On 11/14/2017 7:50 AM, ATMunn wrote:
I haven't read through this entire thing yet, but I will, leaving
comments as I go. I haven't looked at anyone else's comments yet either,
so forgive me if I cover something someone else has already mentioned.
The only problem I see with this right off th
It says, in fixed-width text in the archives (and presumably some email
receiving thingies) "Shinies CFJ this is a CFJ".
On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 11:20 PM, Alexis Hunt wrote:
> I object.
>
> On Tue, Nov 14, 2017, 02:34 VJ Rada, wrote:
>
> > __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __
On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 7:36 PM, Alex Smith
wrote:
> On Mon, 2017-11-13 at 16:29 -0800, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> > Also, I'm going back and forth on whether there should be a fixed Plat
> > supply and Plats transferred back and forth between Agora and private
> > ownership, versus just creating/destr
On Tue, 14 Nov 2017, ATMunn wrote:
> Actually, is any of the ADoP's report self-ratifying? It says nowhere in rule
> 2138 that it is.
All switch sections of reports self-ratify by R2162. Interim is
not a switch, officeholder is though.
Actually, is any of the ADoP's report self-ratifying? It says nowhere in rule
2138 that it is.
On 11/14/2017 2:44 PM, Alexis Hunt wrote:
I don't believe interim-ness is self-ratifying.
On Tue, 14 Nov 2017 at 09:08 ATMunn wrote:
It's been like that for several reports, and nobody brought it
It used to be that claiming your White right away made sense, but now, you
should hang onto it since it makes Transparent easier.
On Tue, 14 Nov 2017 at 12:40 Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, 14 Nov 2017, Alex Smith wrote:
> > On Tue, 2017-11-14 at 09:25 -0800, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> > > As a coun
I don't believe interim-ness is self-ratifying.
On Tue, 14 Nov 2017 at 09:08 ATMunn wrote:
> It's been like that for several reports, and nobody brought it to my
> attention. I believe it's self-ratified by this point.
>
> On 11/14/2017 7:10 AM, Telnaior wrote:
> > In which case CoE: The office
It's a submodule, which makes it weird. Copying the other one isn't a bad idea.
-Aris
On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 10:44 AM, ATMunn wrote:
> Hm, I don't know how to include the header. I've tried to copy from the old
> repo, but I'm having trouble with that. I'm considering just getting rid of
> my n
Hm, I don't know how to include the header. I've tried to copy from the old
repo, but I'm having trouble with that. I'm considering just getting rid of my
new one and using the old one instead.
On 11/14/2017 1:11 PM, ATMunn wrote:
Yep, thanks.
On 11/14/2017 1:02 PM, Aris Merchant wrote:
I'm
Yep, thanks.
On 11/14/2017 1:02 PM, Aris Merchant wrote:
I'm presuming you're ATMunngit? If so, done.
-Aris
On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 9:35 AM, ATMunn wrote:
I'd like to join the Agora GitHub group, so I can publish my ADoP reports on
there.
I'm presuming you're ATMunngit? If so, done.
-Aris
On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 9:35 AM, ATMunn wrote:
> I'd like to join the Agora GitHub group, so I can publish my ADoP reports on
> there.
On Tue, 14 Nov 2017, Alex Smith wrote:
> On Tue, 2017-11-14 at 09:25 -0800, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> > As a counterpoint, if there's someone you feel has really served
> > as a mentor -- it's not always about the $$. (IIRC it was originated
> > as a "mentorship" sort of badge).
>
> That was back wh
I'd like to join the Agora GitHub group, so I can publish my ADoP reports on
there.
On Tue, 2017-11-14 at 09:25 -0800, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> As a counterpoint, if there's someone you feel has really served
> as a mentor -- it's not always about the $$. (IIRC it was originated
> as a "mentorship" sort of badge).
That was back when different sorts of VCs were mostly interchangeable
On Tue, 14 Nov 2017, Alex Smith wrote:
> On Tue, 2017-11-14 at 12:19 -0500, ATMunn wrote:
> > Makes sense. Another ribbon question: Any ideas on when I should give
> > a White Ribbon? It's probably better to not give one away unless I'm
> > absolutely sure that I want to give it to a certain pers
Alright. That makes sense. And actually, in order to get a White Ribbon, is the
only qualification that you haven't earned one before, or do you have to be
awarded one? I used to think it was the second option, but on closer
inspection, it seems to be the first.
On 11/14/2017 12:22 PM, Alex Sm
On Tue, 2017-11-14 at 12:19 -0500, ATMunn wrote:
> Makes sense. Another ribbon question: Any ideas on when I should give
> a White Ribbon? It's probably better to not give one away unless I'm
> absolutely sure that I want to give it to a certain person, right?
> How long do people tend to go withou
Makes sense. Another ribbon question: Any ideas on when I should give a White
Ribbon? It's probably better to not give one away unless I'm absolutely sure
that I want to give it to a certain person, right? How long do people tend to
go without giving a White Ribbon?
On 11/14/2017 10:46 AM, Ker
Probably because I wrote that on my phone, and my phone's mail app sucks
really bad.
--
Trigon
On Nov 14, 2017 7:56 AM, "ATMunn" wrote:
> Your comments are a bit hard to distinguish from the original message.
>
> On 11/14/2017 2:26 AM, Reuben Staley wrote:
>
>> This all is why it's a proto prop
On Tue, 14 Nov 2017, ATMunn wrote:
> The only problem I see with this right off the bat is that G. has already made
> a draft proposal dealing with land in a different way (see DIS: SimAgora
> 2000). These two proposals would probably
Yes I agree we should do one or the other not both. I don't
On Tue, 14 Nov 2017, ATMunn wrote:
> I change my emotion to Joyous because today is my birthday.
>
> Unrelated thing: I also claim a Blue Ribbon. (Is that actually valid, or is
> there something I'm missing? The qualification seems a bit too easy, and I
> feel like I have to be missing something
That's a very interesting idea. It might make the game a bit too focused on
traveling everywhere rather than doing stuff, though.
On 11/14/2017 6:22 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
What if you could only perform certain game actions in certain places
and you could only move certain d
Your comments are a bit hard to distinguish from the original message.
On 11/14/2017 2:26 AM, Reuben Staley wrote:
This all is why it's a proto proposal. There are so many issues that you
don't realize as the author, so you never even think of the criticisms
others realize so quickly. Comments b
I haven't read through this entire thing yet, but I will, leaving comments as I
go. I haven't looked at anyone else's comments yet either, so forgive me if I
cover something someone else has already mentioned.
The only problem I see with this right off the bat is that G. has already made
a dra
Judgment is actually spelled correctly in rule 991. I believe both spellings are actually correct;
however "judgment" seems to be preferred. However, the name of the rule does use
"Judgement," so it might still be good to do what you did to keep things consistent.
On 11/14/2017 2:25 AM, VJ Rada
what is it supposed to say?
On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 8:34 AM, VJ Rada wrote:
> __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __
> /\ ___\ /\ \_\ \ /\ \ /\ "-.\ \ /\ \ /\ ___\ /\ ___\
> \ \___ \ \ \ __ \ \ \ \ \ \ \-. \ \ \ \ \ \ __\ \ \___ \
> \/\
What if you could only perform certain game actions in certain places
and you could only move certain distances. So, we would have a forum for
voting and proposing. A courthouse for CFJs and judging. An office
building for publishing reports. A bank for treasury. An auction house
for auction stuff.
27 matches
Mail list logo
