Re: DIS: How are Rule ID Numbers assigned?
On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 6:08 PM Aris Merchant wrote: > Good question. Rule 2141 says that the Rulekeepor can assign a number, and > doesn’t say in what way e must do so, so e could theoretically assign any > number. There is possibly a limitation against re-assigning ID numbers based on an old precedent. CFJ 1358 found that "name" in R1586 does not equate to "title" for proposals and rules, but rather by common usage "name" refers to "Proposal [ID number]" or "Rule [ID Number]" because that's how we refer to those entities in practice (with titles being secondary). Therefore R1586's uniqueness criteria prevents ID numbers from being re-used. https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/?1358
Re: DIS: How are Rule ID Numbers assigned?
Maybe, but I’d guess not. Assigning a number to something is inherently a by announcement action. If I say “this is boat number 1”, then it’s boat #1 by my definition. All Rule 2141 does is to say the Rulekeepor’s definitions are the ones officially recognized by Agora. -Aris On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 8:09 PM Ørjan Johansen wrote: > No method? There might be a Rule 2125 problem here. > > Greetings, > Ørjan. > > On Sat, 1 Jun 2019, Aris Merchant wrote: > > > Good question. Rule 2141 says that the Rulekeepor can assign a number, > and > > doesn’t say in what way e must do so, so e could theoretically assign any > > number. You’re right that this gives em some power over conflict > > resolution. However, as a matter of convention, e only assigns the next > > number in line. The rule is left unspecified so that there isn’t a > problem > > if e assigns the wrong number by mistake and also because defining which > > number e has to use would require the rule to write out the algorithm to > be > > used. The benefit gained by assigning the wrong number is small enough > that > > the Rulekeepor can be trusted not to annoy everyone by breaking the > > convention. Make sense? > > > > -Aris > > > > > > On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 5:57 PM Jason Cobb > wrote: > > > >> Hello everyone, > >> > >> I'm new, and I've just started reading the rules, so please forgive me > if > >> this is has an obvious answer. > >> > >> Can the Rulekeepor assign any ID numbers to rules that e wishes? I ask > >> because I noticed that the ID numbers of rules affect conflict > resolution, > >> and there doesn't seem to be a way of assigning ID numbers specified in > the > >> rules, thus giving the Rulekeepor some (small) amount of say in the > >> application of the rules. > >> > >> Jason Cobb > >> > > >
Re: DIS: How are Rule ID Numbers assigned?
No method? There might be a Rule 2125 problem here. Greetings, Ørjan. On Sat, 1 Jun 2019, Aris Merchant wrote: Good question. Rule 2141 says that the Rulekeepor can assign a number, and doesn’t say in what way e must do so, so e could theoretically assign any number. You’re right that this gives em some power over conflict resolution. However, as a matter of convention, e only assigns the next number in line. The rule is left unspecified so that there isn’t a problem if e assigns the wrong number by mistake and also because defining which number e has to use would require the rule to write out the algorithm to be used. The benefit gained by assigning the wrong number is small enough that the Rulekeepor can be trusted not to annoy everyone by breaking the convention. Make sense? -Aris On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 5:57 PM Jason Cobb wrote: Hello everyone, I'm new, and I've just started reading the rules, so please forgive me if this is has an obvious answer. Can the Rulekeepor assign any ID numbers to rules that e wishes? I ask because I noticed that the ID numbers of rules affect conflict resolution, and there doesn't seem to be a way of assigning ID numbers specified in the rules, thus giving the Rulekeepor some (small) amount of say in the application of the rules. Jason Cobb
Re: DIS: How are Rule ID Numbers assigned?
Wow. Thank you all for the quick replies. I really was not expecting it that quickly. That all makes sense, thank you. Jason Cobb On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 9:14 PM ais...@alumni.bham.ac.uk < ais...@alumni.bham.ac.uk> wrote: > On Sat, 2019-06-01 at 18:09 -0700, Aris Merchant wrote: > > Was that really a deliberate perk? It seems incredibly trivial, as > > perks go. I was under the impression the old rule was repealed as > > part of a simplification effort; lots of stuff was being repealed > > around then. > > I think it was an accidental perk, i.e. because there were plenty of > other perks around at the time, creating a new one didn't seem like a > problem (although the simplification effort was the actual reason, not > the perk in of itself). > > -- > ais523 > >
Re: DIS: How are Rule ID Numbers assigned?
On Sat, 2019-06-01 at 18:09 -0700, Aris Merchant wrote: > Was that really a deliberate perk? It seems incredibly trivial, as > perks go. I was under the impression the old rule was repealed as > part of a simplification effort; lots of stuff was being repealed > around then. I think it was an accidental perk, i.e. because there were plenty of other perks around at the time, creating a new one didn't seem like a problem (although the simplification effort was the actual reason, not the perk in of itself). -- ais523
Re: DIS: How are Rule ID Numbers assigned?
On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 6:01 PM ais...@alumni.bham.ac.uk < ais...@alumni.bham.ac.uk> wrote: > On Sat, 2019-06-01 at 20:57 -0400, Jason Cobb wrote: > > I'm new, and I've just started reading the rules, so please forgive me if > > this is has an obvious answer. > > > > Can the Rulekeepor assign any ID numbers to rules that e wishes? I ask > > because I noticed that the ID numbers of rules affect conflict > resolution, > > and there doesn't seem to be a way of assigning ID numbers specified in > the > > rules, thus giving the Rulekeepor some (small) amount of say in the > > application of the rules. > > There used to be a rule enforcing a particular ID number allocation > algorithm. It got repealed, though, so right now it's fully up to the > Rulekeepor. > > I think that at the time, we were in an "office perk era" where > officers were paid via giving them advantages like that one, because > there wasn't a functioning economy, so the discretion didn't seem out > of place. Some of the perk economy still survives, and I don't think > it's doing any real damage. > > -- > ais523 > Was that really a deliberate perk? It seems incredibly trivial, as perks go. I was under the impression the old rule was repealed as part of a simplification effort; lots of stuff was being repealed around then. -Aris > >
Re: DIS: How are Rule ID Numbers assigned?
Rulekeepor reporting in. As AIS523 says, there is no perscribed method of ID assignment. I assign each rule the ID number one greater than the one enacted before it. Theoretically, I *could* influence the way rules are interpreted in a very minor way, but I don't see any purpose. The general attitude at the moment is that we should let the officers handle whatever they need to and if they become corrupted, we just remove them from office with minimal and easily reprable harm to the gamestate. On 6/1/19 7:01 PM, ais...@alumni.bham.ac.uk wrote: On Sat, 2019-06-01 at 20:57 -0400, Jason Cobb wrote: I'm new, and I've just started reading the rules, so please forgive me if this is has an obvious answer. Can the Rulekeepor assign any ID numbers to rules that e wishes? I ask because I noticed that the ID numbers of rules affect conflict resolution, and there doesn't seem to be a way of assigning ID numbers specified in the rules, thus giving the Rulekeepor some (small) amount of say in the application of the rules. There used to be a rule enforcing a particular ID number allocation algorithm. It got repealed, though, so right now it's fully up to the Rulekeepor. I think that at the time, we were in an "office perk era" where officers were paid via giving them advantages like that one, because there wasn't a functioning economy, so the discretion didn't seem out of place. Some of the perk economy still survives, and I don't think it's doing any real damage. -- Trigon
Re: DIS: How are Rule ID Numbers assigned?
Good question. Rule 2141 says that the Rulekeepor can assign a number, and doesn’t say in what way e must do so, so e could theoretically assign any number. You’re right that this gives em some power over conflict resolution. However, as a matter of convention, e only assigns the next number in line. The rule is left unspecified so that there isn’t a problem if e assigns the wrong number by mistake and also because defining which number e has to use would require the rule to write out the algorithm to be used. The benefit gained by assigning the wrong number is small enough that the Rulekeepor can be trusted not to annoy everyone by breaking the convention. Make sense? -Aris On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 5:57 PM Jason Cobb wrote: > Hello everyone, > > I'm new, and I've just started reading the rules, so please forgive me if > this is has an obvious answer. > > Can the Rulekeepor assign any ID numbers to rules that e wishes? I ask > because I noticed that the ID numbers of rules affect conflict resolution, > and there doesn't seem to be a way of assigning ID numbers specified in the > rules, thus giving the Rulekeepor some (small) amount of say in the > application of the rules. > > Jason Cobb >
Re: DIS: How are Rule ID Numbers assigned?
On Sat, 2019-06-01 at 20:57 -0400, Jason Cobb wrote: > I'm new, and I've just started reading the rules, so please forgive me if > this is has an obvious answer. > > Can the Rulekeepor assign any ID numbers to rules that e wishes? I ask > because I noticed that the ID numbers of rules affect conflict resolution, > and there doesn't seem to be a way of assigning ID numbers specified in the > rules, thus giving the Rulekeepor some (small) amount of say in the > application of the rules. There used to be a rule enforcing a particular ID number allocation algorithm. It got repealed, though, so right now it's fully up to the Rulekeepor. I think that at the time, we were in an "office perk era" where officers were paid via giving them advantages like that one, because there wasn't a functioning economy, so the discretion didn't seem out of place. Some of the perk economy still survives, and I don't think it's doing any real damage. -- ais523
