Re: DIS: Draft Reportor contract
On July 24, 2020 7:51:04 p.m. EDT, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion wrote: >On 7/24/20 1:47 PM, Falsifian via agora-discussion wrote: >> >> The Weekly Assignment can be transferred as follows: >> >> * If this contract owns it, any Reportor CAN take it by announcement. >> >> * If a Reportor consents to receive it, the owner CAN transfer it to >> that Reportor by announcement. >> >> * At the beginning of every week (immediately after responsibility >for >> the previous week is determined) it becomes owned by this contract. >> >> * If it would lack an owner or be owned by the Lost and Found >> department, it becomes owned by this contract. > >Players should probably be allowed to always return it to the contract, I was worried that if players can just release the assignment, there's no reason not to just grab it as soon as possible at the start of a week and then decide much later whether to actually do it. This way you can't deprive someone else of the assignment unless you're willing to do it yourself or receive blots. But maybe I'm overthinking it. Falsifian
DIS: Re: BUS: [Diplonomic 2020] BT2 Removal of R. Lee
F On Sat., 25 Jul. 2020, 11:34 pm Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-business, wrote: > As France has been eliminated, it is with great sadness that I cause R. > Lee to cease to be a Contestant in the 2020 Birthday Tournament, > pursuant to Regulation BT2. > -- > > Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate > Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth >
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Diplonomic 2020] BT2 Removal of R. Lee
On 7/25/2020 9:15 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote: > On 7/25/20 11:54 AM, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote: >> On 7/25/2020 6:33 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote: >>> As France has been eliminated, it is with great sadness that I cause R. >>> Lee to cease to be a Contestant in the 2020 Birthday Tournament, >>> pursuant to Regulation BT2. >>> >> >> H. Judge Publius, >> >> I'd like to ask for a clarification here that doesn't make a difference >> now, but might later. >> >> In classic diplomacy terms, a player is eliminated when e loses all eir >> supply centers? In this case, France was eliminated by those standards >> before the proposals were resolved, not after, and proposal resolution is >> "only after resolving moves and unit adjustments for that turn." So by >> that classic elimination definition (being part of unit adjustments) >> France's votes would not have counted for this past batch of proposals and >> "half the contestants" would be 3 not 3.5. I'm sure that doesn't change >> this turn's proposal results, but it might in the future. >> >> More generally, I'm also noting that "eliminated" or a synonym aren't >> defined in any of the mutable rules at all (unless I'm missing it). So >> we're wholly relying on the concept of "supply center elimination = player >> elimination", but it's squishy and not defined. For example, with >> Turkey's new powers, it implies that "support one Fleet" might be enough >> to keep em in the game, depending on how "elimination" is defined (supply >> centers versus supported pieces). >> >> The most reliable reading is probably "elimination is only when the >> Gamemaster removes a Contestant by announcement" but that leaves it wholly >> undefined in terms of practical game play, you could have ruled that >> France was off the board, but not eliminated from voting and still been >> consistent (we could still vote to bring em back, after all!) - or you >> could eliminate anyone when you felt like it, not that you would! >> >> So overall, just looking for some clarity on how you will consider >> "elimination" (both conditions and timing)? >> >> Ciao, >> Italy. >> > > I thought about this, and I obviously can't address whether it would > have made a difference in this specific instance, but generally my > interpretation was that if someone had not been eliminated during a turn > of voting, eir votes should count, therefore I decided that I would > eliminate them, which only occurs manually and is simply conceptually > connected to a lack of supply centers, after all other steps. If > supplyless countries get a role, I will ad R. Lee back and not remove > future Contestants, but the intent was that once a Contestant could no > longer submit orders, e would be removed. If a proposal changed that > though, I'd have no objection. To address the specific issue of Turkey, > I would not cause em to cease to be a Contestant. If any other country > were given a role after loss of supply, I would also allow them to > remain or cause them to return to being a Contestant. For that matter, > you could create new countries. > Thanks! Under the current rules anyway, "no possible orders to submit (after proposals are resolved)" seems like a good, clear conditional to work with. -G.
DIS: Re: OFF: [Diplonomic 2020] Resolution of Fall 1904
Updated https://agoranomic.org/omd-diplonomic-2020-maps/.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Diplonomic 2020] BT2 Removal of R. Lee
On 7/25/20 11:54 AM, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote: > > On 7/25/2020 6:33 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote: >> As France has been eliminated, it is with great sadness that I cause R. >> Lee to cease to be a Contestant in the 2020 Birthday Tournament, >> pursuant to Regulation BT2. >> > > H. Judge Publius, > > I'd like to ask for a clarification here that doesn't make a difference > now, but might later. > > In classic diplomacy terms, a player is eliminated when e loses all eir > supply centers? In this case, France was eliminated by those standards > before the proposals were resolved, not after, and proposal resolution is > "only after resolving moves and unit adjustments for that turn." So by > that classic elimination definition (being part of unit adjustments) > France's votes would not have counted for this past batch of proposals and > "half the contestants" would be 3 not 3.5. I'm sure that doesn't change > this turn's proposal results, but it might in the future. > > More generally, I'm also noting that "eliminated" or a synonym aren't > defined in any of the mutable rules at all (unless I'm missing it). So > we're wholly relying on the concept of "supply center elimination = player > elimination", but it's squishy and not defined. For example, with > Turkey's new powers, it implies that "support one Fleet" might be enough > to keep em in the game, depending on how "elimination" is defined (supply > centers versus supported pieces). > > The most reliable reading is probably "elimination is only when the > Gamemaster removes a Contestant by announcement" but that leaves it wholly > undefined in terms of practical game play, you could have ruled that > France was off the board, but not eliminated from voting and still been > consistent (we could still vote to bring em back, after all!) - or you > could eliminate anyone when you felt like it, not that you would! > > So overall, just looking for some clarity on how you will consider > "elimination" (both conditions and timing)? > > Ciao, > Italy. > I thought about this, and I obviously can't address whether it would have made a difference in this specific instance, but generally my interpretation was that if someone had not been eliminated during a turn of voting, eir votes should count, therefore I decided that I would eliminate them, which only occurs manually and is simply conceptually connected to a lack of supply centers, after all other steps. If supplyless countries get a role, I will ad R. Lee back and not remove future Contestants, but the intent was that once a Contestant could no longer submit orders, e would be removed. If a proposal changed that though, I'd have no objection. To address the specific issue of Turkey, I would not cause em to cease to be a Contestant. If any other country were given a role after loss of supply, I would also allow them to remain or cause them to return to being a Contestant. For that matter, you could create new countries. -- Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth
DIS: Re: BUS: [Diplonomic 2020] BT2 Removal of R. Lee
On 7/25/2020 6:33 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote: > As France has been eliminated, it is with great sadness that I cause R. > Lee to cease to be a Contestant in the 2020 Birthday Tournament, > pursuant to Regulation BT2. > H. Judge Publius, I'd like to ask for a clarification here that doesn't make a difference now, but might later. In classic diplomacy terms, a player is eliminated when e loses all eir supply centers? In this case, France was eliminated by those standards before the proposals were resolved, not after, and proposal resolution is "only after resolving moves and unit adjustments for that turn." So by that classic elimination definition (being part of unit adjustments) France's votes would not have counted for this past batch of proposals and "half the contestants" would be 3 not 3.5. I'm sure that doesn't change this turn's proposal results, but it might in the future. More generally, I'm also noting that "eliminated" or a synonym aren't defined in any of the mutable rules at all (unless I'm missing it). So we're wholly relying on the concept of "supply center elimination = player elimination", but it's squishy and not defined. For example, with Turkey's new powers, it implies that "support one Fleet" might be enough to keep em in the game, depending on how "elimination" is defined (supply centers versus supported pieces). The most reliable reading is probably "elimination is only when the Gamemaster removes a Contestant by announcement" but that leaves it wholly undefined in terms of practical game play, you could have ruled that France was off the board, but not eliminated from voting and still been consistent (we could still vote to bring em back, after all!) - or you could eliminate anyone when you felt like it, not that you would! So overall, just looking for some clarity on how you will consider "elimination" (both conditions and timing)? Ciao, Italy.
