acka-voting Digest Saturday, February 06 1999 Volume: 04 Issue: 033 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Acka: Proposal 4061 From: ackabot@ackanomic.org Date: Sat, 06 Feb 1999 01:12:23 -0500 (EST) Proposal 4061 Fuzzy Wuzzy K 2 Due: Sat Feb 13 01:12:21 1999 This is a Modest proposal. {{[This fixes a small flaw in the Mannna distribution scheme: players who vote exactly 60 neither lose nor gain Mannna.]}} Replace the text "between 60 and 100" in section b of rule 2-1-2 (Mannna from Heaven) with "between 60 and 100 inclusive," {{[This fixes a small flaw in the designation of Boring proposals. Currently a proposal on which everyone voles 10 would not be boring (AI: ~100) while a divisive proposal on which half of players vote 100 and the other half vote -100 would be.]}} Amend Rule 2-2 (Scoring When A Proposal's Voting Results are Reported) making the first sentence of section VI read in full: " A proposal is Boring if and only if the majority of votes cast on it were between -60 and 60 inclusive. " {{[This fixes the effect of P4043's self deleting text. I would've placed this in my own Solstice fixit but JT H*berted me :-)]}} {{All amendments caused by the application of Proposal 4043 are changed to Wild Card}} ------------------------------ Subject: Acka: Proposal 4062 From: ackabot@ackanomic.org Date: Sat, 06 Feb 1999 02:04:08 -0500 (EST) Proposal 4062 Generic Proposal Title #4062 K 2 Due: Sat Feb 13 02:04:07 1999 This is a Modest proposal. {{[This fixes a small flaw in the Mannna distribution scheme: players who vote exactly 60 neither lose nor gain Mannna.]}} {{[Due to entity round rules the point to maximum Mannna gain is actually at +/-61; this section causes Mannna to be rounded]}} Replace section b of rule 2-1-2 (Mannna from Heaven) with: " b) Players who cast a vote with an absolute value between 60 and 100, inclusive, gain 50 less half the absolute value of their vote, rounded down, in Mannna. " {{[This fixes a small flaw in the designation of Boring proposals. Currently a proposal on which everyone voles 10 would not be boring (AI: ~100) while a divisive proposal on which half of players vote 100 and the other half vote -100 would be.]}} Amend Rule 2-2 (Scoring When A Proposal's Voting Results are Reported) making the first sentence of section VI read in full: " A proposal is Boring if and only if the majority of votes cast on it were between -60 and 60 inclusive. " {{[In the case were the Acceptance Threshold is 100, if 10 players vote 10 it'll pass even though all players who voted voted to reject under the current definition.... ]}} Replace the second paragraph of rule 2-1, "Voting on Proposals", which reads: " Players who vote less than a proposal's Acceptance Threshold are said to have voted to reject it, while players who vote greater are said to have voted to accept it. " with: " Players who vote less than zero on a proposal are said to have voted to reject it, while players who vote greater than zero are said to have voted to accept it. " {{[This fixes the effect of P4043's self deleting text. I would've placed this in my own Solstice fixit but JT H*berted me :-)]}} {{All amendments caused by the application of Proposal 4043 are changed to Wild Card}} ------------------------------ Subject: Acka: Proposal 4063 From: ackabot@ackanomic.org Date: Sat, 06 Feb 1999 13:01:53 -0500 (EST) Proposal 4063 A little power else...if Due: Sat Feb 13 13:01:51 1999 {{[This would allow the Rule-Harfer to set the support needed for a proposal to pass to a value between 50% and 75%.]}} Amend rule 2-1 to read " Voting Players may vote an integer with an absolute value less than or equal to 100 times their Voting Characteristic on each proposal, by sending their vote to the Tabulator. Players who vote less than 0 are said to have voted to reject it, while players who vote greater than 0 are said to have voted to accept it. Votes must be unambiguous and unconditional. A Voting Player may also choose not to vote on a proposal, which is called abstaining. Voting Players who do not vote within the prescribed voting period shall be deemed to have abstained. Voting Players may change their vote up until the end of the prescribed voting period, but in any case are limited to one vote per proposal. A proposal's Positive Acceptance Index is the sum of all positive votes legally cast within its prescribed voting period. Its Negative Acceptance Index is the absolute value of the sum of all negative votes legally cast within its prescribed voting period. Its Acceptance Index is equal to the Positive Acceptance Index divided by the sum of the Positive and Negative Acceptance Indices. The prescribed voting period on a proposal is seven days, starting from the moment that the proposal is publicly distributed as specified by the rules. Entities may vote only as specified by the rules. Non-entities may not vote. " Amend the third paragraph of rule 2 to read " As soon as possible after a proposal's prescribed voting period ends, the votes on that proposal shall be posted publicly. The proposal is then accepted if the proposal's Acceptance Index exceeds its Acceptance Threshold and the Positive Acceptance Index exceeds its Negative Acceptance Index. " Create rule 6-20-2, "Acceptance Threshold", reading " As an Official Decree, the Rule-Harfer may set the Acceptance Threshold to a value between .5 and .75, inclusive as long as it can be evenly divided by .05, unless the Rule-Harfer has made an Official Decree within the preceding week. " ------------------------------ End of acka-voting Digest V4 #33 ********************************