Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Herald election

[Alexis Hunt]

On Tue, 21 Nov 2017 at 21:00 Ørjan Johansen  wrote:

> On Mon, 20 Nov 2017, Corona wrote:
>
> > Also, what is the point of campaign proposals? (Except for proposing
> > overpowered powers for yourself and ensuring nobody else gets them)
> > Seems like tying a proposal coming into force to your being elected
> > will lower the chances of either happening; players who like one, but
> > not the other are IMO more likely to vote against both than if you ran
> > for an election and submitted a proposal separately.
>
> This prompted me to look at the rules for those, and I noticed something
> subtly off:
>
> Rule 2513:
>
>When a Campaign Proposal is adopted, it CANNOT take effect until
>the associated election ends.
>
> Rule 2034:
>
>A public message purporting to resolve an Agoran decision
>constitutes self-ratifying claims that
> [...]
>3. (if the indicated outcome was to adopt a proposal) such a
>   proposal existed, was adopted, and took effect.
>
> I think 1551 saves the day:
>
>  Such a modification cannot add
>inconsistencies between the gamestate and the rules,
>
> although, does this mean a Campaign Proposal adoption never self-ratifies?
>
> Maybe that depends on whether the parts of 3. above are individual
> self-ratifying claims or not.
>
> Greetings,
> Ørjan.
>

This bug wasn't intentional, but I noticed it after the proposal was
adopted and felt like saving it. I think that the result is that the "took
effect" portion of a non-winning campaign proposal's self-ratification must
be CoEd. I don't think that the proposal taking effect adds an
inconsistency with the rules, since taking effect is not a part of the
gamestate; it's merely a series of changes applied to it.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Herald election

[Ørjan Johansen]

On Mon, 20 Nov 2017, Corona wrote:


Also, what is the point of campaign proposals? (Except for proposing
overpowered powers for yourself and ensuring nobody else gets them)
Seems like tying a proposal coming into force to your being elected
will lower the chances of either happening; players who like one, but
not the other are IMO more likely to vote against both than if you ran
for an election and submitted a proposal separately.


This prompted me to look at the rules for those, and I noticed something 
subtly off:


Rule 2513:

  When a Campaign Proposal is adopted, it CANNOT take effect until
  the associated election ends.

Rule 2034:

  A public message purporting to resolve an Agoran decision
  constitutes self-ratifying claims that
[...]
  3. (if the indicated outcome was to adopt a proposal) such a
 proposal existed, was adopted, and took effect.

I think 1551 saves the day:

Such a modification cannot add
  inconsistencies between the gamestate and the rules,

although, does this mean a Campaign Proposal adoption never self-ratifies?

Maybe that depends on whether the parts of 3. above are individual 
self-ratifying claims or not.


Greetings,
Ørjan.

DIS: Re: BUS: Herald election

[Kerim Aydin]

Really nice to finally put back a requirement to track theses!  (even
if it's just a SHOULD)  It's nobody's job now, a long time ago it used 
to be the Rulekeepor funnily enough:
>  The Rulekeepor shall retain a copy of each Thesis approved by
>  its Thesis Committee.

On Mon, 20 Nov 2017, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
> I submit the below campaign proposal, but remain uncommitted:
> Title: History by Force
> AI: 1
> Enact a new Rule "Miscellaneous Herald Duties", with the following text:
> {
>     The Herald SHALL in eir weekly report include an interesting Agoran
>     fact and SHALL in eir monthly report include a short essay of any
>     authorship, regarding an aspect of Agoran history. Any player
>     publishing a thesis for a degree, related to Agoran history SHOULD
>     offer a summary for publication in the Herald's monthly report.
> 
>     The Herald SHALL in eir monthly report publish, with reasonable
>     effort, a summary of all theses written for the purpose of
>     receiving degrees, regardless of whether a degree was awarded.
>     The Herald SHOULD attempt to make theses available for reading.
> }
> On 11/20/2017 12:32 PM, Corona wrote:
> > I nominate myself for Herald, as, if what G. said about that office
> > being best for new players is true, surely I, the newest player, am
> > the best choice for Herald! (I should point a finger at myself for
> > that logic)
> >
> > Also, I don't hold any office, so no consolidation of offices here
> 
> -- 
> 
> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> 
> 
>

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Herald election

[VJ Rada]

I made great use of my campaign proposal. IDK what all these other scrubs
are doing haha.

On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 5:56 AM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:

>
>
> On Mon, 20 Nov 2017, Alex Smith wrote:
> > On Mon, 2017-11-20 at 09:48 -0800, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> > > You can see how it would work better for hard-coded matters of
> > > economic policy:  "if elected, I'll double the supply of land/halve
> > > the cost of pending proposals" or whatever (though if most of the
> > > campaign proposals are like that, there was a lightweight version
> > > called 'budgets' that we used to do).
> >
> > That sounds a lot like a Regulation to me. If we decided to make more
> > use of them (and I'm still pretty iffy on the current implementation),
> > we could perhaps have Campaign Regulations (which get promulgated
> > automatically) rather than needing them to be Proposals.
> >
> > (For what it's worth, my preferred version of a Regulation would be a
> > tracked statement that has no Power, but that can define values that
> > rules are capable of inspecting.)
>
> Regulations could work.  The old system was sort-of like this:
>
>   A Budget is a document maintained by an Officer that contains
>   the values of certain switches defined as being part of that
>   Officer's Budget.  The Budget is part of that Officer's Report.
>
>   The Officer maintaining that Budget CAN flip its switches
>   [subject to whatever per-item constraints] Without Objection.
>   [i.e. things can be adjusted at any time, but only with
>full consensus]
>
>   A nominee SHOULD submit a Prototype Budget with legal values
>   for all the budget's switches.  These are included in the
>   Election Decision initiation.   When the winner is installed
>   in office, the switches are all flipped to the values in the
>   winner's Prototype. [no separate voting process needed]
>
> In the current system, the Treasuror's Budget would include
> Supply Level, Pend Cost, CFJ Cost, Officer Rewards, etc. instead
> of them being hard-coded in Rules.
>
> In a decentralized system, you split this among Officers, so
> the Treasuror controls the Supply Level, the Arbitor the CFJ cost,
> the Promotor the Pend cost, the ADoP the Officer salary, etc.,
> all as part of their separate Budgets.
>
>
>
>


-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Herald election

[Kerim Aydin]

On Mon, 20 Nov 2017, Alex Smith wrote:
> On Mon, 2017-11-20 at 09:48 -0800, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> > You can see how it would work better for hard-coded matters of 
> > economic policy:  "if elected, I'll double the supply of land/halve
> > the cost of pending proposals" or whatever (though if most of the
> > campaign proposals are like that, there was a lightweight version
> > called 'budgets' that we used to do).
> 
> That sounds a lot like a Regulation to me. If we decided to make more
> use of them (and I'm still pretty iffy on the current implementation),
> we could perhaps have Campaign Regulations (which get promulgated
> automatically) rather than needing them to be Proposals.
> 
> (For what it's worth, my preferred version of a Regulation would be a
> tracked statement that has no Power, but that can define values that
> rules are capable of inspecting.)

Regulations could work.  The old system was sort-of like this:

  A Budget is a document maintained by an Officer that contains
  the values of certain switches defined as being part of that
  Officer's Budget.  The Budget is part of that Officer's Report.

  The Officer maintaining that Budget CAN flip its switches
  [subject to whatever per-item constraints] Without Objection.
  [i.e. things can be adjusted at any time, but only with
   full consensus]

  A nominee SHOULD submit a Prototype Budget with legal values
  for all the budget's switches.  These are included in the
  Election Decision initiation.   When the winner is installed
  in office, the switches are all flipped to the values in the
  winner's Prototype. [no separate voting process needed]

In the current system, the Treasuror's Budget would include
Supply Level, Pend Cost, CFJ Cost, Officer Rewards, etc. instead
of them being hard-coded in Rules.

In a decentralized system, you split this among Officers, so
the Treasuror controls the Supply Level, the Arbitor the CFJ cost,
the Promotor the Pend cost, the ADoP the Officer salary, etc.,
all as part of their separate Budgets.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Herald election

[Alex Smith]

On Mon, 2017-11-20 at 09:48 -0800, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> You can see how it would work better for hard-coded matters of 
> economic policy:  "if elected, I'll double the supply of land/halve
> the cost of pending proposals" or whatever (though if most of the
> campaign proposals are like that, there was a lightweight version
> called 'budgets' that we used to do).

That sounds a lot like a Regulation to me. If we decided to make more
use of them (and I'm still pretty iffy on the current implementation),
we could perhaps have Campaign Regulations (which get promulgated
automatically) rather than needing them to be Proposals.

(For what it's worth, my preferred version of a Regulation would be a
tracked statement that has no Power, but that can define values that
rules are capable of inspecting.)

-- 
ais523

DIS: Re: BUS: Herald election

[Corona]

Also, what is the point of campaign proposals? (Except for proposing
overpowered powers for yourself and ensuring nobody else gets them)
Seems like tying a proposal coming into force to your being elected
will lower the chances of either happening; players who like one, but
not the other are IMO more likely to vote against both than if you ran
for an election and submitted a proposal separately.

On 11/20/17, Corona  wrote:
> I nominate myself for Herald, as, if what G. said about that office
> being best for new players is true, surely I, the newest player, am
> the best choice for Herald! (I should point a finger at myself for
> that logic)
>
> Also, I don't hold any office, so no consolidation of offices here
>

DIS: Re: BUS: Herald Election Fails Quorum

[Jonatan Kilhamn]

2009/4/18 Aaron Goldfein aarongoldf...@gmail.com:
 This post serves the purpose of resolving the Agoran Decision to choose the
 holder of the Registrar office. The options were coppro, root, and Tiger.
The subject line says Herald.



-- 
-Tiger

DIS: Re: BUS: Herald Election Fails Quorum

[Sean Hunt]

Aaron Goldfein wrote:
 This post serves the purpose of resolving the Agoran Decision to choose
 the holder of the Registrar office. The options were coppro, root, and
 Tiger.
 
 The votes are:
 
 coppro: No votes.
 root: coppro
 Tiger: No votes.
 
 Votes: 1
 Quorum: 6
 
 (Note: Tiger and Murphy endorsed root and Yally endorsed Tiger, but root
 did note vote. Wooble cast a conditional vote endorsing the first person
 to deputize to publish the Herald's report during the election period,
 or endorsing ais523 if no one has deputized to pusblish such a report.
 Noone deputized to publish such a report, so Wooble endorsed ais523, but
 e not vote.)
 
 The outcome selected by Agora is FAILED QUORUM. The Voting Period is
 hereby doubled.
CoE: This is the Herald election, not the Registrar one. (Tiger's post
to a-d is not sufficient; this post is self-ratifying if a formal CoE
isn't submitted).

DIS: Re: BUS: Herald Election Fails Quorum

[Alex Smith]

On Sat, 2009-04-18 at 12:46 -0500, Aaron Goldfein wrote:
 This post serves the purpose of resolving the Agoran Decision to
 choose the holder of the Registrar office.
(snip)
 Wooble cast a conditional vote endorsing the first person to deputize
 to publish the Herald's report during the election period, or
 endorsing ais523 if no one has deputized to pusblish such a report.

I'm pretty sure e voted like that in the Herald election, not the
Registrar election. As it is, I'm not voting in elections atm partly
because I'm really confused as to what the situation is with officers
atm.

-- 
ais523

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Herald Election Fails Quorum

[Aaron Goldfein]

On Sat, Apr 18, 2009 at 2:42 PM, Alex Smith ais...@bham.ac.uk wrote:

 On Sat, 2009-04-18 at 12:46 -0500, Aaron Goldfein wrote:
  This post serves the purpose of resolving the Agoran Decision to
  choose the holder of the Registrar office.
 (snip)
  Wooble cast a conditional vote endorsing the first person to deputize
  to publish the Herald's report during the election period, or
  endorsing ais523 if no one has deputized to pusblish such a report.

 I'm pretty sure e voted like that in the Herald election, not the
 Registrar election. As it is, I'm not voting in elections atm partly
 because I'm really confused as to what the situation is with officers
 atm.

 --
 ais523


You're right, this was an error that I have already corrected.