I'm probably going to deny this, as there is (I think) a custom that the effective date of a revision is implied to be that of the original report.
-Aris On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 9:04 PM Alexis Hunt <aler...@gmail.com> wrote: > Oh, also, just in case, to stop self-ratification: CoE: there are more > proposals in the Proposal Pool than just these. > > > On Sun, 15 Oct 2017 at 21:10 Alexis Hunt <aler...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I spend an AP to CFJ: The below-quoted document contains a self-ratifying >> list of proposals in the Proposal Pool. Arguments: does this count as a >> portion of a purported Promotor's report? There is no information in the >> report which isn't in the document, and this is clearly published by the >> Promotor with the intent to convey all of the report's information. The >> subject further implies it was a report. >> >> Evidence: rules 1607 and 2201 >> >> 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. >>> === >>> >>> ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// >>> >>
