RESOLUTION OF PROPOSALS 9058-9061
=================================

THIS IS AN AUTOMATICALLY GENERATED REPORT.
SOME INFORMATION MAY DIFFER FROM THE HISTORICAL REPORT.
THE ASSESSMENT SENT TO THE PUBLIC FORUM IS THE DEFINITIVE SOURCE OF HISTORICAL INFORMATION.

The official historical report is located at https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-official/2024-March/017634.html

ID    Title                                   Result  
------------------------------------------------------
9058  Things Mean What They're Meant to Mean  ADOPTED 
9059  Ambiguity Amendment                     REJECTED
9060  Ambiguity Amendment                     REJECTED
9061  Wake Up Call                            REJECTED

I hereby resolve the Agoran decisions to adopt the below proposals.

The quorum for all below decisions was 5.

VOTING STRENGTHS
================

Strength is 3 unless otherwise noted.
#: player has voting strength 3
$: player has voting strength 4
%: player has voting strength 5
^: player has voting strength 6
+: player has voting strength 9

PROPOSALS
=========

PROPOSAL 9058 (Things Mean What They're Meant to Mean)
AUTHOR: Aris
CLASS: DEMOCRATIC
FOR (6): Aris, Mercury, Murphy, Yachay Wayllukuq, nix, snail
AGAINST (0): 
PRESENT (3): Janet, juan, kiako
BALLOTS: 9
AI (F/A): 18/0 (AI=3.0)
POPULARITY: 0.667
OUTCOME: ADOPTED
[
Janet: Endorsement of non-voter ais523: Inextricable
kiako: Janet is the Rulekeepor: Endorsement of Janet
snail: Endorsement of Aris
]

PROPOSAL 9059 (Ambiguity Amendment)
AUTHOR: Maloney
CLASS: ORDINARY
FOR (0): 
AGAINST (7): Aris%, Janet+, Murphy%, Yachay Wayllukuq%, kiako, nix, snail^
PRESENT (2): Mercury, juan$
BALLOTS: 9
AI (F/A): 0/36 (AI=1.0)
POPULARITY: -0.778
OUTCOME: REJECTED

PROPOSAL 9060 (Ambiguity Amendment)
AUTHOR: Maloney
CLASS: ORDINARY
FOR (0): 
AGAINST (7): Aris%, Janet+, Murphy%, Yachay Wayllukuq%, kiako, nix, snail^
PRESENT (2): Mercury, juan$
BALLOTS: 9
AI (F/A): 0/36 (AI=1.0)
POPULARITY: -0.778
OUTCOME: REJECTED

PROPOSAL 9061 (Wake Up Call)
AUTHOR: snail
CLASS: ORDINARY
FOR (3): Mercury, Murphy%, snail^
AGAINST (5): Aris%, Janet+, Yachay Wayllukuq%, juan$, nix
PRESENT (1): kiako
BALLOTS: 9
AI (F/A): 14/26 (AI=2.0)
POPULARITY: -0.222
OUTCOME: REJECTED
[
Aris: Conditional resolved: Janet did not vote FOR or PRESENT
Murphy: snail is the Dream Keeper: Endorsement of snail
]

The full text of each ADOPTED proposal is included below:

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
ID: 9058
Title: Things Mean What They're Meant to Mean
Adoption index: 3.0
Author: Aris
Co-authors: G.


Amend Rule 105, "Rule Changes", by adding at the end of the paragraph:

  A rule change is any effect that falls into the above classes.
  Rule changes always occur sequentially, never simultaneously.

the text:

  If a specification would ever be interpreted as causing multiple changes
to
  happen at once, it is instead interpreted as attempting to cause them to
  occur separately, in the order they are listed in the specification.

and by replacing the paragraph:

  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.

with:

  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. Furthermore, if the change being specified
  would be clear to any reasonable player, the specification is not
ambiguous,
  even if it is incorrect or unclear on its face. This provision does not
  prevent the specification of undesirable changes; for instance, an
amendment
  which adds a typo is not corrected to remove the typo.

and by replacing the text:

   5. retitle (syn. amend the title of) a rule.

with:

   5. retitle a rule.

[Removing the synonym, since it should now be unneeded.]

At 4st's request, it is publicly noted that e is very silly for calling
this proposal an unneeded bug fix.

[Some further examples of what should now work:

1. An amendment to the power of a rule is read as a change in the rule's
power.
2. A repeal of a section of a rule is read as an amendment which removes
that
   section.
3. Ellipses are read sensibly in rule quotations.
4. "Enact the following:" enacts the rule, unless it could sensibly be read
   as enacting a regulation.
5. "Append the following paragraph" works even if two paragraphs are clearly
    specified. (It still fails if it's unclear whether the text means one or
    two paragraphs though.)

You get the point.]

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////