Re: [Fwd: Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Clearing up the game state]

[Owen Jacobson]

> On Sep 26, 2017, at 4:35 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus 
>  wrote:
> 
> One of the goals with my banking system si using loans to help more people 
> get money to do things.

That was part of the reason for my general positivity about it, as well, but

a) I at least have clearly done a poor job communicating that goal, and

b) it’s possible that full-blown banking with investment vehicles is an 
overly-complex way to solve a much more immediate problem.

To be completely clear, I agree with G. in so far as our economy does not 
function if broke players are locked out, and the resulting liquidity problems 
are strangling the inputs as well. I’d love to solve this using something more 
complex than a straight basic income, but I’d love to _solve this_, first and 
foremost.

-o



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: [Fwd: Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Clearing up the game state]

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

One of the goals with my banking system si using loans to help more people get 
money to do things.

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com



> On Sep 26, 2017, at 1:07 PM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, 26 Sep 2017, Alex Smith wrote:
>> Here's a message that, as a consequence of my email troubles, never
>> successfully sent. Although the immediate context is no longer
>> applicable, the general principles still are, so I thought I'd resend
>> it now that my email is working a bit better than it was.
> 
> Still quite relevant and worth addressing!
> 
> Personally, my willingness to use the deregistration scam is political.
> 
> The issues with minimum income and fluctuating values were pointed out
> 2+ months ago and the designers of the economy were basically lukewarm
> on fixing it, to the point of saying no minimum incomes were necessary
> and things were just fine other than implementation bugs.  And the
> response of "fix it yourself" isn't very satisfactory, as others charge
> ahead with Banking and other very secondary elaboration before the basic
> game balance is addressed.
> 
> So now that the bug has been pointed out and anyone can use it, it
> becomes a political tool, not a scam.  Regardless of how it got there,
> there's a power in the rules that people seeking a minimum income can
> use as a bargaining chip.
> 
> And to be clear, it's not trying to game the current system (that is,
> use it to game my present position), it's a political question on what
> the "right" overall system is (i.e. what's the game balance), and if
> there's a genuine disagreement about design, it becomes a "political"
> discussion where different tools can be used to compromise (and if
> everything's reset to boot the new system and remove temporary scam
> advantages, that's fine).
> 
> -G.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

Re: [Fwd: Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Clearing up the game state]

[Kerim Aydin]

On Tue, 26 Sep 2017, Alex Smith wrote:
> Here's a message that, as a consequence of my email troubles, never
> successfully sent. Although the immediate context is no longer
> applicable, the general principles still are, so I thought I'd resend
> it now that my email is working a bit better than it was.

Still quite relevant and worth addressing!

Personally, my willingness to use the deregistration scam is political.

The issues with minimum income and fluctuating values were pointed out
2+ months ago and the designers of the economy were basically lukewarm
on fixing it, to the point of saying no minimum incomes were necessary
and things were just fine other than implementation bugs.  And the
response of "fix it yourself" isn't very satisfactory, as others charge
ahead with Banking and other very secondary elaboration before the basic
game balance is addressed.

So now that the bug has been pointed out and anyone can use it, it 
becomes a political tool, not a scam.  Regardless of how it got there,
there's a power in the rules that people seeking a minimum income can
use as a bargaining chip.

And to be clear, it's not trying to game the current system (that is,
use it to game my present position), it's a political question on what 
the "right" overall system is (i.e. what's the game balance), and if
there's a genuine disagreement about design, it becomes a "political"
discussion where different tools can be used to compromise (and if
everything's reset to boot the new system and remove temporary scam
advantages, that's fine).

-G.

[Fwd: Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Clearing up the game state]

[Alex Smith]

Here's a message that, as a consequence of my email troubles, never
successfully sent. Although the immediate context is no longer
applicable, the general principles still are, so I thought I'd resend
it now that my email is working a bit better than it was.

 Forwarded Message 
From: Alex Smith <ais...@alumni.bham.ac.uk>
To: agora-discussion@agoranomic.org
Subject: Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Clearing up the game state
Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2017 20:15:43 +0100

> On Thu, 2017-09-07 at 07:52 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> > It doesn't take 30 days due to a bug.
> > 
> > To use the bug, deregister, and re-register without using the words
> > "I register" or "I become a player", or other action verbs rather, 
> > re-register by passive language indicating "reasonably clearly and
> > reasonably unambiguously that e intends to become a player at that
> > time."
> > 
> > I'd think about doing so as a protest; the difficulty towards casual
> > player economic participation has been pointed out and so far inh
> > conversations, the designers of the system either aren't seeing the
> > great urgency to fix it, or think it's a feature.
> 
> One of the big problems with a fledgling economy like this is that it's
> really disruptable by scams.
> 
> We always used to have something of a separation between scam-based and
> economic gameplay. At some points in time, if a player needed to
> impinge on the legitimate economy in order to pull off a scam, we put
> the economy back later via proposal or via action of the scamsters
> directly. At other points, we even enshrined ways of doing this into
> the rules; for a while we had a "skunk" rule (in which if a scam gained
> a win via damaging the economic gamestate, a "skunk" could be declared,
> which reverse the effects of the scam other than the win itself), and
> I'm a proponent of "scam release valves" which are rules that make it
> possible to convert scams into wins without damaging the gamestate. (We
> have one at the moment - Win by Apathy - and it actually did its job
> recently.)
> 
> In turn, this means that scamming an economic system before it's fully
> started up is just a mean and arbitrary thing to do. You don't actually
> get an advantage, because the assets that you scammed only have value
> insofar as people recognise the system as functioning; if you damage
> the economy to the point it doesn't work, it's just going to be fixed
> by proposal (or outright replacement of the economy), so you don't get
> a long-term advantage. This is why when I see scams in a new economic
> system, I typically hold onto them until I can use them for an
> immediate win (and in that case, the win typically doesn't hurt any
> player's economic standings other than typically my own).
> 
> Note that this post is mostly talking about scams in Agora's rules or
> the like. If someone makes a poorly-thought-out contract or agreement
> dealing with the economy and I take advantage of it, I consider that to
> be economic behaviour rather than a scam. (The notable difference here
> is that it hurts only the person who made the mistake, rather than
> everyone.)
> 
> Anyway, the best course of action is probably to run the economy as a
> "trial run" with no real rules effect, until we get it working. That's
> pretty much what AP does at the moment; it allows you to ignore the
> economy if you don't like it or if it isn't working. The problem is, it
> also allows you to participate in the economy and also participate in
> the game without spending Shinies, which is a problem.
> 
> Incidentally, if we want to keep our Shiny cap, I'd be in favour of a
> regular tax on Shiny holdings (to get them out of the hands of inactive
> players and, if it's a percentage tax, to help equalize the situation
> if a player becomes richer than others). We could use the extra income
> to give a basic income to players with lower Shiny holdings.

-- 
ais523

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Clearing up the game state

[Cuddle Beam]

>any shinies from this Agency.

R2466 "When an action is performed on behalf
 of a principal, then the action
is considered for all game purposes to have been performed by the
principal."

I don't think that the Agency is actually giving anything. It's you.

That said, it's now exploitable by anyone who has never gotten a Welcome
Package because they could just claim the 20 shinies ad infinitum so I
suggest fixing it quickerino, would I be correct in my insight.

On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 6:48 PM, Gaelan Steele  wrote:

> I list the following action as Performable by Agency for the purposes of
> GII: giving 20 shinies to a player who has neither received a welcome
> package nor any shinies from this Agency.
>
> Gaelan
>
> > On Sep 7, 2017, at 7:52 AM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > It doesn't take 30 days due to a bug.
> >
> > To use the bug, deregister, and re-register without using the words
> > "I register" or "I become a player", or other action verbs rather,
> > re-register by passive language indicating "reasonably clearly and
> > reasonably unambiguously that e intends to become a player at that
> > time."
> >
> > I'd think about doing so as a protest; the difficulty towards casual
> > player economic participation has been pointed out and so far in
> > conversations, the designers of the system either aren't seeing the
> > great urgency to fix it, or think it's a feature.
> >
> > Of course, there aren't enough shinies to give you a welcome package
> > now, so it depends on your current holdings.  Another failing of
> > the system is no one is actually responsible or held accountable
> > for failing to pay out welcome packages - this system definitely
> > supports the gerontocracy, much worse than other systems I've seen.
> >
> > (Not that I think this was the intent, but at this time it should
> > be clear and as game designers, there should be some urgency in
> > fixing it).
> >
> >> On Thu, 7 Sep 2017, Josh T wrote:
> >> I would like my stamp or the value of Shinies which I paid for it back
> because I do not
> >> effectively have a way to earn Shinies as a casual player. If
> deregistration and
> >> re-registering didn't take 30 days I would seriously consider doing so
> so I qualify for
> >> another welcome package at this point. Expect me to do so at some point
> if the economy
> >> doesn't get fixed, and re-implement everything I own.
> >>
> >> 天火狐
> >>
> >> On 7 September 2017 at 09:32, Gaelan Steele  wrote:
> >>  That was my main reason for assuming it would fail, and why my
> attempt specified an order.
> >>
> >>  Gaelan
> >>
> >>> On Sep 7, 2017, at 5:55 AM, Kerim Aydin 
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Coming back to the "all stamps" statement.
> >>>
> >>> "all" is a convenient shorthand and wholly unofficial.  If it is too
> >>> difficult (ambigious) for an officer to calculate, we can assume that
> >>> the actor also didn't sufficiently specify the set to perform multiple
> >>> actions, and is uncertain about what it is shorthand for, and the whole
> >>> thing is unsuitably ambiguous.
> >>>
> >>> ALSO:  we stated that "If a transaction doesn't go through, the whole
> >>> thing fails."  Would Agora have run out of shinies partway through
> >>> destroying stamps?  If so, some stamps survived.  If we don't know
> >>> the order in which stamps were destroyed, it is ambiguous which ones
> >>> were destroyed.  This is also enough to toss the whole thing out.
> >>>
> >>> (There is also a precedent, which I can find if there's a CFJ, that we
> >>> require extra scrutiny on scam actions).
> >>>
> >>>
>  On Thu, 7 Sep 2017, V.J Rada wrote:
>  how much is this by the way? It may be a nightmare to bookkeep every
>  stamp for poor o.
> 
> > On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 4:59 PM, Cuddle Beam 
> wrote:
> > OK, we're all stupid lol, let me fix it then : P
> >
> > I destroy all stamps and cause Agora to transfer, for each, the
> Stamp Value
> > to me, in shinies.
> >
> >
> >> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 8:57 AM, V.J Rada 
> wrote:
> >>
> >> "e tried to have Agora transfer em the FLOATING value, not the SHINY
> >> value."
> >>
> >> I think you mean STAMP value :)
> >>
> >>> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 4:51 PM, Gaelan Steele 
> wrote:
> >>> I discovered two problems with Cuddle’s attempt. The first, which I
> >>> believe is sufficient to make it fail, is that e tried to have
> Agora
> >>> transfer em the FLOATING value, not the SHINY value. This means
> that VJ got
> >>> his rewards. My other reason remains classified.
> >>>
> >>> I’d advise that VJ still refrain from spending his shinies until
> we are
> >>> absolutely certain that the typo failed it.
> >>>
> >>> Gaelan
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> 

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Clearing up the game state

[Cuddle Beam]

I feel like its a safety measure against someone suddenly spawning infinite
cash and making shinies worthless.

If that can be avoided (maybe the cap can increase per each Welcoming
Package? Or over time? Inflation, baby) then, I'd be totally for it.

On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 6:07 PM, Quazie  wrote:

> I hate the economy cap - it doesn't seem fun, and seems to ruin any chance
> of a basic income
> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 09:06 Cuddle Beam  wrote:
>
>> I agree there. However I feel like Agora is going to be bone dry every
>> single time a "get a lot of shinies" scam appears, and a lot of them have
>> popped up so far (iirc, there is that official report one that VJ has
>> pointed out, there is the mass Stamp destruction one which Gaelan has
>> perfected, that bogus report one floating around and the issue of
>> re-registering repeatedly to claim Welcome Packages en masse).
>>
>> Maybe something like this would help? Proto:
>>
>> "If Agora has 100 or less shinies, Agora can only give shinies by virtue
>> of granting Welcoming Packages."
>>
>> And then reinforce Welcoming Package rules too
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 4:52 PM, Kerim Aydin 
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> It doesn't take 30 days due to a bug.
>>>
>>> To use the bug, deregister, and re-register without using the words
>>> "I register" or "I become a player", or other action verbs rather,
>>> re-register by passive language indicating "reasonably clearly and
>>> reasonably unambiguously that e intends to become a player at that
>>> time."
>>>
>>> I'd think about doing so as a protest; the difficulty towards casual
>>> player economic participation has been pointed out and so far in
>>> conversations, the designers of the system either aren't seeing the
>>> great urgency to fix it, or think it's a feature.
>>>
>>> Of course, there aren't enough shinies to give you a welcome package
>>> now, so it depends on your current holdings.  Another failing of
>>> the system is no one is actually responsible or held accountable
>>> for failing to pay out welcome packages - this system definitely
>>> supports the gerontocracy, much worse than other systems I've seen.
>>>
>>> (Not that I think this was the intent, but at this time it should
>>> be clear and as game designers, there should be some urgency in
>>> fixing it).
>>>
>>> On Thu, 7 Sep 2017, Josh T wrote:
>>> > I would like my stamp or the value of Shinies which I paid for it back
>>> because I do not
>>> > effectively have a way to earn Shinies as a casual player. If
>>> deregistration and
>>> > re-registering didn't take 30 days I would seriously consider doing so
>>> so I qualify for
>>> > another welcome package at this point. Expect me to do so at some
>>> point if the economy
>>> > doesn't get fixed, and re-implement everything I own.
>>> >
>>> > 天火狐
>>> >
>>> > On 7 September 2017 at 09:32, Gaelan Steele  wrote:
>>> >   That was my main reason for assuming it would fail, and why my
>>> attempt specified an order.
>>> >
>>> >   Gaelan
>>> >
>>> >   > On Sep 7, 2017, at 5:55 AM, Kerim Aydin <
>>> ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote:
>>> >   >
>>> >   >
>>> >   >
>>> >   > Coming back to the "all stamps" statement.
>>> >   >
>>> >   > "all" is a convenient shorthand and wholly unofficial.  If it
>>> is too
>>> >   > difficult (ambigious) for an officer to calculate, we can
>>> assume that
>>> >   > the actor also didn't sufficiently specify the set to perform
>>> multiple
>>> >   > actions, and is uncertain about what it is shorthand for, and
>>> the whole
>>> >   > thing is unsuitably ambiguous.
>>> >   >
>>> >   > ALSO:  we stated that "If a transaction doesn't go through,
>>> the whole
>>> >   > thing fails."  Would Agora have run out of shinies partway
>>> through
>>> >   > destroying stamps?  If so, some stamps survived.  If we don't
>>> know
>>> >   > the order in which stamps were destroyed, it is ambiguous
>>> which ones
>>> >   > were destroyed.  This is also enough to toss the whole thing
>>> out.
>>> >   >
>>> >   > (There is also a precedent, which I can find if there's a CFJ,
>>> that we
>>> >   > require extra scrutiny on scam actions).
>>> >   >
>>> >   >
>>> >   >> On Thu, 7 Sep 2017, V.J Rada wrote:
>>> >   >> how much is this by the way? It may be a nightmare to
>>> bookkeep every
>>> >   >> stamp for poor o.
>>> >   >>
>>> >   >>> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 4:59 PM, Cuddle Beam <
>>> cuddleb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >   >>> OK, we're all stupid lol, let me fix it then : P
>>> >   >>>
>>> >   >>> I destroy all stamps and cause Agora to transfer, for each,
>>> the Stamp Value
>>> >   >>> to me, in shinies.
>>> >   >>>
>>> >   >>>
>>> >    On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 8:57 AM, V.J Rada <
>>> vijar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >   
>>> >    "e tried to have Agora 

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Clearing up the game state

[Quazie]

I hate the economy cap - it doesn't seem fun, and seems to ruin any chance
of a basic income
On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 09:06 Cuddle Beam  wrote:

> I agree there. However I feel like Agora is going to be bone dry every
> single time a "get a lot of shinies" scam appears, and a lot of them have
> popped up so far (iirc, there is that official report one that VJ has
> pointed out, there is the mass Stamp destruction one which Gaelan has
> perfected, that bogus report one floating around and the issue of
> re-registering repeatedly to claim Welcome Packages en masse).
>
> Maybe something like this would help? Proto:
>
> "If Agora has 100 or less shinies, Agora can only give shinies by virtue
> of granting Welcoming Packages."
>
> And then reinforce Welcoming Package rules too
>
> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 4:52 PM, Kerim Aydin 
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> It doesn't take 30 days due to a bug.
>>
>> To use the bug, deregister, and re-register without using the words
>> "I register" or "I become a player", or other action verbs rather,
>> re-register by passive language indicating "reasonably clearly and
>> reasonably unambiguously that e intends to become a player at that
>> time."
>>
>> I'd think about doing so as a protest; the difficulty towards casual
>> player economic participation has been pointed out and so far in
>> conversations, the designers of the system either aren't seeing the
>> great urgency to fix it, or think it's a feature.
>>
>> Of course, there aren't enough shinies to give you a welcome package
>> now, so it depends on your current holdings.  Another failing of
>> the system is no one is actually responsible or held accountable
>> for failing to pay out welcome packages - this system definitely
>> supports the gerontocracy, much worse than other systems I've seen.
>>
>> (Not that I think this was the intent, but at this time it should
>> be clear and as game designers, there should be some urgency in
>> fixing it).
>>
>> On Thu, 7 Sep 2017, Josh T wrote:
>> > I would like my stamp or the value of Shinies which I paid for it back
>> because I do not
>> > effectively have a way to earn Shinies as a casual player. If
>> deregistration and
>> > re-registering didn't take 30 days I would seriously consider doing so
>> so I qualify for
>> > another welcome package at this point. Expect me to do so at some point
>> if the economy
>> > doesn't get fixed, and re-implement everything I own.
>> >
>> > 天火狐
>> >
>> > On 7 September 2017 at 09:32, Gaelan Steele  wrote:
>> >   That was my main reason for assuming it would fail, and why my
>> attempt specified an order.
>> >
>> >   Gaelan
>> >
>> >   > On Sep 7, 2017, at 5:55 AM, Kerim Aydin 
>> wrote:
>> >   >
>> >   >
>> >   >
>> >   > Coming back to the "all stamps" statement.
>> >   >
>> >   > "all" is a convenient shorthand and wholly unofficial.  If it
>> is too
>> >   > difficult (ambigious) for an officer to calculate, we can
>> assume that
>> >   > the actor also didn't sufficiently specify the set to perform
>> multiple
>> >   > actions, and is uncertain about what it is shorthand for, and
>> the whole
>> >   > thing is unsuitably ambiguous.
>> >   >
>> >   > ALSO:  we stated that "If a transaction doesn't go through, the
>> whole
>> >   > thing fails."  Would Agora have run out of shinies partway
>> through
>> >   > destroying stamps?  If so, some stamps survived.  If we don't
>> know
>> >   > the order in which stamps were destroyed, it is ambiguous which
>> ones
>> >   > were destroyed.  This is also enough to toss the whole thing
>> out.
>> >   >
>> >   > (There is also a precedent, which I can find if there's a CFJ,
>> that we
>> >   > require extra scrutiny on scam actions).
>> >   >
>> >   >
>> >   >> On Thu, 7 Sep 2017, V.J Rada wrote:
>> >   >> how much is this by the way? It may be a nightmare to bookkeep
>> every
>> >   >> stamp for poor o.
>> >   >>
>> >   >>> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 4:59 PM, Cuddle Beam <
>> cuddleb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >   >>> OK, we're all stupid lol, let me fix it then : P
>> >   >>>
>> >   >>> I destroy all stamps and cause Agora to transfer, for each,
>> the Stamp Value
>> >   >>> to me, in shinies.
>> >   >>>
>> >   >>>
>> >    On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 8:57 AM, V.J Rada 
>> wrote:
>> >   
>> >    "e tried to have Agora transfer em the FLOATING value, not
>> the SHINY
>> >    value."
>> >   
>> >    I think you mean STAMP value :)
>> >   
>> >   > On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 4:51 PM, Gaelan Steele <
>> g...@canishe.com> wrote:
>> >   > I discovered two problems with Cuddle’s attempt. The first,
>> which I
>> >   > believe is sufficient to make it fail, is that e tried to
>> have Agora
>> >   > 

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Clearing up the game state

[Cuddle Beam]

I agree there. However I feel like Agora is going to be bone dry every
single time a "get a lot of shinies" scam appears, and a lot of them have
popped up so far (iirc, there is that official report one that VJ has
pointed out, there is the mass Stamp destruction one which Gaelan has
perfected, that bogus report one floating around and the issue of
re-registering repeatedly to claim Welcome Packages en masse).

Maybe something like this would help? Proto:

"If Agora has 100 or less shinies, Agora can only give shinies by virtue of
granting Welcoming Packages."

And then reinforce Welcoming Package rules too

On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 4:52 PM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:

>
>
> It doesn't take 30 days due to a bug.
>
> To use the bug, deregister, and re-register without using the words
> "I register" or "I become a player", or other action verbs rather,
> re-register by passive language indicating "reasonably clearly and
> reasonably unambiguously that e intends to become a player at that
> time."
>
> I'd think about doing so as a protest; the difficulty towards casual
> player economic participation has been pointed out and so far in
> conversations, the designers of the system either aren't seeing the
> great urgency to fix it, or think it's a feature.
>
> Of course, there aren't enough shinies to give you a welcome package
> now, so it depends on your current holdings.  Another failing of
> the system is no one is actually responsible or held accountable
> for failing to pay out welcome packages - this system definitely
> supports the gerontocracy, much worse than other systems I've seen.
>
> (Not that I think this was the intent, but at this time it should
> be clear and as game designers, there should be some urgency in
> fixing it).
>
> On Thu, 7 Sep 2017, Josh T wrote:
> > I would like my stamp or the value of Shinies which I paid for it back
> because I do not
> > effectively have a way to earn Shinies as a casual player. If
> deregistration and
> > re-registering didn't take 30 days I would seriously consider doing so
> so I qualify for
> > another welcome package at this point. Expect me to do so at some point
> if the economy
> > doesn't get fixed, and re-implement everything I own.
> >
> > 天火狐
> >
> > On 7 September 2017 at 09:32, Gaelan Steele  wrote:
> >   That was my main reason for assuming it would fail, and why my
> attempt specified an order.
> >
> >   Gaelan
> >
> >   > On Sep 7, 2017, at 5:55 AM, Kerim Aydin 
> wrote:
> >   >
> >   >
> >   >
> >   > Coming back to the "all stamps" statement.
> >   >
> >   > "all" is a convenient shorthand and wholly unofficial.  If it is
> too
> >   > difficult (ambigious) for an officer to calculate, we can assume
> that
> >   > the actor also didn't sufficiently specify the set to perform
> multiple
> >   > actions, and is uncertain about what it is shorthand for, and
> the whole
> >   > thing is unsuitably ambiguous.
> >   >
> >   > ALSO:  we stated that "If a transaction doesn't go through, the
> whole
> >   > thing fails."  Would Agora have run out of shinies partway
> through
> >   > destroying stamps?  If so, some stamps survived.  If we don't
> know
> >   > the order in which stamps were destroyed, it is ambiguous which
> ones
> >   > were destroyed.  This is also enough to toss the whole thing out.
> >   >
> >   > (There is also a precedent, which I can find if there's a CFJ,
> that we
> >   > require extra scrutiny on scam actions).
> >   >
> >   >
> >   >> On Thu, 7 Sep 2017, V.J Rada wrote:
> >   >> how much is this by the way? It may be a nightmare to bookkeep
> every
> >   >> stamp for poor o.
> >   >>
> >   >>> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 4:59 PM, Cuddle Beam <
> cuddleb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >   >>> OK, we're all stupid lol, let me fix it then : P
> >   >>>
> >   >>> I destroy all stamps and cause Agora to transfer, for each,
> the Stamp Value
> >   >>> to me, in shinies.
> >   >>>
> >   >>>
> >    On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 8:57 AM, V.J Rada 
> wrote:
> >   
> >    "e tried to have Agora transfer em the FLOATING value, not
> the SHINY
> >    value."
> >   
> >    I think you mean STAMP value :)
> >   
> >   > On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 4:51 PM, Gaelan Steele <
> g...@canishe.com> wrote:
> >   > I discovered two problems with Cuddle’s attempt. The first,
> which I
> >   > believe is sufficient to make it fail, is that e tried to
> have Agora
> >   > transfer em the FLOATING value, not the SHINY value. This
> means that VJ got
> >   > his rewards. My other reason remains classified.
> >   >
> >   > I’d advise that VJ still refrain from spending his shinies
> until we are
> >   > absolutely certain that the typo failed 

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Clearing up the game state

[Kerim Aydin]

It doesn't take 30 days due to a bug.

To use the bug, deregister, and re-register without using the words
"I register" or "I become a player", or other action verbs rather, 
re-register by passive language indicating "reasonably clearly and
reasonably unambiguously that e intends to become a player at that
time."

I'd think about doing so as a protest; the difficulty towards casual
player economic participation has been pointed out and so far in
conversations, the designers of the system either aren't seeing the
great urgency to fix it, or think it's a feature.

Of course, there aren't enough shinies to give you a welcome package
now, so it depends on your current holdings.  Another failing of
the system is no one is actually responsible or held accountable
for failing to pay out welcome packages - this system definitely
supports the gerontocracy, much worse than other systems I've seen.

(Not that I think this was the intent, but at this time it should
be clear and as game designers, there should be some urgency in
fixing it).

On Thu, 7 Sep 2017, Josh T wrote:
> I would like my stamp or the value of Shinies which I paid for it back 
> because I do not 
> effectively have a way to earn Shinies as a casual player. If deregistration 
> and
> re-registering didn't take 30 days I would seriously consider doing so so I 
> qualify for
> another welcome package at this point. Expect me to do so at some point if 
> the economy
> doesn't get fixed, and re-implement everything I own.
> 
> 天火狐
> 
> On 7 September 2017 at 09:32, Gaelan Steele  wrote:
>   That was my main reason for assuming it would fail, and why my attempt 
> specified an order.
> 
>   Gaelan
> 
>   > On Sep 7, 2017, at 5:55 AM, Kerim Aydin  
> wrote:
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   > Coming back to the "all stamps" statement.
>   >
>   > "all" is a convenient shorthand and wholly unofficial.  If it is too
>   > difficult (ambigious) for an officer to calculate, we can assume that
>   > the actor also didn't sufficiently specify the set to perform multiple
>   > actions, and is uncertain about what it is shorthand for, and the 
> whole
>   > thing is unsuitably ambiguous.
>   >
>   > ALSO:  we stated that "If a transaction doesn't go through, the whole
>   > thing fails."  Would Agora have run out of shinies partway through
>   > destroying stamps?  If so, some stamps survived.  If we don't know
>   > the order in which stamps were destroyed, it is ambiguous which ones
>   > were destroyed.  This is also enough to toss the whole thing out.
>   >
>   > (There is also a precedent, which I can find if there's a CFJ, that we
>   > require extra scrutiny on scam actions).
>   >
>   >
>   >> On Thu, 7 Sep 2017, V.J Rada wrote:
>   >> how much is this by the way? It may be a nightmare to bookkeep every
>   >> stamp for poor o.
>   >>
>   >>> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 4:59 PM, Cuddle Beam  
> wrote:
>   >>> OK, we're all stupid lol, let me fix it then : P
>   >>>
>   >>> I destroy all stamps and cause Agora to transfer, for each, the 
> Stamp Value
>   >>> to me, in shinies.
>   >>>
>   >>>
>    On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 8:57 AM, V.J Rada  
> wrote:
>   
>    "e tried to have Agora transfer em the FLOATING value, not the 
> SHINY
>    value."
>   
>    I think you mean STAMP value :)
>   
>   > On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 4:51 PM, Gaelan Steele  
> wrote:
>   > I discovered two problems with Cuddle’s attempt. The first, which 
> I
>   > believe is sufficient to make it fail, is that e tried to have 
> Agora
>   > transfer em the FLOATING value, not the SHINY value. This means 
> that VJ got
>   > his rewards. My other reason remains classified.
>   >
>   > I’d advise that VJ still refrain from spending his shinies until 
> we are
>   > absolutely certain that the typo failed it.
>   >
>   > Gaelan
>   
>   
>   
>    --
>    From V.J Rada
>   >>>
>   >>>
>   >>
>   >>
>   >>
>   >> --
>   >> From V.J Rada
>   >>
> 
> 
> 
>

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Clearing up the game state

[Gaelan Steele]

That was my main reason for assuming it would fail, and why my attempt 
specified an order. 

Gaelan 

> On Sep 7, 2017, at 5:55 AM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> Coming back to the "all stamps" statement.
> 
> "all" is a convenient shorthand and wholly unofficial.  If it is too
> difficult (ambigious) for an officer to calculate, we can assume that
> the actor also didn't sufficiently specify the set to perform multiple
> actions, and is uncertain about what it is shorthand for, and the whole
> thing is unsuitably ambiguous.
> 
> ALSO:  we stated that "If a transaction doesn't go through, the whole
> thing fails."  Would Agora have run out of shinies partway through
> destroying stamps?  If so, some stamps survived.  If we don't know
> the order in which stamps were destroyed, it is ambiguous which ones
> were destroyed.  This is also enough to toss the whole thing out.
> 
> (There is also a precedent, which I can find if there's a CFJ, that we
> require extra scrutiny on scam actions).
> 
> 
>> On Thu, 7 Sep 2017, V.J Rada wrote:
>> how much is this by the way? It may be a nightmare to bookkeep every
>> stamp for poor o.
>> 
>>> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 4:59 PM, Cuddle Beam  wrote:
>>> OK, we're all stupid lol, let me fix it then : P
>>> 
>>> I destroy all stamps and cause Agora to transfer, for each, the Stamp Value
>>> to me, in shinies.
>>> 
>>> 
 On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 8:57 AM, V.J Rada  wrote:
 
 "e tried to have Agora transfer em the FLOATING value, not the SHINY
 value."
 
 I think you mean STAMP value :)
 
> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 4:51 PM, Gaelan Steele  wrote:
> I discovered two problems with Cuddle’s attempt. The first, which I
> believe is sufficient to make it fail, is that e tried to have Agora
> transfer em the FLOATING value, not the SHINY value. This means that VJ 
> got
> his rewards. My other reason remains classified.
> 
> I’d advise that VJ still refrain from spending his shinies until we are
> absolutely certain that the typo failed it.
> 
> Gaelan
 
 
 
 --
 From V.J Rada
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> From V.J Rada
>> 

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Clearing up the game state

[Kerim Aydin]

> On Sep 7, 2017 3:14 AM, "V.J Rada"  wrote:
>   So we need to make that a CAN and add "a stamp they own". I don't have
>   AP but someone should make and pend that.

Anytime in the past we've had to pay to pend, we've always suffered from
"this is a group proposal that's for the good of the game - who's going to
spend to pend it... anyone?  anyone?"  Especially if it's a trivial bug-fix
once pointed out - who wants to spend on that?

Officers get bit more than most:  if an officer finds a bug, introduced
through no fault of its own, that makes it hard (or even Illegal) to do
eir job, e often ends up obliged to pay to fix it.

We solved this by making it possible to Pend a proposal w/o objection, a
proposal so-pended didn't get any rewards for passage, and we're *not*
permissive on that, we object to anything that isn't a clear, collective
good-of-the-game thing.  (another option is to make it an officer perk,
still with some level of oversight).

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Clearing up the game state

[Nicholas Evans]

Per Assets: "An asset generally CAN
 be destroyed by its owner by
announcement, subject to modification by its backing document."

On Sep 7, 2017 3:14 AM, "V.J Rada"  wrote:

So we need to make that a CAN and add "a stamp they own". I don't have
AP but someone should make and pend that.

On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 6:10 PM, Owen Jacobson  wrote:
>
>> On Sep 7, 2017, at 4:06 AM, Alex Smith  wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 2017-09-07 at 00:52 -0700, Gaelan Steele wrote:
>>> The reason I have seen is public now (I made an attempt). The events
>>> went down something like this, AFAIK:
>>
>> My reason was different, and I don't see any reason not to make it
>> public (other than wanting the last Secretary's report to self-ratify).
>>
>> Rule 2498, as far as I can tell, doesn't do anything other than
>> override rule 2471 due to outpowering it, by making it legal to attempt
>> to make or cash in a Stamp. It doesn't actually give any ability or
>> mechanism to do so. (Rule 2152 is clear that MAY means that performing
>> the action is not a rules violation, but doesn't have any opinion on
>> whether the action is possible or not; rule 2125 makes it impossible,
>> as it modifies recordkeepor information, without a rule specifically
>> making it possible.)
>
> Since I always get this wrong, I might as well ask it now:
>
> Is this grouping meaningfully incorrect?
>
> * MUST NOT, MAY NOT, SHALL NOT, ILLEGAL, PROHIBITED, NEED NOT, OPTIONAL,
MAY, MUST, SHALL, REQUIRED, and MANDATORY refer to the card-legality of an
action, for lack of a better name for the concept: they don’t constrain,
but they do define the bounds of what will draw a penalty.
>
> * CANNOT, IMPOSSIBLE, INEFFECTIVE, INVALID, and CAN refer to the
platonic-legality of an action: they constrain the possible actions, and
the possible states the game may visit.
>
> * SHOULD NOT, DISCOURAGED, DEPRECATED, SHOULD, ENCOURAGED, and
RECOMMENDED advise additional consideration before undertaking an action.
>
> I always get MAY and CAN crossed up, but if MAY is about penalties and
CAN is about possibilities, that would be much easier for me to remember.
>
> -o
>



--
>From V.J Rada

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Clearing up the game state

[Kerim Aydin]

On Thu, 7 Sep 2017, Gaelan Steele wrote:
> I point out CB’s typo. He tries again, but this attempt fails because e 
> doesn’t 
> specify which order to destroy stamps in, which now matters because Agora 
> can’t 
> afford to pay back every stamp in circulation.

Heh, I should catch up before posting :).

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Clearing up the game state

[Kerim Aydin]

Coming back to the "all stamps" statement.

"all" is a convenient shorthand and wholly unofficial.  If it is too
difficult (ambigious) for an officer to calculate, we can assume that
the actor also didn't sufficiently specify the set to perform multiple
actions, and is uncertain about what it is shorthand for, and the whole
thing is unsuitably ambiguous.

ALSO:  we stated that "If a transaction doesn't go through, the whole
thing fails."  Would Agora have run out of shinies partway through
destroying stamps?  If so, some stamps survived.  If we don't know
the order in which stamps were destroyed, it is ambiguous which ones
were destroyed.  This is also enough to toss the whole thing out.

(There is also a precedent, which I can find if there's a CFJ, that we
require extra scrutiny on scam actions).


On Thu, 7 Sep 2017, V.J Rada wrote:
> how much is this by the way? It may be a nightmare to bookkeep every
> stamp for poor o.
> 
> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 4:59 PM, Cuddle Beam  wrote:
> > OK, we're all stupid lol, let me fix it then : P
> >
> > I destroy all stamps and cause Agora to transfer, for each, the Stamp Value
> > to me, in shinies.
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 8:57 AM, V.J Rada  wrote:
> >>
> >> "e tried to have Agora transfer em the FLOATING value, not the SHINY
> >> value."
> >>
> >> I think you mean STAMP value :)
> >>
> >> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 4:51 PM, Gaelan Steele  wrote:
> >> > I discovered two problems with Cuddle’s attempt. The first, which I
> >> > believe is sufficient to make it fail, is that e tried to have Agora
> >> > transfer em the FLOATING value, not the SHINY value. This means that VJ 
> >> > got
> >> > his rewards. My other reason remains classified.
> >> >
> >> > I’d advise that VJ still refrain from spending his shinies until we are
> >> > absolutely certain that the typo failed it.
> >> >
> >> > Gaelan
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> From V.J Rada
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> From V.J Rada
>

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Clearing up the game state

[V.J Rada]

So we need to make that a CAN and add "a stamp they own". I don't have
AP but someone should make and pend that.

On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 6:10 PM, Owen Jacobson  wrote:
>
>> On Sep 7, 2017, at 4:06 AM, Alex Smith  wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 2017-09-07 at 00:52 -0700, Gaelan Steele wrote:
>>> The reason I have seen is public now (I made an attempt). The events
>>> went down something like this, AFAIK:
>>
>> My reason was different, and I don't see any reason not to make it
>> public (other than wanting the last Secretary's report to self-ratify).
>>
>> Rule 2498, as far as I can tell, doesn't do anything other than
>> override rule 2471 due to outpowering it, by making it legal to attempt
>> to make or cash in a Stamp. It doesn't actually give any ability or
>> mechanism to do so. (Rule 2152 is clear that MAY means that performing
>> the action is not a rules violation, but doesn't have any opinion on
>> whether the action is possible or not; rule 2125 makes it impossible,
>> as it modifies recordkeepor information, without a rule specifically
>> making it possible.)
>
> Since I always get this wrong, I might as well ask it now:
>
> Is this grouping meaningfully incorrect?
>
> * MUST NOT, MAY NOT, SHALL NOT, ILLEGAL, PROHIBITED, NEED NOT, OPTIONAL, MAY, 
> MUST, SHALL, REQUIRED, and MANDATORY refer to the card-legality of an action, 
> for lack of a better name for the concept: they don’t constrain, but they do 
> define the bounds of what will draw a penalty.
>
> * CANNOT, IMPOSSIBLE, INEFFECTIVE, INVALID, and CAN refer to the 
> platonic-legality of an action: they constrain the possible actions, and the 
> possible states the game may visit.
>
> * SHOULD NOT, DISCOURAGED, DEPRECATED, SHOULD, ENCOURAGED, and RECOMMENDED 
> advise additional consideration before undertaking an action.
>
> I always get MAY and CAN crossed up, but if MAY is about penalties and CAN is 
> about possibilities, that would be much easier for me to remember.
>
> -o
>



-- 
>From V.J Rada

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Clearing up the game state

[Owen Jacobson]

> On Sep 7, 2017, at 4:06 AM, Alex Smith  wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 2017-09-07 at 00:52 -0700, Gaelan Steele wrote:
>> The reason I have seen is public now (I made an attempt). The events
>> went down something like this, AFAIK:
> 
> My reason was different, and I don't see any reason not to make it
> public (other than wanting the last Secretary's report to self-ratify).
> 
> Rule 2498, as far as I can tell, doesn't do anything other than
> override rule 2471 due to outpowering it, by making it legal to attempt
> to make or cash in a Stamp. It doesn't actually give any ability or
> mechanism to do so. (Rule 2152 is clear that MAY means that performing
> the action is not a rules violation, but doesn't have any opinion on
> whether the action is possible or not; rule 2125 makes it impossible,
> as it modifies recordkeepor information, without a rule specifically
> making it possible.)

Since I always get this wrong, I might as well ask it now:

Is this grouping meaningfully incorrect?

* MUST NOT, MAY NOT, SHALL NOT, ILLEGAL, PROHIBITED, NEED NOT, OPTIONAL, MAY, 
MUST, SHALL, REQUIRED, and MANDATORY refer to the card-legality of an action, 
for lack of a better name for the concept: they don’t constrain, but they do 
define the bounds of what will draw a penalty.

* CANNOT, IMPOSSIBLE, INEFFECTIVE, INVALID, and CAN refer to the 
platonic-legality of an action: they constrain the possible actions, and the 
possible states the game may visit.

* SHOULD NOT, DISCOURAGED, DEPRECATED, SHOULD, ENCOURAGED, and RECOMMENDED 
advise additional consideration before undertaking an action.

I always get MAY and CAN crossed up, but if MAY is about penalties and CAN is 
about possibilities, that would be much easier for me to remember.

-o



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Clearing up the game state

[Alex Smith]

On Thu, 2017-09-07 at 00:52 -0700, Gaelan Steele wrote:
> The reason I have seen is public now (I made an attempt). The events
> went down something like this, AFAIK:

My reason was different, and I don't see any reason not to make it
public (other than wanting the last Secretary's report to self-ratify).

Rule 2498, as far as I can tell, doesn't do anything other than
override rule 2471 due to outpowering it, by making it legal to attempt
to make or cash in a Stamp. It doesn't actually give any ability or
mechanism to do so. (Rule 2152 is clear that MAY means that performing
the action is not a rules violation, but doesn't have any opinion on
whether the action is possible or not; rule 2125 makes it impossible,
as it modifies recordkeepor information, without a rule specifically
making it possible.)

-- 
ais523

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Clearing up the game state

[Gaelan Steele]

The reason I have seen is public now (I made an attempt). The events went down 
something like this, AFAIK:

Stamp value is 4. 9 stamps exist. Agora has 36 shinies. 
CB attempts the scam, but typos “stamp value” into “floating value.”
VJ claims a reward, bringing Agora to 26 shinies. 
I point out CB’s typo. He tries again, but this attempt fails because e doesn’t 
specify which order to destroy stamps in, which now matters because Agora can’t 
afford to pay back every stamp in circulation.
I make an attempt, specifying the order in which to destroy stamps. 

> On Sep 7, 2017, at 12:43 AM, Alex Smith  wrote:
> 
>> On Thu, 2017-09-07 at 09:10 +0200, Cuddle Beam wrote:
>> This is a bit of a tangent but I'm curious to see if you'll play that card
>> or not. Imagine you choose NOT to reveal it, and have people need to go
>> with a worldview that isn't according to that insight. Imagine if revealing
>> that or not will alter what is ultimately perceived to be "legal" or not
>> from our self-described "platonic" point of view.
>> 
>> I dunno, I like how Perspectivism plays into that lol.
> 
> For what it's worth, I suspect that this failed, and I also suspect the
> reason I've seen is different from the reason Gaelan has seen. I'll
> wait for any potential loophole to be closed before talking about it,
> though.
> 
> (Also, self-ratification normally solves this sort of issue
> eventually.)
> 
> -- 
> ais523

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Clearing up the game state

[Alex Smith]

On Thu, 2017-09-07 at 00:14 -0700, Gaelan Steele wrote:
> OK, I’m just gonna do the scam properly so I can stop keeping secrets
> and whatnot.
> 
> For each player by reverse order of first registration, I destroy eir
> stamps one at a time, causing Agora to give me the stamp value in
> shinies for each, until Agora can no longer afford to do so. 

I think this still fails. That said, it's quite probable that without
self-ratification, no Stamps would exist at all.

(I've mostly been ignoring how buggy most of the economy rules are
until it becomes important and people try to fix them; the economy can
function if we all act as though it's functioning, but it'll break
apart if people try to scam it.)

For what it's worth, I believe anyone attempting this scam will most
likely destroy eir own stamps for no benefit, unless they use a narrow
wording (like Gaelan's) which causes non-matching actions to fail due
to ambiguity.

-- 
ais523

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Clearing up the game state

[Alex Smith]

On Thu, 2017-09-07 at 09:10 +0200, Cuddle Beam wrote:
> This is a bit of a tangent but I'm curious to see if you'll play that card
> or not. Imagine you choose NOT to reveal it, and have people need to go
> with a worldview that isn't according to that insight. Imagine if revealing
> that or not will alter what is ultimately perceived to be "legal" or not
> from our self-described "platonic" point of view.
> 
> I dunno, I like how Perspectivism plays into that lol.

For what it's worth, I suspect that this failed, and I also suspect the
reason I've seen is different from the reason Gaelan has seen. I'll
wait for any potential loophole to be closed before talking about it,
though.

(Also, self-ratification normally solves this sort of issue
eventually.)

-- 
ais523

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Clearing up the game state

[Owen Jacobson]

I believe this destroys the following stamps, in order:

* 2 stamps made by nichdel, held by nichdel
* 1 stamp made by PSS, held by PSS
* 1 stamp made by 天火狐, held by 天火狐
* 1 stamp made by Aris, held by Aris
* 1 stamp made by o, held by o (sorry, V.J Rada!)

Gaelan gains 24 sh., then pays 10 to CuddleBeam.

-o

> On Sep 7, 2017, at 3:14 AM, Gaelan Steele  wrote:
> 
> OK, I’m just gonna do the scam properly so I can stop keeping secrets and 
> whatnot.
> 
> For each player by reverse order of first registration, I destroy eir stamps 
> one at a time, causing Agora to give me the stamp value in shinies for each, 
> until Agora can no longer afford to do so.
> 
> That was your mistake, cuddle—I didn’t realize the exact numbers at the time 
> of my first message, but in fact VJ’s reward brought Agora’s shinies below 36 
> (9 stamps in existence * 4 per stamp), which meant that cuddle’s most recent 
> attempt failed because he didn’t specify which stamps e wanted to remain.
> 
> If I successfully destroyed at least one stamp above, I give CuddleBeam a 
> Consolation Prize of 10 shinies. I am happy to provide some of my stolen 
> shinies to ensure the proper functioning of the game.
> 
> Gaelan
> 
> On Sep 7, 2017, at 12:06 AM, Cuddle Beam  > wrote:
> 
>> I mean, I could dredge through the archives and find each and every stamp 
>> buut there have been other actions which haven't been exhaustively 
>> specific either, yet have worked (because they were evaluable), so I'll just 
>> let it sit as it is for now. Tomorrow I can make it better if needed (unless 
>> someone wants to try this same thing before me lo, believing that stating 
>> "all" wasn't enough).
>> 
>> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 9:04 AM, Owen Jacobson > > wrote:
>> It’s much less of a nightmare than you might imagine, but if Gaelan _hasn’t_ 
>> publicly identified the failure and if either of you had spend shinies, 
>> recordkeeping across several offices would have gotten very complex very 
>> quickly.
>> 
>> The answer to your question is 36 shinies. Nine stamps existed at that 
>> moment.
>> 
>> -o
>> 
>> > On Sep 7, 2017, at 3:01 AM, V.J Rada > > > wrote:
>> >
>> > how much is this by the way? It may be a nightmare to bookkeep every
>> > stamp for poor o.
>> >
>> > On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 4:59 PM, Cuddle Beam > > > wrote:
>> >> OK, we're all stupid lol, let me fix it then : P
>> >>
>> >> I destroy all stamps and cause Agora to transfer, for each, the Stamp 
>> >> Value
>> >> to me, in shinies.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 8:57 AM, V.J Rada > >> > wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> "e tried to have Agora transfer em the FLOATING value, not the SHINY
>> >>> value."
>> >>>
>> >>> I think you mean STAMP value :)
>> >>>
>> >>> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 4:51 PM, Gaelan Steele > >>> > wrote:
>>  I discovered two problems with Cuddle’s attempt. The first, which I
>>  believe is sufficient to make it fail, is that e tried to have Agora
>>  transfer em the FLOATING value, not the SHINY value. This means that VJ 
>>  got
>>  his rewards. My other reason remains classified.
>> 
>>  I’d advise that VJ still refrain from spending his shinies until we are
>>  absolutely certain that the typo failed it.
>> 
>>  Gaelan
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> --
>> >>> From V.J Rada
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> >> From V.J Rada
>> 
>> 



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Clearing up the game state

[Cuddle Beam]

Ah I see now.

On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 9:14 AM, Gaelan Steele  wrote:

> OK, I’m just gonna do the scam properly so I can stop keeping secrets and
> whatnot.
>
> For each player by reverse order of first registration, I destroy eir
> stamps one at a time, causing Agora to give me the stamp value in shinies
> for each, until Agora can no longer afford to do so.
>
> That was your mistake, cuddle—I didn’t realize the exact numbers at the
> time of my first message, but in fact VJ’s reward brought Agora’s shinies
> below 36 (9 stamps in existence * 4 per stamp), which meant that cuddle’s
> most recent attempt failed because he didn’t specify which stamps e wanted
> to remain.
>
> If I successfully destroyed at least one stamp above, I give CuddleBeam a
> Consolation Prize of 10 shinies. I am happy to provide some of my stolen
> shinies to ensure the proper functioning of the game.
>
> Gaelan
>
> On Sep 7, 2017, at 12:06 AM, Cuddle Beam  wrote:
>
> I mean, I could dredge through the archives and find each and every stamp
> buut there have been other actions which haven't been exhaustively
> specific either, yet have worked (because they were evaluable), so I'll
> just let it sit as it is for now. Tomorrow I can make it better if needed
> (unless someone wants to try this same thing before me lo, believing that
> stating "all" wasn't enough).
>
> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 9:04 AM, Owen Jacobson  wrote:
>
>> It’s much less of a nightmare than you might imagine, but if Gaelan
>> _hasn’t_ publicly identified the failure and if either of you had spend
>> shinies, recordkeeping across several offices would have gotten very
>> complex very quickly.
>>
>> The answer to your question is 36 shinies. Nine stamps existed at that
>> moment.
>>
>> -o
>>
>> > On Sep 7, 2017, at 3:01 AM, V.J Rada  wrote:
>> >
>> > how much is this by the way? It may be a nightmare to bookkeep every
>> > stamp for poor o.
>> >
>> > On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 4:59 PM, Cuddle Beam 
>> wrote:
>> >> OK, we're all stupid lol, let me fix it then : P
>> >>
>> >> I destroy all stamps and cause Agora to transfer, for each, the Stamp
>> Value
>> >> to me, in shinies.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 8:57 AM, V.J Rada  wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> "e tried to have Agora transfer em the FLOATING value, not the SHINY
>> >>> value."
>> >>>
>> >>> I think you mean STAMP value :)
>> >>>
>> >>> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 4:51 PM, Gaelan Steele 
>> wrote:
>>  I discovered two problems with Cuddle’s attempt. The first, which I
>>  believe is sufficient to make it fail, is that e tried to have Agora
>>  transfer em the FLOATING value, not the SHINY value. This means that
>> VJ got
>>  his rewards. My other reason remains classified.
>> 
>>  I’d advise that VJ still refrain from spending his shinies until we
>> are
>>  absolutely certain that the typo failed it.
>> 
>>  Gaelan
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> --
>> >>> From V.J Rada
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> >> From V.J Rada
>>
>>
>

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Clearing up the game state

[Cuddle Beam]

This is a bit of a tangent but I'm curious to see if you'll play that card
or not. Imagine you choose NOT to reveal it, and have people need to go
with a worldview that isn't according to that insight. Imagine if revealing
that or not will alter what is ultimately perceived to be "legal" or not
from our self-described "platonic" point of view.

I dunno, I like how Perspectivism plays into that lol.

On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 9:02 AM, Gaelan Steele  wrote:

> As I said, I had another reason that remains valid. This still failed.
> Muahaha
>
> Gaelan
>
> On Sep 6, 2017, at 11:59 PM, Cuddle Beam  wrote:
>
> OK, we're all stupid lol, let me fix it then : P
>
> I destroy all stamps and cause Agora to transfer, for each, the Stamp Value 
> to me, in shinies.
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 8:57 AM, V.J Rada  wrote:
>
>> "e tried to have Agora transfer em the FLOATING value, not the SHINY
>> value."
>>
>> I think you mean STAMP value :)
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 4:51 PM, Gaelan Steele  wrote:
>> > I discovered two problems with Cuddle’s attempt. The first, which I
>> believe is sufficient to make it fail, is that e tried to have Agora
>> transfer em the FLOATING value, not the SHINY value. This means that VJ got
>> his rewards. My other reason remains classified.
>> >
>> > I’d advise that VJ still refrain from spending his shinies until we are
>> absolutely certain that the typo failed it.
>> >
>> > Gaelan
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> From V.J Rada
>>
>
>

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Clearing up the game state

[Cuddle Beam]

I mean, I could dredge through the archives and find each and every stamp
buut there have been other actions which haven't been exhaustively
specific either, yet have worked (because they were evaluable), so I'll
just let it sit as it is for now. Tomorrow I can make it better if needed
(unless someone wants to try this same thing before me lo, believing that
stating "all" wasn't enough).

On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 9:04 AM, Owen Jacobson  wrote:

> It’s much less of a nightmare than you might imagine, but if Gaelan
> _hasn’t_ publicly identified the failure and if either of you had spend
> shinies, recordkeeping across several offices would have gotten very
> complex very quickly.
>
> The answer to your question is 36 shinies. Nine stamps existed at that
> moment.
>
> -o
>
> > On Sep 7, 2017, at 3:01 AM, V.J Rada  wrote:
> >
> > how much is this by the way? It may be a nightmare to bookkeep every
> > stamp for poor o.
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 4:59 PM, Cuddle Beam 
> wrote:
> >> OK, we're all stupid lol, let me fix it then : P
> >>
> >> I destroy all stamps and cause Agora to transfer, for each, the Stamp
> Value
> >> to me, in shinies.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 8:57 AM, V.J Rada  wrote:
> >>>
> >>> "e tried to have Agora transfer em the FLOATING value, not the SHINY
> >>> value."
> >>>
> >>> I think you mean STAMP value :)
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 4:51 PM, Gaelan Steele  wrote:
>  I discovered two problems with Cuddle’s attempt. The first, which I
>  believe is sufficient to make it fail, is that e tried to have Agora
>  transfer em the FLOATING value, not the SHINY value. This means that
> VJ got
>  his rewards. My other reason remains classified.
> 
>  I’d advise that VJ still refrain from spending his shinies until we
> are
>  absolutely certain that the typo failed it.
> 
>  Gaelan
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> From V.J Rada
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> >> From V.J Rada
>
>

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Clearing up the game state

[Owen Jacobson]

It’s much less of a nightmare than you might imagine, but if Gaelan _hasn’t_ 
publicly identified the failure and if either of you had spend shinies, 
recordkeeping across several offices would have gotten very complex very 
quickly.

The answer to your question is 36 shinies. Nine stamps existed at that moment.

-o

> On Sep 7, 2017, at 3:01 AM, V.J Rada  wrote:
> 
> how much is this by the way? It may be a nightmare to bookkeep every
> stamp for poor o.
> 
> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 4:59 PM, Cuddle Beam  wrote:
>> OK, we're all stupid lol, let me fix it then : P
>> 
>> I destroy all stamps and cause Agora to transfer, for each, the Stamp Value
>> to me, in shinies.
>> 
>> 
>> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 8:57 AM, V.J Rada  wrote:
>>> 
>>> "e tried to have Agora transfer em the FLOATING value, not the SHINY
>>> value."
>>> 
>>> I think you mean STAMP value :)
>>> 
>>> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 4:51 PM, Gaelan Steele  wrote:
 I discovered two problems with Cuddle’s attempt. The first, which I
 believe is sufficient to make it fail, is that e tried to have Agora
 transfer em the FLOATING value, not the SHINY value. This means that VJ got
 his rewards. My other reason remains classified.
 
 I’d advise that VJ still refrain from spending his shinies until we are
 absolutely certain that the typo failed it.
 
 Gaelan
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> From V.J Rada
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
>> From V.J Rada



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Clearing up the game state

[Gaelan Steele]

As I said, I had another reason that remains valid. This still failed. Muahaha

Gaelan

> On Sep 6, 2017, at 11:59 PM, Cuddle Beam  wrote:
> 
> OK, we're all stupid lol, let me fix it then : P
> 
> I destroy all stamps and cause Agora to transfer, for each, the Stamp Value 
> to me, in shinies.
> 
>> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 8:57 AM, V.J Rada  wrote:
>> "e tried to have Agora transfer em the FLOATING value, not the SHINY value."
>> 
>> I think you mean STAMP value :)
>> 
>> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 4:51 PM, Gaelan Steele  wrote:
>> > I discovered two problems with Cuddle’s attempt. The first, which I 
>> > believe is sufficient to make it fail, is that e tried to have Agora 
>> > transfer em the FLOATING value, not the SHINY value. This means that VJ 
>> > got his rewards. My other reason remains classified.
>> >
>> > I’d advise that VJ still refrain from spending his shinies until we are 
>> > absolutely certain that the typo failed it.
>> >
>> > Gaelan
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> From V.J Rada
> 

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Clearing up the game state

[V.J Rada]

how much is this by the way? It may be a nightmare to bookkeep every
stamp for poor o.

On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 4:59 PM, Cuddle Beam  wrote:
> OK, we're all stupid lol, let me fix it then : P
>
> I destroy all stamps and cause Agora to transfer, for each, the Stamp Value
> to me, in shinies.
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 8:57 AM, V.J Rada  wrote:
>>
>> "e tried to have Agora transfer em the FLOATING value, not the SHINY
>> value."
>>
>> I think you mean STAMP value :)
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 4:51 PM, Gaelan Steele  wrote:
>> > I discovered two problems with Cuddle’s attempt. The first, which I
>> > believe is sufficient to make it fail, is that e tried to have Agora
>> > transfer em the FLOATING value, not the SHINY value. This means that VJ got
>> > his rewards. My other reason remains classified.
>> >
>> > I’d advise that VJ still refrain from spending his shinies until we are
>> > absolutely certain that the typo failed it.
>> >
>> > Gaelan
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> From V.J Rada
>
>



-- 
>From V.J Rada