Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Easy Summary Judgement Repeal (also includes treasuror action)
On 6/28/2020 8:35 PM, Aris Merchant via agora-discussion wrote: > On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 8:29 PM Jason Cobb via agora-discussion < > agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > >> On 6/28/20 11:06 PM, Ed Strange via agora-business wrote: >>> So, as it currently stands, the Referee can impose 6 blots around >> anywhere >>> e wants for no reason whatsoever, just because e feels like it. This >> seems, >>> to put it mildly, unfair (the PM can also do this but e is a special boi, >>> so this is fine). I create the following proposal and pay 1 legislative >>> product to pend it. >>> >>> Title: Only the PM can be arbitrary! >>> AI: 1.7 >>> Coauthor Aris >>> Text: Repeal Rule 2479/6 "Official Injustice" >> >> >> I think a judge found that it's impossible to amend a specific rule >> revision, so it's likely to be impossible to repeal it, too. > > > Depending on the judge's reasoning, that doesn't necessarily follow. If you > amend a revision, it isn't the same revision anymore. It's like trying to > change a git commit. That (arguably) doesn't even make sense as an > operation. By contrast, repealing a revision simply means making it not be > a rule anymore. It (arguably) works so long as that revision is the > revision currently in effect. *obviously* repealing a revision is actually a rollback and the revision before that goes back into effect. :p
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Easy Summary Judgement Repeal (also includes treasuror action)
On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 8:29 PM Jason Cobb via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > On 6/28/20 11:06 PM, Ed Strange via agora-business wrote: > > So, as it currently stands, the Referee can impose 6 blots around > anywhere > > e wants for no reason whatsoever, just because e feels like it. This > seems, > > to put it mildly, unfair (the PM can also do this but e is a special boi, > > so this is fine). I create the following proposal and pay 1 legislative > > product to pend it. > > > > Title: Only the PM can be arbitrary! > > AI: 1.7 > > Coauthor Aris > > Text: Repeal Rule 2479/6 "Official Injustice" > > > I think a judge found that it's impossible to amend a specific rule > revision, so it's likely to be impossible to repeal it, too. Depending on the judge's reasoning, that doesn't necessarily follow. If you amend a revision, it isn't the same revision anymore. It's like trying to change a git commit. That (arguably) doesn't even make sense as an operation. By contrast, repealing a revision simply means making it not be a rule anymore. It (arguably) works so long as that revision is the revision currently in effect. -Aris
DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Easy Summary Judgement Repeal (also includes treasuror action)
On 6/28/20 11:06 PM, Ed Strange via agora-business wrote: > So, as it currently stands, the Referee can impose 6 blots around anywhere > e wants for no reason whatsoever, just because e feels like it. This seems, > to put it mildly, unfair (the PM can also do this but e is a special boi, > so this is fine). I create the following proposal and pay 1 legislative > product to pend it. > > Title: Only the PM can be arbitrary! > AI: 1.7 > Coauthor Aris > Text: Repeal Rule 2479/6 "Official Injustice" I think a judge found that it's impossible to amend a specific rule revision, so it's likely to be impossible to repeal it, too. -- Jason Cobb
Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [ADoP] Resolving ADoP election
If it were an outright tie, I probably wouldn't feel right just giving it to myself, I might have rolled a dice. But PSS would have voted for you if you had voted, so you would actually would have won. On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 4:40 AM Edward Murphy via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > R. Lee wrote: > > >I resolve the ADoP election as follows. Quorum was 9, voting system > was > > IRV, candidates were R. Lee and Murphy. > > First round > > R. Lee: (16) tcbapo, R. Lee, G^., twg, PSS* > > Murphy: (9) Aris, ATMunn, Jason > > Present: (3)Falsifian > > > > ^: G. had 4 voting power as speaker > > *PSS cast a conditional vote for me unless Murphy cast a vote, which e > did > > not. > > > > I win this ADoP election and declare myself installed as ADoP. I award > > myself an emerald ribbon unless I already have one, in which case I award > > myself emerald glitter. > > Fair enough. > > I wondered what would happen if there was a dead tie (e.g. if I'd voted > and G. didn't have a Speaker bump then this would've been 12-12-3), but > Election Procedure specifies that the vote collector picks which > option-tied-for-lowest gets discarded, which makes sense. > -- >From R. Lee
Re: DIS: Archiving Metareports
it's on white now, also i think nch will show me how ot archive things in the same place Murphy did it On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 4:44 AM Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > On 6/28/2020 7:22 AM, Ed Strange via agora-official wrote: > > Success! Resending to OFF, for those who prefer it. > > Yay! > > > On 6/28/2020 7:16 AM, Ed Strange via agora-discussion wrote: > > https://leeonlaw.blogspot.com/2020/06/adop-metareport.html > > Bookmarked and thanks. That black on dark brown is super-hard to read tho. > > > > -- >From R. Lee
Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [ADOP] Salaries
You already got paid salary for that week in my most recent salaries (Jun 28) - i gave it to you for your June 21 full report not your June 16 CoE revision. So there is no refund to give. On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 4:12 AM Aris Merchant via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 11:01 AM Edward Murphy via agora-discussion < > agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > > R. Lee wrote: > > > > > I award the following players the following amount of money for their > > > officer reports and assessor resolutions . For more information, see > the > > > recent events section of my last weekly report. > > > > > > R. Lee: 5 coins (ADoP weekly x1) > > > > > > Falsifian: 10 coins (Registrar weekly x1, Registrar monthly x1) > > > > > > PSS: 10 coins (Referee weekly x1, Herald weekly x1) > > > > > > G.: 10 coins (Arbitor weekly x2) > > > > > > Jason: 15 coins (Assessor Assessments x1, SLR x1, FLR x1) > > > > > > Trigon: 5 coins (Treasuror weekly x1) > > > > > > ATMunn: 5 coins (Notary weekly x1) > > > > I think Aris also earned 5 coins for Promotor weekly x1 (June 16)? > > > I demand a refund, back pay, front pay, tonnage, and poundage. ;) > > -Aris > -- >From R. Lee
DIS: Re: BUS: [CFJ] Agoran Announcements
> On Jun 28, 2020, at 7:28 PM, nch via agora-business > wrote: > - If it refers to the announcement, what does it mean for an announcement to > be valid or invalid? Does an invalid announcement fail to have effect? I’d argue that being valid or invalid is not an inherent property of the announcement. Instead, ‘valid’ here means ‘suitable as a method to perform the aforementioned action’ – in other words, it modifies the meaning of “by announcement” as defined in R478.
DIS: Re: BUS: [CFJ] Agoran Announcements
On 6/28/20 9:28 PM, nch via agora-business wrote: > There was some debate and disagreement about this in the discord the > other night, so I think it's worth formally discussing. As a tangent, I don't think I could've formulated this CFJ this well without the previous discussion in discord. In my opinion this is a good example of ephemeral discussion (such as brainstorming) leading to better long-form communication. -- nch Prime Minister, Webmastor, NAX Exchange Manager
DIS: Re: BUS: Birthday Tournament Regulations
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" > 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? > 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. > 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. 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. > 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? > If two units are each ordered to the province that the other occupies, > neither can move. Same (or is my Diplomacy knowledge rusty?) > 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
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Birthday Tournament Regulations
On 6/28/20 8:31 PM, omd via agora-discussion wrote: > >> The Gamemaster CAN, by announcement, amend >> the gamestate by substituting one Contestant into all instances of >> another Contestant. > > Extra space, and it’s pretty unclear what this means. It's intended to allow me to replace a Contestant who disappears. > >> the victor is (1) the last contestant remaining. > > Extra space, and what’s the (1) doing there? I believe that it specifies that that there is one such person. > >> they SHALL notify the Judge and publicly announce the identities of any > > Extra space > >> 8. At any time, any Contestant CAN submit a Proposal to change the rules > > s/rules/regulations > >> lasting from 0 UTC >> until 24 UTC >> 12 UTC >> 24 UTC > > Extra space, and shouldn’t these have :00 appended? I don't think it's necessary, but I could add it. > >> Not >> giving a unit > > space > For the extra spaces, I don't think it's a major concern, so I'll only fix them if other issues arise.. -- Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Interested Proposals
On Sun, 28 Jun 2020 at 23:07, nch via agora-discussion
wrote:
> On 6/23/20 7:33 PM, nch via agora-business wrote:
> > On 6/23/20 7:32 PM, nch via agora-discussion wrote:
> >> On 6/23/20 7:29 PM, nch via agora-business wrote:
> >>> I ditched the idea of Ready Proposals for something more similar to the
> >>> old disinterested proposals system. The way this works is by calling
> >>> proposals pended with pendants "sponsored" proposals, and making that a
> >>> condition of getting the LC and coin rewards. I left a support mechanism
> >>> for the Promotor because this scam convinced me that it's a good
> >>> mechanism (if there was no support mechanism, the opposition wouldn't
> >>> have been able to get their proposal in in time, which wouldn't have
> >>> been nearly as fun). We can tweak it as we see what happens with it.
> >>>
> >>> Also, while I was at it, I rewrote the second paragraph of Popular
> >>> Proposal Proposer Privilege. It should be functionally identical but
> >>> less verbose.
> >> So I forgot to rename this after changing the name of the system... I
> >> withdraw Interested Proposals and submit but do not pend the following
> >> proposal:
> >>
> >> {
> >>
> >> Title: Sponsored Proposals
> >> AI: 1.0
> >> Author: nch
> >> Coauthors: G., Trigon
> >>
> >> Amend R2622, "Pending Proposals", to read in full:
> >>
> >> Pended is an untracked negative boolean proposal switch.
> >>
> >> Any player CAN pay 1 Pendant to flip the Pended switch of a
> >> specified proposal to True. If the player did not create the
> >> proposal and is not listed in the list of co-authors of the
> >> proposal, e is added to the list of co-authors. When e does so,
> >> the proposal becomes sponsored.
> >>
> >> The Promotor CAN, with 2+X support, flip the Pended switch of a
> >> proposal in the Proposal Pool to true. For this, X is equal to the
> >> number of times e has done so in the past 7 days.
> >>
> >> Any player CAN, without objection, flip the Pended switch of a
> >> proposal in the Proposal Pool to true.
> >>
> >> A proposal with a Pended switch set to True is 'pending'.
> >>
> >> Repeal R2626 "Certifiable Patches".
> >>
> >> Amend R2623, "Popular Proposal Proposer Privilege", by replacing:
> >>
> >> The player who proposed the adopted proposal whose referendum had
> >> the greatest popularity among all referenda assessed in the last 7
> >> days CAN once earn one Legislative Card by announcement, provided
> >> that no referendum initiated in the same message as it remains
> >> unresolved. If there is a tie, all authors of the tied proposals
> >> can do so once each.
> >>
> >> with:
> >>
> >> The author of the most popular sponsored proposal adopted in the
> >> last 7 days CAN once earn one Legislative Card by announcement,
> >> provided that no referenda initiated in the same message as it
> >> remain unresolved. If there is a tie, all authors of the tied
> >> proposals can do so once each.
> >>
> >> Amend R2496, "Rewards", by replacing "an adopted proposal" with "an
> >> adopted sponsored proposal".
> >>
> >> }
> >>
> >> --
> >> nch
> >> Prime Minister, Webmastor, NAX Exchange Manager
> >>
> >>
> > TTttPF
> >
> > --
> > nch
> > Prime Minister, Webmastor, NAX Exchange Manager
> >
> >
> Does anyone have any thoughts or feedback on this? Don't want to pend it
> with no idea what anyone thinks about it.
Looks good to me.
- Falsifian
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Honor among Pirates [Attn. All "Pirates"]
On Sat, 27 Jun 2020 at 21:45, nch via agora-discussion wrote: > On 6/16/20 3:17 PM, Cuddle Beam via agora-business wrote: > > I could have just let this pass and banked some MAJOR coinage but the > > long-term consequences of having people be paranoid about my contracts > > isn't worth it imo, I much prefer to have people's trust that I won't > > betray them on contracts. So, the thing is that there is a bug in the > > Plunder contract - nobody could join because there was no join mechanism. > > > > So nobody became a Pirate. I suggest you all rejoin. I'm also adding the > > latest Parley patch. > > > > I propose the following Parley: > Since it was found that everyone did successfully join, this failed. And > afaict Falsifian never resolved either eir intent to amend with consent > of the party members or eir intent to ratify a version without objection. The original Plundership text just said the contract is amended if 2/3 of Pirates agree. No additional triggering action is specified. So, I think it was amended the moment the 2/3-th pirate agreed. - Falsifian
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Proposal: Stop disincentivizing bugfixes
On Sun, Jun 28, 2020, 5:19 PM omd via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > > On Jun 28, 2020, at 4:11 PM, Reuben Staley via agora-business < > agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > > > Don't know how everyone else is feeling about it but there is "Sponsored > Proposals" to fix this which IMO is more elegant of a solution. > > I'm okay with that too, although I’m not a big fan of having to wait, and > remember, to resolve a without-objection intent in order to pend one’s > proposal. > I'm probably going to start using the 2+N support method equivalently to this. We'll see if it needs tweaking. But my current plans are to use it for the sort of public interest, quick fix proposals that certifiable patches currently cover. The criteria will be broadened a bit (since I'll be figuring it out, I can just be reasonable about it). Of course, I'll be open to public comment on the details. -Aris >
DIS: Re: BUS: Birthday Tournament Regulations
> The Gamemaster CAN, by announcement, amend > the gamestate by substituting one Contestant into all instances of > another Contestant. Extra space, and it’s pretty unclear what this means. > the victor is (1) the last contestant remaining. Extra space, and what’s the (1) doing there? > they SHALL notify the Judge and publicly announce the identities of any Extra space > 8. At any time, any Contestant CAN submit a Proposal to change the rules s/rules/regulations > lasting from 0 UTC > until 24 UTC > 12 UTC > 24 UTC Extra space, and shouldn’t these have :00 appended? > Not > giving a unit space
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Contract charities
On 6/28/20 7:21 PM, James Cook via agora-discussion wrote: > On Sat, 27 Jun 2020 at 00:53, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via > agora-discussion wrote: >> On 6/26/20 8:45 PM, James Cook via agora-business wrote: >>>This SHOULD only be done if the >>>contract's provisions ensure that its funds will be used solely >>>for the betterment of Agora. >> I think we should change this to: >>This SHOULD only be done if the contract's provisions ensure that >>the funds received from Agora will be used solely for the >>betterment of Agora. >> >> Some contracts may receive both Agoran and private funds, and only the >> Agoran funds should be restricted. > That's a good point. > > An alternative would be for such a contract to be split into two > pieces, like when a corporation has a charitable foundation attached > to it. I think that would be kind of fun so am inclined to leave the > text as is, but could be persuaded to change it. > > - Falsifian An early, even more needlessly abstract, draft of NAX had the purse as a separate contract just so it was easier to see what belonged to the purse and what was parts of orders and as a proof of concept for interlocking contracts.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Contract charities
On Sat, 27 Jun 2020 at 00:53, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion wrote: > On 6/26/20 8:45 PM, James Cook via agora-business wrote: > > This SHOULD only be done if the > > contract's provisions ensure that its funds will be used solely > > for the betterment of Agora. > > I think we should change this to: > This SHOULD only be done if the contract's provisions ensure that > the funds received from Agora will be used solely for the > betterment of Agora. > > Some contracts may receive both Agoran and private funds, and only the > Agoran funds should be restricted. That's a good point. An alternative would be for such a contract to be split into two pieces, like when a corporation has a charitable foundation attached to it. I think that would be kind of fun so am inclined to leave the text as is, but could be persuaded to change it. - Falsifian
DIS: Re: BUS: Proposal: Stop disincentivizing bugfixes
> On Jun 28, 2020, at 4:11 PM, Reuben Staley via agora-business > wrote: > > Don't know how everyone else is feeling about it but there is "Sponsored > Proposals" to fix this which IMO is more elegant of a solution. I'm okay with that too, although I’m not a big fan of having to wait, and remember, to resolve a without-objection intent in order to pend one’s proposal.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Contract: SNOCS (Simple, No-Opportunity-Cost Sets)
> On Jun 28, 2020, at 5:12 PM, nch via agora-discussion > wrote: > > On 6/28/20 7:07 PM, omd via agora-business wrote: >> Any player CAN join the contract by announcement; any party CAN leave the >> contract by announcement. Any party CAN remove another party from the >> contract >> without objection. Each party consents to the aforementioned membership >> changes. > > > What stops a party from starting a pool and leaving the contract before > they do the steps that require them to distribute the products? This clause: > (b) e does not intersperse them with any other attempted actions where “them” refers to the actions in the procedure. If this isn’t satisfied, there’s no consent to act on behalf, so e can’t get the pool started.
DIS: Re: BUS: Contract: SNOCS (Simple, No-Opportunity-Cost Sets)
On 6/28/20 7:07 PM, omd via agora-business wrote: > Any player CAN join the contract by announcement; any party CAN leave the > contract by announcement. Any party CAN remove another party from the > contract > without objection. Each party consents to the aforementioned membership > changes. What stops a party from starting a pool and leaving the contract before they do the steps that require them to distribute the products?
Re: DIS: [Notary] Web Report Survey
On 2020-06-28 14:51, Edward Murphy via agora-discussion wrote: Or both, if possible with reasonable effort, akin to MediaWiki transclusion. (I used Wikidot when I held Notary several years back, but if it supports transclusion then I was unaware of it; I just had one page per contract, then a link index.) +1 to a wiki sort of thing. Fantastic version control that makes a lot of sense for contracts. But it's not like I'll be mad if the H. Notary doesn't feel like setting something like that up. -- 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
DIS: Re: BUS: Proposal: Decriminalization
On 2020-06-28 13:54, Edward Murphy via agora-business wrote: Proposal: Decriminalization (AI = 1.7) Unless I'm missing something, this is purely a ruleset-wide change in semantics from 'crime' to 'infraction', correct? Not an expansion to a system where crimes and infractions are different things. -- 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: [Proposal] Interested Proposals
On 2020-06-28 17:07, nch via agora-discussion wrote:
On 6/23/20 7:33 PM, nch via agora-business wrote:
On 6/23/20 7:32 PM, nch via agora-discussion wrote:
On 6/23/20 7:29 PM, nch via agora-business wrote:
I ditched the idea of Ready Proposals for something more similar to the
old disinterested proposals system. The way this works is by calling
proposals pended with pendants "sponsored" proposals, and making that a
condition of getting the LC and coin rewards. I left a support mechanism
for the Promotor because this scam convinced me that it's a good
mechanism (if there was no support mechanism, the opposition wouldn't
have been able to get their proposal in in time, which wouldn't have
been nearly as fun). We can tweak it as we see what happens with it.
Also, while I was at it, I rewrote the second paragraph of Popular
Proposal Proposer Privilege. It should be functionally identical but
less verbose.
So I forgot to rename this after changing the name of the system... I
withdraw Interested Proposals and submit but do not pend the following
proposal:
{
Title: Sponsored Proposals
AI: 1.0
Author: nch
Coauthors: G., Trigon
Amend R2622, "Pending Proposals", to read in full:
Pended is an untracked negative boolean proposal switch.
Any player CAN pay 1 Pendant to flip the Pended switch of a
specified proposal to True. If the player did not create the
proposal and is not listed in the list of co-authors of the
proposal, e is added to the list of co-authors. When e does so,
the proposal becomes sponsored.
The Promotor CAN, with 2+X support, flip the Pended switch of a
proposal in the Proposal Pool to true. For this, X is equal to the
number of times e has done so in the past 7 days.
Any player CAN, without objection, flip the Pended switch of a
proposal in the Proposal Pool to true.
A proposal with a Pended switch set to True is 'pending'.
Repeal R2626 "Certifiable Patches".
Amend R2623, "Popular Proposal Proposer Privilege", by replacing:
The player who proposed the adopted proposal whose referendum had
the greatest popularity among all referenda assessed in the last 7
days CAN once earn one Legislative Card by announcement, provided
that no referendum initiated in the same message as it remains
unresolved. If there is a tie, all authors of the tied proposals
can do so once each.
with:
The author of the most popular sponsored proposal adopted in the
last 7 days CAN once earn one Legislative Card by announcement,
provided that no referenda initiated in the same message as it
remain unresolved. If there is a tie, all authors of the tied
proposals can do so once each.
Amend R2496, "Rewards", by replacing "an adopted proposal" with "an
adopted sponsored proposal".
}
--
nch
Prime Minister, Webmastor, NAX Exchange Manager
TTttPF
--
nch
Prime Minister, Webmastor, NAX Exchange Manager
Does anyone have any thoughts or feedback on this? Don't want to pend it
with no idea what anyone thinks about it.
I personally really like this proposal. It's really compact and I think
a lot more functional than anything else we have come up with before.
--
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: [Proposal] Interested Proposals
On 6/23/20 7:33 PM, nch via agora-business wrote:
> On 6/23/20 7:32 PM, nch via agora-discussion wrote:
>> On 6/23/20 7:29 PM, nch via agora-business wrote:
>>> I ditched the idea of Ready Proposals for something more similar to the
>>> old disinterested proposals system. The way this works is by calling
>>> proposals pended with pendants "sponsored" proposals, and making that a
>>> condition of getting the LC and coin rewards. I left a support mechanism
>>> for the Promotor because this scam convinced me that it's a good
>>> mechanism (if there was no support mechanism, the opposition wouldn't
>>> have been able to get their proposal in in time, which wouldn't have
>>> been nearly as fun). We can tweak it as we see what happens with it.
>>>
>>> Also, while I was at it, I rewrote the second paragraph of Popular
>>> Proposal Proposer Privilege. It should be functionally identical but
>>> less verbose.
>> So I forgot to rename this after changing the name of the system... I
>> withdraw Interested Proposals and submit but do not pend the following
>> proposal:
>>
>> {
>>
>> Title: Sponsored Proposals
>> AI: 1.0
>> Author: nch
>> Coauthors: G., Trigon
>>
>> Amend R2622, "Pending Proposals", to read in full:
>>
>> Pended is an untracked negative boolean proposal switch.
>>
>> Any player CAN pay 1 Pendant to flip the Pended switch of a
>> specified proposal to True. If the player did not create the
>> proposal and is not listed in the list of co-authors of the
>> proposal, e is added to the list of co-authors. When e does so,
>> the proposal becomes sponsored.
>>
>> The Promotor CAN, with 2+X support, flip the Pended switch of a
>> proposal in the Proposal Pool to true. For this, X is equal to the
>> number of times e has done so in the past 7 days.
>>
>> Any player CAN, without objection, flip the Pended switch of a
>> proposal in the Proposal Pool to true.
>>
>> A proposal with a Pended switch set to True is 'pending'.
>>
>> Repeal R2626 "Certifiable Patches".
>>
>> Amend R2623, "Popular Proposal Proposer Privilege", by replacing:
>>
>> The player who proposed the adopted proposal whose referendum had
>> the greatest popularity among all referenda assessed in the last 7
>> days CAN once earn one Legislative Card by announcement, provided
>> that no referendum initiated in the same message as it remains
>> unresolved. If there is a tie, all authors of the tied proposals
>> can do so once each.
>>
>> with:
>>
>> The author of the most popular sponsored proposal adopted in the
>> last 7 days CAN once earn one Legislative Card by announcement,
>> provided that no referenda initiated in the same message as it
>> remain unresolved. If there is a tie, all authors of the tied
>> proposals can do so once each.
>>
>> Amend R2496, "Rewards", by replacing "an adopted proposal" with "an
>> adopted sponsored proposal".
>>
>> }
>>
>> --
>> nch
>> Prime Minister, Webmastor, NAX Exchange Manager
>>
>>
> TTttPF
>
> --
> nch
> Prime Minister, Webmastor, NAX Exchange Manager
>
>
Does anyone have any thoughts or feedback on this? Don't want to pend it
with no idea what anyone thinks about it.
--
nch
Prime Minister, Webmastor, NAX Exchange Manager
DIS: [Promotor] Tardiness
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
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Proposal: Decriminalization
nch wrote: On 6/28/20 2:54 PM, Edward Murphy via agora-business wrote: Amend Rule 2626 (Certifiable Patches) by replacing "unless its sole function is" with "unless e reasonably believes its sole function is". [In addition to quibbles about "sole function", this also covers cases like "I thought X was a minimal fix until someone suggested Y as an alternative.] Those aren't just quibbles. I already think Certifiable Patches is too broad and this just makes it broader. Yeah, this specific broadening is functionally redundant with Rule 2557's "fine SHOULD be reduced". I was going for "make explicit the subtext that violation X is a Morally Big Deal while violation Y isn't", but there's plenty of room to make that more elegant somehow.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Proposal: Generalized card auctions
Jason wrote: On 6/28/20 3:11 PM, Edward Murphy via agora-business wrote: [Pending fees are fine and all, but only three new Legislative Cards per month seems a bit low. This would at least raise that to four.] Officers can actually only give two legislative cards right now (since I'm both Assessor and Rulekeepor), but the R2623 provides (at least) four additional cards per month. Oh right, I'd dismissed that because "yeah like I'm likely to ever get any of those". Though that was probably influenced by the unusually large proposal batches of the "oh no pending is about to be hard" phase. If disinterested proposals (in some form) are re-enacted but disqualified from this award, then that would tilt toward "these awards go to players who already had pendants to spend before". Though not necessarily tilt it enough for major lock-in. Hard to predict when it's so highly dependent on various individual behaviors.
Re: DIS: [Notary] Web Report Survey
Jason wrote: On 6/24/20 9:30 PM, ATMunn via agora-discussion wrote: - Should everything be in one long webpage, or should each contract be split into its own page? I think it would be fine to have it all on one page with summary/details for the texts, but having everything on separate pages would be fine, too. Or both, if possible with reasonable effort, akin to MediaWiki transclusion. (I used Wikidot when I held Notary several years back, but if it supports transclusion then I was unaware of it; I just had one page per contract, then a link index.)
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Put the discord on the agora home page
On 6/28/20 3:27 PM, Edward Murphy via agora-discussion wrote: > Falsifian wrote: > >>> On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 1:12 PM Rebecca via agora-business < >>> agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote: >>> See title Also all should join it, it has been a fun and very active atmosphere, although too small. >> >> On Mon, 22 Jun 2020 at 03:17, Rebecca via agora-discussion >> wrote: >>> https://discord.gg/FwmJW8 >> You might consider trying to switch the Publicity of that forum from >> Foreign to Discussion (R478). >> >> As Registrar I can do that without objection, but I have mixed >> feelings about endorsing a proprietary service. I would rather see it >> done by proposal (and I'm not sure how I'd vote). > Also, the invite links are expired, can I get a fresh one? Not sure how > easy/hard it would be to get the web site to auto-update its copy. This one should work indefinitely: https://discord.gg/JCC6YGc -- nch Prime Minister, Webmastor, NAX Exchange Manager
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Put the discord on the agora home page
Falsifian wrote: On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 1:12 PM Rebecca via agora-business < agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote: See title Also all should join it, it has been a fun and very active atmosphere, although too small. On Mon, 22 Jun 2020 at 03:17, Rebecca via agora-discussion wrote: https://discord.gg/FwmJW8 You might consider trying to switch the Publicity of that forum from Foreign to Discussion (R478). As Registrar I can do that without objection, but I have mixed feelings about endorsing a proprietary service. I would rather see it done by proposal (and I'm not sure how I'd vote). Also, the invite links are expired, can I get a fresh one? Not sure how easy/hard it would be to get the web site to auto-update its copy.
DIS: Re: BUS: Proposal: Decriminalization
On 6/28/20 2:54 PM, Edward Murphy via agora-business wrote: > Amend Rule 2626 (Certifiable Patches) by replacing "unless its sole > function is" with "unless e reasonably believes its sole function is". > > [In addition to quibbles about "sole function", this also covers cases > like "I thought X was a minimal fix until someone suggested Y as an > alternative.] Those aren't just quibbles. I already think Certifiable Patches is too broad and this just makes it broader. -- nch Prime Minister, Webmastor, NAX Exchange Manager
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Proposal: Generalized card auctions
On 6/28/2020 12:22 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:> On 6/28/2020 12:14 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion wrote:>> On 6/28/20 3:11 PM, Edward Murphy via agora-business wrote:>>> [Pending fees are fine and all, but only three new Legislative Cards>>> per month seems a bit low. This would at least raise that to four.]>> Officers can actually only give two legislative cards right now (since>> I'm both Assessor and Rulekeepor), but the R2623 provides (at least)>> four additional cards per month.> > +1/3 for each of PM and Speaker (if they were picking at random) but I like the addition in Murphy's proposal, because I think more lots make better auctions (fewer lots increases gerontocracy as it favors the richer), and 1 extra card of variable type could make for interesting auctions if rare types are chosen. -G.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Proposal: Generalized card auctions
On 6/28/2020 12:14 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion wrote: > On 6/28/20 3:11 PM, Edward Murphy via agora-business wrote: >> [Pending fees are fine and all, but only three new Legislative Cards >> per month seems a bit low. This would at least raise that to four.] > > > Officers can actually only give two legislative cards right now (since > I'm both Assessor and Rulekeepor), but the R2623 provides (at least) > four additional cards per month. +1/3 for each of PM and Speaker (if they were picking at random)
DIS: Re: BUS: Proposal: Generalized card auctions
On 6/28/20 3:11 PM, Edward Murphy via agora-business wrote: > [Pending fees are fine and all, but only three new Legislative Cards > per month seems a bit low. This would at least raise that to four.] Officers can actually only give two legislative cards right now (since I'm both Assessor and Rulekeepor), but the R2623 provides (at least) four additional cards per month. -- Jason Cobb
Re: DIS: [Webmastor] AgoraOnline is now Online
nch wrote: Here it is: https://agoranomic.org/Webmastor/ Will surely receive tweaks over time. Suggestion: linkify the links.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Humble Agoran farmer offers wood for sheep (oh, attn Notary btw)
I wrote: Oh, good catch. I intend (with Agoran consent of Collectors) to amend this contract to read, in full: Pinging R. Lee (if you consented to this change, I missed it)
DIS: Re: OFF: [ADoP] Salaries
R. Lee wrote: Salaries I award the following players the following amount of money for their officer reports and assessor resolutions . For more information, see the recent events section of my last weekly report. R. Lee: 5 coins (ADoP weekly x1) Aris: 5 coins (Promotor weeky x1) Falsifian: 10 coins (Registrar weekly x1) PSS: 30 coins (Referee weekly x2, Herald weekly x2, Tailor weekly x2) Trigon: 5 coins (Treasuror weekly x1) ATMunn: 5 coins (Notary weekly x1) This probably covers the Promotor award from earlier, may have just been a timestamp issue. I'll leave the old database up for a while in case anyone feels like grabbing the JSON data dumps.
Re: DIS: Archiving Metareports
On 6/28/2020 7:22 AM, Ed Strange via agora-official wrote: > Success! Resending to OFF, for those who prefer it. Yay! On 6/28/2020 7:16 AM, Ed Strange via agora-discussion wrote: > https://leeonlaw.blogspot.com/2020/06/adop-metareport.html Bookmarked and thanks. That black on dark brown is super-hard to read tho.
DIS: Re: OFF: [ADoP] Resolving ADoP election
R. Lee wrote: I resolve the ADoP election as follows. Quorum was 9, voting system was IRV, candidates were R. Lee and Murphy. First round R. Lee: (16) tcbapo, R. Lee, G^., twg, PSS* Murphy: (9) Aris, ATMunn, Jason Present: (3)Falsifian ^: G. had 4 voting power as speaker *PSS cast a conditional vote for me unless Murphy cast a vote, which e did not. I win this ADoP election and declare myself installed as ADoP. I award myself an emerald ribbon unless I already have one, in which case I award myself emerald glitter. Fair enough. I wondered what would happen if there was a dead tie (e.g. if I'd voted and G. didn't have a Speaker bump then this would've been 12-12-3), but Election Procedure specifies that the vote collector picks which option-tied-for-lowest gets discarded, which makes sense.
Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [ADOP] Salaries
On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 11:01 AM Edward Murphy via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > R. Lee wrote: > > > I award the following players the following amount of money for their > > officer reports and assessor resolutions . For more information, see the > > recent events section of my last weekly report. > > > > R. Lee: 5 coins (ADoP weekly x1) > > > > Falsifian: 10 coins (Registrar weekly x1, Registrar monthly x1) > > > > PSS: 10 coins (Referee weekly x1, Herald weekly x1) > > > > G.: 10 coins (Arbitor weekly x2) > > > > Jason: 15 coins (Assessor Assessments x1, SLR x1, FLR x1) > > > > Trigon: 5 coins (Treasuror weekly x1) > > > > ATMunn: 5 coins (Notary weekly x1) > > I think Aris also earned 5 coins for Promotor weekly x1 (June 16)? > I demand a refund, back pay, front pay, tonnage, and poundage. ;) -Aris
DIS: Re: OFF: [ADOP] Salaries
R. Lee wrote: I award the following players the following amount of money for their officer reports and assessor resolutions . For more information, see the recent events section of my last weekly report. R. Lee: 5 coins (ADoP weekly x1) Falsifian: 10 coins (Registrar weekly x1, Registrar monthly x1) PSS: 10 coins (Referee weekly x1, Herald weekly x1) G.: 10 coins (Arbitor weekly x2) Jason: 15 coins (Assessor Assessments x1, SLR x1, FLR x1) Trigon: 5 coins (Treasuror weekly x1) ATMunn: 5 coins (Notary weekly x1) I think Aris also earned 5 coins for Promotor weekly x1 (June 16)?
DIS: Test (double spacing)
=Metareport= This is the ADoP’s weekly report Date of last report: 2020-06-21 Date of this report: 2020-06-28 MISCELLANEOUS INFO -- Filled offices: 15/15 (100%) Total officers: 10 Consolidation[1]: 1.5 Late reports: 0% -- [1] This is the number of filled offices divided by the number of officers. Each officer, on average, holds this many offices. OFFICES Office Holder Since Last Election -- ADoP R. Lee 2020-06-072020-06-27 ArbitorG. 2019-06-112019-11-23 Assessor Jason 2019-07-092019-11-11 Distributoromd2018-06-15imposed Herald PSS2020-05-032020-05-16 Notary ATMunn 2020-06-152020-06-15 Prime Minister nch2020-06-222020-06-22 Promotor Aris 2016-10-212017-09-21 RefereePSS2020-03-292020-04-19 Registrar Falsifian 2019-05-042020-02-26 Rulekeepor Jason 2019-12-062020-03-07 SpeakerG. 2020-06-15imposed Tailor PSS2020-04-192020-04-19 Treasuror Trigon 2020-05-012020-05-01 Webmastor nch2020-06-032020-06-13 -- * = Interim office (vacant or holder not elected) WEEKLY REPORTS Office Report Last Published Late[1] -- ADoP Offices 2020-06-21[2] ArbitorJudicial matters 2020-06-20 Herald Matters of Honour2020-06-28 Notary Contracts2020-06-22 Promotor Proposal pool2020-06-21 RefereeRule violations 2020-06-28 Registrar Players, Fora2020-06-22 Rulekeepor Short Logical Ruleset2020-06-18 Treasuror Coins, other currencies 2020-06-28 Tailor Glitter Prices 2020-06-28 -- [1] ! = 1 period missed, !! = 2, !!! = 3+ [2] Not including this report MONTHLY REPORTS Office ReportLast Published Late -- Herald Patent titles 2020-05-31 Registrar Player history2020-06-16 Rulekeepor Full Logical Ruleset 2020-05-24 Tailor Ribbons 2020-05-31 Webmastor Web resources 2020-06-03 -- STARTABLE ELECTIONS[1] Office Last Election -- Promotor 2017-09-21 Assessor 2019-11-11 Arbitor 2019-11-23 Registrar2020-02-26 Rulekeepor 2020-03-07 -- [1] Anyone can start an election (with 2 support and also becoming a candidate) 90 days after the previous one (or if it's interim and no election is ongoing). This section lists the offices for which anyone could start an election this way. INTERESTS - Office Interest --ADoP Efficiency ArbitorJustice Assessor Efficiency, Legislation DistributorParticipation Herald Participation Notary Economy Prime Minister Every Ministry Promotor Legislation RefereeJustice Registrar Efficiency Rulekeepor Legislation, Participation SpeakerEvery Ministry Tailor Participation Treasuror Economy, Economy Webmastor Participation -- Recent Events - Jun 07: R. Lee pays rewards for previous officer duties. Jun 07: R. Lee initiates elections for ADoP and Webmastor Jun 07: Notary election enters voting phase. Jun 07: PSS publishes Herald weekly report Jun 07: PSS publishes Referee weekly report Jun 07: G. publishes Arbitor weekly report. BEGINNING OF NEW WEEK Jun 10: Aris publishes Promotor weekly report Jun 11: Prime Minister election enters voting phase Jun 11: Falsifian publishes Registrar weekly report Jun 11: Trigon publishes Treasuror weekly report Jun 12: Jason, the Assessor, resolves proposals Jun 13: Jason, the Rulekeepor, publishes Short Logical Ruleset Jun 13: R. Lee declared winner of ADoP election as only candidate Jun 13:
DIS: Archiving Metareports
Frankly, I have no idea how to code, automatically archive stuff or anything like that. However, I did promise to put all my metareports from now on in the same, easily accessible place. Please accept this blog (which I originally intended to be a pretentious law blog, which I abandoned thank god). Also the spacing is inexplicably single. https://leeonlaw.blogspot.com/2020/06/adop-metareport.html -- >From R. Lee
Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Tailor] Glitteral
On 6/28/20 9:47 AM, Ed Strange via agora-discussion wrote: > By the way the glitteral is an official weekly report now, it would > probably be best to say so in the text/title in the future. > That's a good thought; I'll include a note to that effect in the next one. -- Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth
DIS: Re: OFF: [Tailor] Glitteral
By the way the glitteral is an official weekly report now, it would probably be best to say so in the text/title in the future. On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 11:42 PM Ed Strange wrote: > COE: I claimed glitter for winning the ADOP election that I did. > > On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 11:14 PM Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via > agora-official wrote: > >> >> Weekly Glitter Rewards (June 21 - June 28) >> >> >> Glitter prices at start of week: >> >> Red 15 coinsViolet9 coins >> Orange 12 coinsIndigo 20 coins >> Green16 coinsPlatinum 14 coins >> Emerald 15 coinsLime 19 coins >> Cyan 10 coinsWhite18 coins >> Blue 10 coinsblacK17 coins >> Magenta 10 coinsgrAy 8 coins >> Ultraviolet 10 coinsTransparent 15 coins >> >> * Jun 21: nch is awarded Blue Glitter for CFJ 3853 >> I award 10 coins. >> * Jun 23: R. Lee is awarded Blue Glitter for CFJ 3855 >> I award 10 coins. >> * Jun 27: P.S.S. is awarded Blue Glitter for CFJ 3851 >> I award 10 coins. >> >> Glitter prices at end of week: >> >> Red 15 coinsViolet8 coins >> Orange 12 coinsIndigo 20 coins >> Green15 coinsPlatinum 14 coins >> Emerald 15 coinsLime 19 coins >> Cyan 10 coinsWhite18 coins >> Blue 10 coinsblacK17 coins >> Magenta 10 coinsgrAy 8 coins >> Ultraviolet 10 coinsTransparent 15 coins >> -- >> >> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate >> Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth >> > > > -- > From R. Lee > -- >From R. Lee
DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Tailor] Glitteral
I didn't flag you, I guess i breached contract lol, sorry. On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 11:45 PM Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-business wrote: > On 6/28/20 9:42 AM, Ed Strange via agora-business wrote: > > COE: I claimed glitter for winning the ADOP election that I did. > > > > I'm sorry; I missed that: I award 15 coins to R. Lee for eir Emerald > Glitter, which e received for winning the ADoP election. > > -- > > Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate > Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth > -- >From R. Lee
DIS: Re: OFF: [Herald] Weekly Report
POSITIVE KARMA POGCHAMP On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 11:11 PM Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-official wrote: > Herald's Weekly report > > Date of Last Report: 21 June 2020 > Date of This Report: 28 June 2020 > > Karma Entity > - -- > > +7 Jason <= SHOGUN > +6 Publius Scribonius Scholasticus > +5 Aris > > - ABOVE +4 STAND THE SAMURAI > > +3 G. > +2 omd > +2 Trigon > +2 Warrigal > +1 R. Lee > +1 Tyler > -1 Agora > -1 Bernie > -1 Gaelan > -1 o > -1 Unspecified Behavior [1] > -2 Rance > -3 ATMunn > -3 CuddleBeam > -4 Baron von Vaderham > -4 D. Margaux > -4 Falsifian > -4 Murphy > > - BELOW -4 LIE THE GAMMAS > > <= HONOURLESS WORM > > - -- > All other entities have 0 Karma. > > Notes > - > [1] Unspecified Behavior purports to be a player; however, eir identity is > unspecified. > > > Notices of Honour (2 Years History): > > > grok (28 June 2020) > +1 R. Lee (for Being a Good Sport when faced with a judgment going the >wrong way and eir fun scam attempt that encouraged a flurry of >gameplay) > -1 grok (for neglecting judicial duties and dragging out the scam's > denouement) > > G. (28 June 2020) > +1 grok (for delivering a heavy judgement load under pressure) > -1 G. (for putting you in the situation with rushed Arbitoring) > > ATMunn (23 June 2020) > +1 Agora (Agora has negative karma right now) > -1 Unspecified Behavior [1] (for being suspicious and mysterious and weird) > > Trigon (23 June 2020) > +1 Jason (roolz) > -1 Trigon (sux) > > R. Lee (22 June 2020) > +1 Cuddlebeam (making an actually good contract) > -1 Alexis (inactive with positive honour) > > [New Week 22-June] > > G. (21 June 2020) > +1 Falsifian (e ain't no worm). > -1 G. (following a not-worm's example) > > [time of last report] > > Jason (21 June 2020) > +1 Aris (having to judge my silly CFJs) > -1 Jason (making Aris's life unnecessarily harder (silly CFJs, missing that > the proposal pool draft was backdated)) > > Aris (19 June 2020) > +1 Trigon (excellent work as Treasuror during an extremely difficult time) > -1 Aris (making the Treasuror's life difficult) > > Trigon (19 June 2020) > +1 G. for giving me actual criticism on the format of my report. > -1 twg for being inactive with positive karma (e should be down to 0 now) > > R. Lee (15 June 2020) > +1 PSS (who holds the most offices and does everything in a timely way.) > -1 Murphy (missing 3 reports, failing to contest an election or object to > my >deputisation, and then fussing about it weeks later) > > Falsifian (15 June 2020) > +1 Jason (for setting the record straight.) > -1 Falsifian (on behalf of the office of the Registrar, for bad > recordkeeping > in August 2017.) > > [New Week 15-June] > > Murphy (14 June 2020) > +1 R. Lee (picking up the slack) > -1 Murphy (falling behind again) > > Trigon (09 June 2020) > +1 PSS (for eir help proofreading this contract) > -1 twg (for being a gross zombie with higher karma than many honest > players.) > > nch (09 June 2020) > +1 Falsifian (excellence in journalism) > -1 Jason (to ensure eir ego doesn't grow too big up in the clouds above > the rest > of us) > > grok (09 June 2020) > +1 PSS (for noticing my mistake) > -1 Cuddlebeam (for eir "joke") > > R. Lee (09 June 2020) > +1 Cuddlebeam (for eir fun brand of distraction during a hard time) > -1 Falsifian (frivolous CFJ) > > [New Week 08-June] > > Jason (07 June 2020) > +1 Aris (Writing good proposals while having eir motivations questioned.) > -1 Jason (Karma source, I've been up there a while) > > R. Lee (07 June 2020) > +1 Tyler (seemingly engaged new player) > -1 twg (in service of getting non active players below or at 0) > > G. (04 June 2020) > +1 D. Margaux (for being a generally good person.) > -1 Aris (for starting us down the road to criminalizing intent with that > awful > forbidden arts thing, and continuing the criminalization of > intent by > proposing penalties for the basic free act of voting.) > > Falsifian (04 June 2020) > +1 nch (Great new office and first report!) > -1 Falsifian (default karma source) > > [New Week 01-June] > > ATMunn (28 May 2020) > +1 Agora (i have no clue what's going on so i don't know who else to pick) > -1 ATMunn (pretending to come back and then disappearing again for 6 > months) > > nch (25 May 2020) > +1 Aris (doing a hard job that I made harder) > -1 nch (obliviousness) > > [New Week 25-May] > > Falsifian (24 May 2020) > +1 Jason (doing the research) > -1 Falsifian (I think I'll try being my own default karma source for a > while > and see what happens) > > P.S.S. (24 May 2020) > +1 Murphy (giving a timely and thorough response to my petition) > -1 ATMunn (randomly selected karma source) > > Aris (18 May 2020) > -1 Aris (being the
DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Resolving Ambiguous Decisions
On 6/27/20 9:07 PM, Ed Strange via agora-business wrote: > Tpf > > On Sun., 28 Jun. 2020, 11:06 am Ed Strange, > wrote: > >> I point a finger at jason for uncertain certification. Reasonable players >> may not disagree about the operation of the current wording. I have no reason to believe that Jason is being unreasonable, and G. has contributed in a manner suggestive of eir belief that Jason is being reasonable, so I find this finger-pointing to be SHENANIGANS. -- Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth
DIS: Re: [attn Herald] Re: BUS: Judgment on CFJ 3858
On 6/27/20 10:10 PM, Ed Strange via agora-business wrote: > I give the same notice of honour as G below > > On Sun., 28 Jun. 2020, 12:00 pm Kerim Aydin via agora-business, < > agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > >> >> Notice of Honour >> +1 grok (for delivering a heavy judgement load under pressure) >> -1 G. (for putting you in the situation with rushed Arbitoring) >> >> >> >> This fails as you've already given one in the current week. -- Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth
