Re: DIS: A logo for Agora

PSS this is kind of unrelated (but related to herald) but your last report omitted some hard labor titles, the next one will have them right? On Sun, Jun 21, 2020 at 12:54 PM Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion wrote: > I’ve got the rules coming although there are a lot of edge

DIS: A logo for Agora

I’ve got the rules coming although there are a lot of edge cases. I should have a draft in the next week. > On Jun 20, 2020, at 21:20, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion > wrote: > >  > On 6/20/2020 6:03 PM, Rebecca via agora-discussion wrote: >> Free Tournament? Free Tournament? Free

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Ready Proposals

+1 On 6/20/2020 2:02 AM, Reuben Staley via agora-discussion wrote: On 2020-06-19 23:37, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote: Rule 1623/11 Disinterested Proposals    A Proposal may be Interested or Disinterested. Each Proposal is    Interested when made. The Proposer of a Proposal

Re: DIS: A logo for Agora

Free Tournament? Free Tournament? Free Tournament? On Sun, Jun 21, 2020 at 11:00 AM Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > On 6/20/20 6:10 PM, Reuben Staley via agora-discussion wrote: > > Due to a multitude of factors, I've noticed a lot of sentiment to >

Re: DIS: A logo for Agora

On 6/20/20 6:10 PM, Reuben Staley via agora-discussion wrote: > Due to a multitude of factors, I've noticed a lot of sentiment to "rebrand" > a bit. Along with this, I would like to raise the discussion of potentially > creating a new logo of sorts for Agora. The coat-of-arms has stood as our >

Re: DIS: How and Whether to Change Patch Certification

I disagree, honestly. I don't think it's a good idea, especially in regards to new players, to say "hey, so if there's a problem with the rules, you can do this to fix it, but you can get massively punished for doing something for the good of Agora." And if someone is unfamiliar with our criminal

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Contracts] Six secret contracts.

Yeah, I intended that to be part of it, but it really doesn't matter. -- Trigon currently on a phone On Sat, Jun 20, 2020, 18:35 ATMunn via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > On 6/19/2020 7:42 PM, Reuben Staley via agora-business wrote: > > I consent to the following

DIS: Re: BUS: [Contracts] Six secret contracts.

On 6/19/2020 7:42 PM, Reuben Staley via agora-business wrote: I consent to the following six contracts: *cries in notary* (jk its not a big deal) quick question though: is the "Contract No. N:" meant to be a part of the title or no? -- ATMunn friendly neighborhood notary here :)

Re: DIS: My Piratehood

automatically. it's all good. also for what it's worth, i've almost literally never known this game to be this active/spammy before so maybe you can return when it's quieter, haha On Sun, Jun 21, 2020 at 7:43 AM Stefan Fjellander via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: >

Re: DIS: A logo for Agora

On 6/20/20 6:10 PM, Reuben Staley via agora-discussion wrote: > Due to a multitude of factors, I've noticed a lot of sentiment to "rebrand" > a bit. Along with this, I would like to raise the discussion of potentially > creating a new logo of sorts for Agora. The coat-of-arms has stood as our >

Re: DIS: Fora and Accessibility

On 6/20/20 7:12 PM, Reuben Staley via agora-discussion wrote: > Slack is worse imo. It's free for a limited plan, but archiving longer than > 10,000 messages is reserved for paying customers. At least Discord keeps > all the server's messages in storage. > > -- > Trigon Ouch - I guess that's not

Re: DIS: Fora and Accessibility

Slack is worse imo. It's free for a limited plan, but archiving longer than 10,000 messages is reserved for paying customers. At least Discord keeps all the server's messages in storage. -- Trigon currently on a phone On Sat, Jun 20, 2020, 17:05 Jason Cobb via agora-discussion <

DIS: A logo for Agora

Due to a multitude of factors, I've noticed a lot of sentiment to "rebrand" a bit. Along with this, I would like to raise the discussion of potentially creating a new logo of sorts for Agora. The coat-of-arms has stood as our de-facto logo for years (on the website as well as in other places) but

Re: DIS: Fora and Accessibility

On Sat, 20 Jun 2020 at 22:24, nch via agora-discussion wrote: > Moving this here because multiple subtopics in one thread was explicitly > mentioned as an accessibility problem in the increasing off-topic > "Leaving..." thread. > > First, I want to simply ask: Do you use IRC, and how often? Do

Re: DIS: Fora and Accessibility

On 6/20/2020 4:00 PM, nch via agora-discussion wrote: > On 6/20/20 5:56 PM, Reuben Staley wrote: >> I do, however, think setting up a chat client for discussion that runs >> alongside a-d would be useful for many things, such as private >> discussion of alliances, bugfixing on proposals and

Re: DIS: Fora and Accessibility

On 6/20/20 6:40 PM, nch via agora-discussion wrote: > The one thing Discord is missing that might sway me to a platform that > has it: The ability for anyone to export the entirety of the chat log > since the beginning. That'd make it easier to migrate if and when > discord gets replaced with

Re: DIS: Fora and Accessibility

On 6/20/20 6:23 PM, nch via agora-discussion wrote: > Moving this here because multiple subtopics in one thread was explicitly > mentioned as an accessibility problem in the increasing off-topic > "Leaving..." thread. > > First, I want to simply ask: Do you use IRC, and how often? Do you use >

Re: DIS: Fora and Accessibility

On 6/20/20 5:56 PM, Reuben Staley wrote: > I do, however, think setting up a chat client for discussion that runs > alongside a-d would be useful for many things, such as private > discussion of alliances, bugfixing on proposals and contacts with more > immediate feedback, and, rather

Re: DIS: Fora and Accessibility

On 6/20/2020 3:47 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote: > I think there are valid criticisms of how we use email, and we could adopt > guidelines to change that, but if we started to use Discord or anything other > than IRC or email for significant amounts of discussion, I think I’d

Re: DIS: Fora and Accessibility

I would not suggest that we change *all* discussion to such a platform. I would not say that long-form discussion is discouraged there, but it's definitely harder to have multiple concurrent discussions on different proposals. I have learned that by playing many Discord nomics. Discord furthermore

Re: DIS: Fora and Accessibility

> The ability for anyone to export the entirety of the chat log since the beginning. There's (TOS-violating, but still) chrome plugins for this. Bögtil Den sön 21 juni 2020 kl 00:41 skrev nch via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org>: > On 6/20/20 5:23 PM, nch via agora-discussion

Re: DIS: Fora and Accessibility

On 6/20/20 5:47 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote: > I think there are valid criticisms of how we use email, and we could adopt > guidelines to change that, but if we started to use Discord or anything other > than IRC or email for significant amounts of discussion, I think I’d leave >

Re: Archival Continuity and Discussion Accessibility (was Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Leaving or something like that)

On 6/20/2020 3:01 PM, nch via agora-discussion wrote: > On 6/20/20 4:55 PM, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote: >> On 6/20/2020 2:46 PM, nch via agora-discussion wrote: >>> To be clear, I'd never suggest moving gameplay to a chat client. Discord >>> did not exist 27 years ago, and it's not

Re: DIS: Fora and Accessibility

I think there are valid criticisms of how we use email, and we could adopt guidelines to change that, but if we started to use Discord or anything other than IRC or email for significant amounts of discussion, I think I’d leave because those platforms lend themselves to less verbose and

Re: DIS: Fora and Accessibility

On 6/20/20 5:23 PM, nch via agora-discussion wrote: > Moving this here because multiple subtopics in one thread was explicitly > mentioned as an accessibility problem in the increasing off-topic > "Leaving..." thread. > > First, I want to simply ask: Do you use IRC, and how often? Do you use >

DIS: Fora and Accessibility

Moving this here because multiple subtopics in one thread was explicitly mentioned as an accessibility problem in the increasing off-topic "Leaving..." thread. First, I want to simply ask: Do you use IRC, and how often? Do you use Discord, and how often? Reducing the chatter in a-d by moving

[Poll] A chat client for Agora (was Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Leaving or something like that)

On Sat, Jun 20, 2020, 16:09 nch via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > On 6/20/20 5:07 PM, Reuben Staley wrote: > > Alternatively, we do have an IRC chat which is already an official > > forum. Mayhaps if the Webmastor promoted this service, it could > > encourage us to

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Leaving or something like that

On 6/20/20 5:07 PM, Reuben Staley wrote: > Alternatively, we do have an IRC chat which is already an official > forum. Mayhaps if the Webmastor promoted this service, it could > encourage us to congregate there to answer new players' questions. > > -- > Trigon > > (I haven't figured out my

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Leaving or something like that

On Sat, Jun 20, 2020, 15:33 nch via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > On 6/20/20 4:10 PM, Stefan Fjellander via agora-discussion wrote: > > (I rejoined discussions) > >> Sorry to see you going, but always happy to have you back if you choose. > >> Can I ask what you

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Leaving or something like that

On 6/20/2020 2:55 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > I don't think we need continuity/historicity on every card transfer, and > the only reason for some of the other reports to have timestamped > documents (e.g. Treasuror) is to have self-ratified rollback points. What do people think about a type of

Archival Continuity and Discussion Accessibility (was Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Leaving or something like that)

On 6/20/20 4:55 PM, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote: > > On 6/20/2020 2:46 PM, nch via agora-discussion wrote: >> To be clear, I'd never suggest moving gameplay to a chat client. Discord >> did not exist 27 years ago, and it's not that likely to exist in 27 >> years. Agora needs something

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Leaving or something like that

On 6/20/2020 2:42 PM, Stefan Fjellander via agora-discussion wrote: >> I know the downside to chat systems is that things aren't recorded in a > way > that can be referenced long term, > I happen to run an somewhat nomiclike conlang discord server, where we have > a few channels corresponding

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Leaving or something like that

On 6/20/2020 2:46 PM, nch via agora-discussion wrote: > To be clear, I'd never suggest moving gameplay to a chat client. Discord > did not exist 27 years ago, and it's not that likely to exist in 27 > years. Agora needs something with the continuity of email. This would > only be discussion

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Leaving or something like that

On 6/20/20 4:42 PM, Stefan Fjellander wrote: > I happen to run an somewhat nomiclike conlang discord server, where we > have a few channels corresponding to agora discussion, which are just > as any else, and then in the channels corresponding to agora business > you have to format messages a

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Leaving or something like that

> I know the downside to chat systems is that things aren't recorded in a way that can be referenced long term, I happen to run an somewhat nomiclike conlang discord server, where we have a few channels corresponding to agora discussion, which are just as any else, and then in the channels

DIS: My Piratehood

Save for the piracy thing, i don't think i'm in any other contract. Do i have to terminate the piracy contract manually, or is it automatically terminated when i deregister? Bögtil

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Ready Proposals

On 6/20/20 5:01 PM, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote: > On 6/20/2020 1:49 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion wrote: >> On 6/20/20 8:50 AM, nch via agora-discussion wrote: >>> On 6/20/20 7:20 AM, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion wrote: This may be the programmer in me speaking, but I

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Leaving or something like that

On 6/20/20 4:10 PM, Stefan Fjellander via agora-discussion wrote: > (I rejoined discussions) >> Sorry to see you going, but always happy to have you back if you choose. >> Can I ask what you found most difficult/frustrating? >> Difficult > I must admit I don't really know how to vote, nor how CFJs

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Leaving or something like that

On 6/20/2020 2:10 PM, Stefan Fjellander via agora-discussion wrote: > Thus, I was in the position of "I get 20-50 emails overnight, of which I > instantly delete 99%, from a community which I almost never interact with > and which I don't even understand the basics of", and it's unfair both to >

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Leaving or something like that

(I rejoined discussions) > Sorry to see you going, but always happy to have you back if you choose. > Can I ask what you found most difficult/frustrating? > Difficult I must admit I don't really know how to vote, nor how CFJs work, and the discussion in general was over my head 90% of the time. I

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Ready Proposals

On 6/20/2020 1:49 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion wrote: > On 6/20/20 8:50 AM, nch via agora-discussion wrote: >> On 6/20/20 7:20 AM, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion wrote: >>> This may be the programmer in me speaking, but I don't think it's a good >>> idea to couple these two values

DIS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] Don't forget favoring! (policy statement)

On 6/20/20 2:29 PM, Kerim Aydin via agora-official wrote: > If anything in the above seems confusing/unfair, lmk... Nope, this all seems perfectly reasonable to me. -- Jason Cobb

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Ready Proposals

On 6/20/20 8:50 AM, nch via agora-discussion wrote: > On 6/20/20 7:20 AM, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion wrote: >> This may be the programmer in me speaking, but I don't think it's a good >> idea to couple these two values together. I think it will be easier in >> the future if rules can look at

DIS: Re: BUS: Leaving

On 6/20/20 2:58 PM, Stefan Fjellander via agora-business wrote: > I, Bögtil, hereby deregisters, as via rule 869/46. > It's been nice knowing y'all, but I don't really have time for this nor the > energy (also I understand very little so each email required a lot of > effort) right now. I might

DIS: Draft Reportor contract

This is intended to be a publicly funded contract once we have a rule for that. (The same thing could be accomplished more simply by making Reportor rule-defined, but I'm interested in being able to add things to Agora without adding complexity to the rules.) Much of the text is around

Contract charities (was Re: DIS: How and Whether to Change Patch Certification)

> The idea of a contract charity (which we've done before) is intriguing and > this makes me want to go for the strongest standard (w/o objection). I was just in the middle of drafting a Reportor contract. Here's a copy of your proto for charity contracts from last month: > Proto > - > Enact the

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: CFJ 3846 Judged FALSE

On 6/20/2020 11:55 AM, Aris Merchant via agora-discussion wrote: > On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 10:36 AM Kerim Aydin wrote: >> On 6/19/2020 10:35 PM, Aris Merchant via agora-business wrote: >>> These judgments are basically drafts. I'm assigning them because I've >>> got to assign something, but I'm

Re: DIS: How and Whether to Change Patch Certification

On 6/20/2020 11:29 AM, James Cook via agora-discussion wrote: > On Sat, 20 Jun 2020 at 01:45, Aris Merchant wrote: >> I think we need a free way of pending patch proposals. The voters appear to >> agree with me. A bit of spin here to correct :). 5 voters voted FOR, 5 voters voted AGAINST.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: CFJ 3846 Judged FALSE

On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 10:36 AM Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > On 6/19/2020 10:35 PM, Aris Merchant via agora-business wrote: > > These judgments are basically drafts. I'm assigning them because I've > > got to assign something, but I'm happy to

Re: DIS: How and Whether to Change Patch Certification

On Sat, 20 Jun 2020 at 01:45, Aris Merchant via agora-discussion wrote: > I think we need a free way of pending patch proposals. The voters appear to > agree with me. One voter's perspective: I voted FOR only to protect for the case that someone finds a serious bug with pending proposals.

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] CFJ 3844 Assigned to Murphy

On 6/20/2020 11:04 AM, James Cook via agora-business wrote: > On Sun, 14 Jun 2020 at 22:04, Edward Murphy wrote: >> >> G. wrote: >> >>> The below CFJ is 3844. I assign it to Murphy. >>> >>> status: https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/#3844 >>> >>> ===

DIS: Re: BUS: CFJ 3846 Judged FALSE

On 6/19/2020 10:35 PM, Aris Merchant via agora-business wrote: > These judgments are basically drafts. I'm assigning them because I've > got to assign something, but I'm happy to reconsider as appropriate. I > think the core of the arguments should be good though. I think your judgements as-is

DIS: Re: BUS: CFJ 3853 Judged True

On 6/20/20 9:37 AM, nch via agora-business wrote: > Also note a gratuitous argument [4] submitted at the time the CFJ was > called which uses similar reasoning to arrive at a similar conclusion. This is tacked on at the end because I actually didn't read this gratuitous until I had written the

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Ready Proposals

On 6/20/20 7:14 AM, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion wrote: > On 6/20/20 12:23 AM, nch via agora-discussion wrote: >> On 6/19/20 11:20 PM, nch via agora-discussion wrote: >>> You wrote a proposal designed specifically to only be used for narrow >>> patches and then immediately claimed authority to

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Ready Proposals

On 6/20/20 8:02 AM, nch via agora-discussion wrote: >> We have a fundamental philosophical difference. I do not think patches >> should require a payment to be distributed. I want them to be >> distributable without a fee. I don't particularly mind the author >> still getting a reward for it, but

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Ready Proposals

On 6/20/20 12:01 AM, Aris Merchant wrote: > > > On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 9:21 PM nch via agora-discussion > > wrote: > > On 6/19/20 11:06 PM, Aris Merchant wrote: > > On the other hand, I'd prefer not to have someone run against me > in an >

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Ready Proposals

On 6/20/20 7:20 AM, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion wrote: > This may be the programmer in me speaking, but I don't think it's a good > idea to couple these two values together. I think it will be easier in > the future if rules can look at whether a proposal is distributable vs > whether it is

DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Ready Proposals

On 6/19/20 11:36 PM, nch via agora-business wrote: > Below is v1 of Ready Proposals. It replaces the binary switch for > pending with a trinary one that distinguishes 'proper' pending and > 'special' pending. > > I also propose repealing Certifiable Patches, and amend the Promotor > method to

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Ready Proposals

On 6/20/20 12:23 AM, nch via agora-discussion wrote: > On 6/19/20 11:20 PM, nch via agora-discussion wrote: >> You wrote a proposal designed specifically to only be used for narrow >> patches and then immediately claimed authority to use it because, in >> your arguments, literally any rule text

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Treasuror] [Weekly Report] The long anticipated Forbes 493

On 6/20/20 12:02 AM, Reuben Staley via agora-discussion wrote: > On 2020-06-19 20:06, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via > agora-discussion wrote: >> The way I was thinking of it, I gave you the second legislative card I >> already had: either way, I should have two now. >> >>> On Jun 19,

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Ready Proposals

On 2020-06-19 23:37, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote: Rule 1623/11 Disinterested Proposals A Proposal may be Interested or Disinterested. Each Proposal is Interested when made. The Proposer of a Proposal may cause it to become Disinterested, without objection, but

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Ready Proposals

On 2020-06-19 23:01, Aris Merchant via agora-discussion wrote: The larger problem here is that I think proposals are essentially a volunteer effort. Charging people for them seems to me rather like charging people to hold offices. [1] It's community service. Why would you charge people for

DIS: Re: BUS: CFJ 3846 Judged FALSE

>To be honest, I'm pretty sure >that most of Agora's interpretative woes could be solved by rigorous >application of the principle that language means what people think it means >coupled with rigorous adherence to the text of the rules Yep, I've always tried to (sometimes covertly) judge CFJs in