Goethe wrote:
5708 O 1 1.0 comex none
4xAGAINST. Sell Ticket 2VP vote as specified.
Your caste is only 2.
On Tue, 2008-09-30 at 00:02 -0700, Ed Murphy wrote:
Goethe wrote:
5708 O 1 1.0 comex none
4xAGAINST. Sell Ticket 2VP vote as specified.
Your caste is only 2.
Ooh, sneaky. It's still a good deal for me anyway, though, I think.
--
ais523
On Mon, 2008-09-29 at 19:49 -0400, comex wrote:
On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 4:51 PM, ais523 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I fill this ticket, specifying AGAINST.
Hmm... would you bribe me to vote on 5709 too?
I retract my votes on 5709 and vote SELL (2VP - Endorse Murphy) on 5709.
Sorry, no can
On Tue, 2008-09-30 at 07:17 -0400, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
I install Murphy as CotC, assuming the text of Rule 2154 includes a
provision for doing so.
Given that Goethe unconsented after the end of the nomination period,
then as far as I can tell, your installation of Murphy works, but
regardless
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 7:56 AM, ais523 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Argument: Rule 1551 is an instrument, and a therefore rule 105 allows it
to make rules changes where permitted by rules other than rule 105, and
rule 1551 permits itself to make changes. (Note that there is no
'explicitly'
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 8:59 AM, Elliott Hird
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Also, where da mad scientist elections be at?
The nomination period hasn't ended yet.
On 30 Sep 2008, at 14:07, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 8:59 AM, Elliott Hird
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Also, where da mad scientist elections be at?
The nomination period hasn't ended yet.
Ah. Silly me.
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 8:55 AM, Geoffrey Spear [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To me this says that the ratification of a ruleset that's missing the
effects of the message wherein the Assessor resolved the decision to
adopt a proposal doesn't cancel the effects of that resolution, so the
proposal
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 12:19 AM, Ian Kelly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Of Wooble's three arguments in that case, the third one is the only
one that is persuasive (although I invite Judge Wooble to show me a
dictionary that explicitly equates privilege with all-caps MAY as
e appears to claim in
On Tue, 2008-09-30 at 10:58 -0400, comex wrote:
Googling 'rights and privileges', one of the websites that comes up
contrasts the right of life or liberty with the privilege of driving a
car. Assume that a teenager does not have the privilege of driving
his car, and MAY NOT and CANNOT do it
On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 2:23 PM, Ben Caplan
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Monday 29 September 2008 02:13:41 pm Roger Hicks wrote:
Ivan Hope (SLAVE) 80
CoE: ihope ceased to be a Slave yesterday.
Pavitra
Admitted. Though e is still indebted, despite eir claim otherwise.
BobTHJ
On Tue, 2008-09-30 at 09:06 -0600, Roger Hicks wrote:
On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 2:23 PM, Ben Caplan
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Monday 29 September 2008 02:13:41 pm Roger Hicks wrote:
Ivan Hope (SLAVE) 80
CoE: ihope ceased to be a Slave yesterday.
Pavitra
Admitted.
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 9:10 AM, ais523 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 2008-09-30 at 09:06 -0600, Roger Hicks wrote:
On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 2:23 PM, Ben Caplan
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Monday 29 September 2008 02:13:41 pm Roger Hicks wrote:
Ivan Hope (SLAVE) 80
CoE:
On Tue, 30 Sep 2008, ais523 wrote:
On Tue, 2008-09-30 at 00:02 -0700, Ed Murphy wrote:
Goethe wrote:
5708 O 1 1.0 comex none
4xAGAINST. Sell Ticket 2VP vote as specified.
Your caste is only 2.
Ooh, sneaky. It's still a good deal for me anyway, though, I think.
Oh, crumbs.
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 8:58 AM, comex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The first, too, is irrelevant to this case; the crux of the issue is
whether privilege, in ordinary-language meaning, is MAY or CAN. How
about both?
Googling 'rights and privileges', one of the websites that comes up
contrasts
On Tue, 30 Sep 2008, comex wrote:
Googling 'rights and privileges', one of the websites that comes up
contrasts the right of life or liberty with the privilege of driving a
car. Assume that a teenager does not have the privilege of driving
his car, and MAY NOT and CANNOT do it (he doesn't
On Tue, 2008-09-30 at 08:40 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
On Tue, 30 Sep 2008, ais523 wrote:
On Tue, 2008-09-30 at 00:02 -0700, Ed Murphy wrote:
Goethe wrote:
5708 O 1 1.0 comex none
4xAGAINST. Sell Ticket 2VP vote as specified.
Your caste is only 2.
Ooh, sneaky. It's
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 11:43 AM, Kerim Aydin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's absurd. I couldn't find my keys for a bit this morning. Does
that mean my missing keys revoked my privilege? Practical blockages
have little to do with what is granted by law. -Goethe
If an entity acting under
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 9:43 AM, Kerim Aydin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's absurd. I couldn't find my keys for a bit this morning. Does
that mean my missing keys revoked my privilege? Practical blockages
have little to do with what is granted by law. -Goethe
Is there a practical
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 10:58 AM, comex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
we wouldn't say that he had
gained the privilege of driving his car; nor would we in the more
bizarre situation that he became allowed to do it but remained unable
to.
What if the teenager got eir driver's license by couldn't
On Tue, 2008-09-30 at 11:53 -0400, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 10:58 AM, comex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
we wouldn't say that he had
gained the privilege of driving his car; nor would we in the more
bizarre situation that he became allowed to do it but remained unable
On Tue, 30 Sep 2008, Ian Kelly wrote:
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 9:43 AM, Kerim Aydin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's absurd. I couldn't find my keys for a bit this morning. Does
that mean my missing keys revoked my privilege? Practical blockages
have little to do with what is granted by law.
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 11:53 AM, Geoffrey Spear [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What if the teenager got eir driver's license by couldn't find eir
keys. E'd have the privilege of driving eir car (e MAY drive it), but
not the mechanism for doing so (e CANNOT drive it as it won't start).
Again,
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 12:20 PM, comex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Again, there's a difference between being being unable to do something
for reasons unrelated to the law (cannot find keys; no access to email
so can't mail agora-business) and because of it (it's a super-duper
remote-controlled
On Tue, 2008-09-30 at 08:57 -0700, The PerlNomic Partnership wrote:
NUM C I AI SUBMITTER TITLE
I vote as follows:
5727 D 1 2.0 Ivan Hope CXXVIILegal Tender
SELL (1VP - PRESENT)
5728 D 1 2.0 Ivan Hope CXXVIIWhat, still?
FOR
5729 D 1 3.0 comex switch off the
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 10:36 AM, Geoffrey Spear [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 12:20 PM, comex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Again, there's a difference between being being unable to do something
for reasons unrelated to the law (cannot find keys; no access to email
so can't mail
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 12:51 PM, Ian Kelly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What about the voting example? An ineligible voter platonically
CANNOT vote, and real-life voting works the same way so far as I know.
I doubt it; at least in jurisdictions with secret ballots there's
absolutely no way to
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 11:10 AM, Geoffrey Spear [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 12:51 PM, Ian Kelly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What about the voting example? An ineligible voter platonically
CANNOT vote, and real-life voting works the same way so far as I know.
I doubt it; at
On Tue, 30 Sep 2008, ais523 wrote:
On Tue, 2008-09-30 at 11:53 -0400, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 10:58 AM, comex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
we wouldn't say that he had
gained the privilege of driving his car; nor would we in the more
bizarre situation that he became allowed
On Tue, 30 Sep 2008, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 12:20 PM, comex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Again, there's a difference between being being unable to do something
for reasons unrelated to the law (cannot find keys; no access to email
so can't mail agora-business) and because
On 30 Sep 2008, at 18:12, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
I challenge this message's claim that it was not published by tusho.
I am not Dvorak Herring, nor [EMAIL PROTECTED], nor Annabel.
I am Phill, previously known as tusho. That's it.
On 30 Sep 2008, at 18:35, Kerim Aydin wrote:
I thought the whole *purpose* of MMI was to set up this conceit, that
CAN and CANNOT sets the game physics. This is supported by every
precedent I am aware of as well as words like IMPOSSIBLE. Of course I
am aware of the self-referential issue of
On Tue, 2008-09-30 at 14:53 -0400, comex wrote:
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 1:12 PM, Geoffrey Spear [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I challenge this message's claim that it was not published by tusho.
I challenge this message's claim that it was not pubilshed by root.
I challenge any claim this
On 30 Sep 2008, at 19:55, ais523 wrote:
On Tue, 2008-09-30 at 14:53 -0400, comex wrote:
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 1:12 PM, Geoffrey Spear
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I challenge this message's claim that it was not published by tusho.
I challenge this message's claim that it was not pubilshed
On Tue, 2008-09-30 at 20:05 +0100, Elliott Hird wrote:
On 30 Sep 2008, at 19:55, ais523 wrote:
On Tue, 2008-09-30 at 14:53 -0400, comex wrote:
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 1:12 PM, Geoffrey Spear
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I challenge this message's claim that it was not published by tusho.
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 2:55 PM, ais523 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 2008-09-30 at 14:53 -0400, comex wrote:
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 1:12 PM, Geoffrey Spear [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I challenge this message's claim that it was not published by tusho.
I challenge this message's claim that
On 30 Sep 2008, at 20:47, ais523 wrote:
Actually I posted that to a-d deliberately, it was a bit too frivolous
for the Public Forum IMO. (It was partly an illusion to the
spoon-discussion memes that blow up out of nowhere in B every now and
then, such as players signing messages in s-d as from
On Tue, 2008-09-30 at 15:37 -0400, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 2:55 PM, ais523 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 2008-09-30 at 14:53 -0400, comex wrote:
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 1:12 PM, Geoffrey Spear [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I challenge this message's claim that it was
Proto: Return of the return of the secret ballot (AI=3)
[The secret ballot (which I wasn't around to see in Agora) sounds fun,
and most people who opposed P5605 did so because it would give the
Promotor too much power. So this is based on P5605, but the author of
a proposal has control over
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 1:11 PM, Ian Kelly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
5727 D 1 2.0 Ivan Hope CXXVIILegal Tender
AGAINST (at least allow currencies the chance to opt out)
Legal tender assets are defined by the currency's backing document,
not by the legal tender assets' backing document.
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 7:26 PM, Kerim Aydin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
regulated by the Rules, with the sole exception of
changing the Rules, which is permitted only when the
Rules explicitly or implicitly permit it.
Is it likely that changing the rules will cease to be
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 4:39 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Proposal 5707 has been adopted, awarding a win to ais523.
You owe me 8 VP. :P
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you.
-- Unknown
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 8:16 PM, Elliott Hird
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I intend, with the consent of all parties to Bayes, to cause Bayes to
register.
I consent.
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 6:15 PM, comex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
3. bayes.py is a script whose purpose is to act on behalf of Bayes in
a generally autonomous way, controlled by the parties to this
contract.
4. bayes.py CAN cause Bayes to act by sending a message from [EMAIL PROTECTED]
How can
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 5:26 PM, Kerim Aydin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
i. Every person has the right, though not necessarily the
ability, to perform actions that are not prohibited or
regulated by the Rules, with the sole exception of
changing the Rules, which is
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 5:39 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Proposal 5707 has been adopted
Not until the Assessor determines the option selected by Agora.
-root
On 01/10/2008, Ian Kelly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 6:15 PM, comex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
3. bayes.py is a script whose purpose is to act on behalf of Bayes in
a generally autonomous way, controlled by the parties to this
contract.
4. bayes.py CAN cause Bayes to act by
On 01/10/2008, Dvorak Herring [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I agree to the Bayes contract if I can.
--
Dvorak Herring
You cannot.
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 8:30 PM, Ian Kelly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 6:15 PM, comex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
3. bayes.py is a script whose purpose is to act on behalf of Bayes in
a generally autonomous way, controlled by the parties to this
contract.
4. bayes.py CAN
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 8:35 PM, Ian Kelly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 5:39 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Proposal 5707 has been adopted
Not until the Assessor determines the option selected by Agora.
Uh... how silly, to miss a monthly win because you misworded a message.
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 7:26 PM, Kerim Aydin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
i. Every person has the right, though not necessarily the
ability, to perform actions that are not prohibited or
regulated by the Rules, with the sole exception of
changing the Rules, which is
Goethe wrote:
i. Every person has the right, though not necessarily the
ability, to perform actions that are not prohibited or
regulated by the Rules, with the sole exception of
changing the Rules, which is permitted only when the
Rules explicitly
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Proposal 5707 has been adopted, awarding a win to ais523. Therefore,
by rule 2188, ais523 satisfies the Winning Condition of Legislation.
Therefore, by rule 2186, as ais523 satisfies a Winning Condition but
no Losing Conditions, ais523 wins.
I need to check the exact
ais523 wrote:
On Mon, 2008-09-29 at 23:44 -0700, Ed Murphy wrote:
The PerlNomic Partnership wrote:
5725 D 1 2.0 Murphy Namespace conflicts (players)
This was INVALID by R107(e) (and I have been discarding votes on it
accordingly). In case the PNP has technical difficulty
On Tue, 30 Sep 2008, comex wrote:
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 8:30 PM, Ian Kelly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 6:15 PM, comex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
3. bayes.py is a script whose purpose is to act on behalf of Bayes in
a generally autonomous way, controlled by the parties to
On Tue, 30 Sep 2008, Ben Caplan wrote:
5731 D 0 3.0 Goethe Loss of Privileges
AGAINST. Still feels rough around the edges.
How can something be rough that was part of Agora for at least 10
years? -G.
On Tue, 30 Sep 2008, Ed Murphy wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Proposal 5707 has been adopted, awarding a win to ais523. Therefore,
by rule 2188, ais523 satisfies the Winning Condition of Legislation.
Therefore, by rule 2186, as ais523 satisfies a Winning Condition but
no Losing Conditions,
On Tuesday 30 September 2008 10:53:00 pm Kerim Aydin wrote:
On Tue, 30 Sep 2008, Ben Caplan wrote:
5731 D 0 3.0 Goethe Loss of Privileges
AGAINST. Still feels rough around the edges.
How can something be rough that was part of Agora for at least 10
years? -G.
If the fitted
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 9:49 PM, Kerim Aydin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
i. Every person has the right, though not necessarily the
ability, to perform actions that are not prohibited or
regulated by the Rules, with the sole exception of
changing the Rules, which is
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 8:27 PM, comex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
although it's mostly ehird's code. While I don't think it's going to
try being the CotC anytime soon, it has a highly interesting method of
voting on proposals. Can you guess what it is?
It categorizes adopted proposals as spam,
On Tue, 30 Sep 2008, Ben Caplan wrote:
On Tuesday 30 September 2008 10:53:00 pm Kerim Aydin wrote:
On Tue, 30 Sep 2008, Ben Caplan wrote:
5731 D 0 3.0 Goethe Loss of Privileges
AGAINST. Still feels rough around the edges.
How can something be rough that was part of Agora for
61 matches
Mail list logo
