Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Proposal
>From https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/?3784, Judge Aspen presiding: "If a proposal fails to state that who is performing an action, Agorans are sufficiently respectful to make the inference that the proposal is. Thus, the proposal takes the place that a player would take for a by announcement action, even if the relevant requirements are generally more relaxed. It follows that a proposal, saying "I", generally refers to emself, since e is the agent of eir own actions." [thanks to Jason for finding this one]. On 8/8/2021 6:19 PM, Ned Strange via agora-discussion wrote: > 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 >> >>
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: [Proposal] Proposal
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
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Proposal Versions
I understand the proposal is flawed but Telnaior is space-bullying me and this fixes my problem. On 2/5/19 3:28 AM, Cuddle Beam wrote: I’m against the Space bullying thing because I believe it’s more interesting if that was achieved via contracts and such. (Our own Geneva Convention of a sort, maybe?) It would harm the “free open world simulation” vibe that I enjoy from Space Battles. Also, a duo of players could still bypass this. On Tue, 5 Feb 2019 at 01:38, Reuben Staley wrote: Context for "version ∞" that I forgot to send in the previous email: when I was going through all the proposals adding names I noticed a lot of them had a version tacked onto the end of the title. I don't even have a problem with versions being an informal system, but I like the idea of them being out of the title; therefore this exists. I also submit the following proposal, while I'm at it: - Title: No one likes a (space) bully AI: 1 Author: Trigon Co-authors: Amend the paragraph beginning "A Space Battle CANNOT be initiated" in Rule 2593 (Power=1) 'Space Battles' by removing the final period and adding the following: "or if the prior Space Battle the spaceship initiating the Space Battle has been in was against the spaceship it is attacking." On 2/4/19 5:27 PM, Reuben Staley wrote: I submit the following proposal: - Title: version ∞ AI: 3 Author: Trigon Co-authors: Amend Rule 2350 (Power=3) 'Proposals' by adding an item to the bulleted list: * A version, which SHOULD only be used when a proposal has been retracted and another proposal has been created with a similar purpose. -- Trigon -- Trigon
DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Proposal Versions
I’m against the Space bullying thing because I believe it’s more interesting if that was achieved via contracts and such. (Our own Geneva Convention of a sort, maybe?) It would harm the “free open world simulation” vibe that I enjoy from Space Battles. Also, a duo of players could still bypass this. On Tue, 5 Feb 2019 at 01:38, Reuben Staley wrote: > Context for "version ∞" that I forgot to send in the previous email: > when I was going through all the proposals adding names I noticed a lot > of them had a version tacked onto the end of the title. I don't even > have a problem with versions being an informal system, but I like the > idea of them being out of the title; therefore this exists. > > I also submit the following proposal, while I'm at it: > > - > Title: No one likes a (space) bully > AI: 1 > Author: Trigon > Co-authors: > > Amend the paragraph beginning "A Space Battle CANNOT be initiated" in > Rule 2593 (Power=1) 'Space Battles' by removing the final period and > adding the following: "or if the prior Space Battle the spaceship > initiating the Space Battle has been in was against the spaceship it is > attacking." > > On 2/4/19 5:27 PM, Reuben Staley wrote: > > I submit the following proposal: > > > > - > > Title: version ∞ > > AI: 3 > > Author: Trigon > > Co-authors: > > > > Amend Rule 2350 (Power=3) 'Proposals' by adding an item to the bulleted > > list: > > > >* A version, which SHOULD only be used when a proposal has been > > retracted and another proposal has been created with a similar > > purpose. > > > > -- > Trigon >
DIS: Re: BUS: Proposal: Proposal protection
On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 4:47 PM, Ed Murphy emurph...@socal.rr.com wrote: I retract my previous proposal Proposal protection. Proposal: Proposal protection (AI = 3, please) CFJ 1647 :P
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Proposal: Proposal protection
comex wrote: On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 4:47 PM, Ed Murphy emurph...@socal.rr.com wrote: I retract my previous proposal Proposal protection. Proposal: Proposal protection (AI = 3, please) CFJ 1647 :P In that case, the old and new texts were identical. (The re-submission was part of a scam attempt, I assume.)
