On 12/31/23 18:04, nix via agora-business wrote:
> {
> Title: Stamp Specialization v1.1
> Adoption Index: 2
> Author: nix
> Co-Authors: 4st, ais523, Janet
>
> Enact a new Power 1 rule titled "Stamp Specialization":
>
> Stamp Specialization is a person switch with potential values "None"
> (default), "Any", "Selfsame", "Stone", and "Strength", tracked by
> the Collector.
>
> If e has not done so since the last time e registered, or since the
> last time a player won via tokens (whichever is more recent), a
> player CAN flip eir Stamp Specialization switch to "Selfsame",
> "Stone", or "Strength" by announcement.
>
> If a person has not been a player for the last three months, any
> player CAN flip that player's Stamp Specialization switch to "Any"
> by announcement. When a player registers, if eir Stamp
> Specialization switch is set to "Any", flip it to "None".
Is this meant to mean "has, at any point in the last 3 months, not been
a player" or "has not, at any point in the last 3 months, been a player"?
Also (as mentioned on Discord, but for completeness) 'flip it to "None"'
shouldn't use the imperative.
>
> To pay a fee of a "X" Stamp, where X is a Stamp Specialization, is
> to pay a fee of a Stamp whose corresponding player's Stamp
> Specialization is either X or "Any".
This has precedence issues with redefining "fee" but it's probably fine.
It happens to work fine now since this rule will take precedence over
the other rules enacted in this proposal, but if a Rule with power > 1
or a Rule enacted before this proposal was changed to use this
definition, it wouldn't apply (except *maybe* through the "reasonable
clarification" clause but that's really questionable in my opinion).
> Enact a new Power 1 rule titled "Victory Tokens":
>
> Victory Tokens are an asset tracked by the Collector in eir weekly
> report. A player CAN pay a Selfsame Stamp, a Stone Stamp, and a
> Strength Stamp to grant emself 1 Victory Token.
>
> If a player has more Victory Tokens than each other player, the
> Boulder's Height is 50 or more, and no one has done so in the last
> 7 days, that player CAN win by announcement. When a player does so,
> eir Victory Tokens are destroyed.
The current convention is to have a separate verb for the victory
condition and the winning. I think this was done to prevent winning from
becoming a fee-based action but that isn't a concern here. In any case,
here's alternative wording:
{
If a player has more Victory Tokens than each other player, the
Boulder's Height is 50 or more, and no one has done so in the last 7
days, that player CAN [clever verb] by announcement.
When a player [verbs], e wins the game. When a player wins the game by
this method, eir Victory Tokens are destroyed.
}
It's questionable whether this is actually necessary in this case, I think.
>
> Enact a new Power 2 rule titled "Stamps for Strength":
>
> A player CAN pay three Strength Stamps. Eir Voting Strength is
> increased by 2 on all ordinary referenda currently being voted on
> for every time e has done so during its voting period.
"CAN pay three Strength Stamps" to do what? R2579 only defines fee-based
methods to perform other actions, it doesn't define merely paying a fee
by itself.
"currently being voted on" looks unnecessary to me? "Ordinary
referendum" is undefined; R2645 uses "on a referendum on an ordinary
proposal".
> Amend R2640, "Stones" by replacing:
>
> A stone is a unique indestructible liquid asset
>
> with:
>
> A stone is a unique fixed indestructible asset
>
> and deleting:
>
> (ii) The smoothness of the stone, which is a non-negative integer;
>
Need to renumber the rest of the list.
> Amend R2641, "Wielding Stones" by replacing:
>
> While a stone is hot, it is IMPOSSIBLE to wield it or to transfer
> it by announcement
>
> with:
>
> While a stone is hot, it is IMPOSSIBLE to wield it
You could add a period while you're changing this anyway.
> Amend R2642, "Gathering Stones", to read in full:
>
> Grab Cost is an integer stone switch with default value 10, tracked
> by the Stonemason. At the beginning of each week, the Grab Cost of
> each Stone is decreased by 1, unless it is already 0.
"non-negative integer stone switch" if it's not expected to go below 0
anyway?
And is it intended to actually reach 0? If it's not, then it could even
be "positive integer stone switch".
> Amend R2645, "The Stones", to read in full:
>
> The following stones are defined, one per paragraph, with the
> following format: Stone Name (Frequency): Description.
>
> - Power Stone (weekly): When this stone is wielded, a specified
> player (defaulting to the wielder if not specified) is Power
> Stoned; Power Stoning is secured. A player's voting strength on
> a referendum on an ordinary proposal is increased by 3 for each
> time that e was Power Stoned during the referendum's voting
> period.
>
> - Soul Stone (weekly): When wielded, this stone is transferred
> to the owner of a different specified non-immune stone not owned
> by Agora, then that stone is transferred to the wielder.
You've repealed R2643, which defines "immunity".
>
> - Sabotage Stone (weekly): When wielded, the adoption index of
> a specified AI-majority Agoran decision is increased by 1.
>
> - Minty Stone (weekly): When wielded, a specified Player gains
> a stamp of eir own type.
>
> - Protection Stone (monthly): When wielded, a specified stone
> is granted immunity.
>
> - Recursion Stone (monthly): The Recursion Stone can be wielded
> once per month as if it had the power of any other stone of your
> choice (the Blueprint Stone), with any references to the
> Blueprint Stone itself changed to the Recursion Stone unless
> they specify otherwise.
Oh I didn't realize this used the second-person. Could this be changed
to say "the wielder's choice" while it's being updated anyway?
> - Blank Stone (monthly): This stone has no effect.
>
> - Hot Potato Stone (weekly): When this stone is wielded, the
> wielder specifies an eligible player. The stone is transferred
> to the eligible player. An eligible player is one who has not
> owned this stone since the last time it was grabbed. When a
> player grabs the Hot Potato Stone, every player that has owned
> it since the last time it was grabbed gains 1 Victory Token.
>
> - Switcheroo Stone (monthly): Where X is the Grab Cost of this
> stone and Y is the Grab Cost of a specified non-immune stone,
> flip the Grab Cost of this stone to Y and the Grab Cost of the
> specified non-immune stone to X.
>
> - Victorious Stone (monthly): Grant the player with the least
> Victory Tokens 2 Victory Tokens. Grant the specified player 2
> Victory Tokens.
Also mentioned this on Discord, but these need to say "When wielded, X
happens" rather than using the imperative.
--
Janet Cobb
Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
