THE FULL LOGICAL RULESET Last proposal with recorded effect on this ruleset: 7053 Last change to this ruleset: by Proposal 7053 Last updated: 31 May 2011 Highest Rule ID number ever assigned: 2347 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Statistics Current total number of rules: 98 Power distribution: 1 with Power=4 1 with Power=3.2 35 with Power=3 30 with Power=2 8 with Power=1.7 3 with Power=1.5 20 with Power=1 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Index of Categories * The Game of Agora * Rules * Players * Economy * Definitions * Offices * Agoran Decisions * Proposals * Adjudication * Patent Titles and Degrees * Trophies ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Index of Rules * The Game of Agora Rule 2105: The Map of Agora Rule 101: The Rights of Agorans Rule 2125: Regulation Regulations Rule 1586: Definition and Continuity of Entities Rule 1688: Power Rule 2140: Power Controls Mutability Rule 104: First Speaker Rule 2326: The President Rule 2344: Anarchy Rule 103: The Speaker Rule 2339: Intention * Rules Rule 2141: Role and Attributes of Rules Rule 217: Interpreting the Rules Rule 1030: Precedence between Rules Rule 2240: No Cretans Need Apply Rule 105: Rule Changes Rule 1681: The Logical Rulesets Rule 2340: Notability Rule 1051: The Rulekeepor Rule 2327: Read the Ruleset Week * Players Rule 869: How to Join and Leave Agora Rule 2170: Who Am I? Rule 2150: Personhood Rule 2328: Public Agreements Rule 2139: The Registrar Rule 1789: Cantus Cygneus Rule 2130: Activity * Economy Rule 2166: Assets Rule 2330: Points Rule 2331: Proposal Points Rule 2335: Judge Points Rule 2336: Officer Points Rule 2343: Victory Cases Rule 2332: Winning by Points Rule 2337: Promises Rule 2338: Cashing Promises Rule 2345: Bets Rule 2346: Betting Markets * Definitions Rule 754: Definition Definitions Rule 2152: Mother, May I? Rule 1023: Common Definitions Rule 2347: Speed Rule 1769: Holidays Rule 2329: Festival Days Rule 2146: Indices Rule 2162: Switches Rule 478: Fora Rule 1728: Dependent Actions Rule 2288: Induction Rule 2124: Agoran Satisfaction Rule 2333: Contests Rule 2334: Timers * Offices Rule 1006: Offices Rule 2143: Official Reports and Duties Rule 2160: Deputisation Rule 2154: Election Procedure Rule 2276: Assumption of Vacant Offices Rule 2138: The Interstellar Associate Director of Personnel Rule 1551: Ratification Rule 2202: Ratification Without Objection Rule 2201: Self-Ratification * Agoran Decisions Rule 693: Agoran Decisions Rule 107: Initiating Agoran Decisions Rule 683: Voting on Agoran Decisions Rule 2127: Conditional Votes Rule 2280: Implicit Votes Rule 2168: Extending the voting period Rule 208: Resolving Agoran decisions Rule 955: Determining the Will of Agora Rule 879: Quorum Rule 2034: Vote Protection and Cutoff for Challenges * Proposals Rule 106: Adopting Proposals Rule 1607: The Promotor Rule 1950: Decisions with Adoption Indices Rule 2137: The Assessor Rule 1698: Agora Is a Nomic * Adjudication Rule 991: Judicial Cases Generally Rule 2158: Judges Rule 591: Inquiry Cases Rule 1504: Criminal Cases Rule 2277: Appeals of Criminal Cases Rule 2205: Judicial Arguments and Evidence Rule 2157: Judicial Panels Rule 2341: Judgements by Judicial Panels Rule 2318: Motions to Reconsider Rule 911: Appeal Cases Rule 2342: Judicial Appeals Panels Rule 2175: Judicial Retraction and Excess Rule 1868: Judge Assignment Generally Rule 1871: The Standing Court Rule 2204: Linked Assignments Rule 2164: Judicial Self-Recusal and Case Transfer Rule 2212: Judicial Declarations * Patent Titles and Degrees Rule 649: Patent Titles Rule 1367: Degrees Rule 2231: Order of the Hero of Agora Nomic * Trophies Rule 1727: Happy Birthday Rule 2029: Town Fountain (Garbage Bin) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Rules are listed as follows. "nnnn" is the rule's ID number, loosely regulated by Rule 2141; ID numbers are assigned in increasing order and are never reused. "r" is the rule's revision number, not defined by the rules; any amendment (but not retitling or mutation) increases this number. History entries are required by Rule 1681; an ellipsis (...) indicates that the history is incomplete. Rule nnnn/r (Power=p) Title of Rule Text of rule. History: List of changes to the rule. Annotations in square brackets are unofficial and have no legal force. They are added at the Rulekeepor's discrection, except for annotations starting with a CFJ number, which are mandated by Rule 2340. A judicial case is Notable if and only if it has such an annotation in this document. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ====================================================================== The Game of Agora A category concerning this nomic generally, constitutional matters, and relationships between the most fundamental nomic entities. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Rule 2105/4 (Power=1) The Map of Agora ____ _ /| DARWIN -> \_ |/ | / \ __/ / | | <- DSV / / | \ _ \ \_ | \ MORNINGTON CRESCENT -> / | <- GOETHE BARRIER _ _/ | \_/\_/ \ REEF / \\ <- SHARK BAY | | / | | \ <- TOWNSVILLE ___/ | | \_ __/ | | .___o ) | / | | ~~vv ===~~~ <-OSCAR'S MIRE / O <- SHERLOCK NESS | |/\ | | | |_ | | | EMERALD -> \ \ |__________=_____, \ BRISBANE / | | | <-' \ O <- LT. ANNE MOORE | __ _\ \ | |_______/ \/ | LORD | __/\ <- TARACOOLA / HOWE -> \ PERTH __/ \_ / / | <-' _ __/ | /| IVANHOE -> | <-. / _/ \/ \ / / | / WOLLONGONG |_ / <- ESPERANTO v /__ |_ / <- CANBERRA \_/ \ | \_ _| __ __ | | \__/ \_ __ \ / __ \___=_ ___| \_ / \ | / \ MANUBOURNE -> \/ NEW C.LAND \} \|/ \) _,.---v---._ /\__ )`-'] /\__/\ / \ | | COPPRO STRAIGHT( ! \_ _/ / \ | / MICHAELTON->) / \ \_| @ __| \_/ <- HOBART |^\ (_/ \ \_ ( | \ ,__/ / / * ~~~`~~~~~~~~~~~~~~/~~~~ BREE_523->/~ / MURPHENDELL--> # / / |BOBCHURCH PAVRITTON->/ _| {__/ / @ WOOBLEING HEIGHTS History: Created by Proposal 4735 (Maud), 5 May 2005 Amended(1) by Proposal 4807 (Sherlock), 15 June 2005 Amended(2) by Proposal 4866 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 Amended(3) by Proposal 4946 (Zefram), 3 May 2007 Amended(4) by Proposal 6581 (G.), 28 November 2009 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Rule 101/13 (Power=3) The Rights of Agorans WHEREAS Agora, since its inception, has functioned not only as a game but as a society, and WHEREAS a society, to function, must balance its Rules with the natural rights of its participants, BE IT HEREBY PROCLAIMED that no interpretation of Agoran law or binding agreement may substantially limit or remove a person's rights as defined by this Rule, except through the explicit and legal amendment of this Rule. This rule takes precedence over any rule which would allow or mandate restrictions of the rights contained herein. i. Every person has the right, though not necessarily the ability, to perform actions that are not prohibited or regulated by the Rules, with the sole exception of changing the Rules, which is permitted only when the Rules explicitly or implicitly permit it. ii. Every person has the right to initiate a formal process to resolve matters of controversy, in the reasonable expectation that the controversy will thereby be resolved. Every person has the right to cause formal reconsideration of any judicial determination that e should be punished. iii. Every person has the right to refuse to become party to a binding agreement. The absence of a person's explicit, willful consent shall be considered a refusal. iv. Every person has the right to not be considered bound by an agreement, or an amendment to an agreement, or a Rule Change, which e has not had the reasonable opportunity to review. For the purpose of protecting this right, a rule change which would otherwise take effect without its substance being subject to general player review through a reasonably public process is wholly prevented from taking effect. v. Every player has the right of participation in the fora. vi. Every person has the right to not be penalized more than once for any single action or inaction. However, this right is not violated by replacing part or all of a penalty with a different but comparable penalty, e.g. when the rules governing penalties are amended. vii. Every player has the right to deregister; e may continue to accrue obligations and penalties after deregistration but, if e wishes to ignore the game, such penalties shall not unduly harass em. Please treat Agora right good forever. [CFJ 24: Players must obey the Rules even in out-of-game actions.] [CFJ 825 (called 7 November 1995): Players must obey the Rules even if no Rule says so.] [CFJ 1848 (called 21 December 2007): The game must operate according to the rules that prevail at the time, and not attempt to incorporate any retroactive changes made in the future.] [CFJ 1709 (called 26 July 2007): The rules are binding on all those who play the game in the broader sense, regardless of whether they have the rule-defined status of "player".] [CFJ 1132: A Player failing to perform a duty required by the Rules within a reasonable time may be in violation of the Rules, even if the Rules do not provide a time limit for the performance of that duty.] [CFJ 1488 (called 11 February 2004): Engineering a situation in which other players are unable to follow a particular rule is not in itself a violation of that rule.] [CFJ 1856 (called 29 December 2007): The requirement that "no interpretation of Agoran law may abridge ... a person's defined rights" means that it must be feasible, given the practical limits of Agoran evidence-gathering, to remain reasonably sure that a person's defined rights are not being limited.] [CFJ 1768 (called 22 October 2007): The right of participation in the fora is the right to participate in them for their intended purposes, and is not necessarily infringed by regulations regarding the manner and type of participation.] [CFJ 1738 (called 29 August 2007): An obligation on a player to not publish statements that e believes are true would conflict with the right of participation in the fora.] [CFJ 1753 (called 28 September 2007): The right to cease playing applies only to those who have the rule-defined status of "player", not to those who play the game in the broader sense without having that official status.] [CFJs 1911-1914 (called 18 March 2008): Physical realities supersede the Rules by default.] [CFJ 2220 (called 11 October 2008): Consent to join a binding agreement may be an effect of another action, such as joining a foreign nomic, as long as the action is triggered by free will and the actor is reasonably aware of the effect.] [CFJ 2246 (called 30 October 2008): Joining a contract does not imply consent to be acted on behalf of simply because the contract might be amended in the future to allow it.] [CFJ 2264 (called 11 November 2008): The right to refuse to become party to an agreement does not apply to amendments to existing agreements.] [CFJ 2361 (called 26 January 2009): The withholding of a reward for doing something may or may not constitute a penalty for not doing it, depending on the circumstances.] [CFJ 2395 (called 1 March 2009): Even without this being explicitly specified in the rules, it is possible for a non-player to violate a rule by missing a deadline.] [CFJ 2410 (called 11 March 2009): Consent to join a binding agreement may be given privately.] History: Initial Immutable Rule 101, Jun. 30 1993 Mutated from MI=Unanimity to MI=3 by Proposal 1480, Mar. 15 1995 Amended(1) by Proposal 3915 (harvel), Sep. 27 1999 Amended(2) by Proposal 4833 (Maud), 6 August 2005 Amended(3) by Proposal 4866 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 Amended(4) by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 Amended(5) by Proposal 4887 (Murphy), 22 January 2007 Amended(6) by Proposal 4944 (Zefram), 3 May 2007 Amended(7) by Proposal 5090 (Zefram), 25 July 2007 Amended(8) by Proposal 5731 (Goethe; disi.), 8 October 2008 Retitled by Proposal 5769 (Goethe), 17 October 2008 Amended(9) by Proposal 5769 (Goethe), 17 October 2008 Amended(10) by Proposal 5773 (Goethe), 17 October 2008 Amended(11) by Proposal 6028 (Murphy), 8 January 2009 Amended(12) by Proposal 6158 (Goethe), 31 March 2009 Amended(13) by Proposal 6589 (c.; disi.), 6 December 2009 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Rule 2125/7 (Power=3) Regulation Regulations A regulated action is an action satisfying any of the following: a) It is IMPOSSIBLE. b) It is ILLEGAL. c) The rules explicitly state that it CAN be performed while certain conditions are satisfied. Such an action CANNOT be performed except as allowed by the rules. In particular, if the action in question is publishing a type of document, then a public message is not that type of document (even if it is labeled as such) except as allowed by the rules. d) The rules explicitly state that it MAY be performed while certain conditions are satisfied. Except as allowed by the rules, performing such an action is the Class-N Crime of Restricted Behavior, where N is the maximum power of the rules explicitly allowing it (rounded up as needed to become a valid Class of Crime). e) It would, as part of its effect, modify information for which some player is required to be a recordkeepor. Such an action CANNOT modify that information except as allowed by the rules. f) A judicial finding has determined that it is regulated, and has not been superseded by subsequent legislation. A person SHOULD NOT violate a rule. History: Created by Proposal 4866 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 Amended(1) by Proposal 5235 (Goddess Eris), 3 October 2007 Amended(2) by Proposal 5536 (Murphy), 7 June 2008 Amended(3) by Proposal 5739 (root), 9 October 2008 Amended(4) by Proposal 6022 (Murphy), 22 December 2008 Amended(5) by Proposal 6251 (Murphy), 9 May 2009 Amended(6) by Proposal 6269 (Pavitra), 11 May 2009 Amended(7) by Proposal 6327 (Murphy), 29 May 2009 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Rule 1586/8 (Power=2) Definition and Continuity of Entities If multiple rules attempt to define an entity with the same name, then they refer to the same entity. A rule-defined entity's name CANNOT be changed to be the same as another rule-defined entity's name. A rule referring to an entity by name refers to the entity that had that name when the rule first came to include that reference, even if the entity's name has since changed. If the rules are amended such that they no longer define an entity, then that entity and its attributes cease to exist. If the rules are amended such that they define an entity both before and after the amendment, but with different attributes, then that entity and its attributes continue to exist to whatever extent is possible under the new definitions. [CFJ 1807 (called 25 November 2007): Rule-defined entities include pending timed events, which can therefore occur under modified rules even if the events that originally triggered them would not trigger them under the new rules.] [CFJ 1922 (called 4 April 2008): Without legislation to the contrary, documents attempting to define an entity with the same name define distinct entities.] History: Created by Proposal 2481, Feb. 16 1996 Amended(1) by Proposal 2795 (Andre), Jan. 30 1997, substantial Amended(2) by Proposal 3999 (harvel), May 2 2000 Power changed from 1 to 2 by Proposal 3999 (harvel), May 2 2000 Amended(3) by Proposal 5077 (Murphy), 18 July 2007 Amended(4) by Proposal 5723 (Murphy), 7 October 2008 Amended(5) by Proposal 5836 (Murphy), 12 October 2008 Amended(6) by cleaning (comex), 26 January 2009 Amended(7) by Proposal 6650 (coppro), 10 March 2010 Amended(8) by Proposal 6981 (Murphy, omd), 10 April 2011 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Rule 1688/6 (Power=3) Power The Power of an entity is a non-negative rational number. An Instrument is an entity with positive Power. The Power of an entity cannot be set or modified except as stipulated by the Rules. All entities have Power zero except where specifically allowed by the rules. A Rule that secures a change, action, or value (hereafter the securing Rule) thereby makes it IMPOSSIBLE to perform that change or action, or to set or modify that value, except as allowed by an Instrument with Power greater than or equal to the change's Power Threshold. This Threshold defaults to the securing Rule's Power, but CAN be lowered as allowed by that Rule (including by the Rule itself). History: Created by Proposal 3445 (General Chaos), Mar. 26 1997 Amended(1) by Proposal 3994 (harvel), Apr. 20 2000 Amended(2) by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 Amended(3) by Proposal 4940 (Zefram), 29 April 2007 Amended(4) by Proposal 5276 (Murphy, Pavitra, Zefram), 7 November 2007 Assigned to Committee on Rules by Proposal 6053 (Murphy, woggle, ais523), 23 January 2009 Amended(5) by Proposal 6513 (coppro; disi.), 3 October 2009 Amended(6) by Proposal 6815 (Murphy, ais523), 4 September 2010 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Rule 2140/1 (Power=3) Power Controls Mutability No entity with power below the power of this rule can (a) cause an entity to have power greater than its own. (b) adjust the power of an instrument with power greater than its own. (c) set or modify any other substantive aspect of an instrument with power greater than its own. A "substantive" aspect of an instrument is any aspect that affects the instrument's operation. History: Created by Proposal 4940 (Zefram), 29 April 2007 Assigned to Committee on Rules by Proposal 6053 (Murphy, woggle, ais523), 23 January 2009 Amended(1) by Proposal 6992 (Murphy, omd), 10 April 2011 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Rule 104/0 (Power=3) First Speaker The Speaker for the first game shall be Michael Norrish. [CFJ 1534 (called 8 March 2005): This does not mean that Michael Norrish necessarily fills the position of Speaker at the present time.] [CFJ 2154: (called 8 September 2008) The Speaker for the first game shall be Michael Norrish.] History: Initial Immutable Rule 104, Jun. 30 1993 Mutated from MI=Unanimity to MI=3 by Proposal 1482, Mar. 15 1995 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Rule 2326/2 (Power=2) The President The President is a second-class person. Causing the President to act is secured. A first-class Player CAN cause the President to take actions Without Objection, or with Agoran Consent. Should the President incur obligations under the Rules, then the Speaker SHALL act to satisfy these obligations. History: Created by Proposal 6961 (G.), 3 March 2011 Amended(1) by Proposal 7029 (Walker), 16 May 2011 Amended(2) by Proposal 7030 (Walker), 16 May 2011 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Rule 2344/0 (Power=1) Anarchy If a player causes the President to cease to be a player, then that player satisfies the Victory Condition of Anarchy. If the President is ever not a player, any person may register em by announcement. History: Created by Proposal 7040 (scshunt), 16 May 2011 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Rule 103/9 (Power=2) The Speaker The Speaker is an imposed office and a figurehead of Agora. The Speaker is a person who has proven themselves to be worthy of the title, and for a time can direct Agoran government affairs. The Speaker is the single first-class player who holds the most Postulated Offices, or if there is no such player, the player who was most recently Speaker. The Speaker CAN, by announcement, cause the President to take actions that are not otherwise IMPOSSIBLE, except for deregistration. Causing the President to perform ILLEGAL actions in this manner is the Class-6 crime of Misleading the Leader. [Cross-references (10 July 2009): the Speaker's duties are: * figurehead (Rule 103) * bestow favors (Rule 103)] History: Initial Immutable Rule 103, Jun. 30 1993 Mutated from MI=Unanimity to MI=3 by Proposal 1481, Mar. 15 1995 Amended(1) by Proposal 3829 (Steve), Feb. 8 1999 Retitled by Proposal 4944 (Zefram), 3 May 2007 Amended(2) by Proposal 4944 (Zefram), 3 May 2007 Retitled by Proposal 5257 (AFO), 27 October 2007 Amended(3) by Proposal 5257 (AFO), 27 October 2007 Amended(4) by Proposal 5407 (root), 22 January 2008 Power changed from 3 to 1 by Proposal 5947 (ais523), 15 November 2008 Amended(5) by Proposal 6026 (Murphy), 22 December 2008 Amended(6) by Proposal 6490 (coppro), 18 September 2009 Power changed from 1 to 2 by Proposal 6821 (G., ais523), 4 September 2010 Amended(7) by Proposal 6821 (G., ais523), 4 September 2010 Retitled by Proposal 6961 (G.), 3 March 2011 Amended(8) by Proposal 6961 (G.), 3 March 2011 Amended(9) by Proposal 7006 (Walker), 20 April 2011 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Rule 2339/0 (Power=1) Intention Agora Nomic is intended to be a person. History: Created by Proposal 7021 (Walker), 5 May 2011 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ====================================================================== Rules A category concerning the rules of the game, including the processes of changing the rules. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Rule 2141/6 (Power=3) Role and Attributes of Rules A rule is a type of instrument with the capacity to govern the game generally, and is always taking effect. A rule's content takes the form of a text, and is unlimited in scope. In particular, a rule may define in-game entities and regulate their behaviour, make instantaneous changes to the state of in-game entities, prescribe or proscribe certain player behaviour, modify the rules or the application thereof, or do any of these things in a conditional manner. Every rule has power between one and four inclusive. It is not possible for a rule to have a power outside this range. Rules have ID numbers, to be assigned by the Rulekeepor. Every rule shall have a title to aid in identification. If a rule ever does not have a title, the Rulekeepor SHALL assign a title to it by announcement as soon as possible. For the purposes of rules governing modification of instruments, the text, power, ID number, and title of a rule are all substantive aspects of the rule. However, rules to the contrary notwithstanding, the Rulekeepor CAN set rule aspects as described elsewhere in this rule. [CFJ 1498 (called 12 April 2004): A rule's title is not strictly a name for the rule, and so rule titles are not subject to the uniqueness requirement on names of rule-defined entities.] [CFJ 2013 (called 17 June 2009): Rule 2141 does not imply that the power of rules is physically unlimited: they can only affect the world outside the game by prescribing or proscribing player behavior.] [CFJ 2213 (called 7 October 2008): The powers granted to rules by the first paragraph of Rule 2141 are general, and only apply as otherwise stated by the Rules.] History: Created by Proposal 4940 (Zefram), 29 April 2007 Amended(1) by Proposal 5110 (Murphy), 2 August 2007 Amended(2) by Proposal 5994 (Murphy), 7 December 2008 Amended(3) by Proposal 6053 (Murphy, woggle, ais523), 23 January 2009 Amended(4) by Proposal 6124 (ehird), 15 March 2009 Amended(5) by Proposal 6670 (coppro), 14 March 2010 Amended(6) by Proposal 6992 (Murphy, omd), 10 April 2011 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Rule 217/6 (Power=3) Interpreting the Rules When interpreting and applying the rules, the text of the rules takes precedence. Where the text is silent, inconsistent, or unclear, it is to be augmented by game custom, common sense, past judgements, and consideration of the best interests of the game. [CFJ 1139: Interpretations [judgements at the time of CFJ 1139] need not necessarily accord with the reasoning and arguments of Judges or Justices given in past CFJs.] History: Initial Mutable Rule 217, Jun. 30 1993 Amended(1) by Proposal 1635, Jul. 25 1995 Infected and amended(2) by Rule 1454, Aug. 7 1995 Amended(3) by Proposal 2507, Mar. 3 1996 Amended(4) by Proposal 4825 (Maud), 17 July 2005 Power changed from 1 to 3 by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 Amended(5) by Proposal 4867 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 Retitled by Proposal 5105 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 Amended(6) by Proposal 5105 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Rule 1030/9 (Power=3.2) Precedence between Rules In a conflict between Rules, the conflict shall be resolved by performing the following comparisons in the sequence written in this rule, until the conflict is resolved. - In a conflict between Rules with different Power, the Rule with the higher Power takes precedence over the Rule with the lower Power ; otherwise, - If all of the Rules in conflict explicitly say that their precedence relations are determined by some other Rule for determining precedence relations, then the determinations of the precedence-determining Rule shall be used to resolve the conflicts; otherwise, - If at least one of the Rules in conflict explicitly says of itself that it defers to another Rule (or type of Rule) or takes precedence over another Rule (or type of Rule), then such provisions shall be used to resolve the conflict, unless they lead to contradictions between each other; otherwise, - The Rule with the lower ID number takes precedence. Clauses in any other rule that broadly claim precedence (e.g. over "all rules" of a certain class) shall be, prima facie, considered to be limited claims of precedence or deference that are applicable only when such claims are evaluated as described within the above sequence. No change to the Ruleset can occur that would cause a Rule to directly claim precedence over this Rule as a means of determining precedence. This applies to changes by the enactment or amendment of a Rule, or of any other form. This Rule takes precedence over any Rule that would permit such a change to the Ruleset. [CFJ 1104 (called 20 August 1998): The presence in a Rule of deference clause, claiming that the Rule defers to another Rule, does not prevent a conflict with the other Rule arising, but shows only how the Rule says that conflict is to be resolved when it does arise.] [CFJs 1114-1115 (called 27 January 1999): This Rule is to be applied to resolve Rule conflicts on a case-by-case basis; just because a Rule is inapplicable in one situation due to conflict with a Rule of higher precedence does not mean that the Rule is nullified in all cases.] History: Initial Mutable Rule 212, Jun. 30 1993 Amended by Proposal 1030, Sep. 15 1994 Amended by Rule 750, Sep. 15 1994 Amended(1) by Proposal 1527, Mar. 24 1995 Amended(2) by Proposal 1603, Jun. 19 1995 Amended(3) by Proposal 2520, Mar. 10 1996 Mutated from MI=1 to MI=3 by Proposal 2763 (Steve), Nov. 30 1996 Amended(4) by Proposal 3445 (General Chaos), Mar. 26 1997, cosmetic (unattributed) Amended(5) by Proposal 4887 (Murphy), 22 January 2007 Amended(6) by Proposal 5110 (Murphy), 2 August 2007 Amended(7) by Proposal 6285 (Goethe), 19 May 2009 Amended(8) by Proposal 6292 (Goethe), 19 May 2009 Title changed by Proposal 6292 (Goethe), 19 May 2009 Power changed from 3 to 3.2 by Proposal 6292 (Goethe), 19 May 2009 Amended(9) by cleaning (Murphy), 16 August 2009 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Rule 2240/1 (Power=3) No Cretans Need Apply In a conflict between clauses of the same Rule, if exactly one claims precedence over the other, then it takes precedence; otherwise, the later clause takes precedence. History: Created by Proposal 6073 (Murphy), 22 February 2009 Amended(1) by Proposal 6429 (Murphy), 18 August 2009 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Rule 105/5 (Power=3) Rule Changes Where permitted by other rules, an instrument generally can, as part of its effect, (a) enact a rule. The new rule has power equal to the minimum of the power specified by the enacting instrument, defaulting to one if the enacting instrument does not specify, and the maximum power permitted by other rules. The enacting instrument may specify a title for the new rule, which if present shall prevail. The ID number of the new rule cannot be specified by the enacting instrument; any attempt to so specify is null and void. (b) repeal a rule. When a rule is repealed, it ceases to be a rule, and the Rulekeepor need no longer maintain a record of it. (c) amend the text of a rule. (d) retitle a rule. (e) change the power of a rule. A rule change is any effect that falls into the above classes. Rule changes always occur sequentially, never simultaneously. Any ambiguity in the specification of a rule change causes that change to be void and without effect. An inconsequential variation in the quotation of an existing rule does not constitute ambiguity for the purposes of this rule, but any other variation does. This rule provides the only mechanism by which rules can be created, modified, or destroyed, or by which an entity can become a rule or cease to be a rule. [CFJ 1499 (called 20 April 2004), CFJ 1623 (called 1 April 2007): If a low-power rule states that an officer can repeal the rule under certain circumstances, then the rule cannot actually be repealed by this process, because the officer, not being an instrument, is categorically incapable of performing rule changes; this is different from the situation where a rule can be triggered to repeal itself.] [CFJ 708 (called October 1994): An Amendment of a non-existing Rule is not a legal Rule Change.] [CFJ 1625 (called 1 April 2007): Where a proposal specifies a rule to amend by both number and title, and the number and title given identify different rules, this constitutes ambiguity that nullifies the attempted rule change.] [CFJ 1644 (called 29 April 2007): Where a proposal contains the form of words "Change the power of rule NNNN to P and amend it by XXX.", where XXX specifies a text change, this constitutes two attempted rule changes.] [CFJ 1638 (called 29 April 2007): Where a proposal contains the form of words "Amend rule NNNN by XXX. Amend rule NNNN by YYY.", this constitutes two separate attempts at rule changes, even though both attempt to amend the same rule.] [CFJ 1642 (called 29 April 2007): Where a proposal contains the form of words "Amend rule NNNN by XXX. Further amend rule NNNN by YYY.", where both XXX and YYY specify text changes, this constitutes two separate attempts at rule changes.] [CFJ 1640 (called 29 April 2007): Where a proposal contains the form of words "Amend rule NNNN by XXX and YYY.", where both XXX and YYY specify text changes, this constitutes a single attempt at a rule change, even though it is specified in two parts.] [CFJ 1641 (called 29 April 2007): Where a proposal contains the form of words "Amend rule NNNN by XXX and by YYY.", where both XXX and YYY specify text changes, this constitutes a single attempt at a rule change, even though it is specified in two parts.] [CFJ 1643 (called 29 April 2007): Where a proposal specifies a single rule amendment in two parts, and one of the parts is not possible but the other is possible, the possible part is applied alone.] [CFJ 2201 (called 30 September 2008): The permission required by Rule 105 need not be explicit.] History: Created by Proposal 4894 (Murphy), 12 February 2007 Renumbered from 2131 to 105 by Proposal 4894 (Murphy), 12 February 2007 Power changed from 1 to 3 by Proposal 4894 (Murphy), 12 February 2007 Retitled by Proposal 4894 (Murphy), 12 February 2007 Amended(1) by Proposal 4894 (Murphy), 12 February 2007 Amended(2) by Proposal 4940 (Zefram), 29 April 2007 Amended(3) by Proposal 5110 (Murphy), 2 August 2007 Assigned to Committee on Rules by Proposal 6053 (Murphy, woggle, ais523), 23 January 2009 Amended(4) by Proposal 6734 (comex), 6 June 2010 Amended(5) by Proposal 6741 (comex; disi.), 1 July 2010 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Rule 1681/18 (Power=1) The Logical Rulesets The Short Logical Ruleset (SLR) is a format of the ruleset. In this format, each rule is assigned to a category, and the rules are grouped according to their category. Rules are assigned to, ordered within, or moved between categories, and categories are added, changed, or empty categories removed, as the Rulekeepor sees fit. The listing of each rule in the SLR must include the rule's ID number, revision number, power, title, and text. The Rulekeepor is strongly DISCOURAGED from including any additional information in the SLR, except that which increases the readability of the SLR. The Full Logical Ruleset (FLR) is a format of the ruleset. In this format, rules are assigned to the same category and presented in the same order as in the SLR. The FLR must contain all the information required to be in the SLR, and any historical annotations which the Rulekeepor is required to record. The Rulekeepor SHOULD also include any other information which e feels may be helpful in the use of the ruleset in the FLR. Whenever a rule is changed in any way, the Rulekeepor SHALL record a historical annotation to the rule indicating: a) The type of change. b) The date on which the change took effect. c) The mechanism that specified the change. d) If the rule was changed due to a proposal, then that proposal's ID number, author, and co-author(s) (if any). History: Created by Proposal 2783 (Chuck), Jan 15 1997 Amended(1) by Proposal 3500 (Crito), Jun. 3 1997, substantial (unattributed) Amended(2) by Proposal 3624 (Chuck), Dec. 29 1997 Amended(3) by Proposal 3704 (General Chaos), Mar. 19 1998 Amended(4) by Proposal 3902 (Murphy), Sep. 6 1999 Amended(5) by Proposal 4002 (harvel), May 8 2000 Amended(6) by Proposal 4811 (Maud, Goethe), 20 June 2005 Amended(7) by Proposal 4841 (Goethe), 27 October 2005 Amended(8) by Proposal 4868 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 Amended(9) by Proposal 4887 (Murphy), 22 January 2007 Amended(10) by Proposal 5006 (Zefram), 18 June 2007 Amended(11) by Proposal 5110 (Murphy), 2 August 2007 Amended(12) by Proposal 5334 (Murphy), 5 December 2007 Amended(13) by Proposal 5956 (comex), 17 November 2008 Amended(14) by Proposal 6019 (Murphy), 22 December 2008 Amended(15) by Proposal 6026 (Murphy), 22 December 2008 Amended(16) by Proposal 6053 (Murphy, woggle, ais523), 23 January 2009 Amended(17) by Proposal 6124 (ehird), 15 March 2009 Amended(18) by Proposal 6662 (Murphy; disi.), 10 March 2010 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Rule 2340/0 (Power=1) Notability Notability is a judicial case switch with values Incidental (default) and Notable, tracked by the Rulekeepor in eir monthly report. A player CAN, with two support, make a case Notable. A player CAN, without two objections, make a case Incidental. The Rulekeepor SHALL annotate the FLR to draw attention to Notable cases, specifying the ID number of the case and including a brief description of the precedent it sets. History: Created by Proposal 7022 (Walker, Murphy, omd), 5 May 2011 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Rule 1051/18 (Power=1) The Rulekeepor The Rulekeepor is an office; its holder is responsible for maintaining the text of the rules of Agora. The Rulekeepor's Weekly report includes the Short Logical Ruleset. The Rulekeepor's Monthly report includes the Full Logical Ruleset. [Cross-references (2 August 2007): the Rulekeepor's duties are: * manage ID numbers of rules (Rule 2141) * assign title to rule (Rule 2141) * report ruleset in two formats (Rule 1051) * manage Logical Ruleset categories (Rule 1681) * annotate the Full Logical Ruleset (Rule 1681) * maintain historical rule annotations (Rule 1681)] History: ... Amended(1) by Proposal 1735, Oct. 15 1995 Amended(2) by Proposal 2042, Dec. 11 1995 Amended(3) by Proposal 2048, Dec. 19 1995 Amended(4) by Proposal 2662, Sep. 12 1996 Amended(5) by Proposal 2696, Oct. 10 1996 Null-Amended(6) by Proposal 2710, Oct. 12 1996 Amended(7) by Proposal 2741 (Zefram), Nov. 7 1996, substantial Infected and Amended(8) by Rule 1454, Nov. 27 1996, substantial (unattributed) Amended(9) by Proposal 2783 (Chuck), Jan. 15 1997, substantial Amended(10) by Proposal 3452 (Steve), Apr. 7 1997, substantial Amended(11) by Proposal 3675 (Michael), Jan. 30 1998 Amended(12) by Proposal 3827 (Kolja A.), Feb. 4 1999 Amended(13) by Proposal 3871 (Peekee), Jun. 2 1999 Amended(14) by Proposal 3882 (harvel), Jul. 21 1999 Amended(15) by Proposal 3902 (Murphy), Sep. 6 1999 Amended(16) by Proposal 4002 (harvel), May 8 2000 Amended(17) by Proposal 4250 (harvel), 19 February 2002 Amended(18) by Proposal 5237 (AFO; disi.), 3 October 2007 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Rule 2327/1 (Power=1) Read the Ruleset Week The first Agoran week each year which falls entirely in February is Read the Ruleset Week. Agorans are encouraged to read the ruleset during Read the Ruleset Week. History: Created by Proposal 6973 (Murphy), 30 March 2011 Amended(1) by Proposal 6995 (omd, harvel), 10 April 2011 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ====================================================================== Players A category concerning players, including the processes of becoming and ceasing to be players, and game-relevant aspects of players. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Rule 869/32 (Power=2) How to Join and Leave Agora Citizenship is an entity switch with values Unregistered (default) and Registered, tracked by the registrar. A player is an entity whose citizenship is Registered. Changes to citizenship are secured. The verb "to be registered" means to become a player (i.e., to have one's citizenship changed from Unregistered to Registered), and the verb "to be deregistered" means to cease to be a player (i.e., to have one's citizenship changed from Registered to Unregistered). Where the verb "to register" or "to deregister" is used without an explicit direct object, the action is implicitly reflexive. A first-class 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. A second-class person CAN register with Agoran Consent. A non-person CANNOT be registered (or created in a Registered state), rules to the contrary notwithstanding. A player CAN deregister by announcement. A person CANNOT register within thirty days after being deregistered, unless rules define the method of deregistration as passive. A player who is not a person and has never been a first-class person CAN be deregistered by any player by announcement. [CFJ 1275 (called 19 February 2001): An entity is a Player if the Rules cannot distinguish that entity from a Player.] [CFJ 1263 (called 5 February 2001): Any message expressing a clear desire or intent to register as a Player counts as a request for registration, whether or not it is explicitly phrased in the manner stipulated by the rules.] History: Created by Proposal 498 (Alexx), Sep. 30 1993 Amended by Proposal 869, ca. Apr. 7 1994 Amended by Rule 750, ca. Apr. 7 1994 Amended(1) by Proposal 1313, Nov. 12 1994 Amended(2) by Proposal 1437, Feb. 21 1995 Amended(3) by Proposal 2040, Dec. 11 1995 Amended(4) by Proposal 2599, May 11 1996 Amended(5) by Proposal 2718, Oct. 23 1996 Amended(6) by Proposal 3475 (Murphy), May 11 1997, substantial Amended(7) by Proposal 3740 (Repeal-O-Matic), May 8 1998 Amended(8) by Proposal 3923 (harvel), Oct. 10 1999 Amended(9) by Proposal 4011 (Wes), Jun. 1 2000 Amended(10) by Proposal 4147 (Wes), 13 May 2001 Amended(11) by Proposal 4155 (harvel), 18 May 2001 Amended(12) by Proposal 4430 (Cecilius), 16 January 2003 Amended(13) by Proposal 4451 (Cecilius), 22 February 2003 Amended(14) by Proposal 4523 (Murphy), 28 August 2003 Amended(15) by Proposal 4693 (Maud), 18 April 2005 Amended(16) by Proposal 4802 (Maud), 15 June 2005 Amended(17) by Proposal 4833 (Maud), 6 August 2005 Amended(18) by Proposal 4989 (Zefram), 6 June 2007 Amended(19) by Proposal 5007 (Zefram), 18 June 2007 Amended(20) by Proposal 5011 (Zefram), 24 June 2007 Amended(21) by Proposal 5086 (Zefram), 1 August 2007 Amended(22) by Proposal 5111 (Murphy), 2 August 2007 Amended(23) by Proposal 5117 (Zefram; disi.), 8 August 2007 Amended(24) by Proposal 5156 (Zefram), 29 August 2007 Amended(25) by Proposal 5271 (Murphy), 7 November 2007 Power changed from 1 to 2 by Proposal 5728 (ihope), 7 October 2008 Amended(26) by Proposal 5728 (ihope), 7 October 2008 Amended(27) by Proposal 5973 (woggle), 25 November 2008 Amended(28) by Proposal 6099 (Pavitra), 22 February 2009 Amended(29) by Proposal 6349 (Pavitra), 17 June 2009 Amended(30) by Proposal 6382 (Murphy), 3 July 2009 Amended(31) by Proposal 6620 (Murphy; disi.), 4 February 2010 Amended(32) by Proposal 6974 (Murphy), 30 March 2011 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Rule 2170/6 (Power=3) Who Am I? Rules regarding persons pertain to those persons directly, not to rule-defined avatars or other entities representing those persons within Agora. A person SHALL NOT make a public statement intended to mislead others as to the identity of its publisher. A player SHALL NOT select a confusing nickname, including but not limited to a name that has generally been used to refer to another entity within the past three months. A public message's (possibly implicit) claim as to the identity of its publisher is self-ratifying, provided that the claim is neither ambiguous nor self-contradictory, and no challenge of identity pertaining to the claimed publisher has been issued within one month before its publication. Upon a judicial finding that the claimed publisher of one or more messages (hereafter the Sock Puppet) was not a person, if any of those claims have already self-ratified, then the judge SHALL as soon as possible publish a judicial declaration that the Sock Puppet was a person during one or more time periods, and SHOULD ensure that it corresponds to general belief prior to that finding. The Executor of a public message is the first-class person who sends it, or who most directly and immediately causes it to be sent. (Upon a judicial finding that the Executor of a public message cannot otherwise be determined within reasonable effort, the judge SHALL as soon as possible publish a judicial declaration specifying the identity of that message's Executor.) The executor of an action performed by announcement is the executor of the announcement. [CFJs 2184-2192 (called 24 September 2008): A message signature containing a unique nickname is not a self-ratifying claim that its publisher is distinct from other generally-recognized persons.] [CFJ 2300 (called 5 December 2008): The Executor of a public message is not necessarily a person who took action at the time the message was sent.] [CFJ 2325 (called 5 January 2009): Only the selection of a nickname for the purposes of Agora is relevant to this rule.] History: Created by Proposal 5212 (Murphy), 8 September 2007 Amended(1) by Proposal 5445 (Goethe, Murphy), 21 February 2008 Amended(2) by Proposal 5671 (Murphy, Pavrita), 12 August 2008 Amended(3) by Proposal 5716 (Murphy), 7 October 2008 Amended(4) by Proposal 5717 (Murphy), 7 October 2008 Amended(5) by Proposal 5741 (Murphy), 16 October 2008 Amended(6) by Proposal 6571 (ais523), 28 November 2009 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Rule 2150/6 (Power=3) Personhood A person is an entity defined as such by rules with power of at least 2. A person CAN generally be the subject of rights and obligations under the rules. Any biological organism that is generally capable of communicating by email in English (including via a translation service) is a person. A first-class person is a person of a biological nature. All other persons are second-class. The basis of a first-class person is the singleton set consisting of that person. [CFJ 1700 (called 10 July 2007): The requirement of capability to communicate by email can be satisfied even if the players of Agora do not know the organism's email address.] [CFJ 1685 (called 31 May 2007): Being in a mindless job (e.g., keyboard, stenographer, spokesman) may create a rebuttable presumption against personhood and against one having spoken on one's own behalf.] [CFJ 2398 (called 3 March 2009): Young children may or may not be considered persons, depending on their communication skills.] History: Created by Proposal 5007 (Zefram), 18 June 2007 Amended(1) by Proposal 5061 (Zefram), 9 July 2007 Amended(2) by Proposal 5303 (root), 24 November 2007 Amended(3) by Proposal 5476 (Murphy; disi.), 27 March 2008 Power changed from 2 to 3 by Proposal 5509 (root; disi.), 28 May 2008 Amended(4) by Proposal 5760 (comex), 16 October 2008 Amended(5) by Proposal 5790 (Murphy), 22 October 2008 Amended(6) by Proposal 6022 (Murphy), 22 December 2008 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Rule 2328/0 (Power=2) Public Agreements An agreement between two or more players is a person if all of the following are true: a) It clearly indicates that it is intended to be a person. b) Its text has been published. History: Created by Proposal 6976 (Murphy, MRW and Associates), 30 March 2011 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Rule 2139/3 (Power=2) The Registrar The Registrar is an office; its holder is responsible for keeping track of players. The Registrar's report includes: a) A list of all players, including information sufficient to identify and contact each player. b) The date on which each player most recently became a player. c) The Activity of each player, and when each Inactive player became Inactive. d) For each former player for which the information is reasonably available, the dates on which e registered and deregistered. The portion of a public message purporting to be a Registrar's report that lists each player implies that no players other than those listed exist and is self-ratifying. [CFJ 1703 (called 13 July 2007): A player cannot change eir nickname by announcement if the new nickname that e specifies is the current nickname of another player.] [CFJ 1361 (called 7 May 2002): Purporting to assign a new nickname, previously unused to refer to any entity, to another player is successful, but does not displace the target's existing name or nickname.] [CFJ 1489 (called 11 February 2004): Watchers are not a rule-defined element of the game.] [CFJ 1420 (called 17 December 2002): The list of watchers, customarily published with the registrar's report, is part of the game state, even though it is not mentioned in the rules and no one is obliged to track or publish it.] [Cross-references (13 February 2008): the Registrar's duties are: * track citizenship (Rule 869) * report players' identity and contact details (Rule 2139) * report registration dates (Rule 2139) * issue Writ of FAGE (Rule 1789) * report deregistration by Writ of FAGE (Rule 1789) * track player activity and report change dates (Rule 2130) * track forum publicity (Rule 478) * report fora (Rule 478) * change the publicity of a forum (Rule 478)] History: Created by Proposal 4939 (Murphy), 29 April 2007 Amended(1) by Proposal 5172 (Murphy), 29 August 2007 Amended(2) by Proposal 6322 (Wooble), 26 May 2009 Amended(3) twice by Proposal 6567 (Walker), 28 November 2009 Power changed from 1 to 2 by Proposal 6567 (Walker), 28 November 2009 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Rule 1789/7 (Power=2) Cantus Cygneus Whenever a Player feels that e has been treated so egregiously by the Agoran community that e can no longer abide to be a part of it, e may submit a document to the Registrar, clearly labeled a Cantus Cygneus, detailing eir grievances and expressing eir reproach for those who e feels have treated em so badly. As soon as possible after receiving a Cantus Cygneus, the Registrar shall publish this document along with a Writ of Fugere Agorae Grandissima Exprobratione, commanding the Player to be deregistered. The Registrar shall note the method of deregistration for that Player in subsequent Registrar Reports. The Player is deregistered as of the posting of the Writ, and the notation in the Registrar's Report will ensure that, henceforth, all may know said Player deregistered in a Writ of FAGE. [CFJ 1594 (called 16 December 2006): Players can be deregistered due to this rule even if there is no Registrar.] [CFJ 2358 (called 26 January 2009): A document which is labeled as a Cantus Cygneus but does not actually detail grievances, etc. is not a Cantus Cygneus.] History: Created by Proposal 3705 (Crito), Mar. 9 1998 Amended(1) by Proposal 4099 (Murphy), Jan. 15 2001 Amended(2) by Proposal 4147 (Wes), 13 May 2001 Amended(3) by Proposal 4825 (Maud), 17 July 2005 Power changed from 1 to 2 by Proposal 5780 (comex, ehird), 22 October 2008 Amended(4) by Proposal 5815 (Pavitra, Murphy), 1 November 2008 Amended(5) by Proposal 5991 (Elysion), 7 December 2008 Amended(6) by Proposal 6099 (Pavitra), 22 February 2009 Amended(7) by Proposal 6338 (Murphy), 29 May 2009 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Rule 2130/13 (Power=2) Activity Activity is a player switch with values Active (default) and Inactive, tracked by the Registrar. The Registrar's report includes the date on which each non-Active player's activity last changed. A player CAN flip eir activity by announcement. "To go on hold" is to become Inactive; "to come off hold" is to become Active. A player CAN flip another player's activity to Inactive without objection. A player who has been continuously Inactive for at least three months CAN be deregistered by any other player without objection. This is a passive method of deregistration. History: Created by Proposal 4893 (Murphy), 12 February 2007 Amended(1) by Proposal 4966 (Zefram), 3 June 2007 Amended(2) by Proposal 4967 (Zefram), 3 June 2007 Amended(3) by Proposal 4985 (Zefram), 6 June 2007 Amended(4) by Proposal 4986 (Zefram), 6 June 2007 Amended(5) by Proposal 5004 (Zefram), 13 June 2007 Retitled by Proposal 5111 (Murphy), 2 August 2007 Amended(6) by Proposal 5111 (Murphy), 2 August 2007 Amended(7) by Proposal 5116 (Zefram; disi.), 8 August 2007 Amended(8) by Proposal 5258 (AFO), 18 October 2007 Amended(9) by Proposal 5271 (Murphy), 7 November 2007 Power changed from 1 to 2 by Proposal 5947 (ais523), 15 November 2008 Amended(10) by Proposal 6100 (Pavitra; disi.), 22 February 2009 Amended(11) by Proposal 6666 (Murphy), 10 March 2010 Amended(12) by Proposal 6974 (Murphy), 30 March 2011 Amended(13) by Proposal 6984 (Murphy), 10 April 2011 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ====================================================================== Economy A category concerning asset-based gameplay. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Rule 2166/16 (Power=2) Assets An asset is an entity defined as such by a rule or contest (hereafter its backing document), and existing solely because its backing document defines its existence. Each asset has exactly one owner. If an asset would otherwise lack an owner, it is owned by the Lost and Found Department. If an asset's backing document restricts its ownership to a class of entities, then that asset CANNOT be gained by or transferred to an entity outside that class, and is transferred to the Lost and Found Department if it is owned by an entity outside that class. If an asset is owned by the Lost and Found department any player CAN transfer or destroy it without objection. The Lost and Found department may own any asset, and have assets transferred to and from it, regardless of the asset's backing document or any Rule, Rules to the contrary notwithstanding. The recordkeepor of a class of assets is the entity (if any) defined as such by, and bound by, its backing document. That entity's report includes a list of all instances of that class and their owners. This portion of that entity's report is self-ratifying. An asset whose backing document is not a rule generally CAN be created by its recordkeepor by announcement, subject to modification by its backing document. To "gain" an asset is to have it created in one's possession; to "award" an asset to an entity is to create it in that entity's possession. An asset generally CAN be destroyed by its owner by announcement, and an asset owned by the Lost and Found Department generally CAN be destroyed by its recordkeepor by announcement, subject to modification by its backing document. To "lose" (syn. "spend") an asset is to have it destroyed from one's possession; to "revoke" an asset from an entity is to destroy it from that entity's possession. An asset generally CAN be transferred by its owner to another entity by announcement, subject to modification by its backing document. A fixed asset is one defined as such by its backing document, and CANNOT be transferred; any other asset is liquid. A currency is a class of asset defined as such by its backing document. Instances of a currency with the same owner are fungible. The Minimum Unit Quantity (MUQ) of each currency is one. [CFJs 1790-1791 (called 11 November 2007): The self-ratifying asset report is the complete list of ownerships of assets of that class; a partial list does not self-ratify.] [CFJ 1850 (called 22 December 2007): The general ability of the recordkeepor to create assets does not include an ability to determine who possesses them when created, so they are necessarily owned by the Lost and Found Department [at the time of CFJ 1850, the Bank] upon creation.] [CFJ 1910 (called 10 March 2008): When an existing entity is defined as an asset, the change of its owner from "undefined" to the Lost and Found Department [Bank at the time of CFJ 1910] counts as a transfer, and fails if the Lost and Found Department is outside of the class of objects that can own the entity.] [CFJ 2176 (called 22 September 2008): Entities may be fungible even if not defined as such by this rule.] [CFJ 2309 (called 11 December 2008): If two separate documents attempt to define an asset with the same name, they refer to the same entity, but the entity is not an asset.] History: Created by Proposal 5173 (Murphy), 29 August 2007 Amended(1) by Proposal 5216 (Murphy), 13 September 2007 Amended(2) by Proposal 5388 (Murphy), 1 January 2008 Amended(3) by Proposal 5475 (Murphy), 24 March 2008 Amended(4) by Proposal 5476 (Murphy; disi.), 27 March 2008 Amended(5) by Proposal 5496 (Murphy), 23 April 2008 Amended(6) by Proposal 5833 (Murphy, Taral), 12 November 2008 Amended(7) by Proposal 5840 (root), 12 November 2008 Amended(8) by Proposal 5974 (Murphy; disi.), 25 November 2008 Amended(9) by Proposal 6023 (Murphy), 22 December 2008 Assigned to Committee on Finance by Proposal 6053 (Murphy, woggle, ais523), 23 January 2009 Amended(10) by Proposal 6161 (Murphy), 31 March 2009 Amended(11) by Proposal 6253 (Quazie), 9 May 2009 Amended(12) by cleaning (Murphy), 16 August 2009 Amended(13) by Proposal 6430 (coppro; disi.), 18 August 2009 Amended(14) twice by Proposal 6650 (coppro), 10 March 2010 Amended(15) by Proposal 6792 (omd), 27 August 2010 Amended(16) by Proposal 6916 (omd; disi.), 2 January 2011 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Rule 2330/2 (Power=2) Points Points are a currency. Ownership of points is restricted to Players. A player's score is the number of points e owns. Changes to point holdings are secured. The Scorekeepor is an office, and the recordkeepor of points. The maximum FINE amount for points is 25. History: Created by Proposal 6989 (Wooble), 10 April 2011 Amended(1) by Proposal 7008 (Walker), 20 April 2011 Amended(2) by Proposal 7011 (G.), 20 April 2011 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Rule 2331/2 (Power=2) Proposal Points When the Agoran Decision to adopt a proposal is resolved, if the outcome is ADOPTED, the author of the proposal gains 2 points for each valid vote FOR the proposal, less 1 point for each valid vote AGAINST the proposal. Each co-author of the proposal gains 2 points. History: Created by Proposal 6989 (Wooble), 10 April 2011 Amended(1) by Proposal 7025 (Murphy), 5 May 2011 Amended(2) by Proposal 7053 (omd), 26 May 2011 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Rule 2335/1 (Power=2) Judge Points When a judge assigns a judgement to a non-appeal judicial case within any time limits for doing so, e gains 5 points, unless e has already assigned judgement to the same case before. If an appeals panel assigns a judgement with prejudice, then any member of the panel CAN, within a week of the disposition judgement being assigned, by announcement, destroy any points the prior judge earned for judging the case. When an appeals panel assigns a judgement to a case within any time limits for doing so, each member of the panel gains 2 points. History: Created by Proposal 7007 (Walker), 20 April 2011 Amended(1) by Proposal 7043 (Walker), 16 May 2011 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Rule 2336/1 (Power=2) Officer Points Weekly Salary is an office switch, tracked by the Scorekeepor, with values of the non-negative integers (default zero). At the beginning of each week, each officer gains a number of points equal to the Weekly Salary of eir office. Monthly Salary is an office switch, tracked by the Scorekeepor, with values of the non-negative integers (default zero). At the beginning of each month, each officer gains a number of points equal to the Monthly Salary of eir office. Players can change the Weekly or Monthly Salary of an office without two objections or with Agoran Consent. History: Created by Proposal 7009 (Walker), 20 April 2011 Amended(1) by Proposal 7035 (scshunt), 16 May 2011 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Rule 2343/0 (Power=1.7) Victory Cases Victory cases are a subclass of judicial cases. Any person believing emself to have satisfied a Victory Condition may initiate a victory case with support, indicating the precise Victory Condition which e believes to have satisfied and how e believes e satisfied it. The entities eligible to be assigned as judges of a victory case are those judicial panels consisting of three first-class players, none of them having called the case or been disqualified as below. A player can be disqualified from judging a victory case with Agoran Consent. The CotC SHOULD NOT assign a panel to a victory case if there is a pending intent to disqualify one of its members unless it is clear that the intent will fail. Players SHOULD be disqualified only if they have a vested interest in the victory, such as having been a co-scammer. A victory case has a judicial question on ascendancy, which is always applicable. The valid judgments for this question are GLORY, appropriate if the Victory Condition was satisfied as described and a judgment of GLORY has not already been reached on an earlier case over substantially the same victory, and SHAME, appropriate otherwise. When a judgment of GLORY has continuously been in effect for two weeks, the caller is deemed to have won the game as specified. The Herald shall forthwith award the patent title Champion to the winner. Winning the game does not cause Agora to end. History: Created by Proposal 7039 (scshunt), 16 May 2011 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Rule 2332/1 (Power=2) Winning by Points A player CAN destroy 250 points in eir possession to satisfy the Victory Condition of Accumulation. History: Created by Proposal 6989 (Wooble), 10 April 2011 Retitled and amended(1) by Proposal 7039 (scshunt), 16 May 2011 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Rule 2337/1 (Power=3) Promises Promises are a class of assets. Horton is an Office and the recordkeepor for promises; Horton's weekly report includes the text, author, conditions, and owner of all existing promises. The Tree is an entity for holding promises. Ownership of promises is limited to persons and the Tree. A Player (the promise's author) CAN create a promise in eir possession by announcement, clearly specifying its text. Optionally, the author CAN, in the creating message, specify one or more conditions required to be true for the promise to be cashed, and/or one or more conditions required to be true for the promise not to be destroyed when cashed. Promises with the same text, author, and conditions are fungible. The creation, transferring, cashing, and destruction of promises is secured. History: Created by Proposal 7015 (G., ais523), 23 April 2011 Amended(1) by Proposal 7026 (Murphy, omd; disi.), 5 May 2011 Power changed from 2 to 3 by Proposal 7027 (omd), 5 May 2011 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Rule 2338/1 (Power=3) Cashing Promises A Player CAN cash a promise in eir possession by announcing that e does so, provided either that all conditions required to be true for the promise to be cashed are true, or it has no such conditions. To do so, e must clearly and unambiguously identify the promise and SHOULD publish its text. When a promise is cashed, the text of the promise is interpreted as if it were published by its author as a standalone statement; if that statement requires additional context, that context MUST be supplied within the body of the message indicating the cashing. Cashing a promise destroys it, unless the promise has at least one condition required to be true for it not to be destroyed when cashed, and all such conditions are true. If a promise is possessed by the Tree, any player except the promise's author CAN transfer it to emself by announcement, if e cashes the promise in the same message in which e transfers it to emself. Horton CAN destroy any promise Without Objection. History: Created by Proposal 7015 (G., ais523), 23 April 2011 Amended(1) by Proposal 7026 (Murphy, omd; disi.), 5 May 2011 Power changed from 2 to 3 by Proposal 7027 (omd), 5 May 2011 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Rule 2345/0 (Power=1) Bets The betting period for a decision on the adoption of a proposal or a degree begins when the proposal or thesis is submitted; the betting period for an election begins when the nomination period begins. The betting period for each decision ends when the decision is initiated. During the betting period for a given Agoran Decision, each active player (the Better) CAN submit a Bet privately to the vote collector for that decision. To be valid, a Bet must a) consist of an indication of which outcome the Better thinks Agora will select in a specified decision, b) clearly indicate the number of Points staked in the Bet - a number of Points less than or equal to the number of Points the Better owns, c) not be sent to anyone other than the Better and the vote collector, d) not be submitted by the vote collector, and e) be submitted during the betting period for the decision. The validity of a Bet is measured when its betting market is resolved. Only the last Bet submitted by each player (which would otherwise be valid) is valid. Players SHALL NOT reveal the existence or details of any Bet to any person other than the vote collector before the betting period has finished, except where allowed by this Rule; violating this requirement is the Class-6 Crime of Collusion. If the vote collector for a decision changes before the decision has been resolved, and one or more Bets have been submitted for the decision, then the previous vote collector SHALL inform the new collector of these Bets and their contents privately, before the decision is resolved. The previous vote collector becomes eligible to submit Bets for the decision if the betting period has not ended, and any previous Bets submitted by the new vote collector become invalid. History: Created by Proposal 7044 (Walker), 16 May 2011 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Rule 2346/0 (Power=1) Betting Markets There is a betting market on a decision if a) more than one player has submitted a valid Bet on the decision, b) more than one outcome was Betted on, and c) at least one of the Bets was for the correct outcome. After a decision has been resolved, the vote collector CAN resolve the betting market (if any) on the decision, and SHALL do so as soon as possible. The resolution of a betting market reveals the outcome betted on by each Better, and the number of Points they staked, in valid Bets. Upon the valid resolution of a betting market a) any Points staked on an incorrect outcome are destroyed b) an equal (or less due to rounding) number of Points are awarded to the player(s) who Betted on the correct outcome, such that the proportion of Points gained by each winning Better is directly proportional to the number of Points they staked, rounded down as necessary. To be valid, the resolution must specify how many Points are lost and gained by each Better. The resolution of a betting market constitutes a self-ratifying claim that the Bets in the resolution are valid, and that no other valid Bets were submitted for the decision. History: Created by Proposal 7044 (Walker), 16 May 2011 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ====================================================================== Definitions A category of definitions of terms and procedures that are widely used and do not readily fall into any other category. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Rule 754/15 (Power=3) Definition Definitions Regularity of communication being essential for the healthy function of any nomic, it is hereby resolved: (1) A difference in spelling, grammar, capitalization, or dialect, or the use of a synonym or abbreviation in place of a word or phrase is inconsequential in all forms of communication, as long as the difference does not create an ambiguity in meaning, except for the purpose of reporting on or quoting the text of a legal document. A difference between two nonempty spans of whitespace is inconsequential in all forms of communication for all purposes. (2) A term explicitly defined by the Rules, along with its ordinary-language synonym not explicitly defined by the rules, by default has that meaning when used in any Rule of equal or lesser power, as well as any Rule of greater power that is clearly intended to comply with that meaning. The following clauses, where X and Y are both nouns or noun phrases, mean "X is/are defined as Y" unless they obviously have a different meaning: a) "X is/are Y" b) "Y is/are known as X" (3) Any term primarily used in mathematical or legal contexts, and not addressed by previous provisions of this Rule, by default has the meaning it has in those contexts. (4) Any term not addressed by previous provisions of this Rule by default has its ordinary-language meaning. In determining the ordinary-language meaning of a term, definitions contained in lower-powered Rules, are relevant and may provide guidance in helping to determine the meaning of a rule, but are not binding (especially if they differ greatly from the definitions that would be used otherwise). This rule takes precedence over any other rules which dictate terminology or grammar. [CFJ 1439 (called 20 February 2003): A difference in language qualifies as a difference in dialect; it is possible to take game actions by messages in languages other than English.] [CFJ 1460 (called 4 April 2003): If a message is in a language other than English, and its intended audience does not understand the language, this constitutes gross unclarity that makes the message ineffective.] [CFJ 712: Referring to a Player by a method other than eir name or nickname is acceptable, as long as it is unambiguous.] [CFJ 1861 (called 8 January 2008): A player's legal name (legal in eir country of residence) is not necessarily an acceptable way to refer to em.] [CFJ 1782 (called 4 November 2007): Referring to a player by the name of an office that e holds suffices to identify em uniquely as a person, if there is no doubt regarding who holds that office.] [CFJ 1460 (called 4 April 2003): Extremely complex synonyms, requiring extensive effort to interpret correctly, can constitute a sufficient degree of unclarity as to render the message ineffective.] [CFJ 1840 (called 20 December 2007): A proper noun that has not been explicitly defined does not adequately refer to any entity, and is not implicitly defined by the context in which it is used.] [CFJ 1580 (called 12 January 2006): Base64 encoding of (part of) a message, other than in the context of MIME with appropriate headers, can render a message ineffective for unclarity, because the decoding step requires unreasonable effort within the meaning of CFJ 1460.] [CFJ 1741 (called 11 September 2007): HTML encoding (including numerical character entity encoding) does not render a message ineffective for unclarity if a suitable MIME type is indicated by a header.] [CFJ 1741 (called 11 September 2007): An email message does not need the RFC-required "MIME-Version:" header in order for it to be interpreted in the MIME way.] [CFJ 1536 (called 13 March 2005): The phrase "AOL!" is not a sufficiently clear synonym for "Me too!".] [CFJ 1770 (called 23 October 2007): A contract can redefine a rule-defined term in its own way, and the contract's definition will then apply in situations governed by the contract.] [CFJ 1885 (called 26 January 2008): A word or phrase can acquire a meaning by custom, provided that it is a reasonable meaning and does not unreasonably change the meaning of phrases that already have a meaning.] [CFJ 1831 (called 10 December 2007): Mentioning a URI, without surrounding text stating its significance, does not incorporate anything identified by that URI into the message that mentions the URI.] [CFJ 1831 (called 10 December 2007): Character sequences within a URI by default have no significance other than their functional role as part of the URI.] [CFJ 2258 (called 6 November 2008): Changes in whitespace are also inconsequential.] History: Created by Proposal 435 (Alexx), Aug. 30 1993 Amended by Proposal 754 (KoJen), Dec. 1 1993 Amended by Rule 750, Dec. 1 1993 Amended(1) by Proposal 2042, Dec. 11 1995 Infected and Amended(2) by Rule 1454, Dec. 17 1995 Amended(3) by Proposal 3452 (Steve), Apr. 7 1997, substantial Amended(4) by Proposal 3915 (harvel), Sep. 27 1999 Power changed from 1 to 3 by Proposal 4507 (Murphy), 20 June 2003 Amended(5) by Proposal 4507 (Murphy), 20 June 2003 Amended(6) by Proposal 4866 (Goethe), 27 August 2006 Amended(7) by Proposal 5038 (Zefram), 28 June 2007 Amended(8) by Proposal 5834 (Goethe), 12 November 2008 Amended(9) by Proposal 6021 (Murphy), 22 December 2008 Amended(10) by Proposal 6384 (Murphy), 3 July 2009 Amended(11) by Proposal 6571 (ais523), 28 November 2009 Amended(12) by Proposal 6650 (coppro), 10 March 2010 Amended(13) by Proposal 6732 (comex), 6 June 2010 Amended(14) by Proposal 6741 (comex; disi.), 1 July 2010 Amended(15) by Proposal 6981 (Murphy, omd), 10 April 2011 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Rule 2152/6 (Power=3) Mother, May I? The following terms are defined. These definitions are used when a rule includes a term in all caps, and provide guidance in determining the ordinary-language meaning of a term when a rule includes a term otherwise. Earlier definitions take precedence over later ones. If a rule specifies one or more persons in connection with a term, then the term applies only to the specified person(s). 1. CANNOT, IMPOSSIBLE, INEFFECTIVE, INVALID: Attempts to perform the described action are unsuccessful. 2. MUST NOT, MAY NOT, SHALL NOT, ILLEGAL, PROHIBITED: Performing the described action violates the rule in question. 3. SHOULD NOT, DISCOURAGED, DEPRECATED: Before performing the described action, the full implications of performing it should be understood and carefully weighed. 4. CAN: Attempts to perform the described action are successful. 5. MAY: Performing the described action does not violate the rules. 6. MUST, SHALL, REQUIRED, MANDATORY: Failing to perform the described action violates the rule in question. 7. SHOULD, ENCOURAGED, RECOMMENDED: Before failing to perform the described action, the full implications of failing to perform it should (in the ordinary-language sense) be understood and carefully weighed. [CFJ 1990 (called 7 June 2008): "Allowed" may refer to either possibility or permissibility depending on context.] [CFJs 2120-2121 (called 4 August 2008): A requirement of the form 'within