DIS: Moving the lists
Okay, folks, I know I've brought this up before, but I still really do need to move the lists. They're hosted on a server that is going away, and I don't have any reliable place to put them. So if you're interested in taking over Distributor-ship, let me know. -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
DIS: Moving the lists?
The host I use for the lists is going down for good soon, and I don't have a convenient place to move them. Anyone willing to host a few mailing lists? [cc: me, I'm not subscribed] -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
DIS: Office bidding
Proto-proto: Office elections start with a player bidding X ergs for the position. Other players can bid against them, and lowest bid wins (after a certain amount of time? anti-sniping?). The salary for the office is the bid value. -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] Short Logical Ruleset (Part 2 of 2)
I'd vote for it.
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 9:45 AM, Elliott Hird
wrote:
> Proposal: All Clogged Up (AI 1, II 0, co-author BobTHJ)
> {
> H. Distributor Taral is requested to increase the size limit of the
> messages sent to the Agora mailing lists hosted at agoranomic.org to
> 512 kibibytes (524288 bytes).
> }
>
--
Taral
"Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you."
-- Unknown
Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] Short Logical Ruleset (Part 2 of 2)
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 9:08 AM, Roger Hicks wrote: > I find this to be a reasonable compromise > > BobTHJ Someone make a proposal? -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] Short Logical Ruleset (Part 2 of 2)
On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 11:32 PM, Roger Hicks wrote: > Could the size limit just be increased to 1MB? That would solve the > ruleset issue and most other large messages that get hung. In today's > age it's hard to find an e-mail client that won't handle 1MB > messages If there is no objection, yes, it can be raised. -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
DIS: Re: BUS: Proposal: new forum
I'd like to point out that the message size limit has been raised in
the past and can be raised again, if people are generally for it.
There's no need to create another forum.
On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 10:38 PM, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
> WHEREAS, the Distributor's moderation policy violates the R101 rights
> of every Player,
>
> and WHEREAS Agora has no Rulekeepor and it's impossible for Players to
> deputize to publish the Rulekeepor's Report without permission from
> said Distributor,
>
> and WHEREAS there's no way this would pass Without Objection should
> the Registrar make an attempt,
>
> I submit the following Proposal, "New Forum", and pay a fee to make it
> Distributable:
>
> {{
> Flip the Publicity of the mailing list with the address
> agora-pub...@googlegroups.com (on the web at
> http://groups.google.com/group/agora-public) to Public.
> }}
>
--
Taral
"Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you."
-- Unknown
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Registration
On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 5:34 PM, omd wrote: > Talk about timing! The revolving door is OPEN. -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
DIS: Re: BUS: (no subject)
On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 9:04 PM, omd wrote: > I was going to deregister, > So I'll just twiddle a line of CotC's report. Thank you. -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [CotC] CFJ 2872 assigned to omd
On Sun, Oct 3, 2010 at 12:53 PM, omd wrote: > FALSE. As G. notes, the last paragraph of Rule 2124 makes this unambiguous. > > Evidence: > > A person CANNOT support or object to an announcement of intent > before the intent is announced, or after e has withdrawn the > same type of response. The question is whether this was a new intent, or merely a restatement of the same intent... -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
DIS: Re: OFF: [Deputy Sysadmin] Our new website! [attn Taral]
On Sun, Sep 26, 2010 at 3:35 PM, ais523 wrote: > I ENCOURAGE Taral to update agoranomic.org to Website Submission 2 (for > convenience, a copy of it is attached to this email). Congrats ais523. Enjoy: http://agoranomic.org/ -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
Re: DIS: Pariah protos
On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 1:25 PM, Ed Murphy wrote: > At the end of each week, if the number of Rests (R) in the current > Pariah's possession that were destroyed during that week [and > while e was Pariah] [and since e most recently became Pariah] is > greater than 6, then e gains R-6 Rests. Destroyed rests are no longer in the player's possession... -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 6842-6846
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 1:15 PM, omd wrote: > Too late. Even with the extended deadline? -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
DIS: Re: OFF: [CotC] CFJ 2859 remanded to G. by Taral, Wooble, omd
Can the record show prejudice somehow?
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 7:12 AM, Ed Murphy wrote:
> Detail: http://zenith.homelinux.net/cotc/viewcase.php?cfj=2859
>
> === CFJ 2859 (Interest Index = 1)
>
> "Distributed Proposal 6830" refers to an undistributed proposal.
>
>
>
> Caller: ais523
>
> Judge: G.
> Judgement: TRUE
>
> Appeal: 2859a
> Decision: REMAND
>
> Judge: G.
> Judgement:
>
>
>
> History:
>
> Called by ais523: 12 Sep 2010 18:54:44 GMT
> Assigned to G.: 13 Sep 2010 21:29:55 GMT
> Judged TRUE by G.: 13 Sep 2010 22:37:34 GMT
> Appealed by omd: 14 Sep 2010 01:52:07 GMT
> Appealed by Tanner L. Swett: 14 Sep 2010 02:07:36 GMT
> Appealed by G.: 14 Sep 2010 15:55:17 GMT
> Appeal 2859a: 14 Sep 2010 15:55:17 GMT
> REMANDED on Appeal: 21 Sep 2010 20:30:59 GMT
> Remanded to G.: 21 Sep 2010 20:30:59 GMT
>
>
>
> Caller's Arguments:
>
> Because a proposal (a rules-defined entity) already had the
> name Distributed Proposal 6830, the power-1 rule 2161 was not powerful
> enough to override the power-2 rule 1586 by causing two rules-defined
> entities to have the same name, and thus it was incapable of renaming
> the proposal with ID number 6830 to Distributed Proposal 6830.
>
>
>
> Judge G.'s Arguments:
>
> Nothing in current naming Rules explicitly allows players to give
> "official" names or titles to Proposals. Two proposals submitted
> with the same "suggested title" by the proposer would still be
> proposals due to R106, which overrules all of this. The way this
> works was described in detail in CFJ 1358, and the current ruleset
> does not regulate proposal titles any more strongly now than it
> did then. The current common "unoffical" referent for the
> undistributable proposal in question is the one listed. TRUE.
>
> ====
>
> Detail: http://zenith.homelinux.net/cotc/viewcase.php?cfj=2859a
>
> = Appeal 2859a (Interest Index = 0) ==
>
> Panelist: Taral
> Decision: REMAND
>
> Panelist: Wooble
> Decision: REMAND
>
> Panelist: omd
> Decision: REMAND
>
>
>
> History:
>
> Appeal initiated: 14 Sep 2010 15:55:17 GMT
> Assigned to Taral (panelist): 17 Sep 2010 04:36:20 GMT
> Assigned to Wooble (panelist): 17 Sep 2010 04:36:20 GMT
> Assigned to omd (panelist): 17 Sep 2010 04:36:20 GMT
> Taral moves to REMAND: 17 Sep 2010 16:40:14 GMT
> Wooble moves to REMAND: 21 Sep 2010 15:18:37 GMT
> omd moves to REMAND: 21 Sep 2010 20:30:59 GMT
> Final decision (REMAND): 21 Sep 2010 20:30:59 GMT
>
>
>
> Appellant omd's Arguments:
>
> I intend to appeal this judgement with 2 support, because (unlike at
> the time of CFJ 1358) R106 explicitly mentions "title":
>
> A player CAN create a proposal by publishing ("submitting") a
> body of text and an associated title with a clear indication
> that it is intended to become a proposal,
>
>
>
> Appellant G.'s Arguments:
>
> I support and do so, requesting REMAND. -G.
>
>
>
--
Taral
"Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you."
-- Unknown
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [CotC] CFJ 2860 assigned to Taral
On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 1:38 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: >> How does 2312 not apply to judges? > > Ah, not in the CotC database yet. See the "Judgement" part of this: > http://www.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-business/2010-September/026683.html > > (I admit, I was only half-accurate in the name of a pithy reply). It seems that your judgement and my findings are in agreement. 2312 applies to judges. -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [CotC] CFJ 2860 assigned to Taral
On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 9:54 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > And no, it doesn't. How does 2312 not apply to judges? -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
DIS: Re: BUS: Judgement, CFJ 2862
On Sun, Sep 19, 2010 at 5:40 PM, omd wrote: > I intend to appeal this with two support. I believe that this > judgement is correct, but should clarify that failing to check did not > actually absolve coppro of any liability were eir original belief in > Wooble's IADoP-ness not quite so certain. That's really not the point of appeals. If you want clarification, just ask the judge for it. -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [CotC] CFJ 2860 assigned to Taral
On Sun, Sep 19, 2010 at 5:35 PM, omd wrote: > On Sun, Sep 19, 2010 at 6:48 PM, Taral wrote: >> 9. omd is the Pariah, and Rule 2312 applies to all players, including judges. > > No I'm not. Oh? I was pretty sure I checked the records... things must have changed on me. Thankfully it's not germane to the judgement. -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
DIS: Re: OFF: [CotC] CFJ 2860 assigned to Taral
H. Caller ais523, would you like to make any gratuitous arguments as
to why the Court should rule that the text in question ("appropriate
for...") is not merely advisory?
On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 2:30 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
> Detail: http://zenith.homelinux.net/cotc/viewcase.php?cfj=2860
>
> == Criminal Case 2860 (Interest Index = 0) ===
>
> omd violated the power-3 rule 2201 by making an inappropriate
> Claim of Error, because the nature of the doubt is a matter of
> legal interpretation rather than of fact.
>
>
>
> Caller: ais523
> Barred: omd
>
> Judge: Taral
> Judgement:
>
>
>
> History:
>
> Called by ais523: 12 Sep 2010 19:30:29 GMT
> Assigned to Taral: (as of this message)
>
>
>
> Caller's Arguments:
>
> On Sun, 2010-09-12 at 12:21 -0700, Ed Murphy wrote:
>> ais523 wrote:
>>
>> > On Sun, 2010-09-12 at 14:46 -0400, omd wrote:
>> >> On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 2:30 PM, Alex Smith wrote:
>> >>> I pay a fee to make Distributed Proposal 6830 distributable.
>> >>
>> >> CoE: You don't have sufficient ergs to perform the action because
>> >> performing the action is impossible because it doesn't have an
>> >> instance of the Distributability switch.
>> >
>> > NoV: omd violated the power-3 rule 2201 by making an inappropriate Claim
>> > of Error, because the nature of the doubt is a matter of legal
>> > interpretation rather than of fact. (This NoV may fail on the basis that
>> > "inappropriate" != "illegal", but I can't think of any more sensible
>> > interpretation there; "impossible" seems rather implausible.)
>>
>> I contest this NoV, as "inappropriate" is not explicitly defined as
>> illegal, here or anywhere else. It /is/ explicitly defined as
>>
>> 1) SHOULD NOT, for judgements. (As long as the judge reasonably
>> believed eir judgement was appropriate - which e pretty much always
>> did - any criminal case would be NOT GUILTY by R1504(d) and/or (e)
>> anyway, so allowing such cases at all was generally agreed to be
>> more annoying than it was worth.)
>>
>> 2) CANNOT, in Rule 2288 (Induction), when allowing a player to
>> voluntarily perform an action using a higher dependent-action
>> threshold than required by the rules.
>
>
>
--
Taral
"Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you."
-- Unknown
DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Deputy Sysadmin] Because this /still/ hasn't been initiated correctly
On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 3:53 PM, Warrigal wrote: > On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 3:03 PM, Alex Smith wrote: >> I deputise for the Sysadmin to initiate an Agoran Decision as to which >> Website Submission to select. The options available are Website >> Submission 1 (by Murphy), Website Submission 2 (by ais523), and NO >> WINNER; the text of the submissions is shown near the end of this email. >> The vote collector is the Sysadmin. > > I endorse the first of these four whose vote is for a submission: > Murphy, ais523, Taral, the next office-holder that replies to this > email with "AOL!". What, no preferences, really? -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Fun with CFJ timing
On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 6:18 PM, Taral wrote: > I can put a shorter session timeout on the smtpd... For the record, the emails were received in this order: Aug 26 17:55:00 yzma postfix/cleanup[16068]: 717A0812E5: message-id= Aug 26 17:55:00 yzma postfix/cleanup[16047]: 2CB1C812E4: message-id= -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Fun with CFJ timing
On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 4:49 PM, ais523 wrote: > You can start sending the email, but stop halfway through, and later on, > finish sending the email (and you don't need to have specified all the > content of the email by this point). For some reason, the timestamp > given is the timestamp when you started sending, even though you might > have decided what to put in the email some time later than that. I can put a shorter session timeout on the smtpd... -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Hoisting one's own wormhole
On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 8:32 PM, Ed Murphy wrote: > Under the circumstances, you could publish non-plaintext reports and > argue a 1504(e) defense. Or use GMail, which has a plain text mode. -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Voting results for Proposals 6763 - 6765
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 9:39 AM, Geoffrey Spear wrote: > That's slightly encouraging, but I still don't care much for putting > obligations on inactive players by name, even if they are reading the > lists. Thank you for your consideration, but so long as I'm Distributor, I have an obligation to the game anyway. :) -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Voting results for Proposals 6763 - 6765
On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 7:55 AM, Geoffrey Spear wrote: > On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 10:38 PM, Sean Hunt wrote: >> H. Distributor Taral, would you care to open the Submission Period? > > According to the subscriber list, e has message delivery disabled. E > also hasn't been an active player for 51 weeks, which is why I voted > against this proposal. I think you'll find that that's because you're looking at an alternate address for me. :) -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Voting results for Proposals 6763 - 6765
After GenCon, sure. On Tuesday, August 3, 2010, Sean Hunt wrote: > > Enact a new rule entitled "Website Fixup" at power 2 with the following > text: > During the Submission Period, any player CAN, by announcement, > submit a Website Submission. A Website Submission is a document or > collection of documents intended to replace the web page at > http://agoranomic.org/. A player CAN by announcement withdraw a > Website Submission (causing it to cease to be a > Website Submission). Submitting a Website Submission causes any > earlier Website Submission authored by the same player to be > withdrawn. > > Website Submissions have ID numbers, to be assigned by the > the Sysadmin. Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, the > Sysadmin has no report and has II 0. The Sysadmin is an imposed > office, its holder is coppro. > > If the Submission Period has not began, Taral CAN, by > announcement, begin it, and e also CAN, by announcement, cause > this Rule to repeal itself. If the Submission Period has not began > and this Rule has been in the Ruleset for more than two weeks, > any player CAN, by announcement, cause this Rule to repeal itself. > > Two weeks after the Submission Period begins, it ends. As soon as > possible thereafter, the Sysadmin SHALL initiate an Agoran > decision to pick the winning Website Sumbission; the options shall > be each Website Submission and NO WINNER. Each active player is > an eligible voter for this decision, as is Taral. Taral's voting > limit is 3, every other voter's limit is 1. The text of each > Website Submission is an essential parameter. > > When the Agoran decision is resolved, if a Website Submission was > selected as the outcome, then its author is awarded two Leadership > Tokens and Taral SHOULD update http://agoranomic.org/ to reflect > the winning Website Submission. Regardless of the outcome, this > rule then repeals itself. > > [Taral gets special treatment because e maintains the website. Imposing > the office on myself will make sure I actually do the sysadminnery > rather than shrug it off by resigning.] > > > H. Distributor Taral, would you care to open the Submission Period? > > Also, I award myself two capacitors for the adoption of this proposal. > > -coppro > -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
DIS: Re: OFF: [Registrar] Writ of FAGE
On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 1:15 PM, Geoffrey Spear wrote: > Wooble: This is a Cantus Cygneus. I detail my grievances and > express my reproach for those who I feel have treated me so badly. ... TIASCOTCISIDTIDFTHPAFAVLT. -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
DIS: Re: The Assumption of Mary
Subscribe the new address and unsubscribe the old address. On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 12:55 PM, Elliott Hird wrote: > Sorry that all of these have come at once, by the way; I had an issue > with the lists: I'm on them under my @googlemail.com address, but I am > now @gmail.com. I have temporarily switched back to rectify this > problem, but could whoever's keeping the lists these days (Taral?) fix > this? Thanks. -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
Re: DIS: Re: BAK: Mail warning
On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 6:28 AM, Geoffrey Spear wrote: > No interpretation of Agoran law may limit the right of participation > in the fora; therefore any interpretation of the law claiming that a > forum G. could not reasonably access is a public forum is INVALID. Do we really want determinations of the validity of a forum to be ex post facto? -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
DIS: Re: BUS: hi
On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 10:43 AM, Geoffrey Spear wrote: > I indicate reasonably clearly and reasonably unambiguously that e > intends to become a player at that time. I say I do, therefore I do? (Yes, I'm still here.) -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
DIS: Re: BUS: Proposal: Rapid returns
On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 8:04 PM, Ed Murphy wrote: > If a player's most recent deregistration was within the past > four weeks, and was not via a mechanism not explicitly described > by the rules as allowing rapid return, then e CAN re-register > without N objections (where N is the number of whole weeks that > have elapsed since that deregistration) if N is at least 1, but > CANNOT otherwise re-register. Is this a deliberate double negative? -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
Re: DIS: timing?
On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 3:31 PM, comex wrote: > I just noticed that yzma's time seems to be off by an hour: > > Received: from yzma.clarkk.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) > by yzma.clarkk.net (Postfix) with ESMTP > id 21A6981293; Mon, 7 Dec 2009 18:18:05 -0600 (CST) > > but it's only about 17:30 right now. Hm. I wonder how long that's been like that. Fixed. -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [CotC] CFJ 2739 judged FALSE by ais523
On Sun, Dec 6, 2009 at 5:30 PM, Sean Hunt wrote: > I intend, with two support, to appeal this judgment. While ais523's logic is > sound, eir arguments apply it to Taral, not to G.. I recommend a judgment of > AFFIRM with a concurring opinion. Huh? -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Not All Bad
On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 11:20 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > Hmmm... history I don't know about in this exact language... what was > the break between I and II? -G. IIRC, and this was before my time, there was a meta-agreement at one point to restore the game to functioning state. That would *technically* make this Agora II. -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Not All Bad
On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 10:53 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > Ultimately, what we're dealing with is, if a person does take an > absolute dictatorship, and e makes too many changes, then players who > are strongly pro-democratic may leave, and having a dictatorship > with no players is rather hollow. So ultimately it's very nomic, as > you're just trying to make sure players don't exercise their ultimate > nomic-right to stop playing. And in Agora, for better or worse, that > means fairly conservative play; if you want something else, B is right > next door, and as is currently very apparent they don't participate in > things too much like Agora :). This. Remember that this is really Agora II... -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Mafia
On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 1:36 PM, Ed Murphy wrote: > You did, I forget what you were responding to though. I found this in my archives. Not sure why I said it that way anymore. :) Date: Sun, 13 May 2007 00:02:17 -0500 Subject: Re: BUS: Inhuman rights campaign On 5/9/07, Ed Murphy wrote: > I intend, with Agoran consent, to make the Pineapple Partnership > the holder of the Office of Registrar. > > I intend, with Agoran consent, to make Human Point Two the holder > of the Office of International Associate Director of Personnel. Of *course* I support these! -- The Goddess Eris "You can't prove anything." -- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
DIS: Re: BUS: Mafia
On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 8:31 AM, Ed Murphy wrote: > Of /course/ I agree to this! Gah. We need a meme record. What's this one again? I have a strange suspicion that I started it. -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
DIS: Re: BUS: Fixing a lack
On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 12:54 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > Amend Rule 2105 to read as follows: When did that become Power 1? -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Registrar] Census
On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 5:55 PM, Aaron Goldfein wrote: > I thought that was text only... It kinda is. It's actually being sent as text + html alternative. -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
DIS: Re: BUS: am I to be expected to actually read the lists in my ignoring^W"absence"? nay, but surely I do see that chaos abounds
On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 1:07 PM, Elliott Hird wrote: > announcement. This causes the 20 rules elevated most often elevated to Typo. -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
DIS: Bills of Attainder
They suck. That is all. -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [IBA] Report
On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 1:09 AM, Charles Walker wrote: > I deposit 3 * WRV for 390zm. I think this affects my later withdrawal. -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [CotC] CFJ 2700 assigned to BobTHJ
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 8:18 PM, Roger Hicks wrote: > Sorry no time at the moment, wife finally had the babyI may be a > bit behind on getting nomic.bob-space.com updated as well. Congratulations! -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
DIS: Re: BUS: IBA/Cards
On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 8:08 PM, Pavitra wrote: > I deposit 4 * Debate-o-Matic. (It's just not a good idea these days to > have excess cards lying around.) You're out of proposals? -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Election
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 7:39 AM, Roger Hicks wrote: > Since nobody responded to this inquiry I'll treat this message as if > it was processed on Sept 15, 00:59 UTC (this seems to be when it > finally cleared the list). Very Old Precedents say that the effective date is 2009/09/13 01:58 (TDOC). -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
Re: DIS: testing: iba.qoid.us
On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 2:55 PM, Elliott Hird wrote: > 19 inches? Insert either "poor you" or "enjoying your lugbook?" here. That's 19 inches wide, not diagonal. -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
Re: DIS: testing: iba.qoid.us
On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 2:55 PM, Elliott Hird wrote: > 2009/9/5 Taral : >> It's a physical 100dpi. 1920 dots / 19 inches. I am sitting far back. > > 19 inches? Insert either "poor you" or "enjoying your lugbook?" here. Desktop monitor. :) -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
Re: DIS: testing: iba.qoid.us
On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 12:28 PM, Elliott Hird wrote: > Is your actual display 100dpi, though? And are you sitting far back or > is it a notebook? It's a physical 100dpi. 1920 dots / 19 inches. I am sitting far back. -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
Re: DIS: testing: iba.qoid.us
On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 9:08 AM, Elliott Hird wrote: > Safari, but the point is that the font size is too small for > comfortable reading, at least on my 100dpi screen (notebooks going up > to 130dpi), and that this is a design flaw; of course I can resize the > text, but the more preferable fix is to change the site. Hrm. I'm running at 100dpi and it looks ok to me... 11px is pretty standard these days. -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
DIS: Re: OFF: [Herald] The Scrolls of Agora
On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 10:27 AM, Roger Hicks wrote: > Vlad, Andre, G., BobTHJ, P1-P100 [pending CFJ 2306] Pretty sure 2306 was judged a long time ago. -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Vacation
On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 6:31 AM, Geoffrey Spear wrote: > On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 7:23 PM, Taral wrote: >> I go on hold. I'll be back Tuesday. > > Taral: I treated this as not automatically taking you off hold on > Tuesday; did you come off hold manually that I missed, or are you > intentionally still on hold? I am intentionally still on hold. :) -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
Re: DIS: testing: iba.qoid.us
On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 11:39 PM, Elliott Hird wrote: > Hey Taral, your site http://havenworks.com/ could use a bit of > a redesign I think. > http://www.getfirefox.com/ > Make a user stylesheet. Meh. User stylesheets are a pain. :P What browser are you using? -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
Re: DIS: testing: iba.qoid.us
On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 7:04 PM, Elliott Hird wrote: > (What's the going rate to bribe you to up the font size?) http://www.getfirefox.com/ -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
Re: DIS: testing: iba.qoid.us
On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 4:05 PM, comex wrote: > http://iba.qoid.us/ Woot. -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
DIS: Penalty Box
This card isn't very useful. With all the Drop Your Weapon cards around, it seems to easy to stop. -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: NoVs
On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 10:52 AM, comex wrote: > On Sep 1, 2009, at 12:58 PM, Roger Hicks wrote: >> For the week of Aug 10-16 game custom dictates I should not be >> penalized due to recently assuming the office. > > I disagree, half a week should be more than enough time. Game custom is 7 days. Change it with a proposal. -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
DIS: Note Exchange
Can we kill the Note Exchange now as obsolete? -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
DIS: Re: BUS: Emergency Fix Proposal
On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 7:47 AM, Roger Hicks wrote: > If the action is to be performed With Notice then there are no > restrictions are imposed on Agora being Satisfied with the intent. English please. -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Bribereee
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 8:50 AM, Pavitra wrote: > A player CAN play N Distrib-u-Matics to make an II(N-1) Undistributable > proposal Distributable. E thereby becomes the proposal's sponsor. When a > proposal becomes Undistributable, it ceases to have a sponsor. Requires too many. How about making people discard II-1 (if II > 1) cards instead? -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
DIS: Re: BUS: Bribereee
On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 4:20 PM, Sean Hunt wrote: > I retract the quoted proposal, and submit the following, and make it > Distributable by announcement: How? -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
DIS: Re: BUS: [AAA] Secretary of Agriculture Report
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 4:09 PM, Sean Hunt wrote: > I harvest 2259 and 1 to turn a 2 ranch into a 1 ranch. O.o -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: AAA Actions
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 10:19 AM, Roger Hicks wrote: > Origin IP is 64.17.129.3 or possibly 64.17.152.116. There were two > messages within the past 15 minutes, both with the subject "BobTHJ's > actions (automated)". Your origin IP is smh*.opentransfer.com. Only one was received at my end, the one everyone got. -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
DIS: Re: BUS: AAA Actions
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 10:12 AM, Roger Hicks wrote: > H. Distributor: the automated e-mails from my site don't seem to be > reaching the list. Do you have spam filtering of some sort active that > may be catching them? I can look if you give me a timestamp and origin IP or envelope return address. -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
Re: DIS: Proto: A familiar right
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 10:00 AM, comex wrote: > Proto: A familiar right (AI=3) Good idea, but I'm not a fan of that wording. -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Trumpeting
On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 6:15 PM, Sean Hunt wrote: > It is restricted to editing "entities and/or attributes" whose > existences depend on it. It restricts itself to entities, therefor the > or clause is satisfied. Otherwise, contracts could not define dependent > actions modifying contract-created values attributed to players. Say what? It's changing *power*. That's editing an attribute whose existence does not depend on the contract. -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
DIS: Re: BUS: Deputizations
On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 5:24 PM, Sean Hunt wrote: > I transfer all my Deck of Change cards to Bank. Fails. Ownership of cards is limited to players and contests. -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
DIS: Re: BUS: Trumpeting
On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 1:39 PM, comex wrote: > comex CAN adopt a trumpet without 15 objections; its power is set to > one, and then it takes effect. It does not otherwise take effect. Nope. The existence of power does not depend on your contract. Therefore your contract cannot modify power. -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [CotC] CFJ 2636 assigned to Taral
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 11:41 PM, Sean Hunt wrote:
> I recommend that the judgment be {Each party to the IBA SHALL vote FOR
> both Motions to Amend the IBA}, and that it be delivered posthaste, so
> that the quorum issue doesn't prevent our contract from being fixed.
Objections?
--
Taral
"Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you."
-- Unknown
DIS: Re: BUS: Strike Colors
On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 5:46 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > I think all flag candidates were dead/impossible anyway (the recent > CFJ aside). This is simply an illustration that, due to the second- > to-last paragraph of R2124, any w/o N objections action combined with > a time limit is effectively the same as w/o 1 objection. Heh, cute. -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
Re: DIS: Straw Poll: agora-actions
On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 3:21 PM, Sean Hunt wrote: > I hereby initiate a Straw Poll to decide whether or not the > Distributor should add another forum (tentatively with the name > agora-business) to the agoranomic.org lists AGAINST -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
DIS: Re: BUS: [Enigma] This week's puzzles
On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 6:03 AM, ais523 wrote: > 2 x-points to root; > 4 x-points to root; ??? -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Voting results for Proposals 6410 - 6413
On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 2:22 PM, Geoffrey Spear wrote: > On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 4:32 PM, Taral wrote: >> It appears we are at the point where it is sometimes better to not >> vote than vote... > > If you like that type of game, you may want to object to my intents to > deactivate. No, I don't. I was just noting that the huge voting power (12) lends itself to that kind of strategy. -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
DIS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Voting results for Proposals 6410 - 6413
On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 4:54 PM, Ed Murphy wrote: > 6410 6411 6412 6413 > > BobTHJ P P P P > coppro F F 12F 12F > c-walker F F 3F 3F > Murphy F F 5F P > Pavitra F F 2F 2F > Taral F F 2A A > woggle A A P P > Wooble A F 2A P > > AI 2 2 1 1 > VI 2.5 6 5.5 17 > F/A 5/2 6/1 22/4 17/1 > > Quorum 8 8 8 8 (may have been different) > Voters 8 8 8 8 It appears we are at the point where it is sometimes better to not vote than vote... -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
DIS: Re: BUS: AAAAAAAAAA! Again
On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 7:54 PM, Kenner Gordon wrote: > Never mind, I had forgotten that I could use a digest. I do not deregister. Too late. -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
DIS: Re: OFF: Distribution of Proposals 6410-6413
On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 6:04 PM, Sean Hunt wrote: > NUM C I AI SUBMITTER TITLE > 6410 D 0 2.0 coppro FOR > 6411 D 1 2.0 Yally Terms and Vacancies 2.0 FOR > 6412 O 1 1.0 allispaul A Standard Standard AGAINSTx3 > 6413 O 1 1.0 c-walker Office IIs with Agoran Consent AGAINSTx1 -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
DIS: Re: OFF: [CotC] CFJ 2596 assigned to Taral
If I can, I judge CFJ 2596 TRUE. The ability to deregister does take precedence over the switch setting. I do not rule on the effectiveness of such deregistration. -- Taral -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [CotC] CFJ 2623 assigned to Taral
On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 8:57 PM, Benjamin
Caplan wrote:
> Clearly this means "I hereby judge {comex SHALL ensure that judicial
> panels of which e is a member are not assigned as judge in the appeal of
> any judicial case." (The bit about the contract is a holdover from the
> days when equity judgements were contracts.)
How is e supposed to accomplish that?
--
Taral
"Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you."
-- Unknown
DIS: Re: BUS: Economic Actions (automated)
On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 10:57 AM, Geoffrey Spear wrote: > I transfer a prop from BobTHJ, for re-platonicizing something that was > pragmatic for a reason, to Rodlen, for being someone I chose > completely at random. Hear, hear. Either deal them, or don't. -- Tar "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Herald] War of the Roses
On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 12:03 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > Addendum: I just went back to 2005, which had the effect of putting Taral > on the list at #18: on 12-Mar-06 Taral held a winning hand of Cards. Well > done, Taral! ... I did? :) -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [CotC] CFJ 2623 assigned to Taral
I'm still not convinced that any other judgement is in the best interests of the parties and the game in general. Unless, of course, the parties wish to suggest some more adequate remedy? -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [CotC] CFJ 2623 assigned to Taral
On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 11:18 AM, Elliott Hird wrote: > That parenthical was a joke; are you seriously suggesting that being > reckless absolves us of the obligations? In an Equitable sense, I believe it actually does. If you both entered into the contract without any intention that it have any effect on you, it may not even be a contract. -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
DIS: Re: OFF: [CotC] CFJ 2623 assigned to Taral
On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 1:00 AM, Ed Murphy wrote:
> == Equity Case 2623 ==
>
> comex - who (dubiously) counts as the CotC when performing
> Justiciar duties - rotated the bench without intending to
> mislead others as to the pointless conceptual games indulged in
> by mistake; furthermore, there hasn't been, to my knowledge, a
> case of two appeals panels trying said action - apparently an
> experiment - beforehand. Indeed, I cannot even find any record
> of em *asking* one to do so!
By the initiator's own admission, e did not envision anything by the
contract. I proto-judge {The parties to (2008-11-22-ehird) SHALL act
to terminate it ASAP.}
Comments?
--
Taral
"Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you."
-- Unknown
DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [CotC] CFJs 2628-29 assigned to woggle
On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 10:39 AM, Sean Hunt wrote: > Either way, my rank could not have become 1. I > recommend REMAND so that the judge may fix the errors in eir argument. He said "if". -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [CotC] CFJ 2606 assigned to Taral
On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 8:13 AM, C-walker wrote: > Whoops, I forgot to appeal this. If I still can, I intend, with 2 > support, to appeal. I (and around two others, IIRC) submitted > suggested settlements in our arguments: these all seem to have been > ignored. No, they submitted *ideas* for settlements. Nothing that I could reasonably turn into a contract without breaking the game in progress. -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Enigma results
On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 10:52 AM, Sgeo wrote: > When I get around to it, I have a puzzle to submit.. *insert appropriate contract here* I create a Round Tuit in Sgeo's possession. -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Another Posture Flip
On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 1:27 PM, Ed Murphy wrote: > * Local Boring. > * Kangaroo Too powerful. > * Night This. :) -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [CotC] CFJ 2606 assigned to Taral
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 4:41 AM, Alex Smith wrote: > This omits my gratuitous arguments (that it would be more equitable to > keep the total number of scrolls everyone owns constant, than reset > things to be the same for everyone). Any idea how to integrate that with the way the contest has been continued already? -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
DIS: Re: OFF: [CotC] CFJ 2606 assigned to Taral
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 12:08 AM, Ed Murphy wrote: > Detail: http://zenith.homelinux.net/cotc/viewcase.php?cfj=2606 > > == Equity Case 2606 == > > I accidentally published the list of what contracts are what and > the contract provides no suitable remedy to ensure the integrity > of the game. Would anyone care to propose a reasonable settlement? It seems like nobody really minded -- the game just started over. Mistakes happen. -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: An action
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 12:02 AM, Ed Murphy wrote: > I figured out how to get this into the database, but why does > http://zenith.homelinux.net/cotc/status.php (newly modified to > specify charset=utf-8 rather than charset=iso-8859-1) render it > incorrectly by default? Either change your default charset for php, or render a meta http-equiv tag. -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
DIS: Re: OFF: [CotC] CFJs 2612-13 assigned to Taral
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 8:30 AM, Ed Murphy wrote: > == CFJ 2612 == > > On 29 February 2004, root called for (or attempted to call for) > the appeal of the judgement of CFJ 1492. > > == CFJ 2613 == > > The Speaker CAN publish an Honors List. > > Proto-judgement: Seriously? The term "Gregorian calendar" is used extensively to denote the modern calendar. "The Gregorian calendar is the internationally accepted civil calendar." (Wikipedia) "The calendar currently in worldwide use for secular purposes..." (Scienceworld) I proto-judge TRUE in both CFJs 2612 and 2613. -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
DIS: Re: BUS: [Scorekeepor] Score Index
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 10:48 AM, Roger Hicks wrote: > I intend with Agoran Consent to set the Score Index to 4. I object. The whole point of raising the high score threshold was to slow down wins. -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: New Contests: CO Set
On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 2:45 PM, Roger Hicks wrote: > True, but I don't see how that ties a specific skunk to a specific > reset. I could honestly see this being interpreted either way, but in > my estimation one skunk canceling all pending resets seems to make the > most sense based on the wording of the rule. I'm happy to abide by > whatever decision a judge makes on the issue, but unless a CFJ is > called I intend to interpret it this way. That's fair. I don't intend to call a CFJ on it. -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: New Contests: CO Set
On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 2:39 PM, Roger Hicks wrote: > No. When a win by points occurs it schedules an event one week in the > future. When it comes time for that event the game checks if a skunk > has been declared in the past week. If not the reset occurs, otherwise > it does not. Except that skunks CANNOT be declared outside a window. -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: New Contests: CO Set
On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 2:26 PM, Roger Hicks wrote: > "If any player does so within the allowed week..." in the next > sentence would corroborate this I think. From my reading one skunk > would void all pending point resets. That doesn't make sense. One skunk and one reset. Your reading would mean that concurrent win announcements only result in one point reset. -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
DIS: Re: BUS: New Contests: CO Set
On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 1:51 PM, Sean Hunt wrote: > I object, since this would interrupt the other two score resets. Since > every player is losing 98% of their points anyways, I don't think the > third reset will have any impact whatsoever. Would it? I'm not convinced that this will prevent the other two resets -- each win announcement triggers a separate reset and therefore requires a separate skunk, based on my reading. -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: New Contests: CO Set
On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 1:47 PM, Alex Smith wrote: > Normally, I'd agree. However, there are going to be so many score resets > anyway due to legit wins, that why bother? To avoid stacking resets? On principle? I'm leaning toward the latter, since I have no points anyway. -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Registering on behalf
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 6:43 AM, Elliott Hird wrote: > NOTE: this is scripted. Myndzi replies to all actions like that. No > consent was involved. I'd say consent was involved in the writing of a script. -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Distributability
On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 6:47 PM, Aaron Goldfein wrote: > I used II=2 because I thought it would be a controversial change. Controversy != complexity. -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
DIS: Distributability?
What about making Distributability like NoVs, where it's with N support? You get one free proposal per week... -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Lurking
On Sun, Jun 7, 2009 at 6:15 AM, Paul VanKoughnett wrote:
> Proposal: Very little or no lurk time (II=1, AI=1)
> {
> Amend rule 1922, Defined Regular Patent Titles, by adding a new bullet
> to the end of the bulleted list reading:
> "(i) Leapt before Lookt, awarded to those individuals who attempted to
> emulate First Speaker Michael Norrish by registering as soon as
> possible after hearing about Agora."
>
> Award the Patent Title of Not A Lurker to Yally, Murphy, and Quazie.
> }
Uh... not quite.
--
Taral
"Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you."
-- Unknown
