DIS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Resolution of Proposals 8077-8085, 8088 and 8087
Actually, upon re-reading rule 2350/9, I think my statement that proposals can't be distributed three times may be incorrect. It would make more sense if the word "once" in the rule meant a proposal could only be redistributed once each time it failed quorum (which is eminently sensible - imagine if there were two simultaneous votes on the same proposal and they had different results!), not that it could only be redistributed once ever. -twg ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On August 25, 2018 10:45 AM, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: > I resolve the most recent Agoran Decisions to adopt each of Proposals > 8077-8081 as described below. > > I resolve the Agoran Decisions to adopt each of Proposals 8082-8085 as > described below. > > I resolve the Agoran Decisions to adopt Proposals 8088 and 8087, in that > order, as described below. > > (The purpose of resolving the last two proposals out of order is to > minimise quorum for the next distribution. This is not part of a scam.) > > -twg > > SUMMARY > > == > > ID Author(s) Title Result > > > > 8077A twg Patchy McPatchface FAILED QUORUM > 8078A twg From each according to eir means FAILED QUORUM > 8079A twg From each according to eir means v2 FAILED QUORUM > 8080A Aris, twg From each according to eir means v3 FAILED QUORUM > 8081A Aris, G., twg Point Installation Act v2 FAILED QUORUM > 8082 twg Gamestate correction for July 2018 FAILED QUORUM > 8083 G. quorum fixes FAILED QUORUM > 8084 Trigon Needs more Competition FAILED QUORUM > 8085 Kenyon, twg Plain Old Bribery, Mk. II FAILED QUORUM > 8088 Kenyon, twg Return of the Zombie Loopholes FAILED QUORUM > 8087 Aris Even Freer Proposals v2 FAILED QUORUM > > An "A" in the ID column indicates that the proposal has been distributed > twice. (Note that proposals CANNOT be distributed three times.) > > TALLY OF VOTES > > = > > ++++++++++++ > |8077|8078|8079|8080|8081|8082|8083|8084|8085|8088|8087| > +--++++++++++++ > |Aris | AA | AA | P | FF | FF | FF | FF | FF | AA | FF | FF | > |G. | | | | | F | P | F | A | F | F | | > |Murphy | F | F | F | F | P | P | F | P | F | F | F | > |Trigon | P | A | F | A | F | F | F | F | P | F | A | > |twg | F | F | F | F | F | F | F | A | F | F | F | > +--++++++++++++ > |Kenyon | F | F | F | F | F | F | F | A | F | F | F | > +--++++++++++++ > |FOR | 3 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 5 | 7 | 3 | 4 | 7 | 5 | > |AGAINST | 2 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 1 | > |AI | 3.0| 2.0| 2.0| 2.0| 3.0| 1.0| 3.0| 1.0| 1.0| 1.0| 1.0| > |Ballots | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 5 | > |Quorum | 7 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 7 | > |Resolved |F.Q.|F.Q.|F.Q.|F.Q.|F.Q.|F.Q.|F.Q.|F.Q.|F.Q.|F.Q.|F.Q.| > +--++++++++++++ > F = FOR; A = AGAINST; P = PRESENT; F.Q. = FAILED QUORUM > > Quorum on Agoran Decisions is now 3 except where otherwise specified.
Re: DIS: Hello
That seems like a precedent with an interesting story behind it. What happened? -twg ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On August 25, 2018 5:47 AM, Aris Merchant wrote: > On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 10:36 PM Alex Smith ais...@alumni.bham.ac.uk > wrote: > > > On Fri, 2018-08-24 at 22:30 -0700, Aris Merchant wrote: > > > > > On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 10:28 PM windlessq hickory zan...@gmail.com > > > wrote: > > > > > > > How do I join the game > > > > > > You might have just done so. To be absolutely sure, send a message to > > > agora-business with the text “I register.”, and sign with your > > > nickname if you have one you want to be called by. Also, welcome to > > > the game! > > > > My guess is that this doesn't work as a registration message; precedent > > is that our current registration standard requires that the message > > carries something to indicate when the registration is supposed to > > happen. > > Asking about how to register doesn't necessarily imply you want to > > register immediately; you might ask how to register if you plan to > > register in the future. > > (A while back I started simply taking actions to a-b that would have > > required me to be a player, but that was ruled to not be registration, > > I think for this same reason. The message here is less blatant.) > > -- > > ais523 > > > Our current precedent also indicates that publicly announcing the > > deployment of cuttlefish can cause registration. I disagree with that one, > actually. > > -Aris
Re: DIS: Hello
Welcome!!! You've sent this to the discussion forum (agora-discussion@agoranomic.org). With rare exception, no actions sent to this forum do anything. To register, send the same message to agora-busin...@agoranomic.org. You should subscribe to that and also agora-offic...@agoranomic.org. If you also let us know the name/nickname you wish to be known by, that would be great (otherwise I can just use windlessq). -The Registrar (nickname: G.). On Sat, 25 Aug 2018, windlessq hickory wrote: > B+. I want to register lol. > > On Sat, Aug 25, 2018 at 1:36 AM Alex Smith wrote: > > > On Fri, 2018-08-24 at 22:30 -0700, Aris Merchant wrote: > > > On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 10:28 PM windlessq hickory > > > wrote: > > > > How do I join the game > > > > > > You might have just done so. To be absolutely sure, send a message to > > > agora-business with the text “I register.”, and sign with your > > > nickname if you have one you want to be called by. Also, welcome to > > > the game! > > > > My guess is that this doesn't work as a registration message; precedent > > is that our current registration standard requires that the message > > carries something to indicate when the registration is supposed to > > happen. > > > > Asking about how to register doesn't necessarily imply you want to > > register immediately; you might ask how to register if you plan to > > register in the future. > > > > (A while back I started simply taking actions to a-b that would have > > required me to be a player, but that was ruled to not be registration, > > I think for this same reason. The message here is less blatant.) > > > > -- > > ais523 > > >
Re: DIS: Hello
There's a far more straightforward argument for this not working as a registration message: it was sent to agora-discussion, which is not a public forum. (Though I admit I did check the most recent Registrar report on agora-official to check that G. hadn't sneakily reclassified it as a public forum...) Rule 869/44: An Unregistered person CAN (unless explicitly forbidden or prevented by the rules) register by publishing a message that indicates reasonably clearly and reasonably unambiguously that e intends to become a player at that time. Rule 478/34: A public message is a message sent via a public forum, or sent to all players and containing a clear designation of intent to be public. A rule can also designate that a part of one public message is considered a public message in its own right. A person "publishes" or "announces" something by sending a public message. -twg ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On August 25, 2018 5:36 AM, Alex Smith wrote: > On Fri, 2018-08-24 at 22:30 -0700, Aris Merchant wrote: > > > On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 10:28 PM windlessq hickory zan...@gmail.com > > wrote: > > > > > How do I join the game > > > > You might have just done so. To be absolutely sure, send a message to > > agora-business with the text “I register.”, and sign with your > > nickname if you have one you want to be called by. Also, welcome to > > the game! > > My guess is that this doesn't work as a registration message; precedent > is that our current registration standard requires that the message > carries something to indicate when the registration is supposed to > happen. > > Asking about how to register doesn't necessarily imply you want to > register immediately; you might ask how to register if you plan to > register in the future. > > (A while back I started simply taking actions to a-b that would have > required me to be a player, but that was ruled to not be registration, > I think for this same reason. The message here is less blatant.) > > -- > > ais523
Re: DIS: Come get your rulesets here!
You definitely aren’t obliged to keep them updated. Keeping existing ones in the ruleset is preferable, but isn’t imminently necessary. It’s annoying not to have them in the long run, so it would be nice if they could be added back in, but it shouldn’t stop you from taking the office. Thanks for stepping up! -Aris On Sat, Aug 25, 2018 at 3:22 PM Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: > I've been looking into the possibility of taking over Rulekeepor, in the > absence of any other willing candidate, and have been looking through your > ruleset generation system. > > One thing I'd like to ask (to everyone, not just you) is whether the > inclusion of major CFJs in the Full Logical Ruleset is important. > Historically, they have been listed as annotations to the rules they > interpret (as in, for example, the two-month-old version at > https://agoranomic.org/ruleset/flr.txt), but your version doesn't include > them, and rule 1681/21 doesn't require them to be included - it just says > "any other information which [the Rulekeepor] feels may be helpful", and > even then it's a SHOULD, not a MUST. > > The thing is, I have no idea where to find information about historical > CFJs other than that two-month-old FLR, and I certainly haven't been > keeping track of CFJs over the last couple of months. So if they are an > integral part of the FLR, it's not a job I can reliably take over, at least > not yet. > > -twg > > > ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ > On August 4, 2018 5:09 AM, Reuben Staley wrote: > > > So I've been on vacation for a while and instead of relaxing like a > > normal person, I decided to make some more up-to-date rulesets. > > > > But not only that. > > > > I couldn't figure out how to install the Haskell code's dependencies so > > I went and rewrote the entire thing in Python. > > > > My hope is that with an easier language to develop with, and with only > > one dependency, it will make the position of Rulekeepor more enticing. > > > > So, uh, yeah. > > > > SHORT LOGICAL RULESET: > > https://github.com/AgoraNomic/ruleset/blob/trigon/slr.txt > > > > FULL LOGICAL RULESET: > > https://github.com/AgoraNomic/ruleset/blob/trigon/flr.txt > > > > I do not intend to deputise for Rulekeepor. Rulekeepor and Cartographor > > simultaneously would be far too much work for me to handle, especially > > with summer ending soon. > > > > But for the time being, these are at least a little more up-to-date. > > > > Enjoy. > > > > Also, there are likely a good few mistakes. Please point them out. > > > > > > > > > Trigon > > >
Re: DIS: Come get your rulesets here!
I didn't include them because I was afraid that there would be more CFJs I should add to the list that someone would get mad at me for not including. If you would like to take the office of Rulekeepor, I can write some code to include annotations and you can deal with adding the new ones because I'm sure as heck not knowledgeable enough about CFJs to do so. On Sat, Aug 25, 2018, 16:22 Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: > I've been looking into the possibility of taking over Rulekeepor, in the > absence of any other willing candidate, and have been looking through your > ruleset generation system. > > One thing I'd like to ask (to everyone, not just you) is whether the > inclusion of major CFJs in the Full Logical Ruleset is important. > Historically, they have been listed as annotations to the rules they > interpret (as in, for example, the two-month-old version at > https://agoranomic.org/ruleset/flr.txt), but your version doesn't include > them, and rule 1681/21 doesn't require them to be included - it just says > "any other information which [the Rulekeepor] feels may be helpful", and > even then it's a SHOULD, not a MUST. > > The thing is, I have no idea where to find information about historical > CFJs other than that two-month-old FLR, and I certainly haven't been > keeping track of CFJs over the last couple of months. So if they are an > integral part of the FLR, it's not a job I can reliably take over, at least > not yet. > > -twg > > > ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ > On August 4, 2018 5:09 AM, Reuben Staley wrote: > > > So I've been on vacation for a while and instead of relaxing like a > > normal person, I decided to make some more up-to-date rulesets. > > > > But not only that. > > > > I couldn't figure out how to install the Haskell code's dependencies so > > I went and rewrote the entire thing in Python. > > > > My hope is that with an easier language to develop with, and with only > > one dependency, it will make the position of Rulekeepor more enticing. > > > > So, uh, yeah. > > > > SHORT LOGICAL RULESET: > > https://github.com/AgoraNomic/ruleset/blob/trigon/slr.txt > > > > FULL LOGICAL RULESET: > > https://github.com/AgoraNomic/ruleset/blob/trigon/flr.txt > > > > I do not intend to deputise for Rulekeepor. Rulekeepor and Cartographor > > simultaneously would be far too much work for me to handle, especially > > with summer ending soon. > > > > But for the time being, these are at least a little more up-to-date. > > > > Enjoy. > > > > Also, there are likely a good few mistakes. Please point them out. > > > > > > > > > Trigon > > >
Re: DIS: Come get your rulesets here!
I've been looking into the possibility of taking over Rulekeepor, in the absence of any other willing candidate, and have been looking through your ruleset generation system. One thing I'd like to ask (to everyone, not just you) is whether the inclusion of major CFJs in the Full Logical Ruleset is important. Historically, they have been listed as annotations to the rules they interpret (as in, for example, the two-month-old version at https://agoranomic.org/ruleset/flr.txt), but your version doesn't include them, and rule 1681/21 doesn't require them to be included - it just says "any other information which [the Rulekeepor] feels may be helpful", and even then it's a SHOULD, not a MUST. The thing is, I have no idea where to find information about historical CFJs other than that two-month-old FLR, and I certainly haven't been keeping track of CFJs over the last couple of months. So if they are an integral part of the FLR, it's not a job I can reliably take over, at least not yet. -twg ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On August 4, 2018 5:09 AM, Reuben Staley wrote: > So I've been on vacation for a while and instead of relaxing like a > normal person, I decided to make some more up-to-date rulesets. > > But not only that. > > I couldn't figure out how to install the Haskell code's dependencies so > I went and rewrote the entire thing in Python. > > My hope is that with an easier language to develop with, and with only > one dependency, it will make the position of Rulekeepor more enticing. > > So, uh, yeah. > > SHORT LOGICAL RULESET: > https://github.com/AgoraNomic/ruleset/blob/trigon/slr.txt > > FULL LOGICAL RULESET: > https://github.com/AgoraNomic/ruleset/blob/trigon/flr.txt > > I do not intend to deputise for Rulekeepor. Rulekeepor and Cartographor > simultaneously would be far too much work for me to handle, especially > with summer ending soon. > > But for the time being, these are at least a little more up-to-date. > > Enjoy. > > Also, there are likely a good few mistakes. Please point them out. > > > > Trigon
Re: DIS: Come get your rulesets here!
Oh, also, would you like me to add some documentation? Figuring out Alexis' system was a bit of a pain for me. On Sat, Aug 25, 2018, 16:27 Reuben Staley wrote: > I didn't include them because I was afraid that there would be more CFJs I > should add to the list that someone would get mad at me for not including. > If you would like to take the office of Rulekeepor, I can write some code > to include annotations and you can deal with adding the new ones because > I'm sure as heck not knowledgeable enough about CFJs to do so. > > On Sat, Aug 25, 2018, 16:22 Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: > >> I've been looking into the possibility of taking over Rulekeepor, in the >> absence of any other willing candidate, and have been looking through your >> ruleset generation system. >> >> One thing I'd like to ask (to everyone, not just you) is whether the >> inclusion of major CFJs in the Full Logical Ruleset is important. >> Historically, they have been listed as annotations to the rules they >> interpret (as in, for example, the two-month-old version at >> https://agoranomic.org/ruleset/flr.txt), but your version doesn't >> include them, and rule 1681/21 doesn't require them to be included - it >> just says "any other information which [the Rulekeepor] feels may be >> helpful", and even then it's a SHOULD, not a MUST. >> >> The thing is, I have no idea where to find information about historical >> CFJs other than that two-month-old FLR, and I certainly haven't been >> keeping track of CFJs over the last couple of months. So if they are an >> integral part of the FLR, it's not a job I can reliably take over, at least >> not yet. >> >> -twg >> >> >> ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ >> On August 4, 2018 5:09 AM, Reuben Staley wrote: >> >> > So I've been on vacation for a while and instead of relaxing like a >> > normal person, I decided to make some more up-to-date rulesets. >> > >> > But not only that. >> > >> > I couldn't figure out how to install the Haskell code's dependencies so >> > I went and rewrote the entire thing in Python. >> > >> > My hope is that with an easier language to develop with, and with only >> > one dependency, it will make the position of Rulekeepor more enticing. >> > >> > So, uh, yeah. >> > >> > SHORT LOGICAL RULESET: >> > https://github.com/AgoraNomic/ruleset/blob/trigon/slr.txt >> > >> > FULL LOGICAL RULESET: >> > https://github.com/AgoraNomic/ruleset/blob/trigon/flr.txt >> > >> > I do not intend to deputise for Rulekeepor. Rulekeepor and Cartographor >> > simultaneously would be far too much work for me to handle, especially >> > with summer ending soon. >> > >> > But for the time being, these are at least a little more up-to-date. >> > >> > Enjoy. >> > >> > Also, there are likely a good few mistakes. Please point them out. >> > >> > >> >> > >> > Trigon >> >> >>
Re: DIS: Come get your rulesets here!
I'm not sure - I haven't actually looked at the code or tried to install anything yet, I'm still in the "this is a thing that might happen" stage - but anything you can tell me is useful. The format of the YAML files seems pretty self-explanatory, though. I don't know a great deal of Python and probably wouldn't know where to start trying to code in annotations myself, but if you are willing to do that then I can try to find time to go over the last couple of months of agora-business and list the recent CFJs. -twg ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On August 25, 2018 10:29 PM, Reuben Staley wrote: > Oh, also, would you like me to add some documentation? Figuring out Alexis' > system was a bit of a pain for me. > > On Sat, Aug 25, 2018, 16:27 Reuben Staley wrote: > >> I didn't include them because I was afraid that there would be more CFJs I >> should add to the list that someone would get mad at me for not including. >> If you would like to take the office of Rulekeepor, I can write some code to >> include annotations and you can deal with adding the new ones because I'm >> sure as heck not knowledgeable enough about CFJs to do so. >> >> On Sat, Aug 25, 2018, 16:22 Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: >> >>> I've been looking into the possibility of taking over Rulekeepor, in the >>> absence of any other willing candidate, and have been looking through your >>> ruleset generation system. >>> >>> One thing I'd like to ask (to everyone, not just you) is whether the >>> inclusion of major CFJs in the Full Logical Ruleset is important. >>> Historically, they have been listed as annotations to the rules they >>> interpret (as in, for example, the two-month-old version at >>> https://agoranomic.org/ruleset/flr.txt), but your version doesn't include >>> them, and rule 1681/21 doesn't require them to be included - it just says >>> "any other information which [the Rulekeepor] feels may be helpful", and >>> even then it's a SHOULD, not a MUST. >>> >>> The thing is, I have no idea where to find information about historical >>> CFJs other than that two-month-old FLR, and I certainly haven't been >>> keeping track of CFJs over the last couple of months. So if they are an >>> integral part of the FLR, it's not a job I can reliably take over, at least >>> not yet. >>> >>> -twg >>> >>> ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ >>> On August 4, 2018 5:09 AM, Reuben Staley wrote: >>> So I've been on vacation for a while and instead of relaxing like a normal person, I decided to make some more up-to-date rulesets. But not only that. I couldn't figure out how to install the Haskell code's dependencies so I went and rewrote the entire thing in Python. My hope is that with an easier language to develop with, and with only one dependency, it will make the position of Rulekeepor more enticing. So, uh, yeah. SHORT LOGICAL RULESET: https://github.com/AgoraNomic/ruleset/blob/trigon/slr.txt FULL LOGICAL RULESET: https://github.com/AgoraNomic/ruleset/blob/trigon/flr.txt I do not intend to deputise for Rulekeepor. Rulekeepor and Cartographor simultaneously would be far too much work for me to handle, especially with summer ending soon. But for the time being, these are at least a little more up-to-date. Enjoy. Also, there are likely a good few mistakes. Please point them out. Trigon
Re: DIS: Come get your rulesets here!
I'm ~a year behind in updating (and have been stuck midway in porting it to Agoranomic.org since spring) but old CFJs are here: https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/ But updating those in the FLR is definitely an optional extra. Very much optional. On Sat, 25 Aug 2018, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: > I've been looking into the possibility of taking over Rulekeepor, in the > absence of any other willing candidate, and have been looking through your > ruleset generation system. > > One thing I'd like to ask (to everyone, not just you) is whether the > inclusion of major CFJs in the Full Logical Ruleset is important. > Historically, they have been listed as annotations to the rules they > interpret (as in, for example, the two-month-old version at > https://agoranomic.org/ruleset/flr.txt), but your version doesn't include > them, and rule 1681/21 doesn't require them to be included - it just says > "any other information which [the Rulekeepor] feels may be helpful", and even > then it's a SHOULD, not a MUST. > > The thing is, I have no idea where to find information about historical CFJs > other than that two-month-old FLR, and I certainly haven't been keeping track > of CFJs over the last couple of months. So if they are an integral part of > the FLR, it's not a job I can reliably take over, at least not yet. > > -twg > > > ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ > On August 4, 2018 5:09 AM, Reuben Staley wrote: > > > So I've been on vacation for a while and instead of relaxing like a > > normal person, I decided to make some more up-to-date rulesets. > > > > But not only that. > > > > I couldn't figure out how to install the Haskell code's dependencies so > > I went and rewrote the entire thing in Python. > > > > My hope is that with an easier language to develop with, and with only > > one dependency, it will make the position of Rulekeepor more enticing. > > > > So, uh, yeah. > > > > SHORT LOGICAL RULESET: > > https://github.com/AgoraNomic/ruleset/blob/trigon/slr.txt > > > > FULL LOGICAL RULESET: > > https://github.com/AgoraNomic/ruleset/blob/trigon/flr.txt > > > > I do not intend to deputise for Rulekeepor. Rulekeepor and Cartographor > > simultaneously would be far too much work for me to handle, especially > > with summer ending soon. > > > > But for the time being, these are at least a little more up-to-date. > > > > Enjoy. > > > > Also, there are likely a good few mistakes. Please point them out. > > > > > > > > Trigon > > >
DIS: Re: BUS: There's always something we miss
Yes you are absolutely doing it right :). Good catch. On Sat, 25 Aug 2018, D Margaux wrote: > Hi everyone! > > I Call for Judgement (barring twg) on the following statement: “D. Margaux > currently has in eir possession 5 incense.” > > Argument in favor: R2499 does state quite clearly that, as part of the > Welcome Package, “Agora creates ... the ... /assets/” of “5 incense” in the > welcomed Player’s possession. So I believe that Rule does establish that > incense is an asset (a pointless one, admittedly), and awards it as part of > a Welcome Package, as its text straightforwardly says. Certainly, it is > absurd to create an asset that has no useful purpose and that is referenced > nowhere else in the Rules, but, under R217, such an absurdity affords no > reason to ignore the text of R2499. > > (Am I doing this right? :-) ) > > On Sat, Aug 25, 2018 at 6:34 PM Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: > > > I submit and pend the following proposal: > > > > // > > Title: Yet Another Economics Patch > > Adoption index: 1.0 > > Author: twg > > > > Amend rule 2499, "Welcome Packages", by removing the list item > > "5 incense" and renumbering the other list items appropriately. > > > > Destroy all incense. > > > > // > > > > I don't _think_ this has a mechanical effect, because incense isn't > > explicitly defined anywhere any more (so it's not technically an > > asset, so D. Margaux can't have been erroneously given any), but > > there's no point keeping it around in the ruleset to confuse people. > > > > -twg > > >
Re: DIS: Come get your rulesets here!
Also for recent stuff, the "recently-resolved cases" sections of the court gazette has summaries that can be grabbed for annotations. On Sat, 25 Aug 2018, Kerim Aydin wrote: > I'm ~a year behind in updating (and have been stuck midway in porting it > to Agoranomic.org since spring) but old CFJs are here: > https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/ > > But updating those in the FLR is definitely an optional extra. Very much > optional. > > On Sat, 25 Aug 2018, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: > > I've been looking into the possibility of taking over Rulekeepor, in the > > absence of any other willing candidate, and have been looking through your > > ruleset generation system. > > > > One thing I'd like to ask (to everyone, not just you) is whether the > > inclusion of major CFJs in the Full Logical Ruleset is important. > > Historically, they have been listed as annotations to the rules they > > interpret (as in, for example, the two-month-old version at > > https://agoranomic.org/ruleset/flr.txt), but your version doesn't include > > them, and rule 1681/21 doesn't require them to be included - it just says > > "any other information which [the Rulekeepor] feels may be helpful", and > > even then it's a SHOULD, not a MUST. > > > > The thing is, I have no idea where to find information about historical > > CFJs other than that two-month-old FLR, and I certainly haven't been > > keeping track of CFJs over the last couple of months. So if they are an > > integral part of the FLR, it's not a job I can reliably take over, at least > > not yet. > > > > -twg > > > > > > ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ > > On August 4, 2018 5:09 AM, Reuben Staley wrote: > > > > > So I've been on vacation for a while and instead of relaxing like a > > > normal person, I decided to make some more up-to-date rulesets. > > > > > > But not only that. > > > > > > I couldn't figure out how to install the Haskell code's dependencies so > > > I went and rewrote the entire thing in Python. > > > > > > My hope is that with an easier language to develop with, and with only > > > one dependency, it will make the position of Rulekeepor more enticing. > > > > > > So, uh, yeah. > > > > > > SHORT LOGICAL RULESET: > > > https://github.com/AgoraNomic/ruleset/blob/trigon/slr.txt > > > > > > FULL LOGICAL RULESET: > > > https://github.com/AgoraNomic/ruleset/blob/trigon/flr.txt > > > > > > I do not intend to deputise for Rulekeepor. Rulekeepor and Cartographor > > > simultaneously would be far too much work for me to handle, especially > > > with summer ending soon. > > > > > > But for the time being, these are at least a little more up-to-date. > > > > > > Enjoy. > > > > > > Also, there are likely a good few mistakes. Please point them out. > > > > > > > > > > > > Trigon > > > > > > >
