Ratification takes effect relative to the publication of the document, however. The context doesn't matter; if this document were ratified, then it would be treated as true and correct; that is, it would be treated as if it was a complete list of the proposal pool at the time of its publication.
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017, 04:11 Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, < p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com> wrote: > No, there were not as of the effective date of the proposal being revised. > > > On 10/16/2017 12:04 AM, Alexis Hunt 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 > > <mailto: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 > > <mailto: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. > > === > > > > > ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// > > > >
