Re: DIS: [Promotor] Draft Report

[nch via agora-discussion]

On Sunday, May 24, 2020 3:58:05 PM CDT you wrote:
> > Grok's "Cantus Counterscam" (which has the author and co-author values
> > that
> > are incorrectly listed for "a Proposed Contract") is missing.
> 
> I believe that e retracted it.

Oh, looks like you're correct.

-- 
nch

Re: DIS: [Promotor] Draft Report

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion]

On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 4:57 PM nchagora--- via agora-discussion
 wrote:
>
> On Sunday, May 24, 2020 3:42:06 PM CDT Aris Merchant via agora-discussion
> wrote:
> > ID Author(s)AITitle
> > ---
> > 8388f  nch  1.0   The Webmastor
> > 8389#  G.   2.0   Just Impeach instead
> > 8390*  R. Lee   3.0   Registror
> > 8391*  R. Lee   3.0   Notory (Vote Labour)
> > 8392#  Jason2.0   Prior violations
> > 8393#  Aris 2.0   Elections Aren't Over Till They End
> > 8394#  Jason2.0   8228 retry
> > 8395#  G., R. Lee   1.7   Mooting moots
> > 8396*  grok, nch3.0   a Proposed Contract
> > 8397#  Jason1.1   Editorial what?
> > 8398#  grok, G. 1.0   Auction End Clarification
> > 8399#  P.S.S.   2.0   Referral
> > 8400*  Murphy, nch, G.  3.0   More conservative implicit
> > announcements 8401#  R. Lee   1.0   E had two months!
> > 8402#  R. Lee   1.0   Clinton v City of New York
> >
> >
> > The proposal pool is currently empty.
>
> Grok's "Cantus Counterscam" (which has the author and co-author values that
> are incorrectly listed for "a Proposed Contract") is missing.
>
>

I believe that e retracted it.

Re: DIS: [Promotor] Draft Report

[nchagora--- via agora-discussion]

On Sunday, May 24, 2020 3:42:06 PM CDT Aris Merchant via agora-discussion 
wrote:
> ID Author(s)AITitle
> ---
> 8388f  nch  1.0   The Webmastor
> 8389#  G.   2.0   Just Impeach instead
> 8390*  R. Lee   3.0   Registror
> 8391*  R. Lee   3.0   Notory (Vote Labour)
> 8392#  Jason2.0   Prior violations
> 8393#  Aris 2.0   Elections Aren't Over Till They End
> 8394#  Jason2.0   8228 retry
> 8395#  G., R. Lee   1.7   Mooting moots
> 8396*  grok, nch3.0   a Proposed Contract
> 8397#  Jason1.1   Editorial what?
> 8398#  grok, G. 1.0   Auction End Clarification
> 8399#  P.S.S.   2.0   Referral
> 8400*  Murphy, nch, G.  3.0   More conservative implicit
> announcements 8401#  R. Lee   1.0   E had two months!
> 8402#  R. Lee   1.0   Clinton v City of New York
> 
> 
> The proposal pool is currently empty.

Grok's "Cantus Counterscam" (which has the author and co-author values that 
are incorrectly listed for "a Proposed Contract") is missing.

Re: DIS: [Promotor] Draft Report

[Aris Merchant via agora-discussion]

On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 1:43 PM Aris Merchant via agora-discussion
 wrote:
>
> Here's my weekly draft.
>
> -Aris
>
> ---
> I hereby distribute each listed proposal, initiating the Agoran
> Decision of whether to adopt it, and removing it from the proposal
> pool. For this decision, the vote collector is the Assessor, the
> quorum is 8, the voting method is AI-majority, and the valid
> options are FOR and AGAINST (PRESENT is also a valid vote, as are
> conditional votes).
>
> ID Author(s)AITitle
> ---
> 8396*  grok, nch3.0   a Proposed Contract

The author, chamber, and AI are all inconsistent with the title.


-Aris

Re: DIS: [Promotor] Draft Report

[Jason Cobb]

I am the author of "Not so indestructible now, eh?". This is correct in 
the table but not correct in the text of the proposal.


Jason Cobb

On 6/11/19 7:31 PM, Aris Merchant wrote:

Given how long it's been, and how many proposals there are, I'd like
to send out a draft rather than just getting everything wrong. Here's
that draft. There will be a small reward (plus my appreciation) for
any corrections!

-Aris
---
I hereby distribute each listed proposal, initiating the Agoran
Decision of whether to adopt it, and removing it from the proposal
pool. For this decision, the vote collector is the Assessor, the
quorum is 9, the voting method is AI-majority, and the valid
options are FOR and AGAINST (PRESENT is also a valid vote, as are
conditional votes).

IDAuthor(s) AITitle
---
8180  Trigon, D Margaux 1.0   Paying our Assessor
8181  D Margaux, [1]1.7   Referee CAN Impose Fines (v1.1)
8182  Jason Cobb3.0   Add value to zombies
8183  V.J. Rada, Tiger  3.0   Regulated Actions Reform
8184  G.3.0   power-limit precedence
8185  Trigon3.0   OUGHT we?
8186  Jason Cobb3.0   Minor currency fixes
8187  Jason Cobb3.0   Not so indestructible now, eh?

[1] Falsifian, twg

The proposal pool is currently empty.

The full text of the aforementioned proposal(s) is included below.

//
ID: 8180
Title: Paying our Assessor
Adoption index: 1.0
Author: Trigon
Co-authors: D Margaux


[ Comment: This is something I didn't include from the version of
Rule 2496 that I didn't include for whatever reason. ]

To Rule 2496 "Rewards" add the following bullet point after the third
one:
   "Resolving an Agoran Decision on whether to adopt a proposal,
   provided that no other Agoran Decision on whether to adopt that or any
   other proposal had been resolved earlier in that Agoran week: 5 coins."

//
ID: 8181
Title: Referee CAN Impose Fines (v1.1)
Adoption index: 1.7
Author: D Margaux
Co-authors: Falsifian, twg


Amend Rule 2478 to replace this text:

   “When a player Points a Finger, the investigator SHALL investigate the
   allegation and, in a timely fashion, SHALL conclude the investigation by:”

With this text:

   “When a player Points a Finger, the investigator SHALL investigate the
   allegation and CAN, and in a timely fashion SHALL, conclude the investigation
   by:”

//
ID: 8182
Title: Add value to zombies
Adoption index: 3.0
Author: Jason Cobb
Co-authors:


Amend Rule 2574 as follows:

   Replace the text
 "Resale is a secured natural switch for zombies"
   with the text
 "Resale value is a secured natural switch for zombies".

   Replace the text "Resale value" in the third item of the only list
   with the text "resale value".

//
ID: 8183
Title: Regulated Actions Reform
Adoption index: 3.0
Author: V.J. Rada
Co-authors: Tiger


Amend Rule 2125 "Regulated Actions" by replacing the text
   "The Rules SHALL NOT be interpreted so as to proscribe unregulated actions."

with the text

   "Nothing in the Rules and no other Entity nor any other thing under these
   rules proscribes unregulated actions, and this sentence takes precedence
   over any Rule or Entity that could be interpreted as proscribing such an
   action"

//
ID: 8184
Title: power-limit precedence
Adoption index: 3.0
Author: G.
Co-authors:


Amend Rule 2140 (Power Controls Mutability) by replacing:
   No entity with power below
with:
   Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, no entity with power below

//
ID: 8185
Title: OUGHT we?
Adoption index: 3.0
Author: Trigon
Co-authors:

In Rule 2152:
   replace "SHOULD NOT, DISCOURAGED, DEPRECATED"
   with "SHOULD NOT, OUGHT NOT, DISCOURAGED, DEPRECATED",

   and replace "SHOULD, ENCOURAGED, RECOMMENDED"
   with "SHOULD, OUGHT, ENCOURAGED, RECOMMENDED"

//
ID: 8186
Title: Minor currency fixes
Adoption index: 3.0
Author: Jason Cobb
Co-authors:

Amend Rule 2578 ("Currencies") as follows:

   Replace all instances of the text '"Agora's official currency"' with
   the text "the official currency of Agora". [Note: this strikes the
   quotation marks]

   Amend Rule 2549 ("Auction Initiation") as follows:
   Replace all instances of the text "Agora's official currency" with
   the text "the official currency of Agora".

   Amend Rule 2483 ("Economics") as follows:

   Replace the text "Coins are the official currency of Agora tracked
   by the Treasuror." with the text 

Re: DIS: [Promotor] Draft Report

[Aris Merchant]

Was Proposal 8089 ever resolved? I can't seem to find an resolution,
which would make quorum 2 from Proposal 8087.

Also, I have only a week to add them back to the pool, and that time
has been expended. We could add them back by proposal though. I'll
write one to do that.




On Sun, Sep 9, 2018 at 5:27 PM Timon Walshe-Grey  wrote:
>
> I make quorum 4. Voters on proposal 8089 were Aris, G., Murphy, Trigon, twg 
> and Kenyon, making 6 valid ballots.
>
> Also, Aris, it would be helpful if you could redistribute proposals 
> 8082-8089, except 8086 which doesn't exist. (8077A-8081A haven't met quorum 
> yet either, but the CFJ on whether you can redistribute twice hasn't been 
> judged yet, and none of 8082-8089 rely on them, so I figure it's safe to wait 
> for a later distribution.)
>
> -twg
>
>
> ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
> On Monday, 10 September 2018 00:22, Kerim Aydin  
> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On Sun, 9 Sep 2018, Aris Merchant wrote:
> >
> > > quorum is 7.0, the voting method is AI-majority, and the valid
> >
> > quorum is 3 I think.
>
>

Re: DIS: [Promotor] Draft Report

[Timon Walshe-Grey]

I make quorum 4. Voters on proposal 8089 were Aris, G., Murphy, Trigon, twg and 
Kenyon, making 6 valid ballots.

Also, Aris, it would be helpful if you could redistribute proposals 8082-8089, 
except 8086 which doesn't exist. (8077A-8081A haven't met quorum yet either, 
but the CFJ on whether you can redistribute twice hasn't been judged yet, and 
none of 8082-8089 rely on them, so I figure it's safe to wait for a later 
distribution.)

-twg


‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Monday, 10 September 2018 00:22, Kerim Aydin  wrote:

>
>
> On Sun, 9 Sep 2018, Aris Merchant wrote:
>
> > quorum is 7.0, the voting method is AI-majority, and the valid
>
> quorum is 3 I think.

Re: DIS: [Promotor] Draft Report

[Kerim Aydin]

On Sun, 9 Sep 2018, Aris Merchant wrote:
> quorum is 7.0, the voting method is AI-majority, and the valid

quorum is 3 I think.

Re: DIS: [Promotor] Draft Report

[Timon Walshe-Grey]

In the full-text-of-proposals section, proposal 8085's title is incorrect.

Also, you missed the proposal Kenyon submitted here: 
https://www.mail-archive.com/agora-business@agoranomic.org/msg32486.html

Otherwise, it looks good to me!

-twg


‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On August 10, 2018 6:47 AM, Aris Merchant  
wrote:

> This is a draft report. Corrections are appreciated, as always. I have
> marked the proposals that are being distributed a second time A,
>
> as noted in the key. This identifies the distribution; the proposal is
> still the same and thus has the same ID. The distribution-qualified
> form should be useful for Assessor tallies, and probably not much
> else.
>
> -Aris
>
> --
>
> I hereby distribute each listed proposal, initiating the Agoran
> Decision of whether to adopt it, and removing it from the proposal
> pool. For this decision, the vote collector is the Assessor, the
> quorum is 7.0, the voting method is AI-majority, and the valid
> options are FOR and AGAINST (PRESENT is also a valid vote, as are
> conditional votes).
>
> ID Author(s) AI Title
>
> 
>
> 8077A* twg 3.0 Patchy McPatchface
> 8078A* twg 2.0 From each according to eir means
> 8079A* twg 2.0 From each according to eir means v2
> 8080A* Aris 2.0 From each according to eir means v3
> 8081A* Aris, G., twg 3.0 Point Installation Act v2
> 8082* twg 1.0 Gamestate correction for July 2018
> 8083* G. 3.0 quorum fixes
> 8084* Trigon 1.0 Needs more Competition
> 8085* Kenyon, twg 2.0 Plain Old Bribery, Mk. II
> 8086* Trigon, [1] 1.0 Revamping movement v3.1
> 8087* Aris 1.0 Even Freer Proposals
>
> The proposal pool is currently empty.
>
> [1] twg, Aris, G., Corona
>
> Legend: * : Proposal is pending.
>
> + : By publishing this report, I pend the marked proposal.
>
> A : Distribution identifier for a second distribution.
>
>
> The full text of the aforementioned proposals is included below.
>
> //
> ID: 8077
> Title: Patchy McPatchface
> Adoption index: 3.0
> Author: twg
> Co-author(s):
>
> Amend rule 478, "Fora", by replacing "may change" with "CAN change".
>
> Amend rule 1789, "Cantus Cygneus", by replacing every occurrence of
> "shall" with "SHALL".
>
> //
> ID: 8078
> Title: From each according to eir means
> Adoption index: 2.0
> Author: twg
> Co-author(s):
>
> [ This is an attempt at a reset/rebalance that strikes a middle ground between
> completely erasing everyone's progress and leaving the current exponentially-
> growing inequality in place. I'm not positive that I struck the right balance
> but even if it's rejected it can be a starting point for discussion. ]
>
> For each facility owned by a player, transfer all coins owned by that facility
> to its owner.
>
> For each zombie owned by a player, transfer all coins owned by that zombie to
> its owner.
>
> Decrease the coin balance of each player to the square root (rounded up to the
> next largest integer) of however many coins e possessed before this sentence
> took effect.
>
> //
> ID: 8079
> Title: From each according to eir means v2
> Adoption index: 2.0
> Author: twg
> Co-author(s):
>
> [An alternative algorithm which may be slightly preferable: Quarter
> the coin balances instead of square-rooting them.]
>
> If the votes on the proposal titled "From each according to eir
> means" authored by twg are such that it has been or will undoubtedly
> be ADOPTED, then this proposal has no effect.
>
> For each facility owned by a player, transfer all coins owned by that
> facility to its owner.
>
> For each zombie owned by a player, transfer all coins owned by that
> zombie to its owner.
>
> Decrease the coin balance of each player to one-quarter (rounded up to
> the next largest integer) of however many coins e possessed before
> this sentence took effect.
>
> //
> ID: 8080
> Title: From each according to eir means v3
> Adoption index: 2.0
> Author: Aris
> Co-author(s): twg
>
> If the votes on any proposal, the title of which contains "From each",
> authored by twg, are such that it has been or will undoubtedly
> be ADOPTED, then this proposal has no effect.
>
> For each facility owned by a player, transfer all 

Re: DIS: [Promotor] Draft Report

[VJ Rada]

o. is a co-author of I Demand Faster Auctions, which you do not list here.

On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 1:57 AM, Alexis Hunt  wrote:
> Also my two proposals about the mailing lists.
>
> On Mon, 23 Oct 2017 at 09:17 Alexis Hunt  wrote:
>>
>> I believe my high power cleanup proposal is missing.
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 23, 2017, 09:11 ATMunn .,  wrote:
>>>
>>> Looks good to me.
>>>
>>> On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 2:14 AM, Aris Merchant
>>>  wrote:

 Just a draft to make sure I haven't messed something up again.

 -Aris

 ---
 I hereby distribute each listed proposal, initiating the Agoran
 Decision of whether to adopt it, and removing it from the proposal
 pool. For this decision, the vote collector is the Assessor, the
 quorum is 8.0 and the valid options are FOR and AGAINST (PRESENT is
 also a valid vote).

 ID Author(s)  AI   TitlePender  Pend
 fee

 ---
 7931*  G. 3.0  Registration fix finally G.  1
 sh.
 7932*  ATMunn, [1]1.0  A Reward for Obedience v4ATMunn  1
 sh.
 7933*  Alexis 3.0  Ribbon Preservation Act  Alexis  1
 sh.
 7934*  天火狐  1.0  Poetry Duel Challenge Writ   天火狐   OP [2]
 7935*  Trigon 1.0  Revision Limits  Trigon  1 AP
 7936*  V.J. Rada  2.0  Print Money  V.J. Rada   1 AP
 7937*  V.J. Rada  2.0  I Demand Faster Auctions V.J. Rada   1 AP
 7938*  Aris   3.0  Fix Campaign Proposals   Aris1 AP
 7939*  V.J. Rada  1.0  Repeal the Reportor  V.J. Rada   1
 sh.

 The proposal pool currently contains the following proposals:

 IDAuthor(s) AI   Title

 ---
 pp1   G.3.0  I've never seen this done

 [1] Aris, Alexis, G.
 [2] Official Proposal, inherently pending

 A proposal may be pended for 1 AP, or for 1/20th the Floating Value
 in shines (see the Treasuror's report).

 The full text of the aforementioned proposals is included below.

 //
 ID: 7931
 Title: Registration fix finally
 Adoption index: 3.0
 Author: G.
 Co-authors:


 [It looks like we have various ways for players to make money now so
 the re-registration bug can be fixed.  Also clearly defines the verb
 "to register" and makes it clear that registered persons can't "re"
 register].


 Amend Rule 869 (How to Join and Leave Agora) by replacing:

   Citizenship is a person switch with values Unregistered
   (default) and Registered, tracked by the Registrar.  Changes to
   citizenship are secured.  A registered person is a Player.

   A person CAN (unless explicitly forbidden or prevented by the
   rules) register by publishing a message that indicates
   reasonably clearly and reasonably unambiguously that e intends
   to become a player at that time.  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.

   A player CAN deregister (cease being a player) by announcement.
   If e does so, e CANNOT register by announcement for 30 days.

 with:

   Citizenship is a person switch with values Unregistered
   (default) and Registered, tracked by the Registrar.  Changes to
   citizenship are secured.  A registered person is a Player.
   To "register" someone is to flip that person's Citizenship
   switch from Unregistered to Registered.

   An Unregistered person CAN (unless explicitly forbidden or
   prevented by the rules) register by publishing a message that
   indicates reasonably clearly and reasonably unambiguously that e
   intends to become a player at that time. A player CAN deregister
   (cease being a player) by announcement. If e does so, e CANNOT
   register or be registered for 30 days.

   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.

 //
 ID: 7932
 Title: A Reward for Obedience v4
 Adoption index: 1.0
 Author: ATMunn
 Co-authors: Aris, Alexis, G.

 Repeal rule 2482, "Victory Elections"

 Create a new power-1 rule titled "Medals of Honour"
 {
   Medals of Honour are a destructible fixed currency tracked by the

Re: DIS: [Promotor] Draft Report

[Alexis Hunt]

Also my two proposals about the mailing lists.

On Mon, 23 Oct 2017 at 09:17 Alexis Hunt  wrote:

> I believe my high power cleanup proposal is missing.
>
> On Mon, Oct 23, 2017, 09:11 ATMunn .,  wrote:
>
>> Looks good to me.
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 2:14 AM, Aris Merchant <
>> thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Just a draft to make sure I haven't messed something up again.
>>>
>>> -Aris
>>>
>>> ---
>>> I hereby distribute each listed proposal, initiating the Agoran
>>> Decision of whether to adopt it, and removing it from the proposal
>>> pool. For this decision, the vote collector is the Assessor, the
>>> quorum is 8.0 and the valid options are FOR and AGAINST (PRESENT is
>>> also a valid vote).
>>>
>>> ID Author(s)  AI   TitlePender  Pend
>>> fee
>>>
>>> ---
>>> 7931*  G. 3.0  Registration fix finally G.  1 sh.
>>> 7932*  ATMunn, [1]1.0  A Reward for Obedience v4ATMunn  1 sh.
>>> 7933*  Alexis 3.0  Ribbon Preservation Act  Alexis  1 sh.
>>> 7934*  天火狐  1.0  Poetry Duel Challenge Writ   天火狐   OP [2]
>>> 7935*  Trigon 1.0  Revision Limits  Trigon  1 AP
>>> 7936*  V.J. Rada  2.0  Print Money  V.J. Rada   1 AP
>>> 7937*  V.J. Rada  2.0  I Demand Faster Auctions V.J. Rada   1 AP
>>> 7938*  Aris   3.0  Fix Campaign Proposals   Aris1 AP
>>> 7939*  V.J. Rada  1.0  Repeal the Reportor  V.J. Rada   1 sh.
>>>
>>> The proposal pool currently contains the following proposals:
>>>
>>> IDAuthor(s) AI   Title
>>>
>>> ---
>>> pp1   G.3.0  I've never seen this done
>>>
>>> [1] Aris, Alexis, G.
>>> [2] Official Proposal, inherently pending
>>>
>>> A proposal may be pended for 1 AP, or for 1/20th the Floating Value
>>> in shines (see the Treasuror's report).
>>>
>>> The full text of the aforementioned proposals is included below.
>>>
>>> //
>>> ID: 7931
>>> Title: Registration fix finally
>>> Adoption index: 3.0
>>> Author: G.
>>> Co-authors:
>>>
>>>
>>> [It looks like we have various ways for players to make money now so
>>> the re-registration bug can be fixed.  Also clearly defines the verb
>>> "to register" and makes it clear that registered persons can't "re"
>>> register].
>>>
>>>
>>> Amend Rule 869 (How to Join and Leave Agora) by replacing:
>>>
>>>   Citizenship is a person switch with values Unregistered
>>>   (default) and Registered, tracked by the Registrar.  Changes to
>>>   citizenship are secured.  A registered person is a Player.
>>>
>>>   A person CAN (unless explicitly forbidden or prevented by the
>>>   rules) register by publishing a message that indicates
>>>   reasonably clearly and reasonably unambiguously that e intends
>>>   to become a player at that time.  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.
>>>
>>>   A player CAN deregister (cease being a player) by announcement.
>>>   If e does so, e CANNOT register by announcement for 30 days.
>>>
>>> with:
>>>
>>>   Citizenship is a person switch with values Unregistered
>>>   (default) and Registered, tracked by the Registrar.  Changes to
>>>   citizenship are secured.  A registered person is a Player.
>>>   To "register" someone is to flip that person's Citizenship
>>>   switch from Unregistered to Registered.
>>>
>>>   An Unregistered person CAN (unless explicitly forbidden or
>>>   prevented by the rules) register by publishing a message that
>>>   indicates reasonably clearly and reasonably unambiguously that e
>>>   intends to become a player at that time. A player CAN deregister
>>>   (cease being a player) by announcement. If e does so, e CANNOT
>>>   register or be registered for 30 days.
>>>
>>>   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.
>>>
>>> //
>>> ID: 7932
>>> Title: A Reward for Obedience v4
>>> Adoption index: 1.0
>>> Author: ATMunn
>>> Co-authors: Aris, Alexis, G.
>>>
>>> Repeal rule 2482, "Victory Elections"
>>>
>>> Create a new power-1 rule titled "Medals of Honour"
>>> {
>>>   Medals of Honour are a destructible fixed currency tracked by the
>>> Herald.
>>>
>>>   In the 7 days of an Agoran month, any player CAN declare emself to be
>>>   eligible for a Medal of Honour by announcement if all of the following
>>> are
>>>   true:
>>>
>>>   * E has made at least 1 message to a public forum in the last Agoran
>>> month.
>>>   * Eir 

Re: DIS: [Promotor] Draft Report

[Alexis Hunt]

I believe my high power cleanup proposal is missing.

On Mon, Oct 23, 2017, 09:11 ATMunn .,  wrote:

> Looks good to me.
>
> On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 2:14 AM, Aris Merchant <
> thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Just a draft to make sure I haven't messed something up again.
>>
>> -Aris
>>
>> ---
>> I hereby distribute each listed proposal, initiating the Agoran
>> Decision of whether to adopt it, and removing it from the proposal
>> pool. For this decision, the vote collector is the Assessor, the
>> quorum is 8.0 and the valid options are FOR and AGAINST (PRESENT is
>> also a valid vote).
>>
>> ID Author(s)  AI   TitlePender  Pend
>> fee
>>
>> ---
>> 7931*  G. 3.0  Registration fix finally G.  1 sh.
>> 7932*  ATMunn, [1]1.0  A Reward for Obedience v4ATMunn  1 sh.
>> 7933*  Alexis 3.0  Ribbon Preservation Act  Alexis  1 sh.
>> 7934*  天火狐  1.0  Poetry Duel Challenge Writ   天火狐   OP [2]
>> 7935*  Trigon 1.0  Revision Limits  Trigon  1 AP
>> 7936*  V.J. Rada  2.0  Print Money  V.J. Rada   1 AP
>> 7937*  V.J. Rada  2.0  I Demand Faster Auctions V.J. Rada   1 AP
>> 7938*  Aris   3.0  Fix Campaign Proposals   Aris1 AP
>> 7939*  V.J. Rada  1.0  Repeal the Reportor  V.J. Rada   1 sh.
>>
>> The proposal pool currently contains the following proposals:
>>
>> IDAuthor(s) AI   Title
>>
>> ---
>> pp1   G.3.0  I've never seen this done
>>
>> [1] Aris, Alexis, G.
>> [2] Official Proposal, inherently pending
>>
>> A proposal may be pended for 1 AP, or for 1/20th the Floating Value
>> in shines (see the Treasuror's report).
>>
>> The full text of the aforementioned proposals is included below.
>>
>> //
>> ID: 7931
>> Title: Registration fix finally
>> Adoption index: 3.0
>> Author: G.
>> Co-authors:
>>
>>
>> [It looks like we have various ways for players to make money now so
>> the re-registration bug can be fixed.  Also clearly defines the verb
>> "to register" and makes it clear that registered persons can't "re"
>> register].
>>
>>
>> Amend Rule 869 (How to Join and Leave Agora) by replacing:
>>
>>   Citizenship is a person switch with values Unregistered
>>   (default) and Registered, tracked by the Registrar.  Changes to
>>   citizenship are secured.  A registered person is a Player.
>>
>>   A person CAN (unless explicitly forbidden or prevented by the
>>   rules) register by publishing a message that indicates
>>   reasonably clearly and reasonably unambiguously that e intends
>>   to become a player at that time.  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.
>>
>>   A player CAN deregister (cease being a player) by announcement.
>>   If e does so, e CANNOT register by announcement for 30 days.
>>
>> with:
>>
>>   Citizenship is a person switch with values Unregistered
>>   (default) and Registered, tracked by the Registrar.  Changes to
>>   citizenship are secured.  A registered person is a Player.
>>   To "register" someone is to flip that person's Citizenship
>>   switch from Unregistered to Registered.
>>
>>   An Unregistered person CAN (unless explicitly forbidden or
>>   prevented by the rules) register by publishing a message that
>>   indicates reasonably clearly and reasonably unambiguously that e
>>   intends to become a player at that time. A player CAN deregister
>>   (cease being a player) by announcement. If e does so, e CANNOT
>>   register or be registered for 30 days.
>>
>>   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.
>>
>> //
>> ID: 7932
>> Title: A Reward for Obedience v4
>> Adoption index: 1.0
>> Author: ATMunn
>> Co-authors: Aris, Alexis, G.
>>
>> Repeal rule 2482, "Victory Elections"
>>
>> Create a new power-1 rule titled "Medals of Honour"
>> {
>>   Medals of Honour are a destructible fixed currency tracked by the
>> Herald.
>>
>>   In the 7 days of an Agoran month, any player CAN declare emself to be
>>   eligible for a Medal of Honour by announcement if all of the following
>> are
>>   true:
>>
>>   * E has made at least 1 message to a public forum in the last Agoran
>> month.
>>   * Eir Karma is not below -3.
>>   * In the last Agoran month, e has not had a Card issued to em.
>>
>>   In the 7 days of an Agoran month after the first 7 days, if there are
>> any
>>   players who are eligible for a Medal of Honour, the Herald 

Re: DIS: [Promotor] Draft Report

[ATMunn .]

Looks good to me.

On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 2:14 AM, Aris Merchant <
thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Just a draft to make sure I haven't messed something up again.
>
> -Aris
>
> ---
> I hereby distribute each listed proposal, initiating the Agoran
> Decision of whether to adopt it, and removing it from the proposal
> pool. For this decision, the vote collector is the Assessor, the
> quorum is 8.0 and the valid options are FOR and AGAINST (PRESENT is
> also a valid vote).
>
> ID Author(s)  AI   TitlePender  Pend
> fee
> 
> ---
> 7931*  G. 3.0  Registration fix finally G.  1 sh.
> 7932*  ATMunn, [1]1.0  A Reward for Obedience v4ATMunn  1 sh.
> 7933*  Alexis 3.0  Ribbon Preservation Act  Alexis  1 sh.
> 7934*  天火狐  1.0  Poetry Duel Challenge Writ   天火狐   OP [2]
> 7935*  Trigon 1.0  Revision Limits  Trigon  1 AP
> 7936*  V.J. Rada  2.0  Print Money  V.J. Rada   1 AP
> 7937*  V.J. Rada  2.0  I Demand Faster Auctions V.J. Rada   1 AP
> 7938*  Aris   3.0  Fix Campaign Proposals   Aris1 AP
> 7939*  V.J. Rada  1.0  Repeal the Reportor  V.J. Rada   1 sh.
>
> The proposal pool currently contains the following proposals:
>
> IDAuthor(s) AI   Title
> 
> ---
> pp1   G.3.0  I've never seen this done
>
> [1] Aris, Alexis, G.
> [2] Official Proposal, inherently pending
>
> A proposal may be pended for 1 AP, or for 1/20th the Floating Value
> in shines (see the Treasuror's report).
>
> The full text of the aforementioned proposals is included below.
>
> //
> ID: 7931
> Title: Registration fix finally
> Adoption index: 3.0
> Author: G.
> Co-authors:
>
>
> [It looks like we have various ways for players to make money now so
> the re-registration bug can be fixed.  Also clearly defines the verb
> "to register" and makes it clear that registered persons can't "re"
> register].
>
>
> Amend Rule 869 (How to Join and Leave Agora) by replacing:
>
>   Citizenship is a person switch with values Unregistered
>   (default) and Registered, tracked by the Registrar.  Changes to
>   citizenship are secured.  A registered person is a Player.
>
>   A person CAN (unless explicitly forbidden or prevented by the
>   rules) register by publishing a message that indicates
>   reasonably clearly and reasonably unambiguously that e intends
>   to become a player at that time.  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.
>
>   A player CAN deregister (cease being a player) by announcement.
>   If e does so, e CANNOT register by announcement for 30 days.
>
> with:
>
>   Citizenship is a person switch with values Unregistered
>   (default) and Registered, tracked by the Registrar.  Changes to
>   citizenship are secured.  A registered person is a Player.
>   To "register" someone is to flip that person's Citizenship
>   switch from Unregistered to Registered.
>
>   An Unregistered person CAN (unless explicitly forbidden or
>   prevented by the rules) register by publishing a message that
>   indicates reasonably clearly and reasonably unambiguously that e
>   intends to become a player at that time. A player CAN deregister
>   (cease being a player) by announcement. If e does so, e CANNOT
>   register or be registered for 30 days.
>
>   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.
>
> //
> ID: 7932
> Title: A Reward for Obedience v4
> Adoption index: 1.0
> Author: ATMunn
> Co-authors: Aris, Alexis, G.
>
> Repeal rule 2482, "Victory Elections"
>
> Create a new power-1 rule titled "Medals of Honour"
> {
>   Medals of Honour are a destructible fixed currency tracked by the Herald.
>
>   In the 7 days of an Agoran month, any player CAN declare emself to be
>   eligible for a Medal of Honour by announcement if all of the following
> are
>   true:
>
>   * E has made at least 1 message to a public forum in the last Agoran
> month.
>   * Eir Karma is not below -3.
>   * In the last Agoran month, e has not had a Card issued to em.
>
>   In the 7 days of an Agoran month after the first 7 days, if there are any
>   players who are eligible for a Medal of Honour, the Herald CAN, by
>   announcement, initiate an Agoran Decision on who is to be awarded a
>   Medal of Honour. E SHALL do so within the 7 days of an Agoran month after
>   the first 7 days. For this decision, the valid votes are all players who
>   are eligible 

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Promotor draft report

[Kerim Aydin]

On Fri, 1 Sep 2017, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> To be clear, I think your proposed fix of "making lots of simple ways to
> earn shinies" would work just as well as a fixed basic income, as long as
> there are enough of those things from the beginning for non-officer players
> to do, that they can have some level of positive equilibrium without a 
> huge amount of effort.  One suggestion I'd really encourage is putting
> together a basic simulation to figure out where equilibrium points might lie
> in this game, and making sure there's no split between the "haves" and the
> "have-nots" in the equilibrium.

Another possible solution:  make the welcome purse some kind of 
income-generating
investment (e.g. land or similar, modified to have some kind of earning) rather
than cash.

Maybe everyone could have a land grant, but the rules for earning shinies from
land grants can vary to have some of the diminishing return behavior you
suggested earlier.

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Promotor draft report

[Kerim Aydin]

On Thu, 31 Aug 2017, Nic Evans wrote:
> On 08/31/17 16:50, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 31 Aug 2017, Nic Evans wrote:
> >>> I'm opposed to anything that doesn't scale with need. A regular payday
> >>> would mostly benefit the already successful players.
> > This is where I disagree, primarily.  We've never had a system that didn't
> > allow a base level of activity on a weekly or monthly level (proposals & 
> > CFJs)
> > just for being a player.
> 
> I'm not sure I see the complaint here. Under AP there is a minimum, and
> in Debts you can just keep making CFJs and proposals indefinitely - you
> just can't buy stamps or estates until you settle debts.

So first, no complaints about the AP (other than it slows the economy down
some, which is what debts is trying to fix).

So the issues I see with your current debt scheme scheme are:

1.  Game balance.  Stamps and estates (in theory) let you earn more cash.
So locking people without a standing income out of those systems exacerbates
the split between have and have-nots.  Related:  catch-up, how long should
a new player need to play before they can earn enough to be competitive with
the longer-standing players?

2.  Incentives.  If the only way to get out of debts is to become an officer,
it makes "becoming an officer" a game incentive.  This leads to lots of
low-effort offices, new players feeling they have to jump in and be an
officer (then flaking on reports).  Officers should be rewarded, sure, but
it shouldn't be a basic requirement of play - we do better when the offices
are taken out of duty/fun, with rewards being secondary.

3.  Discourages economic activity.  With no way to earn shinies, I'm holding
onto my welcome package with an iron fist.

4.  Discourages other game activity.  If this means I make fewer proposals
to hold onto those shinies, that's what I do.

To be clear, I think your proposed fix of "making lots of simple ways to
earn shinies" would work just as well as a fixed basic income, as long as
there are enough of those things from the beginning for non-officer players
to do, that they can have some level of positive equilibrium without a 
huge amount of effort.  One suggestion I'd really encourage is putting
together a basic simulation to figure out where equilibrium points might lie
in this game, and making sure there's no split between the "haves" and the
"have-nots" in the equilibrium.

Other Idea:  Economic revolution.  Debtor players can start a revolt that,
if successful, wipes out their debts.

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Promotor draft report

[Nicholas Evans]

I withdraw the proposal titled Debts.

On Sep 1, 2017 1:21 AM, "Aris Merchant" 
wrote:

> nichdel, is debts being pulled? I should be releasing fairly soonish (as
> in the next day or two).
>
> -Aris
>
> On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 3:30 PM Nic Evans  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 08/31/17 16:50, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>> >
>> > On Thu, 31 Aug 2017, Nic Evans wrote:
>> >>> I'm opposed to anything that doesn't scale with need. A regular payday
>> >>> would mostly benefit the already successful players.
>> > This is where I disagree, primarily.  We've never had a system that
>> didn't
>> > allow a base level of activity on a weekly or monthly level (proposals
>> & CFJs)
>> > just for being a player.
>>
>> I'm not sure I see the complaint here. Under AP there is a minimum, and
>> in Debts you can just keep making CFJs and proposals indefinitely - you
>> just can't buy stamps or estates until you settle debts.
>>
>> What I mean here is that giving X shinies to each player is a
>> compounding advantage for players that are really good with shinies.
>> They don't need that advantage. Thus, any free shinies should be given
>> out based on need, and when a player reaches a point where they can
>> efficiently use their shinies, they don't receive the bonus anymore.
>>
>> >
>> > And officer-work, volunteer as it is, has always granted perks within
>> the
>> > system, and I think it's important to reward work.  I'm not sure why a
>> regular
>> > payday is a bad thing - if accumulation is an issue, I'd suggest
>> dealing with
>> > it on the other side with taxes.
>> >
>> > I'm willing to try various systems, but don't like moving away from the
>> > two principles of "everyone's allowed to have a base activity level" and
>> > "officers get some rewards above that".
>> >
>> >> Actually, on this note maybe we should consider a monthly set of shiny
>> >> rewards for minor achivements. Things like:
>> >>
>> >> *Authoring the most passed proposals in the last month
>> >> *Judging the most CFJs in the last month
>> >> *Being the director of the most used agency in the last month
>> >> *Etc
>> >>
>> >> Ideally, things that any player could accomplish at any time.
>> > An old system we had:
>> >
>> > You could be awarded Boons for doing good things and Albatrosses for
>> doing
>> > bad things.  Everything from standard office-keeping to random
>> occasional
>> > things (like Birthday recognition) granted boons.  Monthly activity
>> level
>> > each month was Base + Boons - Albatrosses (as earned in previous month).
>> >
>> > Glance through following randomly-selected ruleset for Boon to see
>> range of
>> > things we awarded:
>> > https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/
>> agora-official/2004-September/001691.html
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Promotor draft report

[Aris Merchant]

nichdel, is debts being pulled? I should be releasing fairly soonish (as in
the next day or two).

-Aris

On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 3:30 PM Nic Evans  wrote:

>
>
> On 08/31/17 16:50, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 31 Aug 2017, Nic Evans wrote:
> >>> I'm opposed to anything that doesn't scale with need. A regular payday
> >>> would mostly benefit the already successful players.
> > This is where I disagree, primarily.  We've never had a system that
> didn't
> > allow a base level of activity on a weekly or monthly level (proposals &
> CFJs)
> > just for being a player.
>
> I'm not sure I see the complaint here. Under AP there is a minimum, and
> in Debts you can just keep making CFJs and proposals indefinitely - you
> just can't buy stamps or estates until you settle debts.
>
> What I mean here is that giving X shinies to each player is a
> compounding advantage for players that are really good with shinies.
> They don't need that advantage. Thus, any free shinies should be given
> out based on need, and when a player reaches a point where they can
> efficiently use their shinies, they don't receive the bonus anymore.
>
> >
> > And officer-work, volunteer as it is, has always granted perks within the
> > system, and I think it's important to reward work.  I'm not sure why a
> regular
> > payday is a bad thing - if accumulation is an issue, I'd suggest dealing
> with
> > it on the other side with taxes.
> >
> > I'm willing to try various systems, but don't like moving away from the
> > two principles of "everyone's allowed to have a base activity level" and
> > "officers get some rewards above that".
> >
> >> Actually, on this note maybe we should consider a monthly set of shiny
> >> rewards for minor achivements. Things like:
> >>
> >> *Authoring the most passed proposals in the last month
> >> *Judging the most CFJs in the last month
> >> *Being the director of the most used agency in the last month
> >> *Etc
> >>
> >> Ideally, things that any player could accomplish at any time.
> > An old system we had:
> >
> > You could be awarded Boons for doing good things and Albatrosses for
> doing
> > bad things.  Everything from standard office-keeping to random occasional
> > things (like Birthday recognition) granted boons.  Monthly activity level
> > each month was Base + Boons - Albatrosses (as earned in previous month).
> >
> > Glance through following randomly-selected ruleset for Boon to see range
> of
> > things we awarded:
> >
> https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-official/2004-September/001691.html
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Promotor draft report

[Nic Evans]

On 08/31/17 16:50, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> On Thu, 31 Aug 2017, Nic Evans wrote:
>>> I'm opposed to anything that doesn't scale with need. A regular payday
>>> would mostly benefit the already successful players.
> This is where I disagree, primarily.  We've never had a system that didn't
> allow a base level of activity on a weekly or monthly level (proposals & CFJs)
> just for being a player.

I'm not sure I see the complaint here. Under AP there is a minimum, and
in Debts you can just keep making CFJs and proposals indefinitely - you
just can't buy stamps or estates until you settle debts.

What I mean here is that giving X shinies to each player is a
compounding advantage for players that are really good with shinies.
They don't need that advantage. Thus, any free shinies should be given
out based on need, and when a player reaches a point where they can
efficiently use their shinies, they don't receive the bonus anymore.

>
> And officer-work, volunteer as it is, has always granted perks within the
> system, and I think it's important to reward work.  I'm not sure why a regular
> payday is a bad thing - if accumulation is an issue, I'd suggest dealing with
> it on the other side with taxes.
>
> I'm willing to try various systems, but don't like moving away from the
> two principles of "everyone's allowed to have a base activity level" and
> "officers get some rewards above that".
>
>> Actually, on this note maybe we should consider a monthly set of shiny
>> rewards for minor achivements. Things like:
>>
>> *Authoring the most passed proposals in the last month
>> *Judging the most CFJs in the last month
>> *Being the director of the most used agency in the last month
>> *Etc
>>
>> Ideally, things that any player could accomplish at any time.
> An old system we had:
>
> You could be awarded Boons for doing good things and Albatrosses for doing
> bad things.  Everything from standard office-keeping to random occasional
> things (like Birthday recognition) granted boons.  Monthly activity level
> each month was Base + Boons - Albatrosses (as earned in previous month).
>
> Glance through following randomly-selected ruleset for Boon to see range of
> things we awarded:
> https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-official/2004-September/001691.html
>
>
>




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Promotor draft report

[Kerim Aydin]

On Thu, 31 Aug 2017, Nic Evans wrote:
> > I'm opposed to anything that doesn't scale with need. A regular payday
> > would mostly benefit the already successful players.

This is where I disagree, primarily.  We've never had a system that didn't
allow a base level of activity on a weekly or monthly level (proposals & CFJs)
just for being a player.

And officer-work, volunteer as it is, has always granted perks within the
system, and I think it's important to reward work.  I'm not sure why a regular
payday is a bad thing - if accumulation is an issue, I'd suggest dealing with
it on the other side with taxes.

I'm willing to try various systems, but don't like moving away from the
two principles of "everyone's allowed to have a base activity level" and
"officers get some rewards above that".

> Actually, on this note maybe we should consider a monthly set of shiny
> rewards for minor achivements. Things like:
> 
> *Authoring the most passed proposals in the last month
> *Judging the most CFJs in the last month
> *Being the director of the most used agency in the last month
> *Etc
> 
> Ideally, things that any player could accomplish at any time.

An old system we had:

You could be awarded Boons for doing good things and Albatrosses for doing
bad things.  Everything from standard office-keeping to random occasional
things (like Birthday recognition) granted boons.  Monthly activity level
each month was Base + Boons - Albatrosses (as earned in previous month).

Glance through following randomly-selected ruleset for Boon to see range of
things we awarded:
https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-official/2004-September/001691.html

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Promotor draft report

[Nic Evans]

On 08/31/17 16:17, Nic Evans wrote:
> (I've been a bit distracted lately but I'm keeping up with conversation.)
>
> The current economy was designed with the idea of coupling economics
> closely to productivity. Creating work costs, and resolving work pays.
> It's intentionally difficult to profit without doing considerable work
> successfully. I'd like to keep it mostly that way. Maybe there's more
> behaviors we should be rewarding.

Actually, on this note maybe we should consider a monthly set of shiny
rewards for minor achivements. Things like:

*Authoring the most passed proposals in the last month
*Judging the most CFJs in the last month
*Being the director of the most used agency in the last month
*Etc

Ideally, things that any player could accomplish at any time.

>
> But I do agree with the current criticism as well. A welcome package
> isn't enough to get the economy rolling, especially for new players.
> There needs to be a way to fail and bounce back. AP circumvents the
> problem by reducing need for shinies, but it doesn't help new players
> get into the game. Debts solves problems AP introduced, but may very
> well permanently cripple anyone who makes a bad play or two.
> Supplemental income is probably necessary.
>
> I'm opposed to anything that doesn't scale with need. A regular payday
> would mostly benefit the already successful players. A bailout when a
> player reaches 0 shinies would benefit clever players who purposely zero
> their shinies. Overall wealth (shinies, debts, estates, and stamps)
> needs to somehow be a factor to ensure that it's not abusable by players
> that don't need it.
>
> Since stamps are easily liquified, the best solution may be a payday
> only accessible to people with 0 shinies and 0 stamps. I suspect there's
> ways to abuse even that (by trading stamps around and/or buying
> estates), but hopefully its benefits outweigh the negatives. I'm open to
> other suggestions as well.
>




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Promotor draft report

[Nic Evans]

On 08/29/17 13:00, Owen Jacobson wrote:
>> On Aug 29, 2017, at 10:54 AM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, 29 Aug 2017, Owen Jacobson wrote:
 IDAuthor(s)   AI   Title
 ---
 pp1   nichdel, o, grok, Aris  3.0  Debts
 pp2   nichdel 1.0  Better Accounting
>>> I pend each of these proposals, using AP to do so.
>> Debts is badly broken for non-Officers and I'd recommend voting Against.  I 
>> was
>> hoping to see another draft because we want to get off AP, but this debts 
>> draft
>> is worse.
> Yeah, I’m doubtful it’ll pass. Nichdel can still withdraw the proposal, and I 
> do plan to vote AGAINST. I just figured that since I have nothing better to 
> do with my AP, I’d pretend they were Spending Power and use ‘em.
>
> -o
>

(I've been a bit distracted lately but I'm keeping up with conversation.)

The current economy was designed with the idea of coupling economics
closely to productivity. Creating work costs, and resolving work pays.
It's intentionally difficult to profit without doing considerable work
successfully. I'd like to keep it mostly that way. Maybe there's more
behaviors we should be rewarding.

But I do agree with the current criticism as well. A welcome package
isn't enough to get the economy rolling, especially for new players.
There needs to be a way to fail and bounce back. AP circumvents the
problem by reducing need for shinies, but it doesn't help new players
get into the game. Debts solves problems AP introduced, but may very
well permanently cripple anyone who makes a bad play or two.
Supplemental income is probably necessary.

I'm opposed to anything that doesn't scale with need. A regular payday
would mostly benefit the already successful players. A bailout when a
player reaches 0 shinies would benefit clever players who purposely zero
their shinies. Overall wealth (shinies, debts, estates, and stamps)
needs to somehow be a factor to ensure that it's not abusable by players
that don't need it.

Since stamps are easily liquified, the best solution may be a payday
only accessible to people with 0 shinies and 0 stamps. I suspect there's
ways to abuse even that (by trading stamps around and/or buying
estates), but hopefully its benefits outweigh the negatives. I'm open to
other suggestions as well.



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Promotor draft report

[Owen Jacobson]

> On Aug 29, 2017, at 10:54 AM, Kerim Aydin  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, 29 Aug 2017, Owen Jacobson wrote:
>>> IDAuthor(s)   AI   Title
>>> ---
>>> pp1   nichdel, o, grok, Aris  3.0  Debts
>>> pp2   nichdel 1.0  Better Accounting
>> 
>> I pend each of these proposals, using AP to do so.
> 
> Debts is badly broken for non-Officers and I'd recommend voting Against.  I 
> was
> hoping to see another draft because we want to get off AP, but this debts 
> draft
> is worse.

Yeah, I’m doubtful it’ll pass. Nichdel can still withdraw the proposal, and I 
do plan to vote AGAINST. I just figured that since I have nothing better to do 
with my AP, I’d pretend they were Spending Power and use ‘em.

-o



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Promotor draft report

[Kerim Aydin]

On Tue, 29 Aug 2017, Owen Jacobson wrote:
> > IDAuthor(s)   AI   Title
> > ---
> > pp1   nichdel, o, grok, Aris  3.0  Debts
> > pp2   nichdel 1.0  Better Accounting
> 
> I pend each of these proposals, using AP to do so.

Debts is badly broken for non-Officers and I'd recommend voting Against.  I was
hoping to see another draft because we want to get off AP, but this debts draft
is worse.