This method ensures
that, even if we can't deregister them, we can at least stop them from
getting tons of money on the side.

I'm open to other ways to do this if anyone has any ideas.


I think the simple fix for this is to simply not give anything to inactive 
players. Maybe if a player has not sent any public messages in the last month 
or two, or if e hasn't sent more than a certain number of public messages.

Re: DIS: PAoaM v3: Not rushed this time and also better in general

[Reuben Staley]

On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 1:28 AM, Owen Jacobson  wrote:
>
> On Nov 19, 2017, at 7:19 PM, Reuben Staley  wrote:
>
>> Re-enact rule 1994/0 (Power=2) "Ownership of Land" with the text:
>>
>>  Any existent Land for which ownership has not been explicitly
>>  changed belongs to Agora.
>>
>>  Land belonging to Agora is called Public Land. Land belonging to
>>  a contract is called Communal Land. Land belonging to any other
>>  entity is called Private Land. Together, Communal Land and Private
>>  Land are called Proprietary Land.
>
> Each Unit of Land has an Owner switch, tracked by the Cartographer, whose 
> values are any player, any Contract, or Agora (the default).

Why would Land Units have an owner switch? Land Units are assets, and
players can own assets, so it makes sense that you'd just refer to the
owner of a Land Unit as its owner.

>> Re-enact rule 1995/0 (Power=2) "Land Types" with the text:
>>
>>  Each Unit of Land has a single Land Type. Changes to Land Type are
>>  secured. In addition to Aether, the Land types Black and White are
>>  defined.
>>
>>  The phrase "Units of X", where X is a Land Type defined by the
>>  Rules, is considered a synonym for "Units of Land that have Land
>>  Type (or Subtype) X"
>>
>>  When existent Land has not had its Type changed as explicitly
>>  permitted by the Rules, or has a Type that is not currently
>>  defined by the Rules, it is considered to have the Land Type of
>>  Aether. Rules to the contrary nonwithstanding, Units of Aether
>>  CANNOT be transferred from Agora, or owned by any entity other
>>  than Agora. If Proprietary Land becomes Aether, the Cartographor
>>  SHALL transfer it to Agora in a timely fashion.
>>
>>  When an act specifies an alternating Land Type, the Land Type
>>  chosen will be based upon the Land Type used as the previous
>>  alternating Land Type, so that consecutive alternating Land Types
>>  alternate between Black and White. In a timely fashion after a
>>  Player notifies the Cartographor of an act that specifies an
>>  alternating Land Type, the Cartographor MUST announce which Land
>>  Type was used for that act.
>
> Each Unit of Land has a Land Type switch, tracked by the Cartographor, whose 
> values are “Black”, “White”, and “Aether” (the default). Changes to Land Type 
> switches are secured. To “change the type” of, or to “transform”, a Unit of 
> Land is to flip its Type switch. A “Unit of X” is a Unit of Land whose Land 
> Type switch has the value X.

Oh, that's better, thanks.

>> Re-enact rule 1996/3 (Power=1), renaming it to "The Cartographor" with
>> the text:
>>
>>  The Cartographor is an office; its holder is recordkeepor for the
>>  Land of Arcadia.
>>
>>  The Cartographor's Weekly Report shall include:
>>
>>  1. the ownership and land type of all existing land;
>>  2. all changes in the ownership and land type of existing land
>> since the most recent report;
>>  3. the location for the previous week and the current week of each
>> entity or instrument with a defined location;
>>  4. all patches and their constituents; and
>>  5. all facilities and their parent patches.
>
> I volunteer, but as the primary designer, I believe you should have priority. 
> This seems like a good chance to flex my registry system a bit, and with 361 
> distinct land units to worry about (plus the current alternating state and 
> the locations of players), this is an office where automation will pay 
> dividends.

I don't know how your registry system works, but I think it would be a
good opportunity to try it. As long as I can access it with Python --
since that's what I'll probably be using -- it should be good.

>> Re-enact rule 1998/2 (Power=1) "Land Topology" with the text:
>>
>>  Two Units of Land are Adjacent if they have the same Latitude, and
>>  their Longitudes differ by exactly one; or they have the same
>>  Longitude, and their Latitudes differ by exactly one.
>>
>> [ Penguin Distance is never referenced again, so I got rid of it. ]
>>
>>  Two Units of Land are said to be Connected by a specific Type of
>>  Land if it is possible to travel from the first Unit to the second
>>  by only travelling over Land of that specific Type.
>
> It might be worth spelling out that it’s possible to travel from one land to 
> an adjacent land unit, and not to any other land unit. I can see some of our 
> more, uh, creative players applying some surprising interpretations of what 
> it means to travel “over” land.

Good plan. I'll fix it in v4.

>> Re-enact rule 1999/0 (Power=1) "Entity Location" with the text:
>>
>>  Every Player has a single defined Location corresponding to a
>>  single Longitude, Latitude pair.
>>
>>  No other Entity can have a location unless it is defined in a rule
>>  other than this 

Re: DIS: PAoaM v3: Not rushed this time and also better in general

[Kerim Aydin]

On Tue, 21 Nov 2017, Reuben Staley wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 8:36 AM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
> > On Sun, 19 Nov 2017, Aris Merchant wrote:
> >> Also, keeping shinies around as a way to pay for things might
> >> discourage people from investing in the new economy, because what's
> >> the point in getting paper if you can do everything it can more
> >> cheaply with shinies?
> >
> > The proto currently keeps AP which is the biggest brake of all.
> 
> Uuh, no it doesn't? I repealed AP and never referenced it again
> throughout the rest of the proposal.

Oh, really sorry, I mis-read your changes in 2445 as keeping AP - my 
mistake!

(Just as a style note, it's good to put rule titles in places where
you don't include text.  e.g. "Repeal Rule 2500 (Action Points)". This
doesn't make it your fault that I missed it this time -  Just a helpful
editing suggestion).

Re: DIS: PAoaM v3: Not rushed this time and also better in general

[Kerim Aydin]

On Tue, 21 Nov 2017, Reuben Staley wrote:
> My problem with having fixed assets per player per week is that that
> will cause massive accumulation of wealth on the part of inactive
> players. I believe I've mentioned this before in this thread,
> actually. I did want to give everyone the same amount of assets a
> week, but I was scared that inactive people would get a ton of wealth
> and, if they ever decided to rejoin the game, they would be much more
> wealthy than the active people, so that makes no sense.

Just two clarifications that may make all the difference?  In my
recent Shinies Proposal:

1.  I change it to distribute shinies Monthly, not Weekly.

2.  I jigger the prices to make things *much* more expensive.  On a base 
salary, you'd only get 2 Proposals per *month*, instead of the current
2-per-week AP + often dirt-cheap shiny pending prices.

So if people are going to ignore the Land and just use shinies, they'll
have to budget carefully over a month and their options are vastly
reduced.  If accumulation is becoming a problem, we can react to it on 
a scale of months not weeks (i.e. we have plenty of time to fix it 
before the next amount of shinies gets distributed).

Also, the new combo of Zombies + deregistration w/Agoran Consent will 
vastly reduce the inactive player impact, as we just witnessed.


On Tue, 21 Nov 2017, Reuben Staley wrote:
> My problem with having fixed assets per player per week is that that
> will cause massive accumulation of wealth on the part of inactive
> players. I believe I've mentioned this before in this thread,
> actually. I did want to give everyone the same amount of assets a
> week, but I was scared that inactive people would get a ton of wealth
> and, if they ever decided to rejoin the game, they would be much more
> wealthy than the active people, so that makes no sense.
> 
> On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 8:49 AM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Sun, 19 Nov 2017, Aris Merchant wrote:
> >> On Sun, Nov 19, 2017 at 4:19 PM, Reuben Staley  
> >> wrote:
> >> >   1. every player with an amount of papers less than 2 an amount of
> >> >  papers so that eir paper balance is equal to 2.
> >> >
> >> > [ This makes it so that impoverished players can move a little each week
> >> >   and make some proposals. ]
> >>
> >> I now present the Aris Asset Holding Contract (AAHC):
> >>
> >> {Aris CAN amend, repeal, or retitle this contract by announcement.
> >> This contract accepts all assets. Aris can cause this contract to
> >> transfer any asset in its possession by announcement.}
> >>
> >> Then I transfer all of my papers and apples to the AAHC every week.
> >> I'm not really sure how to get around this problem without using
> >> something along the lines of effective control (see the blue cards
> >> rule).
> >
> > Needs-based supply for the "poor" is one of the big failings of the
> > current system, to get rid of.  Just give everyone something each X,
> > but less (e.g. 2/month, not 2/week).
> >
> > Even without the hole you mention, this ends the economy in terms
> > of playing it.  2 paper/week is more than I need, you give it back
> > when I use it, I never have to participate.  Give everyone 2/month,
> > regardless of need, and they need to budget, and then to earn
> > more they need to participate.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Trigon
>

Re: DIS: PAoaM v3: Not rushed this time and also better in general

[Reuben Staley]

My problem with having fixed assets per player per week is that that
will cause massive accumulation of wealth on the part of inactive
players. I believe I've mentioned this before in this thread,
actually. I did want to give everyone the same amount of assets a
week, but I was scared that inactive people would get a ton of wealth
and, if they ever decided to rejoin the game, they would be much more
wealthy than the active people, so that makes no sense.

On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 8:49 AM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, 19 Nov 2017, Aris Merchant wrote:
>> On Sun, Nov 19, 2017 at 4:19 PM, Reuben Staley  
>> wrote:
>> >   1. every player with an amount of papers less than 2 an amount of
>> >  papers so that eir paper balance is equal to 2.
>> >
>> > [ This makes it so that impoverished players can move a little each week
>> >   and make some proposals. ]
>>
>> I now present the Aris Asset Holding Contract (AAHC):
>>
>> {Aris CAN amend, repeal, or retitle this contract by announcement.
>> This contract accepts all assets. Aris can cause this contract to
>> transfer any asset in its possession by announcement.}
>>
>> Then I transfer all of my papers and apples to the AAHC every week.
>> I'm not really sure how to get around this problem without using
>> something along the lines of effective control (see the blue cards
>> rule).
>
> Needs-based supply for the "poor" is one of the big failings of the
> current system, to get rid of.  Just give everyone something each X,
> but less (e.g. 2/month, not 2/week).
>
> Even without the hole you mention, this ends the economy in terms
> of playing it.  2 paper/week is more than I need, you give it back
> when I use it, I never have to participate.  Give everyone 2/month,
> regardless of need, and they need to budget, and then to earn
> more they need to participate.
>
>
>
>
>



-- 
Trigon

Re: DIS: PAoaM v3: Not rushed this time and also better in general

[Reuben Staley]

On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 8:36 AM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
> On Sun, 19 Nov 2017, Aris Merchant wrote:
>> Also, keeping shinies around as a way to pay for things might
>> discourage people from investing in the new economy, because what's
>> the point in getting paper if you can do everything it can more
>> cheaply with shinies?
>
> The proto currently keeps AP which is the biggest brake of all.

Uuh, no it doesn't? I repealed AP and never referenced it again
throughout the rest of the proposal.

-- 
Trigon

Re: DIS: PAoaM v3: Not rushed this time and also better in general

[Corona]

Sorry for the walls of text; if you don't understand anything,  I'll
be happy to clarify.

About it being rushed - A reform that could singlehandedly determine
the (un)balance of Agora will never be prepared enough, if we want to
release it in a (kind of) timely manner.

That's why we should partially leave it to the Agoran legislative
process, fixing it as we go.

After all, it is impossible for this law to introduce a complete
economy, as that depends on all the assets one can buy, and not only
would the reform get bogged down by writing out every asset to be
available for purchase, it will also be easier to imagine how will a
new asset interact with the rest of the economy if one can see that
economy in practice.

Anyways, here are my thoughts:

On 11/19/17, Reuben Staley  wrote:
> This is still pretty rough around the edges with the new mechanics.
>
> Title: Putting Agora on a Map v3
> Author: Trigon
> Co-Authors: Aris, ATMunn, G., o, VJ Rada
> AI: 2
>
> [ Version 3: So this is Go + Settlers of Catan + some RPG mechanics now.
> It'll be interesting to see how this all plays out. Also: two drafts
> in one day YEET! ]
>
> [ PART I: Removing and Changing Stuff ]
>
> Repeal rules 2488, 2489, 2490, and 2491.
>
> [ I honestly tried to keep the estates, but these changes are so radical
> that it wouldn't be compatible. ]
>
> Repeal rule 2500.
>
> Amend rule 2445 by replacing the second paragraph and subsequent list
> with:
>
> Any player CAN flip a specified proposal's imminence to "pending"
> by announcement by spending 1 paper.
>
> Amend rule 991 by removing the first two items of the list directly
> following the first paragraph, and replacing them with the following
> list item:
>
> a) by announcement by spending 1 paper, OR
>
> [ Everyone wants to get rid of these so okay, let's do it. ]
>
> Repeal rules 2483, 2487, and 2497.
>
> [ No more shinies, everybody! ]
>
> Amend rule 2516 by replacing it in full with:
>
> At the beginning of the Agoran week, the Treasuror CAN and SHALL
> cause Agora to create in:
>
> 1. every player with an amount of papers less than 2 an amount of
> papers so that eir paper balance is equal to 2.
>
> 2. every player with an amount of apples less than 4 an amount of
> apples so that eir apple balance is equal to 4.
>
> [ This makes it so that impoverished players can move a little each week
> and make some proposals. ]
>

*I'd wager that players will set up contracts, allowing them to
receive state aid even when they are fabulously wealthy, and it's not
like you can just raise the price of contracts, which should be cheap.
To avoid cluttering up reports with such contracts, you might as well
give every player a flat 2 paper & 4 apples/week.

It is never a bad thing to have more poverty/powerlessness prevention
mechanisms, and one occured to me, "scavenging for apples":

A player can, on any Land Unit, start scavenging for apples by
announcement. While scavenging for apples, e gains one apple after
every 24 hours of scavenging. A player ceases scavenging if:
-E changes location or takes any other map-altering action (building
facilities etc.)
-E has been scavenging for 7 days (to discourage idling).

Maybe there should also be an indestructible lv1 mine or orchard at
0,0 so that impoverished players can get lumber/stone, with which they
can build a facility to create the other.*



> Amend rule 2599 by replacing the second paragraph with:
>
> When a player receives a Welcome Package, Agora creates the
> following assets in eir possession:
>
> 1. 20 coins
> 2. 5 lumber
> 3. 5 stones
> 4. 10 apples
> 5. 5 papers
>
> [PART II: Making Land]
>
> Re-enact rule 1993/1 (Power=2) "The Land of Arcadia" with the text:
>
> Arcadia is a land entirely defined by the Arcadian Map (the Map).
> The Map is the term for the set of all Land Units.
>
> The Map divides Arcadia into a finite, discrete number of Units of
> Land, or simply Land. Each Unit of Land is an indestructible asset
> specified by an ordered pair of integers known as its Latitude and
> Longitude.
>
> Every unique ordered pair of integers within the limits defined in
> the Rules for Latitude and Longitude signifies an existent Unit of
> Land. No other Units of Land exist. Units of Land CAN only be
> created or destroyed by changing the limits of Latitude and
> Longitude defined in the Rules.
>
> All values for Latitude and Longitude MUST lie between -9 and +9,
> inclusive.
>
> The Total Land Area of Arcadia is the number of existent Units of
> Land defined by permissible Latitude and Longitude pairs.

*That is _361_ ! There is a reason why Go is often played (when
practicing) on smaller boards - this is huge for just 10-20 players,
even if half of it is Æther. There are 2 issues I see:

1) It takes 18 moves to get to a corner from the center, assuming no
obstacles. Unless more movement abilities are legislated soon, I'd fix
this by allowing the players to walk diagonally, this also allows for
more 

Re: DIS: PAoaM v3: Not rushed this time and also better in general

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

My idea about actions is less about the specific places, but just having
different actions cost different amounts, based off of the previous
action you did. So, calling a CFJ after just having called a CFJ would
cost less than submitting a proposal after just calling a CFJ.

On 11/21/2017 02:59 PM, Reuben Staley wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 19, 2017 at 6:13 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
>  wrote:
>> Comments:
>>
>> On 11/19/2017 07:19 PM, Reuben Staley wrote:
>>> This is still pretty rough around the edges with the new mechanics.
>>>
>>> Title: Putting Agora on a Map v3
>>> Author: Trigon
>>> Co-Authors: Aris, ATMunn, G., o, VJ Rada
>>> AI: 2
>>>
>>> [ Version 3: So this is Go + Settlers of Catan + some RPG mechanics now.
>>>   It'll be interesting to see how this all plays out. Also: two drafts
>>>   in one day YEET! ]
>>>
>>> [ PART I: Removing and Changing Stuff ]
>>>
>>> Repeal rules 2488, 2489, 2490, and 2491.
>>>
>>> [ I honestly tried to keep the estates, but these changes are so radical
>>>   that it wouldn't be compatible. ]
>>>
>>> Repeal rule 2500.
>>>
>>> Amend rule 2445 by replacing the second paragraph and subsequent list
>>> with:
>>>
>>>   Any player CAN flip a specified proposal's imminence to "pending"
>>>   by announcement by spending 1 paper.
>>>
>>> Amend rule 991 by removing the first two items of the list directly
>>> following the first paragraph, and replacing them with the following
>>> list item:
>>>
>>>   a) by announcement by spending 1 paper, OR
>>>
>>> [ Everyone wants to get rid of these so okay, let's do it. ]
>>>
>>> Repeal rules 2483, 2487, and 2497.
>>>
>>> [ No more shinies, everybody! ]
>>>
>>> Amend rule 2516 by replacing it in full with:
>>>
>>>   At the beginning of the Agoran week, the Treasuror CAN and SHALL
>>>   cause Agora to create in:
>> "create in" is an awkward phrasing. Could you change it somehow?
> Probably.
>
>>>
>>>   1. every player with an amount of papers less than 2 an amount of
>>>  papers so that eir paper balance is equal to 2.
>>>
>>>   2. every player with an amount of apples less than 4 an amount of
>>>  apples so that eir apple balance is equal to 4.
>>>
>>> [ This makes it so that impoverished players can move a little each week
>>>   and make some proposals. ]
>> Why not include a base salary even if you are not impoverished and just
>> have an impoverished salary on top?
> Because doing so would allow inactive people to accumulate a ton of
> wealth. If any of the inactive people ever decided to join again, e
> would be far richer than anyone actually playing. This method ensures
> that, even if we can't deregister them, we can at least stop them from
> getting tons of money on the side.
>
> I'm open to other ways to do this if anyone has any ideas.
>
>>> Amend rule 2599 by replacing the second paragraph with:
>>>
>>>   When a player receives a Welcome Package, Agora creates the
>>>   following assets in eir possession:
>>>
>>>   1. 20 coins
>>>   2. 5 lumber
>>>   3. 5 stones
>>>   4. 10 apples
>>>   5. 5 papers
>>>
>>> [PART II: Making Land]
>>>
>>> Re-enact rule 1993/1 (Power=2) "The Land of Arcadia" with the text:
>>>
>>>   Arcadia is a land entirely defined by the Arcadian Map (the Map).
>>>   The Map is the term for the set of all Land Units.
>>>
>>>   The Map divides Arcadia into a finite, discrete number of Units of
>>>   Land, or simply Land. Each Unit of Land is an indestructible asset
>>>   specified by an ordered pair of integers known as its Latitude and
>>>   Longitude.
>>>
>>>   Every unique ordered pair of integers within the limits defined in
>>>   the Rules for Latitude and Longitude signifies an existent Unit of
>>>   Land. No other Units of Land exist. Units of Land CAN only be
>>>   created or destroyed by changing the limits of Latitude and
>>>   Longitude defined in the Rules.
>>>
>>>   All values for Latitude and Longitude MUST lie between -9 and +9,
>>>   inclusive.
>>>
>>>   The Total Land Area of Arcadia is the number of existent Units of
>>>   Land defined by permissible Latitude and Longitude pairs.
>>>
>>> Re-enact rule 1994/0 (Power=2) "Ownership of Land" with the text:
>>>
>>>   Any existent Land for which ownership has not been explicitly
>>>   changed belongs to Agora.
>>>
>>>   Land belonging to Agora is called Public Land. Land belonging to
>>>   a contract is called Communal Land. Land belonging to any other
>>>   entity is called Private Land. Together, Communal Land and Private
>>>   Land are called Proprietary Land.
>>>
>>> Re-enact rule 1995/0 (Power=2) "Land Types" with the text:
>>>
>>>   Each Unit of Land has a single Land Type. Changes to Land Type are
>>>   secured. In addition to Aether, the Land types Black and White are
>>>   defined.
>>>
>>>   The phrase "Units of X", where X is a Land 

DIS: Re: BUS: (no subject)

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

I agree with this intepretation, but I believe it is problematic and
should be fixed.

On 11/21/2017 01:32 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> I shiny-CFJ on the following statement:  
>
> G. CAN assign this CFJ to emself by announcement.
>
>
> ARGUMENTS
>
> Rule 991 last paragraph paraphrases as following (full text in evidence).
>
> - Sentence 1 unequivocally states that the Arbitor CAN assign any
>   player to be its judge by announcement.
>
> - Sentence 2 states that the Caller is not "eligible to be assigned".
>
> - Sentence 3 is about "interested players having equal opportunity".
>
> - Sentence 4 states that only eligible players CAN assign cases to
>   themselves w/o 3 objections.
>
> The question is whether sentence 2's "eligibility" limitation applies
> backwards to the Arbitor's ability to assign judgement, or if it only
> applies forward (and limits self-assignment, but still allows the
> Arbitor to assign anyone).
>
> My personal feeling is that sentence 2 applies forward, but does not
> limit the Arbitor's ability to assign, literally, any player.  This 
> case occurred to me when I noticed that at least one player was not 
> getting "equal opportunity to judge" (sentence 3) because e also called 
> a lot of CFJs.  So in the case where I (as Arbitor) can't occasionally 
> (in rare circumstances) self-assign, I am at risk of breaking that SHALL.
>
>
> EVIDENCE
>
> Rule 991/23 (Power=2.0)
> Calls for Judgement
>
>   Any person (the initiator) can initiate a Call for Judgement (CFJ,
>   syn. Judicial Case), specifying a statement to be inquired into:
>
>   a) by announcement, and spending 1 Action Point, OR
>
>   b) by announcement, and spending the current CFJ cost in shinies,
>  OR
>
>   c) by announcement if e is not a player.
>
>   When a person initiates a Call for Judgment, e CAN optionally bar
>   one person from the case by announcement.
>
>   At any time, each CFJ is either open (default), suspended, or
>   assigned exactly one judgement.
>
>   The Arbitor is an office, responsible for the administration of
>   justice in a manner that is fair for emself, if not for the rest
>   of Agora.
>
>   When a CFJ has no judge assigned, the Arbitor CAN assign any
>   player to be its judge by announcement, and SHALL do so within a
>   week. The players eligible to be assigned as judge are all players
>   except the initiator and the person barred (if any). The Arbitor
>   SHALL assign judges over time such that all interested players
>   have reasonably equal opportunities to judge. If a CFJ has no
>   judge assigned, then any player eligible to judge that CFJ CAN
>   assign it to emself Without 3 Objections.
>
>   The Arbitor's weekly report includes a summary of recent judicial
>   case activity, including open and recently-judged cases, recent
>   judicial assignments, and a list of players interested in judging.
>
>
>

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: DIS: base currency discussion

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

You could also increase welcome packages over time or tie winning
conditions and such to the amount of time playing or have
inflation-controlled currencies independent for each player based off of
usage and receipt of the currencies. I think that the first or second
would be easiest by the final one would be the most interesting.

On 11/21/2017 12:40 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> On Tue, 21 Nov 2017, VJ Rada wrote:
>> Inflation: the game could actually just be a fun game in itself. Like
>> "race to 1 billion" type thing.
> In real-life economies, controlled inflation can be fine.
>
> In standard boardgames, everyone racing in an inflationary economy is fine.
> It ends up being "exponential" game progression that can make early
> choices very important in determining the winner.
>
> In games that have long play times and have people joining and leaving,
> and no fixed endpoint, it's more of an issue, because you don't want 
> late-joiners to be permanently behind the curve.  Trying to mix "long-
> running economy" with "fair gameplay" is the biggest challenge.  You
> need periodic big resets IMO.  This can either be "taxes", or an 
> incentive for the big holders to spend large chunks of shinies (auctions
> are perfect for this if your auction items are valuable).
>
>
>> In the context of Trigon’s _extremely_ comprehensive whole-game reform, 
>> it’s possible that the whole purpose of a reserve currency changes, too. 
>> In particular, Trigon’s done a fabulous job of attacking the _first_ of 
>> those three causes, by creating reliable reasons to spend Shinies, which
>> are tuned to return the largest number of Shinies any one player or
>> contract is willing to part with to Agora to be distributed.
> I agree, but Trigon's current draft includes getting rid of all shinies
> through repeal not spending, which is why I started this discussion!
>
>

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: DIS: can contracts actually do officer stuff?

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

I concur.

On 11/21/2017 12:30 PM, Alexis Hunt wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Nov 2017 at 12:28 Kerim Aydin  wrote:
>
>> So in the hideously-overwrought, "I'd rather deregister than play
>> this" contract rules, am I reading it right that I can't contract
>> out Officer duties as act-on-behalf actions because they're
>> "protected"?  That's how I read it anyway.
>>
> That was my reading. I'd gladly repeal that rule as I think it does more
> harm than good.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

DIS: Re: BUS: [Agoran Credit Union]

[Corona]

I become a party.

On 11/21/17, ATMunn  wrote:
> Oops, report, not repor.
>
> If the below action of claiming a reward failed, I claim a reward of 5
> shinies for my recent ADoP *report*.
>
> On 11/21/2017 9:34 AM, ATMunn wrote:
>> I become a party to the ACU, and destroy my 40 bills, causing the contract
>> to transfer me 4 shinies.
>>
>> I transfer 4 shinies to Agora.
>>
>> I claim a reward of 5 shinies for my recent ADoP repor (just in time!)
>>
>>
>> I now have a free stamp. :) (see my reply on the Treasuror's report)
>>
>> On 11/21/2017 5:03 AM, Owen Jacobson wrote:
>>> I need a sanity check, but I think all of these actions work.
>>>
>>> I pay Agora 1 sh. to create a contract titled “The Agoran Credit Union”,
>>> with the text:
>>>
>>> {
>>>  Any player CAN become a party to this contract by announcement. Any
>>> party
>>>  other than the Chair CAN cease to be a party (syn. leave the
>>> Institute) by
>>>  announcement.
>>>
>>>  If o is a party to this contract, e is the Chair. Any party CAN
>>> amend the
>>>  contract by announcement to remove this paragraph.
>>>
>>>  The Chair CAN nominate any party as the new Chair by announcement. A
>>> party
>>>  to this contract CAN nominate any party to this contract as the new
>>> Chair
>>>  with 2 support from parties to this contract, other than the
>>> nominee. In
>>>  either case, the most-recently nominated party CAN become the Chair
>>> by
>>>  announcement. A player who ceases to be a party to this contract
>>> loses eir
>>>  nomination.
>>>
>>>  The Chair CAN, at any time, amend or destroy this contract without
>>> 2
>>>  objections from parties to this contract.
>>>
>>>  This contract is willing to accept Shinies.
>>>
>>>  Bills are a private, liquid, indestructibe currency. The Chair is
>>> the
>>>  Recordkeepor of Bills. The Chair CAN cause Agora to transfer Bills
>>> it owns
>>>  to this contract by announcement, and SHALL do so in a timely
>>> fashion when
>>>  Agora owns any Bills.
>>>
>>>  This contract is willing to accept Bills.
>>>
>>>  Any party to this contract CAN pay this contract any number of
>>> Shinies to
>>>  create ten times that number of Bills in eir possession.
>>>
>>>  Any party to this contract CAN cause this contract to pay emself any
>>> number
>>>  of Shinies by destroying ten times that number of Bills in eir
>>> possession.
>>>
>>>  The Chair CAN, by announcement, create and destroy Bills in this
>>> contract's
>>>  possession. The Chair MUST NOT create Bills in this manner if doing
>>> so
>>>  would cause more than a number of Bills equal to fifteen times the
>>> number
>>>  of Shinies owned by this contract to exist, and MUST, in a timely
>>> fashion,
>>>  destroy Bills owned by this contract if more than that number of
>>> Bills exist.
>>>
>>>  The Chair CAN, by announcement, cause this contract to transfer
>>> Bills it
>>>  owns to any party. The Chair SHALL NOT use this ability other than
>>> to
>>>  extend loans to this contract's parties.
>>>
>>>  The Chair SHALL, in a timely fashion after they become the Chair,
>>> publish a
>>>  fiscal policy document describing how they will manage the supply of
>>> Bills.
>>> }
>>>
>>> If I am not already a party to this contract, I become one, and am
>>> immediately appointed Chair.
>>>
>>> I amend the contract to remove the paragraph
>>>
>>> {
>>>  If o is a party to this contract, e is the Chair. Any party CAN
>>> amend the
>>>  contract by announcement to remove this paragraph.
>>> }
>>>
>>> As Chair of The Agoran Credit Union, I publish the following policy
>>> document:
>>>
>>> {
>>>  Bills are meant to be a gently inflationary medium of exchange, and
>>> a
>>>  carrot to use to get people to take Shinies out of circulation and
>>> put them
>>>  in the bank. With the members' consent, I hope to define systems for
>>> the
>>>  bank to invest and recoup those Shinies, but even if that fails,
>>> dividing
>>>  every Shiny into ten Bills while providing a reliable way to convert
>>> them
>>>  back into Shinies as needed may help loosen the interpersonal
>>> economy a bit.
>>>
>>>  As Chair, I will cause The Agoran Credit Union to extend a loan, on
>>>  request, to any party who has no outstanding loans, up to an amount
>>> of
>>>  Bills equal to the net number of Shinies that player has deposited
>>> with the
>>>  Credit Union. (This implies that the excess fraction of Bills is
>>> capped at
>>>  10%.) Loans SHALL be repayable within three months, repayable early
>>> without
>>>  penalty, and extendable up to an additional three months at the
>>> discretion of
>>>  the Chair.
>>> }
>>>
>>> I pay The Agoran Credit Union 64 Shinies to create 640 Bills in my
>>> possession.
>>>
>>> I pay each player other than myself 40 Bills. Please enjoy this token
>>> gift of 4 

Re: DIS: PAoaM v3: Not rushed this time and also better in general

[Reuben Staley]

On Sun, Nov 19, 2017 at 6:13 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
 wrote:
> Comments:
>
> On 11/19/2017 07:19 PM, Reuben Staley wrote:
>> This is still pretty rough around the edges with the new mechanics.
>>
>> Title: Putting Agora on a Map v3
>> Author: Trigon
>> Co-Authors: Aris, ATMunn, G., o, VJ Rada
>> AI: 2
>>
>> [ Version 3: So this is Go + Settlers of Catan + some RPG mechanics now.
>>   It'll be interesting to see how this all plays out. Also: two drafts
>>   in one day YEET! ]
>>
>> [ PART I: Removing and Changing Stuff ]
>>
>> Repeal rules 2488, 2489, 2490, and 2491.
>>
>> [ I honestly tried to keep the estates, but these changes are so radical
>>   that it wouldn't be compatible. ]
>>
>> Repeal rule 2500.
>>
>> Amend rule 2445 by replacing the second paragraph and subsequent list
>> with:
>>
>>   Any player CAN flip a specified proposal's imminence to "pending"
>>   by announcement by spending 1 paper.
>>
>> Amend rule 991 by removing the first two items of the list directly
>> following the first paragraph, and replacing them with the following
>> list item:
>>
>>   a) by announcement by spending 1 paper, OR
>>
>> [ Everyone wants to get rid of these so okay, let's do it. ]
>>
>> Repeal rules 2483, 2487, and 2497.
>>
>> [ No more shinies, everybody! ]
>>
>> Amend rule 2516 by replacing it in full with:
>>
>>   At the beginning of the Agoran week, the Treasuror CAN and SHALL
>>   cause Agora to create in:
> "create in" is an awkward phrasing. Could you change it somehow?

Probably.

>>
>>
>>   1. every player with an amount of papers less than 2 an amount of
>>  papers so that eir paper balance is equal to 2.
>>
>>   2. every player with an amount of apples less than 4 an amount of
>>  apples so that eir apple balance is equal to 4.
>>
>> [ This makes it so that impoverished players can move a little each week
>>   and make some proposals. ]
> Why not include a base salary even if you are not impoverished and just
> have an impoverished salary on top?

Because doing so would allow inactive people to accumulate a ton of
wealth. If any of the inactive people ever decided to join again, e
would be far richer than anyone actually playing. This method ensures
that, even if we can't deregister them, we can at least stop them from
getting tons of money on the side.

I'm open to other ways to do this if anyone has any ideas.

>>
>> Amend rule 2599 by replacing the second paragraph with:
>>
>>   When a player receives a Welcome Package, Agora creates the
>>   following assets in eir possession:
>>
>>   1. 20 coins
>>   2. 5 lumber
>>   3. 5 stones
>>   4. 10 apples
>>   5. 5 papers
>>
>> [PART II: Making Land]
>>
>> Re-enact rule 1993/1 (Power=2) "The Land of Arcadia" with the text:
>>
>>   Arcadia is a land entirely defined by the Arcadian Map (the Map).
>>   The Map is the term for the set of all Land Units.
>>
>>   The Map divides Arcadia into a finite, discrete number of Units of
>>   Land, or simply Land. Each Unit of Land is an indestructible asset
>>   specified by an ordered pair of integers known as its Latitude and
>>   Longitude.
>>
>>   Every unique ordered pair of integers within the limits defined in
>>   the Rules for Latitude and Longitude signifies an existent Unit of
>>   Land. No other Units of Land exist. Units of Land CAN only be
>>   created or destroyed by changing the limits of Latitude and
>>   Longitude defined in the Rules.
>>
>>   All values for Latitude and Longitude MUST lie between -9 and +9,
>>   inclusive.
>>
>>   The Total Land Area of Arcadia is the number of existent Units of
>>   Land defined by permissible Latitude and Longitude pairs.
>>
>> Re-enact rule 1994/0 (Power=2) "Ownership of Land" with the text:
>>
>>   Any existent Land for which ownership has not been explicitly
>>   changed belongs to Agora.
>>
>>   Land belonging to Agora is called Public Land. Land belonging to
>>   a contract is called Communal Land. Land belonging to any other
>>   entity is called Private Land. Together, Communal Land and Private
>>   Land are called Proprietary Land.
>>
>> Re-enact rule 1995/0 (Power=2) "Land Types" with the text:
>>
>>   Each Unit of Land has a single Land Type. Changes to Land Type are
>>   secured. In addition to Aether, the Land types Black and White are
>>   defined.
>>
>>   The phrase "Units of X", where X is a Land Type defined by the
>>   Rules, is considered a synonym for "Units of Land that have Land
>>   Type (or Subtype) X"
>>
>>   When existent Land has not had its Type changed as explicitly
>>   permitted by the Rules, or has a Type that is not currently
>>   defined by the Rules, it is considered to have the Land Type of
>>   Aether. Rules to the contrary nonwithstanding, Units of Aether
>>   CANNOT be transferred 

Re: DIS: PAoaM v3: Not rushed this time and also better in general

[Reuben Staley]

Indeed, public land is crucial to the system. In v4 I am thinking of
implementing a special clause that allows the Cartographor to
promulgate a list of Land Units (and accompanying facilities) that are
not changed by normal capture rules, can't be auctioned, and can only
be Public.

On Sun, Nov 19, 2017 at 6:07 PM, Madeline  wrote:
> Alternatively, though starting everyone with a welcome package is probably a
> good idea, it seems clear the intention is to start by working on the public
> land (you don't need to have coins to build the facilities, and anyone can
> take from public land) and use the resources you get from there to branch
> out into private land (if you even want to, since you don't have to - and
> public land doesn't care about upkeep)
>
>
>
> On 2017-11-20 11:59, Madeline wrote:
>>
>> Maybe the plan is to make Corona and I the richest players :P (I don't
>> think I ever got to claim my welcome package?)
>> Or perhaps the intention is to give everyone a welcome package to start,
>> which is... really not spelled out.
>>
>>
>> On 2017-11-20 11:34, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> I should add :)  The officer thing is a personal preference. But
>>> the circular coin thing - I'm just wearing my game designer hat
>>> and really failing to see how it will work, I feel like I'm either
>>> missing something (which is very very possible, I miss key lines
>>> all the time!) or it's broken...
>>>
>>> On Sun, 19 Nov 2017, Kerim Aydin wrote:

 On Sun, 19 Nov 2017, Reuben Staley wrote:
>
> Title: Putting Agora on a Map v3
> Author: Trigon
> Co-Authors: Aris, ATMunn, G., o, VJ Rada

 Just to be clear; you're consciously getting rid of shinies, and
 making it so you need Land to make Coins, but you need Coins to
 buy land.  I'm really asking you to address this, I would greatly
 appreciate it.  I'm trying to understand why this is not a circular
 collapse like we've been going through already.

 If only to say "yes, it's really integral to my idea to ditch
 shinies" (and how our currency supply is protected) that would
 be great.

 I would also like to know what game benefit the officers enjoy
 in this economy, because I'm not seeing it - missed something?
 That one's really non-negotiable for me personally (even when I'm
 not an officer).

 -G.
>>>
>>>
>>
>



-- 
Trigon

Re: DIS: PAoaM v3: Not rushed this time and also better in general

[Reuben Staley]

Actually, I never claimed my welcome package so...

No, I'm teasing. I really did intend to add a clause making everyone
eligible for welcome packages, but I just forgot to. I really need to
write a list of things I need to implement into the next version.

Also: HOLY CRAP you guys keep on talking about this. Like, the
discussion for version 3 is going to pass up version 1 and 2 combined.
:P

There's a lot of gunk I need to dig through, so expect lots of emails
from me in the next few hours.

On Sun, Nov 19, 2017 at 5:59 PM, Madeline  wrote:
> Maybe the plan is to make Corona and I the richest players :P (I don't think
> I ever got to claim my welcome package?)
> Or perhaps the intention is to give everyone a welcome package to start,
> which is... really not spelled out.
>
>
>
> On 2017-11-20 11:34, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>>
>>
>> I should add :)  The officer thing is a personal preference. But
>> the circular coin thing - I'm just wearing my game designer hat
>> and really failing to see how it will work, I feel like I'm either
>> missing something (which is very very possible, I miss key lines
>> all the time!) or it's broken...
>>
>> On Sun, 19 Nov 2017, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sun, 19 Nov 2017, Reuben Staley wrote:

 Title: Putting Agora on a Map v3
 Author: Trigon
 Co-Authors: Aris, ATMunn, G., o, VJ Rada
>>>
>>> Just to be clear; you're consciously getting rid of shinies, and
>>> making it so you need Land to make Coins, but you need Coins to
>>> buy land.  I'm really asking you to address this, I would greatly
>>> appreciate it.  I'm trying to understand why this is not a circular
>>> collapse like we've been going through already.
>>>
>>> If only to say "yes, it's really integral to my idea to ditch
>>> shinies" (and how our currency supply is protected) that would
>>> be great.
>>>
>>> I would also like to know what game benefit the officers enjoy
>>> in this economy, because I'm not seeing it - missed something?
>>> That one's really non-negotiable for me personally (even when I'm
>>> not an officer).
>>>
>>> -G.
>>
>>
>



-- 
Trigon

Re: DIS: can contracts actually do officer stuff?

[Kerim Aydin]

On Tue, 21 Nov 2017, Alexis Hunt wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Nov 2017 at 12:28 Kerim Aydin  wrote:
> 
> > So in the hideously-overwrought, "I'd rather deregister than play
> > this" contract rules, am I reading it right that I can't contract
> > out Officer duties as act-on-behalf actions because they're
> > "protected"?  That's how I read it anyway.
> >
> 
> That was my reading. I'd gladly repeal that rule as I think it does more
> harm than good.

Yeah, I just wanted to do the simple equivalent of an Agency - of a kind that
worked perfectly well before - and was really Melancholy that all that
complicated machinery came at the expense of very basic functionality.

I think that it's worth Protecting taking away abilities, but shouldn't
prevent the granting of abilities.  E.g., I should be able to allow someone
to Act on Behalf of me to publish a report, but I shouldn't be able to
sign away my ability to publish the report on my own behalf.

Re: DIS: base currency discussion

[Kerim Aydin]

On Tue, 21 Nov 2017, VJ Rada wrote:
> Inflation: the game could actually just be a fun game in itself. Like
> "race to 1 billion" type thing.

In real-life economies, controlled inflation can be fine.

In standard boardgames, everyone racing in an inflationary economy is fine.
It ends up being "exponential" game progression that can make early
choices very important in determining the winner.

In games that have long play times and have people joining and leaving,
and no fixed endpoint, it's more of an issue, because you don't want 
late-joiners to be permanently behind the curve.  Trying to mix "long-
running economy" with "fair gameplay" is the biggest challenge.  You
need periodic big resets IMO.  This can either be "taxes", or an 
incentive for the big holders to spend large chunks of shinies (auctions
are perfect for this if your auction items are valuable).


> In the context of Trigon’s _extremely_ comprehensive whole-game reform, 
> it’s possible that the whole purpose of a reserve currency changes, too. 
> In particular, Trigon’s done a fabulous job of attacking the _first_ of 
> those three causes, by creating reliable reasons to spend Shinies, which
> are tuned to return the largest number of Shinies any one player or
> contract is willing to part with to Agora to be distributed.

I agree, but Trigon's current draft includes getting rid of all shinies
through repeal not spending, which is why I started this discussion!

Re: DIS: can contracts actually do officer stuff?

[Alexis Hunt]

On Tue, 21 Nov 2017 at 12:28 Kerim Aydin  wrote:

> So in the hideously-overwrought, "I'd rather deregister than play
> this" contract rules, am I reading it right that I can't contract
> out Officer duties as act-on-behalf actions because they're
> "protected"?  That's how I read it anyway.
>

That was my reading. I'd gladly repeal that rule as I think it does more
harm than good.

DIS: can contracts actually do officer stuff?

[Kerim Aydin]

So in the hideously-overwrought, "I'd rather deregister than play
this" contract rules, am I reading it right that I can't contract
out Officer duties as act-on-behalf actions because they're 
"protected"?  That's how I read it anyway.

Re: DIS: PAoaM v3: Not rushed this time and also better in general

[ATMunn]

On 11/21/2017 3:28 AM, Owen Jacobson wrote:

[snip]

1. Flip the Land Type of every unit of land that is not directly connected to a unit of Aether or is not connected by its own land type to a unit of Aether to 

You forgot to exclude (0,0).

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: base currency discussion

[Madeline]

Will "not" be exempt, not that it matters since the contract doesn't 
exist now.



On 2017-11-21 22:07, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:

Why will it be exempt?

On 11/21/2017 04:24 AM, Owen Jacobson wrote:

On Nov 21, 2017, at 4:14 AM, Telnaior  wrote:

On 2017-11-21 19:57, Owen Jacobson wrote:

Incidentally, I think the distribution rules, fiddly though they are, are 
actually working as intended, but I want to get other players’ perspective on 
them. The same handful of players have repeatedly benefitted from them without 
spending any Shinies, but we’ve reached a level where there are now a 
significant number of players with “the fewest” shinies, instead of only two.

-o


Worth noting this only lasts as long as people don't try to game the system, 
which has already been threatened with one of the new systems.

In related news, I transfer a shiny to Agora to create the contract "Telnaior Asset 
Holding Contract (TAHC)":
{
Telnaior CAN amend, repeal, or retitle this contract by announcement. This 
contract accepts all assets. Telnaior can cause this contract to transfer any 
asset in its possession by announcement.
}

I transfer all of my shinies to TAHC.

(VJ Rada's scam attempt irritated me, sorry)

I duly cause Agora to distribute the following payments:

Tue, 21 Nov 2017 09:14:17 ? Telnaior paid Agora 1 sh.

In total, 1 shiny must be distributed. I cause Agora to pay as follows:

* 1 sh. to Telnaior (0 -> 1 sh.)

Enjoy your free contract! I’m not sure whether this contract has fulfilled its 
purpose, so I’ll refrain from destroying it, but I will note that any player can 
destroy it with two consent, for any reason, excepting that “Players SHOULD NOT use 
the methods in this paragraph to further their private interests."

This contract will not be exempt from sustenance payments, but I doubt they’ll 
tick fast enough to matter for your purposes.

-o

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: base currency discussion

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

Why will it be exempt?

On 11/21/2017 04:24 AM, Owen Jacobson wrote:
>> On Nov 21, 2017, at 4:14 AM, Telnaior  wrote:
>>
>> On 2017-11-21 19:57, Owen Jacobson wrote:
>>> Incidentally, I think the distribution rules, fiddly though they are, are 
>>> actually working as intended, but I want to get other players’ perspective 
>>> on them. The same handful of players have repeatedly benefitted from them 
>>> without spending any Shinies, but we’ve reached a level where there are now 
>>> a significant number of players with “the fewest” shinies, instead of only 
>>> two.
>>>
>>> -o
>>>
>> Worth noting this only lasts as long as people don't try to game the system, 
>> which has already been threatened with one of the new systems.
>>
>> In related news, I transfer a shiny to Agora to create the contract 
>> "Telnaior Asset Holding Contract (TAHC)":
>> {
>> Telnaior CAN amend, repeal, or retitle this contract by announcement. This 
>> contract accepts all assets. Telnaior can cause this contract to transfer 
>> any asset in its possession by announcement.
>> }
>>
>> I transfer all of my shinies to TAHC.
>>
>> (VJ Rada's scam attempt irritated me, sorry)
> I duly cause Agora to distribute the following payments:
>
> Tue, 21 Nov 2017 09:14:17 ? Telnaior paid Agora 1 sh.
>
> In total, 1 shiny must be distributed. I cause Agora to pay as follows:
>
> * 1 sh. to Telnaior (0 -> 1 sh.)
>
> Enjoy your free contract! I’m not sure whether this contract has fulfilled 
> its purpose, so I’ll refrain from destroying it, but I will note that any 
> player can destroy it with two consent, for any reason, excepting that 
> “Players SHOULD NOT use the methods in this paragraph to further their 
> private interests."
>
> This contract will not be exempt from sustenance payments, but I doubt 
> they’ll tick fast enough to matter for your purposes.
>
> -o
>

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Agoran Credit Union]

[Owen Jacobson]

> On Nov 21, 2017, at 5:17 AM, Madeline  wrote:
> 
> ...Wait, so what stops me from taking a 45-shiny loan then using my bills to 
> withdraw everything else in the ACU and cease being a party? Not gonna do it 
> because it's a cool idea that I don't want to wreck, but…

Oh, maybe I phrased the policy poorly. That’s intended to be a 45 _Bill_ loan, 
if you have 45 Shinies on deposit. The actual numbers almost certainly need 
tinkering, but it’s meant to be a small enough fraction that the temptation to 
default is limited.

-o



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Agoran Credit Union]

[Owen Jacobson]

> On Nov 21, 2017, at 5:17 AM, Madeline  wrote:
> 
> ...Wait, so what stops me from taking a 45-shiny loan then using my bills to 
> withdraw everything else in the ACU and cease being a party? Not gonna do it 
> because it's a cool idea that I don't want to wreck, but…

The loans will likely be issued in the form of pledges.

I didn’t put a lot of work into working out the terms; I might need to tinker 
with that (with the consent of the ACU members, since they’ll be able to unseat 
me if I ram it through without talking to them) but I think it’s fixable, and 
defrauding a lender like that seems like an obvious Blue Card.

-o



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

DIS: Re: BUS: [Agoran Credit Union]

[Madeline]

...Wait, so what stops me from taking a 45-shiny loan then using my 
bills to withdraw everything else in the ACU and cease being a party? 
Not gonna do it because it's a cool idea that I don't want to wreck, but...



On 2017-11-21 21:13, Telnaior wrote:

Sure, that works for me.
I cause TAHC to transfer all 45 shinies to Telnaior, then destroy TAHC.
I become a party to The Agoran Credit Union, and transfer all 45 
shinies in my possession to The Agoran Credit Union, gaining 450 Bills 
in return (for a total of 490 in my possession).



On 2017-11-21 21:03, Owen Jacobson wrote:

I need a sanity check, but I think all of these actions work.

I pay Agora 1 sh. to create a contract titled “The Agoran Credit 
Union”, with the text:


{
 Any player CAN become a party to this contract by announcement. 
Any party
 other than the Chair CAN cease to be a party (syn. leave the 
Institute) by

 announcement.

 If o is a party to this contract, e is the Chair. Any party CAN 
amend the

 contract by announcement to remove this paragraph.

 The Chair CAN nominate any party as the new Chair by 
announcement. A party
 to this contract CAN nominate any party to this contract as the 
new Chair
 with 2 support from parties to this contract, other than the 
nominee. In
 either case, the most-recently nominated party CAN become the 
Chair by
 announcement. A player who ceases to be a party to this contract 
loses eir

 nomination.

 The Chair CAN, at any time, amend or destroy this contract 
without 2

 objections from parties to this contract.

 This contract is willing to accept Shinies.

 Bills are a private, liquid, indestructibe currency. The Chair 
is the
 Recordkeepor of Bills. The Chair CAN cause Agora to transfer 
Bills it owns
 to this contract by announcement, and SHALL do so in a timely 
fashion when

 Agora owns any Bills.

 This contract is willing to accept Bills.

 Any party to this contract CAN pay this contract any number of 
Shinies to

 create ten times that number of Bills in eir possession.

 Any party to this contract CAN cause this contract to pay emself 
any number
 of Shinies by destroying ten times that number of Bills in eir 
possession.


 The Chair CAN, by announcement, create and destroy Bills in this 
contract's
 possession. The Chair MUST NOT create Bills in this manner if 
doing so
 would cause more than a number of Bills equal to fifteen times 
the number
 of Shinies owned by this contract to exist, and MUST, in a 
timely fashion,
 destroy Bills owned by this contract if more than that number of 
Bills exist.


 The Chair CAN, by announcement, cause this contract to transfer 
Bills it
 owns to any party. The Chair SHALL NOT use this ability other 
than to

 extend loans to this contract's parties.

 The Chair SHALL, in a timely fashion after they become the 
Chair, publish a
 fiscal policy document describing how they will manage the 
supply of Bills.

}

If I am not already a party to this contract, I become one, and am 
immediately appointed Chair.


I amend the contract to remove the paragraph

{
 If o is a party to this contract, e is the Chair. Any party CAN 
amend the

 contract by announcement to remove this paragraph.
}

As Chair of The Agoran Credit Union, I publish the following policy 
document:


{
 Bills are meant to be a gently inflationary medium of exchange, 
and a
 carrot to use to get people to take Shinies out of circulation 
and put them
 in the bank. With the members' consent, I hope to define systems 
for the
 bank to invest and recoup those Shinies, but even if that fails, 
dividing
 every Shiny into ten Bills while providing a reliable way to 
convert them
 back into Shinies as needed may help loosen the interpersonal 
economy a bit.


 As Chair, I will cause The Agoran Credit Union to extend a loan, on
 request, to any party who has no outstanding loans, up to an 
amount of
 Bills equal to the net number of Shinies that player has 
deposited with the
 Credit Union. (This implies that the excess fraction of Bills is 
capped at
 10%.) Loans SHALL be repayable within three months, repayable 
early without
 penalty, and extendable up to an additional three months at the 
discretion of

 the Chair.
}

I pay The Agoran Credit Union 64 Shinies to create 640 Bills in my 
possession.


I pay each player other than myself 40 Bills. Please enjoy this token 
gift of 4 sh. worth of a more granular currency.


-o

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: base currency discussion

[VJ Rada]

>I'm going to transfer that shiny to Aris as an apology for the blatant 
>plagiarism.

We've already found (informally, but w/ no noted dissent) that the
phrasing "I'm going to do this" or "I will do this" is insufficient
for a by announcement action.

Also, I dread to think what my D alignment is.

On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 8:33 PM, Telnaior  wrote:
> On 2017-11-21 20:24, Owen Jacobson wrote:
>>>
>>> On Nov 21, 2017, at 4:14 AM, Telnaior  wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2017-11-21 19:57, Owen Jacobson wrote:

 Incidentally, I think the distribution rules, fiddly though they are,
 are actually working as intended, but I want to get other players’
 perspective on them. The same handful of players have repeatedly benefitted
 from them without spending any Shinies, but we’ve reached a level where
 there are now a significant number of players with “the fewest” shinies,
 instead of only two.

 -o

>>> Worth noting this only lasts as long as people don't try to game the
>>> system, which has already been threatened with one of the new systems.
>>>
>>> In related news, I transfer a shiny to Agora to create the contract
>>> "Telnaior Asset Holding Contract (TAHC)":
>>> {
>>> Telnaior CAN amend, repeal, or retitle this contract by announcement.
>>> This contract accepts all assets. Telnaior can cause this contract to
>>> transfer any asset in its possession by announcement.
>>> }
>>>
>>> I transfer all of my shinies to TAHC.
>>>
>>> (VJ Rada's scam attempt irritated me, sorry)
>>
>> I duly cause Agora to distribute the following payments:
>>
>> Tue, 21 Nov 2017 09:14:17 ? Telnaior paid Agora 1 sh.
>>
>> In total, 1 shiny must be distributed. I cause Agora to pay as follows:
>>
>> * 1 sh. to Telnaior (0 -> 1 sh.)
>>
>> Enjoy your free contract! I’m not sure whether this contract has fulfilled
>> its purpose, so I’ll refrain from destroying it, but I will note that any
>> player can destroy it with two consent, for any reason, excepting that
>> “Players SHOULD NOT use the methods in this paragraph to further their
>> private interests."
>>
>> This contract will not be exempt from sustenance payments, but I doubt
>> they’ll tick fast enough to matter for your purposes.
>>
>> -o
>>
> I'm going to transfer that shiny to Aris as an apology for the blatant
> plagiarism.
>
> (Ugh I can feel the imaginary DM threatening to shift my alignment, I feel
> kinda bad >_>)
>
> (Oh well, in for a penny in for a pound)
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: base currency discussion

[Owen Jacobson]

> On Nov 21, 2017, at 4:00 AM, VJ Rada  wrote:
> 
> Inflation: the game could actually just be a fun game in itself. Like
> "race to 1 billion" type thing.

I knew I used bignums for a reason.

-o



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: DIS: base currency discussion

[VJ Rada]

Inflation: the game could actually just be a fun game in itself. Like
"race to 1 billion" type thing.

On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 7:57 PM, Owen Jacobson  wrote:
>
> On Nov 19, 2017, at 1:44 PM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
>
>> 2.  Is fairly granular/divisible (I mean, we count our monthly salaries
>> and costs in 10s or 100s of units, not 1s).  So people can use small
>> fractions of "pend units" or "CFJ units" to trade and auctions can turn
>> on small bid differences.
>
> I think this might be the core problem with our current system, honestly. 
> Because it’s so aggressively deflationary, the nominal value of 1 sh. climbs 
> to its upper bound (FV <= 5) or to infinity (FV = 0) as soon as it’s 
> practical to do so. The run on stamps is a good example of that in action: we 
> introduced several hundred new sh., nominally devaluing the currency by a 
> third, and yet 1 sh. is still worth an entire pend or an entire CFJ. There’s 
> no granularity.
>
> I doubt there’s any fix to this as long as
>
> 1. there are incentives to hoard shinies - and simply having things or 
> watching a number go up is often sufficient incentive, and
>
> 2. there is a finite number of shinies - i.e., all activity is zero-sum, 
> which is fairly well known to be problematic from a game theory perspective, 
> and
>
> 3. there are systems that can be gamed to turn a small number of shinies into 
> a larger number, however unreliably.
>
> Introducing an unlimited number of shinies affects the latter two, and the 
> systems currently proposed look like they should replace the aggressive 
> deflation of the Shiny system with inflation. I’m not sure it’s inflation 
> with a limit, but honestly, who cares? If it’s too aggressive, we can rein it 
> in in a few ways, and if it goes all Weimar-shaped, we can remonetize or 
> repeal the whole mess.
>
> In the context of Trigon’s _extremely_ comprehensive whole-game reform, it’s 
> possible that the whole purpose of a reserve currency changes, too. In 
> particular, Trigon’s done a fabulous job of attacking the _first_ of those 
> three causes, by creating reliable reasons to spend Shinies, which are tuned 
> to return the largest number of Shinies any one player or contract is willing 
> to part with to Agora to be distributed.
>
> Incidentally, I think the distribution rules, fiddly though they are, are 
> actually working as intended, but I want to get other players’ perspective on 
> them. The same handful of players have repeatedly benefitted from them 
> without spending any Shinies, but we’ve reached a level where there are now a 
> significant number of players with “the fewest” shinies, instead of only two.
>
> -o
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: base currency discussion

[Owen Jacobson]

On Nov 19, 2017, at 1:44 PM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:

> 2.  Is fairly granular/divisible (I mean, we count our monthly salaries
> and costs in 10s or 100s of units, not 1s).  So people can use small
> fractions of "pend units" or "CFJ units" to trade and auctions can turn
> on small bid differences.

I think this might be the core problem with our current system, honestly. 
Because it’s so aggressively deflationary, the nominal value of 1 sh. climbs to 
its upper bound (FV <= 5) or to infinity (FV = 0) as soon as it’s practical to 
do so. The run on stamps is a good example of that in action: we introduced 
several hundred new sh., nominally devaluing the currency by a third, and yet 1 
sh. is still worth an entire pend or an entire CFJ. There’s no granularity.

I doubt there’s any fix to this as long as

1. there are incentives to hoard shinies - and simply having things or watching 
a number go up is often sufficient incentive, and

2. there is a finite number of shinies - i.e., all activity is zero-sum, which 
is fairly well known to be problematic from a game theory perspective, and

3. there are systems that can be gamed to turn a small number of shinies into a 
larger number, however unreliably.

Introducing an unlimited number of shinies affects the latter two, and the 
systems currently proposed look like they should replace the aggressive 
deflation of the Shiny system with inflation. I’m not sure it’s inflation with 
a limit, but honestly, who cares? If it’s too aggressive, we can rein it in in 
a few ways, and if it goes all Weimar-shaped, we can remonetize or repeal the 
whole mess.

In the context of Trigon’s _extremely_ comprehensive whole-game reform, it’s 
possible that the whole purpose of a reserve currency changes, too. In 
particular, Trigon’s done a fabulous job of attacking the _first_ of those 
three causes, by creating reliable reasons to spend Shinies, which are tuned to 
return the largest number of Shinies any one player or contract is willing to 
part with to Agora to be distributed.

Incidentally, I think the distribution rules, fiddly though they are, are 
actually working as intended, but I want to get other players’ perspective on 
them. The same handful of players have repeatedly benefitted from them without 
spending any Shinies, but we’ve reached a level where there are now a 
significant number of players with “the fewest” shinies, instead of only two.

-o



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: CFJ 3597 judged FALSE

[VJ Rada]

The judgement's statement that the shiny is mine is dicta: absolutely
no relevance to the case's statement. Call another CFJ.

On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 7:37 PM, Owen Jacobson  wrote:
>
>> On Nov 19, 2017, at 6:36 PM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, 19 Nov 2017, Owen Jacobson wrote:
 Because V.J. Rada did not pay 1011 shinies as a single action, eir purchase
 failed, and this CFJ is FALSE. E retains all of eir shinies, because they 
 did
 not in the end accomplish their clearly stated goal.
>>>
>>> I intend, with two support, to file a motion to reconsider.
>>>
>>> I agree with the overarching logic of this decision, and expect that the 
>>> reconsidered
>>> judgement on the statement in question should stand, but I’m concerned that 
>>> this may
>>> set the precedent that an action intended to lead to a future consequence 
>>> can be un-done,
>>> retroactively, if the consequence fails.
>>
>> So if the Pend price is 2, and I try to spend 1 shiny in one message
>> "for the purpose of pending the proposal" and then try to do the
>> second one in a second message, you're suggesting that this counts
>> as retroactive un-doing?  It seems to me that, they way we've been
>> playing, the first one just fails right away because it didn't do the
>> intended thing.
>
> The last time I can remember that this came up, it was a new player’s attempt 
> to spend a shiny to pend a proposal, specifically[0], which I have no problem 
> arguing failed. Using vaguer wording (“towards the purchase of” rather than 
> “to purchase”) in the scam message was an intentional choice: I wanted to 
> eliminate or at least reduce this class of objection to the overall action by 
> using a broader, possibly-unregulated goal instead of a specific, regulated 
> action. I specifically wanted the individual payments to succeed 
> independently of the overall scam[1].
>
> I can’t think of any spots where we’ve had to deal with a partial payment on 
> a less-specific goal action, but I may be missing something.
>
> -o
>
> [0] bayushi’s exact wording was
>
>> I pay Agora 5 shinies to pay the Pending List Price for my proposal 
>> "Agoraculture v. 2.0" to flip its Imminence switch to "pending”.
>
>
> [1] in fact, that’s what I was expecting to see in the CFJ, although I admit 
> I’m pleasantly surprised by the actual judgement.
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: PAoaM v3: Not rushed this time and also better in general

[Owen Jacobson]

On Nov 19, 2017, at 7:19 PM, Reuben Staley  wrote:

> Re-enact rule 1994/0 (Power=2) "Ownership of Land" with the text:
> 
>  Any existent Land for which ownership has not been explicitly
>  changed belongs to Agora.
> 
>  Land belonging to Agora is called Public Land. Land belonging to
>  a contract is called Communal Land. Land belonging to any other
>  entity is called Private Land. Together, Communal Land and Private
>  Land are called Proprietary Land.

Each Unit of Land has an Owner switch, tracked by the Cartographer, whose 
values are any player, any Contract, or Agora (the default).

> Re-enact rule 1995/0 (Power=2) "Land Types" with the text:
> 
>  Each Unit of Land has a single Land Type. Changes to Land Type are
>  secured. In addition to Aether, the Land types Black and White are
>  defined.
> 
>  The phrase "Units of X", where X is a Land Type defined by the
>  Rules, is considered a synonym for "Units of Land that have Land
>  Type (or Subtype) X"
> 
>  When existent Land has not had its Type changed as explicitly
>  permitted by the Rules, or has a Type that is not currently
>  defined by the Rules, it is considered to have the Land Type of
>  Aether. Rules to the contrary nonwithstanding, Units of Aether
>  CANNOT be transferred from Agora, or owned by any entity other
>  than Agora. If Proprietary Land becomes Aether, the Cartographor
>  SHALL transfer it to Agora in a timely fashion.
> 
>  When an act specifies an alternating Land Type, the Land Type
>  chosen will be based upon the Land Type used as the previous
>  alternating Land Type, so that consecutive alternating Land Types
>  alternate between Black and White. In a timely fashion after a
>  Player notifies the Cartographor of an act that specifies an
>  alternating Land Type, the Cartographor MUST announce which Land
>  Type was used for that act.

Each Unit of Land has a Land Type switch, tracked by the Cartographor, whose 
values are “Black”, “White”, and “Aether” (the default). Changes to Land Type 
switches are secured. To “change the type” of, or to “transform”, a Unit of 
Land is to flip its Type switch. A “Unit of X” is a Unit of Land whose Land 
Type switch has the value X.

> Re-enact rule 1996/3 (Power=1), renaming it to "The Cartographor" with
> the text:
> 
>  The Cartographor is an office; its holder is recordkeepor for the
>  Land of Arcadia.
> 
>  The Cartographor's Weekly Report shall include:
> 
>  1. the ownership and land type of all existing land;
>  2. all changes in the ownership and land type of existing land
> since the most recent report;
>  3. the location for the previous week and the current week of each
> entity or instrument with a defined location;
>  4. all patches and their constituents; and
>  5. all facilities and their parent patches.

I volunteer, but as the primary designer, I believe you should have priority. 
This seems like a good chance to flex my registry system a bit, and with 361 
distinct land units to worry about (plus the current alternating state and the 
locations of players), this is an office where automation will pay dividends.

> Re-enact rule 1998/2 (Power=1) "Land Topology" with the text:
> 
>  Two Units of Land are Adjacent if they have the same Latitude, and
>  their Longitudes differ by exactly one; or they have the same
>  Longitude, and their Latitudes differ by exactly one.
> 
> [ Penguin Distance is never referenced again, so I got rid of it. ]
> 
>  Two Units of Land are said to be Connected by a specific Type of
>  Land if it is possible to travel from the first Unit to the second
>  by only travelling over Land of that specific Type.

It might be worth spelling out that it’s possible to travel from one land to an 
adjacent land unit, and not to any other land unit. I can see some of our more, 
uh, creative players applying some surprising interpretations of what it means 
to travel “over” land.

> Re-enact rule 1999/0 (Power=1) "Entity Location" with the text:
> 
>  Every Player has a single defined Location corresponding to a
>  single Longitude, Latitude pair.
> 
>  No other Entity can have a location unless it is defined in a rule
>  other than this one. Changes to the Location of an Entity are
>  secured. If an Entity is specified by this Rule as having a
>  defined Location, but its Location has not been explicity set or
>  changed, its Location is set to (0, 0).

These should probably be player switches. I’d prefer they were tracked by 
someone (and not the Registrar), but untracked player switches would also 
suffice:

Location is a player switch, tracked by the Cartographer, whose values are 
ordered pairs of integers where the first value is a valid Latitude, and the 
second is a valid Longitude. The default Location is (0, 0).