Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Re: OFF: Distribution of Proposals 7858-7863

[Alex Smith]

On Mon, 2017-06-12 at 22:41 +, Aris Merchant wrote:
> Grr. My fault. Will anyone mind if I ratify this away? Only way I can think
> of fixing it, so I'm going to try. I intend, without objection, to ratify
> the following document: {{The proposal that would otherwise have the ID
> number 7958 instead has the ID number 7864.}}

I object, not because I disagree with the principle, but because of the
time paradox. Identify the proposal via some means other than number
(e.g. via its title and submission date).

-- 
ais523

BUS: Re: DIS: Re: OFF: Distribution of Proposals 7858-7863

[Aris Merchant]

Grr. My fault. Will anyone mind if I ratify this away? Only way I can think
of fixing it, so I'm going to try. I intend, without objection, to ratify
the following document: {{The proposal that would otherwise have the ID
number 7958 instead has the ID number 7864.}}

-Aris

On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 3:30 PM Quazie  wrote:

> 7958?  This is good because 7858 is indeed a proposal already, but the out
> of order numbering is confusing.
>
> Sorry I didn't catch this earlier.
>
> On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 9:34 PM Quazie  wrote:
>
>>
>>> ID Author(s) AI   Title  Pender Pend fee
>>> (sh.)
>>> -
>>> 7958*  Aris, [1] 3.0  Assets v7  Aris   6
>>>
>>
>>

Re: BUS: Cuddlebeam = CuddleBeam?

[CuddleBeam]

I retract the CFJ on ""Cuddlebeam" and "CuddleBeam" are both valid ways to

write the name of the Player that initiated this CFJ."

BUS: Cuddlebeam = CuddleBeam?

[CuddleBeam]

I CFJ the following: ""Cuddlebeam" and "CuddleBeam" are both valid ways to
write the name of the Player that initiated this CFJ."

If it helps, I wish for Cuddlebeam and CuddleBeam to both be valid ways to
write my Player name, and if not, for "Cuddlebeam" to be a nickname for
CuddleBeam.

Re: BUS: Mess in CFJ 3509 (attn: Cuddlebeam)

[CuddleBeam]

I'm not going to give Judgement on that, because while I am honestly able
to give Judgement (and would Judge TRUE, because I agree with Gaelan), I
won't engage in tit for tat and cards for cards because I believe it's
wrong, even if our Justice system commands me to.

BUS: Re: OFF: Distribution of Proposals 7858-7863

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

I vote FOR Proposal 7958.
I endorse ais523 on Proposal 7859
I vote FOR Proposal 7860.
I vote FOR Proposal 7861, given the without objection provision.
I vote FOR Proposal 7862.
I vote AGAINST Proposal 7863.

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com



> On Jun 11, 2017, at 9:32 PM, Aris Merchant 
>  wrote:
> 
> I hereby distribute each listed proposal, initiating the Agoran
> Decision of whether to adopt it, and removing it from the proposal
> pool. For this decision, the vote collector is the Assessor, and the
> valid options are FOR and AGAINST (PRESENT is also a valid vote).
> 
> ID Author(s) AI   Title  Pender Pend fee (sh.)
> -
> 7958*  Aris, [1] 3.0  Assets v7  Aris   6
> 7859*  Quazie, grok  1.7  Gentle Judicial UpdatesQuazie 6
> 7860*  Quazie1.7  Cards are power 1.7Quazie 6
> 7861*  Quazie, [2]   3.0  Trivia(l)  Quazie 6
> 7862*  Quazie, [3]   1.7  Betterer Pledges   Quazie 6
> 7863*  Quazie1.2  Why should outsiders...[4] Quazie 6
> 
> The proposal pool currently contains the following proposals:
> 
> IDAuthor(s) AI   Title
> ---
> pp1   nichdel   1.2  Organization Integration and Stamp Collecting
> pp2   Gaelan, [5]   2.0  Judicial Reform v2
> pp3   Quazie3.0  Throw off Your Chains [6]
> 
> Legend: * : Proposal is pending.
> 
> [1] G., o, nichdel, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> [2] Aris, Ørjan
> [3] G., Gaelan, Aris, 天火狐
> [4] ...be able to Object?
> [5] Aris, Quazie
> [6] The author of this proposal and whether or not it currently exists are
> provisional.
> 
> 
> The Pending List Price (PLP) is 6 shinies.
> 
> The full text of the aforementioned proposals is included below.
> 
> 
> //
> Title: Assets v7
> Adoption index: 3.0
> Author: Aris
> Co-authors: G., o, nichdel, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> 
> Reenact rule 2166, Assets (Power = 2), with the following text:
> 
>  An asset is an entity defined as such by a rule (hereafter its backing
>  document), and existing solely because its backing document defines its
>  existence.
> 
>  Each asset has exactly one owner.  If an asset would otherwise
>  lack an owner, it is owned by Agora.  If an asset's backing document 
> restricts
>  its ownership to a class of entities, then that asset CANNOT be gained by or
>  transferred to an entity outside that class, and is destroyed if it is owned
>  by an entity outside that class (except for Agora, in which case any player
>  CAN transfer or destroy it without objection). The restrictions in the
>  previous sentence are subject to modification by its backing document.
> 
>  Unless modified by an asset's backing document, ownership of an asset is
>  restricted to Agora, persons, and organizations.
> 
>  An organization's charter CAN specify whether or not that organization is
>  willing receive assets or a class of assets. Generally, an organization 
> CANNOT
>  be given assets its charter states that it is unwilling to receive. The
>  previous provisions of this paragraph do not apply to an asset if the
>  organization is required to provide that asset in order to continue existing.
> 
>  The recordkeepor of a class of assets is the entity (if any)
>  defined as such by, and bound by, its backing document.  That
>  entity's report includes a list of all instances of that class
>  and their owners.  This portion of that entity's report is
>  self-ratifying.
> 
>  An asset generally CAN be destroyed by its owner by
>  announcement, subject to modification by its backing document. An
>  indestructible asset is one defined as such by it backing document, and 
> CANNOT
>  be destroyed except by a rule specifically addressing the destruction of
>  indestructible assets or that asset in particular; any other asset is
>  destructible. In circumstances where another asset would be
>  destroyed, an indestructible asset is generally transferred to Agora, subject
>  to modification by its backing document and the intervention of other rules.
> 
>  To "lose" an asset is to have it destroyed from one's
>  possession; to "revoke" an asset from an entity is to destroy it
>  from that entity's possession.
> 
>  An asset generally CAN be transferred (syn. payed, given) by its owner to
>  another entity by announcement, subject to modification by its backing
>  document.  A fixed asset is one defined as such by its backing
>  document, and CANNOT be transferred; any other asset is liquid.
> 
>  A currency is a class of asset defined as such by its backing document.
>  Instances of a currency with the same owner are fungible.
> 
>  The "x balance of an entity", where x is a currency, is the number 

BUS: Re: OFF: Distribution of Proposals 7858-7863

[Martin Rönsch]

I hereby distribute each listed proposal, initiating the Agoran
Decision of whether to adopt it, and removing it from the proposal
pool. For this decision, the vote collector is the Assessor, and the
valid options are FOR and AGAINST (PRESENT is also a valid vote).

ID Author(s) AI   Title  Pender Pend fee (sh.)
-
7958*  Aris, [1] 3.0  Assets v7  Aris   6


I vote FOR


7859*  Quazie, grok  1.7  Gentle Judicial UpdatesQuazie 6


I vote AGAINST


7860*  Quazie1.7  Cards are power 1.7Quazie 6


I vote FOR


7861*  Quazie, [2]   3.0  Trivia(l)  Quazie 6


I vote AGAINST


7862*  Quazie, [3]   1.7  Betterer Pledges   Quazie 6


I vote FOR


7863*  Quazie1.2  Why should outsiders...[4] Quazie 6


I vote AGAINST


Veggiekeks

Re: BUS: Votes

[V.J Rada]

Additionally on
7863*  Quazie1.2  Why should outsiders...
I VOTE PRESENT


On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 4:04 PM, V.J Rada  wrote:

> 7958*  Aris, [1] 3.0  Assets v7
> I VOTE FOR
> 7859*  Quazie, grok  1.7  Gentle Judicial Updates
> I VOTE FOR
> 7860*  Quazie1.7  Cards are power 1.7
> I VOTE PRESENT
> 7861*  Quazie, [2]   3.0  Trivia(l)
> Believing that the triviality of proposals should remain vague, I VOTE FOR
> 7862*  Quazie, [3]   1.7  Betterer Pledges
> I VOTE FOR
> 7863*  Quazie1.2  Why should outsiders
>

BUS: Votes

[V.J Rada]

7958*  Aris, [1] 3.0  Assets v7
I VOTE FOR
7859*  Quazie, grok  1.7  Gentle Judicial Updates
I VOTE FOR
7860*  Quazie1.7  Cards are power 1.7
I VOTE PRESENT
7861*  Quazie, [2]   3.0  Trivia(l)
Believing that the triviality of proposals should remain vague, I VOTE FOR
7862*  Quazie, [3]   1.7  Betterer Pledges
I VOTE FOR
7863*  Quazie1.2  Why should outsiders