On Tue, 30 Jul 2013, Michael Slone wrote:
I think I'm missing something in the rules, though. Actions
performed with notice require Agoran Satisfaction (1728(c)).
Rule 2124, which defines Agoran Satisfaction, appears to require
the action to fall into one or more of the following categories:
On Mon, 29 Jul 2013, Fool wrote:
The sentences in question are not directly self-referential or even
mutually-referential. This is more of a Curry-flavoured confused deputy, with
rule 2337 as the deputy. It says that the author can destroy a promise with
notice IFF the sentence in its
On Mon, 29 Jul 2013, Fool wrote:
On 29/07/2013 6:20 PM, Ørjan Johansen wrote:
On Mon, 29 Jul 2013, Fool wrote:
The sentences in question are not directly self-referential or even
mutually-referential. This is more of a Curry-flavoured confused
deputy, with rule 2337 as the deputy. It says
On Mon, 29 Jul 2013, Alex Smith wrote:
If they dispose of their dictatorship quickly via win+trophy, Agora
typically tolerates them. (Sometimes there's a race where someone with a
power-1 dictatorship tries to get it at a higher power; normally the
time limit for that is long enough for the
On Mon, 29 Jul 2013, Fool wrote:
On 29/07/2013 7:33 PM, Ørjan Johansen wrote:
On Mon, 29 Jul 2013, Fool wrote:
I assume Assessor.
Voting results for Proposals 7530-7547:
COE:
By Rule 1950, the eligible voting entities are set at the _distribution_
of the proposal. I am not sure whether
On Mon, 29 Jul 2013, Fool wrote:
On 29/07/2013 7:46 PM, Ørjan Johansen wrote:
See the recent TIME OUT scam... making someone not an eligible voter
does set their voting limit to 0.
I'm claiming you haven't made them not eligible voters in the first
place, even if you deregistered them
On Fri, 26 Jul 2013, Ørjan Johansen wrote:
I would correspondingly find it natural for the TDoC of the sender to be
consulted for when a message is _sent_, if the rules were otherwise silent,
which however they currently are not (date stamps), albeit in a not very
clarifying way.
Oh also I
On Fri, 26 Jul 2013, Alex Smith wrote:
Finally, CFJ 866 seems to be relevant background reading too (and also
supports this verdict), and may be responsible for the TDoC confusion
(in that it holds that the /recipient's/ TDoC is what matters, not
the /sender's/ TDoC).
FWIW IMO as the original
On Fri, 26 Jul 2013, Alex Smith wrote:
received is what the recent precedents indicate. (The rules require
the message to be sent via a public forum, rule 478, and it hasn't
gone via the forum until both the sender has sent it, and the recipient
has received it. Also I can't construct a
On Wed, 17 Jul 2013, omd wrote:
Right. Mailman is really vintage code... The list should now:
- rewrite date headers to be the actual time of receipt, as briefly
attempted before;
- include a new X-Timestamp header to provide additional precision if required;
- by default, only send back
On Tue, 16 Jul 2013, Steven Gardner wrote:
Entreco Rule 8, Idealism:
The state of Entreco is determined by what its players believe
that it is. The state of the game can be changed by the
consensus (including unintentionally, if a mistake is made in
applying the rules,
On Tue, 16 Jul 2013, Alex Smith wrote:
More Interesting Timing Scams (AI 3, Proposal Fee Y20)
Add a new paragraph to rule 478, just before its last paragraph:
{{{
As an exception to the rest of this rule, no message is a public message
if, during the 1-hour period that ends when that
On Sat, 13 Jul 2013, omd wrote:
Proposal: The Wisconsin Line-Item Veto (AI=2)
When a Signed Copy is submitted, its Power is set to the minimum
^^^
of four and adoption index of the proposal, and then it takes
On Sat, 13 Jul 2013, Tanner Swett wrote:
On Jul 13, 2013, at 4:01 AM, Ørjan Johansen wrote:
On Sat, 13 Jul 2013, omd wrote:
Proposal: The Wisconsin Line-Item Veto (AI=2)
When a Signed Copy is submitted, its Power is set to the minimum
On Fri, 12 Jul 2013, Kerim Aydin wrote:
On Fri, 12 Jul 2013, John Smith wrote:
I intend with 1 ais523 support to join the alliance containing ais523.
CfJ, barring ais523: If ais523 immediately replies to that intent with 'I support
and do so', I become a member of the same alliance as
Oh hm, reading further it seems I must also include proof that the
conditions are satisfied.
I once again attempt to cash this promise, with the message further below
as proof the conditions are satisfied.
Greetings,
Ørjan.
On Thu, 11 Jul 2013, Ørjan Johansen wrote:
On Wed, 10 Jul 2013
...and on second thought, I don't think including the proof was actually
necessary, since that only applies to the _text_ of the promise, not its
condition. :P
Greetings,
Ørjan.
On Thu, 11 Jul 2013, Ørjan Johansen wrote:
*sigh* pf
On Thu, 11 Jul 2013, Ørjan Johansen wrote:
Oh hm
On Mon, 8 Jul 2013, Alex Smith wrote:
I meant buggy requirement as a hypothetical in my quote (as in,
satisfies the requirement if it's bugged).
FWIW, I meant omd's interpretation when I wrote the rule originally. Not
that that really counts for anything. (And not that either
interpretation is
On Mon, 8 Jul 2013, Kerim Aydin wrote:
On Mon, 8 Jul 2013, Fool wrote:
Generally I don't think it's true the meta-agreement is subject to amendment
by even true nomic. There are still limits. What if we made Agora purport to
be played by the NZ All Blacks?
This would paralyze the rule until
On Mon, 8 Jul 2013, omd wrote:
On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 5:16 PM, Lindar Greenwood
lindartheb...@gmail.com wrote:
I initiate a CFJ on the following:
The common vernacular for someone who does something is Xor, where a Xor Xes.
By rule 2408 the 'recordkeepor' is the title for one who keeps
On Tue, 9 Jul 2013, Sean Hunt wrote:
I hereby initiate the Agoran Decisions to select the holders of the
offices of Ambassador-At-Large and Promotor. The vote collector is the
IADoP; the eligible voters are the active first-class players.
The candidates for Ambassador-At-Large are Walker and
On Sun, 7 Jul 2013, omd wrote:
On Sun, Jul 7, 2013 at 8:51 PM, Tanner Swett swe...@mail.gvsu.edu wrote:
Pretty sure the Gerontocracy is irrelevant. The only things that matter
(pretending Lindar's message was effective) are that Fool announced
intent within the correct time period, Fool is
On Mon, 8 Jul 2013, Steven Gardner wrote:
R2357:
An Elder is a first-class player who has been registered
continuously for at least 32 days, and also registered for at
least 128 days total (not necessarily contiguously).
I was registered continuously from 1 July 1994 until
On Mon, 8 Jul 2013, omd wrote:
On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 12:21 AM, Ørjan Johansen oer...@nvg.ntnu.no wrote:
Did 4 days pass since the declaration of intent already, and if it did so,
given the strong precedence claims, does that mean the action can now be
performed? (Since no Elders have objected
On Wed, 3 Jul 2013, Steven Gardner wrote:
My dim recollection is that it took a kind of high level scam (in the sense
of loophole exploitation, there was no attempt to win) to move away from the
Mutable/Immutable distinction. But we didn't get straight to the Power
system - that came later. The
Agora is older than Eternal September...
Greetings,
Ørjan.
On Wed, 3 Jul 2013, Sean Hunt wrote:
On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 2:12 PM, Ed Murphy emurph...@socal.rr.com wrote:
3343: FALSE
If any party's constitution actually authorized party members to act on
its behalf, then such an inference would be valid. However, no party's
constitution currently does
On Thu, 4 Jul 2013, Elliott Hird wrote:
I intend, with 3 elder support, to declare a gerontocracy.
Is the joke that I've been a Player before y'all and still am not an
Elder? (Or even registered.)
Greetings,
Ørjan.
On Mon, 1 Jul 2013, Chuck Carroll wrote:
A very similar thought had occurred to me, except the Speaker could do even
better than independently selecting a Judge for each possible set; e could
link the sets in such a way to maximize the probability that the same Judge
is selected for each set.
On Mon, 1 Jul 2013, Chuck Carroll wrote:
I also have an idea or two about how a group of players could get around the
requirement of unanimity for making a rule mutable against a single player
determined to prevent all such transmutations.
My vague memory is that something like that is how
On Mon, 1 Jul 2013, omd wrote:
INACTIVE PLAYERS (8)
PlayerInactive since
----
Pavitra 31 Mar 13
Kolja 7 Apr 13
Wooble 7 Apr 13
Machiavelli 13 May 13
Tomas
On Sat, 29 Jun 2013, Fool wrote:
And we have a last minute registration, Ørjan. Just in time to lose!
Yay!
* resolves to read proposals before voting on them in the future :P
Greetings,
Ørjan, still an old-timer in spirit.
Someone should probably update the agoranomic webpage not to say 2010
everywhere hth.
Greetings,
Ørjan.
Happy birthday, Agora!
Greetings,
Ørjan.
On Sat, 29 Jun 2013, Charles Walker wrote:
There will be an irc session in celebration of Agora's birthday in the
##nomic channel on Sunday 30th June (tomorrow) starting at 21:00 UTC.
I am a little confused by this.
Agora's birthday is Sunday 30th June, but in the +1200 (New Zealand)
Sometimes you just have to be there.
Greetings,
Ørjan.
On Sat, 29 Jun 2013, Steven Gardner wrote:
Hello old friend! I thought of you several times today. How are you?
It's complicated.
Greetings,
Ørjan. (I haven't said this for years!)
I register as a player in Agora XX
(I hope this is how it is done.)
Greetings,
Ørjan.
Of Ørjan Johansen
Sent: Friday, June 28, 2013 9:58 AM
To: Agora Discussion List
Subject: DIS: Boo!
Sometimes you just have to be there.
Greetings,
Ørjan.
701 - 739 of 739 matches
Mail list logo
