On Sun, Mar 28, 2021 at 1:05 PM Aris Merchant via agora-discussion
<agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
>
> Wasn't really planning to publish this so soon, as I'm not really done
> editing it. On the other hand, Murphy has published eirs, so I'm going
> for it.
>
> -Aris
> ---
> Title: Ratification Rewrite
> Adoption index: 3.0
> Author: Aris
> Co-authors: Jason, G.
An updated version that removes the confusing special case for
ratifying public documents. I also incorporated part of Murphy's
proposal (specifically, eir definition of the time of a document's
ratification).
-Aris
---
Title: Ratification Rewrite
Adoption index: 3.0
Author: Aris
Co-authors: Jason, G., Murphy
[Let's face it, the ratification rules are a mess. They're nearly
unreadable, full of complicated technical language that is painfully
hard to understand. While they deal with an inherently complex
problem, that doesn't mean they need to be impossible to read
themselves.
A while back people suggested some rewrites that
came at the problem from different angles, but all of them
had their own problems. This proposal maintains the
same basic conceptual approach as the current rules,
but rewrites the text to make it more readable
and adjusts the complex to simplify them. I hope this will
lead to cleaner results than we have at present.]
Enact a new power 3.0 rule entitled "Documents", with the
following text:
A document is a body of text. A public document is a document that
is part (possibly all) of a public message.
A public document's effective date is the time it was published,
unless the document explicitly specifies a different past time as
the time it was true, in which case its effective date is that
past time.
Amend Rule 1551, "Ratification", by changing it to read as follows:
When a statement is ratified, play proceeds as if the statement has
become true, and the state of the game is updated accordingly.
A statement CANNOT be ratified if:
1. it is internally inconsistent;
2. it describes a state of affairs that is impossible for
reasons outside its scope;
3. its ratification would make the state of the game
indeterminate or inconsistent with the rules.
The ratification of a statement does not change the rules,
unless the statement (or a public document that it references)
explicitly and unambiguously recites either the changes to
them or their final properties. Text purportedly about previous
instances of ratification is excluded from ratification.
Ratification is secured at power 3.
Amend Rule 2202, "Ratification Without Objection", by changing it to read
in full:
A player CAN, without objection, ratify a specified statement.
Ratification without objection CANNOT cause rule changes, rules to the
contrary notwithstanding.
A player SHALL NOT ratify or announce intent to ratify
a statement without objection if e knows it is incorrect or
indeterminate, unless the general nature of the statement's
error and reason for ratifying it is plainly described
in the announcement of intent. Doing so is the Class 8
Crime of Endorsing Forgery.
Amend Rule 2201, "Self-Ratification", by changing it to read in full:
When a public document is defined as self-ratifying by the rules
remains continuously undoubted for one week, it is ratified
that the statement became true and correct in all respects
at its effective date.
Any person CAN by announcement submit a claim of error,
identifying a document (perhaps implicitly) and explaining the
nature of a perceived error in it. For so long as a claim
exists against the document, it is doubted.
When this happens, the publisher of the original document SHALL
(if e was required to publish that document) or SHOULD (otherwise)
do one of the following in a timely fashion, in an announcement
that clearly cites the claim of error:
1. Deny the claim (causing it to cease to exist).
2. Initiate an inquiry case regarding the truth of the claim
(if the subject is actually a matter of law), or cite a
relevant existing inquiry case.
3. Publish a revision. If no claim of error is stated,
the revision implicitly responds to all claims of error
against the document being revised.
Amend Rule 107, "Initiating Agoran Decisions", by replacing:
A public notice purporting to initiate an Agoran decision is a
self-ratifying attestation of the notice's validity.
with:
A public notice purporting to initiate an Agoran decision
contains an implied self-ratifying statement that the
notice is valid.
Amend Rule 2034, "Vote Protection and Cutoff for Challenges", by
replacing:
A public message purporting to resolve an Agoran decision is a
self-ratifying attestation that
with:
A public message purporting to resolve an Agoran decision
contains an implied self-ratifying statement that
