Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Estate Auction Bid

[Aris Merchant]

On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 8:00 PM, Owen Jacobson  wrote:
>
> On Nov 3, 2017, at 10:28 PM, Aris Merchant
>  wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 5:52 PM Aris Merchant
>  wrote:
>>
>>
>> Finally an excuse to suggest accounts (they're on the Massive Reform
>> Plan). An account would be a rule defined portion of an entities assets,
>> which may be spent only as authorized by the enacting rule. Here we could
>> either transfer the assets to a spesific account of Agora (to ensure that
>> they aren't spent) or to a special account of the player bidding. Actually,
>> we could do that with the items being auctioned too, which would simplify
>> things and ensure that they stay up for auction. You can think of accounts
>> being basically like Agoran institutions, except that the owner technically
>> still has ownership, just not the power to spend the asset.
>>
>> -Aris
>
> That was horribly worded, but what do people think of my basic idea?
>
> -Aris
>
>
> If I follow, it sounds like the basic idea is a hybrid of implied contracts
> and the ability to create a binding preauthorization transaction by creating
> an account for the associated assets?
>
> If so, it’s interesting. It’s lighter than escrow, and if it platonically
> makes transactions involving those assets impossible, it might be
> interesting. Figuring out how to determine which pile of a fungible asset
> are inside of or not inside of an account might be challenging - which kind
> of reminds me of the legal distinctions between depositing a sealed bag or
> chest of coins and depositing loose coins in old UK law.

I don't get what you're saying about implied contracts, but the basic
idea is indeed transaction assurance, to make sure that the offers
made by the parties can be relied upon. Accounts are a general idea
though. The real reason I'm working on this is all a planned minigame,
and I want there to be trust in the market that Agora will be able to
pay out rewards.

-Aris

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Estate Auction Bid

[Owen Jacobson]

> On Nov 3, 2017, at 10:28 PM, Aris Merchant 
>  wrote:
> 
> 
> On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 5:52 PM Aris Merchant 
>  > wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 5:11 PM Alex Smith  > wrote:
> On Sat, 2017-11-04 at 10:39 +1100, VJ Rada wrote:
> > It's already ILLEGAL to not pay it, and it certainly shouldn't be
> > made IMPOSSIBLE to bid more than you have, because you could gain
> > money later.
> 
> In my opinion, bidding on an auction should actually require paying the
> Shinies, but you should get them back if you don't win.
> 
> --
> ais523
> 
> Finally an excuse to suggest accounts (they're on the Massive Reform Plan). 
> An account would be a rule defined portion of an entities assets, which may 
> be spent only as authorized by the enacting rule. Here we could either 
> transfer the assets to a spesific account of Agora (to ensure that they 
> aren't spent) or to a special account of the player bidding. Actually, we 
> could do that with the items being auctioned too, which would simplify things 
> and ensure that they stay up for auction. You can think of accounts being 
> basically like Agoran institutions, except that the owner technically still 
> has ownership, just not the power to spend the asset.
> 
> -Aris
> That was horribly worded, but what do people think of my basic idea?
> 
> -Aris

If I follow, it sounds like the basic idea is a hybrid of implied contracts and 
the ability to create a binding preauthorization transaction by creating an 
account for the associated assets?

If so, it’s interesting. It’s lighter than escrow, and if it platonically makes 
transactions involving those assets impossible, it might be interesting. 
Figuring out how to determine which pile of a fungible asset are inside of or 
not inside of an account might be challenging - which kind of reminds me of the 
legal distinctions between depositing a sealed bag or chest of coins and 
depositing loose coins in old UK law.

-o



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Estate Auction Bid

[Aris Merchant]

On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 5:52 PM Aris Merchant <
thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 5:11 PM Alex Smith 
> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 2017-11-04 at 10:39 +1100, VJ Rada wrote:
>> > It's already ILLEGAL to not pay it, and it certainly shouldn't be
>> > made IMPOSSIBLE to bid more than you have, because you could gain
>> > money later.
>>
>> In my opinion, bidding on an auction should actually require paying the
>> Shinies, but you should get them back if you don't win.
>>
>> --
>> ais523
>
>
> Finally an excuse to suggest accounts (they're on the Massive Reform
> Plan). An account would be a rule defined portion of an entities assets,
> which may be spent only as authorized by the enacting rule. Here we could
> either transfer the assets to a spesific account of Agora (to ensure that
> they aren't spent) or to a special account of the player bidding. Actually,
> we could do that with the items being auctioned too, which would simplify
> things and ensure that they stay up for auction. You can think of accounts
> being basically like Agoran institutions, except that the owner technically
> still has ownership, just not the power to spend the asset.
>
> -Aris
>
>> That was horribly worded, but what do people think of my basic idea?

-Aris

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Estate Auction Bid

[Aris Merchant]

On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 5:11 PM Alex Smith  wrote:

> On Sat, 2017-11-04 at 10:39 +1100, VJ Rada wrote:
> > It's already ILLEGAL to not pay it, and it certainly shouldn't be
> > made IMPOSSIBLE to bid more than you have, because you could gain
> > money later.
>
> In my opinion, bidding on an auction should actually require paying the
> Shinies, but you should get them back if you don't win.
>
> --
> ais523


Finally an excuse to suggest accounts (they're on the Massive Reform Plan).
An account would be a rule defined portion of an entities assets, which may
be spent only as authorized by the enacting rule. Here we could either
transfer the assets to a spesific account of Agora (to ensure that they
aren't spent) or to a special account of the player bidding. Actually, we
could do that with the items being auctioned too, which would simplify
things and ensure that they stay up for auction. You can think of accounts
being basically like Agoran institutions, except that the owner technically
still has ownership, just not the power to spend the asset.

-Aris

>

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Estate Auction Bid

[Alex Smith]

On Sat, 2017-11-04 at 10:39 +1100, VJ Rada wrote:
> It's already ILLEGAL to not pay it, and it certainly shouldn't be
> made IMPOSSIBLE to bid more than you have, because you could gain
> money later.

In my opinion, bidding on an auction should actually require paying the
Shinies, but you should get them back if you don't win.

-- 
ais523

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Estate Auction Bid

[ATMunn]

It was good until the word "copypasta."

 Maybe it could be a blockchain! 

On 11/3/2017 7:58 PM, Cuddle Beam wrote:

I suggest having the bids then work as a chain of copypasta where, when you add 
your build, you add your changes to the copypasta with all of the previous bids 
so that its easier to figure out what's going on and it's just not all buried 
under messages and withdrawals and loopiness.

On Sat, Nov 4, 2017 at 12:56 AM, ATMunn > wrote:

On 11/3/2017 7:48 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:



I think the only real solution is that, if the top bidder doesn't pay
in time, e ceases to be the winner and the next highest-bidder wins 
(with
a fairly stiff penalty to dissuade this sort of tactic).  Of course that
drags things out a fair amount.

To do this, you'd also have to allow bidding lower than the top bid
so a high bid doesn't stop all the bidding.  And possibly allow the
withdrawing of bids.

Yeah, both of those things are things I intended to do. I think this
solution should work.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Estate Auction Bid

[Owen Jacobson]

> On Nov 3, 2017, at 7:58 PM, Cuddle Beam  wrote:
> 
> I suggest having the bids then work as a chain of copypasta where, when you 
> add your build, you add your changes to the copypasta with all of the 
> previous bids so that its easier to figure out what's going on and it's just 
> not all buried under messages and withdrawals and loopiness.

Tracking this is all ultimately the responsibility of the auctioneer (vis., the 
Surveyor, under present rules). Having officers track complex state is a 
well-established convention. I wrote the estate auction rules so that the 
auction has a single platonic result; incorrectly announcing the result does 
nothing (and incorrectly paying Agora as the winner doesn’t transfer the 
Estate, either).

-o



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Estate Auction Bid

[Cuddle Beam]

when you add your bid*

On Sat, Nov 4, 2017 at 12:58 AM, Cuddle Beam  wrote:

> I suggest having the bids then work as a chain of copypasta where, when
> you add your build, you add your changes to the copypasta with all of the
> previous bids so that its easier to figure out what's going on and it's
> just not all buried under messages and withdrawals and loopiness.
>
> On Sat, Nov 4, 2017 at 12:56 AM, ATMunn  wrote:
>
>> On 11/3/2017 7:48 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I think the only real solution is that, if the top bidder doesn't pay
>>> in time, e ceases to be the winner and the next highest-bidder wins (with
>>> a fairly stiff penalty to dissuade this sort of tactic).  Of course that
>>> drags things out a fair amount.
>>>
>>> To do this, you'd also have to allow bidding lower than the top bid
>>> so a high bid doesn't stop all the bidding.  And possibly allow the
>>> withdrawing of bids.
>>>
>>> Yeah, both of those things are things I intended to do. I think this
>> solution should work.
>>
>
>

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Estate Auction Bid

[Cuddle Beam]

I suggest having the bids then work as a chain of copypasta where, when you
add your build, you add your changes to the copypasta with all of the
previous bids so that its easier to figure out what's going on and it's
just not all buried under messages and withdrawals and loopiness.

On Sat, Nov 4, 2017 at 12:56 AM, ATMunn  wrote:

> On 11/3/2017 7:48 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> I think the only real solution is that, if the top bidder doesn't pay
>> in time, e ceases to be the winner and the next highest-bidder wins (with
>> a fairly stiff penalty to dissuade this sort of tactic).  Of course that
>> drags things out a fair amount.
>>
>> To do this, you'd also have to allow bidding lower than the top bid
>> so a high bid doesn't stop all the bidding.  And possibly allow the
>> withdrawing of bids.
>>
>> Yeah, both of those things are things I intended to do. I think this
> solution should work.
>

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Estate Auction Bid

[ATMunn]

On 11/3/2017 7:48 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:



I think the only real solution is that, if the top bidder doesn't pay
in time, e ceases to be the winner and the next highest-bidder wins (with
a fairly stiff penalty to dissuade this sort of tactic).  Of course that
drags things out a fair amount.

To do this, you'd also have to allow bidding lower than the top bid
so a high bid doesn't stop all the bidding.  And possibly allow the
withdrawing of bids.


Yeah, both of those things are things I intended to do. I think this
solution should work.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Estate Auction Bid

[Kerim Aydin]

I think the only real solution is that, if the top bidder doesn't pay
in time, e ceases to be the winner and the next highest-bidder wins (with 
a fairly stiff penalty to dissuade this sort of tactic).  Of course that 
drags things out a fair amount.

To do this, you'd also have to allow bidding lower than the top bid
so a high bid doesn't stop all the bidding.  And possibly allow the
withdrawing of bids.

On Fri, 3 Nov 2017, ATMunn wrote:
> Maybe make it so you CAN bid whatever you want, but it doesn't do anything
> until you actually have that many shinies?
> 
> On 11/3/2017 7:39 PM, VJ Rada wrote:
> > It's already ILLEGAL to not pay it, and it certainly shouldn't be made
> > IMPOSSIBLE to bid more than you have, because you could gain money later.
> > 
> > On Sat, Nov 4, 2017 at 10:37 AM, ATMunn  > > wrote:
> > 
> > Oh, thanks for reminding me to disallow this in my auctions proposal!
> > 
> > Quick side note: Should this be made ILLEGAL or IMPOSSIBLE?
> > 
> > 
> > On 11/3/2017 7:23 PM, VJ Rada wrote:
> > 
> > I bid 1011 shinies on the Estate Auction.
> > 
> > --   From V.J. Rada
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > -- 
> >  From V.J. Rada
>

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Estate Auction Bid

[VJ Rada]

As I said before and will say again: Bids should be made secretly to the
Surveyor, so that the right price is actually paid. And if the winner
doesn't pay up, second place should be allowed to pay up (which e currently
isn't)

On Sat, Nov 4, 2017 at 10:44 AM, Cuddle Beam  wrote:

> I knew of this move too, I just didn't think anyone would pull it lol.
>
> It's totally legal to bid amounts you don't have.
>
> On Sat, Nov 4, 2017 at 12:39 AM, VJ Rada  wrote:
>
>> It's already ILLEGAL to not pay it, and it certainly shouldn't be made
>> IMPOSSIBLE to bid more than you have, because you could gain money later.
>>
>> On Sat, Nov 4, 2017 at 10:37 AM, ATMunn  wrote:
>>
>>> Oh, thanks for reminding me to disallow this in my auctions proposal!
>>>
>>> Quick side note: Should this be made ILLEGAL or IMPOSSIBLE?
>>>
>>>
>>> On 11/3/2017 7:23 PM, VJ Rada wrote:
>>>
 I bid 1011 shinies on the Estate Auction.

 --
  From V.J. Rada

>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> From V.J. Rada
>>
>
>


-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Estate Auction Bid

[Cuddle Beam]

I knew of this move too, I just didn't think anyone would pull it lol.

It's totally legal to bid amounts you don't have.

On Sat, Nov 4, 2017 at 12:39 AM, VJ Rada  wrote:

> It's already ILLEGAL to not pay it, and it certainly shouldn't be made
> IMPOSSIBLE to bid more than you have, because you could gain money later.
>
> On Sat, Nov 4, 2017 at 10:37 AM, ATMunn  wrote:
>
>> Oh, thanks for reminding me to disallow this in my auctions proposal!
>>
>> Quick side note: Should this be made ILLEGAL or IMPOSSIBLE?
>>
>>
>> On 11/3/2017 7:23 PM, VJ Rada wrote:
>>
>>> I bid 1011 shinies on the Estate Auction.
>>>
>>> --
>>>  From V.J. Rada
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
> From V.J. Rada
>

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Estate Auction Bid

[ATMunn]

Maybe make it so you CAN bid whatever you want, but it doesn't do anything 
until you actually have that many shinies?

On 11/3/2017 7:39 PM, VJ Rada wrote:

It's already ILLEGAL to not pay it, and it certainly shouldn't be made 
IMPOSSIBLE to bid more than you have, because you could gain money later.

On Sat, Nov 4, 2017 at 10:37 AM, ATMunn > wrote:

Oh, thanks for reminding me to disallow this in my auctions proposal!

Quick side note: Should this be made ILLEGAL or IMPOSSIBLE?


On 11/3/2017 7:23 PM, VJ Rada wrote:

I bid 1011 shinies on the Estate Auction.

-- 
  From V.J. Rada





--
 From V.J. Rada