On Sun, 2010-11-21 at 19:40 -0500, omd wrote:
On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 5:25 PM, ais523 callforjudgem...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
On Sun, 2010-11-14 at 16:17 -0800, Ed Murphy wrote:
Detail: http://zenith.homelinux.net/cotc/viewcase.php?cfj=2897
=== CFJ 2897 (Interest Index = 0)
On Mon, 22 Nov 2010, Sean Hunt wrote:
On 10-11-22 03:19 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
I publish the following document:
{
The Bank
Obligatory: CFJ on {The document referred to above is a group.}
CFJ on {The document referred to above would be a group if 3 players consent
to it.}
On Mon, 2010-11-22 at 09:45 -0800, Kerim Aydin wrote:
On Mon, 22 Nov 2010, Sean Hunt wrote:
On 10-11-22 03:19 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
I publish the following document:
{
The Bank
Obligatory: CFJ on {The document referred to above is a group.}
CFJ on {The document referred to
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 4:55 AM, ais523 callforjudgem...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
Oh, this judgement definitely failed, by the way-- it's almost exactly
parallel to CFJ 1631.
Not really; CFJ 1361 had a blank body so there was not obviously an
action taking place, my message clearly was indicating a
On Mon, 22 Nov 2010, omd wrote:
... It's unfortunate, but I don't think this rule actually does
anything, other than make some confusing definitions, and potentially
make a contest and/or the Ruleset dissolve if either defines its text
^^^
You call
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 1:40 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
On Mon, 22 Nov 2010, omd wrote:
... It's unfortunate, but I don't think this rule actually does
anything, other than make some confusing definitions, and potentially
make a contest and/or the Ruleset dissolve if either
On Mon, 2010-11-22 at 13:39 -0500, omd wrote:
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 4:55 AM, ais523 callforjudgem...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
Oh, this judgement definitely failed, by the way-- it's almost exactly
parallel to CFJ 1631.
Not really; CFJ 1361 had a blank body so there was not obviously an
On Mon, 22 Nov 2010, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
Ienpw III james.m.bei...@gmail.com 02 Oct 10 I
Didn't we just get rid of this guy?
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 14:40, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
On Mon, 22 Nov 2010, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
Ienpw III james.m.bei...@gmail.com 02 Oct 10 I
Didn't we just get rid of this guy?
No, we just made him inactive.
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 1:45 PM, ais523 callforjudgem...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
Any message sent to the business forum pretty strongly indicates an
action (evidence: the pseudo-tradition of objecting to empty
messages), but I wouldn't say a message with a quote does so more than
an entirely blank
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 3:37 PM, Alex Smith ais...@bham.ac.uk wrote:
Rule 2230 makes it illegal to knowingly issue an NoV with incorrect
information. (This is not quite the same thing as issuing an NoV with
knowingly incorrect information; you can know you've issued the NoV even
without
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 3:37 PM, Alex Smith ais...@bham.ac.uk wrote:
Clearly, in the hypothetical inside the CFJ, the statement ais523
violated/is currently violating the power-2 rule 2230, committing the
Class-4 Crime of Libel, by publishing this NoV. is messy, thus
incorrect.
First of all,
On 10-11-22 03:37 PM, Alex Smith wrote:
I call for judgement on the statement «It would be illegal for me to
publish a public message consisting only of the following text: I
publish the following Notice of Violation: ais523 violated/is currently
violating the power-2 rule 2230, committing the
On 10-11-22 05:03 PM, omd wrote:
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 4:53 PM, Sean Huntscsh...@csclub.uwaterloo.ca wrote:
I favor this CFJ and also set its II to 1. I intend, without 3
objections, to set its II to 2, and I intend, without 2 objections, to
set its II to 3.
I object to both and favor this
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 5:06 PM, Sean Hunt scsh...@csclub.uwaterloo.ca wrote:
I object to both and favor this CFJ.
Why do you object? I am not trying to raise the II for personal gain.
Because I honestly don't think it's a very complicated case. But if
there's a reason that I'm missing why it
On 10-11-22 05:08 PM, omd wrote:
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 5:06 PM, Sean Huntscsh...@csclub.uwaterloo.ca wrote:
I object to both and favor this CFJ.
Why do you object? I am not trying to raise the II for personal gain.
Because I honestly don't think it's a very complicated case. But if
On Mon, 2010-11-22 at 17:25 -0500, Sean Hunt wrote:
On 10-11-22 05:08 PM, omd wrote:
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 5:06 PM, Sean Huntscsh...@csclub.uwaterloo.ca
wrote:
I object to both and favor this CFJ.
Why do you object? I am not trying to raise the II for personal gain.
Because I
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 17:06, Sean Hunt scsh...@csclub.uwaterloo.ca wrote:
On 10-11-20 05:46 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
Voting results for Proposals 6877 - 6894:
[This notice resolves the Agoran decisions of whether to adopt the
following proposals. For each decision, the options available to
On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 5:46 PM, Ed Murphy emurph...@socal.rr.com wrote:
Proposal 6884 (Ordinary, AI=1.0, Interest=1) by omd
This is basically common sense anyway
Repeal Rule 2161 (ID Numbers).
Amendment fails, that rule was already repealed.
omd wrote:
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 4:55 AM, ais523 callforjudgem...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
Oh, this judgement definitely failed, by the way-- it's almost exactly
parallel to CFJ 1631.
Not really; CFJ 1361 had a blank body so there was not obviously an
action taking place, my message clearly was
On Mon, 22 Nov 2010, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
Herald's Weekly Report
ps. missing leadership tokens.
On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 12:07 AM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
When a player becomes speaker due to rebellion [R2270(b)(ii)], it is
considered a Crowning.
Arguments:
R2270(b)(ii) doesn't match the R402 definition of a Coronation, but
it could be said it matches most of the
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 11:48 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
I Bestow Favors as follows:
Taral K.S Supervisor
Tiger Chief Justice
Ienpw III Grand Vizier
Keba Head Gardener
Oh, that's boring. :(
- omd, totally not just
23 matches
Mail list logo
