Goethe wrote:
On Sat, 12 Jul 2008, Ed Murphy wrote:
c) Any disclaimer, conditional clause, or other qualifier
attached to a statement constitutes part of the statement;
the truth or falsity of the whole is what is significant.
The preamble addition isn't a bad
On Sat, Jul 12, 2008 at 10:31 PM, Ed Murphy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
a) A public statement that one performs an action is true
if and only if the attempt is successful.
This means that attempting to take actions that one does not
necessarily believe are possible is criminally
Taral wrote:
This means that attempting to take actions that one does not
necessarily believe are possible is criminally punishable. Is that
really what we want?
Yes. If one believes that an action is not possible, then it is dishonest
to claim to perform it, such as by attempting to do so
Ed Murphy wrote:
A person SHALL NOT make a public statement unless e believes,
according to some plausible interpretation of the rules, that
in doing so e is telling the truth.
I think according to some plausible interpretation of the rules is
not helpful here, and will just be
The Airstrip One contract is giving contract-defined props to players
who are not parties to the contract. Is this a good idea? Is this
permissible?
-
Benjamin Schultz KE3OM
OscarMeyr
On Jul 11, 2008, at 1:32 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jul 2008, comex wrote:
On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 4:57 PM, Sgeo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
for i in range(1000):
print I go on hold. I come off hold.
for((i=0;i1000;i++)); do echo 'I go on hold. I come off hold.';
done
On Sunday 13 July 2008 10:00:48 am Benjamin Schultz wrote:
The Airstrip One contract is giving contract-defined props to
players who are not parties to the contract. Is this a good idea?
Is this permissible?
I don't see that it's fundamentally different from pens or chits.
In 2058a, I am inclined towards moving to sustain. The rule on
publication does clearly specify that publication happens when a
message is sent -- and this rule does need fixing so that publication
happens when a message is passed out to the public forum list.
I'd appreciate some feedback
On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 11:16 AM, Ben Caplan
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Saturday 12 July 2008 10:05:36 pm Ben Caplan wrote:
[More rotation.]
Comments?
Seems like a lot of work for the Disc Jockey.
I'm having trouble finding the original message from ehird / tusho
that initiated CFJ 2053, wherein e said I register; the agoranomic
archive doesn't want to cooperate with me today, and my scroll-fu is
coming up short. Could someone please help me out here?
-
Benjamin Schultz KE3OM
Might be a good idea for the RBoA to set an exchange rate for pesos.
On Sunday 13 July 2008 10:22:27 am comex wrote:
On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 11:16 AM, Ben Caplan
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Saturday 12 July 2008 10:05:36 pm Ben Caplan wrote:
[More rotation.]
Comments?
Seems like a lot of work for the Disc Jockey.
Probably.
Note, though, that the only
On Jul 13, 2008, at 11:37 AM, Ben Caplan wrote:
Might be a good idea for the RBoA to set an exchange rate for pesos.
With all these various currencies, maybe we should have a common
measure of account, and revive (for valuation purposes only) the
Agoran Shequel?
-
Benjamin Schultz
2008/7/13 Benjamin Schultz [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Unless anybody wants to take up my Whitespace challenge, I proclaim Goethe
the winner of this competition.
-
Benjamin Schultz KE3OM
OscarMeyr
I preferred the INTERCAL.
On Sunday 13 July 2008 10:35:47 am Benjamin Schultz wrote:
I'm having trouble finding the original message from ehird / tusho
that initiated CFJ 2053, wherein e said I register; the agoranomic
archive doesn't want to cooperate with me today, and my scroll-fu is
coming up short. Could someone
On Jul 13, 2008, at 11:44 AM, Elliott Hird wrote:
2008/7/13 Benjamin Schultz [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Unless anybody wants to take up my Whitespace challenge, I
proclaim Goethe the winner of this competition.
-
Benjamin Schultz KE3OM
OscarMeyr
I preferred the INTERCAL.
It didn't have
On Sun, 13 Jul 2008, Zefram wrote:
Taral wrote:
This means that attempting to take actions that one does not
necessarily believe are possible is criminally punishable. Is that
really what we want?
Yes. If one believes that an action is not possible, then it is dishonest
to claim to
On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 11:41 AM, Benjamin Schultz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jul 13, 2008, at 11:37 AM, Ben Caplan wrote:
Might be a good idea for the RBoA to set an exchange rate for pesos.
With all these various currencies, maybe we should have a common measure of
account, and revive (for
On Jul 13, 2008, at 11:57 AM, ihope wrote:
On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 11:41 AM, Benjamin Schultz
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jul 13, 2008, at 11:37 AM, Ben Caplan wrote:
Might be a good idea for the RBoA to set an exchange rate for pesos.
With all these various currencies, maybe we should
2008/7/13 Benjamin Schultz [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
It didn't have enough PLEASE statements.
-
Benjamin Schultz KE3OM
OscarMeyr
Pretty sure it should always work correctly (and ais523 will
know how many are needed precisely, of course...)
2008/7/13 Elliott Hird [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
2008/7/13 Benjamin Schultz [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
It didn't have enough PLEASE statements.
-
Benjamin Schultz KE3OM
OscarMeyr
Pretty sure it should always work correctly (and ais523 will
know how many are needed precisely, of course...)
Too
On Sun, 13 Jul 2008, ihope wrote:
What was the Shequel?
It was either a databashe language or the one after Epishode I.
On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 8:22 AM, Benjamin Schultz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ais523 has pointed out an interesting hole in R2136, that a contestmaster
does not have to remain a member of the contest. Accordingly, root's as
contestmaster of Brainfuck Golf did not depend on eir being a member of
On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 7:31 AM, Zefram [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Taral wrote:
This means that attempting to take actions that one does not
necessarily believe are possible is criminally punishable. Is that
really what we want?
If one believes that an action is not possible, then it is dishonest
On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 12:53 PM, Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 8:56 AM, Benjamin Schultz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In the message in question, Defendant stated: I join and not I am
registered. As e argued, a failed action is not a false statement. I
therefore rule
On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 9:59 AM, ihope [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The alleged action was lying, not saying I join, so it's INNOCENT
that's appropriate here.
Ah, quite right. Something that my proposal is intended to fix. Nevermind.
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please let me know if there's any
On Sun, 2008-07-13 at 11:05 -0400, Benjamin Schultz wrote:
On Jul 11, 2008, at 1:32 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
(snip)
+++]++] // Horribly non-optimal
for the win. -Goethe
Unless anybody wants to take up my Whitespace challenge, I proclaim
Goethe the winner of
On Sun, 2008-07-13 at 11:49 -0400, Benjamin Schultz wrote:
It didn't have enough PLEASE statements.
-
Benjamin Schultz KE3OM
OscarMeyr
Yes it did, I ran it to check. In fact it had too many at one point and
I had to remove some.
--
ais523
2008/7/13 Zefram [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Poppycock. E said that e joined, but knew that e was not in fact joining.
I support the call for appeal of this judgement, and recommend a final
judgement of GUILTY.
-zefram
I'm not sure I _want_ to be registered if something that goes wrong is illegal.
2008/7/13 Geoffrey Spear [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Oh please. Using a different email address and pretending you have no
idea why anyone would suspect you were you isn't something that goes
wrong.
That is not what the CFJ is on.
Elliott Hird wrote:
I'm not sure I _want_ to be registered if something that goes wrong is illegal.
R2149 does not forbid mistakes. It forbids lies.
-zefram
ais523 wrote:
I attempt to
...
, but fail.
I wonder whether this qualifies for acting by announcement. On the
face of it, this was not an announcement that ais523 did something, but
rather an announcement that e made a failed attempted to do something.
That doesn't meet the requirements of R478,
On Sun, 2008-07-13 at 21:11 +0100, Zefram wrote:
ais523 wrote:
I attempt to
...
, but fail.
I wonder whether this qualifies for acting by announcement. On the
face of it, this was not an announcement that ais523 did something, but
rather an announcement that e made a failed attempted to
ais523 wrote:
Oh, and this little bit of confusion is designed as an exercise to show
the absurdity of finding speech acts to be lying.
It's not succeeding. I see no such absurdity. Your bizarre message,
while of uncertain interpretation, did not challenge my concepts of
truthfulness and speech
Kerim Aydin wrote:
If you really want justice, you'd admit the rules are unclear on avatars,
and make a rule to wit masquerading as more than one individual is against
the Rules.
It has occurred to me that the power of R2149 makes the available penalty
somewhat inadequate for this particular type
Ivan Hope wrote:
On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 11:41 AM, Benjamin Schultz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jul 13, 2008, at 11:37 AM, Ben Caplan wrote:
Might be a good idea for the RBoA to set an exchange rate for pesos.
With all these various currencies, maybe we should have a common measure of
Proto-Proposal: But what is truth?
Zefram and Goethe are co-authors of this proposal.
Amend Rule 2149 (Truthfulness) to read:
A person SHALL NOT make a public statement unless e reasonably
believes it is true.
For the purpose of this rule:
a) Merely quoting a false
2008/7/13 Ed Murphy [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
A person SHALL NOT make a public statement unless e reasonably
believes it is true.
This is a fundamentally flawed and dangerous idea and should not pass.
Elliott Hird wrote:
This is a fundamentally flawed and dangerous idea and should not pass.
What is the nature of the flaw? Does the current R2149 share it?
-zefram
On Sunday 13 July 2008 03:26:01 pm ais523 wrote:
Clearly, I would only initiate a criminal CFJ against myself if I
had in fact committed the crime in question; therefore, I intended
to initiate the criminal CFJ if and only if my attempt to initiate
the CFJ did not fail, like I claimed, i.e. I
On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 2:55 PM, Elliott Hird
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2008/7/13 Ed Murphy [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
A person SHALL NOT make a public statement unless e reasonably
believes it is true.
This is a fundamentally flawed and dangerous idea and should not pass.
I just think it
2008/7/13 Zefram [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Elliott Hird wrote:
This is a fundamentally flawed and dangerous idea and should not pass.
What is the nature of the flaw? Does the current R2149 share it?
An announcement is a vessel for performing or trying to perform an action.
A failing action is not
ais523 wrote:
I would strongly prefer it if rule 2149 was amended the other way, to
make failed attempts to perform acts legal (e.g. what happens if a
contest is decontestified but the contestmaster still has to try to
award points).
Easy argument for EXCUSED for failing to award them,
ais523 wrote:
I would strongly prefer it if rule 2149 was amended the other way, to
make failed attempts to perform acts legal
As has been repeatedly pointed out, failing attempts at speech actions
can still avoid false statements, provided that the statement carries an
appropriate qualifier.
ais523 wrote:
I attempt to file a criminal CFJ against ais523 for violating rule 2149
for lying by incorrectly saying in this message that they failed to
initiate a CFJ when they didn't, but fail.
I'm interpreting this as failing due to ambiguity (Rules 1504 and 2208).
Proto-Proposal:
Taral wrote:
A person SHALL not make a public statement e believes to be false.
We tried that, in the original version of rule 2149, and eventually
rejected it when restoring the rule after the truthiness era. The problem
is that a reckless falsehood is still dishonest and problematic.
-zefram
Taral wrote:
On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 2:55 PM, Elliott Hird
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2008/7/13 Ed Murphy [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
A person SHALL NOT make a public statement unless e reasonably
believes it is true.
This is a fundamentally flawed and dangerous idea and should not pass.
Elliott Hird wrote:
An announcement is a vessel for performing or trying to perform an action.
We announce a lot of things other than actions. An announcement is a
vessel for informing players about the game state.
A failing action is not an illegal lie.
It doesn't have to be, as already
On Sun, 13 Jul 2008, ais523 wrote:
Hmm... I seem to have a veto right now and rule 2149 is power 1. I don't
really like using vetos, but now might seem to be a good time. Would
this be massively against the Agoran Spirit if I try? Would people just
try to make it democratic?
In my opinion,
On Sunday 13 July 2008 06:29:26 pm Kerim Aydin wrote:
That being said, even
taking on a more conservative role, the fact that something like
this particular rule is pretty darn important to the tone of play
but at power-1 means a veto is particularly apt. If something of
this importance
On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 7:08 PM, Zefram [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As has been repeatedly pointed out, failing attempts at speech actions
can still avoid false statements, provided that the statement carries an
appropriate qualifier. Formulations such as If possible I do X. and I
attempt to do
On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 8:07 PM, Roger Hicks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As allowed by the Protection Racket agreement I create a Favor in the
possession of the Protection Racket. I deposit this Favor in the RBOA
in exchange for 150 Chits.
Time to create the New Really Reformed Bank of Agora, run
On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 7:02 PM, Geoffrey Spear [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 8:07 PM, Roger Hicks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As allowed by the Protection Racket agreement I create a Favor in the
possession of the Protection Racket. I deposit this Favor in the RBOA
in exchange
On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 8:02 PM, Geoffrey Spear [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 8:07 PM, Roger Hicks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As allowed by the Protection Racket agreement I create a Favor in the
possession of the Protection Racket. I deposit this Favor in the RBOA
in exchange
H. Murphy, with respect, I request not to be a coauthor on the previous proto.
Proto-Proposal, AI-2: No SpeechActCrime
Increase the power of R2149 to 2 and append the following paragraphs:
An attempt to perform an action by announcement, made by asserting
that one acts as specified,
On Sunday 13 July 2008 10:45:42 pm ihope wrote:
Either the sky is always red or, if I do not hereby initiate an
inquiry case on this sentence, then the sky is always green.
(R v (~I = G))
Since ~G, it follows that I (ihope127 does in fact call said CFJ).
Although ~R, (false v true) evaluates
Ed Murphy wrote:
A person SHALL NOT make a public statement unless e reasonably
believes it is true.
For the purpose of this rule:
c) A public statement that one performs an action is true if
and only if one thereby succeeds in performing that
Proto-Proposal: But what is truth?
(AI = 2, please)
Zefram and Goethe are co-authors of this proposal.
Change the power of Rule 2149 (Truthfulness) to 2, and amend it to read:
A person SHALL NOT make a public statement unless e reasonably
believes it is true, or else makes eir
I have many many mills, and i would like another digit ranch,
specifically a 2 digit ranch. I could also take a 0 ranch. If
someone wants to make a trade of one of my mills for one of the
ranches I want, let me know.
Without 3 proto-objections I proto-change the AAA contract as follows:
---
Add the following after point f. within the 6th section of the AAA contract:
g. A farmer CAN harvest any 4 consecutive numbers and specify
another farmer. As soon as possible after doing so the SoA shall
select a random,
On Sunday 13 July 2008 09:37:16 Ben Caplan wrote:
Might be a good idea for the RBoA to set an exchange rate for pesos.
Since there has been no activity in my economics contract, I don't really
know. I'd like there to just be on contract handling these things. Perhaps we
should try to merge our
avpx wrote:
On Sunday 13 July 2008 09:37:16 Ben Caplan wrote:
Might be a good idea for the RBoA to set an exchange rate for pesos.
Since there has been no activity in my economics contract, I don't really
know. I'd like there to just be on contract handling these things. Perhaps we
62 matches
Mail list logo
