BUS: Sometimes it pays to ask?
I transfer 1 Justice card to Aspen.
BUS: I'm not a fan of mallards either
I register.
BUS: Time for a break (@Notary, Treasuror, Registrar)
Sorry about falling so far behind on things, things have been changing
quite abruptly in my life and I haven't been able to keep up with the
game or my officer duties.
I'll be back sometime, no doubt. Until then...
I create and become party to the following contract, titled "Dragon's
Hoard":
{
Any person can join or leave this contract by announcement. Telna can
amend this contract by announcement, but SHALL NOT impose obligations
upon other parties by doing so.
This contract can hold coins. Any player can transfer coins to this
contract by announcement. Telna can transfer coins from this contract to
any other entity by announcement.
Those who offer tribute to the dragon's hoard will be rewarded when the
dragon wakes.
}
I transfer all my coins to the above contract. I deregister (thus
resigning Arbitor).
BUS: Intent (Nothing Untoward Here, Honest)
I intend to temporarily deputise for Referee in order to conclude the investigation of ais523's pointed finger dated 2021-09-22. I pledge that, if allowed to execute on this intent, I will announce the Finger Pointing to be SHENANIGANS and transfer the coins gained from the resulting Cyan Glitter to the Referee.
BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8607-8630
On 2021-10-04 15:26, Aspen via agora-official wrote: ID Author(s) AITitle ---I vote as follows: 8607* Telna, ais523, Alexis 3.0 Asset Self-Ratification Fix FOR 8608* Telna, Jason, G., [1] 3.0 Powering Up FOR 8609& Jason 1.0 Axiom of Limitations FOR 8610& Jason 1.7 No Immediate Shenanigans PRESENT 8611& Jason, Trigon 1.0 Reasonably Responsive Reactivation PRESENT 8612& Jason, G., Ørjan1.0 Tournament Conclusion Fixes v2 FOR 8613* Jason, Trigon 3.0 The Name of the Win Cards v2 FOR 8614* Jason 3.0 Simultaneity Security FOR 8615* Jason 3.0 Supporter/Objector clarification v2 PRESENT 8616& nix, Telna, Trigon 1.0 Narrowing Margins AGAINST (this needs to start at a higher value if we do this) 8617& nix, G. 1.0 Forgiveness FOR 8618& nix, Jason 1.0 Solo Acitivity FOR 8619& ATMunn 1.0 The Bottomless Pit AGAINST (this should be a contract) 8620& R. Lee 1.0 Im coolxa AGAINST (why do you do these things) 8621* R. Lee 3.0 Proposal spreading ENDORSE the Promotor 8622* R. Lee 3.0 [2] AGAINST 8623& Trigon 1.0 No prizeless victory auctions PRESENT 8624& Trigon 1.0 I'd like to thank the academy AGAINST (agree with more whimsy, but getting victory-related patent titles for not winning is super bad and I wish dumb bribery proposals didn't do this already) 8625& Trigon 1.0 giving the gift of an amendment AGAINST 8626* Trigon, Jason, ais523 3.0 pledge(2)(2) AGAINST 8627& G. 1.0 INSANITY CLAUSES AGAINST 8628& G. 2.0 tacking into the win FOR 8629* G., Telna, nix, [3] 3.0 Independence Day FOR 8630* Cuddlebeam 3.0 A Very Merry Unvictory to Me! [1] FOR
Re: BUS: humble agoran farmer ends contracts
On 2021-09-22 15:35, Cuddle Beam via agora-business wrote: OK, I agree with Jason and Telna. We should defend contracts with an idle player! Therefore: I create the following contract called Joevotes: -+- Cuddlebeam and Slam_Joe_Jr_Supreme are the only persons that can become members of this contract, and can do so by announcement. Cuddlebeam can act on behalf of Slam_Joe_Jr_Supreme to submit a ballot with a vote of his (Cuddlebeam's) choice. Cuddlebeam can act on behalf of Slam_Joe_Jr_Supreme to cast a vote of his (Cuddlebeam's) choice. Cuddlebeam can act on behalf of Slam_Joe_Jr_Supreme to activate Slam_Joe_Jr_Supreme. After 6 months have passed since the creation of this contract, any party to this contract can destroy it by announcement. I intend to shred "Joevotes" without 2 objections.
BUS: (@Promotor) What's One More Than Four?
So we had a fun discussion about exactly how various high-power rules
interact when it comes to asserting themselves over other high-power
rules. There was a lot more confusion than there was consensus, so we
would like to put it to the test in a harmless way.
Accordingly, I submit and pend the following proposal:
Title: Powering Up
Author: Telna
Co-Authors: Jason, G., R. Lee, Trigon, ATMunn
Adoption Index: 3.0
{
Enact a Power-5 Rule titled "High Five" with the following text:
This Power-5 Rule (the first ever) commemorates the Agoran Spirit To
Break The Game.
Agora is no stranger to love. You know the Rules, and so do I.
This is the highest-powered Rule, no matter what. Even if it wouldn't
be, it is.
What is logic? Agora, don't hurt me.
Agora hereby apologises to the Rulekeepor for making em track this mess.
}
BUS: (@Treasuror) Transfer of An Asset
I transfer 1 Legislative Card to Jason.
Re: BUS: humble agoran farmer ends contracts
On 2021-09-22 02:51, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote: On 9/21/21 11:40, Cuddle Beam via agora-business wrote: I intend to shred "Jumblebeam Deal" without 2 objections. (never got used) I object. I also object.
Re: BUS: [Survivor] Finale Script: Feats
On 2021-09-21 09:58, Rose Strong via agora-business wrote:
As do I.
On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 9:16 AM ATMunn via agora-business <
agora-business@agoranomic.org> wrote:
On 9/15/2021 16:49, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote:
On 9/15/21 16:47, Kerim Aydin via agora-business wrote:
On 9/15/2021 1:15 PM, nix via agora-business wrote:
I, channeling the other side, publish the following Finale Script:
{
Amend "#Finale" to read in full:
Each Finale Survivor has 7 days from the adoption of the finale script
to enter one or more of the following TESTS, marked in the subject line
as a survivor move:
- Test of Strength: make a strong power move of some kind in Agora;
- Test of Brains: set a puzzle, similar in style to previous puzzle
rounds,
with the idea that ghosts would work on the puzzle together, and give
the
answer at the end of the week;
- Test of Heart: a public, artistic performance.
During the Finale, all Contestants CAN, by sending a message to the
Host, vote on a specified Survivor.When all Contestants have voted, or 11
days after the Finale began, the
Host CAN announce the Survivor who received the most votes, and Expel
all other Survivors.
}
I support this finale script. -G.
As do I.
As do I.
--
ATMunn
friendly neighborhood notary :)
I support as well.
BUS: Buying Justice Cards (@Notary)
I grant ten copies of the following promise to the Library: "Buying Justice Cards" created by Telnai Bearer: the Library Text: Cashing conditions: The bearer has transferred Telna one Justice Card in the same message as which e cashes this promise, and has not cashed any other promise between doing so and cashing this promise, and Telna has at least 250 coins. I transfer 250 coins to the bearer.
BUS: Use Them Or Lose Them (@Referee)
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: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8603-8606
On 2021-09-12 19:13, Aspen via agora-official wrote:
PROMOTOR'S REPORT AS OF RIGHT NOW.
The proposal pool currently contains the following proposal(s):
Author(s) AITitle
---
G. 1.0 another device defect
CoE: I think the quoted proposal got lost?
On 2021-09-05 15:18, Telna via agora-business wrote:
On 2021-09-05 15:16, Telna via agora-business wrote:
The basis for this CFJ is that asset self-ratification is currently
bugged. While all other cases of self-ratification in the ruleset
apply to "a public document that purports to be a report", asset
self-ratification instead simply applies to "a report". This
(unintentional) difference leads to a number of problems.
The easiest solution to the issues raised is to just fix asset
self-ratification to work as all other self-ratification does. As such,
I create and pay 1 Pendant to pend the following proposal:
Title: Asset Self-Ratification Fix
Author: Telna
Coauthors: ais523, Alexis
Adoption Index: 3.0
{
In Rule 2166 "Assets", replace the text "This portion of that entity's
report is self-ratifying." with the following:
A public document purporting to be this portion of that entity's report
is self-ratifying.
}
Re: BUS: Re: OFF: CFJ 3927 Assigned to Telna (@Promotor)
On 2021-09-05 15:16, Telna via agora-business wrote:
The basis for this CFJ is that asset self-ratification is currently
bugged. While all other cases of self-ratification in the ruleset apply
to "a public document that purports to be a report", asset
self-ratification instead simply applies to "a report". This
(unintentional) difference leads to a number of problems.
The easiest solution to the issues raised is to just fix asset
self-ratification to work as all other self-ratification does. As such,
I create and pay 1 Pendant to pend the following proposal:
Title: Asset Self-Ratification Fix
Author: Telna
Coauthors: ais523, Alexis
Adoption Index: 3.0
{
In Rule 2166 "Assets", replace the text "This portion of that entity's
report is self-ratifying." with the following:
A public document purporting to be this portion of that entity's report
is self-ratifying.
}
BUS: Re: OFF: CFJ 3927 Assigned to Telna
On 2021-09-04 19:52, Telna via agora-official wrote: The below CFJ is 3927. I assign it to Telna. = If the above-quoted message had explicitly listed the types of stones that exist (and otherwise contained the same information), then despite the disclaimer, it would have been self-ratifying. Called by ais523: Sat 04 Sep 2021 05:42:42 = On 2021-09-04 15:42, ais523 via agora-business wrote: On Sat, 2021-09-04 at 01:23 -0400, Jason Cobb via agora-official wrote: I hereby publish the following collection notice (NOT a self- ratifying stone report): All stones are owned by Agora, and are thus immune. No escape choices are necessary. CFJ: If the above-quoted message had explicitly listed the types of stones that exist (and otherwise contained the same information), then despite the disclaimer, it would have been self-ratifying. Evidence: The above-quoted message. Arguments: Most triggers for self-ratification in the rules require the thing that self-ratifies to purport to be something, e.g. a Ribbons report self-ratifies only if it's purporting to be a Ribbons report. However, assets are a separate case; rule 2166 states that the recordkeepor's report lists all instances of the class of assets and their owners, and that portion of the report is self-ratifying. In other words, the trigger is whether something *is* an asset report, not whether it *purports to be* one. The Stonemason's only weekly duty, as far as I can tell, is to be "the recordkeepor of stones". As such, I think any listing, published by the Stonemason, of what stones exist and who their owners are is a Stonemason weekly report by definition, even if it claims not to be. (Specifically, I think the hypothetical collection notice posited by the CFJ would be sufficient to satisfy the requirement in rule 2143 to perform the officekeepor's weekly duties.) As a side note: the actual message did not list what stones existed, which I think is sufficient to make it not count as a weekly report; I can't find anything in the rules that requires all the defined stones to exist (they're indestructible but nothing forces them to have been created in the first place). So this means, sadly, that I have to put a hypothetical in the statement to prevent the CFJ ending up with an obvious result on a technicality. The basis for this CFJ is that asset self-ratification is currently bugged. While all other cases of self-ratification in the ruleset apply to "a public document that purports to be a report", asset self-ratification instead simply applies to "a report". This (unintentional) difference leads to a number of problems. The first is that it maybe be possible for something to unintentionally be an asset report, and thus self-ratify by mistake. In this hypothetical instance, the CFJ posits that a list of all stones would self-ratify despite the document claiming to not be a self-ratifying report. The core problem is therefore: Is it possible for a report to not purport to be a report? While the Rules place a few constraints on what a report (or part of a report) can be, they infamously refuse to define what exactly a report is. This leaves the matter to be resolved by precedent and game custom. However, the precedent on this question is mixed and unclear: - In CFJ 3645, the caller argues that "A report occurs when an officer publishes certain information, whether they want it to or not." and "I'm inclined to think that the disclaimer is ineffective". These arguments were then accepted by the judge without further analysis. - In CFJ 3792, the judge (while discussing how self-ratification is intended to work) claims that "The important thing here is that, to publish a report, the Rules don't require the Officer to display intent, e.g. to say "I hereby publish the following report" as they would if they were publishing a report "by announcement". Rather, the rules require that the person simply "publish all the information"." The judge then goes on to argue that an explicit purportation is still required, but relies upon the intended form of self-ratification when making this claim. - In CFJ 3798, the judge discusses a strict list of requirements in order for a part of a report to qualify as such. This includes "Each part must purport to contain the full set of information that is rules-defined as being that portion of the report". Note that this is not the same thing as a document purporting to be a report, but instead that the document must purport to contain the information that a part of a report would necessarily include. How do we interpret these precedents? Nothing seems to dispute that a disclaimer is not enough to prevent a public document from being a report if that document contains all the information required to be in that report. So, what information is required to be in the Stonemason's report? Rule 2166 "Assets" has the answer. "The recordkeepor of a class of assets is the
BUS: Skipping the official trade system because effort (@Treasuror)
I transfer 85 coins to R. Lee.
BUS: Self-Grant (@Treasuror)
Pursuant to my Focus, I grant myself a Justice Card.
BUS: [Survivor] Finale Script
Let's get something rolling here - this text would have each team vote for a winner immediately. Feel free to pass it or not, but if you disagree then I STRONGLY ENCOURAGE you to suggest an alternative so that we can make something happen before the tournament expires. The below text is a Finale Script. I support it. = R. Lee becomes a Contestant and Ghost. --- Replace the text of section "#1 Winning" with the following: A Contestant wins when e is the only Survivor on eir team. When e achieves this, e has Outlasted the other Contestants on eir team. --- Replace the text of section "#Finale" with the following: During the Finale, all Contestants CAN, by sending a message to the Host, vote on a specified Survivor on eir team. When all Contestants have voted, or 7 days after the Finale began, the Host CAN announce the Survivor on each team who received the most votes, and Expel all other Survivors. --- All Ghosts rejoin the teams they were originally assigned to, but remain Ghosts. The Finale begins. =
BUS: Re: OFF: [Mad Scientist] Lab Notebook (also @treasuror)
On 2021-09-01 00:26, Kerim Aydin via agora-official wrote: I intend, with Agoran Consent, to cause Rule 2655 to amend Rule 2654, by appending the following list item[**] to the "device on" section: The week that contains the beginning of Agora's Device, together with the following week, is a Holiday. I support.
Re: BUS: The Arbitor is BORED. (@Treasuror)
On 2021-07-12 13:15, Telna via agora-business wrote: I pledge to transfer a total of 840 coins split between the player or players who do something before the end of July 2021 that is interesting enough to have another player call a non-trivial CFJ about it, provided at least one such player exists at the end of August 2021. (Terms and Conditions: Which CFJs qualify as "non-trivial" will be decided at the Arbitor's sole discretion. Please don't try to get me in trouble for offering free stuff.) Resolving the above: I transfer 630 coins to D. Wet for proposing to create a rule, resulting in CFJ 3922. I think we can all agree this has led to an interesting time for the judiciary of Agora! I transfer 210 coins to Trigon for attempting to call a CFJ on 13 Jul 2021 on 12 Jul 2021, resulting in CFJs 3919 and 3920. Sorry you got overshadowed!
BUS: CFJ 3925 Assigned to ais523
The below CFJ is 3925. I assign it to ais523. = If a Mad Scientist announces a random selection for a rule for a specified future week, and the ruleset doesn't change, e both can, and needs to, use that pick to fulfill eir weekly duties. Called by G.: Tue Aug 31 2021 14:43:34 = On 2021-09-01 00:42, Kerim Aydin via agora-business wrote: CFJ: If a Mad Scientist announces a random selection for a rule for a specified future week, and the ruleset doesn't change, e both can, and needs to, use that pick to fulfill eir weekly duties. Arguments: For the "can" part of the cfj, Rule 2655 reads in part: The Mad Engineer's weekly duties include the performance of the following tasks, in order: a) Randomly select exactly one rule. Now, we've generally accepted that random picks can be separate from action emails (e.g. use a dice server to get a confirmably random number, in a follow-up email perform the action that uses that number). But what if there's weeks of ahead-warning for what the pick will be? Are random picks well in advance on the dependent action still random, once published? The counterargument is that "weekly duties...randomly select" means that the random result can't be known to anyone (must still be random) until you get to the appropriate week. For the "needs to" part: If a draw is published, and later taken back (assuming the ruleset hasn't changed etc.), then the full selection process was biased in terms of discarding the previous pick, and wasn't determined uniformly.
BUS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] Decision to Determine Public Confidence in the Judgement of CFJ 3922 (Please Vote!)
On 2021-08-29 00:10, Telna via agora-official wrote: Having been entered into Moot, I hereby initiate the Agoran Decision to determine public confidence in R. Lee's judgement of CFJ 3922. I vote PRESENT.
Re: BUS: CFJ 3922 judged TRUE
On 2021-08-28 17:11, Aspen via agora-business wrote:> I intend, with 2 support, to enter this judgement into moot. I support so that this controversial case can be decided by the will of Agora.
Re: BUS: @Notary Promise (@Treasuror)
On 2021-08-24 18:34, Sarah S. via agora-business wrote: I create the following promise in Telna's possession. Cashing Condition: Telna transfers a Blot-B-Gone to R. Lee Text: R. Lee transfers 2 boatloads of coins to Telna -- R. Lee I transfer 1 Blot-B-Gone to R. Lee and cash the quoted promise.
BUS: (@Treasuror) Card Trade-In
I pay a set of 4 Justice Cards to gain 10 Blot-B-Gones.
BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8596-8601
I vote as follows: On 2021-08-23 08:53, Aspen via agora-official wrote: 8597& R. Lee 1.0 [1] AGAINST 8598& G. 1.0 [1] FOR 8599& G., Murphy 1.0 The Device (mark 2) FOR 8600& G. 2.0 fix win lockouts FOR 8601& Murphy, Telna 1.0 Adjust late recusal FOR
BUS: Self-Grant (@Treasuror)
Pursuant to my Focus, I grant myself a Justice Card.
Re: BUS: Fruit? Fruit.
On 2021-07-24 09:57, Telna via agora-business wrote: I become an Orchardor, becoming party to The Orchard. Hey while we're at it I want to know why this doesn't work I PLANT A TREE, specifying "Victory Cards" as the fruit type. I PICK FRUIT.
BUS: Fruit? Fruit.
I become an Orchardor, becoming party to The Orchard.
Re: BUS: Happy Tuesday!
I call a CFJ: Trigon initiated a Call for Judgement in the below message. (There's enough uncertainty in the arguments given in the Happy Tuesday thread that this makes sense to question) On 2021-07-13 15:30, Trigon via agora-business wrote: I call the following CFJ: This CFJ was called on 13 Jul 2021. Caller's Evidence: This message sure seems to think so. So as not to be dinged for No Faking, it is completely possible that nothing here worked.
BUS: Re: OFF: [Press] Payroll [@Treasuror]
On 2021-07-13 05:01, Falsifian via agora-official wrote: Coins Owed balances are as follows: lucidiot: 95 Telna: 95 I Redeem 95 Coins Owed (resulting in the transfer of 95 coins from the Agora Press contract to myself).
BUS: The Arbitor is BORED.
I pledge to transfer a total of 840 coins split between the player or players who do something before the end of July 2021 that is interesting enough to have another player call a non-trivial CFJ about it, provided at least one such player exists at the end of August 2021. (Terms and Conditions: Which CFJs qualify as "non-trivial" will be decided at the Arbitor's sole discretion. Please don't try to get me in trouble for offering free stuff.)
BUS: Re: OFF: [ADoP] Election updates
On 2021-07-12 06:40, Edward Murphy via agora-official wrote: I resolve elections as follows (sole nominees): * Telna is elected Arbitor I award myself an Emerald Ribbon.
Re: BUS: [Contract Amendment] Agoran Press Changes
On 2021-07-05 13:34, Telna via agora-business wrote: On 2021-07-05 11:17, Falsifian via agora-business wrote: I propose the following amendment to the Agoran Press contract, and I consent to it.I consent to this amendment. I really need to figure out why this happens :V To be clear, I do in fact consent to the amendment.
BUS: Re: OFF: [ADoP] Notice of Elections
On 2021-07-05 09:50, Edward Murphy via agora-official wrote: I publish the following Notice of Election: - Arbitor - Registrar - Tailor - ADoP Per new rule "The Election Cycle", this initiates an election for each of these offices. I become a candidate for Arbitor.
Re: BUS: [Contract Amendment] Agoran Press Changes
On 2021-07-05 11:17, Falsifian via agora-business wrote: I propose the following amendment to the Agoran Press contract, and I consent to it.I consent to this amendment.
Re: BUS: Slightly Inefficient Blot Removal Acquisition
On 2021-07-05 10:57, Gaelan Steele via agora-business wrote:
I create the following promise in the Library's possession: {
Cashing conditions: The bearer has transferred to Gaelan, in the same message,
two blot-be-gones.
Gaelan transfers the bearer one justice card.
}
Gaelan
I perform the following actions if and only if they all succeed:
{
I take the quoted promise from the Library.
I transfer two blot-be-gones to Gaelan.
I cash the quoted promise, causing Gaelan to transfer one justice card
to me.
}
BUS: Re: OFF: [Herald] 2021 Birthday Tournament: Survivor
On 2021-07-03 03:55, nix via agora-official wrote:> I initiate this tournament. Players may now become a contestant by announcement. I wanted to start Monday, but I realize that might be short notice, so I'll wait to see how many people sign up by then. I become a contestant.
Re: BUS: Player Continuity + Registration (ATTN: Treasuror)
On 2021-06-14 17:18, Telna via agora-business wrote: On 2021-06-14 17:09, Telna wrote: I Plan to Flip my Ministry Focus to Ministry of Compliance. I grant 1 Justice Card (my Ministry Focus' Grant) to myself.
Re: BUS: [DoV] Happy birthday [attn. Tailor]
On 2021-06-30 08:37, Falsifian via agora-business wrote: On Tue, Jun 29, 2021 at 08:27:48PM +0100, ais523 via agora-business wrote: On Tue, 2021-06-29 at 09:02 -0400, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote: It is Agora's birthday. Happy birthday, Agora! I award myself a Magenta ribbon. I Raise a Banner. Yay, another Agoran Birthday Ribbon win! I award myself Magenta glitter. -- ais523 Happy Birthday, Agora! I award myself Magenta glitter. Happy birthday to Agora~ Happy birthday to Agora~ I award myself Magenta Glitter~ Happy birthday to Agora~ ...bah, doesn't have the same ring to it.
BUS: BBG Sale (feat. shameless plagiarism)
I grant R. Lee the following promise:
{
Cashing conditions: It is June, 2021, UTC. The bearer has, in the same
message as e cashed this promise, transferred me 80 coins, without any
intervening promise cashes.
I transfer the bearer one Blot Be Gone.
}
BUS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] Court Gazette (@Tailor)
On 2021-06-22 10:55, Telna via agora-official wrote: I deputise for Arbitor (the office is vacant) to publish the following report: I award myself a Cyan Ribbon.
Re: BUS: Cleaning Up a Typo
On 2021-06-17 15:19, Telna via agora-business wrote: I intend without objection to clean Rule 2635 "Floating Rate Fleet" by correcting the word "Floatation" to "Flotation". Having received no objection, I do so.
BUS: Re: DIS: [Referee] Courtesy Flagging @Telna [@Treasuror]
On 2021-06-21 11:25, Rebecca Lee via agora-discussion wrote: Telna pointed 2 fingers that resulted in the CHOJ last Agoran week (E also pointed a single finger that resulted in a warning that was just inside this week by UTC). ATMunn pointed one such finger, nobody else pointed any. Telna may grant emself a Justice Card by announcement. I do so grant myself a Justice Card.
Re: BUS: Registration
On 2021-06-20 12:17, Surprise Nomic via agora-business wrote: I register with the preferred name 'surprise'. Welcome! I cause surprise to receive a Welcome Package.
BUS: Re: OFF: [Referee] Investigation of Telna and Indictment (plz support/oppose)
On 2021-06-19 07:29, Rebecca Lee via agora-official wrote: Telna pointed a finger at emself for Unjustified Gesticulation for eir finger pointing that was later found shenanigans. Original point (found shenanigans): https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-business/2021-June/046723.html Second point: https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-business/2021-June/046794.html Telna did indeed commit unjustified gesticulation by pointing a finger found to be Shenanigans. Because e did not point any other such fingers earlier in the week, the crime is class 0. Rule 2557 allows me to issue a Warning for class 0 crimes. Unfortunately, I cannot impose any blots by the Cold Hand of Justice under rule 2557 because I can impose a number of blots that is at most twice the crime's class, which is still 0. Clearly, Telna pointed this finger for personal gain of a justice card. E essentially admitted as such on discord. The element of profitability makes an upward variance appropriate (2557). I therefore intend, with 1.5 Agoran consent (this is the procedure under a new proposal, https://agoranomic.org/assessor/proposal/8560.txt) to Indict Telna, levying a fine of 2 blots. I object, stop bullying the newbie :(
Re: BUS: [@Referee] What is the Unit of Flotation?
On 2021-06-16 13:34, Telna via agora-business wrote: I Point my Finger at Trigon for not tracking the Unit of Flotation in eir weekly report as directed by Rule 2635 "Floating Rate Fleet". I point my Finger at Telna for committing the crime of Unjustified Gesticulation in the quoted message.
Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8574-8592
On 2021-06-18 14:22, ais523 via agora-business wrote: On Fri, 2021-06-18 at 00:20 -0400, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote: On 6/17/21 3:38 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote: 8586* Murphy 3.0 Clarify deputisation FOR I change this vote to AGAINST, per Falsifian. I also change my vote on this proposal to AGAINST. I also change my vote on this proposal to AGAINST.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [@Promotor] The Notary's Report is too long
On 2021-06-18 13:42, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion wrote: On Thu, Jun 17, 2021, 11:03 PM Telna via agora-business < agora-business@agoranomic.org> wrote: I create the following proposal: // Title: Contract Chaff Cleanup Adoption index: 2.5 Author: Telna Co-author(s): Amend Rule 1742 "Contracts" by appending the following as a new paragraph: The Notary CAN destroy a contract Without 2 Objections, but SHOULD NOT do so unless the contract no longer serves any significant purpose. // I grant the following promise, titled "Pendant Payment" to the Library: Cashing conditions: The bearer has pended the proposal "Contract Chaff Cleanup" authored by Telna, and Telna has at least 2 boatloads of coins. I transfer 2 boatloads of coins to the bearer. (This is currently valued at 28 coins) Proposal 8559 adds the same mechanism, but whether the proposal worked was under CFJ, so it hasn't appeared in a published ruleset. That will be remedied (hopefully) within a day. Right, I'm glad for that! Was a bit further back than I was looking. I retract the quoted proposal and revoke the quoted promise.
BUS: [@Promotor] The Notary's Report is too long
I create the following proposal: // Title: Contract Chaff Cleanup Adoption index: 2.5 Author: Telna Co-author(s): Amend Rule 1742 "Contracts" by appending the following as a new paragraph: The Notary CAN destroy a contract Without 2 Objections, but SHOULD NOT do so unless the contract no longer serves any significant purpose. // I grant the following promise, titled "Pendant Payment" to the Library: Cashing conditions: The bearer has pended the proposal "Contract Chaff Cleanup" authored by Telna, and Telna has at least 2 boatloads of coins. I transfer 2 boatloads of coins to the bearer. (This is currently valued at 28 coins)
Re: (mooty moot intent) Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] CFJ 3916 Assigned to ais523
On 2021-06-18 08:26, Aris Merchant via agora-business wrote: On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 2:07 PM Kerim Aydin via agora-business < agora-business@agoranomic.org> wrote: On 6/17/2021 5:37 AM, Telna via agora-business wrote: On 2021-06-14 22:40, Kerim Aydin via agora-business wrote: Do you really have any doubt that a finger pointed at me for failing to respond to the petition wouldn't have succeeded? We'll never know of course. But if I'd defended myself by saying "hey, that wasn't directed at me as PM, it was directed at me as a person" that wouldn't have held any water - the answer would be "you were the PM, you are you, there's no ambiguity, what's the problem?" If I had been the PM, I would have been forced to respond. But since I wasn't the PM, it's somehow retroactively ambiguous? Punished if I am, punished if I'm not. -G. I support the motion to reconsider. I intend to enter the judgement of CFJ 3916 into moot, with 2 support. Reasons: H. Judge ais523 has followed up to my intent to reconsider with some discussion arguments, but I think eir semantic dissections are missing the forest for the trees somewhat. I think this one of the rare cases where a moot/democracy may be a better determinate of resolving the controversy. It is a matter of post-hoc justification for Agora to consider - if I had been PM at the time of the petition and didn't respond, would Agora have considered it a formal petition, and therefore a penalty? When I thought I was PM back in February, and had counterscammers arrayed against me, I had no doubt they would use every tool in their arsenal, including this one. But maybe I'm wrong! Hence, perhaps, a polling moot. -G. I support. This should not be taken as agreement, just a sign that I want this to go to a vote. -Aris I support as well.
Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] CFJ 3916 Assigned to ais523
On 2021-06-14 22:40, Kerim Aydin via agora-business wrote: On 6/14/2021 3:08 AM, ais523 via agora-business wrote: I judge CFJ 3916 FALSE. I intend to motion to reconsider this with 2 support. Frankly, this seems unfair and like trying to have it two ways. Let's say I had been PM. And let's say I failed to respond to the petition. Do you really have any doubt that a finger pointed at me for failing to respond to the petition wouldn't have succeeded? We'll never know of course. But if I'd defended myself by saying "hey, that wasn't directed at me as PM, it was directed at me as a person" that wouldn't have held any water - the answer would be "you were the PM, you are you, there's no ambiguity, what's the problem?" If I had been the PM, I would have been forced to respond. But since I wasn't the PM, it's somehow retroactively ambiguous? Punished if I am, punished if I'm not. -G. I support the motion to reconsider.
BUS: [@Notary, Press] New Reportor on the Block
I become a party to the contract "Agoran Press". I transfer the Weekly Assignment from the contract "Agoran Press" to myself.
BUS: Cleaning Up a Typo
I intend without objection to clean Rule 2635 "Floating Rate Fleet" by correcting the word "Floatation" to "Flotation". (Wait, does Rule 2221 "Cleanliness and Tidy Filing" even work? Rule 105 "Rule Changes" says that no other rule can provide a mechanism to modify rules, and they're both the same power + the latter has a lower ID number. I make the intent regardless, though.)
BUS: Re: OFF: [Referee] Investigation of Trigon
On 2021-06-17 13:56, Rebecca Lee via agora-official wrote: This is my investigation of Telnaior's finger pointing at Trigon, here: https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-business/2021-June/046723.html Rule 2635 states that the Unit of Flotation is tracked in the Treasuror's weekly report. Rule 2143 states the following "If any task is defined by the rules as part of that person's weekly duties, then e SHALL perform it at least once each week. If any information is defined by the rules as part of that person's weekly report, then e SHALL maintain all such information, and the publication of all such information is part of eir weekly duties." The rule makes clear that the publication of "all such information" that must be tracked by the Treasuror must be performed at least once per week. Trigon has not violated this rule for this Agoran week (I'm assuming Telnaior was referring to eir most recent report, which was published this week) until the week elapses without that information having been published. Trigon must, of course, publish this information before the end of the week (it would be best if e included this info in eir weekly report documents, which I have been informed e has never done). I find this finger pointing SHENANIGANS. *sigh* I Point my Finger at Trigon for not tracking the Unit of Flotation in eir weekly report for the week beginning June 7th as directed by Rule 2635 "Floating Rate Fleet". I Point my Finger at Trigon for not tracking the Unit of Flotation in eir weekly report for the week beginning May 31st as directed by Rule 2635 "Floating Rate Fleet".
Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8574-8592
Clarifying: On 2021-06-16 14:00, Telna via agora-business wrote: 8585* Murphy 3.0 Clarify variable voting periodFOR I vote FOR 8585. 8592& ATMunn 1.0 Secret proposal DAGAINST I vote AGAINST 8592.
BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8574-8592
I vote as follows:> 8574& Trigon, Jason, Aris 1.0 mending the quill FOR 8575& Jason, Gaelan 2.0 Stone Win Delay v2 FOR 8576* Jason, Aris, Murphy 3.0 "By announcement" loosening FOR 8577* Jason 3.0 Festival intent eligibility FOR 8578& Jason, Trigon 2.0 Auction limitation FOR 8579* Jason, Trigon 3.0 AI voting method clarification v2 FOR 8580* Jason, ais523, Trigon 3.0 Strength Buying Separation v2 PRESENT 8581& Aris1.0 Grants on Resets AGAINST Aren't there enough cards going around at the start of the round already? I'd support this if it only awarded your grant if you'd used it already that month (and just lost it in the reset). 8582& Aris2.0 The Artistry Lies in the Art PRESENT 8583* Murphy 3.0 Clarify switches FOR 8584* Murphy 3.0 Effective deference PRESENT I feel very wary of this one. 8585* Murphy 3.0 Clarify variable voting periodFOR 8586* Murphy 3.0 Clarify deputisation FOR 8587& Murphy, G. 2.0 Clarify nomination period FOR 8588& Murphy, G. 2.0 Clarify stone retrieval AGAINST Why are we locking L out of coins? 8589& ATMunn 1.0 Secret proposal A AGAINST 8590& ATMunn 1.0 Secret proposal B AGAINST 8591& ATMunn 1.0 Secret proposal C AGAINST 8592& ATMunn 1.0 Secret proposal DAGAINST
BUS: [@Referee] What is the Unit of Flotation?
I Point my Finger at Trigon for not tracking the Unit of Flotation in eir weekly report as directed by Rule 2635 "Floating Rate Fleet".
Re: BUS: [Treasuror] A Completed Set
On 2021-06-15 02:55, Telna via agora-business wrote: Having gathered four Justice Cards (one from Welcome Package, one from Cuddlebeam, one from Murphy, one from G.), I pay a set of 4 Justice Cards to receive 10 Blot-B-Gones. I transfer 2 Blot-B-Gones to G.
BUS: [Treasuror] A Completed Set
Having gathered four Justice Cards (one from Welcome Package, one from Cuddlebeam, one from Murphy, one from G.), I pay a set of 4 Justice Cards to receive 10 Blot-B-Gones.
BUS: Trading Card Minmaxing feat. an old promise
I transfer Murphy one Legislative card. I take the promise "Legislative for Justice v2", created by Murphy, from the Library and cash it. For reference: "Legislative for Justice v2" created by Murphy Cashing conditions: The bearer has transferred or granted Murphy one Legislative Card in the same message as which e cashes this promise, and has not cashed any other promise between doing so and cashing this promise, and Murphy has at least one Justice Card. I transfer one Justice Card to the bearer.
BUS: EVERYTHING IS FINE
I create the following promise, titled "Another VC on the wall": - Cashing conditions: The bearer has transferred or granted Telna 300 coins and one Justice Card in the same message as which e cashes this promise, and has not cashed any other promise between doing so and cashing this promise, and Telna has at least one Victory Card. I transfer one Victory Card to the bearer. - I transfer the promise "Another VC on the wall" to Cuddlebeam.
Re: BUS: Player Continuity + Registration (ATTN: Treasuror)
On 2021-06-14 17:09, Telna wrote: On 2021-06-14 17:07, Telnaior via agora-business wrote: Hi, My new preferred name is Telna and my new email is agorate...@iprimus.com.au. Please understand that I continue to be the same person as when I was previously a player. Confirming the above. I register as a Player. I cause myself to receive a Welcome Package. Sorry, forgot one other thing: I Plan to Flip my Ministry Focus to Ministry of Compliance. (Why does Ministry of Economy not have a Grant?)
Re: BUS: Player Continuity + Registration (ATTN: Registrar)
On 2021-06-14 17:07, Telnaior via agora-business wrote: Hi, My new preferred name is Telna and my new email is agorate...@iprimus.com.au. Please understand that I continue to be the same person as when I was previously a player. Confirming the above. I register as a Player. I cause myself to receive a Welcome Package.
