On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 1:52 PM, Charles
Walkercharles.w.wal...@googlemail.com wrote:
Evidence:
R105 states:
A variation in whitespace or capitalization in the quotation of an
existing rule does not constitute ambiguity for the purposes of this rule,
but any other variation does.
Well, this
On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 2:24 PM, Rodlenrodlenj...@gmail.com wrote:
I wish for the following proposal to be placed in the pool:
What embargo?
Adoption Index: 1.0
{Repeal Rule 2207.}
Simply clearly labeling a published body of text as a proposal, which
you've done, looks sufficient under R106
On Fri, 2009-06-05 at 14:34 -0400, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 2:24 PM, Rodlenrodlenj...@gmail.com wrote:
I wish for the following proposal to be placed in the pool:
What embargo?
Adoption Index: 1.0
{Repeal Rule 2207.}
Simply clearly labeling a published body of
ehird wrote:
2009/6/5 Geoffrey Spear geoffsp...@gmail.com:
I publish an NoV alleging that You May Call Me Big Fucking Edward
violated the Power 2 Rule 2158 by failing to assign a judgement to CFJ
2537 as soon as possible after it was assigned to em.
I contest this as I was legitimately
Here's a new inactivity idea:
Make a new class of proposals, called plebiscite. They are otherwise
identical to democratic proposals as the currently exist.
Make it so that Savages cannot vote on democratic proposals.
If a player has not voted on an election in N weeks or M proposals, any
player
On Fri, 5 Jun 2009, Elliott Hird wrote:
2009/6/5 Ed Murphy emurph...@socal.rr.com:
Legitimately as in you overlooked a message?
http://www.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-official/2009-May/006402.html
Arguments on yonder CFJ: Yes; I do look hawkishly for CFJ assignments
but I
On Fri, 5 Jun 2009, Sean Hunt wrote:
Here's a new inactivity idea:
Make a new class of proposals, called plebiscite. They are otherwise
identical to democratic proposals as the currently exist.
Make it so that Savages cannot vote on democratic proposals.
If a player has not voted on an
Kerim Aydin wrote:
On Fri, 5 Jun 2009, Sean Hunt wrote:
Here's a new inactivity idea:
Make a new class of proposals, called plebiscite. They are otherwise
identical to democratic proposals as the currently exist.
Make it so that Savages cannot vote on democratic proposals.
If a player has
Benjamin Caplan wrote:
Kerim Aydin wrote:
On Fri, 5 Jun 2009, Sean Hunt wrote:
Here's a new inactivity idea:
Make a new class of proposals, called plebiscite. They are otherwise
identical to democratic proposals as the currently exist.
Make it so that Savages cannot vote on democratic
On Fri, 2009-06-05 at 15:05 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
On Fri, 5 Jun 2009, Sean Hunt wrote:
Here's a new inactivity idea:
Make a new class of proposals, called plebiscite. They are otherwise
identical to democratic proposals as the currently exist.
Make it so that Savages cannot vote on
On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 3:30 PM, Alex Smith ais...@bham.ac.uk wrote:
On Fri, 2009-06-05 at 15:05 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
On Fri, 5 Jun 2009, Sean Hunt wrote:
Here's a new inactivity idea:
Make a new class of proposals, called plebiscite. They are otherwise
identical to democratic
On Fri, 2009-06-05 at 17:24 -0700, Rodlen wrote:
I participate, but have not gotten 5 different kinds of notes that
would form the start of a major scale. So...not really.
Ah, of course. I forgot you needed 5 of them
--
ais523
Pavitra wrote:
I don't see the purpose of the new class of proposals. Take the other
two points (Savages CANNOT vote on democratic proposals, nonvoters CAN
be ensavaged by announcement) and add that a Savage CAN become Epsilon
by announcement provided e votes in the same message.
s/a Savage
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 7:32 PM, comexcom...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 6:52 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
On Tue, 26 May 2009, Sean Hunt wrote:
Aaron Goldfein wrote:
Proposal: IADoP CAN and SHALL (AI = 2, II = 1):
I intend, with 3 support, to make the quoted
On Sat, Jun 6, 2009 at 11:55 AM, Sgeo sgeos...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 7:32 PM, comexcom...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 6:52 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu
wrote:
On Tue, 26 May 2009, Sean Hunt wrote:
Aaron Goldfein wrote:
Proposal: IADoP CAN and
Kyle Marek-Spartz - KDØGTK
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 12:23 AM, Kerim Aydinke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
On Thu, 4 Jun 2009, Kyle Marek-Spartz wrote:
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 12:15 AM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
On Wed, 3 Jun 2009, Kyle Marek-Spartz wrote:
I CFJ on the following
On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 7:55 PM, Sgeosgeos...@gmail.com wrote:
I really don't like this. It makes it difficult for new players to
start submitting proposals,
No. It means that new players have to convince someone else to make
their stuff Distributable.
--
Taral tar...@gmail.com
Please let me
On Fri, 2009-06-05 at 22:27 -0500, Kyle Marek-Spartz wrote:
What is the usual turn around time on CFJs being listed on the CotC page?
It varies a lot. CFJs have been turned around within a few minutes
before; sometimes they take several weeks. (Even over a month on
occasion, if the CotC's slow
On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 10:32 PM, Alex Smithais...@bham.ac.uk wrote:
On Fri, 2009-06-05 at 22:27 -0500, Kyle Marek-Spartz wrote:
What is the usual turn around time on CFJs being listed on the CotC page?
It varies a lot. CFJs have been turned around within a few minutes
before; sometimes they
On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 10:38 PM, Kyle Marek-Spartz zeckal...@gmail.comwrote:
On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 10:32 PM, Alex Smithais...@bham.ac.uk wrote:
On Fri, 2009-06-05 at 22:27 -0500, Kyle Marek-Spartz wrote:
What is the usual turn around time on CFJs being listed on the CotC
page?
It
On Fri, 2009-06-05 at 22:43 -0500, Aaron Goldfein wrote:
On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 10:38 PM, Kyle Marek-Spartz
zeckal...@gmail.com wrote:
I understood that. To clarify: How soon after a player CFJs is the
CFJ typically listed on the CotC page?
When Murphy sees the message and updates his
Yally wrote:
I intend, without 2 objections, to flip the II of the Promotor office
to 3. Distributability on its own, IMO, warrants this change;
messages like this one make it even more appropriate.
I object.
Any particular reason?
22 matches
Mail list logo
