Re: BUS: Arbitrary Blotting before the reset

[Sarah S. via agora-business]

On Sun, Sep 19, 2021 at 5:06 AM Kerim Aydin via agora-business <
agora-business@agoranomic.org> wrote:

>
> It has been brought to my considered attention that a single exclamation
> of "Fun!" may not be a sufficiently elucidating statement vis-à-vis
> establishing formal mental causality underlying my previous attempts at
> certain in-game desired actions; therefore, I hereby, with clear and
> unambiguous intent, and as enabled to do so by the text of Rule 2555
> (revision 10) interpreted under the definitions contained in Rule 478
> (revision 39) and Rule 2152 (revision 9) among others, pay a fee of two
> (2) Blot-b-gones for the sole and entire purpose of levying a fine with a
> value of one (1) Blot on the person generally known on this forum as R.
> Lee, with the reasoned motivation for this action being the provision
> of a minor level of felicitous amusement to those who may witness said
> event.
>
> Let me be fully clear and transparent to state that the above statement
> may fail to enact a meaningful change in the game, if it is generally
> accepted, reported, and/or judicially confirmed that I previously
> accomplished this self-same feat, or if my actions are prevented from
> execution by facts-on-the-ground establishing that the entity known as R.
> Lee has already received 2 blots or more in the current week, prior to the
> sending of this missive.
>
> To account for this final possibility:
>I pay a fee of 1 blot-b-gone to expunge a blot from myself.
>I pay a fee of 1 blot-b-gone to expunge a blot from myself.
>
> As an additional qualifier, those latter two sentences will only succeed
> if I retained sufficient blot-b-gones in my possession at the point of
> those sentences' sequential execution.
>
> -G.
>
>
I received 2 blots from trigon so I didn't get any from you.
-- 
--
R. Lee

Re: BUS: Use Them Or Lose Them (@Referee)

[Jason Cobb via agora-business]

On 9/19/21 00:31, Trigon via agora-business wrote:
> El 19/09/2021 a las 03:49, Telna via agora-business escribió:
>> I pay a fee of 2 Blot-B-Gones to levy a fine of 1 blot upon Cuddlebeam 
>> for "Gambling Away the Economy".
>>
>> I pay a fee of 2 Blot-B-Gones to levy a fine of 1 blot upon Trigon for 
>> "Gambling With the Economy When You're Treasuror".
>>
>> I do not pay a fee of 2 Blot-B-Gones to levy a fine of 1 blot upon R. 
>> Lee for "You're The Referee, You Should Follow Defendant's Rights More 
>> Clearly" because e has already received two blots this week.
>>
>> I pay a fee of 2 Blot-B-Gones to levy a fine of 1 blot upon Cuddlebeam 
>> for "Dealing in the Souls of Your Fellow Players".
>>
>> I pay a fee of 2 Blot-B-Gones to levy a fine of 1 blot upon cuddlybanana 
>> because "I Need To Use Them On Someone and You Don't Seem To Care About 
>> Your Voting Strength Right Now".
>>
>> I pay a fee of 2 Blot-B-Gones to levy a fine of 1 blot upon Trigon for 
>> "Thinking It Rude That Items Are Used For Their Intended Purporses".
>>
>> I pay a fee of 1 Blot-B-Gone to expunge a blot from Trigon because e is 
>> our Right Honourable Speaker after all.
>>
>> I pay a fee of 2 Blot-B-Gones to levy a fine of 1 blot upon Telna for 
>> "Waiting Until The Last Minute To Do This Nonsense".
>>
>> I pay a fee of 1 Blot-B-Gone to expunge a blot from Telna because it 
>> wasn't my choice to have to use them now! D:
>>
>> Side Note: We should bring back Notices of Honour and tie them in to 
>> BBGs. They were fun.
> I'm pretty sure that my expunging didn't work earlier because R. Lee 
> failed to actually blot me. So I should have one more blot-be-gone. If I 
> do, I spend it to expunge a blot from myself.
>

This fails. The economic reset occurred before you sent this message.

-- 
Jason Cobb

Assessor, Rulekeepor, S​tonemason

Re: BUS: Use Them Or Lose Them (@Referee)

[Trigon via agora-business]

El 19/09/2021 a las 03:49, Telna via agora-business escribió:
I pay a fee of 2 Blot-B-Gones to levy a fine of 1 blot upon Cuddlebeam 
for "Gambling Away the Economy".


I pay a fee of 2 Blot-B-Gones to levy a fine of 1 blot upon Trigon for 
"Gambling With the Economy When You're Treasuror".


I do not pay a fee of 2 Blot-B-Gones to levy a fine of 1 blot upon R. 
Lee for "You're The Referee, You Should Follow Defendant's Rights More 
Clearly" because e has already received two blots this week.


I pay a fee of 2 Blot-B-Gones to levy a fine of 1 blot upon Cuddlebeam 
for "Dealing in the Souls of Your Fellow Players".


I pay a fee of 2 Blot-B-Gones to levy a fine of 1 blot upon cuddlybanana 
because "I Need To Use Them On Someone and You Don't Seem To Care About 
Your Voting Strength Right Now".


I pay a fee of 2 Blot-B-Gones to levy a fine of 1 blot upon Trigon for 
"Thinking It Rude That Items Are Used For Their Intended Purporses".


I pay a fee of 1 Blot-B-Gone to expunge a blot from Trigon because e is 
our Right Honourable Speaker after all.


I pay a fee of 2 Blot-B-Gones to levy a fine of 1 blot upon Telna for 
"Waiting Until The Last Minute To Do This Nonsense".


I pay a fee of 1 Blot-B-Gone to expunge a blot from Telna because it 
wasn't my choice to have to use them now! D:


Side Note: We should bring back Notices of Honour and tie them in to 
BBGs. They were fun.


I'm pretty sure that my expunging didn't work earlier because R. Lee 
failed to actually blot me. So I should have one more blot-be-gone. If I 
do, I spend it to expunge a blot from myself.


--
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

BUS: Use Them Or Lose Them (@Referee)

[Telna via agora-business]

I pay a fee of 2 Blot-B-Gones to levy a fine of 1 blot upon Cuddlebeam 
for "Gambling Away the Economy".


I pay a fee of 2 Blot-B-Gones to levy a fine of 1 blot upon Trigon for 
"Gambling With the Economy When You're Treasuror".


I do not pay a fee of 2 Blot-B-Gones to levy a fine of 1 blot upon R. 
Lee for "You're The Referee, You Should Follow Defendant's Rights More 
Clearly" because e has already received two blots this week.


I pay a fee of 2 Blot-B-Gones to levy a fine of 1 blot upon Cuddlebeam 
for "Dealing in the Souls of Your Fellow Players".


I pay a fee of 2 Blot-B-Gones to levy a fine of 1 blot upon cuddlybanana 
because "I Need To Use Them On Someone and You Don't Seem To Care About 
Your Voting Strength Right Now".


I pay a fee of 2 Blot-B-Gones to levy a fine of 1 blot upon Trigon for 
"Thinking It Rude That Items Are Used For Their Intended Purporses".


I pay a fee of 1 Blot-B-Gone to expunge a blot from Trigon because e is 
our Right Honourable Speaker after all.


I pay a fee of 2 Blot-B-Gones to levy a fine of 1 blot upon Telna for 
"Waiting Until The Last Minute To Do This Nonsense".


I pay a fee of 1 Blot-B-Gone to expunge a blot from Telna because it 
wasn't my choice to have to use them now! D:


Side Note: We should bring back Notices of Honour and tie them in to 
BBGs. They were fun.

BUS: @Promotor: proposals to use pendants

[Sarah S. via agora-business]

I create the below proposal and pay a pendant to pend it
Title: Im cool
AI 1
{Create a power one rule with the text "Anyone who voted for the adoption
of this rule CAN once by announcement redeem this rule to win the game.
Anyone who does so CAN by announcement award emself one of the following
patent titles: God, Goddess, Deity".}

I create the below proposal and pay a pendant to pend it.

Title: Proposal spreading
AI: 3
{At the end of paragraph four of the rule 1607 "Distribution", append the
following sentence
"If there are ten or more pending undistributed proposals in the proposal
pool, the promotor MAY refrain from distributing the most recently added 5
proposals if e distributes each other pending proposal in that Agoran week.
E SHALL then distribute those undistributed proposals the next Agoran week.}

-- 
--
R. Lee

BUS: (proposal) tacking into the win

[Kerim Aydin via agora-business]

I submit the following proposal, "tacking into the win", AI=2 and pay a
pendant to pend it:
---

Amend Rule 2638 (Player Focuses) by replacing:
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.
with:
  When the rules state that the winds change, 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 since the last time the winds changed,
  it is not flipped.

  The winds change at the beginning of each month.


Amend Rule 2621 (VP Wins) by replacing:
  Then, each active player gains 1 card of each type and eir grant
  (if any).
with:
  Then, the winds change, following which each active player
  gains 1 card of each type and eir grant (if any).

---

BUS: [proposal] Stolen from Murphy

[Jason Cobb via agora-business]

I submit the following proposal (stolen from Murphy without permission,
but there's no time to ask before econ reset), then pay a fee of one
pendant to cause it to become pending:

Title: Clarify deputisation v2

Adoption index: 3.0

Author: Jason

Coauthors: Murphy

{

[Fixes the bug in the previous version where it didn't explicitly say
that all of the conditions must be met.]

Amend Rule 2160 (Deputisation) to read:

   A player acting as emself (the deputy) CAN perform an action
   ordinarily reserved for an office-holder, as if e held the office,
   if all of the following are true:

   1. The rules require the holder of that office, by virtue of
  holding that office, to perform the action. (This requirement
  is fulfilled by the deputy performing the action.)

   2. It would be POSSIBLE for the deputy to perform the action,
  other than by deputisation, if e held the office.

   3. Either (i) the office is vacant; or (ii) a time limit by
  which the rules require the action to be performed has expired,
  and the deputy announced between two and fourteen days before
  the action that e intended to deputise for the office to
  perform that particular action; or (iii) such a time limit
  expired more than fourteen days ago.

   4. When performing the action, the deputy announces that e is
  doing so by deputisation or by temporary deputisation.

   When a player deputises for an elected office, e becomes the
   holder of that office, unless the action being performed would
   already install someone into that office, and/or e announces
   that e is doing so by temporary deputisation.

}

-- 
Jason Cobb

Assessor, Rulekeepor, S​tonemason

BUS: [proposal] in-dependence

[Kerim Aydin via agora-business]

I create the following proposal, and pay a pendant to pend it.


Title: Independence Day
Adoption Index: 3.0
Co-authors: Gaelan, Telna, nix, CuddleBeam, cuddlybanana, Jason
Text:
--

[Note: this proposal was not rushed, it was originally part of survivor
golf, and then substantially honed on discord.  Doesn't mean it should be
thoroughly checked! Also, please see the note at the bottom.]


Amend Rule 1728 (Dependent Action Methods) by changing its title to
"Tabled Actions" and amending its text to:

An action is a Tabled Action if it is performed with one of the
following methods:
* With N Support, where N is a positive integer.
* Without N Objections, where N is a positive integer.
* With N Agoran Consent, where N is a positive integer multiple of
  0.1.
* With T notice, where T is a time period.

The parameters N and T, if omitted, default to 1 and 4 days,
respectively (e.g. "without objection" means N=1). If a rule defines
N as less than 1 or greater than 8, it is instead treated as 1 or 8,
respectively.

A person CAN act on eir own behalf, by announcement, to table an
intent (syn. "intend") to perform a tabled action, conspicuously and
without obfuscation specifying the action, the method (including non-
default parameter values), and optionally, conditions.

A person is the sponsor of such an intent if e tabled it, or if e is
authorized to perform its action due to holding a rule-defined
position previously held by the person who tabled it.


Amend Rule 2124 (Agoran Satisfaction) by changing its title to
"Performing Tabled Actions" and amending its text to:

For a given tabled intent, a player CAN, unless otherwise forbidden by
the rules or the document enabling the action, act on eir own behalf,
by announcement, to:
* Become a supporter ("support" it), unless e tabled or previously
  supported it;
* Become an objector ("object to" it), unless e previously
  objected to it;
* Cease to be a supporter or objector ("withdraw" support/objection).

An intent is ripe if was tabled within the past 14 days, the Speaker
hasn't objected to it in the past 48 hours, and its conditions, if
any, are met.

An intent is mature if it was tabled at least 4 days ago and nobody
withdrew objections from it in the past 24 hours.

A rule purporting to allow a person to perform a tabled action allows
em to do so by announcement, if, considering only intents for that
action/method combination:
* With N Support: e is a sponsor or supporter of a ripe intent with
  at least N supporters.
* Without N Objections: e is a sponsor of a mature ripe intent with
  less than N objectors.
* With N Agoran Consent: e is a sponsor or supporter of a mature
  ripe intent with supporters greater than N times its objectors
  (e SHOULD list supporters and objectors).
* With T notice: e is the sponsor of a ripe intent created at
  least T ago.


Repeal Rule 2595 (Performing a Dependent Action).


Amend Rule 2481 (Festival Restrictions) by replacing:
  1. Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, non-Festive players are
 not eligible to support a dependent action;
with:
  1. Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, non-Festive players
 CANNOT support/be a supporter for tabled action intents;


If the effects of a proposal authored by R. Lee have amended Rule 2124
in the previous 14 days, then amend Rule 2124 by deleting:
   "on eir own behalf,"

[On this final clause: this proposal is meant to keep all actual mechanics
of dep. actions unchanged.  I didn't want to take a particular position on
whether you can act-on-behalf of someone to support/object to an intent.
Unfortunately, it's unclear what the current rules allow.  By clarifying
in either direction, I'm taking a side.  But R. Lee has submitted a
proposal called "Allow acting on behalf to support or object".  The clause
above ensures that if R. Lee's proposal is adopted, the act-on-behalf
functionality stays in the rewrite as per the will of the voters.]

--

BUS: [proposal] No Immediate Shenanigans

[Jason Cobb via agora-business]

I submit the following proposal, and pay a fee of one pendant to cause
it to become pending:

Title: No Immediate Shenanigans

Adoption index: 1.7

Author: Jason

Coauthors:

{

Amend Rule 2478 by appending the following to the paragraph beginning
"Initiating a Finger pointing found to be Shenanigans is ILLEGAL": "The
investigator of a finger pointing SHALL NOT point eir finger for the
Crime of Unjustified Gesticulation with respect to that finger pointing.".

[Prohibits the Referee from ruling Shenanigans, then immediately
pointing eir finger at the first pointer in order to get ahead on the
finger pointing contest.]

}

-- 
Jason Cobb

Assessor, Rulekeepor, S​tonemason

Re: BUS: Arbitrary Blotting before the reset

[Kerim Aydin via agora-business]

It has been brought to my considered attention that a single exclamation
of "Fun!" may not be a sufficiently elucidating statement vis-à-vis
establishing formal mental causality underlying my previous attempts at
certain in-game desired actions; therefore, I hereby, with clear and
unambiguous intent, and as enabled to do so by the text of Rule 2555
(revision 10) interpreted under the definitions contained in Rule 478
(revision 39) and Rule 2152 (revision 9) among others, pay a fee of two
(2) Blot-b-gones for the sole and entire purpose of levying a fine with a
value of one (1) Blot on the person generally known on this forum as R.
Lee, with the reasoned motivation for this action being the provision
of a minor level of felicitous amusement to those who may witness said event.

Let me be fully clear and transparent to state that the above statement
may fail to enact a meaningful change in the game, if it is generally
accepted, reported, and/or judicially confirmed that I previously
accomplished this self-same feat, or if my actions are prevented from
execution by facts-on-the-ground establishing that the entity known as R.
Lee has already received 2 blots or more in the current week, prior to the
sending of this missive.

To account for this final possibility:
   I pay a fee of 1 blot-b-gone to expunge a blot from myself.
   I pay a fee of 1 blot-b-gone to expunge a blot from myself.

As an additional qualifier, those latter two sentences will only succeed
if I retained sufficient blot-b-gones in my possession at the point of
those sentences' sequential execution.

-G.

Re: BUS: Arbitrary Blotting before the reset

[Trigon via agora-business]

El 17/09/2021 a las 20:05, Trigon escribió:

El 17/09/2021 a las 20:00, Kerim Aydin via agora-business escribió:



On 9/17/2021 12:52 PM, Sarah S. via agora-business wrote:

I spend 2 BBGs to give one blot to Trigon and I spend 2 BBGs to give one
blot to ATMunn



Fun!  I pay a fee of 2 BBGs to levy a 1-blot fine on R. Lee

-G.



Oh, I have some too! I twice do the same as G..

If it would be possible to do so, I pay a fee of 2bg to levy a 1-blot 
fine on R. Lee for the specific reason of eir rudeness in frivolously 
levying fines.


If it would be possible to do so, I pay a fee of 2bg to levy a 1-blot 
fine on R. Lee for the specific reason of eir rudeness in frivolously 
levying fines.


--
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

BUS: [Proposals] Proposing my protos

[Trigon via agora-business]

I create each of the following proposals and pend each using a pendant.

There will be about nine and a half hours before the economy nuke. 
Please plan accordingly.



Title: pledge(2)(2)
Author: Trigon
Coauthors: Jason, ais532
AI: 3

[ COMMENT: The gist of this idea is that players can choose for some
  part of their messages which actions should succeed and which actions
  should fail. Hopefully, this would be integrated gracefully into the
  rest of the rules, but that's a lot of SHALLs to sort through to
  decide which should be scoped actions. Comments can be found
  throughout.

  Second update: I've reworked some of the wording. There might still be
  room for breaking. Feel free to tell me to fix it. ]

Enact a new Power=3 rule entitled "Scopes" with text:

  Players CAN take actions in a specific scope. When a player does
  so, e must either clearly and unambiguously describe a list of
  allowed actions or a list of prohibited actions for that scope, or
  e must refer to a source which clearly and unambiguously defines
  such a list. E must also clearly and unambiguously specify when e
  begins acting in that scope and when e finishes acting in that
  scope.

  Actions within a scope which are prohibited or not allowed are
  blocked actions, while actions which are allowed or not prohibited
  are unblocked actions.

[ COMMENT: I'm not sure what I think of this terminology. ]

  When a player is acting within a specific scope, if an action
  which would otherwise succeed is blocked within that scope, then
  that action instead fails.

  When a player begins acting in a scope, e CAN specify which
  of the following modifiers apply, if any.

  * Indirection allowed: actions within this scope whose end results
are solely to initiate one or more unblocked actions within this
scope succeed as well.

  * Partial success prohibited: if one action within this scope
would fail, then all actions within the scope fail.

  * Acting on behalf allowed: acting on behalf to perform an
unblocked action within this scope succeeds as well.

[ COMMENT: There's got to be a way to phrase these scope modifiers
  better, right? ]

  The following scopes are defined:

[ COMMENT: These are just random suggestions , though I think they are
  useful. Feel free to suggest more. ]

  * Global scope: all actions are allowed in this scope.

[ COMMENT: This should also allow players to say something like "I act
  in the global scope, disallowing partial success, to do the following:
  {...}" instead of "If all the following succeed I do this: {...}".
  I think that it's elegant, if a bit wordy. Suggestions for better
  terminology for scopes are welcome. ]

  * Transaction scope: when acting in this scope, only transfers of
assets are allowed.
  * Economic scope: when acting in this scope, creation,
destruction, and transfers of assets are allowed.
  * Official scope: for a specified office, only actions mandated by
the rules for that office succeed.

[ COMMENT: This is a rather broad specification, but it might allow us
  to write something like "When the rules say an Officer CAN do
  something, then e does so in that Office's scope", though whether we
  want to is another question. ]

[ COMMENT: So what do you think? I like the idea, but executing actions
  within a scope is wordy. As is the proposed rule. With no comments,
  it's still over 40 lines long. Suggestions to make either more
  succinct are very welcome. ]


Title: No prizeless victory auctions
Author: Trigon
Coauthors:
AI: 1

[ COMMENT: After the reset, the poor player who still has the highest
  claim might be forced to pay for nothing; or, more realistically, the
  auction runner might just not be able to distribute lots for the
  auction. Either way, this is certainly not an ideal situation. ]

In Rule 2561 "VP Wins" replace the following:

  Four days after such a win occurs, all Cards and all Products are
  destroyed.

with:

  Four days after such a win occurs, all Cards and all Products are
  destroyed and any ongoing victory auctions end with no victors.

All victory auctions that were initiated before this proposal was
created end with no victors.


Title: I'd like to thank the academy
Author: Trigon
Coauthors:
AI: 1

[ COMMENT: This one's a lot less serious, but I like the concept.
  Initially, I felt bad that I won and Cuddlebeam didn't even get a
  consolation prize for eir cooperation in the victory.

  I just wanted to add the second half of this proposal to allow winners
  to nominate players for helping them win because we could always use
  more patent titles, but I realized that it might be fun to make it a
  ceremony. Being a Champion merits more whimsy than we afford it now.

  Neither of the lists in the rule are super solid right now, though
  their 

Re: BUS: humble agoran farmer flips

[Sarah S. via agora-business]

On Sat, Sep 18, 2021 at 7:15 PM Cuddle Beam via agora-business <
agora-business@agoranomic.org> wrote:

> I Plan to Flip my Focus to Participation
>

I plan to flip my focus to legislation

-- 
--
R. Lee

BUS: humble agoran farmer flips

[Cuddle Beam via agora-business]

I Plan to Flip my Focus to Participation