I disfavour this case. On Wed, 25 Oct 2017 at 18:32 Publius Scribonius Scholasticus < [email protected]> wrote:
> I think the key is a pattern of behaviour resembling consent. If ais523 > had not expressed a pattern of behaviour or engaged in the pattern of > behaviour from the beginning, I would not accept it. > > > On 10/25/2017 04:44 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > > How long after the fact are you comfortable with accepting evidence of > > consent? (obviously this works for any future ratification). > > > > What if OscarMeyr came back and said - you know back in May and that > > other CFJ - well actually I consent. > > > > On Wed, 25 Oct 2017, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote: > >> However, this action should still be taken into account. > >> > >> On 10/25/2017 04:22 PM, VJ Rada wrote: > >>> This doesn't affect the actual CFJ I called (because, as we all know, > >>> CFJs are judged on the facts of their calling) but THIS might be the > >>> player-like action we need to ratify ais523 in. > >>> > >>> On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 10:40 PM, Alex Smith <[email protected] > >>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > >>> > >>> On Wed, 2017-10-25 at 02:14 -0400, Owen Jacobson wrote: > >>> > Because this failed, I believe ais523’s attempt to buy a stamp > also > >>> > failed. > >>> > > >>> > The following chart shows the correct distribution of shinies, > and I > >>> > cause Agora to pay 1 sh. to each recipient listed below, in > >>> order. In > >>> > total, this will cause Agora to pay: > >>> > > >>> > * ProofTechnique: 8 sh. > >>> > * ais523: 8 sh. > >>> > * Gaelan: 4 sh. > >>> > >>> I buy a Stamp. > >>> > >>> I now have 8sh. minus whatever the stamp value is. > >>> > >>> -- > >>> ais523 > > >
