2024-03-14-writ-4st.txt (5261B)
1 Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2024 18:34:10 -0300 2 From: juan <juan@juanmeleiro.mat.br> 3 To: agora-official@agoranomic.org 4 Subject: [Registrar] Writ of FAGE 5 Message-ID: <ojjhkqny4rjqh2cz2zxr7oaksrvrtncz5r6v545hws2yoy2poy@s7hhwtyz4weu> 6 Mail-Followup-To: agora-official@agoranomic.org 7 MIME-Version: 1.0 8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii 9 Content-Disposition: inline 10 X-Mutt-Resume-Draft: 1 11 12 =============================================================================== 13 Registrar: juan Writ of FAGE 2024-03-14 14 =============================================================================== 15 16 On the date of 17 18 The 12th of March of 2024 19 20 the player known as 21 22 4st 23 24 has submited to me, the Registrar, a 25 26 CANTUS CYGNEUS 27 28 reproduced in its entirety below. As required of me by Rule 1789, by the rules 29 in general, by Agora, and by the integrity of this office, I put forth this 30 31 WRIT OF 32 FUNGIDAE AGORAE 33 GRANDISSIMA EXPROBRATIONE 34 35 thusly commanding that e be deregistered. 36 37 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 38 The CANTUS CYGNEUS 39 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 40 41 being a player is too complicated. too many taxes, rules, confusion, etc. 42 look at all these complex cfj's on the existence of rules, whether 43 fundamental agoran components have worked 44 like the full process for a proposal to be adopted has 5 BASIC steps, which 45 are all broken down even further into many additional sublevels (submit a 46 proposal, distribute it, vote on it, resolve it, it takes effect), and then 47 parallel to those 5 steps are various rules that intercept them, providing 48 prohibitions and alterations, 49 and still some of those basic steps are being called into question on their 50 efficacy, 51 so we're having to sift through history back to 2011? 2014? when???, before 52 I was even a player, to fix it, and I didn't even agree or know of the 53 whatever rules that I was supposed to be playing by this whole time 54 and it feels like we're all fighting against the ruleset to fix it, when we 55 are the ones in control the whole time 56 this is also like the same thing when we had to ban madrid: it takes too 57 long to do a simple thing! 58 59 also I'm just bad at being a player: 60 i ran a tournament and it took 6 months or something to finally get 61 assigned a judge (i made it too complicated, and I should not have been 62 involved in it itself, so I could thereby judge it.) 63 and I had no chance of winning the tournament anyways even if I got the 64 most wins within it, (which I probably didn't anyways), because I wanted to 65 be silly 66 and I haven't really gotten that close to winning in my registered time 67 otherwise (which are required for the ultraviolet/platinum ribbons) 68 and I haven't really had much success with a lime ribbon, nor indigo, at 69 all. 70 and I forgot to award myself a violet ribbon when I became a marvy 71 my "long service" patent title for geologist is at risk. that and I haven't 72 even been doing those reports. 73 74 i'd like to come back as a player... but only when things are less 75 platonic, so maybe I can understand what's going on better, or at the very 76 least, my opinion will matter more. I refuse to continue to agree to a 77 ruleset that I can never, ever, know the real text of with 100% certainty. 78 By looking too closely at a ruleset causes it to change is quantum 79 bullshit. that should at least be explicitly mentioned somewhere, anywhere. 80 but not even that. it was presented as fact, and now we can CoE it all the 81 way to 2011. Or whatever. this is not a game I thought I was playing at 82 all, and it's a symptom of platonicity. it's ethically wrong to allow 83 people to agree to a contract and then find that they actually agreed to a 84 different one, so whether I agreed to the old one, or I agreed to a new one 85 there are many less players playing, I don't know, but the rug has been 86 thoroughly pulled from under me. even if it's "fixed" it's not fixed to me, 87 because it's still based on some unknowable, platonic ideal, so this 88 problem is fully capable of just occurring again when player inevitably 89 lapse in their maintenance of gamestate and scrutiny, or perhaps we just 90 missed an important component crucial to actually fixing the problem at 91 hand. 92 93 also generally these past rulesets looked like they were having fun doing 94 funny funky silly things, doesn't seem much silliness abounds at the 95 moment. it's just so... pedantic right now. i thought it would just be 96 silly little ideas that we bat around and then put out of their misery, 97 like Mao or 1kbwc. 98 99 instead it feels like a game of pedantic historical accuracy and repairs. 100 why does it need to be repaired so thoroughly? just play the game like what 101 102 So if/when I come back as a player, hopefully I'll know 100% which game I'm 103 playing, or at least, there will be something worth playing. 104 105 106 =============================================================================== 107 108 -- 109 juan 110 Registrar, Absurdor