On Sun, 2013-08-04 at 22:16 -0400, Fool wrote: > Okay. Why would he have to have been continuously registered since > ratification broke? Wouldn't it be sufficient for him to have registered > after ratification broke, and been continously registered since?
It reduces the variables as much as possible. There are basically two ways you can go about fixing things: a) Massive Gamestate Recalculation. According to conversations I've had on the topic, people /are/ willing to go through with this if it's necessary, but it's easy to make a mistake, and it's a huge amount of effort. (It consists of checking every action in the past 3 years to see what its effects were, taking the bug into account.) It probably wouldn't take too long if we restricted ourselves to tracking merely things that affected the ruleset (registration status, voting limits, proposal results). b) Uncertainty reduction. Instead of trying to work out the effects of every action, try to calculate a sequence of actions that necessarily works to recover the gamestate. This normally involves pinning down the variables as much as possible; for instance, there may be players which nobody's even attempted to deregister, thus they're necessarily players under any ruleset that we might reasonably have ended up with. However, registrations in Agora are often ambiguous; normally we just CFJ on whether they worked and then let the Registrar's report ratify, but if ratification is broken, that doesn't necessarily work, both due to the possibility of the CFJ having been judged incorrectly (ratification and to some extent rule 217 is how CFJs get their power!), and due to the possibility of the registration rules being different from what people thought they were. If we're attempting a single-player recovery, at this point the best option would be to find the player with the least ambiguous registration over the last several years, and check that it worked with every version of the registration rules that had even been proposed in that sequence of time. Also the player would have to be someone that the rest of Agora could trust with that sort of power. You've proven over the last several days that the vast majority of Agorans would be unwilling to appoint you as a dictator, so would be a bad choice. But with your scam muddying the waters, we're quite low on choices. -- ais523
