DIS: Re: OFF: Revision
omd <c.ome.xk <at> gmail.com>
2014-03-26 05:48:32 GMT
On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 11:59 PM, Sean Hunt <scshunt <at> csclub.uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
> Repeal Rule 2166 (Assets).
Meh. It's been a long run.
> Repeal Rule 2288 (Induction).
> Repeal Rule 2280 (Implicit Votes).
> Repeal Rule 2373 (Voting Chambers).
> Repeal Rule 2389 (Ordinary Chamber).
> Repeal Rule 2374 (Democratic Chamber).
> Repeal Rule 2409 (Star Chamber).
> Repeal Rule 2276 (Assumption of Vacant Offices).
> Repeal Rule 2395 (Government Waste).
> Enact a new power-2 rule entitled "Score", reading as follows:
> Score is a player switch, with default 0 and possible values all
> non-negative integers.
Hmm... this would make Score momentarily defined by both this rule and
R2419; since everyone has a score that wouldn't be a possible value by
this definition, scores all go to default? Well, maybe only after
R2419 is amended if "a player's Score is a complex number" counts as a
conflict. A bit weird to leave that implicit.
> If any player has a score of at least 250, then any player who
> has at least as much score as any other player can make an
> announcement naming all players with the highest score and
> indicating that they have won Agora.
This wording is somewhat odd, since anyone can make such an
announcement at any time. You know better than that.
> reset to default. The beginning of a new game does not cause
> any changes to
> the game state not specified by the rules; in particular, Agora does
> not end and the ruleset remains unchanged.
> Amend Rule 2160 (Deputisation) by appending:
> When a player deputises for an office, e becomes the holder of
> that office.
Hmm, why not.
> Amend Rule 2154 (Election Procedure) by
> a) deleting "or the office is Assumed" and
> b) deleting bullets 2) and 3) and renumbering that list accordingly
Can we just get rid of elections unless we're actually going to do
something with them, like the constants-set-as-part-of-campaign
suggestion? (Wasn't that in the rules at some point?)
I guess without elections, you'd be left with deposing people by
deputising for them, which might cause more rancor than necessary; on
the other hand, that sounds a little fun (similar to the old Pariah
> Amend Rule 2138 (The Interstellar Associate Director of Personnel) by
> a) deleting the words "and reports" and
> b) replacing bullet c) with:
> c) The date on which the most recent election for that office
> was initiated.
Why do you want the IADoP to no longer track reports? Speaking for
myself, I usually don't notice when someone has stopped publishing
reports if I'm not particularly interested in their contents.
(Speaking of which, I have an IADoP report to publish...)
> Amend Rule 107 (Initiating Agoran Decisions) by deleting item (b)
> in the list and renumbering it accordingly.
> Determining whether to adopt a proposal is an Agoran decision.
> An Agoran decision with an adoption index has the following
> essential parameters:
> a) Its adoption index.
> b) Its author (and co-authors, if any).
Just say proposal.
> Amend Rule 991 (Calls for Judgment) by
> a) inserting, between the second and third paragraphs, "The Arbitor is
> an office, responsible for the administration of justice in a manner
> that is fair for emself, if not for the rest of Agora."
What's the point? It's not like the Speaker has much else to do.
Also, might want to remove
The Speaker SHALL assign judges over time such that all
interested players have reasonably equal opportunities to judge.