On Sun, 4 Aug 2019 at 03:38, Aris Merchant
wrote:
> 2. Variety. Contributions that move things in a new direction shall be
>rewarded. Contributions that merely repeat things that have come
>before shall be punished. Remember that there are three distinct goals for
>the contest; pursuin
On Sun, 4 Aug 2019 at 04:33, Jason Cobb wrote:
>
> On 8/4/19 12:24 AM, Rebecca wrote:
> > I submit myself to the Agoran Gods! I join the FRC and create the following
> > rule
> >
> > O Hark, the commandments of the LORD are upon us! The LORD demanding the
> > respect he deserves, the LORD hereby d
On Sat, 3 Aug 2019 at 19:57, Cuddle Beam wrote:
> Hello my bruddah and sistahs, please make way for my infinite swagger:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_izvAbhExY
Hi Cuddle Beam! In case you're trying to not become a zombie, a
reminder that you need to post to a public forum to prevent that.
On Sat, 3 Aug 2019 at 14:08, Nich Evans wrote:
> In a decluttering effort, I'm going to start using this address.
>
> --
> Nich Evans
Let me know if you'd like it to be included somewhere in the
Registrar's reports. E.g. I could add it to your footnote at
https://agoranomic.org/Registrar/monthly/
On Sat, Aug 3, 2019 at 10:31 PM Jason Cobb wrote:
> On 8/4/19 1:23 AM, James Cook wrote:
> >Whenever a player has not done so in the past 4 days, e CAN
> >Commune with the Wheel by announcement, specifying Rock, Paper or
> >Scissors. A player CAN Reach into the Past by an
On 8/4/19 1:23 AM, James Cook wrote:
Whenever a player has not done so in the past 4 days, e CAN
Commune with the Wheel by announcement, specifying Rock, Paper or
Scissors. A player CAN Reach into the Past by announcement at any
time. If a player Communes the Wheel at
On Fri, 2 Aug 2019 at 21:04, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> Actually, I wonder if we should think about some kind of "debugging"
> mechanism for victories. Something like "when a win method is first
> implemented (some mechanism, probably involving Agoran Consent, for
> figuring out whether the first win w
> Random "I" after "then at time T".
>
> Jason Cobb
Thanks, should be fixed in the draft I just published.
--
- Falsifian
> Okay, a few things.
>
> * Defining “unconditional announcement” is probably overkill; any sane
> judge would arrive at that that anyway, and it adds a bit to bloat.
> * You should probably say "Roshambo Score is an integer player switch" (R
> 2509)
> * You should probably say "increased by 1" and
On 8/4/19 12:56 AM, Jason Cobb wrote:
[This is not a challenge, and is not sent to the public forum]
By my reading, by this rule each contest message must contain one
message _per Agoran God_. Is there a defined set of Agoran Gods
anywhere? Because if not, there might be an issue.
Never mi
On 8/4/19 12:49 AM, Reuben Staley wrote:
I create the following Fantasy Rule: {
The final paragraph of each contest message shall contain a message of
praise to each Agoran God mentioned previously in a contest message, plus
one not mentioned previously.
}
[This is not a challenge, and is no
On 8/4/19 12:24 AM, Rebecca wrote:
I submit myself to the Agoran Gods! I join the FRC and create the following
rule
O Hark, the commandments of the LORD are upon us! The LORD demanding the
respect he deserves, the LORD hereby decrees that all references to Agoran
Gods shall refer to em in ALL CA
On 8/3/19 9:58 PM, Jason Cobb wrote:
Excerpt from Rule 2202 ("Ratification Without Objection"):
Any player CAN, without objection, ratify a public document,
specifying its scope.
Whoops, I changed the statement while I was drafting and I no longer
actually use this as evidence. H. Arbitor,
On 8/3/2019 4:42 PM, Jason Cobb wrote:
> On 8/3/19 7:37 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>> We added "rules to the contrary notwithstanding" to
>> R2140 to solve that - but R2140 still only applies to instruments below
>> power-3.
>
>
> How does that solve the problem? If I understand the issue correctly,
On 8/3/19 7:37 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
We added "rules to the contrary notwithstanding" to
R2140 to solve that - but R2140 still only applies to instruments below
power-3.
How does that solve the problem? If I understand the issue correctly,
the power-1 rule wouldn't be blocked by R2140, since
On 8/3/2019 3:57 PM, Nich Evans wrote:
>> R849 clearly prohibits the registration. The "Comptrollor" ban we added
>> in R2140 recently to prevent lower-powered rules from prohibiting proposal
>> clauses in higher-powered proposals doesn't apply, because R2140 includes
>> the "below the power of
On 8/3/19 2:16 PM, D. Margaux wrote:
On Fri, Aug 2, 2019 at 8:14 PM Kerim Aydin wrote:
The below CFJ is 3764. I assign it to D. Margaux.
=== CFJ 3764 ===
If a proposal purporting to register nch was adopted now, then one
On 8/3/19 2:36 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
On 8/3/2019 12:16 PM, D. Margaux wrote:
> Judged FALSE. NCH voluntarily deregistered less than 30 days ago. Under
> Rule 849, if a player does that, then "e CANNOT register or be
registered
> for 30 days." In my opinion, a proposal "purporting to register n
On 8/3/19 2:16 PM, D. Margaux wrote:
In my opinion, a proposal "purporting to register nch" would
constitute an attempt to have nch "be registered" less than 30 days after
his voluntary deregistration. That attempt necessarily fails under Rule
849.
Please use spivak or gender neutral 'they' i
1. A party to this contract CAN cease being a contract by announcement.
Whoops, just realized I wrote this. I cease being a contract :P (this
does nothing, doubly so because this isn't to the public forum).
On 8/3/2019 11:06 AM, Jason Cobb wrote:
> On 8/3/19 1:56 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>>
>> In the current situation, Clause 3 of the contract successfully defines a
>> currency. By default (if there were no further clauses), the POSSIBLE
>> currency actions are in R2577, and include destruction and
Hello my bruddah and sistahs, please make way for my infinite swagger:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_izvAbhExY
On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 6:04 PM Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> On 8/1/2019 8:48 AM, James Cook wrote:
> > On Thu, 1 Aug 2019 at 15:46, James Cook wrote:
> >>
> >> No zombie auction is nece
On 8/3/2019 12:16 PM, D. Margaux wrote:
> Judged FALSE. NCH voluntarily deregistered less than 30 days ago. Under
> Rule 849, if a player does that, then "e CANNOT register or be registered
> for 30 days." In my opinion, a proposal "purporting to register nch" would
> constitute an attempt to ha
On 8/3/19 1:56 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
In the current situation, Clause 3 of the contract successfully defines a
currency. By default (if there were no further clauses), the POSSIBLE
currency actions are in R2577, and include destruction and transfer of
currencies by announcement, but not creati
=== CFJ 3761 ===
A party to the contract in evidence CAN create a gift by some
method.
==
Proto-judgement (used up my Motion so want to proto this
On Sat, 2019-08-03 at 16:19 +, ais...@alumni.bham.ac.uk wrote:
> On Sat, 2019-08-03 at 11:12 -0400, D. Margaux wrote:
> > 2c. Enact a rule of power sufficient to give effect to its
> > terms
> > that states:
> >
> > "Any attempt to enact this rule is IMPOSSIBLE."
>
> That example is
On Sat, 2019-08-03 at 11:12 -0400, D. Margaux wrote:
> 2c. Enact a rule of power sufficient to give effect to its terms
> that states:
>
> "Any attempt to enact this rule is IMPOSSIBLE."
That example isn't impossible to enact even in the present gamestate.
You could write a proposal "Cr
On 8/2/2019 6:10 PM, Jason Cobb wrote:
> I don't need to make anything up, the answer to the question of what a
> rule change is lies in R105.
There is some ambiguity in R105 in terms of "compound" rule changes within a
single Rule, though it may not be relevant to your CFJ at all. For example
On 8/3/19 10:39 AM, Nich Evans wrote:
On 8/3/19 10:12 AM, D. Margaux wrote:
On Aug 2, 2019, at 11:27 PM, Jason Cobb wrote:
The caller also provides this as an example:
"Repeal Rule 1698 (Ossification).
Enact a power 100 rule that procides, 'It is IMPOSSIBLE to change
the Rules,
rules
On 8/3/19 10:12 AM, D. Margaux wrote:
On Aug 2, 2019, at 11:27 PM, Jason Cobb wrote:
The caller also provides this as an example:
"Repeal Rule 1698 (Ossification).
Enact a power 100 rule that procides, 'It is IMPOSSIBLE to change the Rules,
rules to the contrary notwithstanding.'"
Again,
On 8/3/19 11:12 AM, D. Margaux wrote:
The Ossification rule says "arbitrary rule changes to be made and/or arbitrary
proposals to be adopted"--that's plural changeS/proposalS. Based on the text of the
rule, Agora is Ossified if there is a combination of rule changes and/or proposals that
are
Sorry, sent this too early. Another email coming soon.
Jason Cobb
On 8/3/19 11:16 AM, Jason Cobb wrote:
On 8/3/19 11:12 AM, D. Margaux wrote:
The Ossification rule says "arbitrary rule changes to be made and/or
arbitrary proposals to be adopted"--that's plural changeS/proposalS.
Based on th
On 8/3/19 11:12 AM, D. Margaux wrote:
The Ossification rule says "arbitrary rule changes to be made and/or arbitrary
proposals to be adopted"--that's plural changeS/proposalS. Based on the text of the
rule, Agora is Ossified if there is a combination of rule changes and/or proposals that
ar
> On Aug 2, 2019, at 11:27 PM, Jason Cobb wrote:
>
> The caller also provides this as an example:
>
>> "Repeal Rule 1698 (Ossification).
>> Enact a power 100 rule that procides, 'It is IMPOSSIBLE to change the Rules,
>> rules to the contrary notwithstanding.'"
>
> Again, this is not a rule c
On 8/3/19 9:08 AM, Nich Evans wrote:
In a decluttering effort, I'm going to start using this address.
Confirming that I sent the above message.
In a decluttering effort, I'm going to start using this address.
--
Nich Evans
36 matches
Mail list logo
