Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Space Rebel Uprising
It does, nch currently is not a player. To get around this, Falsifian has submitted a proposal to re-register em. Jason Cobb On 7/28/19 1:25 PM, Edward Murphy wrote: I deregister. I register. How does this not fall afoul of Rule 869's 30-day wait?
DIS: Re: BUS: Space Rebel Uprising
I deregister. I register. How does this not fall afoul of Rule 869's 30-day wait?
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Space Rebel Uprising
On 7/25/2019 4:44 PM, Nicholas Evans wrote: > On Thu, Jul 25, 2019, 3:16 PM ais523 wrote: >> On Thu, 2019-07-25 at 07:59 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote: >>> idk, as much as I don't want nch to sit out for 30 days, we've had >>> people deregister themselves to do a scam and in the past said "hey >>> well that's the price of scamming" (if it was accidental for non-scammy >>> reasons we try to get em back definitely). Just a discussion not >>> absolutely set to vote against this. -G. >> >> The Registrar's report has a "deregistered emself by mistake" entry for >> a reason :-D >> >> This is a bit different, it's "deregistered emself intentionally >> without realising the consequences". I'm not totally against giving >> people a pass for that, even if it was part of a scam, but with a >> caveat that they mustn't have gained any benefit from the scam attempt >> (and only once per person, obviously). > > I'll be a good Agoran if such a proposal makes it through. But I'm also > understanding of the reason this limit exists, even if I think 30 days is > a bit much. Well, sub-games have to balance letting new players join (via welcome packages etc.) with not letting everyone trivially re-set their position via deregistration (which can spoil the subgame if it's too easy). I think anything much shorter makes it harder to do that. We've been pretty-well calibrated (in player rewards etc) to that 30 days for a long time, though that assumes players are making a conscious choice of whether a reset is worth the length of the timeout. Maybe we should codify an override, e.g. "Exception to the 30-day limit CAN happen via 3 Agoroan Consent, provided the to-be-registered person announces support too; this SHOULD only be done if the 30-day limit is manifestly unfair based on the circumstances of the deregistration". -G.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Space Rebel Uprising
I'll be a good Agoran if such a proposal makes it through. But I'm also understanding of the reason this limit exists, even if I think 30 days is a bit much. On Thu, Jul 25, 2019, 3:16 PM ais...@alumni.bham.ac.uk < ais...@alumni.bham.ac.uk> wrote: > On Thu, 2019-07-25 at 07:59 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > idk, as much as I don't want nch to sit out for 30 days, we've had people > > deregister themselves to do a scam and in the past said "hey well that's > the > > price of scamming" (if it was accidental for non-scammy reasons we try to > > get em back definitely). Just a discussion not absolutely set to vote > > against this. -G. > > The Registrar's report has a "deregistered emself by mistake" entry for > a reason :-D > > This is a bit different, it's "deregistered emself intentionally > without realising the consequences". I'm not totally against giving > people a pass for that, even if it was part of a scam, but with a > caveat that they mustn't have gained any benefit from the scam attempt > (and only once per person, obviously). > > -- > ais523 > >
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Space Rebel Uprising
On Thu, 2019-07-25 at 07:59 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote: > idk, as much as I don't want nch to sit out for 30 days, we've had people > deregister themselves to do a scam and in the past said "hey well that's the > price of scamming" (if it was accidental for non-scammy reasons we try to > get em back definitely). Just a discussion not absolutely set to vote > against this. -G. The Registrar's report has a "deregistered emself by mistake" entry for a reason :-D This is a bit different, it's "deregistered emself intentionally without realising the consequences". I'm not totally against giving people a pass for that, even if it was part of a scam, but with a caveat that they mustn't have gained any benefit from the scam attempt (and only once per person, obviously). -- ais523
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Space Rebel Uprising
On Thu, 25 Jul 2019 at 15:00, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> On 7/25/2019 7:38 AM, James Cook wrote:
> > Title: Fresh start
> > Co-authors: (empty list)
> > Adoption index: 3.1
> > Text: {
> > Register nch.
> > nch receives a Welcome Package.
> > Destroy all of nch's Coins.
> > }
>
> idk, as much as I don't want nch to sit out for 30 days, we've had people
> deregister themselves to do a scam and in the past said "hey well that's the
> price of scamming" (if it was accidental for non-scammy reasons we try to
> get em back definitely). Just a discussion not absolutely set to vote
> against this. -G.
If another person does it in the near future I won't feel so
forgiving; I don't want to make it a pattern, and anyway people who
didn't know that rule should know it now.
In this case, as Registrar, I encourage others to vote FOR bringing
nch back. I expect keeping active and creative players around to be
good for the health and vitality of Agora.
--
- Falsifian
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Space Rebel Uprising
Ah, that makes sense, sorry. Jason Cobb On 7/25/19 2:22 PM, James Cook wrote: On Thu, 25 Jul 2019 at 16:07, Jason Cobb wrote: Also, if you want em to have the welcome package, you might not want to destroy all of eir coins after giving it to em. Jason Cobb The purpose was to effectively deny em a welcome package.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Space Rebel Uprising
On Thu, 25 Jul 2019 at 16:07, Jason Cobb wrote: > Also, if you want em to have the welcome package, you might not want to > destroy all of eir coins after giving it to em. > > Jason Cobb The purpose was to effectively deny em a welcome package.
DIS: Re: BUS: Space Rebel Uprising
Also, if you want em to have the welcome package, you might not want to
destroy all of eir coins after giving it to em.
Jason Cobb
On 7/25/19 10:38 AM, James Cook wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jul 2019 at 14:33, James Cook wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jul 2019 at 01:30, nch wrote:
Oops, oh well. Guess I'm sitting out for a month.
I submit a proposal as follows.
Title: Fresh start
Co-authors: (empty list)
Adoption index: 3.01
Text: {
Register nch.
nch receives a Welcome Package.
Destroy all of nch's Coins.
}
Oops, forgot about integer multiples of 0.1.
If I created a proposal with the above message, I withdraw it.
I submit a proposal as follows.
Title: Fresh start
Co-authors: (empty list)
Adoption index: 3.1
Text: {
Register nch.
nch receives a Welcome Package.
Destroy all of nch's Coins.
}
DIS: Re: BUS: Space Rebel Uprising
On 7/25/2019 7:59 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> On 7/25/2019 7:38 AM, James Cook wrote:
> > Title: Fresh start
> > Co-authors: (empty list)
> > Adoption index: 3.1
> > Text: {
> > Register nch.
> > nch receives a Welcome Package.
> > Destroy all of nch's Coins.
> > }
Just on a purely technical side - I assume nch will consent, but if e
doesn't not even AI-3.1 will work and might create a weird situation.
Here:
A person, by registering, agrees to abide by the Rules. The Rules
CANNOT otherwise bind a person to abide by any agreement without
that person's willful consent.
If the person is registered "by force" without consent, e never agrees to
abide by the rules. Being "bound to the rules" is a continuous state. We
might get the odd situation that someone is registered (by force of
proposal) but not "bound to abide" because they didn't consent.
Easy fix: wrap the whole thing in a conditional "if nch has publicly
consented to abide by the rules in clear reference to this proposal
(and not withdrawn consent) then..."
-G.
DIS: Re: BUS: Space Rebel Uprising
On 7/25/2019 7:38 AM, James Cook wrote:
> Title: Fresh start
> Co-authors: (empty list)
> Adoption index: 3.1
> Text: {
> Register nch.
> nch receives a Welcome Package.
> Destroy all of nch's Coins.
> }
idk, as much as I don't want nch to sit out for 30 days, we've had people
deregister themselves to do a scam and in the past said "hey well that's the
price of scamming" (if it was accidental for non-scammy reasons we try to
get em back definitely). Just a discussion not absolutely set to vote
against this. -G.
DIS: Re: BUS: Space Rebel Uprising
On Thu, 25 Jul 2019 at 14:33, James Cook wrote:
> I submit a proposal as follows.
>
> Title: Fresh start
> Co-authors: (empty list)
> Adoption index: 3.01
> Text: {
> Register nch.
> nch receives a Welcome Package.
> Destroy all of nch's Coins.
> }
I believe the "Register nch." provision is unaffected by R869's
"CANNOT be registered for 30 days" because of the third list item in
R2140 (Power Controls Mutability). Am I understanding that right?
--
- Falsifian
DIS: Re: BUS: Space Rebel Uprising
On 7/24/2019 6:25 PM, nch wrote: I deregister. I register. Um, how are you getting around this CANNOT in R869: A player, acting as emself, CAN deregister (cease being a player) by announcement. If e does so, e CANNOT register or be registered for 30 days.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Space Rebel Uprising
On 7/24/19 8:28 PM, James Cook wrote: On Thu, 25 Jul 2019 at 01:25, nch wrote: I deregister. I register. Sorry, you can't be registered for 30 days after deregistering yourself by announcement. R869 Oops, oh well. Guess I'm sitting out for a month.
DIS: Re: BUS: Space Rebel Uprising
On Thu, 25 Jul 2019 at 01:25, nch wrote: > I deregister. I register. Sorry, you can't be registered for 30 days after deregistering yourself by announcement. R869 -- - Falsifian
