Re: DIS: Re: [Indictment] Re: BUS: actually fuck it
> On Jun 27, 2020, at 2:45 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via > agora-discussion wrote: > > On 6/26/20 11:50 PM, omd via agora-discussion wrote: >> On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 5:39 PM Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via >> agora-business wrote: >>> Here is the list of proposals that I believe were pended in this way — >> >> I think my proposal "Reset deadlines when resetting the economy" was >> also pended. >> > > E did pend that illegally, but no finger has been pointed for that as > far as I can tell. How is this possible if e pointed fingers at emself "once for each proposal I just certified”? I ask because, if the recent scam was in fact successful, e appears to have escaped effective punishment for the other instances.
Re: DIS: Re: [Indictment] Re: BUS: actually fuck it
On 6/27/20 10:03 AM, Ed Strange via agora-discussion wrote: > well i can still buy extra votes if voting is ever important to me (voting > can't go below 0) If you have 30 blots, your voting strength would be at -10 before clamping. Even if you buy 3 extra votes, you'll be at -7, which is clamped to 0, since clamping is applied after all modifications: > When multiple rules set or modify an entity's voting strength on > an Agoran decision, it shall be determined by first applying the > rule(s) which set it to a specific value, using the ordinary > precedence of rules, and then applying the rules, other than > this one, which modify it, in numerical order by ID. Finally, if > the result of the calculation is not an integer, it is rounded > up, and then if it is outside the allowable range of values for > voting strength, it is set to the minimum value if it was less > and the maximum value if it was more. > -- Jason Cobb
Re: DIS: Re: [Indictment] Re: BUS: actually fuck it
well i can still buy extra votes if voting is ever important to me (voting can't go below 0) On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 11:55 PM Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion wrote: > On 6/27/20 9:53 AM, Ed Strange via agora-discussion wrote: > > I have no defense (I also don't REALLY care how many blots i get as long > as > > it's less than 40, so 7 blots each is fine) > > > > On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 10:39 AM Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via > > agora-business wrote: > > > >> On 6/19/20 9:27 PM, Rebecca via agora-business wrote: > >>> I certify every proposal in the proposal pool. I wasn't going to win in > >>> this system anyway (and i dont really care about winning) and this > gives > >> me > >>> an amount of Blots truly coinciding with my self-image. > >>> > >>> I point fingers at myself for Uncertain Certification, once for each > >>> proposal I just certified. > >>> > >>> Also good luck punishing me in time for the statute of limitations > given > >>> that you guys just basically made it impossible to punish class 4 > crimes. > >>> > >> > >> Here is the list of proposals that I believe were pended in this way — > >> some may be missing, and I considered the possibility that the finger > >> pointing was insufficiently precise, but given that I can recommend > >> arbitrary punishment, I'm not particularly concerned: > >> > >> CHILL BRO > >> Redoing Adopted Proposals > >> UV-G Sunblock > >> Fee-based methods > >> You can certify, but you can't win ever! > >> > >> For each of the above proposals, I find that R. Lee committed the > >> Class-4 Crime of Uncertain Certification. Given that this crime was not > >> minor, accidental, or inconsequential and was willful, profitable, and > >> egregious, I plan to seek a fine of seven blots for each violation. > >> > >> As referee, I hereby indict the Honorable R. Lee for the Class-4 Crime > >> of Uncertain Certification, specifying a fine of 7 blots, for the > >> proposal, "CHILL BRO". As referee, I hereby indict the Honorable R. Lee > >> for the Class-4 Crime of Uncertain Certification, specifying a fine of 7 > >> blots, for the proposal, "Redoing Adopted Proposals". As referee, I > >> hereby indict the Honorable R. Lee for the Class-4 Crime of Uncertain > >> Certification, specifying a fine of 7 blots, for the proposal, "UV-G > >> Sunblock". As referee, I hereby indict the Honorable R. Lee for the > >> Class-4 Crime of Uncertain Certification, specifying a fine of 7 blots, > >> for the proposal, "You can certify, but you can't win ever!". As > >> referee, I hereby indict the Honorable R. Lee for the Class-4 Crime of > >> Uncertain Certification, specifying a fine of 7 blots, for the proposal, > >> "CHILL BRO". > >> > >> E should be convicted because e has clearly committed the crimes. The > >> current indictment should be improved given the willful and egregious > >> nature of the crime and the burden placed on the Honorable Arbitor and > >> myself in the great number of crimes and the poor specification of the > >> finger-pointings. I'd like to note that this has taken me around an hour > >> to determine the proposals involved and determine whether anything > >> occurred to make it reasonable and that the Honorable Arbitor will be > >> required to conduct ten decisions to process this. While this will > >> result in 35 blots if all are approved, this is not an overly harsh > >> penalty because e could have predicted the consequences or at least > >> should have been able to had e appropriately specified the > >> finger-pointings. Additionally, I'll note that these blots will almost > >> surely be imposed after the scam has been included meaning that e should > >> not be able to benefit from this. > >> > >> R. Lee, please submit your defences. > >> > >> G., my apologies for the great number of decisions, but please prepare > >> them. > >> > >> -- > >> > >> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate > >> Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth > >> > > > > > > Well, you'll have no votes, and given your tendency for rule-breaking, > you'll likely get more blots from other things, so I would still > recommend that you consider changing your behavior moving forwards. > > -- > > Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate > Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth > -- >From R. Lee
Re: DIS: Re: [Indictment] Re: BUS: actually fuck it
On 6/27/20 9:53 AM, Ed Strange via agora-discussion wrote: > I have no defense (I also don't REALLY care how many blots i get as long as > it's less than 40, so 7 blots each is fine) > > On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 10:39 AM Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via > agora-business wrote: > >> On 6/19/20 9:27 PM, Rebecca via agora-business wrote: >>> I certify every proposal in the proposal pool. I wasn't going to win in >>> this system anyway (and i dont really care about winning) and this gives >> me >>> an amount of Blots truly coinciding with my self-image. >>> >>> I point fingers at myself for Uncertain Certification, once for each >>> proposal I just certified. >>> >>> Also good luck punishing me in time for the statute of limitations given >>> that you guys just basically made it impossible to punish class 4 crimes. >>> >> >> Here is the list of proposals that I believe were pended in this way — >> some may be missing, and I considered the possibility that the finger >> pointing was insufficiently precise, but given that I can recommend >> arbitrary punishment, I'm not particularly concerned: >> >> CHILL BRO >> Redoing Adopted Proposals >> UV-G Sunblock >> Fee-based methods >> You can certify, but you can't win ever! >> >> For each of the above proposals, I find that R. Lee committed the >> Class-4 Crime of Uncertain Certification. Given that this crime was not >> minor, accidental, or inconsequential and was willful, profitable, and >> egregious, I plan to seek a fine of seven blots for each violation. >> >> As referee, I hereby indict the Honorable R. Lee for the Class-4 Crime >> of Uncertain Certification, specifying a fine of 7 blots, for the >> proposal, "CHILL BRO". As referee, I hereby indict the Honorable R. Lee >> for the Class-4 Crime of Uncertain Certification, specifying a fine of 7 >> blots, for the proposal, "Redoing Adopted Proposals". As referee, I >> hereby indict the Honorable R. Lee for the Class-4 Crime of Uncertain >> Certification, specifying a fine of 7 blots, for the proposal, "UV-G >> Sunblock". As referee, I hereby indict the Honorable R. Lee for the >> Class-4 Crime of Uncertain Certification, specifying a fine of 7 blots, >> for the proposal, "You can certify, but you can't win ever!". As >> referee, I hereby indict the Honorable R. Lee for the Class-4 Crime of >> Uncertain Certification, specifying a fine of 7 blots, for the proposal, >> "CHILL BRO". >> >> E should be convicted because e has clearly committed the crimes. The >> current indictment should be improved given the willful and egregious >> nature of the crime and the burden placed on the Honorable Arbitor and >> myself in the great number of crimes and the poor specification of the >> finger-pointings. I'd like to note that this has taken me around an hour >> to determine the proposals involved and determine whether anything >> occurred to make it reasonable and that the Honorable Arbitor will be >> required to conduct ten decisions to process this. While this will >> result in 35 blots if all are approved, this is not an overly harsh >> penalty because e could have predicted the consequences or at least >> should have been able to had e appropriately specified the >> finger-pointings. Additionally, I'll note that these blots will almost >> surely be imposed after the scam has been included meaning that e should >> not be able to benefit from this. >> >> R. Lee, please submit your defences. >> >> G., my apologies for the great number of decisions, but please prepare >> them. >> >> -- >> >> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate >> Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth >> > > Well, you'll have no votes, and given your tendency for rule-breaking, you'll likely get more blots from other things, so I would still recommend that you consider changing your behavior moving forwards. -- Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth
DIS: Re: [Indictment] Re: BUS: actually fuck it
I have no defense (I also don't REALLY care how many blots i get as long as it's less than 40, so 7 blots each is fine) On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 10:39 AM Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-business wrote: > On 6/19/20 9:27 PM, Rebecca via agora-business wrote: > > I certify every proposal in the proposal pool. I wasn't going to win in > > this system anyway (and i dont really care about winning) and this gives > me > > an amount of Blots truly coinciding with my self-image. > > > > I point fingers at myself for Uncertain Certification, once for each > > proposal I just certified. > > > > Also good luck punishing me in time for the statute of limitations given > > that you guys just basically made it impossible to punish class 4 crimes. > > > > Here is the list of proposals that I believe were pended in this way — > some may be missing, and I considered the possibility that the finger > pointing was insufficiently precise, but given that I can recommend > arbitrary punishment, I'm not particularly concerned: > > CHILL BRO > Redoing Adopted Proposals > UV-G Sunblock > Fee-based methods > You can certify, but you can't win ever! > > For each of the above proposals, I find that R. Lee committed the > Class-4 Crime of Uncertain Certification. Given that this crime was not > minor, accidental, or inconsequential and was willful, profitable, and > egregious, I plan to seek a fine of seven blots for each violation. > > As referee, I hereby indict the Honorable R. Lee for the Class-4 Crime > of Uncertain Certification, specifying a fine of 7 blots, for the > proposal, "CHILL BRO". As referee, I hereby indict the Honorable R. Lee > for the Class-4 Crime of Uncertain Certification, specifying a fine of 7 > blots, for the proposal, "Redoing Adopted Proposals". As referee, I > hereby indict the Honorable R. Lee for the Class-4 Crime of Uncertain > Certification, specifying a fine of 7 blots, for the proposal, "UV-G > Sunblock". As referee, I hereby indict the Honorable R. Lee for the > Class-4 Crime of Uncertain Certification, specifying a fine of 7 blots, > for the proposal, "You can certify, but you can't win ever!". As > referee, I hereby indict the Honorable R. Lee for the Class-4 Crime of > Uncertain Certification, specifying a fine of 7 blots, for the proposal, > "CHILL BRO". > > E should be convicted because e has clearly committed the crimes. The > current indictment should be improved given the willful and egregious > nature of the crime and the burden placed on the Honorable Arbitor and > myself in the great number of crimes and the poor specification of the > finger-pointings. I'd like to note that this has taken me around an hour > to determine the proposals involved and determine whether anything > occurred to make it reasonable and that the Honorable Arbitor will be > required to conduct ten decisions to process this. While this will > result in 35 blots if all are approved, this is not an overly harsh > penalty because e could have predicted the consequences or at least > should have been able to had e appropriately specified the > finger-pointings. Additionally, I'll note that these blots will almost > surely be imposed after the scam has been included meaning that e should > not be able to benefit from this. > > R. Lee, please submit your defences. > > G., my apologies for the great number of decisions, but please prepare > them. > > -- > > Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate > Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth > -- >From R. Lee
Re: DIS: Re: [Indictment] Re: BUS: actually fuck it
On 6/26/20 11:50 PM, omd via agora-discussion wrote: > On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 5:39 PM Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via > agora-business wrote: >> Here is the list of proposals that I believe were pended in this way — > > I think my proposal "Reset deadlines when resetting the economy" was > also pended. > E did pend that illegally, but no finger has been pointed for that as far as I can tell. -- Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth
Re: DIS: Re: [Indictment] Re: BUS: actually fuck it
On 6/27/20 12:14 AM, Aris Merchant via agora-discussion wrote: > On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 9:13 PM Jason Cobb via agora-discussion < > agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > >> On 6/27/20 12:11 AM, nch via agora-discussion wrote: >>> Regardless of the interpretation of this clause, "pending" a proposal is >>> flipping its switch. You can't flip a switch to the same value it >>> already has, per R2162. >> >> Right, I'm not arguing that the flipping of the switch failed. I'm >> arguing that the flipping failing doesn't cause the certification to >> fail due to the phrasing of the rule. > > One advantage of having written Contracts v8 is that it's so terrible that > all of my other mistakes pale by comparison. > > > -Aris I'm not sure that's it's really a "mistake", since the wording seems relatively idiomatic. -- Jason Cobb
Re: DIS: Re: [Indictment] Re: BUS: actually fuck it
On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 9:13 PM Jason Cobb via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > On 6/27/20 12:11 AM, nch via agora-discussion wrote: > > Regardless of the interpretation of this clause, "pending" a proposal is > > flipping its switch. You can't flip a switch to the same value it > > already has, per R2162. > > > Right, I'm not arguing that the flipping of the switch failed. I'm > arguing that the flipping failing doesn't cause the certification to > fail due to the phrasing of the rule. One advantage of having written Contracts v8 is that it's so terrible that all of my other mistakes pale by comparison. -Aris
Re: DIS: Re: [Indictment] Re: BUS: actually fuck it
On 6/27/20 12:11 AM, nch via agora-discussion wrote: > Regardless of the interpretation of this clause, "pending" a proposal is > flipping its switch. You can't flip a switch to the same value it > already has, per R2162. Right, I'm not arguing that the flipping of the switch failed. I'm arguing that the flipping failing doesn't cause the certification to fail due to the phrasing of the rule. -- Jason Cobb
Re: DIS: Re: [Indictment] Re: BUS: actually fuck it
On 6/26/20 7:50 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion wrote:
> On 6/26/20 8:38 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-business
> wrote:
>> Here is the list of proposals that I believe were pended in this way —
>> some may be missing, and I considered the possibility that the finger
>> pointing was insufficiently precise, but given that I can recommend
>> arbitrary punishment, I'm not particularly concerned:
>
> Oooh, time for more semantics!
>
> Rule 2626:
>
>>Any player CAN, by announcement, certify a specified proposal (as
>>a patch), causing it to become pending.
>
> My reading of this would be that any player CAN certify any proposal
> (even one that is already pending), which also makes em cause the
> proposal to become pending as a side effect. This would mean that the
> pending can fail independently of the certification, and R2626 says "A
> player SHALL NOT certify a proposal...", rather than prohibiting the
> pending itself.
>
> I made a similar argument in CFJ 3769 [0], but the language was slightly
> different in that the rule in that case was written in the passive voice
> ("the gamestate is modified" vs R2626's "causing it to become pending").
>
> --
> Jason Cobb
>
Regardless of the interpretation of this clause, "pending" a proposal is
flipping its switch. You can't flip a switch to the same value it
already has, per R2162.
--
nch
Prime Minister, Webmastor, NAX Exchange Manager
DIS: Re: [Indictment] Re: BUS: actually fuck it
On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 5:39 PM Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-business wrote: > Here is the list of proposals that I believe were pended in this way — I think my proposal "Reset deadlines when resetting the economy" was also pended.
Re: DIS: Re: [Indictment] Re: BUS: actually fuck it
On 6/26/20 8:50 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion wrote:
> On 6/26/20 8:38 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-business
> wrote:
>> Here is the list of proposals that I believe were pended in this way —
>> some may be missing, and I considered the possibility that the finger
>> pointing was insufficiently precise, but given that I can recommend
>> arbitrary punishment, I'm not particularly concerned:
>
>
> Oooh, time for more semantics!
>
> Rule 2626:
>
>> Any player CAN, by announcement, certify a specified proposal (as
>> a patch), causing it to become pending.
>
>
> My reading of this would be that any player CAN certify any proposal
> (even one that is already pending), which also makes em cause the
> proposal to become pending as a side effect. This would mean that the
> pending can fail independently of the certification, and R2626 says "A
> player SHALL NOT certify a proposal...", rather than prohibiting the
> pending itself.
>
> I made a similar argument in CFJ 3769 [0], but the language was slightly
> different in that the rule in that case was written in the passive voice
> ("the gamestate is modified" vs R2626's "causing it to become pending").
>
I think that's a reasonable interpretation although not one that I had
considered. I think that that interpretation though could lead to some
complications around how certification will soon affect other switches,
so I'm inclined to prefer mine.
--
Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Herald, Referee, Tailor, Pirate
Champion, Badge of the Great Agoran Revival, Badge of the Salted Earth
Re: DIS: Re: [Indictment] Re: BUS: actually fuck it
On 6/26/20 8:50 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion wrote: > On 6/26/20 8:38 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-business > wrote: >> Here is the list of proposals that I believe were pended in this way — >> some may be missing, and I considered the possibility that the finger >> pointing was insufficiently precise, but given that I can recommend >> arbitrary punishment, I'm not particularly concerned: > Oooh, time for more semantics! Oh, forgot to add: If I'm right, I don't think anybody would honestly expect you to go through the indictment for each potentially pended proposal. -- Jason Cobb
DIS: Re: [Indictment] Re: BUS: actually fuck it
On 6/26/20 8:38 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-business
wrote:
> Here is the list of proposals that I believe were pended in this way —
> some may be missing, and I considered the possibility that the finger
> pointing was insufficiently precise, but given that I can recommend
> arbitrary punishment, I'm not particularly concerned:
Oooh, time for more semantics!
Rule 2626:
> Any player CAN, by announcement, certify a specified proposal (as
> a patch), causing it to become pending.
My reading of this would be that any player CAN certify any proposal
(even one that is already pending), which also makes em cause the
proposal to become pending as a side effect. This would mean that the
pending can fail independently of the certification, and R2626 says "A
player SHALL NOT certify a proposal...", rather than prohibiting the
pending itself.
I made a similar argument in CFJ 3769 [0], but the language was slightly
different in that the rule in that case was written in the passive voice
("the gamestate is modified" vs R2626's "causing it to become pending").
--
Jason Cobb
