There have been quite a few times where proposals in the same batch operate
on the same rule in an uncoordinated way, and someone realizes "hey, if these
are resolved in order, something fails, but in reverse order they both work
as intended". A simple request to the assessor fixes things easily without
needing follow-on proposals.
There have also been cases where a proposal changes something that affects
the voting system itself, so the assessor will say "for safety's sake, I'm
going to resolve all the other changes [before/after] the big voting change".
So, for example, changes to Voting Strength or Quorum don't happen halfway
through the resolution of a particular batch.
In general, I think it's a good idea that each Officer have a procedural trick
or two as a perk of the office and to use to counterscam if needed - if they
abuse it, that's what Impeachment is for (I don't think an occasional profit
like this one is "abuse" unless e uses it constantly).
On Tue, 27 Nov 2018, Gaelan Steele wrote:
> Is there any reason we’d want proposals resolved out of order? I don’t see
> any
> off hand, but it’s worth making sure we’re not losing the ability to easily
> clean up some mess.
>
> Gaelan
>
> > On Nov 27, 2018, at 7:29 AM, Jacob Arduino <jacobardu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Good catch
> > I change my votes on Proposals 8135, 8137, and 8138 to:
> > ENDORSE twg if e has made a public oath, specifying a time window of the
> > remainder of eir time as Assessor, to always resolve proposals in numerical
> > order
> > AGAINST otherwise
> >
> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> > From: Ørjan Johansen <oer...@nvg.ntnu.no>
> > Date: Tue, Nov 27, 2018, 04:42
> > Subject: DIS: Re: OFF: Ballot for Proposals 8133-8138
> > To: <agora-discussion@agoranomic.org>
> >
> >
> >> On Mon, 26 Nov 2018, Jacob Arduino wrote:
> >>
> >> 8135 twg, D Margaux 2.0 Blot Decay (Reprise)
> >> ENDORSE twg if the Agoran Decision of Proposal 8133 has been resolved
> >> AGAINST otherwise
> >
> >> 8137 Aris, twg, Trigon 3.0 Uncorrecting Rewards
> >> ENDORSE twg if the Agoran Decision of Proposal 8133 has been resolved
> >> AGAINST otherwise
> >
> >> 8138 twg 2.5 Access to contracts' assets
> >> ENDORSE twg if the Agoran Decision of Proposal 8133 has been resolved
> >> AGAINST otherwise
> >
> > While I applaud the attempt to prevent the Assessor from gaining personal
> > advantage by reordering resolutions again, I don't think these work,
> > because conditionals are evaluated at the end of the _voting period_, not
> > when the proposals are later resolved.
> >
> > Suggestion: Try something like "ENDORSE twg if e has pledged not to gain
> > personal advantage by reordering proposal resolutions for this batch."
> >
> > Greetings,
> > Ørjan.
>
>
