DIS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8133-8138
On Sun, 25 Nov 2018, Aris Merchant wrote: > I hereby distribute each listed proposal... [...] > The proposal pool is currently empty. Random question: with this workflow, is there ever a self-ratification that a proposal existed and was in the pool? (not that it matters too much because the Assessor's voting report ratifies the whole process at the end - though as a decision not as a proposal - I'm just curious).
Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8133-8138
NttPF
--
Trigon
On Sun, Nov 25, 2018, 15:51 Gaelan Steele Votes below. I’ve decided to start ENDORSing the author instead of voting
> FOR, to allow proposals to be easily killed if a bug is found.
>
> > On Nov 25, 2018, at 2:35 PM, Aris Merchant <
> thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I hereby distribute each listed proposal, initiating the Agoran
> > Decision of whether to adopt it, and removing it from the proposal
> > pool. For this decision, the vote collector is the Assessor, the
> > quorum is 6, the voting method is AI-majority, and the valid
> > options are FOR and AGAINST (PRESENT is also a valid vote, as are
> > conditional votes).
> >
> > IDAuthor(s) AITitle
> >
> ---
> > 8133 Trigon 1.0 Proposals aren't worth *that* much
>
> ENDORSE Trigon
>
> > 8134 G. 2.0 The judge switch
>
> ENDORSE G
>
> > 8135 twg, D Margaux 2.0 Blot Decay (Reprise)
>
> AGAINST, because I’m not a fan of the gamestate changing “on its own.”
> Personally, I’d make it so that the Ref CAN and SHALL do it weekly, and
> people can do it themselves as well if the Ref fails to. Sorry, probably
> should have brought this up earlier.
>
> > 8136 V.J. Rada 3.0 I hate myself
>
> ENDORSE V.J. Rada. MEMES SUBMISSION: {Create the power-3 rule
> “micro-dictatorship” with text “Gaelan has power 3.”}
>
> > 8137 Aris, twg, Trigon 3.0 Uncorrecting Rewards
>
> PRESENT, because I haven’t bothered to keep track of this mess.
>
> > 8138 twg 2.5 Access to contracts’ assets
>
> ENDORSE two
>
> >
> > The proposal pool is currently empty.
> >
> > The full text of the aforementioned proposal(s) is included below.
> >
> > //
> > ID: 8133
> > Title: Proposals aren't worth *that* much
> > Adoption index: 1.0
> > Author: Trigon
> > Co-authors:
> >
> >
> > Amend rule 2496 by replacing the text "the total strength of all valid
> > ballots", wherever it appears, to "the number of valid ballots".
> >
> > //
> > ID: 8134
> > Title: The judge switch
> > Adoption index: 2.0
> > Author: G.
> > Co-authors:
> >
> >
> > Amend R991 (Calls for Judgement) by replacing the paragraph beginning
> > "When a CFJ has no judge assigned" with the following text:
> >
> > Judge is an untracked CFJ switch with possible values of any
> > person or "unassigned" (default). To "assign" a CFJ to a person
> > is to flip that CFJ's judge to that person. To "remove" or
> > "recuse" a person from a being the judge of a CFJ is to flip that
> > CFJ's judge from that person to unassigned.
> >
> > When a CFJ's judge is unassigned, the Arbitor CAN assign any
> > eligible player to be its judge by announcement, and SHALL do so
> > in a timely fashion. The players eligible to be assigned as judge
> > are all active players except the initiator and the person barred
> > (if any). The Arbitor SHALL assign judges over time such that all
> > interested players have reasonably equal opportunities to judge.
> > If a CFJ has no judge assigned, then any player eligible to judge
> > that CFJ CAN assign it to emself Without 3 Objections.
> >
> >
> > [I think all instances of judge assignment/removal work with the
> > above definitions, without further modification].
> >
> > For every CFJ that was assigned to a judge immediately before this
> > proposal took effect, that CFJ's judge switch is flipped to that
> > judge.
> >
> > [Note: all old cases - however old - are still considered to have
> > their last-assigned judge (judges are not "removed" when a case is
> > closed). This is true both before and after this proposal].
> >
> > //
> > ID: 8135
> > Title: Blot Decay (Reprise)
> > Adoption index: 2.0
> > Author: twg
> > Co-authors: D Margaux
> >
> >
> > Amend Rule 2555 to replace:
> >
> > “If a player has neither gained blots nor expunged any blots from emself
> > in the current Agoran week, e CAN expunge 1 blot from emself by
> > announcement.”
> >
> > With:
> >
> > “At the end of each Agoran week, 1 blot is automatically expunged from
> each
> > impure player who that week had not gained any blots.”
> >
> > //
> > ID: 8136
> > Title: I hate myself
> > Adoption index: 3.0
> > Author: V.J. Rada
> > Co-authors:
> >
> >
> > Rules or Instruments to the contrary notwithstanding, this proposal
> > shall act as though its text is the text submitted to a public forum and
> > clearly marked "Memes submission" by the last person to vote FOR it.
> >
> > //
> > ID: 8137
> > Title: Uncorrecting Rewards
> > Adoption index: 3.0
> > Author: Aris
> > Co-authors: twg, Trigon
> >
>
DIS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8133-8138
Votes below. I’ve decided to start ENDORSing the author instead of voting FOR,
to allow proposals to be easily killed if a bug is found.
> On Nov 25, 2018, at 2:35 PM, Aris Merchant
> wrote:
>
> I hereby distribute each listed proposal, initiating the Agoran
> Decision of whether to adopt it, and removing it from the proposal
> pool. For this decision, the vote collector is the Assessor, the
> quorum is 6, the voting method is AI-majority, and the valid
> options are FOR and AGAINST (PRESENT is also a valid vote, as are
> conditional votes).
>
> IDAuthor(s) AITitle
> ---
> 8133 Trigon 1.0 Proposals aren't worth *that* much
ENDORSE Trigon
> 8134 G. 2.0 The judge switch
ENDORSE G
> 8135 twg, D Margaux 2.0 Blot Decay (Reprise)
AGAINST, because I’m not a fan of the gamestate changing “on its own.”
Personally, I’d make it so that the Ref CAN and SHALL do it weekly, and people
can do it themselves as well if the Ref fails to. Sorry, probably should have
brought this up earlier.
> 8136 V.J. Rada 3.0 I hate myself
ENDORSE V.J. Rada. MEMES SUBMISSION: {Create the power-3 rule
“micro-dictatorship” with text “Gaelan has power 3.”}
> 8137 Aris, twg, Trigon 3.0 Uncorrecting Rewards
PRESENT, because I haven’t bothered to keep track of this mess.
> 8138 twg 2.5 Access to contracts’ assets
ENDORSE two
>
> The proposal pool is currently empty.
>
> The full text of the aforementioned proposal(s) is included below.
>
> //
> ID: 8133
> Title: Proposals aren't worth *that* much
> Adoption index: 1.0
> Author: Trigon
> Co-authors:
>
>
> Amend rule 2496 by replacing the text "the total strength of all valid
> ballots", wherever it appears, to "the number of valid ballots".
>
> //
> ID: 8134
> Title: The judge switch
> Adoption index: 2.0
> Author: G.
> Co-authors:
>
>
> Amend R991 (Calls for Judgement) by replacing the paragraph beginning
> "When a CFJ has no judge assigned" with the following text:
>
> Judge is an untracked CFJ switch with possible values of any
> person or "unassigned" (default). To "assign" a CFJ to a person
> is to flip that CFJ's judge to that person. To "remove" or
> "recuse" a person from a being the judge of a CFJ is to flip that
> CFJ's judge from that person to unassigned.
>
> When a CFJ's judge is unassigned, the Arbitor CAN assign any
> eligible player to be its judge by announcement, and SHALL do so
> in a timely fashion. The players eligible to be assigned as judge
> are all active players except the initiator and the person barred
> (if any). The Arbitor SHALL assign judges over time such that all
> interested players have reasonably equal opportunities to judge.
> If a CFJ has no judge assigned, then any player eligible to judge
> that CFJ CAN assign it to emself Without 3 Objections.
>
>
> [I think all instances of judge assignment/removal work with the
> above definitions, without further modification].
>
> For every CFJ that was assigned to a judge immediately before this
> proposal took effect, that CFJ's judge switch is flipped to that
> judge.
>
> [Note: all old cases - however old - are still considered to have
> their last-assigned judge (judges are not "removed" when a case is
> closed). This is true both before and after this proposal].
>
> //
> ID: 8135
> Title: Blot Decay (Reprise)
> Adoption index: 2.0
> Author: twg
> Co-authors: D Margaux
>
>
> Amend Rule 2555 to replace:
>
> “If a player has neither gained blots nor expunged any blots from emself
> in the current Agoran week, e CAN expunge 1 blot from emself by
> announcement.”
>
> With:
>
> “At the end of each Agoran week, 1 blot is automatically expunged from each
> impure player who that week had not gained any blots.”
>
> //
> ID: 8136
> Title: I hate myself
> Adoption index: 3.0
> Author: V.J. Rada
> Co-authors:
>
>
> Rules or Instruments to the contrary notwithstanding, this proposal
> shall act as though its text is the text submitted to a public forum and
> clearly marked "Memes submission" by the last person to vote FOR it.
>
> //
> ID: 8137
> Title: Uncorrecting Rewards
> Adoption index: 3.0
> Author: Aris
> Co-authors: twg, Trigon
>
> [
> This is A.I. 3.0 because I don't know what Rule 2496's power is.
> Proposal 8127 "reenacted" it, meaning it acquires the power it had
> when it was originally repealed, but I wasn't around when that
> happened and it's not in the SLR yet.
> ]
>
> Amend rule 2496 by replacing all instances of the text "create in
Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Herald] Weekly Report
admitted - my search actually pinged that one but I was lazy and didn't scroll (thought it was a false positive). correction incoming. On Sun, 25 Nov 2018, Reuben Staley wrote: > CoE: this message is missing: > > https://www.mail-archive.com/agora-business@agoranomic.org/msg33094.html > > -- > Trigon > > On Sun, Nov 25, 2018, 13:52 Kerim Aydin > > > > > > Herald’s Weekly report > > > > Date of Last Report: 16 Nov 2018 > > Date of This Report: 25 Nov 2018 > > > > KarmaEntity (np=not player) > > - > > +5 twg <= SHOGUN > > -ABOVE +4 STAND THE SAMURAI > > +2 D. Margaux > > +2 Corona > > +1 Trigon > > +1 ATMunn > > +1 Aris > > +1 Tenhigitsune[1] (zombie) > > -1 Kenyon (np) > > -1 Telnaior (zombie) > > -1 Gaelan > > -2 G. > > -2 Ouri (np) > > -2 CuddleBeam > > -2 Murphy > > -2 V.J. Rada > > -BELOW -4 LIE THE GAMMAS > > <= HONOURLESS WORM > > - > > > > All other entities have 0 Karma (0's included on the list > > indicate an honour change since the last report). > > Notations of player/not-player and zombie status above are > > not complete switch reports, so are not self-ratifying. > > [1] aka 天火狐 > > > > Notices of Honour: > > > > D. Margaux (19 Nov 2018) > > +1 twg (spotting errors in Arbitor’s weekly) > > -1 D. Margaux (being careless with CFJ numbers) > > > > [New Week 19-Nov] > > > > Telnaior via Aris (16 Nov 2018) > > -1 twg (rebalancing) > > +1 Gaelan (rebalancing) > > > > Aris (16 Nov 2018) > > -1 twg (rebalancing) > > +1 V.J. Rada (rebalancing) > > > > G. (16 Nov 2018) > > -1 twg (rebalancing) > > +1 Murphy (rebalancing) > > > > [Time of Last Report] > > [New Week 12-Nov] > > > > twg (11 Nov 2018) > > -1 G. (not having properly judged CFJ 3681 yet) > > +1 Sky Fox (being an obedient zombie) > > > > [New Week 05-Nov] > > > > ATMunn (04 Nov 2018) > > -1 twg (rebalancing) > > +1 VJ Rada (rebalancing) > > > > Trigon (01 Nov 2018) > > -1 G. for acting recklessly and not considering eir actions' effects > > +1 Gaelan because why is e at -3 when e hasn't even been here for months? > > > > G. (31 Oct 2018) > > +1 twg (for reminding us about violet ribbons) > > -1 Trigon (for only awarding a violet ribbon to emself) > > > > [New Week 29-Oct] > > > > [New Week 22-Oct] > > > > D. Margaux (20 Oct 2018) > > twg +1 (Doomsday Clock was a very clever way to blow up the land minigame) > > Murphy -1 (impeding the due course of justice by leaving Arbitor stuff > > undone) > > > > [New Week 15-Oct] > > > > [New Week 08-Oct] > > > > D. Margaux (07 Oct 2018) > > +1 Aris for giving careful consideration to arguments > > -1 D Margaux for persisting in advocating perhaps a tenuous interpretation > > of the rules > > > > Gaelan via Master G. INVALID, NOT FIRST IN WEEK > > -1 twg (for making someone a zombie who was clearly returning) > > +1 ATMunn (welcome back! > > > > twg (03 Oct 2018) > > +1 D. Margaux (managing to sneak this one past me) > > -1 Kenyon (arbitrarily selected zombie) > > > > Gaelan via Master G. (01 Oct 2018) > > +1 CuddleBeam (for taking the burden G.'s RL bank balance). > > -1 Ouri (more karma decay for zombies) > > > > D. Margaux (02 Oct 2018) > > +1 CuddleBeam for an ingenious pledge > > -1 D Margaux because eir karma is too high > > > > G. (01 Oct 2018) > > +1 twg (for this great addition to the assessor's results) > > -1 Ouri (zombies close to deregistration mean nonzero karma > > balance in Agora eventually). > > > > [New Week] > > > > twg (30 Sep 2018) > > +1 D. Margaux (fulfilling agreed obligation) > > -1 Telnaior (arbitrarily selected zombie) > > > > Aris (24 Sep 2018) > > -1 G. (unclear communication) > > +1 omd (serving as our Distributor) > > > > Gaelan, via master G. (24 Sep 2018) > > -1 Aris (because Gaelan may or may not feel like it). > > +1 V.J. (or VJ) Rada, because eir name is confusing enough to be > > listed in two different ways within the Registrar's Report, and > > I like that. > > > > G. (24 Sep 2018) > > -1 Aris (because really, I feel like it). > > +1 CuddleBeam (because I'm tired of seeing that name at the bottom). > > > > [New Week] > > > > Trigon (23 Sep 2018) > > -1 to D. Margaux for being a manipulator > > +1 to D Margaux for helping debug zombie rules > > > > Aris (23 Sep 2018) > > -1 G. (complaining about proposals being readded while resisting > > any attempt to lower quorum or otherwise resolve the problem of > > them failing quorum) > > +1 D Margaux (helping fix problems by debugging the proposals) > > > > Telnaior, via master Aris (23 Sep 2018) > > -1 D Margaux (manipulating zombies to gain honor) > > +1 nichdel (being mainipulated) > > > > D. Margaux (23 Sep 2018) > > -1 nichdel (having the misfortune of being D. Margaux’s zombie) > > +1 D Margaux (for revealing what might be yet another zombie exploit) > > > > G. (23 Sep 2018) > > -1 Aris (for persisting with group of
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: CFJ 3688 judgement
Sorry about that, I actually had 2-3 process reasons (i.e. in Motions and Moots processes) that 2 judges at once would break things enough to violate R217 - I'd written up the first one (probably the weakest as it relied on grammar alone) but that's where I stalled out for a while (and delay was annoying the treasuror) so I just submitted the judgement without adding the rest. On Fri, 16 Nov 2018, Aris Merchant wrote: > Indeed. For example, the earth is inhabited by a person, to wit, it is > inhabited by Hillary Rodham Clinton (our traditional example > non-player human). It may also be inhabited by other persons, but that > doesn't matter. Technically, I believe this acts as an existential quantifier. > > -Aris > On Fri, Nov 16, 2018 at 6:12 PM Ørjan Johansen wrote: > > > > On Fri, 16 Nov 2018, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > > > R591 contains: > > >> When a CFJ is open and assigned to a judge, that judge CAN assign > > >> a valid judgement to it by announcement, and SHALL do so in a > > >> timely fashion after this becomes possible. If e does not, the > > >> Arbitor CAN remove em from being the judge of that case by > > >> announcement > > > Here, "When a CFJ is ... assigned to a judge" is singular, which implies > > > that if a CFJ is assigned to 2 judges, then this condition isn't meant. > > > > I really don't see how you can deduce that from this grammatical > > construction unless you've _already_ decided "assigned to" is an n to 1 > > relationship. > > > > Greetings, > > Ørjan. >
DIS: Re: OFF: [Herald] Weekly Report
CoE: this message is missing: https://www.mail-archive.com/agora-business@agoranomic.org/msg33094.html -- Trigon On Sun, Nov 25, 2018, 13:52 Kerim Aydin > > Herald’s Weekly report > > Date of Last Report: 16 Nov 2018 > Date of This Report: 25 Nov 2018 > > KarmaEntity (np=not player) > - > +5 twg <= SHOGUN > -ABOVE +4 STAND THE SAMURAI > +2 D. Margaux > +2 Corona > +1 Trigon > +1 ATMunn > +1 Aris > +1 Tenhigitsune[1] (zombie) > -1 Kenyon (np) > -1 Telnaior (zombie) > -1 Gaelan > -2 G. > -2 Ouri (np) > -2 CuddleBeam > -2 Murphy > -2 V.J. Rada > -BELOW -4 LIE THE GAMMAS > <= HONOURLESS WORM > - > > All other entities have 0 Karma (0's included on the list > indicate an honour change since the last report). > Notations of player/not-player and zombie status above are > not complete switch reports, so are not self-ratifying. > [1] aka 天火狐 > > Notices of Honour: > > D. Margaux (19 Nov 2018) > +1 twg (spotting errors in Arbitor’s weekly) > -1 D. Margaux (being careless with CFJ numbers) > > [New Week 19-Nov] > > Telnaior via Aris (16 Nov 2018) > -1 twg (rebalancing) > +1 Gaelan (rebalancing) > > Aris (16 Nov 2018) > -1 twg (rebalancing) > +1 V.J. Rada (rebalancing) > > G. (16 Nov 2018) > -1 twg (rebalancing) > +1 Murphy (rebalancing) > > [Time of Last Report] > [New Week 12-Nov] > > twg (11 Nov 2018) > -1 G. (not having properly judged CFJ 3681 yet) > +1 Sky Fox (being an obedient zombie) > > [New Week 05-Nov] > > ATMunn (04 Nov 2018) > -1 twg (rebalancing) > +1 VJ Rada (rebalancing) > > Trigon (01 Nov 2018) > -1 G. for acting recklessly and not considering eir actions' effects > +1 Gaelan because why is e at -3 when e hasn't even been here for months? > > G. (31 Oct 2018) > +1 twg (for reminding us about violet ribbons) > -1 Trigon (for only awarding a violet ribbon to emself) > > [New Week 29-Oct] > > [New Week 22-Oct] > > D. Margaux (20 Oct 2018) > twg +1 (Doomsday Clock was a very clever way to blow up the land minigame) > Murphy -1 (impeding the due course of justice by leaving Arbitor stuff > undone) > > [New Week 15-Oct] > > [New Week 08-Oct] > > D. Margaux (07 Oct 2018) > +1 Aris for giving careful consideration to arguments > -1 D Margaux for persisting in advocating perhaps a tenuous interpretation > of the rules > > Gaelan via Master G. INVALID, NOT FIRST IN WEEK > -1 twg (for making someone a zombie who was clearly returning) > +1 ATMunn (welcome back! > > twg (03 Oct 2018) > +1 D. Margaux (managing to sneak this one past me) > -1 Kenyon (arbitrarily selected zombie) > > Gaelan via Master G. (01 Oct 2018) > +1 CuddleBeam (for taking the burden G.'s RL bank balance). > -1 Ouri (more karma decay for zombies) > > D. Margaux (02 Oct 2018) > +1 CuddleBeam for an ingenious pledge > -1 D Margaux because eir karma is too high > > G. (01 Oct 2018) > +1 twg (for this great addition to the assessor's results) > -1 Ouri (zombies close to deregistration mean nonzero karma > balance in Agora eventually). > > [New Week] > > twg (30 Sep 2018) > +1 D. Margaux (fulfilling agreed obligation) > -1 Telnaior (arbitrarily selected zombie) > > Aris (24 Sep 2018) > -1 G. (unclear communication) > +1 omd (serving as our Distributor) > > Gaelan, via master G. (24 Sep 2018) > -1 Aris (because Gaelan may or may not feel like it). > +1 V.J. (or VJ) Rada, because eir name is confusing enough to be > listed in two different ways within the Registrar's Report, and > I like that. > > G. (24 Sep 2018) > -1 Aris (because really, I feel like it). > +1 CuddleBeam (because I'm tired of seeing that name at the bottom). > > [New Week] > > Trigon (23 Sep 2018) > -1 to D. Margaux for being a manipulator > +1 to D Margaux for helping debug zombie rules > > Aris (23 Sep 2018) > -1 G. (complaining about proposals being readded while resisting > any attempt to lower quorum or otherwise resolve the problem of > them failing quorum) > +1 D Margaux (helping fix problems by debugging the proposals) > > Telnaior, via master Aris (23 Sep 2018) > -1 D Margaux (manipulating zombies to gain honor) > +1 nichdel (being mainipulated) > > D. Margaux (23 Sep 2018) > -1 nichdel (having the misfortune of being D. Margaux’s zombie) > +1 D Margaux (for revealing what might be yet another zombie exploit) > > G. (23 Sep 2018) > -1 Aris (for persisting with group of low-quorum proposals). > +1 D. Margaux (for finding bugs after several votings). > > [New Week] > > D. Margaux (15 Sep 2018) > -1 D. Margaux (misnaming G.) > +1 G. (being gracious about that misnaming) > > [New Week] > > G. (9 Sep 2018) > -1 Trigon (being generally MIA on land) > +1 D. Margaux (keeping up officer report standards via SJ) > > [New Week] > > [New Week] > > G. 29 Aug 2018 > -1 G (not reading proposals carefully) > +1 D. Margaux (reading carefully and researching back beyond eir tenure) > > twg 26 Aug
Re: DIS: [Meta] Linguistic Experimentation
haha gotcha i don't know crap about anything except american law i guess and even that interest is very casual. i flaunt my own ignorance. On Fri, Nov 23, 2018 at 12:16 PM Aris Merchant < thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote: > Indeed. Or perhaps "All Agorans are snerds". > > -Aris > On Thu, Nov 22, 2018 at 5:04 PM Reuben Staley > wrote: > > > > Instead, how about we adopt the following term: > > > > snerd > > > > * American English /snɚd/ > > * British English /snəd/ > > > > (noun) 1. short for "super nerd"; i.e. "People who know Lojban are > snerds" > > > > -- > > Trigon > > > > On Thu, Nov 22, 2018, 17:41 Aris Merchant < > > thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > I propose to conduct an experiment into the nature of the Agoran > > > dialect, and specifically how easy it is to change it. I'm planning to > > > start occasionally sprinkling some Lojban indicators [1] into my > > > emails. They represent expressions like "yay!", ";)", or "IMO", but > > > Lojban has many more of them than English. I will gloss most of them, > > > and guarantee that I will gloss anything that substantially changes > > > the meaning of a sentence. This isn't an attempt to do an experiment > > > from the perspective of rules or formal actions (I don't expect to do > > > anything that causes a CFJ). Instead, I'm just going to start using > > > some useful expressions and see if any of them become part of standard > > > Agoran. Of course, I would encourage other interested parties to try > > > doing the same thing. Does anyone have any objections to this > > > proposal? > > > > > > [1] > > > > https://lojban.org/publications/cll/cll_v1.1_xhtml-chapter-chunks/chapter-attitudinals.html > > > > > > -Aris > > > > -- >From V.J. Rada
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Resolution of Proposals 8129, 8131, 8127, 8123-8126, 8128, 8130 and 8132
On Sat, 24 Nov 2018, Reuben Staley wrote: In the most recent ruleset, I only replaced the "earn", not the "earns". Someone can CoE it, but in a couple of weeks, Aris' proposal will pass and converge the gamestate. My options (1) and (4) would converge with this proposal, but the rest wouldn't. Greetings, Ørjan. On 11/24/18 11:05 AM, Ørjan Johansen wrote: On Fri, 23 Nov 2018, Aris Merchant wrote: Sorry, my mind isn’t getting the semantics of your comment. Could you break down what you mean? The original rule text contains both the words "earn" and "earns", and the latter may be considered a form of the former (the lemma form). Then the question is, did "earns" get replaced as well? If (1) no, then it is still in the rule (and the provision was buggy). If yes, did it (2) get substituted by the same text, or (3) by a version with a suitable -s added for grammatical correctness? Does this whole thing (4) make the triggered provision ambiguous and thus the amendment fails completely? And then for each option above, what happens with your uncorrection proposal? (1) It's fine since "earns" was never replaced. (2) It will turn what used to be "earns" into "earn". (3) It will leave what used to be "earns" as "creates in eir possession". (4) It's fine but redundant. Greetings, Ørjan. -Aris On Fri, Nov 23, 2018 at 11:40 PM Ørjan Johansen wrote: I'm wondering what happens to the word "earns" throughout these changes. Did it get replaced by the original provision, and if so, does it get uncorrected back correctly? Greetings, Ørjan. On Fri, 23 Nov 2018, Aris Merchant wrote: Wait, you want the literal opposite of this right? You want to switch it back to “earn”. The problem is that the provision did trigger, and it shouldn't have. I submit the following proposal: // Title: Uncorrecting Rewards Adoption index: 3.0 Author: Aris Co-authors: twg, Trigon [ This is A.I. 3.0 because I don't know what Rule 2496's power is. Proposal 8127 "reenacted" it, meaning it acquires the power it had when it was originally repealed, but I wasn't around when that happened and it's not in the SLR yet. ] Amend rule 2496 by replacing all instances of the text "create in eir possession" with the word "earn". // -Aris On Fri, Nov 23, 2018 at 1:43 PM Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: You are, of course, correct. I submit this proposal: // ID: 8127 Title: Rephrasing Rewards Adoption index: 3.0 Author: twg Co-authors: Trigon [ This is A.I. 3.0 because I don't know what Rule 2496's power is. Proposal 8127 "reenacted" it, meaning it acquires the power it had when it was originally repealed, but I wasn't around when that happened and it's not in the SLR yet. ] Amend rule 2496 by replacing all instances of the word "earn" with "create in eir possession". // Notice of Honour: -1 twg (allowing eir own moneymaking activities to interfere with the rest of the game) +1 Trigon (suffering eir proposal being mangled by aforementioned activities) (I'm virtually certain my "rewards" _do_ work, but I'm astonished nobody's CFJed them on principle yet...) -twg ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On Tuesday, November 20, 2018 3:19 AM, Ørjan Johansen < oer...@nvg.ntnu.no> wrote: On Mon, 19 Nov 2018, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: I resolve the Agoran Decisions to adopt each of Proposals 8129, 8131, 8127, 8123-8126, 8128, 8130 and 8132, in that order, as follows. Fiendish. (Assuming this works. People might want to CFJ your double earnings.) However, I think resolving 8127 before 8126 has another unfortunate side effect, it causes the last paragraph of 8127 to trigger: If a proposal by Trigon has not passed in the same distribution as this proposal entitled "High-level asset verbs", amend rule 2496 by replacing all instances of the word "earn" with "create in eir possession". Greetings, Ørjan. -- Trigon
