Aw, I won't be able to keep / recreate 蘭亭社 under the new proposal. I'll
have to rethink how to test the things that should go with it should this
pass.
I would like to propose adding making CFJs as protected. I think the reason
thereof should be evident if one were party to a theoretical contract which
forbade making CFJs.
Otherwise, I think what needs to be said has been done. Well done.
天火狐
On 5 September 2017 at 11:22, Owen Jacobson <o...@grimoire.ca> wrote:
> I read this last night, slept on it, skimmed it again, and read the
> replies. Here’s my initial thoughts, thin as they are - I had more, but
> Gaelan and ais523 have already covered most of my inquiries.
>
> On Sep 4, 2017, at 11:10 PM, Aris Merchant <thoughtsoflifeandlight17@
> gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > My proposal has three parts. Part 1 cleans up (tweaks and repeals)
> > existing rules. A lot of it is drawn from o's organization repeal
> > proposal, which I borrowed and then edited. Thank you, o.
>
> No problem! I’m glad you found it useful.
>
> > # 1.2.2 Change Secretary to Treasuror
>
> One thing I missed in my original Organization Repeal proposal was
> something you (Aris) did in the Assets proposal. Quoting that proposal:
>
> On Jun 9, 2017, at 3:35 PM, Aris Merchant <thoughtsoflifeandlight17@
> gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > For the avoidance of doubt, all shinies existing under the old system
> continue
> > to so under the new system, and if they would not otherwise do so, new
> shinies
> > are created to replace them.
>
> Some similar mechanism to make it clear that the Secretary becomes the
> Treasuror, rather than that the Secretary’s office ceases to be defined by
> the rules and a new office comes to be defined, would be nice. It’s not
> strictly necessary but it might influence when elections for the office can
> be called.
>
> Carrying on…
>
> On Sep 4, 2017, at 11:10 PM, Aris Merchant <thoughtsoflifeandlight17@
> gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Amend rule 2489 ("Estates") by replacing the first sentence with:
> >
> > {{{
> > An Estate is a type of indestructible liquid asset.
> > }}}
>
> Did you intend to allow persons who are not players to own Estates?
>
> > Amend rule 2483 ("Economics") by replacing its text, entirely, with:
> >
> > {{{
> > Shinies (singular "shiny", abbreviated "sh.") are an
> > indestructible liquid currency, and the official currency
> > of Agora. The Treasuror is the recordkeepor for shinies.
> >
> > The Treasuror CAN cause Agora to pay any player or
> > contract by announcement if doing so is specified by a
> > rule.
> > }}}
>
> Did you intend to allow persons who are not players to own Shinies?
>
> > Repeal Rule 2485 ("You can't take it with you”).
>
> Given that this rule is completely broken - its text never applies to any
> situation which can be reached by gameplay - I’m tempted to repeal it in a
> freestanding proposal just to get it gone. Objections?
>
> > Make <someone> Notary. [Any volunteers? Maybe our current Secretary or
> > Superintendent?]
>
> I’m happy to take the office. This is an interesting-enough idea that I’d
> hate to see it wither for lack of recordkeeping.
>
> > # 3.0 Asset Changes
> >
> > Amend Rule 2166, "Assets", by changing it to read in full:
> >
> > An asset is an entity defined as such by a rule, authorized regulation,
> > group of rules/regulations, or contract (hereafter its backing
> > document), and existing solely because its backing document defines its
> > existence.
> >
> > Each asset has exactly one owner. If an asset would otherwise
> > lack an owner, it is owned by Agora. If an asset's backing document
> restricts
> > its ownership to a class of entities, then that asset CANNOT be gained
> by or
> > transferred to an entity outside that class, and is destroyed if it is
> owned
> > by an entity outside that class (except if it is owned by Agora, in
> which case
> > any player CAN transfer or destroy it without objection). The
> restrictions in
> > the previous sentence are subject to modification by its backing
> document.
> >
> > Unless modified by an asset's backing document, ownership of an asset is
> > restricted to Agora, players, and contracts.
>
> Flipping my previous two questions about ownership around, did you intend
> to forbid non-player persons from ever owning assets?
>
> -o
>
>
>
