I was grouchy when I saw this finger point. The error that elicited it is a very minor error, practically to the point of insignificance. While I know that publishing a draft doesn't absolve me of responsibility for the accuracy of the report, I do make substantial efforts to publish accurate reports. Overall, it just doesn't feel like a finger point makes sense here.
Part of the problem is the purpose of the SHALL. It seems like what it's really trying to prevent is the Promotor *deliberately* distributing non-pending proposals. It serves as a "don't do that" which is stronger than a SHOULD - there's an actual penalty for a breach. But it doesn't seem like it was really put there for situations like this. The bigger problem I have is just... what's the point of this sort of finger point? When I asked the referring party, e said that e wanted to create more work for our Honorable Referee, draw attention to the fact that the proposal shouldn't have been distributed, and encourage me to keep doing my best work. Applying my perhaps antiquated views of when finger points make sense, none of these seem to render a finger point the appropriate solution. Right now, I'm frustrated, and I apologize if I put things in a bad or aggressive way way. I also know there has been talk of moving from a paradigm where there is restraint in finger pointing to one where finger pointing to one where there judgement applied by the Referee. However, I wish to express, in a generalized sense and without intending personal disparagement of the finger pointer, that I am frustrated, I am grouchy, and I don't like it. Sincerely and temperamentally yours in possibly-excessive and hopefully-short-lived frustration, Aspen On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 11:52 PM Trigon via agora-business < agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > El 26/03/2022 a las 06:00, secretsnail9 via agora-business escribió: > > I point my finger at Aspen for breaking Rule 1607 (Distribution) by > > distributing the non-pending proposal, "The Hexeract" (Proposal 8663) on > or > > around Saturday, March 26th, 2022, 3:39:27. > > > > This crime should be VERY forgivable as I probably should have caught it > > before the distribution. > > > > The message in which the crime took place: > > https://www.mail-archive.com/agora-official@agoranomic.org/msg12106.html > > > > Relevant rule text: > > > > The Promotor CAN distribute a proposal which is in the Proposal > > Pool at any time, but SHALL NOT do so unless it is pending. > > > > > > -- > > secretsnail > > I opine that this action is bad form. > > For one thing, a draft was published. Aspen is very thorough with > publishing drafts but if no one looks at them that defeats the point. > This mistake should have been caught before the distribution and since > it wasn't, that in no way reflects poorly on the Promotor. > > For another thing, if this were any other report this would not have > been a pointable offense; instead it would have been a harmless CoE. > Officers make mistakes, and there are mechanisms in the rules to account > for human error. This is a double standard that does not do us any good > to uphold. > > Finally, this literally does no harm whatsoever to Agora. In my opinion > crimes exist to chastise someone if something they do harms Agora or > makes it unreasonable to play. I get that this is probably all for the > most-fingers-pointed reward. That is a mechanic of which I have never > been a fan because it goes against that philosophy. > > I don't know if this changes anyone's mind or if I'm whinging at this > point. I just don't think that a finger point like this is at all > justified. > > -- > Trigon > > Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone > > ¸¸.•*¨*• Play AGORA QUEST > > <https://agoranomic.org/AgoraQuest> > <https://agoranomic.org/AgoraQuest> > <https://agoranomic.org/AgoraQuest> > > I’m always happy to become a party to contracts. > I LOVE SPAGHETTI > transfer Jason one coin > nch was here > I hereby > don't... trust... the dragon... > don't... trust... the dragon... > Do not Construe Jason's message with subject TRIGON as extending this >
