As fun as it would be to keep stringing you all along, I feel I should come
clean: I am not trying to hide any specific announcement of intent to perform a
dependent action. What really happened is that I mixed up the proposal ID
numbers, G. assumed something suspicious was going on, and it
Gratuitous arguments for this CFJ
The below quote is from one judgement I remember writing, the custom is
old, though I don't know it's full history, and the language in R1728
hasn't changed appreciably.
>From Judge's Arguments in CFJ 2316:
On Tue, 2018-10-16 at 00:18 +, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote:
> CFJ, barring G.: "In the quoted message, G. objected to at least one
> intent to perform a dependent action."
>
> Caller's arguments: According to the judgement issued by Maud in CFJ
> 1460, an action is only effective if "unreasonably
CFJ, barring G.: "In the quoted message, G. objected to at least one intent to
perform a dependent action."
Caller's arguments: According to the judgement issued by Maud in CFJ 1460, an
action is only effective if "unreasonably excessive effort" is not required to
determine what the action is.
On Mon, 15 Oct 2018, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote:
> I vote AGAINST proposals 8105 and 8107.
> I vote FOR proposals 8106, 8108, 8109 and 8110.
hmmm on 8107 vote there.
I object to all intents to perform actions without N objections
(for all values of N) that have been announced by people other
I vote AGAINST proposals 8105 and 8107.
I vote FOR proposals 8106, 8108, 8109 and 8110.
-twg
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Monday, October 15, 2018 12:06 AM, Aris Merchant
wrote:
> I hereby distribute each listed proposal, initiating the Agoran
> Decision of whether to adopt it, and
I submit the following proposal, The Middle Way, AI-1, and pend it:
---
Amend Rule 2510 (Such is Karma) by replacing the list in which the list
items are delimited with the - symbol with the following list:
- Any
Yeah, that sounds better. I was kind of thinking the same thing.
I change my vote on proposal 8106 to PRESENT.
On 10/15/2018 10:17 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
I was also thinking 7 was too high, but 3 is too low - it's basically
noise in the way people go up and down. How's 5?
On Sun, 14 Oct
I vote, and act on behalf of Gaelan to vote:
On Sun, 14 Oct 2018, Aris Merchant wrote:
> 8105* Trigon 0.5 Trust no one
FOR
> 8106* Aris 1.0 Attainable Karma
AGAINST. I'd vote for 5.
> 8107* D Margaux, [1] 3.0 Buried Intent Prevention Act v2
FOR
> 8108*
I vote as follows:
On 10/14/2018 06:06 PM, Aris Merchant wrote:
ID Author(s)AITitle
---
8105* Trigon 0.5 Trust no one
FOR
8106* Aris 1.0 Attainable Karma
AGAINST (I think 3
I vote FOR each proposal in the range 8105-8110.
On 10/14/2018 8:06 PM, Aris Merchant wrote:
I hereby distribute each listed proposal, initiating the Agoran
Decision of whether to adopt it, and removing it from the proposal
pool. For this decision, the vote collector is the Assessor, the
quorum
I vote and cause nichdel to vote:
ID Author(s)AITitle
---
8105* Trigon 0.5 Trust no one
FOR
8106* Aris 1.0 Attainable Karma
FOR
8107* D Margaux, [1] 3.0 Buried Intent
12 matches
Mail list logo
