I think this clearly didn’t work. ---- Publius Scribonius Scholasticus p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com
> On Jul 9, 2017, at 8:53 PM, CuddleBeam <cuddleb...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > Via "An asset generally CAN be transferred (syn. payed, given) by its owner > to another entity by announcement", I announce that I transfer all assets to > myself. > > How? > > Because "by announcement", which is the method; "An asset generally CAN be > transferred (syn. payed, given) by its owner to another entity" > > So by announcement, I can make it so there is a transfer (performed by the > owner, apparently, but demanded to be so by me) to another entity, which is > me. > > I create the following Proposal: > > ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// > Title: humble agoran farmer pokes you with a water gun and makes evil demands > Author: Cuddlebeam > Cuddlebeam wins the game (via Proposal). > > Cuddlebeam gains a Black Ribbon. > > Cuddlebeam gains the Patent title of "evil water gun wielder person thing". > > Set Pending List Price to 5. > > Set Agora's Balance amount to be equal to the Supply Level amount. > ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// > > I pend it with all of my shines. > > I announce that I transfer all assets to myself. > > I create the following Proposal: > > ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// > Title: Proposal Proposal > Author: Cuddlebeam > > This proposal is a proposal. > > ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// > > I pend it with all of my shines. > > I announce that I transfer all assets to myself. > > I announce that I destroy all of my assets. The method is the following: > > We have: > > "An asset generally CAN be destroyed by its owner by announcement, subject to > modification by its backing document." > > I'm employing that, however: > > "An indestructible asset is one defined as such by it backing document, and > CANNOT be destroyed except by a rule specifically addressing the destruction > of indestructible assets." > > That text itself addresses the destruction of indestructible assets (because > it says that they "CANNOT be destroyed except by a rule specifically > addressing the destruction of indestructible assets", which is in itself > addressing the destruction of indestructible assets.) > > Ergo, Rule 2166 addresses the destruction of indestructible assets and > therefore can be used to destroy indestructible assets, so I can use "An > asset generally CAN be destroyed by its owner by announcement, subject to > modification by its backing document." to destroy my indestructible assets. > > In case the above works, I'm guessing the easiest fix would be a Shiny > Relevelling event, but if that happens, I'll (attempt to) keep on triggering > "The above notwithstanding, if the action depends on objections, and an > objection to it has been withdrawn within the past 24 hours, then Agora is > not Satisfied with the intent." by just withdrawing the same Objection every > 12 hours or so. > > There's likely some counter to this, IN the case that it actually works at > all lol. I've got too many things I want to try out so I'm just winging this. > > In the case that it actually is stalwart, then, yeah. Vote for it or we won't > have proposals for a while, because there is no cash to actually pend > anything with (in fact, not voting for it could be criminal, for the same > reason that the stick-up itself would be, which is enabling boring gameplay. > Although I find stick-ups themselves to be pretty exciting lol).
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
