On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 12:38 AM, Paul VanKoughnett allisp...@gmail.com wrote:
I retract my proposal Very little to no lurk time.
Please respond if you believe you deserve the Patent Title of Not A Lurker.
I'll resubmit when I have a more complete list.
Who has the longest lurk time? I have
Paul VanKoughnett wrote:
I retract my proposal Very little to no lurk time.
Please respond if you believe you deserve the Patent Title of Not A
Lurker. I'll resubmit when I have a more complete list.
I think the patent title deserves a better name. Something creative.
Instant Gratification?
Leapt Before Lookt?
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 3:05 PM, Sean Hunt ride...@gmail.com wrote:
Paul VanKoughnett wrote:
I retract my proposal Very little to no lurk time.
Please respond if you believe you deserve the Patent Title of Not A
Lurker. I'll resubmit when I
Kerim Aydin wrote:
On Wed, 3 Jun 2009, Aaron Goldfein wrote:
On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 10:18 PM, Luke Lockhart
luke.lockh...@gmail.comwrote:
I have no idea what is going on here but wish to join you.
Welcome to Agora. Is there any nickname you would like to use?
Er, not knowing what one
zeckalpha wrote:
I was 2 when Agora was born... has there been a player younger than Agora?
I believe ehird was the first to mention holding that status.
teucer wrote:
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 12:40 AM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
Oh hey you're that Craig? I remember your CFJs fondly. -G.
Huh. I don't remember them at all. But yes, I'm the same Craig.
...how bad were they?
On Wed, 2009-06-03 at 08:18 -0400, comex wrote:
On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 11:20 PM, Benjamin Caplan
celestialcognit...@gmail.com wrote:
All this is far more complicated than it's worth.
{
Amend rule 1742 (Contracts) by appending the paragraph:
A person CAN on behalf of another as
On Wed, 2009-06-03 at 08:36 -0400, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 1:53 AM, Benjamin Caplan
celestialcognit...@gmail.com wrote:
The Assessor's report contains a list of all pending intents to
perform dependent actions.
Doesn't really work; just post your sneaky
On Wed, 2009-06-03 at 15:22 +0100, Elliott Hird wrote:
Someone attempts to inactivate you.
(A) Start participating
(B) Let it happen
(C) Just object without justification for eternity, inflating quorum.
C
Maybe we should instead make quorum depend on the number of people who
actually voted
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 7:30 AM, Alex Smith ais...@bham.ac.uk wrote:
Maybe we should instead make quorum depend on the number of people who
actually voted last time round (like B used to), rather than messing
with inactivation?
One can be active without voting.
Kyle Marek-Spartz - KDØGTK
On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 11:10 PM, Aaron Goldfein aarongoldf...@gmail.com wrote:
The pledge with the following text:
Players may add or remove an email address as a send-only address
to a specific Public Forum Without Objection. The Distributor SHALL
take what actions are necessary to permit
On Wed, 2009-06-03 at 16:25 -0500, Benjamin Caplan wrote:
Furthermore, the ambiguity in your thought experiment is caused by the
text of the contract poorly specifying its internal mechanisms, whereas
the unordered actions argument is properly talking about shorthand in
a message itself that
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 12:38 AM, Paul VanKoughnett allisp...@gmail.com wrote:
I retract my proposal Very little to no lurk time.
Fails; no such proposal was ever in the Pool.
On Wed, 2009-06-03 at 22:10 -0500, Aaron Goldfein wrote:
The pledge with the following text:
Players may add or remove an email address as a send-only
address
to a specific Public Forum Without Objection. The Distributor
SHALL
take what actions are
Um- no.
On 2009-06-04, Aaron Goldfein aarongoldf...@gmail.com wrote:
The pledge with the following text:
Players may add or remove an email address as a send-only address
to a specific Public Forum Without Objection. The Distributor SHALL
take what actions are necessary to permit (or
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 7:42 AM, Geoffrey Spear geoffsp...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 12:38 AM, Paul VanKoughnett allisp...@gmail.com
wrote:
I retract my proposal Very little to no lurk time.
Fails; no such proposal was ever in the Pool.
He meant Very little or no lurk time
On 2009-06-04, Rodlen rodlenj...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 9:39 PM, Kyle Marek-Spartz
zeckal...@gmail.comwrote:
On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 11:30 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu
wrote:
On Thu, 4 Jun 2009, Michael Norrish wrote:
Aaron Goldfein wrote:
But Michael
Activity is just for quorum.
On 2009-06-04, Kyle Marek-Spartz zeckal...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 7:30 AM, Alex Smith ais...@bham.ac.uk wrote:
Maybe we should instead make quorum depend on the number of people who
actually voted last time round (like B used to), rather than
Oerjan proposed those.
On 2009-06-04, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
On Thu, 4 Jun 2009, Craig Daniel wrote:
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 12:40 AM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu
wrote:
Oh hey you're that Craig? I remember your CFJs fondly. -G.
Huh. I don't remember them at
With a dot?
On 2009-06-04, Craig Daniel teu...@pobox.com wrote:
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 12:07 AM, Craig Daniel teu...@pobox.com wrote:
That being the case: I register.
And now I do so TTPF, specifying the nickname teucer.
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 1:31 AM, Paul VanKoughnett allisp...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 2:20 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
On Wed, 3 Jun 2009, Kerim Aydin wrote:
I think that's in the FAQ, although maybe that's just about R104.
Original ruleset defined games as
On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 9:58 PM, Sean Hunt ride...@gmail.com wrote:
comex wrote:
If this is correct:
Player 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 X WRV
Pavitra 1 7 0 2 2 2 2 1 3 13 4 1
then you deposited crops as follows:
total: 728 zm
WRVs aren't
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 9:48 PM, Kyle Marek-Spartz zeckal...@gmail.comwrote:
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 7:42 AM, Geoffrey Spear geoffsp...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 12:38 AM, Paul VanKoughnett allisp...@gmail.com
wrote:
I retract my proposal Very little to no lurk time.
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 6:55 AM, Elliott Hird
penguinoftheg...@googlemail.com wrote:
Activity is just for quorum.
On 2009-06-04, Kyle Marek-Spartz zeckal...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 7:30 AM, Alex Smith ais...@bham.ac.uk wrote:
Maybe we should instead make quorum depend on the
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 8:14 AM, Ed Murphy emurph...@socal.rr.com wrote:
http://zenith.homelinux.net/cotc/list.php?caller=Craig
The server is taking too long to respond.
I mean, the only non-possibility thing.
On 2009-06-04, Sean Hunt ride...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 6:55 AM, Elliott Hird
penguinoftheg...@googlemail.com wrote:
Activity is just for quorum.
On 2009-06-04, Kyle Marek-Spartz zeckal...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 7:30
ie a non acting active person just inflates quorum
On 2009-06-04, Elliott Hird penguinoftheg...@googlemail.com wrote:
I mean, the only non-possibility thing.
On 2009-06-04, Sean Hunt ride...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 6:55 AM, Elliott Hird
penguinoftheg...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Thu, 4 Jun 2009, Benjamin Caplan wrote:
Kerim Aydin wrote:
On Wed, 3 Jun 2009, Aaron Goldfein wrote:
On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 10:18 PM, Luke Lockhart
luke.lockh...@gmail.comwrote:
I have no idea what is going on here but wish to join you.
Welcome to Agora. Is there any nickname you would
On Thu, 4 Jun 2009, Alex Smith wrote:
On Wed, 2009-06-03 at 15:22 +0100, Elliott Hird wrote:
Someone attempts to inactivate you.
(A) Start participating
(B) Let it happen
(C) Just object without justification for eternity, inflating quorum.
C
Maybe we should instead make quorum depend on
On Thu, 4 Jun 2009, Alex Smith wrote:
An interesting point. There's an unofficial title of Distributor, that's
granted by game custom to whoever's in charge of the mailing lists; even
though the rules don't define it, I wonder if it's possible for a
contract to refer to it anyway? (Contracts
On Thu, 4 Jun 2009, Elliott Hird wrote:
Not bad at all. Actually it's the INSANE proposals I remember the
most... definitely added to the game in a good way. -G.
Oerjan proposed those.
I'm pretty sure it was several by Craig. -G.
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 12:18 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
On Thu, 4 Jun 2009, Elliott Hird wrote:
Not bad at all. Actually it's the INSANE proposals I remember the
most... definitely added to the game in a good way. -G.
Oerjan proposed those.
I'm pretty sure it was
Thought you meant the concept.
On 2009-06-04, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
On Thu, 4 Jun 2009, Elliott Hird wrote:
Not bad at all. Actually it's the INSANE proposals I remember the
most... definitely added to the game in a good way. -G.
Oerjan proposed those.
I'm pretty
On Wed, 2009-06-03 at 22:55 -0500, Aaron Goldfein wrote:
On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 10:53 PM, Craig Daniel teu...@pobox.com
wrote:
On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 11:50 PM, Aaron Goldfein
aarongoldf...@gmail.com wrote:
You're not a player.
On Thu, 2009-06-04 at 07:32 -0500, Kyle Marek-Spartz wrote:
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 7:30 AM, Alex Smith ais...@bham.ac.uk wrote:
Maybe we should instead make quorum depend on the number of people who
actually voted last time round (like B used to), rather than messing
with inactivation?
On Thu, 2009-06-04 at 13:55 +0100, Elliott Hird wrote:
Activity is just for quorum.
And officer obligations. And judging.
Making someone inactive is a good way to shield them from obligations if
they've left the lists for a while. Likewise, inactivating yourself (and
resigning offices, if
On Wed, 2009-06-03 at 22:31 -0500, Kyle Marek-Spartz wrote:
Can non-players get crim CFJs? What if players committed crimes prior
to eir registration? If you were a second-class person, would its
parties be liable?
Kyle Marek-Spartz - KDØGTK
Non-players /can/ be crimmed, but it's very hard
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 12:10 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
Maybe we should be permitted to make people inactive by support (rather
than w/o objection) if they have not voted for N months or M proposals.
As long as you can flip yourself back to Active by announcement, it
wouldn't
On Thu, 4 Jun 2009, Elliott Hird wrote:
On 2009-06-04, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
On Thu, 4 Jun 2009, Elliott Hird wrote:
Not bad at all. Actually it's the INSANE proposals I remember the
most... definitely added to the game in a good way. -G.
Oerjan proposed those.
I'm
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 10:42 AM, Geoffrey Spear geoffsp...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 12:10 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
Maybe we should be permitted to make people inactive by support (rather
than w/o objection) if they have not voted for N months or M proposals.
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 1:12 PM, Benjamin Caplan
celestialcognit...@gmail.com wrote:
Also AGAINST. There must be a better way than invalidating the
transaction completely. Maybe a general rule for disambiguating?
Well... if you're depositing so many assets (and getting such a low
multiplier)
Sean Hunt wrote:
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 10:42 AM, Geoffrey Spear geoffsp...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 12:10 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
Maybe we should be permitted to make people inactive by support (rather
than w/o objection) if they have not voted for N
On Thu, 4 Jun 2009, Sean Hunt wrote:
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 10:42 AM, Geoffrey Spear geoffsp...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 12:10 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
Maybe we should be permitted to make people inactive by support (rather
than w/o objection) if they have
On Thu, 4 Jun 2009, Benjamin Caplan wrote:
Legislature is a player switch with values Quoredupon and Unquoredfor
(default). A player CAN flip eir Legislature to Unquoredfor by
announcement. A player CAN flip eir Legislature to Quoredupon by
submitting a valid ballot on an Agoran Decision.
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 1:59 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
I know it's unimaginable now; but in past we've gone through slow periods
with many fewer distributions (even none for two months). It's slowing
down now due to distributability. To prevent us from all suddenly being
On Thu, 2009-06-04 at 14:03 -0400, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 1:59 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
I know it's unimaginable now; but in past we've gone through slow periods
with many fewer distributions (even none for two months). It's slowing
down now due
Kerim Aydin wrote:
On Thu, 4 Jun 2009, Benjamin Caplan wrote:
Legislature is a player switch with values Quoredupon and Unquoredfor
(default). A player CAN flip eir Legislature to Unquoredfor by
announcement. A player CAN flip eir Legislature to Quoredupon by
submitting a valid ballot on an
teucer wrote:
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 8:14 AM, Ed Murphy emurph...@socal.rr.com wrote:
http://zenith.homelinux.net/cotc/list.php?caller=Craig
The server is taking too long to respond.
It responded to me within 2 seconds (but then it's less than 50 feet
away from me so YMMV). There's a
Charles Walker wrote:
A player CAN cause another person to cease to be a Senator with Senator
Consent.
Presumably this is supposed to mean with something like Agoran Consent,
except that only Senators can vote. This might work in a contract
(though it could also be read as with the
Pavitra wrote:
Kerim Aydin wrote:
On Thu, 4 Jun 2009, Benjamin Caplan wrote:
Legislature is a player switch with values Quoredupon and Unquoredfor
(default). A player CAN flip eir Legislature to Unquoredfor by
announcement. A player CAN flip eir Legislature to Quoredupon by
submitting a
On Thu, 4 Jun 2009, Benjamin Caplan wrote:
Kerim Aydin wrote:
On Thu, 4 Jun 2009, Benjamin Caplan wrote:
Legislature is a player switch with values Quoredupon and Unquoredfor
(default). A player CAN flip eir Legislature to Unquoredfor by
announcement. A player CAN flip eir Legislature to
On Thu, 2009-06-04 at 11:32 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
The only risk I see is that reducing quorum when the number of active
players stays high ups the conspiracy attempt: in the words of a past
wise agoran, quorum describes the minimum size for a legislative
conspiracy.
Which, given the
Ed Murphy wrote:
Pavitra wrote:
The idea is that there would be some people that aren't interested in
being legislators, but are interested in other parts of the game
(judging, contract subgames, etc.) I refer again to the analogy with
Posture: a person can be an active participant without
On Thu, 4 Jun 2009, Alex Smith wrote:
On Thu, 2009-06-04 at 11:32 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
The only risk I see is that reducing quorum when the number of active
players stays high ups the conspiracy attempt: in the words of a past
wise agoran, quorum describes the minimum size for a
On Thu, 4 Jun 2009, Kerim Aydin wrote:
On Thu, 4 Jun 2009, Alex Smith wrote:
On Thu, 2009-06-04 at 11:32 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
The only risk I see is that reducing quorum when the number of active
players stays high ups the conspiracy attempt: in the words of a past
wise agoran, quorum
On Thu, 4 Jun 2009, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
Plus, we don't really have much gameplay at the moment.
Er, compare to the business archives for all of September or October 2006.
-G.
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 7:28 PM, Benjamin Caplan
celestialcognit...@gmail.com wrote:
Charles Walker wrote:
A player CAN cause another person to cease to be a Senator with Senator
Consent.
Presumably this is supposed to mean with something like Agoran Consent,
except that only Senators can
On Thu, 4 Jun 2009, Benjamin Caplan wrote:
Kerim Aydin wrote:
The only risk I see is that reducing quorum when the number of active
players stays high ups the conspiracy attempt: in the words of a past
wise agoran, quorum describes the minimum size for a legislative
conspiracy.
As I
On Thu, 2009-06-04 at 12:18 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
Again, all this only comes out when a proposal is out there that's
really a faction-based attempt (e.g. enough members on each side for
procedural move and counter-move to matter). Town Fountain was one
like this. The last such ones (e.g.
On Thu, 2009-06-04 at 12:08 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
On Thu, 4 Jun 2009, Kerim Aydin wrote:
On Thu, 4 Jun 2009, Alex Smith wrote:
On Thu, 2009-06-04 at 11:32 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
The only risk I see is that reducing quorum when the number of active
players stays high ups the
2009/6/4 comex com...@gmail.com:
While everyone else mounts a run on the bank in panic.
If you are trying to improve on the perceived flaws of the PBA I'm
surprised that you're relying on any human behavior whatsoever.
2009/6/4 Ed Murphy emurph...@socal.rr.com:
It responded to me within 2 seconds (but then it's less than 50 feet
away from me so YMMV).
D'you think that might have something to do with being on your network?
It takes ~30s average for me; often I just give up looking for
anything. It's really
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 3:56 PM, Elliott Hird
penguinoftheg...@googlemail.com wrote:
2009/6/4 comex com...@gmail.com:
While everyone else mounts a run on the bank in panic.
If you are trying to improve on the perceived flaws of the PBA I'm
surprised that you're relying on any human behavior
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 3:58 PM, Elliott Hird
penguinoftheg...@googlemail.com wrote:
It takes ~30s average for me; often I just give up looking for
anything. It's really quite annoying; I'm willing to host it if you
decide making its speed usable at all is a good idea...
...and if you don't
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 3:58 PM, Elliott Hird
penguinoftheg...@googlemail.com wrote:
2009/6/4 Ed Murphy emurph...@socal.rr.com:
It responded to me within 2 seconds (but then it's less than 50 feet
away from me so YMMV).
D'you think that might have something to do with being on your network?
On Thu, 4 Jun 2009, Alex Smith wrote:
Actually, the last dictatorship proposal forced through by scam (as
opposed to a proposal which was itself a scam) was done by setting three
voting limits up to 8 at the last minute of a proposal, swamping all the
other votes. The WoV didn't have a chance
On Thu, 4 Jun 2009, comex wrote:
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 3:58 PM, Elliott Hird
penguinoftheg...@googlemail.com wrote:
2009/6/4 Ed Murphy emurph...@socal.rr.com:
It responded to me within 2 seconds (but then it's less than 50 feet
away from me so YMMV).
D'you think that might have something
On Thu, 2009-06-04 at 13:25 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
On Thu, 4 Jun 2009, comex wrote:
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 3:58 PM, Elliott Hird
penguinoftheg...@googlemail.com wrote:
2009/6/4 Ed Murphy emurph...@socal.rr.com:
It responded to me within 2 seconds (but then it's less than 50 feet
away
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 12:33, Geoffrey Speargeoffsp...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 2:23 PM, Benjamin Caplan
celestialcognit...@gmail.com wrote:
The idea is that there would be some people that aren't interested in
being legislators, but are interested in other parts of the game
2009/6/4 Geoffrey Spear geoffsp...@gmail.com:
...and if you don't think setting it up to suffer the same fate as
Bayes is a bad idea.
Because not developing a program = not hosting a few PHP files and an
SQL database, and nobody keeps local backups.
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 12:23, Ed Murphyemurph...@socal.rr.com wrote:
teucer wrote:
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 8:14 AM, Ed Murphy emurph...@socal.rr.com wrote:
http://zenith.homelinux.net/cotc/list.php?caller=Craig
The server is taking too long to respond.
It responded to me within 2 seconds
On Thu, 4 Jun 2009, Alex Smith wrote:
The speed of an internet connection is not just to do with how fast it
is at the ends, but also how fast it is in the middle, which tends to
depend more on politics between the various companies involved in the
Internet than any good technical reasons.
On Thu, 4 Jun 2009, Roger Hicks wrote:
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 12:33, Geoffrey Speargeoffsp...@gmail.com wrote:
I personally find that most proposal distributions I could care less
about. I do tend overall to play Agora for the contract sub-games and
not for the rule-making system. That
On Jun 3, 2009, at 11:18 PM, Luke Lockhart wrote:
I have no idea what is going on here but wish to join you.
Welcome, Luke!
-
Benjamin Schultz KE3OM
OscarMeyr
On Jun 4, 2009, at 12:39 AM, Kyle Marek-Spartz wrote:
I was 2 when Agora was born... has there been a player younger than
Agora?
Kyle Marek-Spartz - KDØGTK
That is a scary thought.
-
Benjamin Schultz KE3OM
OscarMeyr
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 7:28 PM, Benjamin Caplan
celestialcognit...@gmail.com wrote:
Charles Walker wrote:
A player CAN cause another person to cease to be a Senator with Senator
Consent.
Presumably this is supposed to mean with something like Agoran Consent,
except that only Senators
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 10:03 PM, Alex Smith ais...@bham.ac.uk wrote:
Also, I'm surprised nobody mentioned CFJ 2003 yet.
(http://zenith.homelinux.net/cotc/viewcase.php?cfj=2003, for the
benefit of the players who have just joined and might not know how to
look up historical CFJs yet.)
On Thu,
Reality, rather - see Rodlen and me. Really, anyone 15 or under is eligible.
On 2009-06-04, Benjamin Schultz ke...@verizon.net wrote:
On Jun 4, 2009, at 12:39 AM, Kyle Marek-Spartz wrote:
I was 2 when Agora was born... has there been a player younger than
Agora?
Kyle Marek-Spartz - KDØGTK
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 5:25 PM, Elliott Hird
penguinoftheg...@googlemail.com wrote:
Reality, rather - see Rodlen and me. Really, anyone 15 or under is
eligible.
Just be happy that none of the 15-year-olds from my high school are here.
Now, THAT would be scary.
--
--Rodlen
Goethe wrote:
On Thu, 4 Jun 2009, Alex Smith wrote:
The speed of an internet connection is not just to do with how fast it
is at the ends, but also how fast it is in the middle, which tends to
depend more on politics between the various companies involved in the
Internet than any good
On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 8:10 PM, Aaron Goldfein aarongoldf...@gmail.com wrote:
should have terminated as there is currently no Distributor as defined by
the rules.
The post is still filled, even if the Rules don't regulate it anymore.
--
Taral tar...@gmail.com
Please let me know if there's any
Paul VanKoughnett wrote:
It seems like dependent actions with supporters/objectors restricted
to a single class of player would be a good functionality to have, in
general. As far as I know, the only other places in the rules where
this is used are rule 2198, Making Contract Changes, which
On Thu, 4 Jun 2009, Ed Murphy wrote:
The server isn't CPU-intensive (load average = 0.05), but it does have
to compete for bandwidth with the family's incoming videos and torrents,
plus it hosts one 50 MB file that gets downloaded ~40 times per month.
Heh. my home connection is reaching you
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 11:35 PM, Kerim Aydinke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
On Thu, 4 Jun 2009, Ed Murphy wrote:
The server isn't CPU-intensive (load average = 0.05), but it does have
to compete for bandwidth with the family's incoming videos and torrents,
plus it hosts one 50 MB file that gets
On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 2:05 PM, Sean Hunt ride...@gmail.com wrote:
Sean Hunt wrote:
Proposal, entitled B Friends:
{{{
WHEREAS imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, and
WHEREAS B Nomic recently adopted Agora's ruleset,
BE IT RESOLVED THAT B Nomic be formally recognized for its
Paul VanKoughnett wrote:
On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 2:05 PM, Sean Hunt ride...@gmail.com wrote:
Sean Hunt wrote:
Proposal, entitled B Friends:
{{{
WHEREAS imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, and
WHEREAS B Nomic recently adopted Agora's ruleset,
BE IT RESOLVED THAT B Nomic be formally
86 matches
Mail list logo
