Comments inline > On Feb 27, 2018, at 2:52 PM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote: > > > > > proto-proposal, the Lesson of the Weevils > > ======================================================================== > > Create the following Rule, Weevils, power-2: > > Weevils are an indestructible fixed currency with ownership > restricted to persons. A person with 1 or more weevils is > Impure, a person with 0 weevils is Pure. An impure unregistered > person is a Fugitive. > > To Levy a Fine of N on a person, where N is a positive integer, > is to create N weevils in eir possession by announcement. To > Expunge a weevil is to destroy it by announcement. If expunging > weevils would reduce a person's weevils to less than 0, their > weevils are instead reduced to 0 but the cost of expunging, if > any, is not reduced. Levying fines and destroying weevils are each > secured with a power threshold of 1.7. > > The Referee is an office, and the recordkeepor for Weevils. > > > Create the following Rule, Penalties, power-3: > > Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, an impure person CANNOT win > the game. > > The voting strength of a player on an Agoran Decision is reduced > by 1 for every 3 weevils in eir possession.
Voting strength is an integer, right? I kind of like the idea of this immediately reducing voting strength -- we could do that by allowing fractional strengths or by multiplying all strengths in the rules by 3. > > > Create the following Rule, Forgiveness, power-1.7: > > A player CAN spend X [PAotM Currency TBD] to expunge X weevils in > eir possession, or to expunge 2xX weevils in another person's > possession. I personally prefer 2X instead of 2xX. "Twice X" also works. > > At the beginning of each quarter, half (rounded down) of each > fugitive's weevils are destroyed. Maybe not just fugitives? Currently all punishments wear off if ignored for a while, and I'm inclined to believe that is a good thing. This may also encourage deregistration to get rid of fines. Also also, this will never let a person get down to zero. Not sure if that's a good thing or not. > > > Amend Rule 2478 (Vigilante Justice) to read: > > A player CAN by announcement, but subject to the provisions of > this rule, Point eir Finger at a person (the perp) who plays the > game, citing an alleged violation of the rules by that person. > > When a player Points a Finger, the investigator SHALL investigate > the allegation and, in a timely fashion, SHALL conclude the > investigation by: > > - Imposing the Cold Hand of Justice on the perp, as described > elsewhere; or > > - if e believes that no rules violation occurred or that it would > be ILLEGAL to levy a fine for it, announcing the Finger Pointing > to be Shenanigans. > > There is no limit on how many times a player may impose the Cold > Hand of Justice per week. > > The Referee is by default the investigator for all Finger > Pointing. When a Finger, other than the Arbitor's, is Pointed over > an allegation related to the official duties or powers of the > Referee, then the Arbitor CAN, by announcement, take over the > investigation and thereby become the investigator. > > The Referee CANNOT Point eir Finger. The Arbitor CANNOT Point eir > Finger at the Referee. This seems like a good time to patch the "point finger than deputize" bug you used to get around this. > > Create the following Rule, Sentencing Guidelines, power 1.7: > > When the rules authorize an investigator to impose the Cold Hand of > Justice for a violation, e CAN do so by levying a fine on the perp > with a minimum of 1 and a maximum of 2x the base value of the > violation, within the following guidelines: > > - If the violation is described by the rules as a Class N crime, > then N is the base value; otherwise the base value is the power > of the rule that was violated, rounded up. Not sure if power is the best way to guess rules importance; I think it would be rather arbitrary most of the time. Also, I'm wondering if a shorthand such as SHALL(3) for defining a crime's class is a good idea. > > - The fine is reduced to the degree that the violation is a minor, > accidental, and/or inconsequential infraction. > > - The fine is increased to the degree that the violation is wilful, > profitable, egregious, or an abuse of an official position. s/wilful/willful > > Optionally, in the same message in which e imposes justice, the > investigator CAN specify that the violation is forgivable, > specifying up to 10 words to be included in an apology. If e > does so, the perp CAN, in a timely fashion, expunge the value > of the fine up to a maximum of 3 weevils from emself by publishing a > formal apology of at least 200 words and including all the specified > words, explaining eir error, shame, remorse, and ardent desire for > self-improvement. If the fine is 4, can I apologize for 3? If so, make that more clear. > > > Amend Rule 2479 (Official Justice) to read: > > The Referee CAN, subject to the provisions of this rule, impose > Summary Judgment on a person who plays the game by levying a > fine of up to 2 Weevils on em. Summary Judgement is imposed on the > Referee's own initiative, and not in response to any official > proceeding. > > The Referee CANNOT impose Summary Judgement more than three times > a week. > > > Amend Rule 2531 (Referee Accountability) to read: > > Any attempt to levy a fine is INEFFECTIVE if it does not include > (1) value of the fine in Weevils, (2) the name of the person being > fined (the perp), and (3) the specific reason for > the fine, or if it attempts to levy a fine on a person for an > action or inaction which e (more likely than not) did > not commit, or if it attempts to levy a fine for an action or > inaction which is not prohibited by law, or if it attempts to > levy a fine with a value which is blatantly and obviously unsuited to > the conduct which constitutes the reason for its levy or to > the person to which it is being levied, or if it is made more than > 14 days after the conduct constituting the reason for the fine, or > if it attempts to levy a fine to a player who has > already been levied a fine for the conduct constituting the reason > for the levy. > > If the Referee attempts to levy three or more INEFFECTIVE fines > in a week, any player CAN, with two support, issue a writ of > Impartial Arbitration Restoration, immediately making the position > of Referee vacant. When a writ of Impartial Arbitration > Restoration is issued, the ADoP SHALL initiate an election for the > Referee within a timely fashion. Should we add "players SHALL NOT hold the office of referee when such a writ is published"? > > > Increase the power of Rule 2531 (Referee Accountability) to 2. > > > Repeal Rule 2426 (Cards) > Repeal Rule 2477 (The Referee) > Repeal Rule 2474 (Green Cards) > Repeal Rule 2506 (Blue Cards) > Repeal Rule 2427 (Yellow Cards) > Repeal Rule 2475 (Red Cards) > Repeal Rule 2476 (Pink Slips) > > TODO: Amend Rule 2523 (Contracts as Agreements) > > ======================================================================== > > > > > > > > > > > > >
