Re: DIS: Proto-contract: the Dragon Corporation (the new TTC Corporation)
On Sat, Feb 15, 2020 at 5:01 PM AIS523--- via agora-discussion wrote: > On Sat, 2020-02-15 at 16:54 -0500, Tanner Swett via agora-discussion > wrote: > > All other provisions of this contract notwithstanding, this contract > > does not permit any entity to act on behalf of any other entity. This > > contract cannot be amended to remove this paragraph or to add any > > provision which contradicts this paragraph. > [snip] > > > > If the Dragon Corporation owns a zombie talisman, then the President > > is permitted to act on behalf of that zombie's master to act on > > behalf of that zombie. > > I think something is wrong here. Naaah. Yeah, good point. I guess I'll just remove the "this contract does not permit any entity to act on behalf of any other entity" thing, unless someone has a better idea? —Warrigal
Re: DIS: Proto-contract: the Dragon Corporation (the new TTC Corporation)
On Sat, 2020-02-15 at 16:54 -0500, Tanner Swett via agora-discussion wrote: > All other provisions of this contract notwithstanding, this contract > does not permit any entity to act on behalf of any other entity. This > contract cannot be amended to remove this paragraph or to add any > provision which contradicts this paragraph. [snip] > > If the Dragon Corporation owns a zombie talisman, then the President > is permitted to act on behalf of that zombie's master to act on > behalf of that zombie. I think something is wrong here. -- ais523
DIS: Proto-contract: the Dragon Corporation (the new TTC Corporation)
{{{
## Bylaw 1: Definition
This contract is named "the Dragon Corporation". The purpose of the
Dragon Corporation is to earn as much money as possible for its
shareholders.
All other provisions of this contract notwithstanding, this contract
does not permit any entity to act on behalf of any other entity. This
contract cannot be amended to remove this paragraph or to add any
provision which contradicts this paragraph.
Shares of Dragon stock (also known as "shares of DRGN", or, in this
contract, "shares") are a currency whose purpose is to represent
ownership of the Dragon Corporation. An entity which owns at least one
share is known as a shareholder.
If, at any time, the Dragon Corporation or the Lost and Found Department
owns any shares, then those shares are destroyed.
Any person CAN, by announcement, become a party to this contract or
cease to be a party to this contract.
Wherever this contract states that an entity becomes a party to this
contract or ceases to be a party to this contract, all parties to this
contract are considered to consent to this change.
## Bylaw 2: Proposals
Any member CAN, by announcement, submit a Corporate Proposal. A
Corporate Proposal must have exactly one of the types defined by this
contract. Thereafter, any shareholder CAN vote FOR or AGAINST that
proposal by announcement, or retract such a vote, which causes the vote
to become null and void. Whenever a shareholder votes, all of eir
previous votes on the same proposal are implicitly retracted.
If a Corporate Proposal was submitted more than 7 but fewer than 21 days
ago, and the proposal has approval (as defined in other bylaws), and the
proposal has not been applied, then any member may, by announcement,
apply the proposal, which has effects as defined in other bylaws.
Members SHALL NOT submit, vote for, or apply proposals that are
egregiously unfair to other shareholders (such as a proposal which takes
or revokes shares from minority shareholders without just compensation).
## Bylaw 3: Amendment Proposals
An Amendment Proposal is a type of Corporate Proposal. An Amendment
Proposal has approval if at least one shareholder has voted FOR it, and
the number of shares owned by shareholders who have voted FOR it is at
least 2 times the number of shares owned by shareholders who have voted
AGAINST it.
When an Amendment Proposal is applied, the following occur:
1. Each party to this contract who has not consented to the application
of the proposal ceases to be a party to this contract. A party who has
voted FOR a proposal consents to the application of that proposal,
unless e has publicly stated otherwise at or after the time at which e
voted FOR it.
2. This contract is modified as described in the proposal.
However, the application of an Amendment Proposal is INEFFECTIVE unless,
in the same message, the entity who applies the proposal also publishes
a text which is labeled as being the text of this contract after the
application. E SHOULD, at that point, publish intent to ratify that
text without objection.
## Bylaw 4: Ordinary Proposals
An Ordinary Proposal is a type of Corporate Proposal. An Ordinary
Proposal has approval if the number of shares owned by shareholders
voting FOR it is greater than the number of shares owned by shareholders
voting AGAINST it.
When an Ordinary Proposal is applied, assets are created, destroyed,
and/or transferred as described in the proposal; and entities may
create, destroy, and/or transfer assets as permitted in the proposal.
Such permission expires 30 days after the proposal is applied.
After an Ordinary Proposal is applied, the person who applied it SHOULD
publish a description of its effects in a timely fashion, including all
balances of assets defined by this contract which were affected by the
proposal.
## Bylaw 5: Bonds and Banknotes
Perpetual Dragon bonds (hereinafter "bonds") are a currency. Banknotes
are a currency.
At the beginning of each Agoran quarter, each entity is awarded a number
of banknotes equal to the number of bonds that e owns.
If an entity owns a banknote, any party to this contract CAN redeem the
banknote by transferring 1 coin from the Dragon Corporation to that
entity; the banknote is then destroyed.
## Bylaw 6: Recordkeeping
If a party to this contract owns more shares than any other party to
this contract, then that party becomes the President of the Dragon
Corporation, if e is not already the President. The former President
SHALL publicly inform the new President of this event in a timely
fashion.
The President is the recordkeepor of all assets defined by this
contract, except those for which this contract specifies a different
recordkeepor.
## Bylaw 7: IPO
Within 90 days after this contract is created, any entity may buy a
share by announcement; in the same message, the entity must transfer 10
coins and/or banknotes to the Dragon Corporation as a cost for this
action. When e does this, e is awarded 1 share.
Within 90 days after
DIS: Proto-contract: the Zombie Market
{{{
This contract is named "the Zombie Market".
Any entity CAN become a party to this contract by announcement. Any
party to this contract CAN cease to be a party to this contract by
announcement, unless e is the master of a zombie and does not own that
zombie's Talisman.
For each zombie whose master is a party to this contract, that zombie's
Talisman is an asset, which, by default, is owned by that zombie's
master.
The owner of a zombie's talisman CAN act on behalf of that zombie's
master to act on behalf of that zombie. The master of a zombie SHALL NOT
act on behalf of a zombie, or intentionally cease to be the master of
that zombie, without the consent of the owner of that zombie's talisman.
The preceding not withstanding, the master of a zombie MAY transfer the
zombie to the owner of that zombie's talisman.
If the owner of a zombie's talisman is a contract, then any entity CAN
act on behalf of that zombie's master to act on behalf of that zombie
according to the terms of that contract. That contract is considered to
consent to an action if its text says so.
}}}
—Warrigal
DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Re-renumbered Index: Proposals 8322-8341
On Sat, 15 Feb 2020 at 14:57, Tanner Swett via agora-business wrote: > > 8341* Alexis, G. 3.0 Support of the Person > AGAINST; I don't see the purpose of this, and it's confusing for "With > 2 Support" to technically mean "with 3 supporters, but you count as a > supporter". > > —Warrigal I think you may have missed the original explanations. The primary purpose of the proposal is to amend the rules of Agoran consent to better line up with how voting usually works. Currently, if an AI=2 proposal is submitted and the author and one other player voted in favour, and one other player voted against, then (assuming equal voting strength) it passes. But with Agoran consent, if someone attempts to do something with 2 Agoran consent, and one other person supports and one objects, then the action cannot be performed. In fact, it can't even be performed with two other supporters if there is a single objector. The initiator is ineligible as a supporter, and on top of that, the requirement that the supporters be greater than the objectors means that 2:1 is not enough. So the two parts are to make it so that the initiator can support (you can vote for your own proposal) and to make it so that when N>1, a "tie" is resolved in favour of allowing the action. Again, this is just to bring it into consistency with how proposal voting works. However, if the initiator is ineligible to support the intent, then they simply do not count. They must find an additional support to replace their own. This is again the same as what would happen if someone was ineligible to vote on their own proposal. But then it makes sense to apply the same logic to N support. And in particular, if we had something such as "A Doodad CAN be awarded to any player with 2 support; the recipient is ineligible to support this intent." then the typical case would be that three people other than the recipient would be required to agree: the initiator and 2 other supporters. But if someone wanted to award it to emself, then e would need to find an additional friend to do so. I think, personally, that "with 2 support" is still the more logical name for this, and if you disagree, I'd prefer to deal with that by voting on a separate proposal rather than voting this one down. -Alexis
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Re-renumbered Index: Proposals 8322-8341
On Sat, Feb 15, 2020, 10:43 Jason Cobb via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > Did we ever get the results from the blackjack game? I think at least > one person won their hand. > Yowch, it looks like I botched sending the final result message. I've sent that now. —Warrigal >
DIS: Re: OFF: [Herald] Weekly Report: The Honour Roll
On 2/15/2020 9:28 AM, Alexis Hunt via agora-official wrote: > > =0 Falsifian > =0 ATMunn > Minor note: I tended to keep 0s on the list for the first report or two after they became 0s (so it was clear that they had changed recently in case anyone wanted to doubt the entries) then drop them. Otherwise there would be a lot more explicit 0s on the list.
DIS: Re: BUS: Missed report
On 2/15/2020 9:59 AM, Timon Walshe-Grey via agora-business wrote: > > These fines are, collectively, forgivable. Alexis CAN, in a timely > fashion, expunge 2 blots from emself by publishing a formal apology of > at least 200 words and including the words "shambolic", "muddlement", > "sanity", "hearthflame", "nappe" and "INTERCAL", explaining eir error, > shame, remorse and ardent desire for self-improvement. > > (I think this works: to my knowledge, there is nothing in the rules > saying an apology can only count for one fine.) This would be another good memorandum. The strict issue may be that an apology allows the expunging of "P blots from emself, where P is the minimum of the value of the fine and 3". So what's the value of P in this case? (it seems like each fine has a separate P). Of course, the other little issue is that this is one of those cases where it doesn't say "once" in terms of the expunging, so re-publishing the same apology multiple times could do the trick and then some. -G.
DIS: Re: BUS: since we're doing this now
On Mon, 10 Feb 2020 at 12:57, Timon Walshe-Grey via agora-business wrote: > I pay 1000 coins to win the game. > > -twg Can someone confirm for me that this is in fact the only outstanding win I have to resolve? I have lost track XD. -Alexis
DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Herald] The Scroll of Agora
On Fri, 14 Feb 2020 at 12:50, James Cook via agora-business wrote: > > > On February 8, twg and Falsifian were awarded the title of > > Champion, categorized as Renaissance and High Score, > > respectively. twg was awarded Associate of Nomic, and > > Gaelan was awarded Little Ricky Tables. > > CoE: I don't see Little Ricky Tables listed anywhere other than Recent > Changes. I haven't checked the other recent awards. > > - Falsifian Admitted; revision forthcoming.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Re-renumbered Index: Proposals 8322-8341
On Fri, 14 Feb 2020 at 14:28, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion wrote: > > On 2/14/20 2:12 PM, Timon Walshe-Grey via agora-business wrote: > >> 8323* Jason3.0 Secure Ribbons > > Conditional: AGAINST if Jason votes AGAINST; otherwise PRESENT. > > Undeniably a good idea, but I can't quite bring myself to give up on > > such a juicy scam target. > > > > [Apologies if this has already been sent, but I got failure notices.] > > One option would be to add some special language for black ribbons, > which would also make it clear that those are specifically for scam targets. I agree, it would also make quite clear that black ribbons are intended as a reward for a dictatorship at any power.
Re: DIS: [proto] Fix zombie auctions
On Fri, 14 Feb 2020 at 14:04, James Cook via agora-discussion wrote: > As I pointed out in response to Murphy's "Fix Auctions" proposal, I > don't think it works, because master is secured at power 2. > > How about this one? Still no mechanism by which Agora does it.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Re-renumbered Index: Proposals 8322-8341
On 2/15/20 9:39 AM, Tanner Swett via agora-discussion wrote: > On Fri, Feb 14, 2020, 14:12 Timon Walshe-Grey via agora-business < > agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > >>> 8331j Warrigal 1.7 Promissory cleanliness >> Conditional: AGAINST if Warrigal votes AGAINST; otherwise PRESENT. I >> don't object in principle, but, I mean, you didn't _have_ to set your >> pledge's expiry date a full year in the future... >> > I'm more than happy to be bound by the pledge for an entire year. :D > However, it might be convenient for the other players for the pledge to go > away sooner than that. > > —Warrigal Did we ever get the results from the blackjack game? I think at least one person won their hand. -- Jason Cobb
DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Re-renumbered Index: Proposals 8322-8341
On Fri, Feb 14, 2020, 14:12 Timon Walshe-Grey via agora-business < agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > 8331j Warrigal 1.7 Promissory cleanliness > Conditional: AGAINST if Warrigal votes AGAINST; otherwise PRESENT. I > don't object in principle, but, I mean, you didn't _have_ to set your > pledge's expiry date a full year in the future... > I'm more than happy to be bound by the pledge for an entire year. :D However, it might be convenient for the other players for the pledge to go away sooner than that. —Warrigal >
Re: DIS: Numbers and dependent actions
On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 8:51 PM Edward Murphy via agora-discussion wrote: > > "Without objection" and "without objections" both sound okay to me. I > > prefer the first, but I don't know why. Maybe I'm just used to it. > > The second makes it sound like there need to be objection/s/, plural, to > block the relevant action. I'd interpret it as only requiring one objection, myself. But "without objections" would be short for "without any objections", logically equivalent to "with 0 objections", but different from "without 0 objections". So it wouldn't be a matter of N defaulting to 0. Indeed, "any" effectively means "1 or more", and the "or more" is implied, so we're left with "without 1 objection". In any case, "without objection" is actually a stock phrase from parliamentary procedure. "Without objections" is also used sometimes, but not as often: https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=without+objection%2Cwithout+objections_insensitive=on_start=1500_end=2008=15=3=_url=t4%3B%2Cwithout%20objection%3B%2Cc0%3B%2Cs0%3B%3Bwithout%20objection%3B%2Cc0%3B%3Bwithout%20Objection%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BWithout%20objection%3B%2Cc0%3B.t4%3B%2Cwithout%20objections%3B%2Cc0%3B%2Cs0%3B%3Bwithout%20objections%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BWithout%20objections%3B%2Cc0
