Very true. I plead guilty and request the mercy of the Referee for this error, noting that it was an inadvertent mistake.
-Aris On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 4:57 PM, Alexis Hunt <aler...@gmail.com> wrote: > I Point a Finger at Aris, alleging that e failed to distribute the proposal > identified below as pp3 last week, thereby failing to distribute all pending > proposals. > > On Sun, Oct 15, 2017, 17:38 Aris Merchant, > <thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> This following is a revision to the proposal pool from my last report. >> >> The proposal pool contains the following proposals: >> >> ID Author(s) AI Title >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> pp1 nichdel 3.0 Slower Promotion >> pp2 nichdel 1.0 Guaranteed Stampage >> pp3* Alexis 3.0 Clarity Act >> pp4* Gaelan 1.0 Another Economy Fix Attempt >> >> Legend: <ID>* : Proposal is pending. >> >> The full text of the aforementioned proposals is included below. >> >> ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// >> ID: pp1 >> Title: Slower Promotion >> Adoption index: 3.0 >> Author: nichdel >> Co-authors: >> >> >> Amend R1607 (Distribution) by replacing: >> >> In a given Agoran week, the Promotor SHALL, as part of eir weekly >> duties, >> distribute all pending proposals. >> >> with >> >> In a given Agoran week, as part of eir weekly duties, the Promotor >> SHALL: >> >> * distribute all pending proposals if there are no unresolved Agoran >> decisions to adopt a proposal. >> >> * list all unresolved Agoran decisions to adopt a proposal. The >> Promotor >> MAY still distribute all pending proposals. >> >> ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// >> ID: pp2 >> Title: Guaranteed Stampage >> Adoption index: 1.0 >> Author: nichdel >> Co-authors: >> >> >> Amend 2499 "Welcome Packages" to read in full: >> >> If a player has not received one since e most recently became a >> player, any player CAN, by announcement, cause em to receive a >> Welcome package. When a player receives a Welcome Package: >> >> * Agora transfers em 1/10th the FV in shinies and >> >> * a Stamp, with Agora as the Creater, is created in eir >> possession. >> >> Amend R2498 to be titled "Stamps" and to read in full: >> >> Stamps are an asset. The Secretary is the recordkeepor of Stamps. >> >> Each Stamp has an associated Creater which SHOULD be noted whenever the >> Stamp >> is mentioned and MUST be noted whenever the Stamp is transfered. Stamps >> with >> the same creater are fungible. >> >> Once per month a player CAN, by announcement, create a Stamp with >> themselves >> as the Creater by transferring the Stamp Value, in shinies, to Agora. >> >> If Agora owns at least as many Shinies as the current Stamp Value, a >> player >> CAN, by announcement, destroy a Stamp e owns to cause Agora to transfer >> the >> Stamp Value, in shinies, to emself. >> >> Enact a Power 1 rule titled "Stamp Wins" with the following text: >> >> If a player owns 10 stamps with different Creaters, none of which have >> Agora >> as its Creater, e CAN win by announcement. Doing so destroys the >> specified >> stamps. >> >> Enact a Power 1 rule titled "Basic Stamp Income" with the following >> text: >> >> When the Secretary publishes the first Weekly Report of an Agoran Month, >> e >> CAN and SHALL, by announcement, create Stamps with Agora as the Creater >> and >> transfer them to any player who has no stamps and less than the Stamp >> Value >> in shinies at the time of publication. >> >> ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// >> ID: pp3 >> Title: Clarity Act >> Adoption index: 3.0 >> Author: Alexis >> Co-authors: >> >> Text in square brackets is not a part of this proposal's substance and >> is ignored when it takes effect. >> >> Enact a new power 3 rule entitled Voting Methods, reading as follows: >> Each Agoran decision has a voting method, which must be >> AI-majority, instant runoff, or first-past-the-post. The voting >> method is that specified by the authorizing authority, or >> first-past-the-post by default. >> >> Each Agoran decision has a set of valid options (the choices that >> the voters are being asked to select from) and valid votes (the >> ways in which the voters can express their opinion or lack thereof. >> For AI-majority decisions, the valid options are FOR and AGAINST; >> for other decisions, the valid options are defined by other rules. >> >> The valid votes on an Agoran decision are: >> 1. PRESENT; >> 2. The valid conditional votes, as defined by rules of power at >> least that of this rule; and >> 3. For an instant runoff decision, the ordered lists of entities. >> 4. For any other decision, the valid options. >> >> [This splits off the portion of 955 that isn't actually related to >> resolution. The definition of instant runoff is changed to evaluate >> validity of options at the end of the voting period, and avoid >> retroactively invalidating votes if an option drops out.] >> >> Amend Rule 955 by replacing the second paragraph and numbered list with >> the following and by deleting the second bullet in the unnumbered list. >> 1. For an AI-majority decision, let F be the total strength of all >> valid ballots cast FOR a decision, A be the same for AGAINST, >> and AI be the adoption index of the decision. The outcome is >> ADOPTED if F/A >= AI and F/A > 1 (or F>0 and A=0), otherwise >> REJECTED. >> >> 2. For an instant runoff decision, the outcome is whichever option >> wins according to the standard definition of instant runoff. >> For this purpose, a ballot of strength N is treated as if it >> were N distinct ballots expressing the same preferences. In >> case multiple valid options tie for the lowest number of votes >> at any stage, the vote collector CAN and must, in the >> announcement of the decision's resolution, select one such >> option to eliminate; if, for M > 1, all eir possible choices in >> the next M stages would result in the same set of options being >> eliminated, e need not specify the order of elimination. If an >> entity that is part of a valid vote is not a valid option at >> the end of the voting period, or disqualified by the rule >> providing for the decision, then that entity is eliminated >> prior to the first round of counting. >> >> 3. For a first-past-the-post decision, the outcome is whichever >> option received the highest total strength of valid ballots. In >> case of a tie, the vote collector CAN and must, in the >> announcement of the decision's resolution, select one of the >> leaders as the outcome. >> >> [No change here, except for removing the valid votes, and clearly >> specifying what happens to options that are no longer valid at the end >> of the voting period.] >> >> If the text "The rule providing for an Agoran Decision by instant runoff >> may disqualify one or more options; in such a case, they are eliminated >> prior to beginning the first stage of the vote count." appears in Rule >> 955, delete it. >> >> [Coordinating amendment to the Election Procedure proposal. H. Assessor, >> please resolve that one first.] >> >> Amend Rule 2127 to read as follows: >> A conditional vote on an Agoran decision is a vote which indicates >> a vote based on some condition(s). A conditional vote is evaluated >> at the end of the voting period and, rules to the contrary >> notwithstanding, is clearly specified if and only if the value of >> the condition(s) is/are determinate at the end of the voting >> period. If the conditional is clearly specified, and evaluates to >> a valid vote, it is counted as that vote; otherwise, it is counted >> as PRESENT. >> >> Any vote which is clearly expressed as a conditional, e.g. "FOR if >> <X> is true, AGAINST otherwise", is a valid conditional vote that >> evaluates as specified. >> >> A vote endorsing another person is equivalent to a conditional >> vote evaluating to the vote specified in that person's valid >> ballot on the decision, if any. >> >> For an instant runoff decision, a vote consisting of a list, one >> or more entries of which are valid conditional votes, and the >> remaining entries of which are valid options, is a valid >> conditional vote. Such a vote is evaluated by evaluating each >> conditional entry to a list of votes (or an empty list, if it >> evaluates to PRESENT either directly or indirectly), and then >> concatenating those lists with the specified valid options in the >> order they occurred in the original vote. >> >> [New conditional vote rule clearly specifies what conditional votes are >> valid, as well as providing for evaluation of conditional lists in >> instant runoff in the sensible way.] >> >> Amend Rule 2438 by replacing the paragraph describing Orange >> Ribbons with: >> >> Orange (O): When a proposal is adopted via an Agoran Decision on >> which no valid ballots were AGAINST (after evaluating >> conditionals), its proposer earns an Orange Ribbon. >> >> Award G. a Transparent Ribbon. >> >> [I accept that it's fair that this may not actually be a problem, >> but clarifying it and converging gamestate does not hurt.] >> >> ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// >> ID: pp4 >> Title: Another Economy Fix Attempt >> Adoption index: 1.0 >> Author: Gaelan >> Co-authors: >> >> >> Create a power-1 rule titled "Keep it up" with the following text: >> === >> If an action defined entirely by the rules that would otherwise be >> POSSIBLE for a player to perform is IMPOSSIBLE due to Agora having a >> low shiny balance, that player may win the game with 2 Days Notice. >> Upon doing so, half of all player's shiny balances (rounded down) are >> transferred to Agora. >> === >> >> //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
