Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Blots v1.0

Did already... On Sun, 18 Mar 2018, Aris Merchant wrote: > Looks good. Want to pend it? > > -Aris > > On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 3:28 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > > > > > > Proposal, 'Blots v1.0', AI-3, co-author = Aris: > > > > > >

DIS: Re: BUS: Blots v1.0

Looks good. Want to pend it? -Aris On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 3:28 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > > Proposal, 'Blots v1.0', AI-3, co-author = Aris: > > > > [I'm keeping this MODDULAR. Meaning I'm

Re: DIS: PAoaM Patch v3

Ugh. No, too ill defined. They should probably mark it provisional too, if it's in danger of self-ratifying. This was mostly to say that convergence (which I'm lowercasing) implies provisional, and stop someone from CoEing on that basis. -Aris On Sun, Mar 18, 2018 at 4:19 PM, Gaelan Steele

Re: DIS: PAoaM Patch v3

I am in favor of ratifying (self- or without objection) everything but the auctions (per Aris’s reasoning). Gaelan > On Mar 18, 2018, at 7:00 PM, Kenyon Prater wrote: > > Does something need to retroactively make land auctions and > resource-nabbing current? I don't see

Re: DIS: PAoaM Patch v3

We are definitely restarting land auctions. A lot of players, including me, didn't bid because we though they didn't work. As for resource nabbing, I don't know. I don't like the idea of selectively resetting that, because the actions were legal. I'd favor some sort of voluntary thing, or maybe

Re: DIS: PAoaM Patch v3

Does something need to retroactively make land auctions and resource-nabbing current? I don't see that included in here. My understanding is that the Cartographor doesn't exist which probably makes land auctions and maybe all movement on the map broken? Or are we starting with new land auctions

DIS: Re: BUS: Nabbing the stuffs part 2

If the orchard at (-1, 1) is nonempty I take all the contents of the orchard at (-1, 1). On Sun, Mar 11, 2018 at 5:27 PM, Aris Merchant < thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote: > If the mine at (-1, -1) is nonempty, then I do the following: > > Destroy 1 apple to move from (0, 0) to (-1, 0)

Re: DIS: PAoaM Patch v3

> On Mar 18, 2018, at 3:34 PM, Aris Merchant > wrote: > > Information about a Convergence (but not > the resulting state) is inherently uncertain and is thus excluded from > self-ratification.” Do we need to specify that the history leading up to the

DIS: PAoaM Patch v3

Another draft, which hopefully includes everyone's changes. I fiddled around a bit with the Convergence wording for clarity and aesthetics. -Aris --- Title: PAoaM Patch v3 Adoption index: 3.0 Author: Aris Co-authors: Gaelan, Trigon, G. Lines beginning with hashmarks ("#") and comments in

Re: DIS: Draft: PAoaM Patch v2

Sounds reasonable. I'll add it to the general reports rule. -Aris On Sun, Mar 18, 2018 at 12:32 PM Gaelan Steele wrote: > How about a rule to this effect: “A Convergence is a change to the > gamestate designed to resolve ambiguity in the current state. [Maybe: > Causing a

Re: DIS: Draft: PAoaM Patch v2

How about a rule to this effect: “A Convergence is a change to the gamestate designed to resolve ambiguity in the current state. [Maybe: Causing a change to the gamestate to be considered a Convergence is protected at power 3. A player may cause a gamestate change to be considered a Convergence

Re: DIS: Draft: PAoaM Patch v2

This used to be true, but was changed in your absence. Rule 106 now states "Except insofar as the action performed by a proposal happen one after another, rather than simultaneously, a proposal's effect is instantaneous. A proposal can neither delay nor extend its own effect. Once a propsal

Re: DIS: Draft: PAoaM Patch v2

On Sun, Mar 18, 2018 at 10:45 AM Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > On Sun, 18 Mar 2018, Aris Merchant wrote: > > In Rule 105 “Rule Changes,” replace > > For absolute safety please change this to: "Amend R105 by replacing" > > > Thanks, will do. -Aris

Re: DIS: Draft: PAoaM Patch v2

Yep, I evidently missed that bit. -Aris On Sun, Mar 18, 2018 at 2:31 AM Gaelan Steele wrote: > Why the “rounds” of cleanup? The “END CLEANUP” thing was to avoid the need > to figure out what the “actual” game state was for the purposes of the FLR > history, while still having

Re: DIS: Draft: PAoaM Patch v2

On Sun, 18 Mar 2018, Aris Merchant wrote: > In Rule 105 “Rule Changes,” replace For absolute safety please change this to: "Amend R105 by replacing"

DIS: Re: OFF: [ADoP] Metareport

> Prime Minister*(vacant) 2018-02-28[2] (ongoing) Can the prime minister election be resolved please?

Re: DIS: Draft: PAoaM Patch v2

IIRC proposals are instruments with power, and that power is never revoked. Unfortunately, I don’t think a temporary rule would do the trick—unless we ratified the history of the PAoaM rules (something I’d rather not do), every future FLR might be technically “incorrect” unless we figured out

Re: DIS: Draft: PAoaM Patch v2

Why the “rounds” of cleanup? The “END CLEANUP” thing was to avoid the need to figure out what the “actual” game state was for the purposes of the FLR history, while still having the actual text changes in this proposal be annotated properly. Other than that, looks good. Thanks for picking

Re: DIS: Draft: PAoaM Patch v2

I didn't see the "entities other than Agora" change, that works. On Sun, Mar 18, 2018 at 12:46 AM, Kenyon Prater wrote: > In "Facilities": > >If a player owns any facilities with upkeep costs, e must pay them >before the first day of the next Agoran month. Failing

Re: DIS: Draft: PAoaM Patch v2

In "Facilities": If a player owns any facilities with upkeep costs, e must pay them before the first day of the next Agoran month. Failing to do this destroys the facility. In the second to last Eastman week of the Agoran Month, the Cartographor SHOULD issue a humiliating public

Re: DIS: Draft: PAoaM Patch v2

On Sun, 2018-03-18 at 00:09 -0700, Aris Merchant wrote: > Okay, everyone, here's a revised patch. Please point out any other > issues you see. All changes more significant than a typo fix have > been moved to a new section for reader's convenience . Gaelan, some > version of this will be in this

DIS: Draft: PAoaM Patch v2

Okay, everyone, here's a revised patch. Please point out any other issues you see. All changes more significant than a typo fix have been moved to a new section for reader's convenience . Gaelan, some version of this will be in this week's distribution, so you can withdraw your original. -Aris