Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Not so fast!

On Thu, 14 Feb 2019, D. Margaux wrote: The way it should work is for Agora to be satisfied if any of (1) through (4) are satisfied. That is, Agora is “satisfied” if there were fewer than N objections and the action was without N objections; OR if there are more than N supporters and the action

Re: DIS: Trouble subscribing

On Wed, 13 Feb 2019, James Cook wrote: I was unable to subscribe jc...@cs.berkeley.edu to the Agora lists (except tue), but was able to subscribe falsifi...@gmail.com. Is this a common problem? It's not a problem for me (assuming you received this message) but thought I'd mention it in case

DIS: Re: OFF: [Clork] House of Snerds

On Mon, 11 Feb 2019, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: RETIREMENT ANNOUNCEMENT Kim Ping Pong has announced eir retirement. To secure the stability and continued prosperity of the people, we trust that his glorious tenure will be

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Quang Revived

On Sun, 10 Feb 2019, Gaelan Steele wrote: I object, both to any intents this may create and to people taking this gibberish thing way too far. I don't think it could create any intents, even if the relevant rule did _not_ contain a clear disqualification of obfuscation. Greetings,

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [ADoP] Metareport

On Sun, 10 Feb 2019, Gaelan Steele wrote: CoE: the Astronomor weekly report was not published the day before the Unix epoch. Maybe the Astronomor found a wormhole. Greetings, Ørjan.

DIS: Re: BUS: still need a currency for something

Ah I see you thought of the same bug as I. Greetings, Ørjan. On Sun, 10 Feb 2019, D. Margaux wrote: Just in case... On Feb 4, 2019, at 5:11 PM, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: I intend, with 2 Agoran Consent, to award myself the degree Associate of Nomic (A.N.). I object. I withdraw my

DIS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8152-8163

On Sat, 9 Feb 2019, Aris Merchant wrote: // ID: 8162 Title: No Contract Reporting Rewards Adoption index: 2.0 Author: Telnaior Co-authors: G. Amend the phrase "Publishing a duty-fulfilling report" in Rule 2496 ("Rewards") to

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Agora itself is a contract

On Sat, 9 Feb 2019, Cuddle Beam wrote: - You can change the rules if everyone agrees to it, without needing a proposal for it. R1742: "A contract may be modified, including by changing the set of parties, by agreement between all existing parties." That rule has too low power to trump the

DIS: Re: BUS: Red herrings and indigo ribbons

On Sat, 9 Feb 2019, D. Margaux wrote: I think I have found a bug in twg’s execution of the scheme! I also see some bugs, although the rule 869 issue makes them pretty moot. For one thing, it was argued in previous discussion that supporting cannot be done on behalf as an accidental side

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: humble agoran farmer something something

On Sat, 9 Feb 2019, Cuddle Beam wrote: I editted it to point out the specific rule but is it really necessary? I thought it would be unambiguous where the edit was supposed to be. Just curious about if there's a formal reason for it. Hm, I think you're technically correct, although it's still

Re: DIS: [Proto] Extend "amend"

On Fri, 8 Feb 2019, Reuben Staley wrote: Title: Extend "amend" Amend Rule 105 (Power=3) 'Rule Changes' by removing items 3-6 in the ordered list and then adding to that list: 3. reenact a rule. A repealed rule not in the ruleset identified by its most recent rule number MUST be

Re: DIS: Proto-Proposal - Dependent Action Cleanup

I am reminded that a previous Rulekeepor (Gaelan perhaps?) made a number of formatting changes in order to make the Ruleset valid markdown, and I don't quite remember for sure, but that may be how this rule ended up with the confusion of two top-level lists with the same numbering scheme. I

DIS: Re: BUS: CFJs 3705 and 3706 judged FALSE

On Thu, 7 Feb 2019, Aris Merchant wrote: Gaelan tried to win by Apathy, using one buried intent to satisfy R1728(2) and then another open intent to satisfy R1728(1). This relies on the assumption that the R1728(1) and R1728(2) intents can be separate from each other. However, this is not the

DIS: Re: BUS: Quang Revived

On Thu, 7 Feb 2019, Cuddle Beam wrote: - "kuukie" as shorthand for "I intend to" - "dvba" as shorthand for "declare victory by apathy" kuukie dvba for myself. This part probably won't work, because intents are required to be unobfuscated. Greetings, Ørjan.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: The Duumvirate

On Tue, 5 Feb 2019, D. Margaux wrote: I guess if a person had power >3, then the R2125 limitation wouldn’t be a barrier anymore, though. I don't see why. I don't think there's any provision for anything other than a rule to take precedence over a rule, regardless of power. Greetings,

DIS: Re: BUS: Intent

I think you technically cannot force it until just after the Week, because you need to wait until the Promotor is late (rule 2160 §3). Greetings, Ørjan. On Tue, 5 Feb 2019, D. Margaux wrote: I intend to deputise for Promotor to distribute the proposals in the proposal pool. I intend to

DIS: Re: BUS: still need a currency for something

I assume G. was hinting to the fact that these are fungible assets yet distinguishable. Not that the rules define what "fungible" means, anymore. Which might make them hard to track, so just as well that there's no recordkeepor defined. No idea how you intend to get any advantage out of

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Herald] It's (nearly) Read the Ruleset Week!

On Sun, 3 Feb 2019, Kerim Aydin wrote: To enter, you have to publicly outline/ describe the full idea of the loophole during Read the Ruleset week. If you're actually pulling the trick as a scam, you need to make sure we (the "public") have the info we need to understand how the scam works or

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Registrar] Zombie Auction

On Sat, 2 Feb 2019, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: I transfer all Tenhigitsune's liquid assets to myself, flip eir master switch to Agora, and bid 1 coin in this auction. You forgot to act on behalf, so the first action fails. Greetings, Ørjan.

DIS: Re: BUS: humble agoran farmer something something

On Sat, 2 Feb 2019, Cuddle Beam wrote: When a player Becomes One With The Cosmos, if their Fame is either 10 or -10, their Fame is set to 0 and they win the game." Please use proper Agoran pronouns. Greetings, Ørjan.

DIS: Re: BUS: humble agoran farmer becomes an automated victory dispensing machine

On Fri, 1 Feb 2019, Cuddle Beam wrote: Note that I can have others send the attack Energy message on my behalf, and it's not obligatory for the sender of the attack Energy to _understand their own message_. [...]; in particular, a person CANNOT act on behalf of another person to

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: bring back judicial protections

On Thu, 31 Jan 2019, Gaelan Steele wrote: Not just that—at the time there was a rule that reenacted rules had to have “largely the same purpose” or something. Yeah, that was changed to a SHOULD in the current version. Greetings, Ørjan.

DIS: Re: BUS: bring back judicial protections

On Wed, 30 Jan 2019, Kerim Aydin wrote: Re-enact Rule 2246 (name at repeal: Submitting a CFJ to the Justiciar), at Power-2, with the title "Submitting a CFJ to the Referee", and the following text: I don't think you can change the title without a separate rule change, although the

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [ADoP] Metareport

On Sun, 27 Jan 2019, Edward Murphy wrote: I transfer a kudo from myself (for overlooking this) to twg (for pointing it out). That takes me back. But it's all about karma nowadays. Which is probably a bit more flexible. Greetings, Ørjan.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: I realise this is extremely ridiculous, but

This provision is clearly intended to be a long-term protection against rule abuse. In such cases, it seems reasonable to interpret the meticulous wording as an added safety in case of new rule changes, without any implications following from whether or not the phrasing is redundant given the

Re: DIS: oh dear

On Fri, 18 Jan 2019, Reuben Staley wrote: This is exactly what I said nearly a year ago when PAoaM passed. Minigames rarely work the way they are supposed to on their first revision. * * THE AGORAN MINIGAME CYCLE * * 1. Enact a minigame

DIS: Re: BUS: I realise this is extremely ridiculous, but

On Tue, 15 Jan 2019, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: I act on behalf of Tenhigitsune to announce that e will spend rau Energy in Space Battle 0001, where "rau" is a word in twgese, which is a constructed language invented by me. (Other twgese words include "quang" and "spaaace".) Go ahead, CFJ

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: RIP

On Tue, 15 Jan 2019, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: "And I'm joining you live from Agora's Lost and Found Department, where a large Spaceship has appeared in the central office, causing widespread damage. Projected casualties number in the dozens..." Spaceships are destructible. Reading rule

DIS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Resolution of Proposals 8143-8145 and 8142

On Tue, 15 Jan 2019, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: I resolve the Agoran Decisions to adopt each of Proposals 8143, 8144, 8145 and 8142, in that order, as follows. I'll do 8139-8141 after lunch. (I know this is a controversial use of Assessor powers, but if you will keep voting for proposals about

DIS: Re: BUS: Open call for politician names

On Sun, 13 Jan 2019, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: I pledge that whenever I create a politician with a name someone else suggested to me, I will transfer 5 coins to that person (if it would be LEGAL and POSSIBLE to do so). *Looks up the previous list to avoid duplicates* Theresa Cannot Benjamin

DIS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] Short Logical Ruleset: Second Week of 2019

On Fri, 11 Jan 2019, Reuben Staley wrote: THE SHORT LOGICAL RULESET I think that's a bit shorter than you intended. Greetings, Ørjan.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Registrar] Zombie Auction

On Thu, 10 Jan 2019, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: I think this argument doesn't work because, according to the FLR, CFJs 1911-1914 set the precedent that "Physical realities supersede the Rules by default" - in this case, the physical reality that no rule defines a process for zombie transferral

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Birthdays II

On Sun, 16 Dec 2018, Kerim Aydin wrote: Using the Registrar's monthly report, my Agoran birthdays would be: 4-Feb-01, 14-Jul-03, 23-Feb-07, 27-Oct-07, 19-Jun-08, 4-May-09, 29-Oct-09, 18-Oct-11 and 25-Aug-17. You may want to use "day e most recently registered" or "day e first registered"?

DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Coauthors deserve something.

On Sat, 15 Dec 2018, Reuben Staley wrote: Amend rule 2496 "Rewards" by replacing the list element beginning "Being the author" that reads: I suspect you are missing "with text" or something in there. * The following apply to adopted proposals: * Being the author: a number of

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Let's do some space

On Fri, 14 Dec 2018, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: Perform the following action for each player, iterating over them in order of the days of the year (1 January to 31 December) on which they most recently registered, breaking ties in order of the times at which they most recently registered. [Does

DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Let's do some space

On Thu, 13 Dec 2018, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: The resolver for a Space Battle is the person highest in the following list who is not a combatant in the Space Battle: 1) the Astronomor; 2) the Arbitor; 3) the Prime Minister; 4) the non-combatant who has least recently registered. For

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] Short Logical Ruleset -- December 7

in a month. That seems clear, although I have a nagging doubt about "what if there's something severely wrong with the first one?" Greetings, Ørjan. -twg ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On Saturday, December 8, 2018 6:17 PM, Ørjan Johansen wrote: On Sat, 8 Dec 2018, Timon W

DIS: Re: BUS: Weekly maintenance

On Sun, 2 Dec 2018, Edward Murphy wrote: I expunge one of my Blots. With the proposal to automatize this having failed, I can no longer resist pointing out that the way the rule works, you would generally want to do this at the _beginning_ of a week, not the end. Greetings, Ørjan, who is

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Registrar] The Agoran Directory

On Sun, 2 Dec 2018, D. Margaux wrote: Does that actually work though? I don’t see any provision that resets the resale value to 2 after the master switch is set back to the player. So I think nichdel’s resale value is still 1, because eir master switch was previously transferred to me.

Re: DIS: [Proto-proposal] Agora can into space

On Sun, 2 Dec 2018, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: Enact a new rule entitled "The Astronomor", with power 1.0 and the following text: { The Astronomor is an office. The Astronomor's weekly report includes, in addition to any information required by other rules, a list of all Sectors and

DIS: Re: OFF: [Registrar] The Agoran Directory

On Sat, 1 Dec 2018, ATMunn wrote: 12-Nov-18 15:54:54 Jacob Ardruino registers. Welcome, Jacob Ardruino! [let me know if I missed anything, but it seems like this is it] The spelling of eir name? Impressively, even in the email address. Greetings, Ørjan. Players (20) (by Rule 869,

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [minority] Report

On Fri, 30 Nov 2018, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: So I believe I have two legal options: - declare this Finger Pointing Shenanigans now, or - wait until December (35 minutes) and then levy a fine on you. Third option would have been to get someone to repeat the Finger Pointing - the double

DIS: Re: BUS: Vote

On Thu, 29 Nov 2018, D. Margaux wrote: I vote AGAINST the proposal referenced below. I change my vote on that proposal to ENDORSE the most recent player to join the Living Zombie contract, if and only if one or more new players have joined that contract before the end of the voting period on

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8133-8138

t. On Tue, 27 Nov 2018, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: Well in that case it's similarly broken in the current rule as well, albeit only for actions on behalf, not for currency transfers. No? -twg ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On Tuesday, November 27, 2018 2:35 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote

Re: BUS: Fwd: DIS: Re: OFF: Ballot for Proposals 8133-8138

On Tue, 27 Nov 2018, Gaelan Steele wrote: Is there any reason we’d want proposals resolved out of order? I don’t see any off hand, but it’s worth making sure we’re not losing the ability to easily clean up some mess. In addition to what G. listed, there may be cases where it is _required_

DIS: Re: OFF: Ballot for Proposals 8133-8138

On Mon, 26 Nov 2018, Jacob Arduino wrote: 8135 twg, D Margaux 2.0 Blot Decay (Reprise) ENDORSE twg if the Agoran Decision of Proposal 8133 has been resolved AGAINST otherwise 8137 Aris, twg, Trigon 3.0 Uncorrecting Rewards ENDORSE twg if the Agoran Decision of Proposal 8133

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8133-8138

On Sun, 25 Nov 2018, Kerim Aydin wrote: 8138 twg 2.5 Access to contracts' assets No vote for now. I see an issue with this that I have to think about (i.e. read the rules a few times to see if it's actually an issue). There seems to be no methods as required by rule 2125.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Resolution of Proposals 8129, 8131, 8127, 8123-8126, 8128, 8130 and 8132

oposal, but the rest wouldn't. Greetings, Ørjan. On 11/24/18 11:05 AM, Ørjan Johansen wrote: On Fri, 23 Nov 2018, Aris Merchant wrote: Sorry, my mind isn’t getting the semantics of your comment. Could you break down what you mean? The original rule text contains both the wor

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Resolution of Proposals 8129, 8131, 8127, 8123-8126, 8128, 8130 and 8132

ot;. (3) It will leave what used to be "earns" as "creates in eir possession". (4) It's fine but redundant. Greetings, Ørjan. -Aris On Fri, Nov 23, 2018 at 11:40 PM Ørjan Johansen wrote: I'm wondering what happens to the word "earns" throughout these chang

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Resolution of Proposals 8129, 8131, 8127, 8123-8126, 8128, 8130 and 8132

wg (allowing eir own moneymaking activities to interfere with the rest of the game) +1 Trigon (suffering eir proposal being mangled by aforementioned activities) (I'm virtually certain my "rewards" _do_ work, but I'm astonished nobody's CFJed them on principle yet...) -twg ‐‐‐ Origi

DIS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Resolution of Proposals 8129, 8131, 8127, 8123-8126, 8128, 8130 and 8132

On Mon, 19 Nov 2018, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: I resolve the Agoran Decisions to adopt each of Proposals 8129, 8131, 8127, 8123-8126, 8128, 8130 and 8132, in that order, as follows. Fiendish. (Assuming this works. People might want to CFJ your double earnings.) However, I think resolving

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Treasuror] Weekly report: Forbes 500

NttPF. Greetings, Ørjan. On Mon, 19 Nov 2018, Gaelan Steele wrote: Oh right. I create a nothing in my possession (in case I don’t have one) and pay it to nichdel for his auction. E automatically pays me 10 coins. Gaelan On Nov 19, 2018, at 2:35 PM, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: Date of this

DIS: Re: BUS: CFJ 3674

My copy of the Ruleset contains no such judgement as DISCHARGE. You probably meant DISMISS? (Given that you still resolved the actual issue, INSUFFICIENT is probably inappropriate.) Greetings, Ørjan. On Sun, 18 Nov 2018, Aris Merchant wrote: I'm running out of time to judge CFJ 3674. I'm

DIS: Re: BUS: CFJ 3688 judgement

On Fri, 16 Nov 2018, Kerim Aydin wrote: R591 contains: When a CFJ is open and assigned to a judge, that judge CAN assign a valid judgement to it by announcement, and SHALL do so in a timely fashion after this becomes possible. If e does not, the Arbitor CAN remove em from

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Resolution of Proposals 8112-8122

On Wed, 14 Nov 2018, Reuben Staley wrote: Hold up. That's INEFFECTIVE since the rule it modifies is power 1.5. The AI must have been misreported. Actually Proposal 8116 is probably either right or overpowered - the Assessor's Report says its AI is 1.5 and 3 in different places. Greetings,

DIS: Re: BUS: Memes

On Mon, 12 Nov 2018, Rebecca wrote: I create the following proposal Title: I hate myself AI: 3 Text: Rules or Instruments to the contrary notwithstanding, this proposal shall act as though its text is the text submitted to a public forum and clearly marked "Memes submission" by the last person

Re: DIS: Interest Poll: Rulekeepor's Notes

On Sun, 11 Nov 2018, Reuben Staley wrote: Would anyone like me to start publishing Rulekeepor's notes? It's an old tradition but I'm not going to do it if people don't think it would be useful. If you *do* want me to publish them, tell me what information you would like me to include. As

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [ADoP] Metareport

On Sun, 4 Nov 2018, ATMunn wrote: For some reason, this showed up as a separate email for me. For a second I missed the "DIS: Re:" and thought you were trying to publish an ADoP report. Hm, I don't recall doing anything out of the ordinary for that message. I deleted the copy I got back from

DIS: Re: OFF: [ADoP] Metareport

On Sun, 4 Nov 2018, Edward Murphy wrote: [twg intended to deputise for Referee on Nov 1, though I don't think it was effective; see my recent CFJ] COE: E did, see my gratuitous argument. Greetings, Ørjan.

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Reminder to claim violet ribbons

On Sun, 4 Nov 2018, Edward Murphy wrote: CFJ, barring twg: twg is Referee. Caller's arguments: * Oct 30, D. Margaux resigned Referee * Nov 1, twg published the Referee's report but did not announce that e was deputising (as required by Rule 2160 item #5) Gratuitous argument: E had just

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: 3679-80 judgements

that there's nothing regulating pledges that are _not_ to perform or refrain from performing actions. And thus, the pledge does exist. Greetings, Ørjan. On Sat, 3 Nov 2018, Ørjan Johansen wrote: On Sat, 3 Nov 2018, Reuben Staley wrote: You clearly understand my point, though. Since V.J

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: 3679-80 judgements

On Sat, 3 Nov 2018, Reuben Staley wrote: You clearly understand my point, though. Since V.J. is referring to a pledge that doesn't exist, saying "the pledge above is true" just doesn't really mean anything. I wouldn't call them "lies", or "intending to mislead" because I don't see any of that

DIS: Re: BUS: 3679-80 judgements

On Sat, 3 Nov 2018, Reuben Staley wrote: == Judgement of CFJ 3679 == Since, per CFJ 3680, the pledge mentioned does not exist, the statement affirming the pledge's truthfulness is also INEFFECTIVE. INEFFECTIVE statements are not lies. I strongly dislike this argument. INEFFECTIVE applies to

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: CFJs 3679 and 3680 - judgements

On Fri, 2 Nov 2018, Gaelan Steele wrote: - With N Agoran Consent, where N is an integer multiple of 0.1 with a minimum of 1. ("With Consent" is shorthand for this method with N = 1.) "With Agoran Consent". Consent has other meanings so not good to leave it out. OPINIONS ON DEPENDENT

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Quick proposals

On Thu, 1 Nov 2018, Gaelan Steele wrote: Is this really what you want? Gaelan On Nov 1, 2018, at 3:37 PM, Reuben Staley wrote: 2. For each office, if a single player held that office for 16 or more days in the previous month and no unforgivable fines were levied on em for

DIS: Murphy's Lawlessness (Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Referee] The Police Blotter (Weekly Report))

On Fri, 2 Nov 2018, Rebecca wrote: I expunge a blot from myself Looking at the recent blot history, someone should remind Murphy e might want to start doing this too. Greetings, Ørjan. On Fri, Nov 2, 2018 at 2:54 AM Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: Date of this weekly report: 2018-11-01 Date

Re: DIS: [Proto-proposal] let's do some space

Packages are received. (If I recall correctly, it's mattered less subtly before when Agora had limited funds.) On 10/31/2018 9:36 PM, Ørjan Johansen wrote: On Wed, 31 Oct 2018, ATMunn wrote: Imminent Sector is an singleton switch, tracked by the Spacekeepor, defaulting to 1. Every

DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] Quick proposals

On Wed, 31 Oct 2018, Reuben Staley wrote: Repeal Rule 2505 "Distributing Assets". That should be 2515. Amend Rule 1728 "Dependent Actions" by: replacing the following: 2. If the action is to be performed Without N Objections, With N Agoran Consent, or With Notice, if the

Re: DIS: [Proto-proposal] let's do some space

On Wed, 31 Oct 2018, ATMunn wrote: Imminent Sector is an singleton switch, tracked by the Spacekeepor, defaulting to 1. Every time a player receives a Welcome Package, the Imminent Sector is increased by one. If the Imminent Sector ever is greater than the

Re: DIS: Hypothetical: What if a player dies?

On Mon, 29 Oct 2018, ATMunn wrote: Kinda dark, but interesting. And since Agora has been going on for so long and doesn't seem like it will stop anytime soon, even thought it would be sad, it's not a complete impossibility. Even darker, it may already have happened without us knowing.

DIS: Proposal 8121 (Re: BUS: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8112-8122)

On Sun, 28 Oct 2018, Reuben Staley wrote: 8121 G. 3.0 Retroactive Documents PRESENT. There are arguments for and against doing this and I am not convinced which way to go. This was a result of a discussion between me and G. on a rather subtle point, where it took a

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: I intend to win by apathy without objection AND I OBJECT

On Tue, 23 Oct 2018, Kerim Aydin wrote: Oh for crying out loud. I object to everything. To everything, literally. I object. It seems like it's the final stage before you turn abject. Greetings, Ørjan.

DIS: Re: BUS: These declarations of apathy are getting ridiculous

On Sun, 21 Oct 2018, Reuben Staley wrote: Any player who consents to be bound by this contract CAN become a party by announcement. Every day at 0:00 UTC, this contract acts on behalf of all its parties to object to each intent to declare apathy. This won't work, as only persons can act on

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: [Prime Minister] Regarding Wins

didn't keep that particular message in my inbox, but that's where I've usually seen the quoting for others. Greetings, Ørjan. On Oct 21, 2018, at 11:49 AM, Ørjan Johansen wrote: On Sat, 20 Oct 2018, D. Margaux wrote: Oh crud. That wasn’t supposed to be in quotes. Looks like I only unquoted

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: [Prime Minister] Regarding Wins

On Sun, 21 Oct 2018, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: Ah, darn it. (This message best viewed in a fixed-width font.) I don't know whether this would have worked anyway but it would have been amusing. That looked quoted, so I'm pretty sure would be excluded by the principles in G.s recent (although

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: [Prime Minister] Regarding Wins

On Sat, 20 Oct 2018, D. Margaux wrote: Oh crud. That wasn’t supposed to be in quotes. Looks like I only unquoted the second line of the intent, not both lines. That’s very annoying. I've often seen messages with a first new line after quoted content accidentally quoted like that. I've

Re: DIS: Fwd: OFF: [Treasuror] Weekly report: Last ever painstaking addition of 3s to each facility balance

On Sat, 20 Oct 2018, Kerim Aydin wrote: On Sat, 20 Oct 2018, Ørjan Johansen wrote: On Sat, 20 Oct 2018, Kerim Aydin wrote: You can still use ratification, just be specific on date/time, e.g. The following document is hereby ratified: { On 18-Oct-2018, HH:MM:SS [time of Treasuror's Report

Re: DIS: Fwd: OFF: [Treasuror] Weekly report: Last ever painstaking addition of 3s to each facility balance

On Sat, 20 Oct 2018, Kerim Aydin wrote: You can still use ratification, just be specific on date/time, e.g. The following document is hereby ratified: { On 18-Oct-2018, HH:MM:SS [time of Treasuror's Report], G. had 42 coins and D. Margaux had 62 coins. } Um, that's precisely the kind of

Re: DIS: Fwd: OFF: [Treasuror] Weekly report: Last ever painstaking addition of 3s to each facility balance

On Sat, 20 Oct 2018, Kerim Aydin wrote: How is this different than self-ratification - when it self-ratifies a week after publication, it ratifies the past condition as being true as of that past date, correct? If not, we're really messed up. I think it works fine as long as the published

Re: DIS: Fwd: OFF: [Treasuror] Weekly report: Last ever painstaking addition of 3s to each facility balance

On Thu, 18 Oct 2018, Kerim Aydin wrote: This is very weird phrasing to me. You can backdate ratification, so possibly better phrasing: "The following list is Ratified as being an accurate list of coin holdings for 18 Oct 2018". Maybe no big deal tho. I think I've quibbled in the past that

DIS: Re: BUS: Auction related proposals

On Thu, 18 Oct 2018, Reuben Staley wrote: Amend the last paragraph of rule 2551 'Auction End' by removing the final sentence. This also removes a clarifying part about Agora and the relevant CAN, which may not be obvious otherwise, since Agora is AFAICT not commonly presented as an agent in

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: CFJ 3644 judged TRUE

On Thu, 18 Oct 2018, Kerim Aydin wrote: (on a side note, should I start publishing these again after cases are complete? I'm entering them into the database once a month or so). It's nice to see it all at once, especially if the judge doesn't quote everything relevant. Greetings, Ørjan.

Re: DIS: Joining

On Thu, 18 Oct 2018, hal...@safiria.net wrote: In accordance with Rule 869/33, I, Hālian, hereby publish a message of intent to become a player of Agora Nomic. (Also, where relevant, I am a he.) Welcome to Agora! (Well, once you resend it to the proper place.) I don't think it's ever

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8077B-8085A and 8087A-8089A

On Sun, 30 Sep 2018, D Margaux wrote: I CFJ (barring Aris) this statement: “G.’s attempt in the message quoted below to transfer coins to the contract between em and D. Margaux is EFFECTIVE.” (I note for the Arbitor’s benefit that G. is an interested party. Also twg might be considered an

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Click here for FREE land!

On Sat, 29 Sep 2018, Kerim Aydin wrote: On Sat, 29 Sep 2018, Ørjan Johansen wrote: Unless it's been changed since June 6, creating a Contract requires payment. [snip] It changed in late June. Ruleset up to July (unofficial, but with the new contract text) is here: https://github.com

DIS: Re: BUS: Reiteration Judgement (3663)

On Fri, 28 Sep 2018, Kerim Aydin wrote: 2. Not only does the chosen term ("reiterate") have a common use that makes sense in context of voting, but the common use is actually opposite the proposed meaning! To "reiterate" means to "restate clearly". If you say "I hereby restate my name for the

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Click here for FREE land!

On Fri, 28 Sep 2018, Kerim Aydin wrote: CFJ, barring D. Margaux: Corona and D. Margaux made a Contract in the last 24 hours. Unless it's been changed since June 6, creating a Contract requires payment. Greetings, Ørjan.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Notice of Honour

On Sun, 23 Sep 2018, Kerim Aydin wrote: 2. In R2510, clause (2) and clause (3) somehow got reversed, in that the "other" in clause (2) is meant to refer to the fact that it can't be the same entity as in clause (3). Does the "other" mean anything with that reversal? Um no, it's meant to

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Define Reiteration

On Sun, 23 Sep 2018, Aris Merchant wrote: On Sun, Sep 23, 2018 at 6:00 PM Ørjan Johansen wrote: On Sun, 23 Sep 2018, Aris Merchant wrote: [This is an informal general definition that is helpful for proposals added again to the pool. The Assessor already has this information, which means

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8096-8103

On Sun, 23 Sep 2018, Aris Merchant wrote: I vote, and act on behalf as Tenaior to vote, as follows: Not that it matters, but it's "Telnaior". Greetings, Ørjan.

DIS: Re: BUS: Define Reiteration

On Sun, 23 Sep 2018, Aris Merchant wrote: [This is an informal general definition that is helpful for proposals added again to the pool. The Assessor already has this information, which means that it's legal under past precedent to cast a vote that requires em to retrieve it.] The obvious

DIS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] Court Gazette

On Sun, 23 Sep 2018, Edward Murphy wrote: Open cases (CFJs) - 3645 called by Aris 20 June 2018, assigned to V.J. Rada 26 August 2018: "G. has satisfied eir weekly obligation with regard to the FLR and SLR." 3648 called by G. 24 June 2018, assigned to V.J. Rada 26 August 2018:

DIS: Re: OFF: [Registrar] Weekly Report

On Sun, 16 Sep 2018, Kerim Aydin wrote: Fora (Rule 478, self-ratifying) Discussion irc://irc.freenode.net:6667/##nomic discussion There seems to be a http: in the link, which doesn't work. However, for people without irc: set up,

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: Deputy-[Herald] Scroll of Agora

On Sat, 15 Sep 2018, D Margaux wrote: I think the Herald must timely award the patent title Champion after a victory per Rule 649: “... A person permitted and enabled to award (revoke) a Patent Title SHALL do so in a timely fashion after the conditions authorizing em to do so are announced,

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: Deputy-[Herald] Scroll of Agora

On Sat, 15 Sep 2018, D Margaux wrote: I CoE this Monthly Report on the ground that twg and I won by Apathy I don't think this CoE is correct, because Champion is not automatically awarded and the Herald isn't required to report wins per se. Greetings, Ørjan.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Declaration of Apathy

On Fri, 14 Sep 2018, Kerim Aydin wrote: On Fri, 14 Sep 2018, Ørjan Johansen wrote: This seems to be an argument for replacing (or complementing) "clear" by "unobfuscated" in the relevant rule text. Huh, actually, a leading definition of "obfuscated" is "u

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Declaration of Apathy

On Thu, 13 Sep 2018, Kerim Aydin wrote: 1. The Parliamentary Tradition: "Without Objection" has more dangerous consequences than win by Apathy (e.g. Ruleset changes). In a legislature, if you mumbled "any objections?" so only you could hear it, then said "with no objections I proceed", it

DIS: Re: OFF: [Registrar] Weekly Report

On Sun, 9 Sep 2018, Kerim Aydin wrote: Fora (Rule 478, self-ratifying) Discussion irc://irc.freenode.net:6667/##nomic discussion There seems to be a http: in the link, which doesn't work. However, for people without irc: set up,

DIS: Re: BUS: End-of-month business

On Sat, 1 Sep 2018, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: I intend, with Agoran Consent, to award the Badge "Badge of Accidental Loom Destruction" to myself, Trigon and Corona. I find it an extraordinary coincidence that three players have managed to accomplish this, completely independently. Needs more

DIS: Re: BUS: Proposal: Slow your quorum

On Sun, 26 Aug 2018, Edward Murphy wrote: I submit the following proposal and destroy the minimum amount of paper required to pend it (I think this is either 0 or 1). This definition of Baseline Quorum doesn't seem to make it the actual quorum for anything. Greetings, Ørjan. Proposal:

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   >