DIS: Re: BUS: (no subject)
This is not a working link if you aren't aware.; Regards On Fri, Oct 13, 2023 at 9:18 AM nix via agora-business < agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > file:///tmp/Screenshot_2023-10-12_17-16-26.png > -- >From R. Lee
DIS: Re: BUS: [Herald] Granting Champion
On Wed, Feb 8, 2023 at 10:30 AM nix via agora-business < agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > On 2/5/23 20:52, secretsnail9 via agora-business wrote: > > I notice the rock garden, specifying Murphy. > > I award Murphy the patent title of Champion. Currently planning to > record it as Rock Gardening. > > -- > nix > Herald, Collector > > > There are already stone wins in the Scroll recorded as by 'Gauntlet', though after the flavor change that isn't ideal. But under many names and iterations of points we've still always used the name 'High Score', so all stone wins should have the same name. I suggest champion by Masonry for all of those wins. -- >From R. Lee
Re: DIS: A proto
I think that you don't need to ask 'hard questions' about why trans people are trans. I'm quite open about my gender and why I'm trans, but I don't think anything I have said in any way invited 'hard questions' to be posed about the subject. Sure, I have spoken from a more academic perspective about what I believe about gender and my own struggles with the subject - because I believed at that time I wouldn't receive absurd pushback from you or your ilk. I will not discuss those things again, which is actually quite sad for me because some of these people are my friends and I want to be open with my friends. There may be a forum for discussing 'hard questions' of gender and race - I believe the rest of us unanimously agree that any agora nomic forum is not it. Open discussion is one thing, but making strange insinuations about how trans women are actually men or randomly bringing up biological racial differences and blaming political correctness out of nowhere is not it, chief. On Wed, 31 Aug 2022, 18:48 Madrid via agora-discussion, < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > Before I get dogpiled for being called a "racist" - different races, in a > very general way, have different medical needs. > > What I mainly wanted to bring up back then was that it puts those in a > racial minority at a disadvantage when general medical culture seems (often > unintentionally) catered towards a particular racial majority and > 'political correctness' silences voices that want to bring up that these > minorities generally have different inborn vulnerabilities than the > majority. It seems racist to say "darker skinned people need more sunlight > to be healthy". But it's true. I'm darker skinned myself, I want to know > these things to get the vitamin D I need! This doesn't only apply to skin > color, but ultimately, what's more important, political correctness, or > people's health? > > About trans people, I think I'm the only guy making hard questions about > the phenomenon. I curious about these things that people seem so hushed > about. Like, for example: > > Why are the vast majority of women on Agora, trans? > > Stone me, burn me on the stake, I am legitimately curious. > > On Wednesday, August 31, 2022, Sarah S. via agora-discussion < > agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > > On Wed, Aug 31, 2022 at 9:40 AM Sarah S. > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 31, 2022 at 3:32 AM Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion < > > > agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > > > > >> > > >> On 8/30/2022 9:25 AM, ais523 via agora-discussion wrote: > > >> > On Tue, 2022-08-30 at 18:14 +0200, Madrid via agora-discussion > wrote: > > >> >> Its true that I don't care much about upholding ancient tradition. > > >> >> > > >> >> It's nomic, a game of change, and I'm very willing to see Spivak > > >> >> removed. > > >> > > >> [snip] > > >> > > >> > I probably wouldn't object to a widespread change to singular-they > if > > >> > the general view of the playerlist is that that would be preferable, > > >> > but it would be likely to add a little extra confusion for no real > > >> > benefit (the distinction between singular "e" and plural "they" > makes > > >> > it easier to parse what a rule is saying). > > >> > > > >> > > >> Just as a minor clarification, I'm not arguing for Spivak per se based > > on > > >> "ancient tradition" but more along the lines you suggest here, of > > >> evaluating our community standards continuously but generally > > >> respectfully. The important point for me is that this is not just an > > >> isolated quibble over a single instance of language use (and a single > > >> unfortunate comparison), but rather an inability to reach a reasonable > > >> accommodation with the current community's longstanding/currently- > > standing > > >> practices. > > >> > > >> That stuff is just exhausting and not fun in any gaming group, beyond > > any > > >> historical points or future changes. > > >> > > >> -G. > > >> > > >> I personally support spivak - any change to referring to players > always > > > by the singular 'they' would probably offend me - I'm not a they, I'm a > > > she. E/em pronouns, as something that are generally confined within the > > > game, don't annoy me in the same way that 'they' would and I enjoy our > > odd > > > little game pronouns. That said, Agora Is A Nomic and people are free > to > > > advocate changing to the use of preferred pronouns if they like - this > > > doesn't bother me particularly much when Madrid does it. I too find > them > > > odd to adapt to (and get them wrong quite often), and blognomic did > start > > > with spivak then abolish them many years ago. And yes, I do think > > > traditions ought to be questioned - a substantial majority of the > player > > > base is newer and if they choose to revise something that doesn't work > > for > > > them, they should do so. > > > > > > What bothers me rather more is Madrid's attitude to trans people and > > women > > > expressed
DIS: Re: BUS: (@Promotor)
On Wed, Aug 31, 2022 at 2:42 AM Forest Sweeney via agora-business <
agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> (I'm not sure where discussions are, but I think something needs to be done
> right now. A proposal will take some time to pass anyways, but at least it
> will be something to look towards as this unravels.
>
> If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of
> the oppressor.
> - Desmond Tutu
> )
>
> I submit the following proposal:
> {
> Title: Temporary Justice
> Adoption Index: 1.0
> Author: 4st
> Co-author(s):
>
> Destroy all coins in Madrid's possession.
> Destroy all stamps in Madrid's possession.
> Grant Madrid 100 blots.
> Remove all patent titles from Madrid.
> }
>
> --
> 4st
> Referee
>
> [image: width=]
> <
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail
> >
> Virus-free.www.avast.com
> <
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail
> >
> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>
I can't agree with removing patent titles - they are a historical record
rather than something that enables a player to play the game.
--
>From R. Lee
DIS: Re: [@Notary] Re: BUS: [@Treasuror] Black List Clean-Up
On Fri, Mar 18, 2022 at 3:42 PM secretsnail9 via agora-business <
agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 13, 2022 at 2:24 PM nix via agora-business <
> agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
>
> > I intend, without objection, to transfer 5000 coins from the L to
> > myself.
> >
> > I intend, without objection, to transfer 1 wincard from the L to
> myself.
> >
>
> I table each of the above intents again.
>
> If it clears things up, "myself" refers to me.
>
> Having received no objections, I transfer 5000 coins from the L to
> myself
>
> Having received no objections, I transfer 1 wincard from the L to
> myself.
>
> This may work because each intent is ripe (tabled within the past 14 days)
> and mature (tabled at least 4 days ago).
>
> I perform the following actions 5 times:
> {
> On Sun, Mar 13, 2022 at 2:24 PM nix via agora-business <
> agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
>
> > I intend, without objection, to transfer 1 wincard from the L to
> myself.
>
>
> I table the above intent again.
>
> Having received no objections, I transfer 1 wincard from the L to
> myself.
>
> }
>
> Precedent on this? This seems way too broken to work, and like I'm probably
> missing something.
> --
> secretsnail
>
'Myself' coming from nix surely is just a substitute for nix.
If I said quang means snail for the purpose of this message, quang means
snail. Similarly, the word 'myself' implcitly operates in that way -
'myself' refers to the tabler of the intent.
--
>From R. Lee
DIS: Re: BUS: [DoV?] Apathy resolution
In the usual case I would have been emailed or messaged in some way which means I would be able to see the message. I was offline the whole time this message was unedited. It can't be to me if it never reached me at any point. On Mon, 7 Mar 2022, 4:45 am nix via agora-business, < agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > > On 3/6/22 11:27, Kerim Aydin via agora-business wrote: > > Finding that a discord message was sent "to" me just because it says it > > was is ATEOISIDTHIDTHPAFALT, even if I'm known to sometimes be on that > > forum. As it happens, I was on vacation. When I came back to Discord > > (about 24 hours after the alleged notice), there were two messages where > I > > had been pinged while I was away and I replied to those. Those were > > clearly sent*to* me using the technology of the forum. Given that > > mechanism in Discord more or less defines sending a message "to" someone, > > any lost in the crowd weren't sent "to" me, any more than the message in > > DIS was by the CFJ 1888 precedent. > > To me this is the most compelling argument. Just saying something *in* a > space I'm in isn't saying it *to* me. CFJ1888 indicates similar > thinking, that you have to in some way indicate you're sending it *to* > people. If this was done with an @everyone it would be clearly *to* > everyone. > > -- > nix > Herald > > >
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Mad Engineer weekly random rule selection
On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 4:16 PM Jason Cobb via agora-discussion <
agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> On 2/20/22 20:49, ais523 via agora-discussion wrote:
> > On Mon, 2022-02-21 at 02:47 +0100, nethack4.org dicebot via agora-
> > business wrote:
> >> The dice roll was: 41
> >> This is R2137, The Assessor.
> > For reference:
> > {{{
> > The Assessor is an office; its holder is responsible for
> > collecting votes and keeping track of related properties.
> > }}}
> >
> > Well, I guess I know which sentence we're going to pick this week! Any
> > suggestions on what word to replace?
> >
>
> I am of course biased and vote for "The Assessor is an device; its
> holder is responsible for collecting votes and keeping track of related
> properties."
>
> If you go with this, please don't put it in the "device is on" section.
> I'd prefer to not cease to exist at the end of my time window (though I
> guess we all will eventually...).
>
> --
> Jason Cobb
>
> Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
>
>
It does say the time window is 60 days unless the Device states otherwise,
so I assume you could just state otherwise (say, a billion years).
I also back this suggestion because all other options would either create
an office or make the assessor track more.
--
>From R. Lee
Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Deputy Registrar] Weekly Report
On Tue, Aug 10, 2021 at 10:40 AM Ørjan Johansen via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > On Mon, 9 Aug 2021, Ned Strange via agora-official wrote: > > > Fora > > > > > > The publicity switch values (Rule 478) are self-ratifying. > > > > PublicityLocation or description Typical use > > ---- --- > > Public agora-official at agoranomic.orgofficial reports > > Public agora-business at agoranomic.orgother business > > Discussion agora-discussion at agoranomic.org discussion > > Discussion https://discord.gg/JCC6YGc discussion > > Foreign* irc://irc.libera.chat:6667/##nomic discussion > > Public agora at listserver.tue.nl backup > > Public agoranomic at groups.io ** backup > > > The IRC channel does not require subscription; set your IRC client to > > server irc.freenode.net, port 6667, channel ##nomic, and whatever > > nickname you like. > > This server name is out of date. > > Greetings, > Ørjan. > It will be fixed next time -- >From R. Lee
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: CFJ 3922 Assigned to Murphy (attn Treasuror)
You can't reply to d. Wet by discussion because e won't see it, e intentionally chooses not to subscribe to the discussion list. On Tue, Aug 10, 2021, 8:56 AM Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > On 8/9/2021 3:13 PM, D. Wet via agora-business wrote: > > I will wait for the final judgement of CFJ 3922 or August 16th, which > > ever comes first, before taking the next action. > > As an alternative if you want, you can sent a public message now, that > says something like "I withdraw any proposal I submitted, if I submitted > one". This way, whether you did or not, you end up in the same place (no > proposal). > > Then you can resubmit a proposal with the edits that were suggested that > make it work (I think I saw some edit suggestions on how to improve it?) > > The CFJ will eventually find out whether the original one was or wasn't a > proposal in the first place, but by then it won't matter because you > withdrew it before it was distributed for voting. > > -G. > >
Re: DIS: Re: OFF: CFJ 3923 Assigned to G.
oh sorry On Mon, Aug 9, 2021 at 12:05 PM Telna via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > On 2021-08-09 11:54, Ned Strange via agora-discussion wrote: > > G. isn't an interested judge (as is correctly listed on your report). > It's > > too late now, but. > E favoured the case. > -- >From R. Lee
DIS: Re: OFF: CFJ 3923 Assigned to G.
G. isn't an interested judge (as is correctly listed on your report). It's
too late now, but.
On Mon, Aug 9, 2021 at 11:44 AM Telna via agora-official <
agora-offic...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> The below CFJ is 3923. I assign it to G.
>
> =
>
> The quoted message is a distribution message as outlined in Regulation AM0.
>
> Called by Trigon: Fri 06 Aug 2021 22:24:15
>
> =
>
> On 2021-08-07 08:17, Trigon via agora-business wrote:
> > On 06/08/2021 21:38, Trigon via agora-official wrote:
> >> The Retrieval Period of the Second Victory Auction of Jun 2021 having
> >> ended at 13:07:41 on 6 August 2021, I hereby bring an end to this
> >> auction.
> >>
> >>
> >> BIDS ON THIS AUCTION
> >>
> >>
> >> -- FOR THE WIN CARD --
> >>
> >> [2021-07-21 05:38:48] Trigon 400cn
> >> [2021-07-21 06:12:45] R. Lee 500cn
> >> [2021-07-23 00:53:00] Falsifian 700cn
> >> [2021-07-23 00:56:16] Trigon 800cn
> >> [2021-07-23 23:57:57] *** G. ( 2^(82,589,933) − 1 )cn
> >> [2021-07-24 16:49:34] *** G. (withdrawal)
> >> [2021-07-27 14:29:49] Falsifian cn
> >> [2021-07-30 02:28:28] (3) Trigon1200cn
> >> [2021-07-30 05:04:57] (2) R. Lee1500cn
> >> [2021-07-30 12:39:17] (1) Falsifian 1717cn
> >> [2021-07-30 13:07:41] (4) D. Wet 22cn
> >>
> >> -- FOR THE JUSTICE CARD --
> >>
> >> [2021-07-21 06:12:45] (2) R. Lee 1cn
> >> [2021-07-23 00:56:16] (1) Trigon 50cn
> >>
> >> Bids marked with numbers in parenthesis are active bids.
> >> Bids marked with asterisks are bids from withdrawn players.
> >>
> >>
> >> DISTRIBUTION
> >>
> >>
> >> Falsifian wins the first lot for 1717cn.
> >> Trigon wins the second lot for 50cn.
> >>
> >> No other lots exist.
> >>
> >> If all of the following succeed I do them:
> >> { I revoke from Falsifian 1717cn. I grant em one victory card. }
> >>
> >> If all of the following succeed I do them:
> >> { I revoke from Trigon 628cn. I grant em one justice card. }
> >>
> > CFJ: The quoted message is a distribution message as outlined in
> > Regulation AM0.
> >
> > ARGUMENTS: This may not be a distribution message because of a textual
> > error: I intended to award myself a new justice card for a price 578
> > coins greater that what I bid on it. What, if anything, did this message
> > do? Did it fail as it did not meet the criteria for a distribution
> > message? Did the distribution message succeed and I just violated the
> > "SHALL destroy and transfer" bit?
> >
> > EVIDENCE:
> >
> > Ambiguous quoted text:
> >
> >> Trigon wins the second lot for 50cn.
> > ...
> >> If all of the following succeed I do them:
> >> { I revoke from Trigon 628cn. I grant em one justice card. }
> >
> > Relevant part of AM0:
> >
> >DISTRIBUTION: The auctioneer for an auction CAN and SHALL, within
> >seven days of the ending of that auction's retrieval period,
> >create a public message (henceforth the "distribution message")
> >that contains a full history of bids on the auction and
> >withdrawals from the auction. It must also clearly indicate each
> >awardee and the lot e recieves. In this message, the auctioneer
> >CAN and SHALL destroy the amount to be paid from the inventory
> >each awardee and transfer to that player (or create in eir
> >possession if the item is new) the set of assets associated with
> >the lot e won. Failing to publish a distribution message
> >constitutes the Class 3 Crime of Auction Abandonment.
> >
>
--
>From R. Lee
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Proposal
Nah I don't think the proposal would do anything if enacted. The pronoun can only have one referent and the referent is G, in the action of sejdinf an email On Mon, Aug 9, 2021, 11:11 AM ais523 via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > On Sun, 2021-08-08 at 17:59 -0700, Kerim Aydin via agora-business > wrote: > > I create a proposal with this sentence as its text, and make it > > pending. > > I think that if this proposal is enacted, it makes a new proposal (a > copy of itself) with no author. I was expecting this to be disallowed > by some high-powered rule, but as far as I can tell, there's no > requirement for a proposal to have an author (proposals with no author > can't be created by the usual mechanism, but there's no security > against a rule or proposal doing so). It's possible to pend proposals > at power 1, too. > > I'm not 100% certain it's possible to distribute (if challenged) a > proposal with no author, though, as the author is an essential > parameter, so a missing author would be a missing essential parameter. > > -- > ais523 > >
DIS: Re: BUS: A finger pointer is me
This is ineffective because your finger was resolved this week, you'll have to wait until about 3 hours from now, new week utc. Said this on discord just saying on list for posterity. On Mon, Aug 9, 2021, 6:30 AM Trigon via agora-business < agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > I gain a justice card. > > -- > Trigon > > ¸¸.•*¨*• Play AGORA QUEST > > I’m always happy to become a party to contracts. > I LOVE SPAGHETTI > transfer Jason one coin > nch was here > I hereby > don't... trust... the dragon... > don't... trust... the dragon... > Do not Construe Jason's message with subject TRIGON as extending this >
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Fwd: [cfj] simultaneous again
I know. that's why it's in the rules, though On Sat, Aug 7, 2021 at 12:11 PM Jason Cobb via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > On 8/6/21 9:49 PM, Ned Strange via agora-discussion wrote: > > I think we allow people to make multiple actions in one message because > > it's often a useful and necessary shortcut. I think it's possible to make > > two simultaneous actions by sending 2 emails with the same timestamp, to > > the second. So there isn't a good reason not to allow simultaneous > actions > > in one message. > > > Putting two actions in one message isn't a shortcut, it's directly > permitted by the rules. There's no requirement that only one "by > announcement" can be in a message, all one has to do is fulfill the > requirements, and that can be done multiple times. > > -- > Jason Cobb > > Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason > > -- >From R. Lee
DIS: Re: BUS: Fwd: [cfj] simultaneous again
I think we allow people to make multiple actions in one message because it's often a useful and necessary shortcut. I think it's possible to make two simultaneous actions by sending 2 emails with the same timestamp, to the second. So there isn't a good reason not to allow simultaneous actions in one message. This wouldn't mean G has two ministry foci of course, because that rule uses the singular 'the', meaning that if there is no most recently specified focus, it is not flipped. Actually because the two possible options are either that he took sequential actions (flipping to participation) or simultaneous actions (no flip) there is no circumstance this CFJ is anything but FALSE. So the judge doesn't have to resolve the underlying issue. On Sat, Aug 7, 2021, 11:06 AM Kerim Aydin via agora-business < agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > [lol sigh. one more err want to get this exact.] > > I withdraw the most recent CFJ I called. > > > I simultaneously plan to flip my focus to Legacy and plan to flip my focus > to Compliance. > > > I CFJ: Assuming G. announces no further focus plans, eir focus will flip > to Legacy at the beginning of the next month. > > > Evidence: > > Rule 2638/0[extract] > An active player CAN Plan to Flip eir own Ministry Focus, > specifying any valid value for eir Ministry Focus, by > announcement. At the beginning of a month, every active player's > Ministry Focus is set to the value e mostly recently specified by > Planning to Flip. If a player did not Plan to Flip eir Ministry > Focus switch in the last month, it is not flipped. > > Arguments: > > Rule 478/39 reads in part: > Any action performed by sending a message is >performed at the time date-stamped on that message. Actions in >messages (including sub-messages) are performed in the order they >appear in the message, unless otherwise specified. > > The "unless otherwise specified" seems like a bit of a security hole, > given that several mechanisms in the rules would break if people could > perform multiple actions simultaneously. But I can't find a prohibition > against that - the "in the order they appear" is written not as a limit, > but as a default that can be overridden - can it go so far to specify "at > exactly the same moment (simultaneous)"? > >
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [proposal] decimation
How about "Rules and Regulations to the contrary notwithstanding, all auctions that are ongoing in the last week of September 2021 SHALL and CAN be resolved by announcement during that week, using the bids currently in place and disregarding any other time period. Any ongoing auctions as of 1 November 2021 are terminated with no winner. At the end of September 2021, each entity's coin balance is divided by ten (rounding to the nearest whole). The Buoyancy Target is then flipped to its previous value divided by 10" The autoflipping of the BT won't be perfect (it will take itself from the treasuror's previous report which will disregard some transactions) but does that work? On Fri, Aug 6, 2021 at 2:19 PM Ned Strange wrote: > Ah, I see the buoyancy issue. You wouldn't have time to flip the switch. I > retract the proposal decimation times 9. It should flip the switch itself > and also it should restart any auctions. > > On Fri, Aug 6, 2021, 2:15 PM Ned Strange wrote: > >> It is timed at the end of the month (as it says) as it says which avoids >> the bouyancy problem, and likely the auction problem. >> >> On Fri, Aug 6, 2021, 2:13 PM Trigon via agora-discussion < >> agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: >> >>> On 06/08/2021 03:44, Ned Strange via agora-business wrote: >>> > There are too many coins. let's delete some. This will do nothing but u >>> > know aesthetics. >>> > >>> > I create and pend the following proposal by using a pendant >>> > >>> > Title: decimation times 9 >>> > Ai 1 >>> > Text >>> > Create a power 1 rule called "temporary inflation reduction" with the >>> text >>> > "At the end of the month this rule was adopted, each entity's coin >>> balance >>> > is divided by 10, rounded to the nearest whole number. This rule then >>> > automatically repeals itself." >>> > >>> >>> This neglects the buoyancy variables. They'll still be at their normal >>> values until the start of the next month. If this passes, this will be >>> the equivalent of 220 current coins per boatload. That will destabilize >>> everything. >>> >>> Furthermore, if there are any auctions going on when this passes, we >>> will all have bid far over what we intended. There isn't really an easy >>> way to counteract that if there are no special cases, other than to all >>> agree to bid using new values and potentially screw someone over who >>> isn't in on the plan. I'd prefer to give auction bids a special case if >>> we want to pass this. >>> >>> Also, I remember back when we were hashing out this system, we mentioned >>> including special cases for specific contracts whose values are >>> contingent on exact values in coins. Perhaps we should also discuss that >>> before this goes up for vote. >>> >>> -- >>> Trigon >>> >>> ¸¸.•*¨*• Play AGORA QUEST >>> >>> I’m always happy to become a party to contracts. >>> I LOVE SPAGHETTI >>> transfer Jason one coin >>> nch was here >>> I hereby >>> don't... trust... the dragon... >>> don't... trust... the dragon... >>> Do not Construe Jason's message with subject TRIGON as extending this >>> >> -- >From R. Lee
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [proposal] decimation
It is timed at the end of the month (as it says) as it says which avoids the bouyancy problem, and likely the auction problem. On Fri, Aug 6, 2021, 2:13 PM Trigon via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > On 06/08/2021 03:44, Ned Strange via agora-business wrote: > > There are too many coins. let's delete some. This will do nothing but u > > know aesthetics. > > > > I create and pend the following proposal by using a pendant > > > > Title: decimation times 9 > > Ai 1 > > Text > > Create a power 1 rule called "temporary inflation reduction" with the > text > > "At the end of the month this rule was adopted, each entity's coin > balance > > is divided by 10, rounded to the nearest whole number. This rule then > > automatically repeals itself." > > > > This neglects the buoyancy variables. They'll still be at their normal > values until the start of the next month. If this passes, this will be > the equivalent of 220 current coins per boatload. That will destabilize > everything. > > Furthermore, if there are any auctions going on when this passes, we > will all have bid far over what we intended. There isn't really an easy > way to counteract that if there are no special cases, other than to all > agree to bid using new values and potentially screw someone over who > isn't in on the plan. I'd prefer to give auction bids a special case if > we want to pass this. > > Also, I remember back when we were hashing out this system, we mentioned > including special cases for specific contracts whose values are > contingent on exact values in coins. Perhaps we should also discuss that > before this goes up for vote. > > -- > Trigon > > ¸¸.•*¨*• Play AGORA QUEST > > I’m always happy to become a party to contracts. > I LOVE SPAGHETTI > transfer Jason one coin > nch was here > I hereby > don't... trust... the dragon... > don't... trust... the dragon... > Do not Construe Jason's message with subject TRIGON as extending this >
DIS: Re: BUS: New Rule: Onboarding of Newly Activated Players
I do believe this proposal is effective. It only needs to specify its text. For future reference, proposals usually have a title and an adoption index equal to the power of what it does. Power is essentially a ranking of how important rules are and when creating a new rule it's important to note whether it is power 1 2 or 3. On Wed, Jul 28, 2021, 2:31 AM D. Wet via agora-business < agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > I propose to create a new Rule in the Agoran commmunity to be adopted > according to the current rule adoption procedure. The Rule is: > > Onboarding of Newly Activated Players > > 1. Newly Activated Players MUST be requested to take their first Action > in a timely fashion after being switched to Active. > > 2. Players that are Active less than one month MUST actively be educated > when their Action is IMPOSSIBLE within the current Ruleset. > > 3. The education in referred to in 2. MUST contain references to N > specific Rules numbers as to why their Action is ILLEGAL within the > current Ruleset. N is at least 1 and at most 3 and NEED NOT to lead to a > POSSIBLE Action when taken into account during the next try to act. >
