Re: DIS: zombie auctions have been broken since April?
On Mon, 12 Nov 2018, Aris Merchant wrote: > On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 5:08 PM Kerim Aydin wrote: > > On Mon, 12 Nov 2018, Aris Merchant wrote: > > > The sentence that you're quoting doesn't "allow" Agora to do > > > anything, it just ensures that those conditions always return true if > > > Agora is the Auctioneer. > > > > This doesn't make sense at all to me. Agora is the Auctioneer, and if > > it's this statement that makes it "return TRUE" that Agora CAN transfer > > something, then it's what makes it TRUE that Agora CAN transfer > > something. It's a tautology. You can't "return TRUE" without making > > something true. > > If the sentence said that "Agora CAN do anything", then that would be > correct. That's not what it says though. It says "For this purpose, a > contract CAN do whatever it could do if it were a person in addition > to what it can do as a contract, and Agora CAN do anything." What does > the "for this purpose" mean? I think it means that the "if the > auctioneer CAN transfer the items in that lot to that winner at will" > is ignored when Agora is the Auctioneer. It's almost as if it were > changed to say "if Agora is the Auctioneer, or if the auctioneer CAN > transfer the items in that lot to that winner at will". So Agora is > exempt from the requirement. I read it as "for this purpose" meaning "for the purpose of transferring the items to the winner" so if you say that Agora CAN do anything for that purpose, you're saying that Agora CAN transfer items to the winner. So that's a point of disagreement I suppose. > It's almost as if it were > changed to say "if Agora is the Auctioneer, or if the auctioneer CAN > transfer the items in that lot to that winner at will". I disagree that this is an equivalent parsing to the actual text. But in any case, we're both agreeing that that clause in particular does not confer transferrability onto zombies (me because it's power-1, you because you don't read is as being enabling at all). So this point is a bit moot.
Re: DIS: zombie auctions have been broken since April?
On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 5:08 PM Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > > On Mon, 12 Nov 2018, Aris Merchant wrote: > > The sentence that you're quoting doesn't "allow" Agora to do > > anything, it just ensures that those conditions always return true if > > Agora is the Auctioneer. > > This doesn't make sense at all to me. Agora is the Auctioneer, and if > it's this statement that makes it "return TRUE" that Agora CAN transfer > something, then it's what makes it TRUE that Agora CAN transfer > something. It's a tautology. You can't "return TRUE" without making > something true. If the sentence said that "Agora CAN do anything", then that would be correct. That's not what it says though. It says "For this purpose, a contract CAN do whatever it could do if it were a person in addition to what it can do as a contract, and Agora CAN do anything." What does the "for this purpose" mean? I think it means that the "if the auctioneer CAN transfer the items in that lot to that winner at will" is ignored when Agora is the Auctioneer. It's almost as if it were changed to say "if Agora is the Auctioneer, or if the auctioneer CAN transfer the items in that lot to that winner at will". So Agora is exempt from the requirement. -Aris
Re: DIS: zombie auctions have been broken since April?
On Mon, 12 Nov 2018, Aris Merchant wrote: > The sentence that you're quoting doesn't "allow" Agora to do > anything, it just ensures that those conditions always return true if > Agora is the Auctioneer. This doesn't make sense at all to me. Agora is the Auctioneer, and if it's this statement that makes it "return TRUE" that Agora CAN transfer something, then it's what makes it TRUE that Agora CAN transfer something. It's a tautology. You can't "return TRUE" without making something true. > One legal argument for why it > might be Rule 1885 is that the auction rules don't do anything > themselves, they just explain what it would mean for an auction to > happen (the same way Rule 2577 para. 2 works) Then it is the rule > authorizing the auction that actually does the allowing. The auctions only work when other rules explicitly enable the auctioneer to transfer the lots. For Asset auctions (all auctions except zombies), it's the general asset transfer rule that allows the auctioneer to transfer something that e owns. But there's no general zombie transfer rule that allows it. As I said, it used to be explicitly permitted via R1885, prior to April (R1885/6): > The Registrar CAN, by announcement, flip the master switch of a > zombie lot from Agora to that lot's winner after the winner has > paid for the lot; But this text was removed. So without that - no ability to transfer exists.
DIS: Re: OFF: Registering as a Player
Welcome to the game, Jacob! -Aris On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 7:55 AM Jacob Arduino wrote: > > I hereby register as a player > > - Jacob Arduino
Re: DIS: zombie auctions have been broken since April?
If anyone finds my explanation confusing, they should feel free to ask for clarification. I tried to be as clear as possible, but it was hard to figure out which portions I needed to explain in more depth. -Aris On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 4:46 PM Aris Merchant wrote: > > I don't think that's actually relevant. IIUC, the sole purpose of that > sentence was the help satisfy the criteria "An Auction also CANNOT be > initiated unless the Auctioneer is able to give away each item in each > of the Auction's lots." (R2549) and "...if the auctioneer CAN transfer > the items in that lot to that winner at will, e immediately does so;" > (R2551). The sentence that you're quoting doesn't "allow" Agora to do > anything, it just ensures that those conditions always return true if > Agora is the Auctioneer. > > If any rule "authorizes" Agora to make the transfer, it would be Rule > 1885, which sets up the auction, or Rule 2551, in the sentence I > quoted, not the one you quoted. If it's the former, zombie auctions > succeed; if it's the later, they fail. One legal argument for why it > might be Rule 1885 is that the auction rules don't do anything > themselves, they just explain what it would mean for an auction to > happen (the same way Rule 2577 para. 2 works) Then it is the rule > authorizing the auction that actually does the allowing. Some of our > earlier precedents support this view, if I remember, but I don't think > this has ever been conclusively decided. > > It might be helpful to adopt a rule about whether references are, in > general, to be resolved referentially (like functions) or > substitutionally (like macros, except continuously updating). That > would solve this kind of ambiguity, which seems to come up > surprisingly often. > > -Aris > On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 4:15 PM Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > > > > > > Latest zombie auction has just self-ratified with last week's > > registrar report of Master switches, so no back-calculations needed > > here. [Also, I only noticed this a day or so ago, when looking at > > the rules behind the Gaelan/nichdel scam - just to make it clear that > > my deputy-Registrar Report was not Faking]. > > > > The issue: > > > > Master Switches are Secured-2 (R2532). In late April, the text > > enabling Agora to flip the master switch to the auction winner was > > moved from R1885 (power-2) to R2551 (power-1). > > > > It was the "Agora CAN do anything" sentence. Now that it's removed, > > I don't think there's any text anywhere that allows Agora to transfer > > zombies to winners? (Maybe I'm missing it...?) > > > > > >
Re: DIS: zombie auctions have been broken since April?
I don't think that's actually relevant. IIUC, the sole purpose of that sentence was the help satisfy the criteria "An Auction also CANNOT be initiated unless the Auctioneer is able to give away each item in each of the Auction's lots." (R2549) and "...if the auctioneer CAN transfer the items in that lot to that winner at will, e immediately does so;" (R2551). The sentence that you're quoting doesn't "allow" Agora to do anything, it just ensures that those conditions always return true if Agora is the Auctioneer. If any rule "authorizes" Agora to make the transfer, it would be Rule 1885, which sets up the auction, or Rule 2551, in the sentence I quoted, not the one you quoted. If it's the former, zombie auctions succeed; if it's the later, they fail. One legal argument for why it might be Rule 1885 is that the auction rules don't do anything themselves, they just explain what it would mean for an auction to happen (the same way Rule 2577 para. 2 works) Then it is the rule authorizing the auction that actually does the allowing. Some of our earlier precedents support this view, if I remember, but I don't think this has ever been conclusively decided. It might be helpful to adopt a rule about whether references are, in general, to be resolved referentially (like functions) or substitutionally (like macros, except continuously updating). That would solve this kind of ambiguity, which seems to come up surprisingly often. -Aris On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 4:15 PM Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > > Latest zombie auction has just self-ratified with last week's > registrar report of Master switches, so no back-calculations needed > here. [Also, I only noticed this a day or so ago, when looking at > the rules behind the Gaelan/nichdel scam - just to make it clear that > my deputy-Registrar Report was not Faking]. > > The issue: > > Master Switches are Secured-2 (R2532). In late April, the text > enabling Agora to flip the master switch to the auction winner was > moved from R1885 (power-2) to R2551 (power-1). > > It was the "Agora CAN do anything" sentence. Now that it's removed, > I don't think there's any text anywhere that allows Agora to transfer > zombies to winners? (Maybe I'm missing it...?) > > >
DIS: zombie auctions have been broken since April?
Latest zombie auction has just self-ratified with last week's registrar report of Master switches, so no back-calculations needed here. [Also, I only noticed this a day or so ago, when looking at the rules behind the Gaelan/nichdel scam - just to make it clear that my deputy-Registrar Report was not Faking]. The issue: Master Switches are Secured-2 (R2532). In late April, the text enabling Agora to flip the master switch to the auction winner was moved from R1885 (power-2) to R2551 (power-1). It was the "Agora CAN do anything" sentence. Now that it's removed, I don't think there's any text anywhere that allows Agora to transfer zombies to winners? (Maybe I'm missing it...?)
Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8123-8132
Yeah, a couple of people have mentioned that. I have no idea why, and it's really annoying. I assume it's some weird bug with my email provider, but I can't see anything obviously wrong in the headers. Your guess is as good as mine, I'm afraid. -twg ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On Monday, November 12, 2018 11:03 PM, Gaelan Steele wrote: > Actually, that sentence is gone now. But you’re right, this case isn’t > necessarily covered, but I still think maybe we should be adapting that > clause to handle this case? I’m not sure. I change my vote to PRESENT. > > Gaelan > > P.S. Whenever I reply to you, the email is addressed to both you and > agora-discussion, and I have to manually remove you. Any idea why that > happens? > > > On Nov 12, 2018, at 2:25 PM, Timon Walshe-Grey m...@timon.red wrote: > > > > > > On Nov 11, 2018, at 9:38 PM, Gaelan Steele g...@canishe.com wrote: > > > > Votes inline > > > > > > > > > On Nov 11, 2018, at 7:34 PM, Aris Merchant > > > > > thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > 8131 天火狐, twg 2.0 V.J. Rada Protection Act > > > > > AGAINST, this is already handled by 2552/0¶1. > > > > I disagree - the auction rules already say that "[for the purposes of > > auction resolution] Agora CAN do anything", and transferring a player is > > defined as being the flipping of eir master switch to the new owner. So > > technically Agora CAN flip a non-zombie's master switch to someone else, > > making them a zombie again (provided it is part of the resolution of an > > auction). No? > > -twg
Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8123-8132
> > On Nov 11, 2018, at 9:38 PM, Gaelan Steele wrote: > > Votes inline > > > On Nov 11, 2018, at 7:34 PM, Aris Merchant > > > thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com wrote: > > > 8131 天火狐, twg 2.0 V.J. Rada Protection Act > > > AGAINST, this is already handled by 2552/0¶1. I disagree - the auction rules already say that "[for the purposes of auction resolution] Agora CAN do anything", and transferring a player is defined as being the flipping of eir master switch to the new owner. So technically Agora CAN flip a non-zombie's master switch to someone else, making them a zombie again (provided it is part of the resolution of an auction). No? -twg
DIS: Re: OFF: Registering as a Player
Welcome to insanit- I mean fun! On 11/12/2018 10:54 AM, Jacob Arduino wrote: I hereby register as a player - Jacob Arduino
Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8123-8132
Gaelan wrote: Votes inline NttPF
