DIS: Plans to Deregister

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

Merry Christmas to those who celebrate it!

Every year in December, I take the opportunity to evaluate what I have
been doing in the past year and make plans for the new year. This year,
I've decided that continuing as a player isn't in line with my
priorities for next year. I've been continuously involved in nomic for
over five years, and I'm very thankful for everything that it and my
fellow players have taught me. I'm sure that I'll return eventually,
possibly even later next year, but next weekend, I will be deregistering.

I wanted to give advance notice, so that others can plan to take my
offices.

Happy holidays from your friend in nomic,
Publius

Proto: Specified Crime not Rule Re: DIS: Re: BUS: @Referee Re: OFF: [ADoP] Metareport

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 12/6/20 7:01 PM, nix via agora-business wrote:
> 
> On 12/6/20 5:57 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion wrote:
>> On 12/6/20 6:56 PM, nix via agora-business wrote:
>>> I point a finger at me for Tardiness on the Webmastor report.
>>>
>>> I point a finger at G. for Tardiness on the Coopor report.
>>
>> Maybe doesn't work for lack of a rule specification:
>>
>>>A player CAN by announcement, but subject to the provisions of
>>>this rule, Point eir Finger at a person (the perp) who plays the
>>>game; the announcement has to explicitly name the perp and cite a
>>>specific rule and an alleged violation of that rule by that
>>>person.
>> --
>> Jason Cobb
>>
>> Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
>>
> Well that's obtuse. Why do we name the crimes if the names aren't 
> sufficient identifiers?
> 
> If I didn't already do so in my last message, I point a finger at me for 
> Tardiness on the Webmastor report, citing rule 2143.
> 
> If I didn't already do so in my last message, I point a finger at G. for 
> Tardiness on the Coopor report, citing rule 2143.
> 

We made it that specific after someone had made very vague accusations.

Title: Specified Crime not Rule
Authors: PSS, nix
Power: 1.7
Text: {
Amend Rule 2478, "Vigilante Justice" by replacing the first paragraph
with the following:
  A player CAN by announcement, but subject to the provisions of
  this rule, Point eir Finger at a person (the perp) who plays the
  game; the announcement has to explicitly name the perp and cite a
  specific rule and an alleged violation of that rule by that
  person or a named crime alleged to have been committed by that
  person.
[ This will allow someone to use the name of a crime without specifying
which rule defines it. ]
}

I still want to do broader criminal changes when I get around to that,
but it's a huge project and this is a quick fix.
-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

DIS: Re: OFF: [Registrar] Agoran Directory

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 12/4/20 1:52 PM, Falsifian via agora-official wrote:
> Watchers (7)

Quick correction: 6 watchers

> 
> The list of Watchers is not governed by the rules, but is
> traditionally maintained in the Registrar's Report.  If you'd like to
> be listed as a Watcher or removed from the list, feel free to email
> the fora or the Registrar directly.
> 
> Nickname  Contact Last confirmed
>   --- --
> ais523AIS523 at alumni.bham.ac.uk 2020 February
> Lykaina   mjbermanator at gmail.com   2019 September
> Ørjan oerjan at nvg.ntnu.no   2017 May
> Dave  davidnicol at gmail.com 2013 May
> Phlogistique  noe.rubinstein at gmail.com 2013 May
> Steve zardoz37 at gmail.com   2013 May


-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] It's not theft if it was offered for free

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 10/31/20 4:56 PM, Aris Merchant via agora-discussion wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 31, 2020 at 1:56 PM Falsifian via agora-business
>  wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 08:51:14PM -0400, ATMunn via agora-business wrote:
>>> I submit (but do not pend) the following proposal:
>>>
>>> Title: I definitely authored this
>>> Adoption index: 2.0
>>> Author: ATMunn
>>> Co-author: Jason
>>>
>>> Amend Rule 2531 by replacing the first paragraph with the following:
>>> {
>>> Any attempt to levy a fine is INEFFECTIVE if it does not include value of
>>> the fine in blots, the name of the person being fined (the perp), and the
>>> specific reason for the fine.
>>> }
>>>
>>> Amend Rule 2531 by renumbering the list so that the numbers start at 1 and
>>> end at 10, with each number other than the fist one higher than the
>>> previous.
>>
>> I'm confused. What do you consider to be the first paragraph of that rule?
>>
>> If item (1) was part of the first paragraph, then the amended rule will
>> only have 9 list items.
>>
>> If item (1) was not part of the first paragraph, then it will still be
>> there so that text will appear twice.
> 
> Now might be a good time to remind everyone that this proposal also
> does not have a title.
> 
> -Aris
> 

I see a title in the submission?

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

DIS: Re: BUS: @Treasuror Re: OFF: [Assessor] Resolution of Proposals 8507-8515

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 10/31/20 10:31 AM, nix via agora-business wrote:
> 
> On 10/28/20 2:28 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-official wrote:
>> PROPOSAL 8515 (adMinistration v1.1)
>> AUTHOR: nix
>> CLASS: ORDINARY
>> CHAMBER: ECONOMY
>> SPONSORED: YES
>> FOR (11): ATMunn&, Aris, Baron von Vanderham, Falsifian, Gaelan@, Jason, 
>> Telnaior, Trigon&, nix, sukil, twg
>> AGAINST (0):
>> PRESENT (3): D. Margaux, G.^, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
>> BALLOTS: 14
>> AI (F/A): 40/0 (AI=2.0)
>> POPULARITY: 0.786
>> OUTCOME: ADOPTED
> This proposal having no against votes, I award myself orange glitter.
> 

For everyone's reference: Glitter must be processed by the Tailor before
the Treasuror.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

DIS: Re: BUS: AGORA QUEST

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 10/14/20 5:16 PM, Cuddle Beam via agora-business wrote:
> I pledge the following: I'll run AGORA QUEST according to the stuff
> described below.
> 
> Hey, welcome to AGORA QUEST. This is an interactive story - you pay me 10
> coins along what you want the protagonist to do, and I'll count it as a
> vote (voting, woo! nomic!!) and then when I have time to continue this,
> I'll tally the votes and progress the story based on that. I'll tiebreak if
> there are any ties. Also, you only get to vote once between updates.
> 
> For your vote, you can choose one of the options I give you in the vein of
> those Choose-Your-Adventure books, or you can just make up your own.
> 
> [image: image.png]
> 
> You're a new PLAYER in AGORA! A fresh, sparkling feeling of EXCITEMENT
> fills you and in your naivety, you are yet not OVERWHELMED by the RULESET.
> 
> So, what do you do?
> 
> - Go look at what that bottomless pit marked "CFJ ARCHIVES" is all about.
> - Check out "OFF:", whatever that is.
> - Look for other Agorans and what they're doing.
> - (Write-in)
> 

Is it 10 coins per update or just to buy in?

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Herald] Matters of Honor

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 10/4/20 6:35 PM, ais523 via agora-discussion wrote:
> On Sun, 2020-10-04 at 18:25 -0400, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via
> agora-business wrote:
>> On 10/4/20 5:56 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote:
>>> On 10/4/20 6:35 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-
>>> official wrote:
>>>
>>> CoE: not all values of the Karma switch have their default values.
>>
>> I respond to this CoE by referencing Jason's most recently called
>> CFJ.
> 
> Can you do that? The CFJ isn't about whether the report is accurate,
> it's about whether the report is a report. (It was definitely
> inaccurate.)
> 

Well, the report wouldn't purport the values of the switches if it was
not a report.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Herald] Matters of Honor

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 10/4/20 11:51 AM, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion wrote:
> Did you mean to send an empty email for this report?
> 

Nope, thanks for letting me know

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Tailor] The Ribbon Bar

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 10/1/20 4:54 PM, ATMunn via agora-discussion wrote:
> On 10/1/2020 4:41 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-business
> wrote:
>> nic    ROGECBMUV PLWKAT
> 
> informal CoE: who's nic?
> 
Fixed, but I think it was sufficiently clear that nothing was broken.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Herald] The Scroll of Agora

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 10/1/20 11:30 AM, nix via agora-business wrote:
> On 9/30/20 8:00 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-official 
> wrote:
>>On September 06, nix, Jason, and grok were awarded the
>>  patent title of Champion, specified as by
>>  Tournament, for having won Nomaic, which was a free
>>  tournament.
> 
> Unfortunately, I realize now I had a blot since August, so I didn't 
> actually get this win.
> 
Corrected for future reference.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

DIS: Re: OFF: [deputy-Coopor] Barrel Broadcast [attn. Tailor]

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 9/30/20 9:28 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-official wrote:
> I deputise for Coopor to publish the following the following monthly
> report, which is late for August:
> 
> {
> 
> No barrels exist.
> 
> The following bargains are on the barrel:
> 
> {
> 
> Bargain 1, Payout 7
> Tender: Voting, Legislative, Victory, Legislative, Justice, Voting
> 
> Bargain 2, payout 10
> Tender: Victory, Victory, Voting, Victory, Victory, Legislative
> 
> Bargain 3 payout 8
> Tender: Victory, Justice, Justice, Voting, Legislative, Legislative
> 
> Bargain 4 payout 3
> Tender:  Voting, Legislative, Victory, Justice, Justice, Legislative
> 
> }
> 
> }
> 
> 
> I award myself a Cyan ribbon.
> 

By my records, you have a Cyan ribbon that you earned in September for
deputizing for Cooper.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

DIS: Re: Peer Review of Cuddlebeam's Visual Submissions

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 8/19/20 7:19 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
> On 8/19/20 7:06 AM, Cuddle Beam via agora-discussion wrote:
>> Oof.
>>
>> How about this? https://imgur.com/a/VDAQaae
>>
>>
>>
>>
> Okay, that works.
> 
> Cuddlebeam having submitted a work of artistry consistent with the
> expectations of a degree therein, I, as Herald, do seek opinions from
> you, eir peers, on the above submitted artistic works.
> 

I didn't really get much discussion on this, having only heard from
Falsifian, so I'd like some more before issuing a degree intent.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: DIS: Discord digest 2020-09-06

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 9/6/20 2:53 PM, AgoraBot via agora-discussion wrote:
> MESSAGE 750824258682355844
> FROM nix ON 2020-09-02 AT 21:07:32.91:
> agora is a hoax we started 5 years ago by creating elaborate backfilled 
> archives

This is the best idea for a BN dynasty I've seen at Agora, and amusing
derrick just raised a similar idea on Slack:

> Have we ever tried running a dynasty that used another dynasty's rule-set as 
> the base?
-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Nomaoic] Daily Report

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 9/2/20 9:13 AM, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote:
> 
> On 9/2/2020 6:11 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>> On 9/1/2020 4:52 PM, Gaelan Steele via agora-official wrote:
>>> I am not required to report any information today.
>>>
>>> Gaelan
>>>
>>
>> Request:  As this is a free tournament, if these are going to be daily can
>> they go to BUS not OFF?
>>
>> Diplonomic and FRC (official birthday tournaments) stayed in BUS with the
>> daily announcements and only went to OFF for the big milestones (beginning
>> and end of tournament or weekly updates).  Weekly or so seems fine for OFF?
> 
> Oh sorry I guess Diplonomic did go to OFF regularly, didn't look too
> closely.  Still, my preference would be BUS in general for daily stuff.
> 

Okay, that makes sense; I'm sorry about Diplonomic. I tried to follow
the same rules as officer stuff: reports with information went to OFF,
most official actions went to BUS.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: DIS: [Revised Proto] Sunlight is the Best Disinfectant

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

> On Aug 30, 2020, at 03:28, Aris Merchant via agora-discussion 
>  wrote:
> 
> Here's a revised version of Sunlight is the Best Disinfectant. I first
> protoed this back at the end of June. I've made a few changes here and
> there, such as rolling the notion of unconcealment into the idea of
> clarity, in line with more recent precedent.
> 
> -Aris
> ---
> 
> Title: Sunlight is the Best Disinfectant
> Adoption index: 3.0
> Author: Aris
> Co-authors: nch, G., Jason
> 
> 
> Amend Rule 2202, "Ratification Without Objection", by deleting:
> 
>  A public document is part (possibly all) of a public message.
> 
> Amend Rule 478, "Fora", by changing the portion of the Rule from
> "A public message is a message" to the end to read as follows:
> 
>  A public message is a message sent via a public forum, or sent to
>  all players and containing a clear designation of intent to be
>  public. A document is part (possibly all) of a message. To "publish" or
>  "announce" something is to send a public message whose body contains that
>  thing. To do something "publicly" is to do that thing within a public
>  message.
> 
>  Where the rules define an action that a person CAN perform "by
>  announcement", that person performs that action by specifying the
>  action and announcing that e performs it, all unambiguously, clearly,
>  and without concealment.
> 
>  A notice is a document specifying conspicuously, clearly, and without
>  obfuscation all information which the rules require that type of notice to
>  contain to be valid. A notice must be public, unless a recipient is
>  specified by the enabling rule. If someone accomplishes an action by
>  sending a notice, e accomplishes that action "by notification".
> 
I’m not sure how I feel about this new method because it reads clumsily in 
practice below.

>  Any action performed by sending a message is performed at the time
>  date-stamped on that message. Actions in messages (including their contained
>  documents) are performed in the order they appear in the message, unless
>  otherwise specified. If an action in a message is being taken by someone
>  who has been a player within the last month, it must be clear, either
>  from the message itself or from context, which person is performing the
>  action; if it is not, the action is canceled and does not occur.
> 
> 
> Retitle Rule 2518 from "Determinacy" to "Don't Even Think About It".
> 
> Amend Rule 2518, "Don't Even Think About It", by changing it to read in full:
> 
> The following terms are defined:
> 
>  1.  If something is reasonably obvious (especially, as applicable, by
>  being reasonably visible and easy to understand), it is clear, otherwise
>  it is unclear.
>  2.  If something has multiple reasonable interpretations that are
>  substantively different and non-trivial to select between,
>  it is ambiguous, otherwise it is unambiguous.
>  3.  If a text stands out so as to be visible with little effort, it is
>  conspicuous, otherwise it is inconspicuous.
>  4.  If a text has been rendered hard to understand at a glance,
>  it is obfuscated, otherwise it is unobfuscated.
>  5.  If a value CANNOT be reasonably determined (without circularity or
Should this be lowercased?
>  paradox) from information reasonably available, or if it
>  alternates indefinitely between values, then the value is
>  considered to be indeterminate, otherwise it is determinate.
> 
For this rule (above), I’m concerned by the defaulting towards clear, 
determinate, etc. I think it would be better to flip each of these definitions 
to avoid a situation where we can’t document that something is indeterminate 
under this rule, but it still is.
> 
> Amend Rule 208, "Resolving Agoran Decisions", by replacing:
> 
>  The vote collector for an unresolved Agoran decision CAN resolve
>  it by announcement, indicating the outcome. If it was required to
>  be initiated, then e SHALL resolve it in a timely fashion after
>  the end of the voting period. To be EFFECTIVE, such an attempt
>  must satisfy the following conditions:
> 
>  1. It is published after the voting period has ended.
> 
>  2. It clearly identifies the matter to be resolved.
> 
>  3. It specifies the number of voters (or a list of the voters).
> For these purposes and for determining quorum, a "voter" is
> someone who submitted a ballot on the decision that was valid
> when it was submitted and also valid (i.e. not withdrawn or
> otherwise invalidated) at the end of the voting period.
> 
>  4. It specifies the outcome, as described elsewhere, and, if there
> was more than one valid option, provides a tally of the voters'
> valid ballots.
> 
> with:
> 
>  The vote collector for an unresolved Agoran decision CAN resolve
>  it by notification. If it was required to be initiated, then e SHALL resolve
>  it in a timely fashion after the end of the voting period. To be valid,
>  the notice of resolution must satisfy the 

Re: DIS: Proto-tournament: Nomaoic

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

I think the interesting gameplay arises in passing rules in different cabals, 
such that you win without either having known.

> On Aug 24, 2020, at 10:05, Gaelan Steele via agora-discussion 
>  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> On Aug 24, 2020, at 2:32 PM, Cuddle Beam via agora-discussion 
>>  wrote:
>> 
>> First turn, after (necessarily) talking to a cabal of players to get it
>> passed: "Randomly choose a player among me and [the cabal]. That player
>> wins and the game ends."
> 
> Admittedly, you have more experience playing "cutthroat" nomics than I do. 
> That being said, I'm not quite sure if I would vote for a proposal like that. 
> I guess it's a good deal iff you think your odds of winning "fair and square" 
> (i.e. finding a way to have specifically you win, as opposed to getting lucky 
> with a cabal proposal) are lower than 1/(size of cabal). So you'd need a 
> majority of players to be pretty sure they were below average, which doesn't 
> strike me as particularly likely. 
> 
> Gaelan

DIS: Re: OFF: [Reportor] Last Week in Agora

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 8/22/20 11:28 PM, Falsifian via agora-official wrote:
> Archived at
> https://github.com/AgoraNomic/Reportor/tree/master/weekly_summaries
> 
> Below is the report for the week of 2020-08-10..16.
> 
> 
> # Summary
> 
> Welcome, Nathan!
> 
> Get paid to write a weekly summary! The Agoran Press now exists, and
> seeks Reportors to share in the telling of our glorious never-ending
> story. Join the contract, claim the Weekly Assignment, and get 5 Coins
> for summarizing a week. (The contract became publicly funded on April
> 21, technically outside the time range covered by this document.)

Minor issue: I don't think that was in April.

> 
> This week, a healthy batch of rule-changes was adopted, including the
> gamification of Finger-Pointing. Agorans, don't let crime go unpunished
> --- a missed punishment is a missed opportunity!
> 
> Agorans love changing the rules, making contracts, moving assets around,
> and that sort of thing. But one proposal adopted this week gives some
> privileged players a new power to to do only things that are outside of
> that list of run-of-the-mill things. Our first Rulebender, G.,
> demonstrates the first "Rulebending Form", which gives names to the five
> Eastman weeks of each month.
> 
> Some of this week's proposals seemed like minor refactors or fixes, but
> were they? Murphy's "simpler ribbon switches" turns out to also get em a
> Transparent Ribbon.
> 
> Voting began on a pair of modest new proposals this week, and there is
> some discussion of changing the way glitter works.
> 
> CFJ 3873 is judged TRUE: it was Shelvacu's birthday on the day e
> registered. Agorans continue to stir things with new experiments,
> including a self-styled "Annoying Experiment" by Gaelan.
> 
> This week, ATMunn became our new speaker, and Birthday Tournament
> participants were awarded the Badge of Diplonomic.
> 
> 
> # Players old and new
> 
> * New player Nathan joins Agora.
> 
> * Bayushi makes an appearance in the thread "Somewhat Annoying Experiment".
> 
> 
> # Voting
> 
> * The decisions on adopting Proposals 8478-8487 are resolved.
> 
>   * Only 8481 is rejected. It would have made non-pending Proposals
>     disappear instead of having the Promotor track them. The Promotor
>     felt it wasn't needed.
> 
>   * Adopted:
> 
>     * Make Finger-Pointing competitive. (8479)
> 
>     * Make the rewards higher for more "complex" offices. (8482)
> 
>     * Apply the effects of "THE MYSTERY DOCUMENT", published last week
>   by G., which it turns enacts a new rule allowing certain players
>   to publish "Rulebending Forms" (8483)
> 
>     * Clarify Rule 2576, about asset ownership. (In the past, there's been
>   confusion about whether assets are destroyed or go to the Lost and
>   Found department, when their owner deregisters, for example.) (8484)
> 
>     * Make it so a person never ceases to be a person. (For one thing,
>   this means that keeping correct records doesn't require knowing who
>   is still alive.) (8485)
> 
>     * Simplify how Ribbon ownership is defined. But also, it turns out,
>   make people eligible for Transparent Ribbons. (8487)
> 
>     * Various fixes. (8478, 8480, 8486)
> 
> * Voting begins on Proposals 8488 and 8489:
> 
>   * Proposal 8488 is another tweak related to the fee-based action
>     rules.
> 
>   * Proposal 8489 adds a new mechanic to the officer card-granting
>     rules.
> 
> 
> # Scams, rule questions, etc.
> 
> * Can a Rulebending Form escape its limitations by explicitly taking
>   precedence over the rule that limits it? ais523 calls CFJ 3874 in the
>   thread "Resolution of Proposals 8478-8487".
> 
> * Can a player be granted birthday gifts on the same day they register?
>   Yes. (CFJ 3873)
> 
>   * Trigon is annoyed because others agreed this wasn't a problem when e
>     came up with the original wording. Thread: "Forbes 485"
> 
> * G. points out a zombie owner can bid in a zombie auction. Before a
>   recent auction overhaul, this was prohibited. Thread: "August zombie
>   auction"
> 
> * G. publishes the first "Rulebending Form", which gives names to the
>   five Eastman weeks of each month. Thread: "The First Form"
> 
> * Are hard-to-compute contract provisions effective? Gaelan tries an
>   experiment in the thread "Somewhat Annoying Experiment", calling CFJ
>   3875.
> 
> * Can multiple persons in the same body receive ribbons? ATMunn calls
>   CFJs in the thread "[Diplonomic 2020] BT3 Intent to Announce Winners,
>   Badge, and Clean-up".
> 
> * When an officer's report includes a caveat, does the indicated
>   information still self-ratify if it's not separately CoE-ed? Thread:
>   "[Treasuror] [Weekly Report] Forbes 486"
> 
> * Jason sends a message to the backup list that at first seems like it
>   might be an objection to an intent to Declare Apathy that nobody saw.
>   But it looks like e just manually added "Re:" to the start of the
>   subject line. Thread: "Re: BAK: Apathy Intent"
> 
> * After 

Re: DIS: Proto-tournament: Nomaoic

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 8/19/20 10:02 PM, Gaelan Steele via agora-discussion wrote:
> I wrote this ruleset up a while ago, and there's been some interest when I 
> brought it up on the discord, so I figured I'd bring it up again. I'll set it 
> up as a free tournament soon, but wanted to get some feedback first. That 
> being said, my preference would be to do relatively minimal iteration on the 
> ruleset before we start playing, because, you know, nomic.
> 
> Gaelan
> 
> ---
> 
> [TL;DR: Suber Nomic, but the ruleset isn’t published and proposals are 
> private. The intention is that you’d make your proposal and share the text 
> with just enough people to get a majority voting for it.]
> 
> Initial Set of Rules
> Immutable Rules
> 101. All players must always abide by all the rules then in effect, in the 
> form in which they are then in effect. The rules in the Initial Set are in 
> effect when the tournament begins. The Initial Set consists of Rules 101-116 
> (immutable) and 201-213 (mutable).
> 
> 102. Initially rules in the 100's are immutable and rules in the 200's are 
> mutable. Rules subsequently enacted or transmuted (that is, changed from 
> immutable to mutable or vice versa) may be immutable or mutable regardless of 
> their numbers, and rules in the Initial Set may be transmuted regardless of 
> their numbers.
> 
> 103. A rule-change is any of the following: (1) the enactment, repeal, or 
> amendment of a mutable rule; (2) the enactment, repeal, or amendment of an 
> amendment of a mutable rule; or (3) the transmutation of an immutable rule 
> into a mutable rule or vice versa.
> 
> 104. All rule-changes proposed in the proper way shall be voted on. They will 
> be adopted if and only if they receive the required number of votes.
> 
> 105. Every player is an eligible voter.
> 
> 106. All proposed rule-changes shall be sent to the Gamemaster before they 
> are voted on. If they are adopted, they shall guide play in the form in which 
> they were voted on.
> 
> 107. No rule-change may take effect earlier than the moment of the completion 
> of the vote that adopted it, even if its wording explicitly states otherwise. 
> No rule-change may have retroactive application.
> 
> 108. Each proposed rule-change shall be given a number for reference. The 
> numbers shall begin with 301, and each rule-change proposed in the proper way 
> shall receive the next successive integer, whether or not the proposal is 
> adopted.
> 
> If a rule is repealed and reenacted, it receives the number of the proposal 
> to reenact it. If a rule is amended or transmuted, it receives the number of 
> the proposal to amend or transmute it. If an amendment is amended or 
> repealed, the entire rule of which it is a part receives the number of the 
> proposal to amend or repeal the amendment.
> 
> 109. Rule-changes that transmute immutable rules into mutable rules may be 
> adopted if and only if three quarters of the eligible voters, rounded up, 
> vote for it. Transmutation shall not be implied, but must be stated 
> explicitly in a proposal to take effect.
> 
> 110. In a conflict between a mutable and an immutable rule, the immutable 
> rule takes precedence and the mutable rule shall be entirely void. For the 
> purposes of this rule a proposal to transmute an immutable rule does not 
> "conflict" with that immutable rule.
> 
> 111. The state of affairs that constitutes winning may not be altered from 
> achieving n points to any other state of affairs. The magnitude of n and the 
> means of earning points may be changed, and rules that establish a winner 
> when play cannot continue may be enacted and (while they are mutable) be 
> amended or repealed. When a player wins, the Gamemaster shall announce this 
> fact, and the tournament ends with that player as the winner.
> 
> 112. A player always has the option to forfeit the tournament rather than 
> continue to play or incur a tournament penalty. No penalty worse than losing, 
> in the judgment of the player to incur it, may be imposed.
> 
> 113. There must always be at least one mutable rule. The adoption of 
> rule-changes must never become completely impermissible.
> 
> 114. Rule-changes that affect rules needed to allow or apply rule-changes are 
> as permissible as other rule-changes. Even rule-changes that amend or repeal 
> their own authority are permissible. No rule-change or type of move is 
> impermissible solely on account of the self-reference or self-application of 
> a rule.
> 
> 115. Whatever is not prohibited or regulated by a rule is permitted and 
> unregulated, with the sole exception of changing the rules, which is 
> permitted only when a rule or set of rules explicitly or implicitly permits 
> it.
> 
> 116. All judgements about the legality of a move or the interpretation or 
> application of a rule shall be made by the Gamemaster.
> 
> Mutable Rules
> 201. Players may take turns at any time, but may not do so less than 23 hours 
> after a previous turn and must 

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: humble agoran comic [attn. Herald]

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 8/19/20 6:22 AM, Cuddle Beam via agora-business wrote:
> bump
> 
> On Sun, Aug 2, 2020 at 11:23 PM Cuddle Beam  wrote:
> 
>> Woops.
>>
>> Anyways, I submit the following images with the intent to obtain a degree
>> in Artistry.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Aug 2, 2020 at 11:22 PM Cuddle Beam  wrote:
>>
>>> I submit the following images with the intent to obtain a degree in
>>> Artistry.
>>>
>>

There are still no images attached.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

DIS: Re: BUS: But I Won't Do That [Finger Point]

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

I imagine that this defeats the purpose, but G. or Jason, if you could disclose 
the hashed document, that would be very much appreciated.

> On Aug 17, 2020, at 11:39, Jason Cobb via agora-business 
>  wrote:
> 
> On 8/3/20 7:56 PM, Kerim Aydin via agora-business wrote:
>> I make/consent to the following contract 'Trust Me':
>> 
>> {
>> 1.  Only G. CAN join this contract.
>> 
>> 2.  G. CAN terminate this contract by announcement;
>> 
>> 3.  G. SHALL, within one week, perform at least one of the actions
>> described in a document that G. has previously published that has the
>> SHA-256 hash:
>> f7609fa40a997e8f7533eb55e0c74b35800c937c8300aa2f70d4feb320247214
>> }
> 
> 
> I point my finger at G. for failure to abide by the above contract.
> 
> -- 
> Jason Cobb
> 

Re: DIS: [Tailor] Rethinking Glitter Prices

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 8/15/20 8:55 PM, Falsifian via agora-discussion wrote:
> On 2020-08-16 00:09, ais523 via agora-discussion wrote:
>> On Sat, 2020-08-15 at 18:20 -0400, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via
>> agora-discussion wrote:
>>> As Tailor, I see and think about everyone's glitter use. Observing
>>> it,
>>> some glitters seem to be frequently awarded and often to the same
>>> people. For Blue Glitter in particular, it's basically a second
>>> reward
>>> for a timely judgement which exceeds the initial one. As a result,
>>> I'd
>>> like to detach the price of Glitter from the number of Ribbons at
>>> least
>>> partially; other factors that I think should influence it are:
>>>
>>> 1. Time since person earned the ribbon
>>> 2. Time since this glitter or the associated ribbon was last claimed
>>> 3. Time since this person last claimed this glitter
>>> 4. Number of times it has been claimed recently
>>> 5. Number of opportunities for it to have been claimed
>>> 6. Number of opportunities for it to have been claimed assuming
>>> everyone
>>>   optimized for claiming it and did everything in a timely manner
>>>
>>> I'm not sure what the ideal formula would be and it would probably
>>> combine some of those factors or more, but I'm just putting this out
>>> there to get others' thoughts.
>>
>> What about setting glitter prices by regulation, and having some
>> lightweight mechanism (e.g. Agoran consent) to change them?
> 
> We could also just remove glitter. It was a fun idea but at this point
> seems a bit tedious.
> 

I don't find it tedious, but on the other hand, it could be combined
with other coin reward mechanisms.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

DIS: [Tailor] Rethinking Glitter Prices

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

As Tailor, I see and think about everyone's glitter use. Observing it,
some glitters seem to be frequently awarded and often to the same
people. For Blue Glitter in particular, it's basically a second reward
for a timely judgement which exceeds the initial one. As a result, I'd
like to detach the price of Glitter from the number of Ribbons at least
partially; other factors that I think should influence it are:

1. Time since person earned the ribbon
2. Time since this glitter or the associated ribbon was last claimed
3. Time since this person last claimed this glitter
4. Number of times it has been claimed recently
5. Number of opportunities for it to have been claimed
6. Number of opportunities for it to have been claimed assuming everyone
 optimized for claiming it and did everything in a timely manner

I'm not sure what the ideal formula would be and it would probably
combine some of those factors or more, but I'm just putting this out
there to get others' thoughts.
-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Registrar] Agoran Directory

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 8/9/20 2:53 PM, Gaelan Steele via agora-business wrote:
> 
> 
>> On Aug 9, 2020, at 11:45 AM, Falsifian via agora-official 
>>  wrote:
>>
>>  Player Contact Registered
>>  -- --- --
>>  omdcomexk at gmail.com  [0]  
>>03 Feb 11
>>  Aris   thoughtsoflifeandlight17 at gmail.com 
>>    13 Sep 16
>>  Gaelan gbs at canishe.com  
>>  15 May 17
>>  G. kerim at uw.edu  
>> 25 Aug 17
>>  Cuddlebeam cuddlebeam at gmail.com   
>>25 Aug 17
>>  Trigon reuben.staley at gmail.com    
>>24 Sep 17
>>  Murphy emurphy42 at zoho.com  
>>   17 Dec 17
>>  ATMunn iamingodsarmy at gmail.com    
>>11 Mar 18
>>  Falsifian  agora at falsifian.org    
>>13 Feb 19
>>  Jason  jason.e.cobb at gmail.com 
>>02 Jun 19
>>  nixnixnull+agora at protonmail.com  
>> [1] 18 Oct 19
>>  P.S.S. [2] p.scribonius.scholasticus at gmail.com 
>>   01 Mar 20
>>  grok   grokagora at gmail.com    
>>20 May 20
>>  Tyler  tylermeady at gmail.com   
>>06 Jun 20
>>  Zyborg zyborgmao at gmail.com    
>>21 Jun 20
>>  R. Lee edwardostrange at gmail.com   
>>30-Jun-20
>>  Fred   zarathustraincandenza at gmail.com    
>>03-Jul-20
>>  Shelvacu [3]   agora at shelvacu.com  
>>   08-Aug-20
>> z twgme at timon.red 24 May 18
>> z D. Margaux [4] dmargaux000 at gmail.com 
>> 25 Aug 18
>> z Baron von Vaderham davidseeber at outlook.com 
>>   04 Feb 19
>> z sukil  sukiletxe+agora at gmail.com 
>> 12 Feb 20
>> z Telnaior   JDGA at iinet.net.au  
>>21 Mar 20
> 
> I point my finger at Falsifian for Making My Eyes Bleed. (The zombies' 
> columns are pushed one column right by the z indicators; the non-zombie 
> players need a space there to make everything line up.)
> 
> Gaelan
> 

My inclination is to find this to be SHENANIGANS because it cannot be
found that Gaelan definitely committed any specific crime.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

DIS: Re: BUS: Publication of potential rule change

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

Since it’s going to happen, I do as well

> On Aug 6, 2020, at 14:05, Jason Cobb via agora-business 
>  wrote:
> 
> On 8/5/20 2:11 PM, Kerim Aydin via agora-business wrote:
>> The below document, labelled THE MYSTERY DOCUMENT, contains the text of a
>> rule change. The rule change will be incorporated by reference into the
>> effects of proposal 8483 (quoted below), and the rule change will take
>> effect if and when that proposal takes effect. The rule change text, along
>> with this specification of the method to be used for the rule change, is
>> being published in accordance with the 'at least 4 days' clause of Rule 105.
> 
> 
> Since it seems to be all the rage these days (and I do need a violet
> ribbon), I change my vote on Proposal 8483 to FOR.
> 
> -- 
> Jason Cobb
> 

Re: DIS: Badge Problems

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 8/3/20 7:48 AM, N. S. via agora-discussion wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 3, 2020 at 8:57 PM Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via
> agora-discussion  wrote:
> 
>> On 8/3/20 3:48 AM, Aris Merchant via agora-discussion wrote:
>>> On Sun, Aug 2, 2020 at 10:47 AM Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via
>>> agora-business  wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I also plan to award the badge for this tournament in the next few days.
>>>> I would be interested in receiving suggestions for titles. I am
>>>> currently planning to award it to ATMunn, G., Jason, Aris, Falsifian, R.
>>>> Lee, omd, Trigon, Ben (Aris's friend), Claire (Aris's friend), and
>>>> myself. If you can think of anyone else to whom it should be awarded,
>>>> please let me know.
>>>
>>> I was trying to put discussion of this topic off, but fate or the
>>> universe or whatever appear to have other things in mind. Ben and
>>> Claire are plural, and thus probably constitute one person for the
>>> purposes of current Agoran law. For a general primer on plurality, see
>>> this [1]. For an etiquette primer, see this [2]. Let me know if you
>>> have any questions, as I am reasonably well informed about plurality
>>> in general.
>>>
>>> For now, unless we want to do an immediate legal change, the simplest
>>> solution is probably to award one badge to the two of them. I can ask
>>> for their preferences on what they'd like to go down as on the scroll.
>>>
>>> [1] https://morethanone.info/
>>> [2] http://www.exunoplures.org/main/articles/rules/
>>>
>>> -Aris
>>>
>>
>> This is an interesting question. Under our current rules, I think they
>> would clearly be treated as a single person; however, I think that our
>> change from "organism" to "entity" makes the question much less clear.
>>
>> --
>> 
>> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
>> Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth
>>
> 
> i personally wouldn't be in favour of changing the rules to allow one human
> being to count as multiple persons.
> 

Well, what do you define as a human being? They share one body, but each
of them has a distinct personhood and identity. If we make it about
physical characteristics, that could also raise questions about
conjoined twins.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: DIS: Badge Problems

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 8/3/20 3:48 AM, Aris Merchant via agora-discussion wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 2, 2020 at 10:47 AM Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via
> agora-business  wrote:
>>
>> I also plan to award the badge for this tournament in the next few days.
>> I would be interested in receiving suggestions for titles. I am
>> currently planning to award it to ATMunn, G., Jason, Aris, Falsifian, R.
>> Lee, omd, Trigon, Ben (Aris's friend), Claire (Aris's friend), and
>> myself. If you can think of anyone else to whom it should be awarded,
>> please let me know.
> 
> I was trying to put discussion of this topic off, but fate or the
> universe or whatever appear to have other things in mind. Ben and
> Claire are plural, and thus probably constitute one person for the
> purposes of current Agoran law. For a general primer on plurality, see
> this [1]. For an etiquette primer, see this [2]. Let me know if you
> have any questions, as I am reasonably well informed about plurality
> in general.
> 
> For now, unless we want to do an immediate legal change, the simplest
> solution is probably to award one badge to the two of them. I can ask
> for their preferences on what they'd like to go down as on the scroll.
> 
> [1] https://morethanone.info/
> [2] http://www.exunoplures.org/main/articles/rules/
> 
> -Aris
> 

This is an interesting question. Under our current rules, I think they
would clearly be treated as a single person; however, I think that our
change from "organism" to "entity" makes the question much less clear.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Diplonomic 2020] BT3 Intent to Announce Winners, Badge, and Clean-up

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 8/2/20 3:21 PM, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote:
> 
> On 8/2/2020 12:19 PM, Falsifian via agora-discussion wrote:
>> What about the following from Rule 16? "After a Fall turn, if one Great 
>> Power controls 18 or more supply centers, all other Contestants cease to 
>> be Contestants."
> 
> lol.  now that's really embarrassing after all that.  in my defense a few
> of us read the rules and somehow missed that entirely.
> 

Being fair to all, I didn't recall that either, and I absolutely should
have given that I wrote it.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Diplonomic 2020] BT3 Intent to Announce Winners, Badge, and Clean-up

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 8/2/20 3:07 PM, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote:
> 
> On 8/2/2020 10:47 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
>> This has been a fun tournament and I look forward to hearing about
>> everything I couldn't see. If you would like to give feedback privately,
>> feel free to reach out; if you would like to give feedback or share
>> information with the public but anonymously, also contact me and I will
>> share it as long as it isn't problematic, offensive, or personal.
> 
> First, thanks for running this!  It was a lot of fun.
> 
> Some initial thoughts to share:
> 
> 1.  A huge amount of action was on Discord for this (6/7 countries were
> there and therefore much/most of the actual diplomacy).  This would have
> been a very different game if it was email-only.
> 
> 2.  Early on, several players commented "I have never/haven't for a long
> time played Diplomacy, I kind of want to play it straight".  There was a
> lot of brainstorming of clever new mechanics early on (airplanes!
> fortresses!  spies!  etc.) but a majority just wanted to play Dip at
> first, and early proposals got voted down unless they were clarifications
> or bugfixes.

This is interesting to find out. If anyone wanted to play another round
of this, either completely separate from Agora or as a Free Tournament,
either way potentially inviting people from BN to fill out a game, I'd
be happy to GM it.

> 
> 3.  So years 1901-1903 at least were nearly 100% classic diplomacy.
> Probably lots of interesting stories to tell here about who was trusting
> whom when!!!
> 
> 4.  However, what no one noticed (or at least mentioned) was that the win
> condition *wasn't* classic diplomacy.  Classic diplomacy win is to own
> more than half the supply centers (18+).  This tournament had "eliminate
> everyone else" as a win condition which is next-to-impossible with
> straight Dip rules (with many board positions leading to stalemates making
> it literally impossible).

It turns out that this was actually an interesting mistake I made. This
came from modifying rules from the previous FRC Birthday Tournaments.  I
didn't actually realize it until a few years in, but I think it led to
some interesting gameplay. I'm not sure whetehr or not it would be best
to keep in a future rendition.

> 
> This led to a puzzle, once the classic Dip play made some definite "ahead"
> and "behind" players (by around 1904-05).  At that point, there were 4
> strong contestants, in a situational 3 against 1 alliance.  In classic
> Dip, with the 18+ Center win condition, the alliances would very possibly
> have shifted again around now (to make it 2 against 2 perhaps, there was
> some diplomacy leading towards that).
> 
> But with proposal voting and "elimination" as the win condition, it went a
> little differently.
> 
> The puzzle can be shown like this:
> 
> - If it came down to 2 surviving players, the game was unwinnable, only a
> tie was possible.
> 
> - So if you were down to 3 players of similar size (i.e. Austria, Italy,
> Russia), then you know that as soon as one of you is gone, it's a tie.
> 
> - Since it's headed to a tie anyway, all three have an incentive to either
> vote for a 3-way tie, or vote 2/1 to make 2 winners and 1 loser.  But that
> 2/1 vote would be arbitrary and anyone could be the loser, and in fact if
> you were the strongest of the 3 you might have more chance of being
> eliminated with a vote.  So there's a perverse incentive there.
> 
> - So if you're at 4 players, and you're a group of 3 of them in a
> situational alliance, it's better to just vote for a 3-way tie then take
> the risk of being the "loser" of a 2/1 vote after player 4 is eliminated.
> 
> So that's how the game ended...
> 
> 

Thanks for sharing these thoughts! It's really interesting to hear about
it from the inside.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

DIS: [Diplonomic 2020] Correction of Resolution of Proposals "Superpowers" and "for added confusion"

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

The stated vote totals were as follows:
“for added confusion” 2 FOR — 4 AGAINST
“Superpowers” 4 FOR — 2 AGAINST
These were incorrect; they should have been the following:
“for added confusion” 3 FOR — 4 AGAINST
“Superpowers” 4 FOR — 3 AGAINST
-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Diplonomic 2020] Resolution of Fall 1905 (revised)

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 7/29/20 10:59 AM, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion wrote:
> On 7/29/20 10:51 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-official
> wrote:
>> Changes in supply centers are as follows:
>>
>> Austria +Ank
>> -Bul
>> +Smy
> 
> 
> I think the Ghost fleet should be disbanded now that Austria controls
> all of Turkey's home SCs.
> 

That's correct; I'm sorry about these errors; I'll get another revision.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Diplonomic 2020] Resolution of Fall 1905 and BT2 Removal of omd

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 7/29/20 10:28 AM, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote:
> 
> On 7/29/2020 7:21 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
>> ItalyA Bul S Sev - Rum**
>> Russia   F Sev - Rum  **
>> Turkey   F Rum - Bul  **
>> 20. A unit moves with its own strength combined with all of its valid
>> supports. Support is cut if the unit giving support is attacked from any
>> province except the one where support is being given or if the unit
>> giving support is dislodged.
> 
> Doesn't the "except" clause mean that Bul's support is not cut and the
> move here succeeds?  (that's standard dip interpretation).
> 
> -G.
> 

Oh, I read it as being that the support is given to the place from which
it is moving, but your interpretation makes more sense; hold on.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

DIS: Re: BUS: [Herald] Let's Award an A.N.A. to Aris

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 7/29/20 2:41 AM, N. S. via agora-business wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 8:04 AM Kerim Aydin via agora-business <
> agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> 
>>
>> On 7/28/2020 2:29 PM, Falsifian via agora-business wrote:
>>> On 2020-07-27 10:46, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-business
>>> wrote:
 I certify that the peer review process has occurred and intend, with 2
 Agoran consent, to award Aris the degree of Associate of Nomic Artistry.
>>>
>>> I support.
>>>
>>
>> I support.
>>
>>   I object
> 

I think an explanation of this objection would be in order.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

DIS: Re: OFF: [Diplonomic 2020] Resolution of Spring 1905

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 7/27/20 12:44 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-official
wrote:
> Here are the final orders I received:
> 
> Austria  F AEG - Smy
>  A Boh - Mun
>  A Con - Ank
>  F ION H
>  A Mun - Bur
>  A Sil D Ruh
>  A Vie - Boh
> England  A Bre - Pic
>  A Edi - NTH
>  F ENG - Bel
>  F IRI - ENG
>  F NTH - Hol
>  A Par H
> Germany  A Kie - Ruh  **
>  A Ruh - Bur  **
> ItalyA Mar S Mun - Bur
>  F Nap H
>  F Por S WES - MAO
>  F Rom - TYS
>  A Ser - Bul
>  F Smy - Syr
>  F Spa/sc S WES - MAO
>  A Tyr S Boh - Mun
>  F WES - MAO
> Russia   F Ank - Arm
>  F BAL S Ber - Kie
>  F Ber - Kie
>  F BLA - Sev
>  A Den S Ber - Kie
>  F Nwy - SKA
>  A Pru - Ber
>  F Stp/nc S BLA - Sev
>  A Swe - Nwy
> Turkey   F Sev - BLA  **
> 
> ** These orders failed. Germany's A Kie is disbanded after being
> dislodged. Turkey's F Sev retreats to Rum after being dislodged.
> 
> Processing all of these, units end up as follows:
> 
> Austria  A Ank
>  A Boh
>  A Bur
>  F ION
>  A Mun
>  A Sil
>  F Smy
> England  F Bel
>  F ENG
>  F Hol
>  A NTH

This should be F NTH, having been F Edi. The built unit was F Edi not A Edi.

>  A Par
>  A Pic
> Germany  A Ruh
> ItalyA Bul
>  F MAO
>  A Mar
>  F Nap
>  F Por
>  F Spa/sc
>  F Syr
>  A Tyr
>  F TYS
> Russia   F Arm
>  F BAL
>  A Ber
>  A Den
>  F Kie
>  A Nwy
>  F Sev
>  F SKA
>  F Stp/nc
> Turkey   F Rum

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [CotC] CFJ 3867 Judged TRUE by Jason [Ribbon]

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 7/26/20 8:12 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion wrote:
> On 7/26/20 8:11 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion
> wrote:
>> On 7/26/20 8:04 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote:
>>> On 7/26/20 5:58 PM, Kerim Aydin via agora-official wrote:
>>>> status: https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/#3867
>>>> (This document is informational only and contains no game actions).
>>>>
>>>> ===  CFJ 3867  ===
>>>>
>>>>   In the above message, I broke a pledge.
>>>>
>>>> ==
>>>>
>>>> Caller:ATMunn
>>>>
>>>> Judge: Jason
>>>> Judgement: TRUE
>>>>
>>>> ==
>>>
>>> I award myself a Blue ribbon for the above judgment. I have earned it
>>> within the last week, so I still qualify for it, and it has been just
>>> over 7 days since I last had it.
>>>
>> This fails because you were already awarded glitter for it.
>>
> 
> Why so?
> 
> Rule 2438:
> 
>>   While a person qualifies for a type of Ribbon:
>>   
>> - If e has not owned that type of Ribbon within the preceding 7
>>   days, any player CAN, by announcement, award em that type of
>>   Ribbon.
>>   
>> - Otherwise, if e has not been awarded that type of Ribbon or
>>   the corresponding type of Glitter since e last earned or came
>>   to qualify for that type of Ribbon, and has not been so
>>   awarded five or more times within the past 24 hours, e CAN, by
>>   announcement, award emself that type of Glitter.
> 
> 
> There's no Glitter restriction on the "CAN award" clause.
> 

Oh, that's true, which is a small hole.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [CotC] CFJ 3867 Judged TRUE by Jason [Ribbon]

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 7/26/20 8:04 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote:
> On 7/26/20 5:58 PM, Kerim Aydin via agora-official wrote:
>> status: https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/#3867
>> (This document is informational only and contains no game actions).
>>
>> ===  CFJ 3867  ===
>>
>>   In the above message, I broke a pledge.
>>
>> ==
>>
>> Caller:ATMunn
>>
>> Judge: Jason
>> Judgement: TRUE
>>
>> ==
> 
> 
> I award myself a Blue ribbon for the above judgment. I have earned it
> within the last week, so I still qualify for it, and it has been just
> over 7 days since I last had it.
> 

This fails because you were already awarded glitter for it.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Tailor] Glitteral

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 7/26/20 1:21 PM, ATMunn via agora-discussion wrote:
> On 7/26/2020 7:37 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-official
> wrote:
>>   Glitter prices at end of week:
>>
>>    Red  16 coins    Violet    9 coins
>>    Orange   12 coins    Indigo   21 coins
>>    Green    15 coins    Platinum 15 coins
>>    Emerald  16 coins    Lime 18 coins
>>    Cyan 11 coins    White    18 coins
>>    Blue 11 coins    blacK    10 coins
>>    Magenta   9 coins    grAy  8 coins
>>    Ultraviolet  11 coins    Transparent  15 coins
> 
> Shouldn't the value of Transparent glitter have gone down after I got my
> Transparent ribbon? or am I just misunderstanding something?
> 

It did, but it went back up because of Jason's Banner.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: DIS: [Diplonomic] Retreat Rules question

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 7/26/20 12:45 PM, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote:
> 
> On 7/26/2020 9:40 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
>> On 7/26/20 12:26 PM, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote:
>>>
>>> H. Publius,
>>>
>>> Another diplonomic rules question!
>>>
>>> The original Diplomacy Rules say:
 A unit may not retreat to the province from where the dislodging unit
 came or to an "embattled" province, meaning one left vacant by a
 bounce/standoff that turn.
>>> (https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Diplomacy/Rules)
>>>
>>> Current Rule 22 says:
 22. A dislodged unit must retreat to an adjacent province. Retreats
 can’t be convoyed or supported. If two or more units are ordered to
 retreat to the same province, they all must be disbanded. If a country
 fails to order a retreat when necessary, the unit is disbanded.
>>>
>>> Reading this on its own, you could retreat anywhere adjacent (even to
>>> occupied territories!)  Obviously that's not true so there are limits not
>>> explicitly spelled out in R22.  Do those limits apply to retreating to
>>> "where the dislodging unit came from" or to "embattled but empty"
>>> provinces under the current R22, as per the original Dip rules?
>>
>> Yes, it couldn't retreat to a province occupied by a dislodging unit or
>> a unit that it couldn't have moved to.
>>
> 
> But 'embattled but empty' can be retreated to?
> 
> 

Since the unit couldn't have moved there, no.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: DIS: [Diplonomic] Retreat Rules question

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 7/26/20 12:26 PM, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote:
> 
> H. Publius,
> 
> Another diplonomic rules question!
> 
> The original Diplomacy Rules say:
>> A unit may not retreat to the province from where the dislodging unit
>> came or to an "embattled" province, meaning one left vacant by a
>> bounce/standoff that turn.
> (https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Diplomacy/Rules)
> 
> Current Rule 22 says:
>> 22. A dislodged unit must retreat to an adjacent province. Retreats
>> can’t be convoyed or supported. If two or more units are ordered to
>> retreat to the same province, they all must be disbanded. If a country
>> fails to order a retreat when necessary, the unit is disbanded.
> 
> Reading this on its own, you could retreat anywhere adjacent (even to
> occupied territories!)  Obviously that's not true so there are limits not
> explicitly spelled out in R22.  Do those limits apply to retreating to
> "where the dislodging unit came from" or to "embattled but empty"
> provinces under the current R22, as per the original Dip rules?

Yes, it couldn't retreat to a province occupied by a dislodging unit or
a unit that it couldn't have moved to.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Diplonomic 2020] BT2 Removal of R. Lee

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 7/25/20 11:54 AM, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote:
> 
> On 7/25/2020 6:33 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
>> As France has been eliminated, it is with great sadness that I cause R.
>> Lee to cease to be a Contestant in the 2020 Birthday Tournament,
>> pursuant to Regulation BT2.
>>
> 
> H. Judge Publius,
> 
> I'd like to ask for a clarification here that doesn't make a difference
> now, but might later.
> 
> In classic diplomacy terms, a player is eliminated when e loses all eir
> supply centers?  In this case, France was eliminated by those standards
> before the proposals were resolved, not after, and proposal resolution is
> "only after resolving moves and unit adjustments for that turn."  So by
> that classic elimination definition (being part of unit adjustments)
> France's votes would not have counted for this past batch of proposals and
> "half the contestants" would be 3 not 3.5.  I'm sure that doesn't change
> this turn's proposal results, but it might in the future.
> 
> More generally, I'm also noting that "eliminated" or a synonym aren't
> defined in any of the mutable rules at all (unless I'm missing it).  So
> we're wholly relying on the concept of "supply center elimination = player
> elimination", but it's squishy and not defined.  For example, with
> Turkey's new powers, it implies that "support one Fleet" might be enough
> to keep em in the game, depending on how "elimination" is defined (supply
> centers versus supported pieces).
> 
> The most reliable reading is probably "elimination is only when the
> Gamemaster removes a Contestant by announcement" but that leaves it wholly
> undefined in terms of practical game play, you could have ruled that
> France was off the board, but not eliminated from voting and still been
> consistent (we could still vote to bring em back, after all!) - or you
> could eliminate anyone when you felt like it, not that you would!
> 
> So overall, just looking for some clarity on how you will consider
> "elimination" (both conditions and timing)?
> 
> Ciao,
> Italy.
> 

I thought about this, and I obviously can't address whether it would
have made a difference in this specific instance, but generally my
interpretation was that if someone had not been eliminated during a turn
of voting, eir votes should count, therefore I decided that I would
eliminate them, which only occurs manually and is simply conceptually
connected to a lack of supply centers, after all other steps. If
supplyless countries get a role, I will ad R. Lee back and not remove
future Contestants, but the intent was that once a Contestant could no
longer submit orders, e would be removed. If a proposal changed that
though, I'd have no objection. To address the specific issue of Turkey,
I would not cause em to cease to be a Contestant. If any other country
were given a role after loss of supply, I would also allow them to
remain or cause them to return to being a Contestant. For that matter,
you could create new countries.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: DIS: Draft Reportor contract

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 7/24/20 1:47 PM, Falsifian via agora-discussion wrote:
> Now that we have Contract Charities, here's another draft of a Reportor
> contract. It's the same as what I circulated last month, except changed
> "When" to "If" at the start of the "SHALL publish a Weekly Report"
> sentence.
> 
> One note: the contract says the "Weekly Assignment" asset is
> (automatically) transferred back to it at the end of each week. It's
> been said that contracts can't do things automatically, but I think in
> this case it works, since R2166 says an asset's backing document can
> "generally specify when and how" that asset is transferred.
> 
> -- 
> 
> Much of the text is around determining who's responsible for writing
> the report for a given week. Summary: whoever claims it first, unless
> e gives it away. I wonder if the text could be simplified.
> 
> Title: Agoran Press
> 
> {
> 
> Purpose: support the documentation of Agoran events in a way that
> informs current players and non-players and also supports future
> research.
> 
> -- Joining and leaving --
> 
> Parties to this contract are called Reportors.
> 
> Any person CAN become a party to this contract by publicly consenting.
> 
> Any person CAN cease to be a party by announcement, unless e owns the
> Weekly Assignment, or is responsible for publishing a report in the
> current week and has not done so.
> 
> -- Assignment --
> 
> The Weekly Assignment is a unique indestructible asset which can be
> owned by players and this contract. It can only be transferred as
> outlined below.
> 
> A player who owns a Weekly Assignment at the end of a week is Assigned
> to that week.
> 
> If a person Assigned to a week, then e SHALL publish a Weekly Report
> during the following week, summarizing notable events for the Assigned
> week. Notability, and what must be included in a summary, are at the
> author's discretion. (If this becomes a problem, we can sort it out
> later.)
> 
> The Weekly Assignment can be transferred as follows:
> 
> * If this contract owns it, any Reportor CAN take it by announcement.
> 
> * If a Reportor consents to receive it, the owner CAN transfer it to
>   that Reportor by announcement.
> 
> * At the beginning of every week (immediately after responsibility for
>   the previous week is determined) it becomes owned by this contract.
> 
> * If it would lack an owner or be owned by the Lost and Found
>   department, it becomes owned by this contract.

Players should probably be allowed to always return it to the contract,

> 
> -- Payment --
> 
> Credits are a currency. If a player is Assigned to a week, then the
> first time e publishes a Weekly Report for that week e is granted one
> credit. (No time limit for payment; late is better than never.)
> 
> Whenever a player owns a Credit and this contract owns at least 5 Coins,
> that player CAN transfer 5 Coins from this contract to emself by
> announcement. When e does so, one of eir Credits is destroyed.
> 
> The Editor is the recordkeepor for Credits. The player Assigned to the
> previous week is the recordkeepor for Credits, or Falsifian if nobody is
> Assigned.
> 
> -- Amendment --
> 
> Any Reportor can propose an amendment to this contract by announcement.
> If an amendment was proposed at least 2 days ago, at least two thirds
> (rounded up) of all Reportors consent to it, and it has not yet been
> applied, then any Reportor can apply it by announcement, causing this
> contract to be amended according to it.
> 
> }
> 
> - Falsifian
> 
> 


-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Resolution of Proposals 8473-8476

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 7/22/20 7:17 PM, Reuben Staley via agora-discussion wrote:
> On 2020-07-22 17:15, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via
> agora-discussion wrote:
>> On 7/22/20 7:01 PM, Reuben Staley via agora-discussion wrote:
>>> On 2020-07-22 16:56, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion wrote:
>>>> On 7/22/20 6:54 PM, Reuben Staley via agora-discussion wrote:
>>>>> Are you certain? The ribbon terminology is a bit weird but I believe
>>>>> that I do.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Rule 2438 awards you the black ribbon because of this paragraph:
>>>>
>>>>>     Black (K): A statute CAN, as part of its effect, cause a
>>>>> person to
>>>>>     earn a Black Ribbon. When this occurs, this Rule awards that
>>>>>     person a Black Ribbon.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The proposal (a statute) caused you to earn a Black Ribbon, so the rule
>>>> awarded it to you (fulfilling the security restriction on ribbon
>>>> ownership).
>>>>
>>>
>>> I suppose that you're right. Good to know that the ribbon terminology is
>>> inconsistent with not only other usages of the same words in the
>>> ruleset, but also itself based on which ribbon is being awarded.
>>>
>>
>> It's not internally inconsistent; one ribbon is just explicitly treated
>> differently than the others.
>>
> 
> That was not my claim. It's not a case of internal inconsistency, it's a
> case of breaking the natural assumption based on the terms already defined.
> 

Okay, I misunderstood; my apologies.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Resolution of Proposals 8473-8476

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 7/22/20 7:01 PM, Reuben Staley via agora-discussion wrote:
> On 2020-07-22 16:56, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion wrote:
>> On 7/22/20 6:54 PM, Reuben Staley via agora-discussion wrote:
>>> Are you certain? The ribbon terminology is a bit weird but I believe
>>> that I do.
>>>
>>
>> Rule 2438 awards you the black ribbon because of this paragraph:
>>
>>>    Black (K): A statute CAN, as part of its effect, cause a
>>> person to
>>>    earn a Black Ribbon. When this occurs, this Rule awards that
>>>    person a Black Ribbon.
>>
>>
>> The proposal (a statute) caused you to earn a Black Ribbon, so the rule
>> awarded it to you (fulfilling the security restriction on ribbon
>> ownership).
>>
> 
> I suppose that you're right. Good to know that the ribbon terminology is
> inconsistent with not only other usages of the same words in the
> ruleset, but also itself based on which ribbon is being awarded.
> 

It's not internally inconsistent; one ribbon is just explicitly treated
differently than the others.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Resolution of Proposals 8473-8476

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 7/22/20 6:54 PM, Reuben Staley via agora-discussion wrote:
> On 2020-07-22 16:41, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via
> agora-discussion wrote:
>> On 7/22/20 6:32 PM, Reuben Staley via agora-business wrote:
>>> On 2020-07-20 16:12, Reuben Staley wrote:
>>>> On 2020-07-19 18:12, Reuben Staley via agora-business wrote:
>>>>> That is to say, I award myself a black glitter, this time on the
>>>>> Public
>>>>> Forum.
>>>>
>>>> As it turns out I do not have a black ribbon yet so the above claim
>>>> failed. I award myself a black ribbon.
>>>
>>> As it turns out that was a-d.
>>>
>>> I award myself a black ribbon.
>>>
>>
>> You don't have to actively award it, so it doesn't matter.
>>
> 
> Are you certain? The ribbon terminology is a bit weird but I believe
> that I do.
> 
> From the proposal in question:
>> ID: 8473
>> Title: Plain Old Bribery
>> Adoption index: 1.0
>> Author: Jason
>> Co-authors: G.
>>
>>
>> Every player who cast a valid non-withdrawn unconditional ballot FOR
>> this proposal earns a Black Ribbon.
> 
> I *earned* a Black Ribbon on at 19 Jun 2020 23:45. According to
> Paragraph 3 of Rule 2438,
> 
>>   A person qualifies for a type of Ribbon if e has earned that type
>>   of Ribbon within the preceding 7 days (including earlier in the
>>   same message).
> Therefore I *qualify* for a Black Ribbon until 26 Jun 2020 23:45.
> According to the end of that rule,
> 
>>   While a person qualifies for a type of Ribbon:
>>       - If e has not owned that type of Ribbon within the
>> preceding 7
>>   days, any player CAN, by announcement, award em that type of
>>   Ribbon.
> 
> So until 23:45 on 26 Jun 2020 anyone can *award* me a Black Ribbon.
> According to Paragraph 2 of that rule,
> 
>>   To "award a person a " is to add that type of Ribbon
>>   to that person's Ribbon Ownership. A person "owns a "
>>   if that type of Ribbon is an element of eir Ribbon Ownership.
> 
> I fail to see how any of this constitutes an immediate addition of black
> to my ribbon ownership upon this proposal passing unless someone judged
> a CFJ that said this and therefore overturned the literal text of the
> rules.
> 

>   Black (K): A statute CAN, as part of its effect, cause a person to
>   earn a Black Ribbon. **When this occurs, this Rule awards that
>   person a Black Ribbon.**

Bolding mine.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Resolution of Proposals 8473-8476

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 7/22/20 6:32 PM, Reuben Staley via agora-business wrote:
> On 2020-07-20 16:12, Reuben Staley wrote:
>> On 2020-07-19 18:12, Reuben Staley via agora-business wrote:
>>> That is to say, I award myself a black glitter, this time on the Public
>>> Forum.
>>
>> As it turns out I do not have a black ribbon yet so the above claim
>> failed. I award myself a black ribbon.
> 
> As it turns out that was a-d.
> 
> I award myself a black ribbon.
> 

You don't have to actively award it, so it doesn't matter.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

DIS: [attn. G.] Re: BUS: [Notary] The Notes (pledges & promises) - revision 2

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 7/22/20 2:37 AM, N. S. via agora-business wrote:
>> "Honor in scammery" created by R. Lee
> 
> I point my finger at myself for violating this pledge
Because breach of this fine is a class 1000 crime, an Indictment will be
needed here. G., do you have a preference for how many blots to impose
as the aggrieved party?

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] CFJ 3867 Assigned to Jason [Ribbon]

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 7/22/20 9:18 AM, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote:
> On 7/21/20 7:21 PM, Jason Cobb wrote:
>> On 7/21/20 7:19 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote:
>>> I assign the following judgment in CFJ 3867:
>>
>> I award myself a blue ribbon for this judgement.
>>
> 
> Sorry, this didn't work because I've had a blue ribbon within the past week.
> 

You could still claim glitter for it.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

DIS: [Diplonomic 2020] Ruling on Elimination of Players

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

It has been requested privately that I clarify whether an "eliminated"
contestant will still vote. They will not do so automatically; however,
I will cause any Contestant who is eliminated to cease to be a
Contestant under Regulation BT2. This was my intent in writing BT2, and,
unless a role is given to Contestants after elimination, I plan to stick
to it.
-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

DIS: Re: BUS: [attn. Tailor] Ribbon claims

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 7/19/20 8:01 PM, Kerim Aydin via agora-business wrote:
> 
> On 7/19/2020 4:49 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote:
>> For the avoidance of doubt, I award myself a Black Ribbon if I do not
>> already have one. [This should do nothing.]
>>
>> I award myself a white ribbon, as I have never owned one before.
>>
> 
> I think you *do* have to award, because "earning" is the prerequisite not
> the actual award?
> 
> I award myself a Black Ribbon.
> 
> -G.
> 

No, they don't because Rule 2438 does it for them:

> When this occurs, this Rule awards that
>   person a Black Ribbon.



-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Diplonomic 2020] Resolution and Enactment of Proposals

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 7/19/20 12:08 PM, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote:
> 
> PSS wrote:
>> All proposals submitted before this sentence took effect, that have not
>> yet been resolved in some manner, CAN and SHALL be resolved as described
>> above, before the next turn (after this sentence takes effect) begins;
>> after doing so, the Judge CAN remove this sentence by announcement.
> 
> H. Judge Publius,
> 
> it looks like you removed the above sentence added by the 'anonymous'
> proposal in the latest rules; I was looking for where you resolved the old
> proposals and announced the deletion of this sentence?  Or did you judge
> that the previous ones that had enough Against votes to have been
> "resolved in some manner" before the 'anonymous' proposal was adopted,
> even if the results/voting totals were never announced?  (sorry if I'm
> blind and missing an email where you did this!)
> 
> -G.
> 

There was only one remaining proposal, which I resolved in the same email:

> Pursuant to Rule 8, I resolve "Disagreeable Proposal v2" by announcing
> that it had 2 votes FOR it.
> 
> Having resolved all outstanding proposals, I remove the final sentence
> of rule 8 by announcement.
-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Diplonomic 2020] Daily Status of Play: Spring 1903 Part 2

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 7/19/20 1:44 AM, omd via agora-discussion wrote:
> at 5:13 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-official
>  wrote:
>> Please also
>> remember to include conditional orders for building and disbanding.
>> While you may not believe that such a thing will occur, I would
>> recommend that you give me something anyway, just to be safe.
> 
> Do you mean retreating?  There shouldn’t be building and disbanding in
> the Spring… right?

Yes, I'm not really sure what I was thinking in writing that.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: DIS: [Webmastor] Homepage Update Shoutout

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 7/18/20 12:13 PM, Nch via agora-discussion wrote:
> The homepage (agoranomic.org) has received some internal updates today. 
> Trigon took the initiative to figure out how to update the homepage to 
> github's markdown and jekyll instead of pure html while keeping the classic 
> two-column look. It doesn't look any different, but this will make the page 
> much easier to maintain and update in the future.
> 
> ---
> Nch
> Prime Minister, Webmastor
> 

That's great! While looking at some of the help pages, I noticed some
minor typos. Can I propose a change just as a pull request?

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

DIS: Re: BUS: [Diplonomic 2020] Resolution and Enactment of Proposals

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 7/17/20 8:59 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
> It is now after 00:00 UTC on July 18, 2020, so the fifth negotiating
> phase has begun. You may now submit orders. Please remember to include
> conditional orders for retreating because civil unrest never serves
> nations well.

I should obviously correct that this was not the case.


-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Diplonomic 2020] Daily Status of Play: Fall 1902 Part 2

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 7/17/20 12:19 AM, Falsifian via agora-discussion wrote:
>> I'd appreciate if everyone could put in votes on these proposals if they
>> haven't already because that would possibly lessen the tracking load. I
>> also still think that it might be a good time to start thinking about
>> more substantive proposals.
> 
> I don't see anything in the Diplonomic rules about voting against
> proposals. Are you saying that if at least half the players tell you
> they're voting against a proposal, you'll stop publishing it in these
> daily messages?
> 

I've been thinking about that. I think I might because the Diplonomic
rules allow votes AGAINST but don't really do anything with them.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: DIS: [Protos] Let's kick the ideas some more

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 7/13/20 6:45 PM, Reuben Staley via agora-discussion wrote:
> Here are some revised protos based on suggestions I got last week:
> 
> ---
> Title: If it's not pending we don't care v2
> AI: 3
> Co-authors: Aris
> 
> Amend Rule 1607 "Distribution" by deleting the paragraph:
> 
>   The Promotor's report includes a list of all proposals in the
>   Proposal Pool, along with their text and attributes. This portion
>   of a public document purporting to be a Promotor's report is
>   self-ratifying.
> 
> then by replacing:
> 
>   If a proposal has been in the proposal pool for more than 7 days
>   and is not pending, the Promotor CAN and SHOULD remove it from the
>   Pool by announcement.
> 
> with:
> 
>   The Promotor CAN Drain the Pool by announcement. When e does so,
>   each proposal in the Proposal Pool that was there for the entirety
>   of the previous Agoran month is destroyed. E SHOULD do so once
>   each month.
> 
> Amend Rule 2496 "Rewards" by adding a bullet point to the list, before
> the one beginning "Publishing an office's weekly or monthly report" that
> reads:
> 
>   * Initiating a referendum, provided that no other referendum had
>     been initiated earlier in that Agoran week: 5 coins (ADoP)
> 
> ---
> Title: Offices are complex v2
> AI: 1
> Co-authors: ATMunn
> 
> Enact a new power-1 rule entitled "Complexity" with the text:
> 
>   Complexity is an office switch reflecting how complex it is to
>   fulfill the duties of its office. Its possible values are all
>   integers from 0 to 3 inclusive, where 1 is the default. It is
>   tracked in the ADoP's weekly report. The ADoP CAN, with 2 Agoran
>   consent, flip the complexity of an office.
> 
> Set the complexity switch of the following offices as such:
> 
> ADoP:   1
> Arbitor:    2 [comment: if we split CotC this should go down]
> Assessor:   3
> Coopor: 1
> Distributor:    0
> Herald: 2
> Notary: 2
> Prime Minister: 0
> Promotor:   3
> Referee:    2
> Registrar:  1
> Rulekeepor: 3
> Speaker:    0
> Tailor: 1

Since the Tailor has to handle glitter, i think it's at least as
difficult as the Referee, but I can't compare to other offices.

> Treasuror:  3
> Webmastor:  1
> 
> Amend Rule 2496 "Rewards" by replacing the text "5 coins" in the
> following bullet points as such:
> 
> - the bullet point beginning "Publishing an office's weekly or monthly
>   report": 5 coins times the complexity of the office
> - the bullet point beginning "Resolving a referendum": 5 coins times
>   the Assessor's complexity.
> - the bullet point beginning "Initiating a referendum", if it exists: 5
>   coins times the Promotor's complexity.
> 


-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: DIS: [Diplonomic 2020] Advice and Information about Conditionals and Missing Information

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

Conditionals can only be used for orders that would need to be given after the 
initial orders: retreat, disband, and build. I’ll give two examples (put in the 
US to avoid revealing information):

If there are any New Yorker troops in Trenton, build a troop at Princeton; 
otherwise, build it at Seacaucus. 

If my troop in Staten Island is forced to retreat, use the path which takes it 
to the northernmost province.

> On Jul 12, 2020, at 20:53, ATMunn via agora-discussion 
>  wrote:
> 
> On 7/12/2020 8:37 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion 
> wrote:
>> First of all, the first set of orders with conditionals is coming in
>> reasonably well. I've had to request a few clarifications or expansions,
>> but people have been helpful and responsive. I would like to make it
>> publicly known that I have prodded and asked for orders in instances
>> where I found them unclear or believed there to have been an oversight
>> in forgetting to update something with a change or failing to include
>> necessary information. I believe this is appropriate because the game
>> should be won on skill of order making and negotiation not on simple
>> mistakes.
>> Second, I should provide some more information on conditionals.
>> Conditionals can use any information that would be publicly available
>> after the orders have been processed. Conditionals can make use of
>> randomness or non-specific algorithms as long as they are definitive and
>> clear. I must, however, be able to evaluate it by hand and, the more
>> complicated and algorithmic it is, the less common sense and forgiveness
>> I will give it.
>> When you leave out information, I will prompt you to provide it, but if
>> it is still missing when I am processing orders, I will first apply the
>> spirit of the civil unrest rules, then common sense, and finally
>> randomness. If I believe you mistyped an order or sent an invalid order,
>> I will ask for clarification of it, but because those are permissible,
>> you can tell me to leave it as is.
>> Concerns have been expressed about the conditional system and the
>> potential lack of information. I apologize for not sending a more
>> obvious reminder about this, but if you want to change it, a proposal
>> would be an appropriate approach.
> 
> I'm not sure I entirely understood that conditionals were even a thing.
> Could you give some sort of example of a conditional?
> 
> -- 
> ATMunn
> friendly neighborhood notary and Czar of Russia :)

DIS: [Diplonomic 2020] Advice and Information about Conditionals and Missing Information

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

First of all, the first set of orders with conditionals is coming in
reasonably well. I've had to request a few clarifications or expansions,
but people have been helpful and responsive. I would like to make it
publicly known that I have prodded and asked for orders in instances
where I found them unclear or believed there to have been an oversight
in forgetting to update something with a change or failing to include
necessary information. I believe this is appropriate because the game
should be won on skill of order making and negotiation not on simple
mistakes.

Second, I should provide some more information on conditionals.
Conditionals can use any information that would be publicly available
after the orders have been processed. Conditionals can make use of
randomness or non-specific algorithms as long as they are definitive and
clear. I must, however, be able to evaluate it by hand and, the more
complicated and algorithmic it is, the less common sense and forgiveness
I will give it.

When you leave out information, I will prompt you to provide it, but if
it is still missing when I am processing orders, I will first apply the
spirit of the civil unrest rules, then common sense, and finally
randomness. If I believe you mistyped an order or sent an invalid order,
I will ask for clarification of it, but because those are permissible,
you can tell me to leave it as is.

Concerns have been expressed about the conditional system and the
potential lack of information. I apologize for not sending a more
obvious reminder about this, but if you want to change it, a proposal
would be an appropriate approach.
-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] CFJ 3863 Assigned to Murphy [attn Treasuror]

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 7/12/20 12:09 PM, Edward Murphy via agora-business wrote:
> I wrote:
> 
>>> ===  CFJ 3863 
>>> ===
> 
>> FALSE.
> 
> I award myself Blue Glitter for this judgement (10 coins according to
> latest Tailor's weekly report).
> 

Just wanted to note that this should signal the Tailor not the Treasuror.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

DIS: Re: BUS: Deputisation Intent

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 7/12/20 7:55 AM, N. S. via agora-business wrote:
> Murphy missed eir report last week, I'll give him 2 days from now. I intend
> to deputise for ADoP to publish eir weekly report.
> 

I think that could be violating the spirit of Rule 1769

Rule 1769/15 (Power=3)
Holidays

  The period each year from midnight GMT on the morning of 24
  December to the beginning of the first Agoran week to begin after
  2 January is a Holiday.

  The week that contains the beginning of Agora's Birthday,
  together with the following week, is a Holiday.

  If a person breaks a Rule by missing a deadline that occurs during
  a Holiday, punishment is generally not appropriate.



-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Diplonomic 2020] Resolution of Spring 1901

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 7/11/20 8:34 PM, omd via agora-discussion wrote:
> at 5:29 PM, omd  wrote:
> 
>> It produces a SVG (vector) image, which I’ve attached and is also
>> available at: https://a.qoid.us/diplonomic-S1901M.svg
>>
>> I've also attached the .jdip file.
>> 
> 
> Well, that one shows the orders from the first turn, but I guess I
> should also produce a SVG for the current state of things:
> 
> https://a.qoid.us/diplonomic-F1901M.svg
> 

Since people like these images, I will start producing them.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Diplonomic 2020] Enacting three proposals

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 7/10/20 6:06 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion wrote:
> On 7/10/20 4:59 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-official
> wrote:
>> I enact each of these proposals in the order above by amending the text
>> of the Diplonomic rules according to each proposal and publish the new
>> full text of the Diplonomic 2020 rules:
> 
> 
> Does this work?
> 
> Rule 8 says:
> 
>> When a Proposal has received a number of
>> non-withdrawn votes in favor greater than half the number of
>> Contestants, the Judge SHALL, in a timely fashion, and CAN enact the
>> proposal by publishing the new text of the rules and the number of votes
>> in favor and against.
> 
> 
> You didn't enact the first or second proposal,s since you didn't publish
> the text of the rules immediately after their application. This would
> also mean that third proposal wasn't enacted because your published text
> includes the first two proposals (which didn't happen), and thus was not
> "the new text of the rules".
> 

I think that this did work, but in the future I will be more careful and
precise.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

DIS: [Diplonomic 2020] Bug in the Rules

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

As a result of the phrasing of rule 8, it actually requires a
2-Contestant majority for anything to pass. I believe that this should
be fixed by either allowing the Proposer to vote or counting the
Proposer as a vote in favor.
-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Diplonomic 2020] Promulgation of Rules, Assignment of Powers, and Start of Play

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 7/9/20 10:21 AM, ATMunn via agora-discussion wrote:
> On 7/8/2020 9:21 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-official
> wrote:
>> 8. At any time, any Contestant CAN submit a Proposal to change these
>> 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 a number of
>> non-withdrawn votes in favor greater than half the number of
>> Contestants, the Judge SHALL, in a timely fashion, and CAN enact the
>> proposal by publishing the new text of the rules and the number of votes
>> in favor and against. The Judge SHALL NOT reveal the votes of specific
>> Contestants.
> 
> I assume that the valid votes are the same as the standard Agoran votes
> on referenda?
> 

No, only votes FOR or AGAINST are acceptable.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: humble agoran farmer creates life [Attn. Notary]

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 7/8/20 10:56 AM, Cuddle Beam via agora-discussion wrote:
> What would be the fix? I don't entirely understand the mistake, sorry. It's
> trivial for me to destroy the contract and remake it with a shorter timer.
> I just made it 24h for the gravitas lol.

It's simply a typo: it says "contact" where it should read "contract".

> 
> On Wed, Jul 8, 2020 at 4:38 PM ATMunn via agora-business <
> agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> 
>> On 7/8/2020 1:59 AM, Cuddle Beam via agora-business wrote:
>>> 
>>> Cuddlebeam is the sole member to this contract. After 24 hours have
>>> passed since this instance of this contract has been created, a copy of
>>> this contact (a new instance of it) is made. Cuddlebeam consents and
>> agrees
>>> with themselves that these new contracts are made in this specific way.
>>> 
>>
>> I'd like to point out that this says "a copy of this *contact*", not
>> contract. I know our custom tends to be that typos don't matter if you
>> know what the person meant, but this might be significant enough to
>> break it.
>>
>> Sending this to a-b so it can be considered a gratuitous argument for
>> the CFJ that will inevitably be called.
>>
>> --
>> ATMunn
>> friendly neighborhood notary here :)
>>


-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: DIS: [proto] Definitely not a ploy to get more pendants

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 7/6/20 8:37 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion wrote:
> It was suggested to make card grants once per office per month rather
> than once per officer per month. This is a proto to make that change, in
> order to solicit feedback on both the wording and the idea in general:

What if the office changes hands? I think we should avoid scams, but if
someone hasn't yet given a card from a particular office in a month, I
think e should be able to even if a previous holder had.

> 
> {
> 
> Amend Rule 2624 (Card Administration) by replacing the final paragraph
> (including the list) with the following:
> 
> {
> 
> The officeholder of an office CAN by announcement grant another player a
> specified type of card, specifying that office, under the following
> conditions:
> 
> * e has not done so in reference to that office in the current Agoran month,
> 
> * that office's interests includes the card's associated ministry,
> 
> * the player receiving the card does not hold an office with the card's
> associated ministry in its interests, and
> 
> * the player receiving the card is not a zombie.
> 
> }
> 
> }
> 


-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal, not pended] Warmer Welcomes

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 7/6/20 2:00 PM, nch via agora-discussion wrote:
> On 7/6/20 12:54 PM, ATMunn via agora-business wrote:
>> [This came from a discussion on Discord in which nch mentioned that the
>> current 10 coin welcome packages really don't help that much. 25 may
>> still be on the low side, but I think it's a lot better. I added in the
>> last clause because I felt it unfair to the players who just recently
>> registered to get the lesser Welcome Packages. It would be as if they
>> were cheated out of those coins just because they wanted to start
>> playing the game. The "for the first time" should stop any extra coins
>> going to the scammers if somehow it turns out the scam was successful.]
> 
> Specifically the issue is that coins continually accrue, which causes 
> inflation. This is going to continuously need updates for the amount it 
> gives you to have the same purchasing power unless we find a way to 
> limit circulation.
> 

Why not just make it a switch specified by the Treasuror's regulations?
This would allow em to either set it directly or use a formula to do so.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Birthday Tournament Fix

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 7/4/20 5:45 PM, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote:
> 
> On 7/4/2020 2:09 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
>> On 7/4/20 3:52 PM, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote:
>>>
>>> On 7/4/2020 12:40 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus:
   Unless
   explicitly permitted by the Diplonomic 2020 rules, all Contestants
   SHALL NOT make use of loopholes in the underlying game of
   Diplomacy in order to gain a competitive advantage.
>>>
>>> I'm a little puzzled/concerned about this bit.  We're introducing
>>> proposals to modify these rules and therefore reading these rules closely,
>>> and it doesn't seem right to forbid that?  Are there specific types of
>>> loopholes in Diplomacy (a game with very very stable rules for a long
>>> time) that you're trying to prevent us from using?
>>
>> My thinking was not to prevent paradoxes or that sort of thing, but more
>> an instance where an unexpected interaction between two rules is
>> intentionally used to get an advantage. I also don't intend for this to
>> apply to any modified rules but only the initial text I draft and the
>> original rules of Diplomacy because those aren't really written as part
>> of the game. If there's strong opposition, I'll drop it.
> 
> I'm not super-bothered - was thinking that, with Diplomacy being around a
> long time and having a lot of advice out on the internet, I could imagine
> someone finding an article that said "I bet you didn't know you could do
> this counterintuitive move in Diplomacy, which might not have been
> intended by the original authors, but try surprising your enemies with
> it!" or something, and wouldn't want anyone to find themselves Blotted for
> trying that kind of thing.

Things like that aren't intended to be prohibited by this. I mean
something where they find a loophole that could allow them to duplicate
armies or other things which clearly violate the spirit of the game. Do
you think there's a better phrasing?

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Birthday Tournament Fix

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 7/4/20 3:52 PM, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote:
> 
> On 7/4/2020 12:40 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus:
>>   Unless
>>   explicitly permitted by the Diplonomic 2020 rules, all Contestants
>>   SHALL NOT make use of loopholes in the underlying game of
>>   Diplomacy in order to gain a competitive advantage.
> 
> I'm a little puzzled/concerned about this bit.  We're introducing
> proposals to modify these rules and therefore reading these rules closely,
> and it doesn't seem right to forbid that?  Are there specific types of
> loopholes in Diplomacy (a game with very very stable rules for a long
> time) that you're trying to prevent us from using?

My thinking was not to prevent paradoxes or that sort of thing, but more
an instance where an unexpected interaction between two rules is
intentionally used to get an advantage. I also don't intend for this to
apply to any modified rules but only the initial text I draft and the
original rules of Diplomacy because those aren't really written as part
of the game. If there's strong opposition, I'll drop it.


-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

DIS: Re: BUS: Proposal: Upvotes

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 7/3/20 7:32 PM, omd via agora-business wrote:
> Proposal: Upvotes (AI=1)
I think I'll probably vote PRESENT or AGAINST on this because I like the
status quo, but I really appreciate the work you've put into this well
thought out alternative.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

DIS: I'm stupid, and we've got a problem.

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

I think that we have time to fix this during the joining period, but I'm
not sure what the best solution is, so I'm seeking thoughts on the best
solution, and I have a few days to propose a specific fix. As it stands,
all of the provisions relating to amendment don't work because of the
following clause:


Rule 2495/2 (Power=1)
The Birthday Tournament

  This title may thereafter be amended only by the Herald or eir
  designee Without 3 Objections.

My first thought is to separate out the internal rules — those outside
of zero through five — into some sort of subset with fewer protections,
but I'm not sure about how best to execute it.
-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

DIS: Re: OFF: Re: BUS: Birthday Tournament Regulations v1.1

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 7/3/20 6:06 PM, Kerim Aydin via agora-business wrote:
> 
> On 7/3/2020 3:00 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
>>> 1. Until July 7 or 7 days after the promulgation of these regulations,
>>> whichever is later, any person CAN enter the contest (becoming a
>>> Contestant) by announcement, acting as emself, as long as no more than
>>> six other persons have already done so.
> 
> I enter the contest (did you give it a name for reference, just
> Diplonomic?  Or Diplonomic 2020?).
> 
> -G.
> 

I didn't, but I think Diplonomic 2020 or 2020 Birthday Tournament refer
to it unambiguously.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: DIS: Re: [Treasuror] Reward Re: BUS: CFJ 3860 judged FALSE

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 7/3/20 5:15 PM, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote:
> 
> Signalling question:  I've been interpreting [Treasusor] subject lines as
> things that are strictly *from* the treasuror (as opposed to [attn.
> Treasuror]).  Is that the best way to distinguish - in particular are
> officers searching for [Officer] but not [attn. Officer]?
> 
> -G.
> 

I think you're right; I apologize for doing it wrong.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: @Notary @Treasuror, I do the scam anyway

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 7/3/20 5:14 PM, nch via agora-discussion wrote:
> On 7/3/20 4:02 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote:
>> On 6/30/20 10:26 AM, Becca Lee via agora-business wrote:
>>> I COE the most recent proposal assessment: you missed a vote by G. in
>>> https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-business/2020-June/043813.html
>>
>> Pursuant to the judgment in CFJ 3860, I deny this CoE, thus causing it
>> to cease to be a doubt and restarting the clock for self-ratification of
>> the assessment at 7 days.
>>
>> --
>> Jason Cobb
>>
> That's not how that works. It has to be "continuously undoubted". There 
> was a time period where it was doubted, and therefore it wasn't continuous.
> 

I think that's what Jason meant by "restarting".

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

DIS: Re: BUS: @Notary @Treasuror, I do the scam anyway

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 7/3/20 5:02 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote:
> On 6/30/20 10:26 AM, Becca Lee via agora-business wrote:
>> I COE the most recent proposal assessment: you missed a vote by G. in
>> https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-business/2020-June/043813.html
> 
> 
> Pursuant to the judgment in CFJ 3860, I deny this CoE, thus causing it
> to cease to be a doubt and restarting the clock for self-ratification of
> the assessment at 7 days.
> 

As a result of this, I also believe the scam failed, but the creation of
the blots didn't.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: DIS: R2472 Question: Incompatibility between Assessor and Associate Director of Personnel

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 7/2/20 2:28 PM, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote:
> 
> On 7/2/2020 11:21 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
>> I was looking at Rule 2472, and I'm confused by the incompatibility of
>> the Assessor and the Associate Director of Personnel. At no place in the
>> ruleset can I find a conflict of interest between the two offices. Did
>> one previously exist or am I missing something now? If not, I plan to
>> remove that.
>>
> 
> Election procedure used to read "if the election is for ADoP, the Assessor
> is the vote collector" because the vote collector gets to break ties.
> (this may have been quite relevant in the most recent ADoP election!  But
> the text is gone now it seems).
> 
> -G.
> 

Why did we remove that? It seems like it might be worth returning to
that, but if it's unneeded complexity, I think we should just remove the
incompatibility.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

DIS: R2472 Question: Incompatibility between Assessor and Associate Director of Personnel

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

Rule 2472/4 (Power=2)
Office Incompatibilities

  Some pairs of office are incompatible:

  1. Prime Minister and Speaker

  2. Promotor and Assessor

  3. Assessor and ADoP

  4. Referee and Arbitor

  A player is Overpowered if e holds two offices which are
  incompatible with each other. Rules to the contrary
  notwithstanding, a player CANNOT be installed into an office if
  doing so would make em Overpowered.

  A zombie is Overpowered if e holds one or more offices.

  If a player is Overpowered, any player CAN, with Notice, Demand
  Resignation from em. When this occurs, each office that the
  Overpowered player holds becomes vacant.



I was looking at Rule 2472, and I'm confused by the incompatibility of
the Assessor and the Associate Director of Personnel. At no place in the
ruleset can I find a conflict of interest between the two offices. Did
one previously exist or am I missing something now? If not, I plan to
remove that.
-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: DIS: art degrees

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 7/1/20 12:15 PM, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote:
> 
> tl;dr What do people think about a separate method for arts degrees that's
> more akin to applause and somehow brings in Bard?  (just in general).
> 
> longer:
> 
> I didn't think about this when voting last month, but the new art degrees
> are kind of how we used to award Bard.  A person produces Good Art, and by
> acclaim they are awarded Bard.
> 
> I'd be a bit sad to see that sidelined, plus the peer-review process seems
> a bit stuffy for art.  Not that art *can't* be reviewed critically and
> academically, but (1) most people are producing it for the applause not
> the analysis when they publish and (2) it's just less fun to do a piece of
> performance art, get told "that's just a draft here's the critiques in
> your rhyme scheme" and publish it again.  Better for people to applaud and
> say "that's some good art, any 'mistakes' are just little happy trees and
> part of the performance."
> 
> So just thinking about writing a method for that and looking for general
> feedback first.
> 
> -G.
> 

My thinking here is that people can choose which to use. If someone
doesn't want to use peer review, e can state that and I'll try to give
em the Bard, but if e wants a degree, e has to go through peer review.
This is similar to the difference between being recognized for good art
by a professional association and being granted an MFA.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: DIS: Re: [Attn. Referee] Re: BUS: @Notary @Treasuror, I do the scam anyway

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

Reading it initially, I was a bit confused by how the math worked out and I do 
think it could have been sufficiently ambiguous to cause it to fail.

> On Jul 2, 2020, at 08:34, Becca Lee via agora-discussion 
>  wrote:
> 
> 
>> 
>> It's obvious what you meant, at least given enough context.  It’s not at
>> all obvious to me that what you said is close enough to what you meant.
> 
> But if what I said is "obvious", and all the context you have is the actual
> words I used in the message, what i said automatically clearly conveys what
> I meant. that's literally how language works! the only way for your
> argument to be successful is if it is remotely possible that I didn't know
> 4x4.
> 
>> On Thu, Jul 2, 2020 at 10:30 PM Becca Lee  wrote:
>> 
>> 
 I repeat the above actions in braces so that they happen 16 times
>> total.
 Nch has 18 victory cards and 18 justice cards.
 
 I act on nch’s behalf to pay those victory and justice cards into
>>> products
 in 4 sets of 4 so that e has 40 victory points and 40 Blot-B-Gones.
>> 
>> "those cards" are the cards nch had, which was more than 16. i didn't say
>> "all of those cards". i was just referring to the group of cards that nch
>> had, rather than any other group of cards.
>> 
>> On Thu, Jul 2, 2020 at 7:22 PM omd via agora-discussion <
>> agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> Arguments:
>>> 
>>> at 12:43 AM, Becca Lee via agora-discussion
>>>  wrote:
>>> 
 I clearly meant that i transfer the cards nch had, "those cards" into
 products in 4 sets of 4. obviously i did not mean that 18 is 4x4.
>>> 
>>> Your rephrased version is still self-contradictory to my ears.  You
>>> didn’t
>>> say that you transferred 4 sets of 4 'out of' or ‘from’ those cards, or
>>> that you transferred 16 of the cards in 4 sets of 4, etc., but just that
>>> you transferred "those cards" “in 4 sets of 4”.  That equates “those
>>> cards”
>>> with “4 sets of 4”.
>>> 
>>> As an analogy, if an advertisement promised I could “pay the fee for
>>> this
>>> service in 4 installments of $40”, I would expect $160 to be the entire
>>> fee.  I would be quite dismayed to hear that it was only part of the
>>> fee,
>>> and there was also, say, a $20 surcharge not included in the installments.
>>> 
 this is so extremely obvious that you calling a CFJ on it is actually
 harmful to gameplay.
>>> 
>>> It's obvious what you meant, at least given enough context.  It’s not at
>>> all obvious to me that what you said is close enough to what you meant.
>>> (You are lucky, however, that the “unambiguously and clearly specifying
>>> the
>>> action” standard from R478 seems to not apply here, so there may be more
>>> wiggle room for ambiguity.)
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> From R. Lee
>> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> From R. Lee

DIS: Re: BUS: Ratification Scam Fix Proposal

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 7/1/20 7:39 PM, James Cook via agora-business wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 at 15:09, Becca Lee via agora-business
>  wrote:
>> I intend to ratify the following document without objection
>>
>> "Every player's assets 1 minute after BUS: @Notary @Treasuror, I do the
>> scam anyway was sent to the public forum  are the same as their assets 1
>> minute before that message was sent, except R. Lee has 60 victory points
>> and 19 blot b gones, and G. has one additional Blot B Gone."
>>
>> Disclaimer: this ratification is knowingly false as everyone's assets would
>> be significantly different under this ratification, however I believe it is
>> needed to minimally alter the game state and
>>
>> This would lead to me still being able to get the rewards of the scam (the
>> blot b gones and a victory for G), but otherwise every single thing in the
>> economy would be exactly the same, meaning that no gameplay is invalidated.
>>
>> --
>> From R. Lee
> 
> I object. For one thing, why should I let G. win?

Because that was the understanding discussed prior to this. This is the
goal that many people wanted to achieve and this is simply a faster way
of achieving it than passing a proposal.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: DIS: Hidden Action Fixes

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 6/30/20 8:45 PM, Aris Merchant via agora-discussion wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 2:09 PM Aris Merchant via agora-discussion
>  wrote:
>>
>> I'm working on a proposal to deal with hidden actions (such a G.'s burried
>> vote). It'll also handle cases where the identity of the player sending a
>> message is unclear. I'm done drafting the core, but I need to handle some
>> technical and confirming amendments; I should have a proto out in the next
>> day or two. Just letting everyone know so we avoid duplication of effort.
> 
> 
> A proto follows. Comments are, as always, welcome.
> 
> -Aris
> ---
> Title: Sunlight is the Best Disinfectant
> Adoption index: 3.0
> Author: Aris
> Co-authors: nch, G., Jason
> 
> 
> Amend Rule 2202, "Ratification Without Objection", by deleting:
> 
>   A public document is part (possibly all) of a public message.
> 
> Amend Rule 478, "Fora", by changing the portion of the Rule from
> "A public message is a message" to the end to read as follows:
> 
>   A public message is a message sent via a public forum, or sent to
>   all players and containing a clear designation of intent to be
>   public. A document is part (possibly all) of a message. To "publish" or
>   "announce" something is to send a public message whose body contains that
>   thing. To do something "publicly" is to do that thing within a public
>   message.
> 
>   Where the rules define an action that a person CAN perform "by
>   announcement", that person performs that action by specifying the
>   action and announcing that e performs it, all unambiguously, clearly,
>   and without concealment.
> 
>   A notice is a document specifying conspicuously and without obfuscation
>   all information which the rules require that type of notice to contain
>   to be valid. A notice must be public, unless otherwise specified by the
>   enabling rule. If someone accomplishes an action by sending
>   a notice, e accomplishes that action "by notice".

I think "by notice" may be too close to "with notice".

> 
>   Any action performed by sending a message is performed at the time
>   date-stamped on that message. Actions in messages (including their contained
>   documents) are performed in the order they appear in the message, unless
>   otherwise specified. If an action in a message is being taken by someone
>   who has been a player within the last month, it must be clear, either
>   from the message itself or from context, which person is performing the
>   action; if it is not, the action is canceled.

This sees a bit problematic. For any new arbitrary person, we don't
certainly know that they weren't previously a person, so this creates
some uneeded ambiguity.

> 
> 
> Retitle Rule 2518 from "Determinacy" to "Safeguards".
> 
> Amend Rule 2518, "Safeguards", by changing it to read in full:
> 
>   1.  If something can be understood with reasonable effort, it is clear,
>   otherwise it is unclear.
>   2.  If something has multiple reasonable interpretations, it is ambiguous,
>   otherwise it is unambiguous.

I think this may be too broad because sometimes there are multiple
reasonable interpretation which may all agree or there may be clear
reasons to select one among the rest.

>   3.  If something has been hidden in such a way that a reasonable player
>   would have difficultly locating it, it is concealed, otherwise it is
>   unconcealed.
>   4.  If something stands out so as to be visible with little effort, it is
>   conspicuous, otherwise it is inconspicuous.
>   5.  If something has been rendered hard to understand at a glance,
>   it is obfuscated, otherwise it is unobfuscated.
>   6.  If a value CANNOT be reasonably determined (without circularity or
>   paradox) from information reasonably available, or if it
>   alternates indefinitely between values, then the value is
>   considered to be indeterminate, otherwise it is determinate.
> 
> 
> Amend Rule 208, "Resolving Agoran Decisions", by replacing:
> 
>   The vote collector for an unresolved Agoran decision CAN resolve
>   it by announcement, indicating the outcome. If it was required to
>   be initiated, then e SHALL resolve it in a timely fashion after
>   the end of the voting period. To be valid, this announcement must
>   satisfy the following conditions:
> 
>   1. It is published after the voting period has ended.
> 
>   2. It clearly identifies the matter to be resolved.
> 
>   3. It specifies the number of voters (or a list of the voters).
>  For these purposes and for determining quorum, a "voter" is
>  someone who submitted a ballot on the decision that was valid
>  when it was submitted and also valid (i.e. not withdrawn or
>  otherwise invalidated) at the end of the voting period.
> 
>   4. It specifies the outcome, as described elsewhere, and, if there
>  was more than one valid option, provides a tally of the voters'
>  valid ballots.
> 
> 
> with:
> 
>   The vote collector for an 

Re: DIS: Re: [Registrar, Treasuror] Re: BUS: @Notary @Treasuror, I do the scam anyway

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 6/30/20 10:51 AM, Becca Lee via agora-discussion wrote:
> Yeah, I'm considering it. I will give G. eir VP early if you guys ever
> start trying to get VP. But you would need 40 VP to contest G's 60 and
> considering the reset, there's no way you could get 16 cards. But anyway,
> we'll see, I'll ask what others think about the politeness of it.
> 
> Anyway, we are obviously Champions!

That's true; I'll issue the titles later, but if you had gotten this in
earlier, it could have made this month's report.

> 
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 12:44 AM Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via
> agora-discussion  wrote:
> 
>> On 6/30/20 10:43 AM, Becca Lee via agora-discussion wrote:
>>> Yes you are right on the second, I created an additional 40 blots. but
>> now
>>> i have 39 blots because of an expungement. Regarding fairness, I have 39
>>> blots and only 59 BBGs so I will still end up with plenty of blots in the
>>> end.
>>
>> That's reasonable, but I think the most fair thing would be to leave
>> yourself with 35, but we'll cross that bridge when we get to it.
>>
>> --
>> 
>> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
>> Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth
>>
> 
> 


-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: DIS: Re: [Registrar, Treasuror] Re: BUS: @Notary @Treasuror, I do the scam anyway

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 6/30/20 10:43 AM, Becca Lee via agora-discussion wrote:
> Yes you are right on the second, I created an additional 40 blots. but now
> i have 39 blots because of an expungement. Regarding fairness, I have 39
> blots and only 59 BBGs so I will still end up with plenty of blots in the
> end.

That's reasonable, but I think the most fair thing would be to leave
yourself with 35, but we'll cross that bridge when we get to it.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Notice of Honour

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 6/30/20 10:41 AM, nch via agora-discussion wrote:
> On 6/30/20 8:51 AM, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote:
>> This is a notice of honour.
>>
>> -1 Jason for attempting to resolve the fix proposal too early, opening a
>> scam opportunity
>>
>> +1 nch for not taking advantage of that opportunity
>>
>> --
>> Jason Cobb
>>
> This is a notice of honour.
> 
> +1 Jason for trying eir best to counterscam and being a fun opponent
> 
> -1 nch for undeserved honour from Jason
> 
NttPF

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

DIS: Re: [Registrar, Treasuror] Re: BUS: @Notary @Treasuror, I do the scam anyway

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 6/30/20 10:39 AM, Becca Lee via agora-business wrote:
> No, you can't do this. First of all, you never gave 7 days notice. 

That's true; good catch.

Second
> of all, if you read the message carefully, you will discover that I am
> currently pure and have no blots (I expunged the 40 in the message itself)
Could you point me to that? I've tried to parse it a few times to log
things in the Referee's report, and the last thing that I see is a
creation without an associated expungement.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: @Notary @Treasuror, I do the scam anyway

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 6/30/20 10:37 AM, Becca Lee via agora-discussion wrote:
> it's a scam, when were they meant to be fair? 

If you want to destroy the blots created in the scam, that's one thing,
but to destroy the blots created by the Indictments is an unnecessary
overreach and a violation, in my opinion, of the appropriate etiquette
around scams.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

DIS: Re: BUS: @Notary @Treasuror, I do the scam anyway

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 6/30/20 10:26 AM, Becca Lee via agora-business wrote:
> I COE the most recent proposal assessment: you missed a vote by G. in
> https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-business/2020-June/043813.html
> 
> That message, therefore making the assessment invalid. So the scam I've
> been threatening to do can still be done.
> 
> I create 40 blots in my possession.
> 
> Nch intended 56 times to deregister me for having too many blots, and
> “Co-Dependence” allows me to do nearly any game action on eir behalf.
> 
> {Acting on behalf of nch, I resolve one of eir intents to deregister R. Lee.
> 
> I register. I award myself a welcome package. I transfer a victory card and
> a justice card to nch.}
> 
> I repeat the above actions (in braces) so that it happens 16 times. Nch has
> 16 victory cards and 16 justice cards that i’ve given em this way. There
> are 16 intents left.
> 
> I act on behalf of nch to pay those cards in sets of 4 so that e has 40
> victory points and 40 Blot-B-Gones.  I act on nch’s behalf to use 10
> blot-b-gones to expunge any blots e may have. I act on nch’s behalf to win
> the game by announcement due to having more than 20 VP more than any other
> player. All cards and products are destroyed, then one of each card is
> created in each player’s possession.
> 
> I transfer a victory card and a Justice card to nch.
> 
> {Acting on behalf of nch, I resolve one of eir intents to deregister R.
> Lee. I register. I award myself a welcome package. I transfer a victory
> card and a justice card to nch.}
> 
> I repeat the above actions in braces so that they happen 16 times total.
> Nch has 18 victory cards and 18 justice cards.
> 
> I act on nch’s behalf to pay those victory and justice cards into products
> in 4 sets of 4 so that e has 40 victory points and 40 Blot-B-Gones. I act
> on nch’s behalf to transfer 40 victory points to myself  and 40
> Blot-B-Gones to myself. (I now have 0 blots and 40 blot-b-gones). I expunge
> 40 blots from myself.  I am now Pure and I own over 20 more points than any
> other player.  I win the game by announcement.  All cards and products are
> destroyed, then one of each card is created in each player’s possession.
> 
> There are still 24 intents left. I give myself 40 blots.
> 
> {Acting on behalf of nch, I resolve one of eir intents to deregister R. Lee.
> 
> I register. I award myself a welcome package. I transfer a victory card and
> a justice card to nch.}
> 
> I repeat the above actions in braces enough so that they happen 24 times
> total. Nch now has 25 justice cards and 25 victory cards. I act on behalf
> of nch to pay those cards in 6 sets of 4 to make 60 Blot-B-Gone and 60
> Victory Points. I act on nch’s behalf to transfer those assets to myself. I
> pledge to transfer those 60 VP to G, giving em a win and the speakership,
> within 24 hours after the indictments of me for Uncertain Certification are

What do you mean by resolving the Indictments? Multiple stages in the
process could be referred to as resolution.

> resolved (I’m doing this so I can wipe my future blots with the

I don't think that's fair.

> blot-b-gones without an economic reset, then I will give G. the points and
> e will win like I promised). Violating this pledge shall be a class 1000
> crime.
> 
> 


-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: DIS: [Proto, ATTN Referee] Competitive Finger Pointing

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 6/30/20 10:13 AM, nch via agora-discussion wrote:
> Here's a proper version of Competitive Finger Pointing.
> 
> Title: Competitive Finger Pointing
> AI: 1.7
> Author: nch
> Coauthors:
> 
> Amend R2478, "Vigilante Justice" by adding after the list items:
> 
>      Initiating a Finger Pointing found to be Shenanigans is the class
>      0+N crime of Shenaniganery, where N is the number of times e has
>      previously committed the crime in the last 7 days.
> 
> and by adding, to the very end of the rule:
> 
>      The player who initiated the most Finger Pointings that resulted in
>      an Indictment or Cold Hand of Justice in the previous calendar week
>      CAN once grant emself a Blot-B-Gone card by announcement.
> 

I'm willing to try this although I have some trepidation. My concern is
about a situation in which two people may have pointed fingers
simultaneously or where there could be ambiguity as to how many fingers
were pointed, but these situations are rare and I have discretion in
other ways, so this seems fine to me.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8459-8472

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 6/30/20 9:02 AM, nch via agora-discussion wrote:
> On 6/30/20 7:57 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion 
> wrote:
>> On 6/30/20 8:52 AM, nch via agora-discussion wrote:
>>> On 6/30/20 5:47 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-business
>>> wrote:
>>>> AGAINST (I'd be supportive of this if it didn't get rid of Certifiable
>>>> Patches)
>>> Is the 2+X support mechanism not a sufficient replacement? Why not?
>>>
>> No, it's not because of its use of a dependent action and the fact that
>> only the Promotor can use it.
> 
> What's wrong with it being a dependent action? Support can be resolved 
> as soon as you have the support.
> 

Even so, it extends the time between the intent and actualization.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

DIS: Re: BUS: CFJ 3857 Judgement: This is a weird one.

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 6/30/20 8:50 AM, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote:
> On 6/30/20 6:57 AM, Becca Lee via agora-business wrote:
>> Whether or not the ballot satisfied the sixth condition for a valid
>> ballot is impossible to decide. This is because the anonymous player
>> was unsuccessful in retracting eir previous vote if e had cast one. To
>> quote rule 683 "an entity can by announcement withdraw... a ballot".
>> For an action to be taken by announcement, rule 478 tells us that the
>> actor "performs that action by unambiguously and clearly specifying
>> the action and announcing that e performs it." In this case, the actor
>> was taking the action of withdrawing a specific player's previous
>> ballot. For an action to be "unambiguous" and "clear" it must, at the
>> bare minimum, be possible to resolve, but this retraction is a
>> gigantic mystery. The recordkeepor simply doesn't know who to withdraw
>> the vote from, and no other Agoran knows either. I don't hold that
>> anonymous actions can never be ambiguous and clear, I simply hold that
>> in the specific case of withdrawing a specific person's ballot on an
>> Agoran decision, part of that action is obviously and integrally the
>> actor and their previous vote on the agoran decision (after all, a
>> vote never cast can't be withdrawn). So this action of withdrawing
>> fails.
> 
> 
> Well, you happen to be wrong that the recordkeepor didn't know whose
> ballot to withdraw.
> 
> - The person controlling the unspecified.behav...@gmail.com email address.
> 

For our records, could you confirm this from that address as well?

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8459-8472

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 6/30/20 8:52 AM, nch via agora-discussion wrote:
> On 6/30/20 5:47 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-business 
> wrote:
>> AGAINST (I'd be supportive of this if it didn't get rid of Certifiable
>> Patches)
> 
> Is the 2+X support mechanism not a sufficient replacement? Why not?
> 

No, it's not because of its use of a dependent action and the fact that
only the Promotor can use it.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

DIS: Re: BUS: Birthday Tournament Regulations v1.1

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 6/29/20 9:52 PM, Kerim Aydin via agora-business wrote:
> 
> On 6/29/2020 10:22 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
>> I intend, Without 3 Objections, to enact the following — modified from
>> previous Birthday regulations and a variety of rulesets for Diplomacy,
>> primarily those of EPCC [0] and the official rules [1] and corrected
>> according to feedback — as the regulations for this year's Birthday
>> Tournament.
> 
> I support!
> 
> 
> Finally got to read this, some small comments:
> 
>> If fewer than seven persons have become Contestants,
>> the Gamemaster CAN replace the text of these regulations with
>> appropriate regulations for a Nomic-inspired game, such as FRC, an
>> experimental Nomic, or a sub-Nomic.
> 
> I love the fact that this could morph into any game.

Hopefully, we won't need this, but it's good to have.

> 
>> The judge SHOULD award a badge to all participants in
>> the Tournament, broadly construed, after the conclusion of the
>> Tournament unless it has not been completed in a satisfactory manner.
> 
> Traditionally, for badges we've also included non-members who watch and
> actively comment.

That's my intent is "broadly construed".

> 
>> were made with arbitrary or capricious disregard for the terms of these
> 
> Yay, administrative law!
> 
>> 7. Contestants may seek the assistance of non-Contestants. 
> 
> (e.g. such helpers should get the badge too)

See above.

> 
>> When a Proposal has received a number of
>> non-withdrawn votes in favor greater than half the number of
>> Contestants, 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.
> 
> Since this isn't synced to moves, it would be great if the judge would
> make a policy of being clear about the timing of this ahead of time, the
> judge could have a huge impact just by deciding to enact a proposal before
> versus after movement.  You did that a little bit on the section about
> orders timing, but that still leaves the judge a lot of leeway.

I've intentionally left it open, but my plan is to enact any proposal
that is passed before the close of orders before processing orders.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

DIS: Re: BUS: [Glitter] Happy Birthday!

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 6/29/20 3:58 PM, Cuddle Beam via agora-business wrote:
> Happy Birthday Agora! I award myself Magenta Glitter and then a Magenta
> Ribbon.
> 

You already have the Ribbon, but even if you didn't the second would
have failed.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Falsifian, Treasuror, Notary] Quickexchange use

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 6/29/20 1:47 PM, James Cook via agora-discussion wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Jun 2020 at 17:41, Becca Lee via agora-business
>  wrote:
>> Nice, I transfer 2 Pendants to QuickExchange
> 
> Er... I think you just gave 2 Pendants to QE for free.
> 
> I consent to the following amendment to the Dragon QuickExchange contract:
> 
> {
> 
> Append one paragraph at the end. It says: { If R. Lee has ever
> transferred 2 Pendants to this contract not as part of a payment in
> exchange for Credits, then R. Lee CAN once take 2 Pendants from this
> contract. After e does so, this paragraph is removed. }
> 
> }
> 
> I think we're the only parties, so if you consent the change will be applied.
> 
While you're at it, why not just add a general fix?

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: DIS: [Notary] Informal Contract Awards

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 6/29/20 1:18 PM, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote:
> 
> On 6/29/2020 10:13 AM, nch via agora-discussion wrote:
>> On 6/29/20 12:11 PM, ATMunn via agora-discussion wrote:
>>> For the Participation Award, given to the people who are members to the
>>> most contracts:
>> I would restrict this to people who are members of contracts with at 
>> least two members. Otherwise, I like the idea!
>>
> 
> I think this is grand, and might even suggest a (simple!) mapping to the
> Terms of Service Patent Title in R2581 - simple like "I'll attempt to
> award the title to anyone who gets [score] in my informal awards system".
> 

I think that this is a good idea. If the Notary wanted to, I'd be
willing to record certain specifications with the Terms of Service title
if e wants to award it for different categories and potentially multiple
times.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: A Pledge

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 6/29/20 12:29 PM, ATMunn via agora-discussion wrote:
> Rule 2450:
>   The time window of a pledge is 60 days, unless the
>   pledge explicitly states otherwise.
> 
> Is "for the next 24 hours" sufficient to be "explicitly stating
> otherwise" regarding the time window?

I think it does, but even if it doesn't, I think the 24 hours are
assessed from creation, so it wouldn't have any effect.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: DIS: [Proto] Welcoming Back Outlaws

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 6/29/20 11:37 AM, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote:
> 
> On 6/29/2020 8:05 AM, Ed Strange via agora-discussion wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 11:50 PM Kerim Aydin wrote:
>>>
>>> Yeah, I think the issue is that letting a person deregistered for crimes
>>> back in the game sooner than a voluntary deregistrant is silly.  Crime
>>> deregistration should be a time out, I thought that was the main bug all
>>> along.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> Very biased, but I'm not at all sure it's silly. Someone who wishes to play
>> but has accumulated 40 blots, without doing any serious destruction of the
>> game (racial slurs, spam, repealing the entire ruleset, etc) is
>> very different from someone who doesn't wish to play the game.
>>
> 
> Then blots shouldn't be an exile condition at all.  Exile should be wholly
> reserved for "this was bad enough that this person really shouldn't be
> playing for a while".  In fact, delinking exile from blots actually makes
> sense now that we're shifting our view of blots - "exile" should now just
> be a straight-up option for an indictment penalty.

I wondered about allowing arbitrary punishments as Indictments, but I
think such punishments should require a higher level of consent, so
might as well be done by proposal.

> 
> If bugs allow for gaming/profitability of exile, those are true bugs.  For
> example:  given the existence of lockboxes, I think exile should (somehow,
> it's hard) embargo/seize all of their locked possessions.
> 
> -G.
> 


-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

DIS: Re: BUS: @Arbitor, if it's not too much work

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 6/29/20 11:11 AM, Ed Strange via agora-business wrote:
> I have an Emerald, Gray, and Magenta ribbon (or glitter) within the last 2
> days, I also can easily get Cyan (by resigning from my own office then
> deputising for it). Can I interest you in bribing you to assigning me a CFJ
> in the next 3 days or so? If you do, I will qualify for transparent. I'd be
> happy to give you all the assets I have for this (after redistributing with
> nch)
> 

You should also check whether you qualify for Green or Orange.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Birthday Tournament Regulations

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On 6/28/20 9:43 PM, James Cook via agora-discussion wrote:
> 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"

Fixed.

> 
>> 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?

Yes, so I've modified it.

> 
>> 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.

Added.

> 
>> 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.

Added.

> 
> 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.

I'll include a reminder.

> 
>> 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?

Yes, fixed

> 
>> If two units are each ordered to the province that the other occupies,
>> neither can move.
> 
> Same (or is my Diplomacy knowledge rusty?)

My understanding is that this is correct.

> 
>> 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
> 

These changes are significant enough that I'll do a new version, my
apologies for rushing this, but I'll allow more discussion first.

-- 

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Birthday Tournament Regulations

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

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: OFF: [Tailor] Glitteral

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

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: BUS: [Proposal] Resolving Ambiguous Decisions

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

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