DIS: Re: BUS: (corrected) Judgement: CFJ 3383

2013-08-12 Thread Fool



Of course, defining bad form in nomic is a minefield, and a blanket
ban would be a bad idea when part of the game is exploring these
limits. But what about a rule prohibiting clear, unambiguous and
severe breaches of good form, with clear malign intent? Or a rule
with specific prohibitions (e.g. don't prevent participation for more
than a week, don't risk ending the game, don't tarnish Agora's
reputation)?


Speaking for myself, if you say something's not welcome then I'd respect 
that, no tricks.


But are you sure you don't want me pulling stunts like de-registering 
everyone? How about, I don't know, once a year?


-Dan


DIS: Re: OFF: [CotC] Appeal 3386a assigned to ais523, scshunt and OscarMeyr

2013-08-12 Thread Sean Hunt
On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 2:51 PM, Jonathan Rouillard
jonathan.rouill...@gmail.com wrote:
 Detail: http://cotc.psychose.ca/viewcase.php?cfj=3386a

   Appeal 3386a  

 Panelist:   ais523
 Decision:

 Panelist:   scshunt
 Decision:

 Panelist:   OscarMeyr
 Decision:

 

CoE: as the appellant, every panel containing me is unqualified.

-scshunt


DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [CotC] Appeal 3383a assigned to Wooble, woggle and Walker

2013-08-12 Thread Jonathan Rouillard
On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 3:18 PM, Charles Walker
charles.w.wal...@gmail.com wrote:
 On 12 August 2013 19:55, Jonathan Rouillard
 jonathan.rouill...@gmail.com wrote:
 Detail: http://cotc.psychose.ca/viewcase.php?cfj=3383a

   Appeal 3383a  

 CoE: missing my arguments.

You weren't part of the appeal - it got completed before you came in.
I'll add them as gratuitous arguments, though.

~ Roujo


Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [CotC] Appeal 3383a assigned to Wooble, woggle and Walker

2013-08-12 Thread Jonathan Rouillard
On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 3:20 PM, Jonathan Rouillard
jonathan.rouill...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 3:18 PM, Charles Walker
 charles.w.wal...@gmail.com wrote:
 On 12 August 2013 19:55, Jonathan Rouillard
 jonathan.rouill...@gmail.com wrote:
 Detail: http://cotc.psychose.ca/viewcase.php?cfj=3383a

   Appeal 3383a  

 CoE: missing my arguments.

 You weren't part of the appeal - it got completed before you came in.
 I'll add them as gratuitous arguments, though.

 ~ Roujo

Wait. That's exactly what you had done. Sorry, my bad.

~ Roujo


Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [CotC] Appeal 3386a assigned to ais523, scshunt and OscarMeyr

2013-08-12 Thread Jonathan Rouillard
On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 3:06 PM, Sean Hunt scsh...@csclub.uwaterloo.ca wrote:
 On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 2:51 PM, Jonathan Rouillard
 jonathan.rouill...@gmail.com wrote:
 Detail: http://cotc.psychose.ca/viewcase.php?cfj=3386a

   Appeal 3386a  

 Panelist:   ais523
 Decision:

 Panelist:   scshunt
 Decision:

 Panelist:   OscarMeyr
 Decision:

 

 CoE: as the appellant, every panel containing me is unqualified.

 -scshunt

I don't see any rule that makes this the case.

~ Roujo


DIS: Re: OFF: [CotC] CFJ 3365 assigned to OscarMeyr

2013-08-12 Thread Benjamin Schultz
On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 8:07 PM, Jonathan Rouillard 
jonathan.rouill...@gmail.com wrote:

 Detail: http://cotc.psychose.ca/viewcase.php?cfj=3365

 =  Criminal Case 3365  =

 scshunt has violated Rule 2143 (Official Reports and Duties) by
 failing to publish the holder of each office, etc. last week.

 



DRAFT

Based on the arguments from the Appeal Panel, I find it sufficient to
reduce the penalty to a loss of salary.  Accordingly, I rule GUILTY / FINE
350 Yaks, that being the present amount of the IADoP's salary.

-- 
OscarMeyr


Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [CotC] CFJ 3365 assigned to OscarMeyr

2013-08-12 Thread Charles Walker
On 12 August 2013 21:44, Benjamin Schultz ben.dov.schu...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 8:07 PM, Jonathan Rouillard
 jonathan.rouill...@gmail.com wrote:

 Detail: http://cotc.psychose.ca/viewcase.php?cfj=3365

 =  Criminal Case 3365  =

 scshunt has violated Rule 2143 (Official Reports and Duties) by
 failing to publish the holder of each office, etc. last week.

 



 DRAFT

 Based on the arguments from the Appeal Panel, I find it sufficient to reduce
 the penalty to a loss of salary.  Accordingly, I rule GUILTY / FINE 350
 Yaks, that being the present amount of the IADoP's salary.

Salaries are paid monthly, so you might want to look at something
closer to a quarter of that, depending on how many reports the
defendant missed.


Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [CotC] CFJ 3381 assigned to ais523

2013-08-12 Thread Fool

On 06/08/2013 2:36 PM, Craig Daniel wrote:

They're actually mostly not for counterscam purposes, as I don't claim
they actually have any scammy effect. (Rather, I claim that their
destroyability is paradoxical, and therefore I ought to be able to get
a win by paradox in the near future. I'm mildly surprised Fool didn't
think of this first, but e was too focused on the dictatorship
interpretation.)


I was aware of it. (I cashed the !!! promise before my stunt, 
referring to basically this.)


I also notice that nothing stops anyone else from repeating what you 
just did and also winning. I'm sure a lot of people see this. And yet 
nobody's doing it. It sort of looks like nobody cares.


-Dan


Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Judgement in R. v. everyone but Fool, CFJ 3381

2013-08-12 Thread Fool

On 04/08/2013 10:27 PM, Sean Hunt wrote:

(Professor Quirrell had remarked over their lunch that Harry really
needed to conceal his state of mind better than putting on a blank
face when someone discussed a dangerous topic, and had explained about
one-level deceptions, two-level deceptions, and so on. So either
Severus was in fact modeling Harry as a one-level player, which made
Severus himself two-level, and Harry's three-level move had been
successful; or Severus was a four-level player and wanted Harry to
think the deception had been successful. Harry, smiling, had asked
Professor Quirrell what level he played at, and Professor Quirrell,
also smiling, had responded, One level higher than you.)

-- /Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality/


Except I've spent the last few years building up an immunity to Iocaine 
powder.


http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?BattleOfWits



Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [CotC] CFJ 3381 assigned to ais523

2013-08-12 Thread Ørjan Johansen

On Mon, 12 Aug 2013, Fool wrote in response to Craig Daniel:

I also notice that nothing stops anyone else from repeating what you just did 
and also winning. I'm sure a lot of people see this. And yet nobody's doing 
it. It sort of looks like nobody cares.


I understood ais523's judgement to mean that such scams could always be 
counterscammed by preventing some other aspect of the destruction before 
the 4 days of notice is up, e.g. by using Gerontocracy.


Greetings,
Ørjan.

DIS: Re: BUS: a criminal case

2013-08-12 Thread Fool

On 12/08/2013 3:39 PM, Geoffrey Spear wrote:

I hereby initiate a criminal CFJ alleging that omd, the Registrar, did
violate Rule 1789 by failing to public my Cantus Cygneus in a timely
fashion after receiving it.

I deregister.



Guess we're not getting that Ruleset from you after all, eh? That's too 
bad. :)






Re: DIS: Re: BUS: a criminal case

2013-08-12 Thread Sean Hunt
On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 11:47 PM, Fool fool1...@gmail.com wrote:
 On 12/08/2013 3:39 PM, Geoffrey Spear wrote:

 I hereby initiate a criminal CFJ alleging that omd, the Registrar, did
 violate Rule 1789 by failing to public my Cantus Cygneus in a timely
 fashion after receiving it.

 I deregister.


 Guess we're not getting that Ruleset from you after all, eh? That's too bad.
 :)

See the Scroll. E'll be back.

-scshunt


DIS: agoran language

2013-08-12 Thread Max Schutz
i am just curious and i don't there was EVER an explanation given but i see
e in liue he almost like pirate language i am just wondering if those
dialects are like designated agoran language


Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [CotC] CFJ 3381 assigned to ais523

2013-08-12 Thread Fool

On 12/08/2013 11:44 PM, Ørjan Johansen wrote:

On Mon, 12 Aug 2013, Fool wrote in response to Craig Daniel:


I also notice that nothing stops anyone else from repeating what you
just did and also winning. I'm sure a lot of people see this. And yet
nobody's doing it. It sort of looks like nobody cares.


I understood ais523's judgement to mean that such scams could always be
counterscammed by preventing some other aspect of the destruction before
the 4 days of notice is up, e.g. by using Gerontocracy.



Though from what I've seen and heard, nobody cares to stop this sort of 
thing either. This might feed into why nobody cares to do it in the 
first place. Speaking for myself, I prefer to have opponents.


-Dan


Re: DIS: agoran language

2013-08-12 Thread Ørjan Johansen

On Mon, 12 Aug 2013, Max Schutz wrote:


i am just curious and i don't there was EVER an explanation given but i see
e in liue he almost like pirate language i am just wondering if those
dialects are like designated agoran language


Yes, Agora traditionally uses the gender neutral Spivak pronouns: e, em, 
eir.


A quick search reveals that they were used already in the initial ruleset. 
Perhaps they were inherited from Nomic World, I found a single use in the
ruleset linked at 
http://www.nomic.net/deadgames/nomicworld/norrish/ruleset-1dec92.


Greetings,
Ørjan.

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [CotC] CFJ 3388 assigned to Fool

2013-08-12 Thread Sean Hunt
On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 12:31 AM, Fool fool1...@gmail.com wrote:
 I judge this FALSE / 'cuz it's ambiguous / it's of no effect if it's unclear
 / I judge this FALSE / 'cuz it's ambiguous / it's of no effect if it's
 unclear / I judge this FALSE / 'cuz it's ambiguous / it's of no effect if
 it's unclear / I judge this FALSE / 'cuz it's ambiguous / it's of no effect
 if it's unclear.

  -- Danny boy, Danny boy, Danny boy

I start an inq'ry case; I start a crim'nal case.
I start an eq't'y case; I start an appeal case.
I find a paradox hiding in the contract.
I find a paradox hiding in the ruleset!