DIS: Re: BUS: Birthday Tournament Regulations v1.1
On 6/29/20 9:52 PM, Kerim Aydin via agora-business wrote: > > On 6/29/2020 10:22 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote: >> I intend, Without 3 Objections, to enact the following — modified from >> previous Birthday regulations and a variety of rulesets for Diplomacy, >> primarily those of EPCC [0] and the official rules [1] and corrected >> according to feedback — as the regulations for this year's Birthday >> Tournament. > > I support! > > > Finally got to read this, some small comments: > >> If fewer than seven persons have become Contestants, >> the Gamemaster CAN replace the text of these regulations with >> appropriate regulations for a Nomic-inspired game, such as FRC, an >> experimental Nomic, or a sub-Nomic. > > I love the fact that this could morph into any game. Hopefully, we won't need this, but it's good to have. > >> The judge SHOULD award a badge to all participants in >> the Tournament, broadly construed, after the conclusion of the >> Tournament unless it has not been completed in a satisfactory manner. > > Traditionally, for badges we've also included non-members who watch and > actively comment. That's my intent is "broadly construed". > >> were made with arbitrary or capricious disregard for the terms of these > > Yay, administrative law! > >> 7. Contestants may seek the assistance of non-Contestants. > > (e.g. such helpers should get the badge too) See above. > >> When a Proposal has received a number of >> non-withdrawn votes in favor greater than half the number of >> Contestants, the Judge SHALL, in a timely fashion, and CAN enact the >> proposal by publishing the new text of the regulations and the number of >> votes in favor and against. The Judge SHALL NOT reveal the votes of >> specific Contestants. > > Since this isn't synced to moves, it would be great if the judge would > make a policy of being clear about the timing of this ahead of time, the > judge could have a huge impact just by deciding to enact a proposal before > versus after movement. You did that a little bit on the section about > orders timing, but that still leaves the judge a lot of leeway. I've intentionally left it open, but my plan is to enact any proposal that is passed before the close of orders before processing orders. -- Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth
DIS: Re: [Notary] Re: BUS: [Pledge] [Dragon] DRGN sale
On 6/29/20 7:59 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-business wrote: > On 6/29/20 7:58 PM, James Cook via agora-business wrote: >> On Mon, 29 Jun 2020 at 23:38, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via >> agora-business wrote: >>> On 6/29/20 7:36 PM, James Cook via agora-business wrote: I pledge that if P.S.S. pays me 40 Coins and 2 Justice cards within the next 4 days, then I will transfer 4 Shares of Dragon to em within 3 days of that payment. The time window of this pledge is 8 days. - Falsifian >>> I transfer 40 coins and 2 Justice cards to Falsifian. >> I transfer 4 Shares of Dragon to P.S.S. >> >> - Falsifian >> > I join the Dragon Corporation contract. > Welcome! -- Jason Cobb
DIS: @Trigon Doubloon Counting
There were actually 9 parties rather than 7, so everybody who tried to cash doubloons actually could only get 55 of them (I think people did this in a way where they did get 55 instead of the whole thing failing). -- >From R. Lee
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Falsifian, Treasuror, Notary] Quickexchange use
On Mon, 29 Jun 2020 at 17:49, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via
agora-discussion wrote:
> On 6/29/20 1:47 PM, James Cook via agora-discussion wrote:
> > On Mon, 29 Jun 2020 at 17:41, Becca Lee via agora-business
> > wrote:
> >> Nice, I transfer 2 Pendants to QuickExchange
> >
> > Er... I think you just gave 2 Pendants to QE for free.
> >
> > I consent to the following amendment to the Dragon QuickExchange contract:
> >
> > {
> >
> > Append one paragraph at the end. It says: { If R. Lee has ever
> > transferred 2 Pendants to this contract not as part of a payment in
> > exchange for Credits, then R. Lee CAN once take 2 Pendants from this
> > contract. After e does so, this paragraph is removed. }
> >
> > }
> >
> > I think we're the only parties, so if you consent the change will be
> > applied.
> >
> While you're at it, why not just add a general fix?
Good idea.
How about this:
Replace the two paragraphs starting "An Allowed Conversion" and
"Whenever this contract owns Credits" with the following two:
If X to Y is an Allowed Conversion, X is in Credits, and this contract
owns at least Y, then any player CAN pay a fee of X to take Y from it.
Players CANNOT destroy Credits in any other way.
If X to Y is an Allowed Conversion and Y is in credits, then every
time a player transfers X to this contract, e is granted Y.
New text:
{
-- Overview --
In a hurry to convert a couple of Cards? This contract permits exchange
of Cards for Products at a reasonable rate within a single message.
Players can also make a profit by doing card-to-product conversions for
this contract.
-- Basic use --
If this contract owns at least 2 of a type of Product, any player CAN
pay 1 of the corresponding Card to this contract to take 2 of that
Product from this contract.
-- Advanced use --
Victory Credits, Justice Credits, Legislative Credits and Voting Credits
are liquid currencies backed by this contract.
The Allowed Conversions are as follows:
* 1 Cardto 100 Credits
* 47 Credits to 1 Product
* 1 Product to 44 Credits
* 100 Credits to 1 Card
If X to Y is an Allowed Conversion, X is in Credits, and this contract
owns at least Y, then any player CAN pay a fee of X to take Y from it.
Players CANNOT destroy Credits in any other way.
If X to Y is an Allowed Conversion and Y is in credits, then every
time a player transfers X to this contract, e is granted Y.
When Cards and Products are destroyed due to a VP win, all Credits are
destroyed as well.
-- Management --
Any player CAN join or leave this contract by announcement.
Any player CAN by announcement transfer assets from this contract to the
Dragon Corporation, if explicitly permitted by the Dragon Corporation's
text.
If an Amendment Proposal for the Dragon Corporation is adopted (as
specified by the Dragon Corporation text) and specifies changes to this
contract, then first any parties to this contract who did not consent to
those changes ceases to be a party, and then the changes are applied.
}
- Falsifian
DIS: [Proto] Welcoming Back Outlaws
Okay, I'm tired, and this is the best I can think of right now. This
would allow exiled players to be repeatedly exiled until they get down
to 9 blots, but give them welcome packages back afterward. Why 9? A
player with fewer than 9 blots has sufferage, and with the Blot-B-Gone
from the Justice Card in eir welcome package, a player who has 9 blots
can get down to 8 and be able to vote. This seems like as good a
solution as any to me. LMK what you all think.
-Aris
---
Title: Welcoming Back Outlaws
Adoption index: 3.0
Author: Aris
Co-authors:
Amend Rule 2556, "Penalties", by changing its final paragraph to read in full:
Outlawed is a secured negative boolean switch, belonging to persons and
tracked by the Referee. A player CAN, with 7 days notice, deregister (exile)
a specified player (the outlaw) who has more than 40 blots or is outlawed.
A person who has been exiled becomes outlawed if e is not already. Any
person CAN cause any outlawed person with 9 or fewer blots to cease being
outlawed by announcement.
If the proposal "Welcome Package Patch" passed, amend Rule 2499,
"Welcome Packages", by changing the last sentence of the first paragraph
to have the text labeled "FIXED TEXT" below. Otherwise, amend Rule 2499,
"Welcome Packages", by appending the text labeled "FIXED TEXT" below to the
first paragraph.
FIXED TEXT: {
An outlawed player CANNOT receive a Welcome Package via this method.
}
DIS: Re: BUS: [proposal] let's just match the promotor's reality shall we
On Sun, Jun 21, 2020 at 8:52 AM Kerim Aydin via agora-business wrote: > Amend Rule 1607 (Distribution) by replacing: > The Promotor's report includes a list of all proposals in the > Proposal Pool > with: > The Promotor's report includes a list of all proposals that were > in the Proposal Pool at the beginning of the current Agoran week What about times when traffic is low and it makes more sense to do reports as of the time of the distribution? If there are three proposals in the pool, and a fourth comes out, it isn't generally a big deal. This gives more consistency, but I'm not sure it's worth it. -Aris
Re: DIS: [Promotor] Draft
the pool also contains my most recent proposal, the one about repealing
summary judgement
On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 6:02 PM Aris Merchant via agora-discussion <
agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> Here's that draft I promised. Time for bed.
>
> -Aris
> ---
> I hereby distribute each listed proposal, initiating a referendum on it,
> and removing it from the proposal pool. For this decision, the vote
> collector
> is the Assessor, the quorum is 8, the voting method is AI-majority, and the
> valid options are FOR and AGAINST (PRESENT is also a valid vote, as are
> conditional votes).
>
> ID Author(s)AITitle
> ---
> 8459* Jason, [1] 3.0 Talismans
> 8460* G., ais523 3.0 UV-G Sunblock
> 8461# R. Lee, Aris 2.0 Redoing Adopted Proposals
> 8462* Jason, Falsifian 3.0 Fee-based methods
> 8463* Jason3.0 Future-proofing black ribbons
> 8464# R. Lee 1.0 You can certify, but you can't win
> ever!
> 8465# Jason, P.S.S.1.0 Public defense
> 8466# ATMunn 1.0 the simple option
> 8467# Jason, Trigon2.0 Talismans auction patch
> 8468* Jason, nch, G. 3.0 Decision resolution patch
> 8469# Aris, [1]2.0 Bureaucratic Reengineering
>
> The proposal pool contains the following proposals:
>
> Author(s)AITitle
> ---
> G. 3.0 no backdating needed
> omd, nch 1.0 Reset deadlines when resetting the economy
> nch, G., Trigon 1.0 Sponsored Proposals
> Falsifian, G.1.0 Contract charities
> Murphy 1.7 Decriminalization
> Murphy, G. 1.0 Generalized card auctions
> omd 1.0 Stop disincentivizing bugfixes
>
> [1] nch, Falsifian
> [2] Alexis, Falsifian, nch, G.
>
> Legend: * : Democratic proposal.
> # : Ordinary proposal, unset chamber.
> e : Economy ministry proposal.
> f : Efficiency ministry proposal.
> j : Justice ministry proposal.
> l : Legislation ministry proposal.
> p : Participation ministry proposal.
>
>
> The full text of the aforementioned proposal(s) is included below. Where
> the information shown below differs from the information shown above,
> the information shown above shall control.
>
> //
> ID: 8459
> Title: Talismans
> Adoption index: 3.0
> Author: Aris
> Co-authors: nch, Falsifian, G.
>
>
> For the purposes of this proposal, a player's prior master is eir master
> before this proposal applies any effects.
>
> Amend Rule 2532 to read, in whole:
> {
>
> A talisman is an indestructible asset, tracked by the Registrar, and
> with ownership wholly restricted to players and Agora. There exists
> exactly one talisman for each player, and no other talismans; if one
> does not exist for a certain player, it is created in eir posession.
> Talismans CAN only be transferred as explicitly specified by the rules.
> The creation, destruction, and transfer of talismans is secured.
>
> Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, a player CAN, by announcement,
> transfer the talisman for em to emself. The master of a player is the
> entity that possesses the talisman for em. A player who is eir own
> master is active; any other player is a zombie (syn. inactive).
>
> The master of a zombie CAN act on behalf of em, except a master CANNOT
> act on behalf of a zombie to:
> - initiate, support, object to, or perform a dependent action;
> - act on behalf of that zombie's zombies;
> - bid in a zombie auction;
> - enter a contract, pledge, or other type of agreement;
> - initiate a Call for Judgement;
> - create blots;
> - deregister.
>
> If a master causes a zombie to perform an ILLEGAL action, the master
> commits the Class 4+N Crime of Masterminding (where N is the class of
> the illegal action).
>
> If an active player who was a zombie has not received a Welcome Package
> since e most recently ceased being a zombie, and if eir resale value was
> less than 2 at any point during eir most recent time as a zombie, then
> any player CAN cause em to receive a Welcome Package by announcement.
>
> }
>
> Amend Rule 2574 to read, in whole:
> {
>
> Any player CAN, with notice, transfer the talisman for an active player
> who has not made a public announcement in the past 60 days to Agora.
>
> Resale value is a secured natural switch for zombies, tracked by the
> Registrar, with a default value of 2. Whenever the talisman for a zombie
> is transferred to a player, that zombie's resale value is decreased by
> 1. At the end of a zombie auction, the resale value
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Birthday Tournament Regulations
On 6/28/20 9:43 PM, James Cook via agora-discussion wrote: > Sorry, I didn't get around to reading these until now. Thanks for > going to the effort to write these! Comments inline. > >> 4. The judge is the final arbitor on matters of this tournament, and eir >> decisions can overturned if and only if a CFJ finds eir decisions were > > "can overturned" Fixed. > >> 8. At any time, any Contestant CAN submit a Proposal to change the rules >> by announcement. Any Contestant CAN withdraw any Proposal e has >> submitted by announcement. When a Proposal has been submitted but not >> withdrawn, any Contestant other than the Proposer CAN privately send a >> vote to the Judge. When a Proposal has received at least three >> non-withdrawn votes in favor, the Judge SHALL, in a timely fashion, and >> CAN enact the proposal by publishing the new text of the regulations and >> the number of votes in favor and against. The Judge SHALL NOT reveal the >> votes of specific Contestants. > > Will this bog down the game once four players are eliminated from the > board but have majority voting power? Yes, so I've modified it. > >> 10. Contestants SHALL NOT offer favors outside of this Tournament in >> order to influence the outcome of it. Contestants CAN and SHOULD lie and >> engage in deceit for personal gain. > > I think it would be good to forbid pledges, contracts or any other > enforcable agreements too. Added. > >> 16. Each turn represents six months of time. The first turn is called a >> Spring turn and the next a Fall turn. After each Fall turn, each Great >> Power must reconcile the number of units it controls with the number of >> supply centers it controls. At this time some units are removed and new >> ones are built. After a Fall turn, if one Great Power controls 18 or >> more supply centers, all other Contestants cease to be Contestants. > > Maybe add "as specified elsewhere in these regulations" after "new > ones are built"? I was confused when I first read this regulation that > it's e.g. missing the requirement that you only build at home. Added. > > Also, I didn't realize I'm supposed to include this as conditionals in > my orders for the turn until re-reading. You might want to remind > players. I'll include a reminder. > >> 19. If two units of equal strength or which are equally supported are >> trying to occupy the same province, all remain where they began. If two >> or more units are ordered to the same province, none of them can move. > > Shouldn't the one with more support win? Yes, fixed > >> If two units are each ordered to the province that the other occupies, >> neither can move. > > Same (or is my Diplomacy knowledge rusty?) My understanding is that this is correct. > >> If an attack is successful, the attacking unit moves >> into the province to which it was ordered. If the unit that was attacked >> had no orders of its own to move elsewhere, it’s defeated and dislodged >> from the province. The dislodged unit must retreat or be disbanded. > > "Attack" isn't defined. Would it make sense to phrase more neutrally > in terms of "move"? > > - Falsifian > These changes are significant enough that I'll do a new version, my apologies for rushing this, but I'll allow more discussion first. -- Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth
DIS: [Promotor] Draft
Here's that draft I promised. Time for bed.
-Aris
---
I hereby distribute each listed proposal, initiating a referendum on it,
and removing it from the proposal pool. For this decision, the vote collector
is the Assessor, the quorum is 8, the voting method is AI-majority, and the
valid options are FOR and AGAINST (PRESENT is also a valid vote, as are
conditional votes).
ID Author(s)AITitle
---
8459* Jason, [1] 3.0 Talismans
8460* G., ais523 3.0 UV-G Sunblock
8461# R. Lee, Aris 2.0 Redoing Adopted Proposals
8462* Jason, Falsifian 3.0 Fee-based methods
8463* Jason3.0 Future-proofing black ribbons
8464# R. Lee 1.0 You can certify, but you can't win ever!
8465# Jason, P.S.S.1.0 Public defense
8466# ATMunn 1.0 the simple option
8467# Jason, Trigon2.0 Talismans auction patch
8468* Jason, nch, G. 3.0 Decision resolution patch
8469# Aris, [1]2.0 Bureaucratic Reengineering
The proposal pool contains the following proposals:
Author(s)AITitle
---
G. 3.0 no backdating needed
omd, nch 1.0 Reset deadlines when resetting the economy
nch, G., Trigon 1.0 Sponsored Proposals
Falsifian, G.1.0 Contract charities
Murphy 1.7 Decriminalization
Murphy, G. 1.0 Generalized card auctions
omd 1.0 Stop disincentivizing bugfixes
[1] nch, Falsifian
[2] Alexis, Falsifian, nch, G.
Legend: * : Democratic proposal.
# : Ordinary proposal, unset chamber.
e : Economy ministry proposal.
f : Efficiency ministry proposal.
j : Justice ministry proposal.
l : Legislation ministry proposal.
p : Participation ministry proposal.
The full text of the aforementioned proposal(s) is included below. Where
the information shown below differs from the information shown above,
the information shown above shall control.
//
ID: 8459
Title: Talismans
Adoption index: 3.0
Author: Aris
Co-authors: nch, Falsifian, G.
For the purposes of this proposal, a player's prior master is eir master
before this proposal applies any effects.
Amend Rule 2532 to read, in whole:
{
A talisman is an indestructible asset, tracked by the Registrar, and
with ownership wholly restricted to players and Agora. There exists
exactly one talisman for each player, and no other talismans; if one
does not exist for a certain player, it is created in eir posession.
Talismans CAN only be transferred as explicitly specified by the rules.
The creation, destruction, and transfer of talismans is secured.
Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, a player CAN, by announcement,
transfer the talisman for em to emself. The master of a player is the
entity that possesses the talisman for em. A player who is eir own
master is active; any other player is a zombie (syn. inactive).
The master of a zombie CAN act on behalf of em, except a master CANNOT
act on behalf of a zombie to:
- initiate, support, object to, or perform a dependent action;
- act on behalf of that zombie's zombies;
- bid in a zombie auction;
- enter a contract, pledge, or other type of agreement;
- initiate a Call for Judgement;
- create blots;
- deregister.
If a master causes a zombie to perform an ILLEGAL action, the master
commits the Class 4+N Crime of Masterminding (where N is the class of
the illegal action).
If an active player who was a zombie has not received a Welcome Package
since e most recently ceased being a zombie, and if eir resale value was
less than 2 at any point during eir most recent time as a zombie, then
any player CAN cause em to receive a Welcome Package by announcement.
}
Amend Rule 2574 to read, in whole:
{
Any player CAN, with notice, transfer the talisman for an active player
who has not made a public announcement in the past 60 days to Agora.
Resale value is a secured natural switch for zombies, tracked by the
Registrar, with a default value of 2. Whenever the talisman for a zombie
is transferred to a player, that zombie's resale value is decreased by
1. At the end of a zombie auction, the resale value of every zombie that
is an excess lot in that auction decreases by 1.
The talisman for a zombie with zero resale value CANNOT be transferred
to any player other than that zombie.
Any player CAN, with notice:
- If a zombie has been a zombie for the past 90 days and not had
Agora for a master during any of that time, transfer the talisman for
em to Agora;
- If a
Re: DIS: [Proto] Welcoming Back Outlaws
On 6/29/20 1:46 AM, Aris Merchant via agora-discussion wrote:
> Okay, I'm tired, and this is the best I can think of right now. This
> would allow exiled players to be repeatedly exiled until they get down
> to 9 blots, but give them welcome packages back afterward. Why 9? A
> player with fewer than 9 blots has sufferage, and with the Blot-B-Gone
> from the Justice Card in eir welcome package, a player who has 9 blots
> can get down to 8 and be able to vote. This seems like as good a
> solution as any to me. LMK what you all think.
>
> -Aris
> ---
> Title: Welcoming Back Outlaws
> Adoption index: 3.0
> Author: Aris
> Co-authors:
>
>
> Amend Rule 2556, "Penalties", by changing its final paragraph to read in full:
>
>Outlawed is a secured negative boolean switch, belonging to persons and
>tracked by the Referee. A player CAN, with 7 days notice, deregister
> (exile)
>a specified player (the outlaw) who has more than 40 blots or is outlawed.
>A person who has been exiled becomes outlawed if e is not already. Any
>person CAN cause any outlawed person with 9 or fewer blots to cease being
>outlawed by announcement.
>
> If the proposal "Welcome Package Patch" passed, amend Rule 2499,
> "Welcome Packages", by changing the last sentence of the first paragraph
> to have the text labeled "FIXED TEXT" below. Otherwise, amend Rule 2499,
> "Welcome Packages", by appending the text labeled "FIXED TEXT" below to the
> first paragraph.
>
> FIXED TEXT: {
>An outlawed player CANNOT receive a Welcome Package via this method.
> }
This seems really over engineered. All we need to do is amend the new
sentence in Welcome Package Patch adds to read "A player CANNOT receive
a Welcome Package via this method if was last deregistered by exile and
currently has more than 9 blots."
--
nch
Prime Minister, Webmastor, NAX Exchange Manager
Re: DIS: Draft Regulations for Diplonomic Birthday Tournament
On Sun, 28 Jun 2020 at 01:30, Ed Strange via agora-discussion wrote: > Im not sure this contract itself can technically override No Faking, > however it should be clear from context as the game goes on that nobody > intends their statenents to be true. If it's still a worry, we could require all game messages to begin with a disclaimer that they might be full of lies. - Falsifian
Re: DIS: [Proto] Welcoming Back Outlaws
On 6/29/2020 6:23 AM, Ed Strange via agora-discussion wrote: > Why don't we just have "A player cannot receive a welcome package if eir > most recent deregistration was as a Fugitive". It means you aren't forever > barred, but you have to wait the 30 days like everyone else. Yeah, I think the issue is that letting a person deregistered for crimes back in the game sooner than a voluntary deregistrant is silly. Crime deregistration should be a time out, I thought that was the main bug all along. Along with that, if blots are now high traffic we should modify "quarter" to "month" in this bit of R2555: > At the beginning of each quarter, half (rounded down) of each > fugitive's blots are destroyed. That way, there's a clean option - you can take (or be forced to take) a 30-day time out to clear half your blots. Also: now that lockbox contracts exist, you can potentially earn more cards in a month by deregistering and coming back then actually playing (maybe a minor point). -G.
Re: DIS: [Promotor] Draft
On 6/29/2020 6:55 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote:> On 6/29/2020 2:09 AM, Ed Strange via agora-discussion wrote:>> the pool also contains my most recent proposal, the one about repealing>> summary judgement> > Aris,> > You just asked why we should change the rule to actually state that> proposal pool report is accurate to the beginning of the week instead of> being truly current.> > This is why - your policies, while legal, are causing a wee bit of> confusion around here. Whether it's people asking "what happened to that> proposal from 13 days ago" or not noticing the date on the pool report> each time, it just doesn't feel quite right to have constantly backdated> reports with missing transactions. Oh, and I don't have any issues with the policies themselves! A reasonable solution to a hard job. Just the clarity bit.
Re: DIS: [Proto] Welcoming Back Outlaws
Why don't we just have "A player cannot receive a welcome package if eir
most recent deregistration was as a Fugitive". It means you aren't forever
barred, but you have to wait the 30 days like everyone else.
On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 10:42 PM nch via agora-discussion <
agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> On 6/29/20 1:46 AM, Aris Merchant via agora-discussion wrote:
> > Okay, I'm tired, and this is the best I can think of right now. This
> > would allow exiled players to be repeatedly exiled until they get down
> > to 9 blots, but give them welcome packages back afterward. Why 9? A
> > player with fewer than 9 blots has sufferage, and with the Blot-B-Gone
> > from the Justice Card in eir welcome package, a player who has 9 blots
> > can get down to 8 and be able to vote. This seems like as good a
> > solution as any to me. LMK what you all think.
> >
> > -Aris
> > ---
> > Title: Welcoming Back Outlaws
> > Adoption index: 3.0
> > Author: Aris
> > Co-authors:
> >
> >
> > Amend Rule 2556, "Penalties", by changing its final paragraph to read in
> full:
> >
> >Outlawed is a secured negative boolean switch, belonging to persons
> and
> >tracked by the Referee. A player CAN, with 7 days notice, deregister
> (exile)
> >a specified player (the outlaw) who has more than 40 blots or is
> outlawed.
> >A person who has been exiled becomes outlawed if e is not already. Any
> >person CAN cause any outlawed person with 9 or fewer blots to cease
> being
> >outlawed by announcement.
> >
> > If the proposal "Welcome Package Patch" passed, amend Rule 2499,
> > "Welcome Packages", by changing the last sentence of the first paragraph
> > to have the text labeled "FIXED TEXT" below. Otherwise, amend Rule 2499,
> > "Welcome Packages", by appending the text labeled "FIXED TEXT" below to
> the
> > first paragraph.
> >
> > FIXED TEXT: {
> >An outlawed player CANNOT receive a Welcome Package via this method.
> > }
>
> This seems really over engineered. All we need to do is amend the new
> sentence in Welcome Package Patch adds to read "A player CANNOT receive
> a Welcome Package via this method if was last deregistered by exile and
> currently has more than 9 blots."
>
> --
> nch
> Prime Minister, Webmastor, NAX Exchange Manager
>
>
>
--
>From R. Lee
Re: DIS: [Promotor] Draft
On 6/29/2020 2:09 AM, Ed Strange via agora-discussion wrote: > the pool also contains my most recent proposal, the one about repealing > summary judgement Aris, You just asked why we should change the rule to actually state that proposal pool report is accurate to the beginning of the week instead of being truly current. This is why - your policies, while legal, are causing a wee bit of confusion around here. Whether it's people asking "what happened to that proposal from 13 days ago" or not noticing the date on the pool report each time, it just doesn't feel quite right to have constantly backdated reports with missing transactions. -G.
Re: DIS: [Promotor] Draft
Oh this is my fault, I thought I'd pended that proposal before the beginning of the GMT week but that was not so. On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 12:05 AM Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > On 6/29/2020 6:55 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote:> On 6/29/2020 2:09 AM, Ed Strange > via agora-discussion wrote:>> the pool also contains my most recent > proposal, the one about repealing>> summary judgement> > Aris,> > You just > asked why we should change the rule to actually state that> proposal pool > report is accurate to the beginning of the week instead of> being truly > current.> > This is why - your policies, while legal, are causing a wee > bit of> confusion around here. Whether it's people asking "what happened > to that> proposal from 13 days ago" or not noticing the date on the pool > report> each time, it just doesn't feel quite right to have constantly > backdated> reports with missing transactions. > Oh, and I don't have any issues with the policies themselves! A > reasonable solution to a hard job. Just the clarity bit. > > -- >From R. Lee
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: @Arbitor, if it's not too much work
Certainly not Green, Orange is a big possibility if there is an assessment within the next few days, it's true. On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 1:14 AM Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion wrote: > On 6/29/20 11:11 AM, Ed Strange via agora-business wrote: > > I have an Emerald, Gray, and Magenta ribbon (or glitter) within the last > 2 > > days, I also can easily get Cyan (by resigning from my own office then > > deputising for it). Can I interest you in bribing you to assigning me a > CFJ > > in the next 3 days or so? If you do, I will qualify for transparent. I'd > be > > happy to give you all the assets I have for this (after redistributing > with > > nch) > > > > You should also check whether you qualify for Green or Orange. > > -- > > Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate > Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth > -- >From R. Lee
Re: DIS: [Proto] Welcoming Back Outlaws
On 6/29/20 11:37 AM, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote: > > On 6/29/2020 8:05 AM, Ed Strange via agora-discussion wrote: >> On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 11:50 PM Kerim Aydin wrote: >>> >>> Yeah, I think the issue is that letting a person deregistered for crimes >>> back in the game sooner than a voluntary deregistrant is silly. Crime >>> deregistration should be a time out, I thought that was the main bug all >>> along. >>> >>> >>> >>> >> Very biased, but I'm not at all sure it's silly. Someone who wishes to play >> but has accumulated 40 blots, without doing any serious destruction of the >> game (racial slurs, spam, repealing the entire ruleset, etc) is >> very different from someone who doesn't wish to play the game. >> > > Then blots shouldn't be an exile condition at all. Exile should be wholly > reserved for "this was bad enough that this person really shouldn't be > playing for a while". In fact, delinking exile from blots actually makes > sense now that we're shifting our view of blots - "exile" should now just > be a straight-up option for an indictment penalty. I wondered about allowing arbitrary punishments as Indictments, but I think such punishments should require a higher level of consent, so might as well be done by proposal. > > If bugs allow for gaming/profitability of exile, those are true bugs. For > example: given the existence of lockboxes, I think exile should (somehow, > it's hard) embargo/seize all of their locked possessions. > > -G. > -- Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth
Re: DIS: [Proto] Welcoming Back Outlaws
On 6/29/2020 8:05 AM, Ed Strange via agora-discussion wrote: > On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 11:50 PM Kerim Aydin wrote: >> >> Yeah, I think the issue is that letting a person deregistered for crimes >> back in the game sooner than a voluntary deregistrant is silly. Crime >> deregistration should be a time out, I thought that was the main bug all >> along. >> >> >> >> > Very biased, but I'm not at all sure it's silly. Someone who wishes to play > but has accumulated 40 blots, without doing any serious destruction of the > game (racial slurs, spam, repealing the entire ruleset, etc) is > very different from someone who doesn't wish to play the game. > Then blots shouldn't be an exile condition at all. Exile should be wholly reserved for "this was bad enough that this person really shouldn't be playing for a while". In fact, delinking exile from blots actually makes sense now that we're shifting our view of blots - "exile" should now just be a straight-up option for an indictment penalty. If bugs allow for gaming/profitability of exile, those are true bugs. For example: given the existence of lockboxes, I think exile should (somehow, it's hard) embargo/seize all of their locked possessions. -G.
DIS: Re: BUS: Justice for Trigon [attn. Herald]
I think the reason was that we'd then have to comb through the entire backlog as long service awards hadnt been awarded for a (very) long time. But as this is relatively recent, an exceptionally long and difficult period, and a current player, I wouldn't mind making an exception. On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 1:49 AM Jason Cobb via agora-business < agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > I petition the Herald to award Trigon the patent title of Long Service > in the class of 12 months, for eir service as Rulekeepor from 2018-10-14 > to 2019-10-22. > > [I just remembered this from R. Lee mentioning it. I think there was > some reason we didn't go back and do it retroactively, but I don't > remember it.] > > > ADoP report showing date of assumption: [0]. > > Resignation: [1]. > > [0]: > > https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-official/2019-October/013212.html > > [1]: > > https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-business/2019-October/041554.html > > -- > Jason Cobb > > -- >From R. Lee
DIS: Re: BUS: A Pledge
Rule 2450: The time window of a pledge is 60 days, unless the pledge explicitly states otherwise. Is "for the next 24 hours" sufficient to be "explicitly stating otherwise" regarding the time window? On 6/29/2020 12:21 PM, grok via agora-business wrote: For the next 24 hours, I pledge to do your will. -- ATMunn friendly neighborhood notary here :)
Re: DIS: [Proto] Welcoming Back Outlaws
I agree! If Agora doesn't want me around, it is welcome to deregister me by proposal, which should be the only way to deregister someone without their consent. On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 1:40 AM Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > On 6/29/2020 8:05 AM, Ed Strange via agora-discussion wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 11:50 PM Kerim Aydin wrote: > >> > >> Yeah, I think the issue is that letting a person deregistered for crimes > >> back in the game sooner than a voluntary deregistrant is silly. Crime > >> deregistration should be a time out, I thought that was the main bug all > >> along. > >> > >> > >> > >> > > Very biased, but I'm not at all sure it's silly. Someone who wishes to > play > > but has accumulated 40 blots, without doing any serious destruction of > the > > game (racial slurs, spam, repealing the entire ruleset, etc) is > > very different from someone who doesn't wish to play the game. > > > > Then blots shouldn't be an exile condition at all. Exile should be wholly > reserved for "this was bad enough that this person really shouldn't be > playing for a while". In fact, delinking exile from blots actually makes > sense now that we're shifting our view of blots - "exile" should now just > be a straight-up option for an indictment penalty. > > If bugs allow for gaming/profitability of exile, those are true bugs. For > example: given the existence of lockboxes, I think exile should (somehow, > it's hard) embargo/seize all of their locked possessions. > > -G. > > -- >From R. Lee
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: A Pledge
On 6/29/20 12:29 PM, ATMunn via agora-discussion wrote: > Rule 2450: > The time window of a pledge is 60 days, unless the > pledge explicitly states otherwise. > > Is "for the next 24 hours" sufficient to be "explicitly stating > otherwise" regarding the time window? I think it does, but even if it doesn't, I think the 24 hours are assessed from creation, so it wouldn't have any effect. -- Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: A Pledge
Yes, it is very explicitly stating otherwise. Anyway, even if it were not, it would not have any effect beyond the 24 hours. On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 2:29 AM ATMunn via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > Rule 2450: >The time window of a pledge is 60 days, unless the >pledge explicitly states otherwise. > > Is "for the next 24 hours" sufficient to be "explicitly stating > otherwise" regarding the time window? > > On 6/29/2020 12:21 PM, grok via agora-business wrote: > > For the next 24 hours, I pledge to do your will. > > > > -- > ATMunn > friendly neighborhood notary here :) > -- >From R. Lee
Re: DIS: [Proto] Welcoming Back Outlaws
On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 11:50 PM Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > Yeah, I think the issue is that letting a person deregistered for crimes > back in the game sooner than a voluntary deregistrant is silly. Crime > deregistration should be a time out, I thought that was the main bug all > along. > > > > Very biased, but I'm not at all sure it's silly. Someone who wishes to play but has accumulated 40 blots, without doing any serious destruction of the game (racial slurs, spam, repealing the entire ruleset, etc) is very different from someone who doesn't wish to play the game. -- >From R. Lee
DIS: Re: BUS: @Arbitor, if it's not too much work
On 6/29/20 11:11 AM, Ed Strange via agora-business wrote: > I have an Emerald, Gray, and Magenta ribbon (or glitter) within the last 2 > days, I also can easily get Cyan (by resigning from my own office then > deputising for it). Can I interest you in bribing you to assigning me a CFJ > in the next 3 days or so? If you do, I will qualify for transparent. I'd be > happy to give you all the assets I have for this (after redistributing with > nch) > You should also check whether you qualify for Green or Orange. -- Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth
Re: DIS: [Promotor] Draft
Yeah, I mean we all CoE things that don't turn out to be errors, on all the reports. But when a particular type of report is causing persistent errors you need to look at your UI to see if it's a little too confusing. :) I've noticed a lot of comments/questions on proposal status, maybe it's confirmation bias or the high traffic, but this goes back to Alexis's concerns in CFJ 3792. On 6/29/2020 8:05 AM, Ed Strange via agora-discussion wrote: > Oh this is my fault, I thought I'd pended that proposal before the > beginning of the GMT week but that was not so. > > On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 12:05 AM Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion < > agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > >> >> On 6/29/2020 6:55 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote:> On 6/29/2020 2:09 AM, Ed Strange >> via agora-discussion wrote:>> the pool also contains my most recent >> proposal, the one about repealing>> summary judgement> > Aris,> > You just >> asked why we should change the rule to actually state that> proposal pool >> report is accurate to the beginning of the week instead of> being truly >> current.> > This is why - your policies, while legal, are causing a wee >> bit of> confusion around here. Whether it's people asking "what happened >> to that> proposal from 13 days ago" or not noticing the date on the pool >> report> each time, it just doesn't feel quite right to have constantly >> backdated> reports with missing transactions. >> Oh, and I don't have any issues with the policies themselves! A >> reasonable solution to a hard job. Just the clarity bit. >> >> >
DIS: [Referee] [Finger]
On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 12:20 PM Ed Strange via agora-business < agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > I point a finger at Aris for Promotor Tardiness > > On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 9:01 AM Aris Merchant via agora-discussion < > agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > > The Promotor's report is going to be late. I'm going to try to have a > draft > > out today (in the next 12 hours) and do the distribution tomorrow (in the > > next 36 hours). I apologise to everyone for my tardiness. I fell behind > on > > things. Entirely my fault. In good news, the distribution will be > current! > > > > Someone is going to point a finger at me. I don't suppose I could beg the > > Referee for a forgiveable fine? > > > > -Aris > > > > > -- > From R. Lee > (flagging the ref) -- >From R. Lee
DIS: Re: BUS: A Pledge
please, film yourself doing a silly dance (if you prefer for privacy reasons, record your voice singing a silly song, or do something textually silly, if you must) On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 2:21 AM grok via agora-business < agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > For the next 24 hours, I pledge to do your will. > -- >From R. Lee
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: A Pledge
Were i still notary, I would hold it automatically destroyed (and did so for many other such pledges). nonetheless, notary reports aren't self-ratifying, so i suppose it's good to keep an eye on it. On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 2:33 AM ATMunn via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > It's just a matter of whether the pledge is automatically destroyed or > needs to be manually destroyed. > > On 6/29/2020 12:30 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via > agora-discussion wrote: > > On 6/29/20 12:29 PM, ATMunn via agora-discussion wrote: > >> Rule 2450: > >>The time window of a pledge is 60 days, unless the > >>pledge explicitly states otherwise. > >> > >> Is "for the next 24 hours" sufficient to be "explicitly stating > >> otherwise" regarding the time window? > > > > I think it does, but even if it doesn't, I think the 24 hours are > > assessed from creation, so it wouldn't have any effect. > > > > -- > ATMunn > friendly neighborhood notary here :) > -- >From R. Lee
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: A Pledge
It's just a matter of whether the pledge is automatically destroyed or needs to be manually destroyed. On 6/29/2020 12:30 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion wrote: On 6/29/20 12:29 PM, ATMunn via agora-discussion wrote: Rule 2450: The time window of a pledge is 60 days, unless the pledge explicitly states otherwise. Is "for the next 24 hours" sufficient to be "explicitly stating otherwise" regarding the time window? I think it does, but even if it doesn't, I think the 24 hours are assessed from creation, so it wouldn't have any effect. -- ATMunn friendly neighborhood notary here :)
DIS: Re: OFF: [Notary] The Notes (weekly report)
On 6/29/20 11:37 AM, ATMunn via agora-official wrote: > "Co Dependents" nch, R. Lee The text you have for this contract is wrong. It excludes the original text of the contract [0]. We appended two lines [1] and then removed one of those two [2]. [0] https://www.mail-archive.com/agora-business@agoranomic.org/msg36844.html [1] https://www.mail-archive.com/agora-business@agoranomic.org/msg37081.html [2] https://www.mail-archive.com/agora-business@agoranomic.org/msg37181.html > "New contract" R. Lee, nch This contract was destroyed [3]. [3] https://www.mail-archive.com/agora-business@agoranomic.org/msg37185.html
Re: DIS: [Notary] Informal Contract Awards
On 6/29/2020 10:13 AM, nch via agora-discussion wrote: > On 6/29/20 12:11 PM, ATMunn via agora-discussion wrote: >> For the Participation Award, given to the people who are members to the >> most contracts: > I would restrict this to people who are members of contracts with at > least two members. Otherwise, I like the idea! > I think this is grand, and might even suggest a (simple!) mapping to the Terms of Service Patent Title in R2581 - simple like "I'll attempt to award the title to anyone who gets [score] in my informal awards system".
DIS: Re: BUS: [Falsifian, Treasuror, Notary] Quickexchange use
On Mon, 29 Jun 2020 at 17:47, James Cook wrote: > On Mon, 29 Jun 2020 at 17:41, Becca Lee via agora-business > wrote: > > Nice, I transfer 2 Pendants to QuickExchange > > Er... I think you just gave 2 Pendants to QE for free. I think you need to say you pay 1 Pendant in order to be granted 44 Legislative Credits. (Other wording might work, but if you don't say what the payment is for, it certainly looks like a simple transfer.) - Falsifian
DIS: Re: [Treasuror] Re: BUS: [ATTENTION PIRATES: IMPORTANT]: Recordkeeping Parley
On 2020-06-29 11:57, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-business wrote: For each doubloon I currently possess (I think: 71), I transfer it to the Plunder Partnership, causing the Plunder Partnership to transfer one coin to me. I think this fails due to the following text: A Pirate with at least 1 Doubloon can transfer 1 coin to themselves from the Plundership. Doing so destroys 1 Doubloon in their possession. -- Trigon 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
Re: BUS: Re: DIS: [Promotor] Tardiness
[I wrote the below, but am purposefully sending it to Discussion for commentary rather than pointing atm] On 6/29/2020 11:08 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote: > > I find Aris guily of Tardiness as Promotor and levy the Cold Hand of > Justice, imposing a forgivable fine of 1 blot, specifying that eir > apology must include the following ten words: Herald, Referee, Tailor, > Pirate, Champion, Badge, Revival, Salted, Baffled, and Hated. > I point the finger at Aris for failure to distribute, last Agoran Week, each proposal that was in the Proposal Pool and pending at the beginning of last week. (to be clear, I believe "failure to distribute each" is a single breach per week, not one breach per proposal). I ask for forgiveable, 1 blot. I think the overall lateness was material - in our current pend, glitter and ribbon system, a delay of proposals that are nearly two weeks old is a material rules breakage for some. I think the "net effect" of the lateness should be the standard 2-blot penalty (forgivable). I apologize for not making this point earlier (that 2 blots was most appropriate in total, due to the material effect on game play). In general, late reports don't delay game play very much if the lateness is one week only, but lateness in distribution, assessment, or judge assignments is material, and especially in this case given the "beginning of the week" cutoff that can stretch a proposal's delay to nearly 14 days without being late. -G.
Re: DIS: [Notary] Informal Contract Awards
The creator of the dragon corporation is warrigal On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 3:13 AM nch via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > On 6/29/20 12:11 PM, ATMunn via agora-discussion wrote: > > For the Participation Award, given to the people who are members to the > > most contracts: > I would restrict this to people who are members of contracts with at > least two members. Otherwise, I like the idea! > > -- >From R. Lee
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Falsifian, Treasuror, Notary] Quickexchange use
lol, I think you need to retry now that I pf'd.
On Mon, 29 Jun 2020 at 17:49, Becca Lee via agora-business
wrote:
>
> Oops, I consent, take the pendants, and transfer them back to QE in
> exchange for 84 credits
>
> On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 3:48 AM James Cook via agora-discussion <
> agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 29 Jun 2020 at 17:41, Becca Lee via agora-business
> > wrote:
> > > Nice, I transfer 2 Pendants to QuickExchange
> >
> > Er... I think you just gave 2 Pendants to QE for free.
> >
> > I consent to the following amendment to the Dragon QuickExchange contract:
> >
> > {
> >
> > Append one paragraph at the end. It says: { If R. Lee has ever
> > transferred 2 Pendants to this contract not as part of a payment in
> > exchange for Credits, then R. Lee CAN once take 2 Pendants from this
> > contract. After e does so, this paragraph is removed. }
> >
> > }
> >
> > I think we're the only parties, so if you consent the change will be
> > applied.
> >
> > - Falsifian
> >
>
>
> --
> From R. Lee
DIS: Re: BUS: [attn Treasuror] arrrr
On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 4:04 AM Kerim Aydin via agora-business < agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > Aye, for it be to my benefit, I do hereby transfer 1 coin from The Plunder > Partnership to myself. Aye, and being as I am a pirate who likes me > riches, I do that 70 more times in succession. > > While I believe our fine ship of free persons could collectively and > democratically track such things, I do like R. Lee's face - a trustworthy > yet squinty visage - and consent to em being the Pursor of our fair and > fine vessel as per the current Parley. > > So I transfer 1 Doubloon to me mate, R. Lee, and as e has accepted me > silver now, it is a bond and position not to be betrayed. > > -G. > > > if any of that is a compliment, thanks -- >From R. Lee
DIS: [Notary] Informal Contract Awards
This is an idea I've been thinking of for a little while now. I think it would be interesting to acknowledge people's effort with contracts. For now, this is just an informal thing sent to a-d, but maybe I'll make it a publicly-funded contract in the future if there's any interest. As this is not sent to the public forum, no actual game actions are being taken in this message.. For the Participation Award, given to the people who are members to the most contracts: I award the gold medal to R. Lee, party to 9 contracts. I award the silver medal to Trigon, party to 8 contracts. I award the bronze medal to Jason, party to 7 contracts. For the Popularity Award, given to the creators of contracts with the most members: I award the gold medal to Cuddlebeam, creator of The Plunder Partnership currently having 9 members. I award the silver medal to Trigon, creator of the League of Agorans Facilitating Effective Recordkeeping, currently having 5 members. As there is a 4-way tie for bronze, I award no bronze medal. For the Wealth Award, given to the creators of contracts possessing the most coins (note: taken according to Treasuror's latest report): I award the gold medal to the creator of The Dragon Corporation (not sure who that is exactly lol), which currently owns 495 coins. I award the silver medal to Cuddlebeam, creator of The Plunder Partnership, which currently owns 216 coins. I also award the bronze medal to Cuddlebeam, creator of Cuddlebeam's Locker, which currently owns 166 coins. The following is the full list of the number of contracts each person is a party to: R. Lee: 9 Trigon: 8 Jason: 7 Falsifian: 6 ATMunn: 4 Cuddlebeam: 4 nch:4 P.S.S.: 4 Aris: 3 omd:2 Bögtil: 1 Gaelan: 1 Murphy: 1 twg:1 The following is the full list of the number of parties each contract has: "TPP": 9 "LoAFER": 5 "GRBaSTttPF": 4 "Needlessly Abstract Exchange": 4 "AAA": 4 "DracoLotto": 4 "The Dragon Corporation": 3 "SEAMSTRESS": 3 "SNOCS":3 "Co Dependents":2 "Card Collective Contract, Agoran": 2 "The Mystical Menagerie": 1 "Humble Agoran Moral Tripwire": 1 "Cuddlebeam's Locker": 1 "Contract No. 1: GIFT": 1 "Contract No. 2: POEM": 1 "Contract No. 3: CARD": 1 "Contract No. 4: SURE": 1 "Contract No. 5: DECK": 1 "Contract No. 6: BOON": 1 "Dragon QuickExchange": 1 "Obstruction": 1 "Obstruction 2: Electric Boogaloo": 1 "Dragon Political Outreach":1 See the Treasuror's latest report for the number of coins owned by each contract. -- ATMunn friendly neighborhood notary here :)
Re: DIS: [Notary] Informal Contract Awards
On 6/29/20 12:11 PM, ATMunn via agora-discussion wrote: > For the Participation Award, given to the people who are members to the > most contracts: I would restrict this to people who are members of contracts with at least two members. Otherwise, I like the idea!
Re: DIS: [Notary] Informal Contract Awards
On 6/29/20 1:18 PM, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote: > > On 6/29/2020 10:13 AM, nch via agora-discussion wrote: >> On 6/29/20 12:11 PM, ATMunn via agora-discussion wrote: >>> For the Participation Award, given to the people who are members to the >>> most contracts: >> I would restrict this to people who are members of contracts with at >> least two members. Otherwise, I like the idea! >> > > I think this is grand, and might even suggest a (simple!) mapping to the > Terms of Service Patent Title in R2581 - simple like "I'll attempt to > award the title to anyone who gets [score] in my informal awards system". > I think that this is a good idea. If the Notary wanted to, I'd be willing to record certain specifications with the Terms of Service title if e wants to award it for different categories and potentially multiple times. -- Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth
DIS: Re: BUS: [Falsifian, Treasuror, Notary] Quickexchange use
On Mon, 29 Jun 2020 at 17:41, Becca Lee via agora-business
wrote:
> Nice, I transfer 2 Pendants to QuickExchange
Er... I think you just gave 2 Pendants to QE for free.
I consent to the following amendment to the Dragon QuickExchange contract:
{
Append one paragraph at the end. It says: { If R. Lee has ever
transferred 2 Pendants to this contract not as part of a payment in
exchange for Credits, then R. Lee CAN once take 2 Pendants from this
contract. After e does so, this paragraph is removed. }
}
I think we're the only parties, so if you consent the change will be applied.
- Falsifian
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Falsifian, Treasuror, Notary] Quickexchange use
On 6/29/20 1:47 PM, James Cook via agora-discussion wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Jun 2020 at 17:41, Becca Lee via agora-business
> wrote:
>> Nice, I transfer 2 Pendants to QuickExchange
>
> Er... I think you just gave 2 Pendants to QE for free.
>
> I consent to the following amendment to the Dragon QuickExchange contract:
>
> {
>
> Append one paragraph at the end. It says: { If R. Lee has ever
> transferred 2 Pendants to this contract not as part of a payment in
> exchange for Credits, then R. Lee CAN once take 2 Pendants from this
> contract. After e does so, this paragraph is removed. }
>
> }
>
> I think we're the only parties, so if you consent the change will be applied.
>
While you're at it, why not just add a general fix?
--
Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth
DIS: Re: [Treasuror] Re: BUS: [ATTENTION PIRATES: IMPORTANT]: Recordkeeping Parley
On 6/29/2020 10:57 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote: > > If I no longer possess any doubloons, I consent to the above Parley. > well *that* defeats the purpose somewhat...
DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Notary] The Notes (weekly report)
you have this right in the text but not in the initial summary On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 2:45 AM Ed Strange via agora-business < agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > (unofficial) CoE: the "new contract" between nch and I doesnt exist as we > both agreed to repeal it. > > On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 2:38 AM ATMunn via agora-official < > agora-offic...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > > [unfortunately, the web report isn't quite ready yet, but it will be > > soon] > > > > As per my duties as Notary, I publish the following as my weekly report: > > > > > > ██ ██ ███ ███ ██ █ ███ ██ > > ████ ██ ██ ██ ██ ██████ ██ > > █████ █ ██ ██ ██ ██ ██████ > > ████ ██ ████ ██ ██████ ██ > > ████ ██ ███ ██ ███ █ █████ ██ > > > > -~= Notary's weekly report =~- > > > > > > > > All times and dates in this report are given in Coordinated Universal > > Time (UTC). > > > > Date of last report: 22 Jun 2020 > > Date of this report: 29 Jun 2020 > > > > Abbreviations used in this report: > > --- > > P.S.S. | Publius Scribonius Scholasticus > > CB | Cuddlebeam > > con. | contract > > --- > > > > > > If any contract(s) have no name currently, I assign it/them the name(s) > > displayed in this report. > > > > > > === SHORT LIST OF CONTRACTS > > > > Title Parties > > "The Dragon Corporation" Aris, Jason, Falsifian > > "GRBaSTttPF"[1] Gaelan, twg, Warrigal, Falsifian > > "Needlessly Abstract Exchange"nch, P.S.S., ATMunn, Jason > > "The Mystical Menagerie" Cuddlebeam > > "Humble Agoran Moral Tripwire"Cuddlebeam > > "TPP"[2] CB, nch, R. Lee, P.S.S., Bögtil, Jason, ... [3] > > "DracoLotto" Aris, R. Lee, Falsifian, Jason > > "AAA"[4] Jason, P.S.S., R. Lee, nch > > "LoAFER"[5]Trigon, Jason, R. Lee, ATMunn, P.S.S. > > "Co Dependents" nch, R. Lee > > "Cuddlebeam's Locker" Cuddlebeam > > "Card Collective Contract, Agoran"Murphy, R. Lee > > "Contract No. 1: GIFT"Trigon > > "Contract No. 2: POEM"Trigon > > "Contract No. 3: CARD"Trigon > > "Contract No. 4: SURE"Trigon > > "Contract No. 5: DECK"Trigon > > "Contract No. 6: BOON"Trigon > > "SEAMSTRESS"[6] Trigon, nch, Jason > > "Dragon QuickExchange" Falsifian > > "New contract" R. Lee, nch > > "Obstruction"omd > > "Obstruction 2: Electric Boogaloo"R. Lee > > "SNOCS"[7] omd, ATMunn, R. Lee > > "Dragon Political Outreach"Falsifian > > > > > > [1] Gaelan's Really Bad At Sending Things To The Public Forum > > [2] The Plunder Partnership > > [3] Also Falsifian, Aris, ATMunn > > [4] The Agoran Arbitration Association > > [5] League of Agorans Facilitating Effective Recordkeeping > > [6] Signature Enthusiast Allows Modification of Signature Through > > Rigorous Exchanging of Signature Suggestions > > [7] Simple, No-Opportunity-Cost Sets > > > > > > > > > > == FULL TEXT AND HISTORY OF CONTRACTS == > > > > > > The following 25 contracts exist: > > > > > > "The Dragon Corporation" (revision 2) > > Parties: Aris, Jason, Falsifian > > > > -- > > > > ## Bylaw 1: Definition > > > > This contract is named "the Dragon Corporation". The purpose of the > > Dragon Corporation is to earn as much money as possible for its > > shareholders. > > > > All other provisions of this contract notwithstanding, this contract > > does
DIS: Re: [Arbitor] CFJ 3857 assigned to R. Lee
On 6/29/2020 9:24 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > Oh nice, quick turnaround! > > I assign CFJ 3857 to R. Lee. > Note: to be clear to everyone I just followed straight-up favoring policy here no bribes were solicited from my end or accepted :). -G.
DIS: Re: BUS: [attn Treasuror] arrrr
On 2020-06-29 12:00, Kerim Aydin via agora-business wrote: So I transfer 1 Doubloon to me mate, R. Lee, and as e has accepted me silver now, it is a bond and position not to be betrayed. This fails if the number of doubloons possessed by each person is greater than 71. -- Trigon 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
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [attn Treasuror] arrrr
I don't plan to spend the doubloon, which will be destroyed after the parley is adopted anyway. On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 4:16 AM Reuben Staley via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > On 2020-06-29 12:00, Kerim Aydin via agora-business wrote: > > So I transfer 1 Doubloon to me mate, R. Lee, and as e has accepted me > > silver now, it is a bond and position not to be betrayed. > > This fails if the number of doubloons possessed by each person is > greater than 71. > > -- > Trigon > > 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 > -- >From R. Lee
DIS: Re: BUS: [Glitter] Happy Birthday!
On 6/29/20 3:58 PM, Cuddle Beam via agora-business wrote: > Happy Birthday Agora! I award myself Magenta Glitter and then a Magenta > Ribbon. > You already have the Ribbon, but even if you didn't the second would have failed. -- Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth
