DIS: Re: BUS: Contract Amendment

I really do think that me losing all of my assets over this is inequitable. On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 3:16 PM, Ned Strange wrote: > That is, I object for myself and PSS to Aris's intent > > On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 2:04 PM, Ned Strange wrote: >>

DIS: Re: BUS: Proposal: Impeachment

Too late, but this proposal should also have excised the last paragraph of "Referee Accountability" On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 3:57 PM, Aris Merchant wrote: > I pend this proposal by expending a paper. > > -Aris > > On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 10:44 PM, Aris Merchant

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Contract Amendment

Nothing involving giving a-d messages effect is legitimate (TBH, not sure whether that would work either). -Aris On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 1:20 AM Ned Strange wrote: > It wasn't really a scam it was going to be used for a perfectly > legitimate application of

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Contract Amendment

It wasn't really a scam it was going to be used for a perfectly legitimate application of zombiception! On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 6:13 PM, Aris Merchant wrote: > Sigh. I tend to agree with you, actually. All of your assets is a bit much. > That might be hard to

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Contract Amendment

Sigh. I tend to agree with you, actually. All of your assets is a bit much. That might be hard to recover from. However, it isn't terribly equitable for you to get off free after attempting a scam, even one that we've sort of encouraged with the Boo Lien system. Also, giving all of your assets to

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Contract Amendment

It's simple to win using zombiception. Step 1 get a zombie. Step 2 don't post for 60 days. Step 3 on behalf of your zombie, bid high on yourself, without flipping your own master switch. On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 6:22 PM, Aris Merchant wrote: > Nothing involving

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Contract Amendment

What about amending it in such a way that everyone gets a coin and VJ Rada gets the rest back? I wouldn't object to that. On Thursday, April 12, 2018, Aris Merchant < thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote: > Sigh. I tend to agree with you, actually. All of your assets is a bit much. > That

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Contract Amendment

I'll pay to pend it if you submit it. On Thu, 12 Apr 2018, Ned Strange wrote: > I couldn't myself write such a proposal, being without assets. > > On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 11:31 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > > > > I think e should get it all back. It was harmless. > > >

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Contract Amendment

I couldn't myself write such a proposal, being without assets. On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 11:31 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > I think e should get it all back. It was harmless. > > If there isn't enough consensus for a w/o objection modification, > maybe a proposal (power

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Cartographor] The Map of Arcadia -- April 11, 2018

On the flip side, we need a currency to remove Blots. I'm hesitant to make it fabric because I think it should be a "basic" (unrefined, provided by payday). I might be convinced otherwise though. On your longer post, I agree - I don't think we're too far off balance and can get there with

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Cartographor] Land auctions for April week 2

I'd say that these data are less relevant than the coordinates of the land units, so it would not invalidate it. But that may just be me but wanting to do work to fix it. On Thu, Apr 12, 2018, 11:24 Corona wrote: > ​Wait, I just looked it up (in your own report)

DIS: Re: OFF: [Cartographor] Land auctions for April week 2

​Wait, I just looked it up (in your own report) and:​ AUCTION 1: The lot is the white land unit at (+1, +2) <-- actually black AUCTION 2: The lot is the white land unit at (+1, +3) AUCTION 3: The lot is the white land unit at (+2, 0) <-- actually black AUCTION 4: The lot is the black land unit

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Contract Amendment

Compromise: proposal offers a minor bribe of N of the contract's assets to the first N voters FOR the proposal - ends up being a partway penalty. On Thu, 12 Apr 2018, Corona wrote: > Well, you're right, the contract was harmless, and losing all the assets > would be crippling, but on the

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Cartographor] Land auctions for April week 2

My interpretation: You describe a particular lot as a "white land unit at ". You do not have a "white land unit at " to transfer, so anyone can terminate the auction. If no one terminates it, I'm not sure whether you can satisfy your obligation to transfer by transferring a black land

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Cartographor] Land auctions for April week 2

On Thu, 12 Apr 2018, Reuben Staley wrote: > > I terminate the ongoing land auction > > I think this intent FAILS as there are in fact 5 going on right now. By R2004 you only CAN initiate 1 each week. At least that's my reading of "each Agoran week... the Cartographer CAN and SHALL initiate an

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Cartographor] Land auctions for April week 2

I was to choose 5 land units and set them as separate lots in the same auction. Even if two of the auctions had valid lots, both of them fail to have the necessary amount of lots for the situation. Therefore, by my interpretation, both auctions are invalid. On 4/12/2018 3:18 PM, Kerim Aydin

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Cartographor] Land auctions for April week 2

> I terminate the ongoing land auction I think this intent FAILS as there are in fact 5 going on right now. On Thu, Apr 12, 2018, 14:33 Aris Merchant < thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote: > I agree with G.'s interpretation. I believe that Rule 2549's statement > that "An Auction also

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Cartographor] Land auctions for April week 2

Because it's clear that I have not used the correct Agoran Term, I amend my statement: This is simply a case of Trigon writing down a thing that e didn't actually mean and everyone else not realizing until after the passing of the proposal. I wanted there to be five auctions, but clearly the

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Cartographor] Land auctions for April week 2

Oops, you're right. You know, it seems pretty likely that those ones just never began in the first place. -Aris On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 1:38 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > These are independent auctions so only the incorrect ones were just > terminated I think? (Auctions

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Cartographor] Land auctions for April week 2

Reading R2004, it looks like it was *supposed* to be a single auction? That's definitely not how the announcement below reads, and not how people have been bidding, so I don't know what actually happened. (R2004 only allows 1 auction to be started each week). I'm also looking for anything that

DIS: No Treasuror

As far as I can tell, the office of Treasuror is currently undefined. It was formerly defined by Rule 2483, but that was amended by PAoaM to mention the office without defining it. -Aris

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Cartographor] Land auctions for April week 2

You CANNOT do that. The rule doesn't allow you to. So you failed to initiate five. You said you did in the announcement, but you didn't. Maybe you initiated one (the first accurate one, AUCTION 2), or maybe the collection was so ambiguous it all failed. On Thu, 12 Apr 2018, Reuben Staley

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Cartographor] Land auctions for April week 2

Do you suppose you started one (the first accurate one?) or do you think the whole thing failed? Not sure myself... On Thu, 12 Apr 2018, Reuben Staley wrote: > Because it's clear that I have not used the correct Agoran Term, I amend my > statement: > > This is simply a case of Trigon writing

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Cartographor] Land auctions for April week 2

These are independent auctions so only the incorrect ones were just terminated I think? (Auctions 1,3,4). On Thu, 12 Apr 2018, Aris Merchant wrote: > I agree with G.'s interpretation. I believe that Rule 2549's statement > that "An Auction also CANNOT be initiated unless the Auctioneer is >

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Cartographor] Land auctions for April week 2

This is simply a case of Trigon writing down a thing that e didn't actually mean and everyone else not realizing until after the passing of the proposal. I wanted there to be five auctions, but clearly the passed text does not reflect my intent. I, working under the assumption that the rules

Re: DIS: Proto: Crystals

That wasn't really what I meant. Winning is it's own incentive, along with Champion and maybe the chance of getting Speaker. This is more like an extra reward. It's just a small bonus that acknowledges the victory. The basic idea for the new system is driven by things I've noticed in video games.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Contract Amendment

On Thu, 12 Apr 2018, Corona wrote: I withdraw my and Quazie's (acting on eir behalf) support for the destruction of "Hi" - let's just have the vote on that proposal, and possibly destroy the contract later, if the proposal fails. It seems possible to read the combination of rule 2519 and rule

DIS: Re: BUS: Blot warning - Corona and CuddleBeam

ATMunn wrote: Oh man, it's been so long since I've been ADoP so I forget if I can do this but if I can: I initiate an election for Referee, and become a candidate in that election. I'm catching up on e-mail, should be done within the hour. As I understand it, this is ineffective, as you

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Cartographor] Land auctions for April week 2

On Thu, 12 Apr 2018, Reuben Staley wrote: > This gag is already old, but the point is that I could go on. Separate > auctions encourage more competitive play. Imagine if these were all lots in > the same auction. Every bid would be a shot in the dark. You couldn't > strategize and attempt to get

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: deputy-[Referee] Weekly Report

G. wrote: Sigh. I deputize for the REFEREE to resolve the finger-pointing as indicated below. Leaving this out of the ADoP history, as you already were Referee (unless I missed something else).

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Blot warning - Corona and CuddleBeam

On Fri, 13 Apr 2018, Ørjan Johansen wrote: On Thu, 12 Apr 2018, Edward Murphy wrote: Also, has anyone noticed the extra 'not' in Gaelan's signature? I suspect it's intentional sneakiness. I'd use Hanlon's razor here, it's the kind of logic many people mess up and it seems a bit too

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Contract Amendment

On Fri, 13 Apr 2018, Ørjan Johansen wrote: > On Thu, 12 Apr 2018, Corona wrote: > > > I withdraw my and Quazie's (acting on eir behalf) support for the > > destruction of "Hi" - let's just have the vote on that proposal, and > > possibly destroy the contract later, if the proposal fails. > >

DIS: Proto: Crystals

Title: Crystals Adoption index: 2.0 Author: Aris Co-author(s): [I'm changing it so that players CAN upgrade facilities they don't own, let me know if that's a problem.] Amend Rule 2562, Facility Ranks, to read as follows: Rank is a secured facility switch tracked by the Cartographor

DIS: Proto: Blot Expansion

Title: Blot Expansion Adoption index: 3.0 Author: Aris Co-author(s): Amend Rule 2483, "Economics", by: { Appending "10. incense", as a new list item after "9. fabric"; and Changing "Stones, apples, and corn are considered unrefinable currencies;" to read "Stones, apples, corn, and incense

Re: DIS: Proto: Blot Expansion

On Thu, 12 Apr 2018, Aris Merchant wrote: Amend Rule 2557, "Removing Blots", by changing the first paragraph to read "A player CAN, by announcement, destroy N incense in eir possession to expunge N of eir blots. When e does so, e is ENCOURAGED to publicly and grandiloquently apologize to the

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Cartographor] The Map of Arcadia -- April 11, 2018

Maybe some large amount of fabric could be turned into a ribbon? Probably a bad idea, but it's an idea. On 4/11/2018 11:41 PM, Reuben Staley wrote: Currently, fabric is only used in some upper-level rank-up payments. I think it is the least useful of the nine economic assets right now. If

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Cartographor] Land auctions for April week 2

Here's my argument on why separate land auctions are better: Imagine that land unit 1 has a Rank 4 facility on it, but land unit 2 has nothing. More people will bid on land unit 1. This is completely justified since land unit 1 is definitely more valuable than land unit 2. So someone might

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: deputy-[Referee] Weekly Report

G. wrote: GUESS WHAT: It's worse than that. There *is* no Referee's weekly report! There's no place I can find that puts together "referee" and "Report". How long has that been the case, so I can remove relevant bits from the ADoP database?

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: deputy-[Referee] Weekly Report

On Thu, 12 Apr 2018, Edward Murphy wrote: > G. wrote: > > > Sigh. I deputize for the REFEREE to resolve the finger-pointing as > > indicated > > below. > > Leaving this out of the ADoP history, as you already were Referee > (unless I missed something else). The subsequent conversation was

Re: DIS: Proto: Crystals

So winning the game is not as valuable as winning an auction? On 4/12/2018 8:46 PM, Aris Merchant wrote: Title: Crystals Adoption index: 2.0 Author: Aris Co-author(s): [I'm changing it so that players CAN upgrade facilities they don't own, let me know if that's a problem.] Amend Rule 2562,

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Blot warning - Corona and CuddleBeam

On Thu, 12 Apr 2018, Edward Murphy wrote: Also, has anyone noticed the extra 'not' in Gaelan's signature? I suspect it's intentional sneakiness. I'd use Hanlon's razor here, it's the kind of logic many people mess up and it seems a bit too indiscriminately destructive to be sneakiness.

Re: DIS: Proto: Crystals

On Thu, 2018-04-12 at 21:13 -0400, ATMunn wrote: > So winning the game is not as valuable as winning an auction? There are two types of Agorans: those who aim to gain economic/political power so that it lets them eventually win the game, and those who aim to win so as to gain economic/political

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Cartographor] Land auctions for April week 2

Haven't read any of the other posts yet, but I would say that I would probably prefer it to be a single auction. On 4/12/2018 4:53 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: Reading R2004, it looks like it was *supposed* to be a single auction? That's definitely not how the announcement below reads, and not how