" Other persons CAN become
parties by announcement if the contract permits them do so."
This should be "them to do so", of course.
I think the Protected Actions bit might go a bit far. We've used
agencies to allow people to file reports on behalf of others before:
in fact that's the only useful use of agencies I can ever recall.
However these rules prohibit "modifying the performance of"
"performing any official duty", which would stop that use.
Has o. agreed to be the notary? I presume so.
On Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 7:03 PM, VJ Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> ". E NEED NOT
> follow any regulation constraining em to take or not to take some action
> with
> to eir regulations,"
>
> Not sure what "with to eir regulations means", is it missing a "regards"?
>
> On Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 7:02 PM, VJ Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> "Parties can leave
>> a contract by announcement, ceasing being parties, if the contract permits
>> the to do so."
>>
>> This should be "if the contract permits them to do so"
>>
>> On Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 6:52 PM, Reuben Staley <reuben.sta...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> I like this. Slight spelling fix, though: in the paragraph after the list of
>>> protected actions, "ILLEGAL" is wrongly spelled "ILEGAL"
>>>
>>> --
>>> Trigon
>>>
>>> On Oct 14, 2017 1:30 AM, "Aris Merchant"
>>> <thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hello everyone! Here is the latest draft of my contracts proposal. I
>>>> plan to submit it this weekend, so I would appreciate it if people
>>>> would try to stick to small fixes. If anyone wants to help look it
>>>> over, prevent exploitable bugs, list problems, or tell me that they're
>>>> planing to vote AGAINST and why, I'd appreciate it.
>>>>
>>>> For those who weren't around or want to see it again, here is my
>>>> statement from the first draft:
>>>>
>>>> {{
>>>>
>>>> I'm going to preface this by saying that my contracts proposal is kind
>>>> of long. It may take a few days for everyone to read through it and
>>>> stuff. It's long for several reasons. For one thing, it repeals about
>>>> as many rules as it creates. As I suggested, this is a consolidation
>>>> of the existing Agency and Organization mechanics, which means it
>>>> should be a net simplification, even though it doesn't feel like it.
>>>> It also adds in the whole new element that the thing is binding. At
>>>> some point we may be able to repeal pledges too, once everyone's used
>>>> to the new mechanics. Another reason is that I've littered the thing
>>>> with safety features. They're probably unnecessary, but better safe
>>>> than sorry.
>>>>
>>>> A few design principles:
>>>>
>>>> 1. Contracts should be easy to use. The primary cause for the failure
>>>> of organizations was their complexity. You had to come up with a name.
>>>> You had to deal with member's budgets. You had to specify whether
>>>> things were "appropriate", without the ease of CANs and CANNOTs. You
>>>> couldn't specify SHALLs and SHALL NOTs.
>>>>
>>>> 2. Contracts should be powerful, but not too powerful. The primary
>>>> cause for the limited adoption of agencies was that you couldn't do
>>>> much with them. Yeah, sure, you can do CANs and CANNOTs now. That's
>>>> great, but the agency can't own assets, or create obligations, or even
>>>> have more than one "Director". There was only one agency (the PDA,
>>>> which I created to let someone else run Promotor temporarily) before
>>>> Free Agency passed, greatly expanding what you could do with agencies.
>>>> Now there are many of them, but they're still not as versatile as they
>>>> could be. It goes without saying that we would like to avoid
>>>> mousetraps or other scams too, so some limitations are necessary.
>>>>
>>>> 3. Reuse what worked. A lot of my new contract rules is drawn from the
>>>> successful parts of the existing organization system.
>>>>
>>>> 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. The second
>>>> part consists of new rules to create contracts. The third part
>>>> modifies the assets rule, both to conform with contracts and for some
>>>> general minor fixes of ambiguities that have been pointed out. Each
>>>> part has subheadings, which should hopefully make it easier to
>>>> read/not get lost in.
>>>>
>>>> Without further ado, here is my draft proposal. Comments and concerns
>>>> appreciated, though please try not to complain about the length :).
>>>> }}
>>>>
>>>> Here's a change-log, which may be somewhat incomplete:
>>>>
>>>> - Extricability is defined in this proposal, but is only a definition with
>>>> no
>>>> intrinsic effect.
>>>> - Various contract operations are constrained by sanity checks.
>>>> - Regulations are made binding on their promulgators so that they work
>>>> with the assets "bound by" restriction for recordkeeping, and because it
>>>> seems
>>>> like a good idea.
>>>> - The Notary is given various throttling powers, to stop players from
>>>> making
>>>> eir life hell. These have been chosen such that they shouldn't interfere
>>>> with the activities of the average player.
>>>> - Clearer guidelines are laid down for contract interpretation.
>>>> - Creating a contract is made restricted to stop the "agencies that
>>>> create
>>>> agencies" thing. I'm getting bored of that pseudo-scam.
>>>> - The Notary is required to post eir full report weekly, as e probably
>>>> produces it from same source and differential reports aren't very
>>>> useful.
>>>> - Changes are made to the spending definition, see the a-d thread
>>>>
>>>> Affixed is the actual proposal text.
>>>>
>>>> -Aris
>>>>
>>>> ---
>>>> Title: Contracts v3
>>>> Adoption index: 3.0
>>>> Author: Aris
>>>> Co-author(s): o, G., ais523, Gaelan, 天火狐, CuddleBeam
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Lines beginning with hashmarks ("#") and comments in square brackets
>>>> ("[]")
>>>> have no effect on the behavior of this proposal. They are not part of any
>>>> rules
>>>> created or amended herein, and may be considered for all game purposes to
>>>> have been removed before its resolution.
>>>>
>>>> # 1 Cleanup & Miscellaneous
>>>> # 1.1 Gamestate Cleanup
>>>>
>>>> Destroy each organization.
>>>>
>>>> Destroy each agency.
>>>>
>>>> Destroy each contract. [Just in case.]
>>>>
>>>> # 1.2 Organization, Secretary, and Economic Cleanup
>>>> # 1.2.1 Repeal Organizations
>>>>
>>>> Repeal rule 2459 ("Organizations").
>>>>
>>>> Repeal rule 2461 ("Death and Birth of Organizations").
>>>>
>>>> Repeal rule 2460 ("Organizational Restructuring").
>>>>
>>>> Repeal rule 2457 ("Lockout").
>>>>
>>>> Repeal rule 2458 ("Invoking Lockout").
>>>>
>>>> Repeal rule 2462 ("Bankruptcy").
>>>>
>>>> # 1.2.2 Change Secretary to Treasuror
>>>>
>>>> Amend rule 2456 ("The Secretary") by
>>>>
>>>> * Changing its title to "The Treasuror", then by
>>>> * Replacing its text, entirely, with:
>>>>
>>>> {{{
>>>> The Treasuror is an office, and the recordkeepor of Shinies.
>>>>
>>>> The Treasuror's weekly report also includes:
>>>>
>>>> 1. the current Floating Value, and all derived values
>>>> defined by the Rules.
>>>> 2. the list of all public classes of assets.
>>>>
>>>> }}}
>>>>
>>>> Make o the Treasuror.
>>>>
>>>> Amend the following rules, in order, by replacing the word
>>>> "Secretary" with the word "Treasuror" wherever it appears:
>>>>
>>>> * Rule 2487 ("Shiny Supply Level")
>>>> * Rule 2498 ("Economic Wins")
>>>> * Rule 2497 ("Floating Value")
>>>>
>>>> # 1.2.3 General Economy Fixes/Cleanup
>>>>
>>>> Amend rule 2489 ("Estates") by replacing the first sentence with:
>>>>
>>>> {{{
>>>> An Estate is a type of indestructible liquid asset.
>>>> }}}
>>>>
>>>> Amend rule 2491 ("Estate Auctions") by replacing its text,
>>>> entirely, with:
>>>>
>>>> {{{
>>>> At the start of each month, if Agora owns at least one
>>>> Estate, the Surveyor CAN and SHALL put one Estate which is owned by
>>>> Agora up for auction by announcement. Each auction ends
>>>> seven days after it begins.
>>>>
>>>> During an auction, any player or contract may bid a number of
>>>> Shinies
>>>> by announcement, provided that the bid is higher than all
>>>> previously-placed bids in the same auction.
>>>>
>>>> If, at the end of the auction, there is a single highest bid,
>>>> then the player or contract who placed that bid wins the auction.
>>>> The winner CAN cause Agora to transfer the auctioned Estate to
>>>> emself
>>>> by announcement, if e pays Agora the amount of the bid. The person
>>>> who
>>>> placed the bid SHALL see to it that this is done in a timely
>>>> fashion.
>>>> }}}
>>>>
>>>> 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
>>>> another rule.
>>>> }}}
>>>>
>>>> Repeal Rule 2485 ("You can't take it with you").
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> # 1.3 Agency Cleanup
>>>>
>>>> Repeal Rule 2467 ("Agencies")
>>>>
>>>> Repeal Rule 2468 ("Superintendent")
>>>>
>>>> # 1.4 Define Extricability
>>>>
>>>> [Note that I do not believe this section makes any substantive changes on
>>>> its
>>>> own. Because of the volume of concerns raised about restricting by
>>>> announcement
>>>> conditionals, this section only contains definitions.]
>>>>
>>>> Create a new power 3.0 rule entitled "Conditionals and Extricability",
>>>> with the
>>>> following text:
>>>>
>>>> A conditional is any textual structure that attempts to make a statement
>>>> affecting any part or aspect of the gamestate (the substrate), or the
>>>> permissibility or possibility of any action affecting such a part or
>>>> aspect,
>>>> dependent on the truth value or other state of a textual structure
>>>> (the condition). The condition is said to be "affixed" to the substrate
>>>> (inverse "to be conditional upon").
>>>>
>>>> A condition is inextricable if it is unclear, ambiguous, circular,
>>>> inconsistent, paradoxical, depends on information that is impossible or
>>>> unreasonably difficult to determine, or otherwise requires an
>>>> unreasonable
>>>> effort resolve; otherwise it is extricable. A conditional is
>>>> inextricable if
>>>> its condition is inextricable; otherwise it is extricable. A player
>>>> SHOULD NOT
>>>> use an inextricable conditional for any purpose.
>>>>
>>>> An action said to be "subject to" a conditional if the possibility,
>>>> permissibility, or effect (depending on context) is determined by the
>>>> conditional. A value is said to be subject to a conditional of the the
>>>> state
>>>> of the value is determined by the conditional.
>>>>
>>>> Create a new power 3.0 rule entitled "Determinacy", with the following
>>>> text:
>>>>
>>>> If a value CANNOT be reasonably determined (without circularity or
>>>> paradox)
>>>> from information reasonably available, or if it alternates indefinitely
>>>> between values, then the value is considered to be indeterminate,
>>>> otherwise
>>>> it is determinate.
>>>>
>>>> Amend Rule 1023, "Common Definitions", by (please note that these
>>>> actions
>>>> are severable):
>>>>
>>>> * removing the third item of the top level list; and
>>>> * renumbering appropriately.
>>>>
>>>> # 1.5 Random Amendments
>>>>
>>>> Amend Rule 869, "How to Join and Leave Agora", by changing its last
>>>> paragraph to
>>>> read:
>>>>
>>>> The Rules CANNOT compel non-players to act without their express or
>>>> reasonably
>>>> implied consent. The rules CANNOT compel players to unduly harass
>>>> non-players.
>>>> A non-person CANNOT be a player, rules to the contrary notwithstanding.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Amend Rule 2139, "The Registrar", by changing the sentence "The Registrar
>>>> is
>>>> also responsible for tracking any switches that would otherwise lack an
>>>> officer
>>>> to track them, unless the switch is defined as untracked." to read "The
>>>> Registrar is also responsible for tracking any switches, defined in a
>>>> rule,
>>>> that would otherwise lack an officer to track them, unless the switch is
>>>> defined
>>>> as untracked."
>>>>
>>>> Amend Rule 2466, "Acting on Behalf", by changing it to read in full:
>>>>
>>>> When a rule allows one person (the agent) to act on behalf of another
>>>> (the principal) to perform an action, that agent CAN perform the action
>>>> if it
>>>> is POSSIBLE for the principal to do so, taking into account any
>>>> prerequisites
>>>> for the action. If the enabling rule does not specify the mechanism by
>>>> which
>>>> the agent may do so, then the agent CAN perform the action in the same
>>>> manner
>>>> in which the principal CAN do so, with the additional requirement that
>>>> the
>>>> agent must, in the message in which the action is performed, uniquely
>>>> identify
>>>> the principal and that the action is being taken on behalf of that
>>>> person.
>>>>
>>>> A person SHALL not act on behalf of another person if doing so causes
>>>> the
>>>> second person to violate the rules. A person CANNOT act on behalf of
>>>> another
>>>> person to do anything except perform a game action; in particular, a
>>>> person
>>>> CANNOT act on behalf of another person to send a message, only to
>>>> perform
>>>> specific actions that might be taken within a message.
>>>>
>>>> When an action is performed on behalf of a principal, then the
>>>> action is considered for all game purposes to have been performed by the
>>>> principal, unless a rule specifically states that it is treated
>>>> differently
>>>> for some purpose, in which case it is treated as described by that rule.
>>>>
>>>> Allowing a person to act on behalf of another person is secured at power
>>>> 2.0.
>>>> This rule takes precedence over any rule which would prohibit a person
>>>> from
>>>> taking an action, except that it defers to any rule that imposes
>>>> limitations
>>>> specifically on actions taken on behalf of another person.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Amend Rule 2350, "Proposals", by appending the sentence "However, if a
>>>> proposal
>>>> is submitted as an action on the behalf of a player, then the agent is the
>>>> author." to the paragraph beginning "Creating a proposal..."
>>>>
>>>> [The below is needed to make regulations play well with the recordkeeping
>>>> restrictions of assets.]
>>>>
>>>> Amend Rule 2493, "Regulations", by appending the following as a new
>>>> paragraph
>>>> to the end of the rule:
>>>>
>>>> A regulation's promulgator SHALL generally obey eir own regulations as
>>>> long
>>>> as they are acting reasonably within their rule defined scope. E NEED
>>>> NOT
>>>> follow any regulation constraining em to take or not to take some action
>>>> with
>>>> to eir regulations, or any regulation constraining em to violate a rule.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> # 2 Contracts
>>>> # 2.1 Core Contract Features
>>>>
>>>> Create a new power 2.5 rule, entitled "Contracts", with the following
>>>> text:
>>>>
>>>> A contract is a textual entity, and the ruleset described entity
>>>> embodied
>>>> therein. A document can only become a contract through the appropriate
>>>> ruleset
>>>> defined procedures. Changes to the contracts text by rule defined
>>>> mechanisms
>>>> (including those delegated to the contract itself) do not change the
>>>> identity
>>>> of the contract.
>>>>
>>>> If any change to a contract's text, internal state, or other properties
>>>> would
>>>> cause them to be indeterminate, it is canceled and does not occur.
>>>>
>>>> The following changes are secured at power 2.1: creating or modifying a
>>>> contract or causing an entity to become a contract. [Note that,
>>>> as a precaution, causing an entity to cease being a contract is not
>>>> secured.]
>>>>
>>>> The properties of contracts, as defined by other rules, include the
>>>> following:
>>>>
>>>> - Parties, persons who agree to be bound by and assume powers under
>>>> the contract.
>>>> - The ability to be amended or destroyed.
>>>> - The ability to compel actions by their parties.
>>>> - The ability to allow persons to take actions on the part of their
>>>> parties.
>>>> - The ability to define arbitrary classes of asset.
>>>> - The ability to possess and control assets.
>>>>
>>>> Create a new power 2.5 rule, entitled "Parties to Contracts", with the
>>>> following
>>>> text:
>>>>
>>>> Contracts have parties, who are persons. The person(s) who create(s) a
>>>> contract is/are automatically a party/parties. Other persons CAN become
>>>> parties by announcement if the contract permits them do so. Parties can
>>>> leave
>>>> a contract by announcement, ceasing being parties, if the contract
>>>> permits
>>>> the to do so. A contract CAN expel a party or group of parties by
>>>> announcement, causing them to cease being parties.
>>>>
>>>> It is IMPOSSIBLE, by any means, for a person to become a party to a
>>>> contract,
>>>> for an contract to be created with a person as a party, or for an entity
>>>> to
>>>> become a contract with a person as a party, without that person's clear,
>>>> willful consent. This rule takes precedence over any rule that might
>>>> make
>>>> such a change possible. A person CANNOT act on behalf of a person to
>>>> give
>>>> consent for the purposes of this rule.
>>>>
>>>> Create a power 2.5 rule entitled "Birth and Death of Contracts", with the
>>>> following text:
>>>>
>>>> A person CAN create a contract by announcement by spending 1 shiny,
>>>> specifying
>>>> the contract's text. A person SHALL NOT create more than 3 contracts per
>>>> week by this method, and the Notary CAN destroy any excess (i.e. beyond
>>>> the
>>>> 3 permitted) contracts by announcement within 7 days of the contracts'
>>>> formation. The Notary CAN by regulation increase this limit up to a
>>>> maximum
>>>> of 7; e CANNOT decrease it.
>>>>
>>>> The person or persons who create a contract CAN and SHOULD also specify
>>>> a
>>>> name for the contract; if e/they do/does not do so, the Notary CAN and
>>>> SHALL assign a name in a timely fashion.
>>>>
>>>> A contract CAN amend, destroy, or retitle itself by announcement. A
>>>> player
>>>> CAN amend, destroy, or retitle a contract without objection, even if its
>>>> text denies em the ability to do so. Players SHOULD only use this
>>>> mechanism
>>>> to recover from situations where the contract is underspecified or has
>>>> unintended effects. The Notary CAN by regulation stop the same contract
>>>> from
>>>> amending or retitling itself more than 5 combined times per Agoran day
>>>> (or any
>>>> number higher than that); e CANNOT stop a contract from being destroyed,
>>>> or
>>>> from being retitled or amended by any other means.
>>>>
>>>> If a contract has fulfilled its purpose, does not specify any gamestate
>>>> affecting statements, or otherwise seems unlikely to be used, the Notary
>>>> CAN and SHOULD destroy it Without 2 Objections or with Agoran Consent.
>>>> Any
>>>> player may destroy a contract with 2 Agoran Consent. Players SHOULD NOT
>>>> use
>>>> the methods in this paragraph to further their private interests.
>>>>
>>>> If the possibility of any action defined by this rule is indeterminate,
>>>> or
>>>> is subject to a inextricable conditional, it is presumptively
>>>> impossible.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> # 2.2 Powers of Contracts
>>>>
>>>> Create a new power 2.4 rule, entitled "Contracts as Agreements", with the
>>>> following text:
>>>>
>>>> The text of a contract CAN specify obligations upon its parties. Parties
>>>> to
>>>> a contract SHALL abide by its terms and SHALL NOT deliberately or
>>>> negligently
>>>> breach them. The fact that the action described by the contract is in
>>>> violation of the rules is not a defense if the violative nature is
>>>> reasonably clear from its text. If whether an action is permitted or
>>>> forbidden
>>>> by a contract is indeterminate or subject to an inextricable
>>>> conditional,
>>>> it is presumptively permitted.
>>>>
>>>> As an exception to the provisions of the previous paragraph and the
>>>> circumstances in which cards would ordinarily be appropriate, a person
>>>> awarding a card under this rule MAY and CAN validly consider the
>>>> equitable
>>>> interests of justice and interests of the game, including the importance
>>>> of
>>>> the observation of contracts, as a mitigating or aggravating
>>>> circumstances
>>>> when awarding a card. Such a person MAY, CAN validly, and SHOULD also
>>>> consider
>>>> the instructions of the contract or contracts in question when issuing a
>>>> card.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Create a new power 2.4 rule, entitled "Acting on Behalf via Contract",
>>>> with
>>>> the following text:
>>>>
>>>> If a rule says that a contract CAN do something by announcement, it is
>>>> equivalent to saying that that any person CAN take that action by
>>>> announcement
>>>> if the contract permits em to do so. A person SHALL NOT cause a contract
>>>> to violate a rule using this method.
>>>>
>>>> If a rule specifies that a contract SHALL or SHALL NOT do something,
>>>> each
>>>> party to the contract SHALL ensure that the contract respectively does
>>>> or does not do that thing.
>>>>
>>>> The text of a contract CAN permit persons to act on behalf of a party or
>>>> group of parties. To do so, it must specify:
>>>>
>>>> a. Which of its parties can be acted on behalf of;
>>>> b. What actions can be taken;
>>>> c. Who can take the actions; and
>>>> d. Any conditions or limitations upon the actions. Such limitations
>>>> and conditions CANNOT be inextricable, and if they are,
>>>> the actions CANNOT be used.
>>>>
>>>> # 2.3 Contract Interpretation and Maintenance
>>>>
>>>> Create a new power 2.6 rule, entitled "Interpreting Contracts",
>>>> with the following text:
>>>>
>>>> A contract should generally be interpreted according to its text,
>>>> including
>>>> any clauses giving directions for its interpretation or construction.
>>>> Additionally, justice, the intent of the contract's parties, and the
>>>> factors
>>>> laid down in the first paragraph of Rule 217 should be reasonably
>>>> applied when
>>>> interpreting a contract.
>>>>
>>>> A contract is subservient to the rules. Although a contract may specify
>>>> obligations or powers beyond those created by the rules, a contract may
>>>> not
>>>> override the rules: in particular, any provision of a contract that
>>>> would
>>>> unreasonably violate an inalienable right of players and/or persons or
>>>> cause any rule defined statement about the gamestate or the possibility
>>>> of
>>>> an action to become false is void and without effect insofar as it does
>>>> so.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The following are protected actions:
>>>>
>>>> 1. Registering and deregistering;
>>>> 2. Submitting, pending, or voting freely on a proposal, but only if the
>>>> sole
>>>> effect the proposal would have if adopted is to create, modify, or
>>>> destroy
>>>> a contract or group of contracts, or to cause an entity or group of
>>>> entities to become or cease to be a contract or group of contracts;
>>>> 3. Destroying or amending a contract, intending to do so, and
>>>> supporting, objecting to, or resolving such an intent, except where
>>>> the
>>>> mechanism for such destruction or amendment is created by the
>>>> contract
>>>> itself, and creating a contract;
>>>> 4. Making true statements about a contract;
>>>> 5. Calling, judging, assigning, or freely discussing a CFJ;
>>>> 6. Lawfully performing an official duty;
>>>> 7. Objecting to or supporting an intent to perform an action while
>>>> speaker;
>>>> 8. Using an executive order; and
>>>> 9. Making, amending, revoking or calling in a pledge.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, a contract CANNOT compel, forbid,
>>>> or in any significant way alter, tamper with, or modify the performance
>>>> of
>>>> a protected action. A contract CANNOT punish a player for performing or
>>>> failing protected action, or for doing so in a particular manner, except
>>>> where it would otherwise be ILEGAL. A contract also CANNOT enable a
>>>> person to
>>>> do any of the things prohibited to the contract by this paragraph.
>>>> Insofar as
>>>> a contract or a provision or clause of a contract contravenes the letter
>>>> or
>>>> spirit of this rule, it is void and without effect.
>>>>
>>>> Create a new power 2.4 rule, entitled "Sustenance Payments", with
>>>> following
>>>> text:
>>>>
>>>> The Notary CAN, once a month, cause each contract that owns at least
>>>> one shiny to transfer one shiny to Agora. E SHALL do so in the first
>>>> week
>>>> of every month. If a contract does not own at least one shiny, and is
>>>> thus unable to make said payment, the Notary CAN and SHALL destroy
>>>> it With Notice. If a contract becomes and remains able to pay before its
>>>> destruction, the Notary CANNOT destroy it, and CAN and SHALL instead
>>>> collect the shiny.
>>>>
>>>> The Notary CAN, by regulation, exempt a contract from the preceding
>>>> paragraph.
>>>> E SHALL NOT do so unless the contract seems to be in the public interest
>>>> of
>>>> Agora.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Create a new power 1.0 rule, entitled "The Notary", with the following
>>>> text:
>>>>
>>>> The Notary is an office, and the recordkeepor of contracts. The Notary
>>>> tracks
>>>> contracts, including their name, text, and parties. The Notary also
>>>> tracks
>>>> the list of private classes of asset.
>>>>
>>>> The Notary's weekly report includes all information which e tracks as a
>>>> part
>>>> of eir official duties. The Notary is ENCOURAGED to list changes to the
>>>> information e tracks in eir report.
>>>>
>>>> Make o the Notary.
>>>>
>>>> # 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 (a) rule, (b) authorized
>>>> regulation, (c) group of rules/authorized regulations, or (d) 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. As an exception to the last
>>>> sentence, non-player persons are generally able to own assets defined by
>>>> a contract they are a party to, subject to modification by the contract
>>>> in
>>>> question.
>>>>
>>>> A contract's text can specify whether or not that contract is
>>>> willing receive assets or a class of assets. Generally, a contract
>>>> CANNOT
>>>> be given assets it is unwilling to receive. If the contract is silent on
>>>> the
>>>> matter, or if its willingness is indeterminate or the subject of a
>>>> inextricable conditional, the procedure to determine its willingness is
>>>> as
>>>> follows:
>>>>
>>>> 1. If the contract appears to anticipate being given assets (e.g. by
>>>> authorizing parties to spend the contract's assets), then the
>>>> contract
>>>> is willing to receive all assets.
>>>> 2. Otherwise, it is unwilling to receive all assets.
>>>>
>>>> The previous paragraph (including the list) notwithstanding, a contract
>>>> CAN be given 1 shiny a month for its sustenance payment, so long as
>>>> it never has more than 1 shiny at a time.
>>>>
>>>> The recordkeepor of a class of assets is the entity (if any)
>>>> defined as such by, and bound by, its backing document. That
>>>> entity's report includes a list of all instances of that class
>>>> and their owners. This portion of that entity's report is
>>>> self-ratifying. Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, a contract CANNOT
>>>> oblige a person who isn't a member to record its internal state.
>>>>
>>>> An asset generally CAN be destroyed by its owner by
>>>> announcement, subject to modification by its backing document. An
>>>> indestructible asset is one defined as such by it backing document, and
>>>> CANNOT
>>>> be destroyed except by a rule, other than this one, specifically
>>>> addressing
>>>> the destruction of indestructible assets or that asset in particular;
>>>> any
>>>> other asset is destructible. In circumstances where another asset would
>>>> be
>>>> destroyed, an indestructible asset is generally transferred to Agora,
>>>> subject
>>>> to modification by its backing document and the intervention of other
>>>> rules.
>>>>
>>>> To "lose" an asset is to have it destroyed from one's
>>>> possession; to "revoke" an asset from an entity is to destroy it
>>>> from that entity's possession.
>>>>
>>>> An asset generally CAN be transferred (syn. payed, given) by
>>>> announcement by
>>>> its owner to another entity, subject to modification by its
>>>> backing document. A fixed asset is one defined as such by its backing
>>>> document, and CANNOT be transferred; any other asset is liquid.
>>>>
>>>> To spend an asset is to pay or destroy it for the purpose of doing some
>>>> other
>>>> action or fulfilling an obligation by announcement; if the action would
>>>> not
>>>> be completed, the obligation would not be at least partially fulfilled,
>>>> or
>>>> more of the asset would be spent than is needed to perform the
>>>> action/fulfill
>>>> the obligation, then the attempt to spend fails. Whether the asset must
>>>> be
>>>> spent or payed is determined by what is needed to perform the action. If
>>>> the entity defining or enabling the action does not specify which is
>>>> necessary, but merely that the asset must be spent, then it is
>>>> transferred
>>>> (to Agora unless otherwise specified).
>>>>
>>>> When a rule indicates transferring an amount that is not a natural
>>>> number,
>>>> the specified amount is rounded up to the nearest natural number.
>>>>
>>>> A currency is a class of asset defined as such by its backing document.
>>>> Instances of a currency with the same owner are fungible.
>>>>
>>>> The "x balance of an entity", where x is a currency, is the number of x
>>>> that
>>>> entity possesses. If a rule, proposal, or other competent authority
>>>> attempts
>>>> to increase or decrease the balance of an entity without specifying a
>>>> source
>>>> or destination, then the currency is created or destroyed.
>>>>
>>>> When a player causes one or more balances to change, e is ENCOURAGED
>>>> to specify the resulting balance(s). Players SHOULD NOT specify
>>>> inaccurate balances.
>>>>
>>>> Where it resolves ambiguity, the asset or currency being referred to is
>>>> the
>>>> currency designated as "Agora's official currency", if there is one.
>>>>
>>>> Amendments to a backing document shall not be construed to alter,
>>>> transfer,
>>>> destroy, or otherwise effect any assets defined by that document, unless
>>>> that is their clear intent.
>>>>
>>>> An asset or class of assets is private, rather than public, if it's
>>>> backing document is a contract.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> From V.J. Rada
>
>
>
> --
> From V.J. Rada
--
>From V.J. Rada
