As I held Promotor for all of last year, I feel that it might be helpful for me to provide nominations for the Silver Quill. Right now, this just has the nominations, honorable mentions, and proposal bodies. I may post more detailed thoughts in the next few days if I can find the energy.
As always, but especially given that I am no longer Promotor, this is not intended to be a complete list of candidates, but merely some suggestions. I didn't have a lot of spare energy to look over proposals, so the chances I missed something are even greater than in previous years. Also as always, the proposal archives [1] have been updated. [1] https://github.com/AgoraNomic/proposal-archives/ Nominees: ID Author(s) AI Title --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8535 Aris, nix, G., Gaelan 3.0 We the People 8561 G., nix 2.0 Election Cycle 8576 Jason, Aris, Murphy 3.0 "By announcement" loosening 8599 G., Murphy 1.0 The Device (mark 2) 8629 G., Telna, nix, [2] 3.0 Independence Day Honorable mentions: ID Author(s) AI Title --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8532 G. 3.0 Turn Undead v2 8613 Jason, Trigon 3.0 The Name of the Win Cards v2 8626 Trigon, Jason, ais523 3.0 pledge(2)(2) [2] CuddleBeam, cuddlybanana, Jason The full text of all nominees and honorable mentions is below. ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// ID: 8535 Title: We the People Adoption index: 3.0 Author: Aris Co-authors: Trigon, nix, G., Gaelan Amend Rule 869, "How to Join and Leave Agora", by replacing: Any entity that is or ever was an organism generally capable of freely originating and communicating independent thoughts and ideas is a person. Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, no other entities are persons. with: Any entity (including a group of confederated entities) that is or ever was able to willingly communicate original ideas is a person. Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, no other entities are persons. Questions about personhood are to be resolved equitably, with regard for the good-faith of those involved and the customs of honorable play. and then, immediately after: An Unregistered person CAN (unless explicitly forbidden or prevented by the rules) register by publishing a message that indicates reasonably clearly and reasonably unambiguously that e intends to become a player at that time. inserting the new text: No person can be a player if e is part of another player or another player is part of em. and inserting a paragraph break immediately thereafter. Amend Rule 2499, "Welcome Packages", by replacing: When a player receives a Welcome Package, if e has not received one in the past 30 days, then e gains 10 boatloads of coins and one of each type of Card defined in the rules. with: When a player receives a Welcome Package, e gains 10 boatloads of coins and one of each type of Card defined in the rules, unless e, or any person of whom e was a part or who was a part of em has received a welcome package in the last 30 days. # CLEANUP Ben and Claire of the BC System are hereby declared to be separate persons; each patent title they collectively bore is revoked and granted to each of them individually. [Interpretive notes may be found in the message "BUS: Interpretive Notes for We the People".] ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// ID: 8561 Title: Election Cycle Adoption index: 2.0 Author: G. Co-author(s): nix Create a power=2 rule, "The Election Cycle", with the following text: A holder of an elected office who did not become its holder by winning an election, and has not won an election for that office since, is an interim holder. An elected office that is either vacant or has an interim holder is an interim office. An office is term-limited if the most recent election for that office was resolved more than the length of that office's term prior. The term for the office of Prime Minister is 90 days. The term for all other elected offices is 180 days. A player CAN initiate an election for a specified elected office: a) with 2 support, if either the office is interim or term- limited, and provided that the initiator becomes a candidate in the same message. b) By announcement, if e is the ADoP (or, if the office is the ADoP, if e is the Assessor) and the office is interim, or if e is the holder of that office. Once per quarter, the ADoP CAN and SHALL publish a Notice of Election specifying between 2-4 term-limited offices (if there fewer than 2 term-limited offices, the ADoP MUST instead list all of them). Such a notice initiates elections for the specified offices. The ADoP SHOULD prioritize offices that have gone longest since their last elections. The above notwithstanding, an election for an office CANNOT be initiated if one is already in progress. [Delete this section added to the previous rule - better gathers election procedure rules in one place]. Amend Rule 1006 (Offices) by removing: A holder of an elected office who did not become its holder by winning an election, and has not won an election for that office since, is an interim holder. An elected office that is either vacant or has an interim holder is an interim office. [For the below rule, remove text placed in the new rule above, and add the Assessor as the vote collector for ADoP elections]. Amend Rule 2154 (Election Procedure) to read in full: When an election is initiated, it enters the nomination period, which lasts for 4 days. After an election is initiated and until nominations close, any player CAN become a candidate by announcement. A candidate ceases to be a candidate if e ceases to be a player during the election or if holding the office would make em Overpowered. During the nomination period, a candidate CAN cease to be a candidate by announcement if there is at least one other candidate. An election whose nomination period is complete is contested if it has two or more candidates, and uncontested otherwise. Nominations close at the end of the poll's voting period or when the election is ended, whichever comes first. After the nomination period ends, the ADoP (or, if the office is the ADoP, the Assessor) CAN and, in a timely fashion, SHALL: 1) If the election is contested, initiate an Agoran decision to select the winner of the election (the poll). For this decision, the Vote Collector is the ADoP (or, if the office is the ADoP, the Assessor), the valid options are the candidates for that election (including those who become candidates after its initiation), and the voting method is instant runoff. When the poll is resolved, its outcome, if a player, wins the election. If the outcome is not a player, the election ends with no winner. 2) If POSSIBLE per the following paragraph, end the election immediately. If at any point an uncontested election has a single candidate, then any player CAN by announcement declare em the winner of the election, thereby causing em to win the election. If at any point an uncontested election has no candidates, then any player CAN declare the election ended with no winner by announcement. When a player wins an election, e is installed into the associated office and the election ends. ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// ID: 8576 Title: "By announcement" loosening Adoption index: Author: Jason Co-author(s): Aris, Murphy Amend Rule 478 by replacing the following: { Where the rules define an action that a person CAN perform "by announcement", that person performs that action by unambiguously and clearly specifying the action and announcing that e performs it. } with the following: { Where the rules define an action that a person CAN perform "by announcement", that person performs that action by, in a single public message, specifying the action and setting forth intent to perform that action by sending that message, doing both clearly and unambiguously. } [This unambiguously makes "CFJ: X" and "Proposal: X" work, even though neither explicitly says they are performing an action, since they both clearly and unambiguously set forth intent to perform the associated action. The "by sending that message" part was suggested by Aris, and prevents "I want to CFJ X at some point" from accidentally taking an action, even though it arguably sets forth intent to initiate a CFJ. This also brings the standard for "by announcement" in line with initiating a decision and casting a ballot, which both require a notice that "sets forth intent".] ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// ID: 8599 Title: The Device (mark 2) Adoption index: 1.0 Author: G. Co-author(s): Murphy [inspired by Rules 2192-2193, "The Monster", by Murphy] Enact a Rule "The Device" with the following text: When the device is on: * click - hummmmmmm When the device is off: * whirrrrrr - THUNK Enact a Rule "The Mad Engineer" with the following text: The Mad Engineer is an office; its holder is responsible for building and maintaining the Device. The device is a singleton switch with values off (default) and on. The Mad Engineer CAN flip the device to either on or off with Agoran Consent; any other player CAN do so with 2 Agoran Consent. The Mad Engineer CAN act on behalf of the device to take any action that the device may take, and SHALL act on behalf of the device to ensure that the device fulfills all of its duties. The Mad Engineer's weekly duties include the performance of the following tasks, in order: a) Randomly select exactly one rule. If the selected rule is either this rule or the rule "The Device", then 007 has been spotted near the self-destruct button; skip directly to proposal submission. b) Select one or more contiguous sentences from the selected rule. c) Select exactly one noun from the selected text, and replace each instance of that noun with "Device" (including grammatical variations, e.g. replacing "<noun>'s" with "Device's"). d) Announce intent to, with Agoran Consent, cause this rule to amend the rule "The Device" by inserting the modified text as the last list item in either the "device on" or "device off" lists in that rule (or, if 007 has been spotted, to repeal both that rule and this one). This intent announcement counts as the Mad Engineers's weekly report. If the announcement of intent above is made with the procedure described above, the Mad Engineer CAN, with Agoran Consent, cause this rule to amend the rule "The Device" as indicated, and SHALL do so if the intent receives sufficient support. G. becomes the holder of the office of Mad Engineer. An election for Mad Engineer is initiated. ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// ID: 8629 Title: Independence Day Adoption index: 3.0 Author: G. Co-author(s): Gaelan, Telna, nix, CuddleBeam, cuddlybanana, Jason [Note: this proposal was not rushed, it was originally part of survivor golf, and then substantially honed on discord. Doesn't mean it should be thoroughly checked! Also, please see the note at the bottom.] Amend Rule 1728 (Dependent Action Methods) by changing its title to "Tabled Actions" and amending its text to: An action is a Tabled Action if it is performed with one of the following methods: * With N Support, where N is a positive integer. * Without N Objections, where N is a positive integer. * With N Agoran Consent, where N is a positive integer multiple of 0.1. * With T notice, where T is a time period. The parameters N and T, if omitted, default to 1 and 4 days, respectively (e.g. "without objection" means N=1). If a rule defines N as less than 1 or greater than 8, it is instead treated as 1 or 8, respectively. A person CAN act on eir own behalf, by announcement, to table an intent (syn. "intend") to perform a tabled action, conspicuously and without obfuscation specifying the action, the method (including non- default parameter values), and optionally, conditions. A person is the sponsor of such an intent if e tabled it, or if e is authorized to perform its action due to holding a rule-defined position previously held by the person who tabled it. Amend Rule 2124 (Agoran Satisfaction) by changing its title to "Performing Tabled Actions" and amending its text to: For a given tabled intent, a player CAN, unless otherwise forbidden by the rules or the document enabling the action, act on eir own behalf, by announcement, to: * Become a supporter ("support" it), unless e tabled or previously supported it; * Become an objector ("object to" it), unless e previously objected to it; * Cease to be a supporter or objector ("withdraw" support/objection). An intent is ripe if was tabled within the past 14 days, the Speaker hasn't objected to it in the past 48 hours, and its conditions, if any, are met. An intent is mature if it was tabled at least 4 days ago and nobody withdrew objections from it in the past 24 hours. A rule purporting to allow a person to perform a tabled action allows em to do so by announcement, if, considering only intents for that action/method combination: * With N Support: e is a sponsor or supporter of a ripe intent with at least N supporters. * Without N Objections: e is a sponsor of a mature ripe intent with less than N objectors. * With N Agoran Consent: e is a sponsor or supporter of a mature ripe intent with supporters greater than N times its objectors (e SHOULD list supporters and objectors). * With T notice: e is the sponsor of a ripe intent created at least T ago. Repeal Rule 2595 (Performing a Dependent Action). Amend Rule 2481 (Festival Restrictions) by replacing: 1. Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, non-Festive players are not eligible to support a dependent action; with: 1. Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, non-Festive players CANNOT support/be a supporter for tabled action intents; If the effects of a proposal authored by R. Lee have amended Rule 2124 in the previous 14 days, then amend Rule 2124 by deleting: "on eir own behalf," [On this final clause: this proposal is meant to keep all actual mechanics of dep. actions unchanged. I didn't want to take a particular position on whether you can act-on-behalf of someone to support/object to an intent. Unfortunately, it's unclear what the current rules allow. By clarifying in either direction, I'm taking a side. But R. Lee has submitted a proposal called "Allow acting on behalf to support or object". The clause above ensures that if R. Lee's proposal is adopted, the act-on-behalf functionality stays in the rewrite as per the will of the voters.] ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// ID: 8532 Title: Turn Undead v2 Adoption index: 3.0 Author: G. Co-authors: [ diffs from proto: - Made activity switchable in both directions at will. - Defined two verbs. - Adjusted time limits as suggested. - Added inactivity as a cfj recusal reason. diffs from v1: - Made emailing a deregistree a SHOULD, but changed the method to w/o three objections, with the idea that if there's question about the email headers or whatever, objections can pragmatically handle the issue. ] Create the following Rule, Activity: Activity is a player switch tracked by the Registrar, with values Active (default) and Inactive. To flip a player's activity to active (inactive) is to activate (deactivate) em. The date on which each player's activity was last changed is part of the Registrar's weekly report. A player CAN activate or deactivate emself by announcement. Any player CAN, with notice, make a player who has not made a public announcement in the past 30 days inactive. If a player has been inactive continuously for the past 60 days, then any player CAN deregister em without 3 objections. The Registrar SHOULD attempt to deregister players who meet this condition. The publication of intent for such a deregistration SHOULD be sent to the inactive player's registered email address at the same time that it is published. Every player's activity is flipped to active [unneeded I think due to default behavior, but precautionary?] Amend Rule 2492 (Recusal) by appending the following text to the second paragraph: The Arbitor CAN recuse an inactive or deregistered judge from a case by announcement. Repeal Rule 2532 (Zombies). Repeal Rule 2574 (Zombie Life Cycle). Repeal Rule 2639 (Zombie Phase-Out). Repeal Rule 1885 (Zombie Auctions). Amend Rule 2472 (Office Incompatibilities) by deleting: A zombie is Overpowered if e holds one or more offices. Amend Rule 2531 (Defendant's Rights) by deleting: (10) it attempts to levy a fine on a zombie for an action that its master performed on its behalf. Amend Rule 2621 (VP Wins) by replacing "non-zombie" with "active". Amend Rule 2581 (Official Patent Titles) by deleting: - Necromancer, awardable by the Registrar to any player who makes such sufficient persistent legal use of zombies that rules need to be amended to prevent such practices. [Checked all the other uses of "active" and "inactive" pertaining to players, looked like all would work fine under this version] ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// ID: 8613 Title: The Name of the Win Cards v2 Adoption index: 3.0 Author: Jason Co-author(s): Trigon In ascending numerical order, amend each enacted rule by case-insensitively replacing, as a single amendment per Rule: * "Victory Card" with "Win Card" * "Victory Point" with "Winsome" * "Extra Vote" with "Votive" Win Card balances are hereby set to what Victory Card balances were at the time immediately before this proposal began taking effect. Winsome balances are hereby set to what Victory Point balances were at the time immediately before this proposal began taking effect. Votive balances are hereby set to what Extra Vote balances were at the time immediately before this proposal began taking effect. [This introduces more whimsy into the asset names and means that Voting Card and Victory Card are no longer both VCs.] ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// ID: 8626 Title: pledge(2)(2) Adoption index: 3.0 Author: Trigon Co-author(s): Jason, ais532 [ COMMENT: The gist of this idea is that players can choose for some part of their messages which actions should succeed and which actions should fail. Hopefully, this would be integrated gracefully into the rest of the rules, but that's a lot of SHALLs to sort through to decide which should be scoped actions. Comments can be found throughout. Second update: I've reworked some of the wording. There might still be room for breaking. Feel free to tell me to fix it. ] Enact a new Power=3 rule entitled "Scopes" with text: Players CAN take actions in a specific scope. When a player does so, e must either clearly and unambiguously describe a list of allowed actions or a list of prohibited actions for that scope, or e must refer to a source which clearly and unambiguously defines such a list. E must also clearly and unambiguously specify when e begins acting in that scope and when e finishes acting in that scope. Actions within a scope which are prohibited or not allowed are blocked actions, while actions which are allowed or not prohibited are unblocked actions. [ COMMENT: I'm not sure what I think of this terminology. ] When a player is acting within a specific scope, if an action which would otherwise succeed is blocked within that scope, then that action instead fails. When a player begins acting in a scope, e CAN specify which of the following modifiers apply, if any. * Indirection allowed: actions within this scope whose end results are solely to initiate one or more unblocked actions within this scope succeed as well. * Partial success prohibited: if one action within this scope would fail, then all actions within the scope fail. * Acting on behalf allowed: acting on behalf to perform an unblocked action within this scope succeeds as well. [ COMMENT: There's got to be a way to phrase these scope modifiers better, right? ] The following scopes are defined: [ COMMENT: These are just random suggestions , though I think they are useful. Feel free to suggest more. ] * Global scope: all actions are allowed in this scope. [ COMMENT: This should also allow players to say something like "I act in the global scope, disallowing partial success, to do the following: {...}" instead of "If all the following succeed I do this: {...}". I think that it's elegant, if a bit wordy. Suggestions for better terminology for scopes are welcome. ] * Transaction scope: when acting in this scope, only transfers of assets are allowed. * Economic scope: when acting in this scope, creation, destruction, and transfers of assets are allowed. * Official scope: for a specified office, only actions mandated by the rules for that office succeed. [ COMMENT: This is a rather broad specification, but it might allow us to write something like "When the rules say an Officer CAN do something, then e does so in that Office's scope", though whether we want to is another question. ] [ COMMENT: So what do you think? I like the idea, but executing actions within a scope is wordy. As is the proposed rule. With no comments, it's still over 40 lines long. Suggestions to make either more succinct are very welcome. ] //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
