Re: DIS: [attn. non-Contestants] Diplonomic Teammate Request
On 2020-07-09 1:59 a.m., ATMunn via agora-discussion wrote: Diplonomic 2020 is starting soon, and Aris and Trigon (a non-contestant) are planning to team up and play as one, and submit a proposal to allow it. Is there anyone else who was interested in playing but didn't get in in time? I would be happy to have a teammate. I'd also be happy to have a teammate. -- Falsifian
Re: DIS: [Protos] Some ideas I've been kicking around
ADoP is easy and should be 1, Arbitor should be 2, Herald should be 2. Distributor should be 0 (should be an option). On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 11:55 AM Falsifian via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > I like this idea a lot. As pointed out on Discord, there should be some > > initial complexity values. I thought I would suggest some: > > > > ADoP: 2 > > Arbitor: 1 > > Assessor: 3 > > Coopor: 1 > > Distributor: N/A? > > Herald: 1 > > I think Herald should be higher. E has a wide variety of duties: > tracking karma; tracking a long history of patent titles (the only other > report I'm aware of that's required to include a historical record is > the Registrar's monthly, but I think that's simple by comparison); > coordinating peer review and awarding of patent titles; not to mention > making sure the Birthday Tournament happens. > > Not sure if 2 or 3 is appropriate though. > > > Notary: 2 > > Prime Minister: 0 > > Promotor: 3 > > Referee: 2 > > Registrar: 1 > > Rulekeepor: 3 > > Speaker: 0 > > Tailor: 1 > > Treasuror: 2 > > Webmastor: 1 > > > > Again, just suggestions; I didn't put a ton of thought into these, and > > I'm sure some will disagree. But I think something like this would work > > for the initial values. > > > > > -- > Falsifian > -- >From R. Lee
Re: DIS: [Protos] Some ideas I've been kicking around
I like this idea a lot. As pointed out on Discord, there should be some initial complexity values. I thought I would suggest some: ADoP: 2 Arbitor: 1 Assessor: 3 Coopor: 1 Distributor: N/A? Herald: 1 I think Herald should be higher. E has a wide variety of duties: tracking karma; tracking a long history of patent titles (the only other report I'm aware of that's required to include a historical record is the Registrar's monthly, but I think that's simple by comparison); coordinating peer review and awarding of patent titles; not to mention making sure the Birthday Tournament happens. Not sure if 2 or 3 is appropriate though. Notary: 2 Prime Minister: 0 Promotor: 3 Referee: 2 Registrar: 1 Rulekeepor: 3 Speaker: 0 Tailor: 1 Treasuror: 2 Webmastor: 1 Again, just suggestions; I didn't put a ton of thought into these, and I'm sure some will disagree. But I think something like this would work for the initial values. -- Falsifian
DIS: Test
No doubt this message will spur a flurry of suspicion and precautionary objections, but after being stuck with a temporary email client for a month, my main email client has started working for receiving Agoran email again. I'm therefore hoping that it will also be currently capable of sending, in which case I may be able to use my main email client for both sending and receiving Agoran email for the first time in years, and this is the message I'm using to test that. -- ais523
Re: DIS: [Treasuror] Second draft of auction regulations
On 2020-07-06 11:42 p.m., Reuben Staley via agora-discussion wrote: I'm going to start the card auctions in a bit but I wanted to reply to this feedback first. On 2020-07-03 20:14, Falsifian via agora-discussion wrote: Looks mostly good. We should probably require lot winners to pay their bid. I don't know if SHALLs in these regulations are enforceable, but might as well try. (If we're going to do that, I guess that would entail REQUIRE-ing bidders in sealed bid auctions to reveal their bids?) The only reason they aren't SHALLed is because I was unsure if they would be enforceable. What are everyone's thoughts on this? Taking another look at R2545, I don't see any reason SHALLS in auction definitions would actually cause anything to be a rule violation. The rule just authorizes the auctioneer to do various things. I guess you might catch someone under No Faking if they clearly had no intention of paying up. Perhaps it would be better to require advance payment of the bids. I think a few months ago, before e deregistered, Alexis said e was going to draft something involving an escrow. Maybe I'm overcomplicating it, but one way to do it would be to create a contract that issues non-transferrable bonds in exchange for the auction currency; only let people bid up to the number of bonds they own; and allow non-winners to cash in their bonds after the auction ends (or when it's clear they can't be a winner). -- Falsifian
DIS: Re: OFF: [Diplonomic 2020] Daily Status of Play
Good luck and have fun to all!
On 7/9/2020 7:56 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-official
wrote:
It is now 00:00 UTC on July 10, 2020, so the first official negotiating
phase now begins.
There are currently a few proposals open, which I reproduce here:
"Team Play" by Aris
{
Amend Diplonomic Rule 7 to read in full:
7. Contestants may seek the assistance of non-Contestants. If any do so,
they SHALL notify the Judge and publicly announce the identities of any
such non-Contestants and what assistance they will provide. This could
include negotiating on eir behalf, providing feedback on orders, or
drafting proposals on eir behalf. Any notifications given under the
former section 7 of the Birthday Tournament regulations are considered
to have fulfilled this section of the Diplonomic 2020 rules.
A contestant CAN, by announcement, cause a person who consents to become
or cease to be eir teammate, provided the person is not another contestant
or the teammate of another contestant. Designating someone as a teammate
is considered a notification that the teammate may assist the contestant
in any manner. When these rules provide for certain contestants to win by
a certain method, the Gamemaster CAN include their teammates and SHALL do
so unless it is eir opinion that extraordinary circumstances render it
against the best interest of the tournament. Teammates are encouraged to
lie to and cheat other teams, and SHALL NOT engage in any behaviors
outside
of the tournament intended to influence its course; however, they
SHALL NOT
betray their teams.
}
omd's Proposal #1
{{
In the following passage of Diplonomic rule 15, change "24:00” to “18:00”:
{
At the beginning of each turn, there is a period, lasting from 0:00
UTC until 24:00 UTC on the same calendar day, in which negotiations
should occur.
}
[This moves 6 hours from the negotiation period to the order-submitting
period, making both 18 hours long, rather than 24 and 12 respectively.
The goal is to make it easier to avoid accidentally missing the
order-submitting period, even if large chunks of it are taken up by,
e.g., sleeping hours or work hours.]
}}
"Order Clarification" by ATMunn
{
Amend Diplonomic Rule 17 to read in full:
17. There are four possible orders: Hold, Move, Support, and Convoy. Not
giving a unit an order is interpreted as ordering it to hold.
A Hold order orders a unit to stay where it is.
A Move order orders a unit to move to a different province. Armies can
only move onto adjacent inland or coastal provinces. Fleets can only
move to adjacent water or coastal provinces. A Move order making use of
a Convoy must specify what Convoy paths it will use or conditionals to
determine such.
Support orders help another unit's action, whether or not it is a unit
of the same Great Power. An Army or Fleet can provide support to another
Army or Fleet. Support can be offensive or defensive. A unit cannot
support an order to or on a province which the supporting unit could not
move to itself.
A Convoy order orders a fleet in a water province to move an army from
an adjacent coastal province to another adjacent coastal province.
Multiple fleets may be used to convoy the same army, allowing an army to
be convoyed over multiple water provinces. If any fleet involved in a
convoy is dislodged, the convoy fails.
}
"Voting Fixes" by Aris
{
Amend Diplonomic Rule 8 to read in full:
8. At any time, any Contestant CAN submit a Proposal to change these
rules by announcement. Any Contestant CAN withdraw any Proposal e has
submitted by announcement. When a Proposal has been submitted but not
withdrawn, any Contestant CAN privately send a vote to the Judge, or
withdraw eir previous vote. When a Proposal has received a number of
non-withdrawn votes in favor greater than half the number of Contestants,
the Judge SHALL, in a timely fashion, and CAN enact the proposal by
publishing the new text of the rules and the number of votes in favor
and against. The Judge SHALL NOT reveal the votes of specific
Contestants.
}
--
ATMunn
friendly neighborhood russian notary here :)
DIS: Re: OFF: [Treasuror] [Weekly Report] Forbes 491
|DracoLotto | 0| 0| 0| 0| 0| 0| 0| 0| 0| You can remove this row now. (Besides owning nothing, it was also destroyed on June 29: https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-business/2020-June/043805.html -- Falsifian
DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Reportor] Last Week in Agora
On 2020-07-06 12:18 a.m., Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote: On 7/5/20 7:23 PM, Falsifian via agora-official wrote: Archived at https://github.com/AgoraNomic/Reportor/tree/master/weekly_summaries Previous reports were sent to the discussion list. Below is the report for the week of 2020-06-22..28. (Note: that's the week before the week that's currently ending. Sorry for the lag!) I transfer 5 coins to Falsifian (we have no public charity yet, so the press must be funded privately). Thanks, ATMunn and Jason. -- Falsifian
Re: DIS: [Diplonomic 2020] Bug in the Rules
On 7/9/2020 10:40 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion wrote: As a result of the phrasing of rule 8, it actually requires a 2-Contestant majority for anything to pass. I believe that this should be fixed by either allowing the Proposer to vote or counting the Proposer as a vote in favor. It's also worth noting that rule 8 currently provides no way to withdraw votes. -- ATMunn friendly neighborhood russian notary here :)
DIS: [Diplonomic 2020] Bug in the Rules
As a result of the phrasing of rule 8, it actually requires a 2-Contestant majority for anything to pass. I believe that this should be fixed by either allowing the Proposer to vote or counting the Proposer as a vote in favor. -- Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth
Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Diplonomic 2020] Promulgation of Rules, Assignment of Powers, and Start of Play
On 7/9/20 10:21 AM, ATMunn via agora-discussion wrote: > On 7/8/2020 9:21 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-official > wrote: >> 8. At any time, any Contestant CAN submit a Proposal to change these >> rules by announcement. Any Contestant CAN withdraw any Proposal e has >> submitted by announcement. When a Proposal has been submitted but not >> withdrawn, any Contestant other than the Proposer CAN privately send a >> vote to the Judge. When a Proposal has received a number of >> non-withdrawn votes in favor greater than half the number of >> Contestants, the Judge SHALL, in a timely fashion, and CAN enact the >> proposal by publishing the new text of the rules and the number of votes >> in favor and against. The Judge SHALL NOT reveal the votes of specific >> Contestants. > > I assume that the valid votes are the same as the standard Agoran votes > on referenda? > No, only votes FOR or AGAINST are acceptable. -- Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth
DIS: Re: OFF: [Diplonomic 2020] Promulgation of Rules, Assignment of Powers, and Start of Play
On 7/8/2020 9:21 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-official wrote: 8. At any time, any Contestant CAN submit a Proposal to change these rules by announcement. Any Contestant CAN withdraw any Proposal e has submitted by announcement. When a Proposal has been submitted but not withdrawn, any Contestant other than the Proposer CAN privately send a vote to the Judge. When a Proposal has received a number of non-withdrawn votes in favor greater than half the number of Contestants, the Judge SHALL, in a timely fashion, and CAN enact the proposal by publishing the new text of the rules and the number of votes in favor and against. The Judge SHALL NOT reveal the votes of specific Contestants. I assume that the valid votes are the same as the standard Agoran votes on referenda? -- ATMunn friendly neighborhood russian notary here :)
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Diplonomic Proposal] Longer Order Period
at 12:41 AM, Aris Merchant via agora-discussion wrote: This seems unnecessary? Rule 15 says "Orders CAN be submitted during the negotiations period and can be changed at any time when orders could be submitted.” Sigh, I seem to be having a lot of “learn to read” moments lately...
DIS: Re: BUS: [Diplonomic Proposal] Longer Order Period
On Wed, Jul 8, 2020 at 11:44 PM omd via agora-business
wrote:
>
> I submit the following as a “Proposal to change these rules” as defined by
> the Diplonomic 2020 rules (but not as an Agoran proposal):
> {{
> In the following passage of Diplonomic rule 15, change "24:00” to “18:00”:
> {
> At the beginning of each turn, there is a period, lasting from 0:00
> UTC until 24:00 UTC on the same calendar day, in which negotiations
> should occur.
> }
> [This moves 6 hours from the negotiation period to the order-submitting
> period, making both 18 hours long, rather than 24 and 12 respectively. The
> goal is to make it easier to avoid accidentally missing the
> order-submitting period, even if large chunks of it are taken up by, e.g.,
> sleeping hours or work hours.]
This seems unnecessary? Rule 15 says "Orders CAN be submitted during
the negotiations
period and can be changed at any time when orders could be submitted."
-Aris
Re: DIS: [attn. non-Contestants] Diplonomic Teammate Request
I'm up for being counsel for free but this would be my first game lol. But yeah if you'd like to bounce ideas off someone, I'm up for it. On Thu, Jul 9, 2020 at 4:00 AM ATMunn via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > Diplonomic 2020 is starting soon, and Aris and Trigon (a non-contestant) > are planning to team up and play as one, and submit a proposal to allow it. > > Is there anyone else who was interested in playing but didn't get in in > time? I would be happy to have a teammate. > -- > ATMunn > friendly neighborhood russian notary here :) >
