Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: 3527 judgement

> On Jun 22, 2017, at 12:09 PM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote: > > > > On Thu, 22 Jun 2017, Owen Jacobson wrote: >> I issue Gaelan a Green Card by summary judgement. >> I award Gaelan a Green Card by summary judgement. > > Is "green

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: 3527 judgement

Thank you. > On Jun 22, 2017, at 11:39 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus > wrote: > > NttPF -o signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: 3527 judgement

V.J Rada wrote: > I also point the finger at gaelan for being late on two CFJs and the SLR > (twice, I think) These would be CFJs 3520 and 3521, both assigned on June 6th, 2017: 14 days prior to the Finger-Pointing above. Rule 591 (“Delivering Judgements”) states, in part: > When a CFJ is

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: It's been a while.

> On Jun 20, 2017, at 11:52 AM, grok (caleb vines) wrote: > > oof, also my apologies for the walls of text. i'm playing with gmail's > plain text editor and the input box doesn't automatically line break > for me. those paragraphs are...denser than expected. I see nothing

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: pointless (has this been tried before?)

> On Jun 20, 2017, at 11:45 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > > On Tue, 20 Jun 2017, grok (caleb vines) wrote: >> Why not just require that shinies may only be given in positive >> integers? Or that any entity that would give shinies may not give >> fractional parts of

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] CFJ 3524 assigned to Publius Scribonius Scholasticus

On Jun 20, 2017, at 5:36 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote: > I find CFJ 3524 FALSE, as the ruleset clearly and undebatebly specifies in > plain terms that any previous holding of a White Ribbon under any ruleset > precludes the action that

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: CFJ 3527 assigned to V.J. Rada

On Jun 19, 2017, at 7:23 PM, V.J Rada wrote: > I promise to post what I'm thinking of first in case I ignore things like > that. Hopefully I don't mess it up. There is absolutely no harm in diving in with both feet, for what it’s worth. As the Judge, you can open a

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: It's been a while.

Now that e’s back: I’ve been objecting partly out of recognition and gratitude for the fact that omd is spending eir personal resources making sure we have lists on which to play this game. Since the enactment of the Shiny economy, this has also meant that omd has drawn a small stipend for

DIS: Re: BUS: pointless (has this been tried before?)

On Jun 19, 2017, at 6:23 PM, omd wrote: > I pay ais523 0.5 shinies. > > CFJ: ais523 has 0 shinies. > > Arguments: > > First of all, does 0.5 count as an "amount" per Rule 2483? Gratuity: there’s an elision here for stylistic reasons, but the rules nonetheless bar

Re: DIS: Regulations v2

> On Jun 19, 2017, at 2:29 AM, Aris Merchant > <thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 8:47 AM, Owen Jacobson <o...@grimoire.ca> wrote: >> >> On Jun 17, 2017, at 11:53 PM, Aris Merchant >> <thoughtsoflifeandli

DIS: Ordering

Can we adopt a style guide imposing a canonical ordering on entries in reports? I nearly CFJ’d that omd had been silently deregistered by ratification (rather, “omd was a player before eir message ‘I register’”) because I skimmed the registrar’s report and didn’t see em there. Turns out omd and

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] A two-fer

Easy come, easy go. -o > On Jun 19, 2017, at 1:43 AM, Quazie <quazieno...@gmail.com> wrote: > > You did lose the 12 shinies though, can't retract that unfortunately > > On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 22:39 Owen Jacobson <o...@grimoire.ca > <mailto:o...@grimoir

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Proposal] A two-fer

> On Jun 19, 2017, at 1:32 AM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote: > > > > On Mon, 19 Jun 2017, Owen Jacobson wrote: >> Title: This Isn't Even A Scam >> Author: o >> Adoption Index: 0.1 > > Are you meaning to get this pas

DIS: Re: OFF: [Secretary] Weekly Report

On Jun 19, 2017, at 1:13 AM, Owen Jacobson <o...@grimoire.ca> wrote: > - time of last report - > > Events marked with a ! are provisional pending the outcome of one or > more CFJs. This isn’t a typo, incidentally. There really weren’t any Shiny transactions or Or

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Secretary] Weekly Report

> On Jun 18, 2017, at 11:01 PM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote: > > > > On Sun, 18 Jun 2017, Owen Jacobson wrote: >> I tend to treat the rule about consent as an informative observation about >> the nature of Agora, and not as a normative part

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Secretary] Weekly Report

> On Jun 17, 2017, at 5:49 PM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote: > > > > On Fri, 16 Jun 2017, Owen Jacobson wrote: >>> 6. If a non-player publicly pledges but says e isn't being bound by the >>> rules, >>> is it a R2450 Agora

Re: DIS: Automated/Automation-assisted Bureaucracy

> On Jun 17, 2017, at 9:36 AM, CuddleBeam wrote: > > With the new Agora site on the horizon, would it be possible to have some > bureaucratic matters be handled by a GNDT-like system? (The GNDT is a little > web code thing on BlogNomic that very comfortably handles

Re: DIS: Regulations v2

> On Jun 17, 2017, at 11:53 PM, Aris Merchant > wrote: An example regulation might be helpful for reasoning about this. It should not be part of the proposal though… I’m using the difference between https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/06r17

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Secretary] Weekly Report

> On Jun 16, 2017, at 3:35 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > > On Fri, 16 Jun 2017, Josh T wrote: >>> Which rule is authorizing the issuance of a card? >> Rule 2450, where it says that breaking a pledge is a cardable offense. > > Food for thought: > > 1. CAN is the

Re: DIS: Proto: Circuit Board

> A Player can make a Circuit Board by announcement. A Circuit Board's length > and complexity should be Reasonable but at most 2000 words long. What is the most recent public message, which does not contain a report or any fragment of a report, which is 2,000 words long or longer? > A Circuit

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Secretary] Weekly Report

On Jun 16, 2017, at 8:44 PM, CuddleBeam wrote: > >Kerim Aydin > >'s > > post > > To add to that, can non-players perform unregulated actions? > > Non-players actually being

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: An apology

On Jun 16, 2017, at 3:40 AM, Josh T wrote: > I just wanted to mention that I approve of what you did with the apology > words. I hope you enjoyed writing them as much as I enjoyed coming up with > the word list. > > 天火狐 Well, thank you. Truth be told, that was

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: An apology

> On Jun 16, 2017, at 1:32 AM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote: > > On Fri, 16 Jun 2017, Owen Jacobson wrote: >> charged with keeping a perfect and omniscient watch over the activities >> of Agora. Even had I been a present and obedient servant, I am only

DIS: Re: BUS: humble agoran farmer lottery

On Jun 15, 2017, at 5:40 PM, CuddleBeam wrote: > With an emulation of 2 Agoran Support, I'm going to add to the "rules" of the > lottery the following: > > - Purchasers of a HAFL Ticket must also choose a 5-number string for their > ticket, which is that "ticket's

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Secretary] Weekly Report

On Jun 15, 2017, at 7:14 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > On Thu, 15 Jun 2017, Alex Smith wrote: >> On Thu, 2017-06-15 at 07:49 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote: >>> Secretary's Weekly Report >> >> Just to make absolutely sure: >> >> CoE: You are not the Secretary. > > C'mon now. You

DIS: Re: OFF: [Secretary] Weekly Report

I don’t think I can do anything about this, formally, since you’re still not a player, but if you insist I can put together a theory under which this should be carded. nichdel’s already done most of the legwork. This does appear to be a purported report - at least, sending a complete report

Re: DIS: 1 person playing as many players?

On Jun 13, 2017, at 6:49 PM, Quazie wrote: > > Proto Proposal: > AI = 4 > Title: When two become one > Rule: 'A short list of things that are too agregious to even attempt' > Doing any of the following is `Treating Agora Right Bad Forever` and are > bannable offenses: > -

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Interaction between CFJ 1709 and R869

> On Jun 13, 2017, at 5:17 PM, V.J Rada wrote: > > "I Point My Finger at um... what's your nickname? Kerim, anyway. For clear > reasons, let's see what happens though” Incidentally, I’m pleased to see the finger-pointing system getting some use. Thanks for this test case!

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: I Point the Finger

Ah, > On Jun 15, 2017, at 2:01 AM, Quazie <quazieno...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Nttpf > On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 22:58 Owen Jacobson <o...@grimoire.ca > <mailto:o...@grimoire.ca>> wrote: > On Jun 13, 2017, at 4:38 AM, V.J Rada <vijar...@gmail.com > <mai

DIS: Re: BUS: I Point the Finger

On Jun 13, 2017, at 4:38 AM, V.J Rada wrote: > I Point the Finger at Cuddlebeam. On 25 May he said "I pledge to not > submit Judgement on CFJ 3509." > (https://www.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-business/2017-May/034882.html > >

Re: DIS: new player limits and bonuses

> On Jun 12, 2017, at 5:06 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > > We used to have a "newbie" category that lasted at least a month. > [This is inspired by CuddleBeam's recent CFJ, but not just because > of that, CuddleBeam, there are several instances in the archives > of new

Re: DIS: new player limits and bonuses

> On Jun 12, 2017, at 9:05 PM, CuddleBeam wrote: > > >The proposal things > > Maybe its just me but I'm not particularly motivated to make proposals. Its a > bit because of Adam Smith-like economics and personal greed I guess. > > I know that using my shinies to

DIS: Noteworthy judgements

Since we’ve had a rather large number of new CFJs recently, I figure it’s worth sanity-checking the results of that process. Which recent-ish judgements should be called out as particularly well thought-out or well-presented, or should serve as a model for future judgements? -o

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Secretary] Weekly Report

Gameplay note: On Jun 14, 2017, at 3:23 AM, Quazie wrote: > COE - I paid 30 shinies to pend my 5 oroposals In the interests of friendliness and expedience, I choose to interpret > For each proposal submitted above, of which there are 5, I N shinies to Agora > to pend

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Referee] Weekly Report

> On Jun 14, 2017, at 4:17 AM, V.J Rada wrote: > > "As Referee, I believe there are no outstanding rules violations in the > preceding Agoran week, for which a Card has not already been issued" > > For clarity, this doesn't mean the investigations into my finger pointing

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Secretary] Payday (revision 2)

A two-fer: On Jun 14, 2017, at 1:51 PM, Ørjan Johansen <oer...@nvg.ntnu.no> wrote: > On Wed, 14 Jun 2017, Owen Jacobson wrote: > >> Sprocklem 10 >> 天火狐 10 > > The 10 after 天火狐 isn't lined up with the rest.

DIS: Re: OFF: Distribution of Proposals 7858-7863

I vote as follows: > ID Author(s) AI Title Pender Pend fee (sh.) > - > 7958* Aris, [1] 3.0 Assets v7 Aris 6 FOR. Aris, your commitment to making this happen is

DIS: Re: OFF: [CotC] CFJ 3497 Judged FALSE by Aris

> Judge's Arguments: > > I was considering playing along with this, but frankly, given > everything that's happened, I'm not in the mood. Even the caller has > practically admitted that this CFJ is frivolous (the message was > entitled "A little levity"). The only sensible reading of the rule is

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: This isn't what I thought it would be

> On Jun 10, 2017, at 11:47 AM, Alex Smith <ais...@alumni.bham.ac.uk> wrote: > > On Sat, 2017-06-10 at 04:04 -0400, Owen Jacobson wrote: >> Separately, we’ve still not reverted the requirement that a payment >> to pend a proposal happen Without 3 Objections that was

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Secretary] Payday

is not. However, that’s not a 4:15 in the morning job. -o > On Jun 2, 2017, at 1:41 AM, Aris Merchant > <thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 10:33 PM, Owen Jacobson <o...@grimoire.ca> wrote: > >> >> Additionally, Agora has

DIS: Re: BUS: This isn't what I thought it would be

I’m way late to this party, and I’m aware I’m running the risk of reigniting a bit of a fight by bringing it up, but, I _heartily_ endorse grok’s lament: > On May 29, 2017, at 12:58 PM, grok (caleb vines) wrote: > > I was really excited to play legislative-based, classic

DIS: Re: BUS: fellow non-player judge nichdel

> On May 31, 2017, at 6:27 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > > A reminder to nichdel: as per recent judgement, even as a > non-player you remain assigned to CFJ 3513, and if you judged > it would be valid. It's right now right on the 1-week deadline. > >

DIS: Has anyone pointed out…

Has anyone pointed out, or ideally discussed in more detail, the idea that ratification without objection is _very_ close to the deliberative idea of suspending the rules[wp]? There are a number of gameplay problems that can (or, in the case of decapitated agencies, have) happened that

Re: DIS: Not dead

On Jun 9, 2017, at 9:01 PM, Owen Jacobson <o...@grimoire.ca> wrote: > Hi folks, > > Sorry about the extended absence at a bad moment. I’m catching up, but I’m > about 550 messages behind - bids and estates are a priority. Then I plan to > issue myself a Card for the o

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Thesis] Actions in Nomic

Be careful about applying Agora norms, three and a half decades later, to Suber’s 1982 ruleset. On May 28, 2017, at 12:21 PM, CuddleBeam wrote: > - "Interestingly, Suber’s ruleset leaves very basic actions such as joining > or leaving the game unregulated allowing

Re: DIS: Issuing a card for the wrong reason generating infinite loop

> On May 27, 2017, at 7:31 AM, CuddleBeam wrote: > > (I know this is related to that CFJ I didn't want to judge but this is more > of a generalization which I've thought based on my own would-be Judgement, to > better understand if my would-be Judgement would be

DIS: Not dead

Hi folks, Sorry about the extended absence at a bad moment. I’m catching up, but I’m about 550 messages behind - bids and estates are a priority. Then I plan to issue myself a Card for the offices I’ve neglected before stepping down as Referee. Anyone have a suggestion for an apology word

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Secretary] Weekly Report

e report? > On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 21:26 Owen Jacobson <o...@grimoire.ca > <mailto:o...@grimoire.ca>> wrote: > Astonishingly, this managed to fall neatly between the various attempts to > keep Shinies in flux. > > -o > > > On Jun 2, 2017, at 12:26 AM, Owen

DIS: Re: OFF: [Secretary] Payday

A bunch of reports are unrepresented here, as the officers responsible have deregistered. Also, this is a _ton_ of paperwork. -o > On Jun 2, 2017, at 1:33 AM, Owen Jacobson <o...@grimoire.ca> wrote: > > Date of this payday: Thu 1 Jun, 2017 > Date of last payday

DIS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposal 7858

I vote as follows: > ID Author(s) AI Title PenderPend fee > (sh.) > - > 7858* Gaelan 3.0 Fast Resolution, now workingais523N/A [1] AGAINST. It’s a really interesting

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [ADoP] Initiating Elections Again (Referee, ADoP, Registrar)

> On Jun 1, 2017, at 9:56 PM, Aris Merchant > <thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 6:45 PM Owen Jacobson <o...@grimoire.ca > <mailto:o...@grimoire.ca>> wrote: > I vote as follows: > > I initiate an election for

DIS: Re: OFF: [Secretary] Weekly Report

Astonishingly, this managed to fall neatly between the various attempts to keep Shinies in flux. -o > On Jun 2, 2017, at 12:26 AM, Owen Jacobson <o...@grimoire.ca> wrote: > > Secretary's Weekly Report > > Date of this report: Sun, 28 May 2017 signature.asc Descri

DIS: Re: BUS: [ADoP] Initiating Elections Again (Referee, ADoP, Registrar)

I vote as follows: > I initiate an election for Referee, as there has been no election since the > last win. I initiate the Agoran decision to determine the new Referee. For > this decision, the vote collector is the ADoP and the valid options are the > players (PRESENT is also a valid vote). o. >

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Buy your way to victory

> On May 24, 2017, at 8:02 PM, Ørjan Johansen wrote: > > On Wed, 24 May 2017, caleb vines wrote: > >> On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 11:44 AM, Gaelan Steele wrote: >> >>> In the victory election, I vote for myself, then the set of all players >>> who gave me

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Resolution of Proposal(s) 7852

There was a defect in the original Payday rules for this round of economics that had two consequences: 1. Inaccuracies in the message purporting to perform the Payday payments likely rendered the whole attempt void, and 2. If the office of Secretary were to be vacant or idle, then Paydays

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: CFJs 3471-3472

> On May 24, 2017, at 5:32 PM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote: > > > > On Tue, 23 May 2017, Owen Jacobson wrote: >> https://ap02.alpine.washington.edu/alpine/alpine/2.0/view/0/agora/80517 >> On May 23, 2017, at 5:27 PM, Kerim Aydin <ke...

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Proto: Stamps

> On May 24, 2017, at 4:24 PM, Nic Evans wrote: > > It's monthly (though that's only stated indirectly), because an org can > be destroyed if it hasn't paid the admin fee in a given month. That may be the intent, but I don’t think that’s how it reads: >>> An organization

DIS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] CFJ 3493, 3494 assigned to Aris

On May 19, 2017, at 3:10 PM, Alex Smith wrote: > On Tue, 2017-05-16 at 10:00 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote: >> I CFJ on: Immediately after my most recent deregistration, I had a Balance >> Switch with a value greater than 0. > > This is CFJ 3494. I assign it to Aris.

Re: DIS: humble agoran farmer attempts to invent the noose

Does the clause “X is a cardable offence” override the clause “A Card is a recognition of a specific violation of the rules?” The former doesn’t actually make X against the rules. I mention this, because it appears that the result could in fact be 1,000 broken pledges, and no further

DIS: An essential diff between Agora and Github

Agoran proposals (and instruments, generally) take effect in the order the clauses of the propsal are written. This is not practical to represent in a Git diff, and, as far as I know, there’s no workaround. Be cautious of treating Github artefacts, such as diffs and pull requests, as

Re: DIS: Rule Numbering

> On May 25, 2017, at 2:25 AM, Gaelan Steele wrote: > > How attached is everyone to the current rule numbering scheme? I’ve started > applying proposals on git branches as they are distributed (so I can just > merge them when resolution rolls around), but I realized that

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: I won't judge CFJ 3509

Stating an intention to break a rule isn’t against the rules. No infraction, no card. -o > On May 25, 2017, at 12:34 AM, Quazie wrote: > > It would also be nice if the Referee had enough power to call a delay of > game, and refuse the judge emself (but id like that to

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] CFJ 3505 assigned to Quazie

> On May 23, 2017, at 9:09 PM, Quazie wrote: > > If i am the judge, how am I not the judge summoned to the CFJ? Eir > conditional didn't say that e paid a shiney to the barred judge, but to the > summoned judge. Hang on, I don’t think that matters. The pledges,

DIS: Re: BUS: Prime Minister Takes a Dive... well, probably not

> On May 23, 2017, at 8:21 PM, Quazie wrote: > > I issue the Cabinet Order of Dive: > {{{ > I award myself a Green Card for attempting a known IMPOSSIBLE action > (This very attempt at issuing the Cabinet Order: Dive). > }}} > > The above action is impossible, as

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] Full Logical Ruleset

On May 23, 2017, at 6:57 PM, Alex Smith wrote: > > On Tue, 2017-05-23 at 12:59 -0600, Sprocklem S wrote: >> Proposal: Ruleset Ratification >> {{{ >> Amend Rule 1681 ("The Logical Rulesets") by appending the following >> paragraph at the end: >> >> The portions of the

DIS: Re: BUS: CFJs 3471-3472

> On May 23, 2017, at 5:27 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > CFJ 3472: 白票 yields "a white paper". This is clearly not a valid vote. > I judge 3472 FALSE. I’m surprised at this. I had assumed this was meant to translate as PRESENT - it’s an unmarked, but cast, ballot. -o

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] Full Logical Ruleset

> On May 23, 2017, at 2:09 PM, Aris Merchant > wrote: > > I don't think it is. We don't want people to, for instance, change a > rule to open a loophole and let it self-ratify. Report's don't self > ratify unless the rules say they do, so I don't think there

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Article 5 invokation

That would be telling. -o > On May 23, 2017, at 6:54 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus > wrote: > > What is this? > > > Publius Scribonius Scholasticus > > On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 12:52 AM, Kerim Aydin

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] Full Logical Ruleset

> On May 22, 2017, at 9:53 PM, Josh T wrote: > > Regardless if the Pink Slip is valid, I get the feeling that a Red Card of > some sort ought to be coming forthwith given the level of ire incited, but my > gauge on that front may be inaccurate. Personally, I think

Re: DIS: Report Event History Ordering

> On May 22, 2017, at 7:55 PM, Quazie wrote: > > Does this ordering look correct: > 2017-05-22 - Quazie establishes WTQ > 2017-05-22 - CuddleBeam establishes ACP > 2017-05-22 - CuddleBeam establishes BGW > 2017-05-21 - Quazie changes GOD > 2017-05-20 - Quazie establishes

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] Full Logical Ruleset

> On May 22, 2017, at 9:30 PM, Gaelan Steele wrote: > > I don’t think the Pink Slip is valid. > > Rule 2476/0: "A Pink Slip is a type of Card that is appropriate for abuses of > official power for personal gain. A Pink Slip CANNOT be issued unless the > reason indicates the

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] CFJ 3505 assigned to Quazie

> On May 23, 2017, at 9:09 PM, Quazie wrote: > > If i am the judge, how am I not the judge summoned to the CFJ? Eir > conditional didn't say that e paid a shiney to the barred judge, but to the > summoned judge. Oh, hell. -o signature.asc Description: Message

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] CFJ 3505 assigned to Quazie

So, in order: 1. I’m pretty sure Cuddlebeam’s condition is invalid, and thus no judges are barred. 2. Therefore, the final proviso “as long as … the barring attempt above had barred someone” in eir pledge does not hold. 3. Therefore, the pledge does not hold. 4. Therefore, the condition “the

DIS: Re: BUS: humble agoran farmer reunites with long-lost twins, becomes immortal and sells CFJ slots for only $2.99

In case it’s not obvious, I suspect that > Powers: Agents may post a message on Cuddlebeam's behalf grants no powers whatsoever, and that such a message would in fact be posted on the Agent’s own behalf, even if it purported to be posted on Cuddlebeam’s behalf. -o signature.asc

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Criminal judges sought

> On May 22, 2017, at 12:39 PM, Quazie wrote: > > Grok - you can always point a finger with similar results. > > o - If someone were to abuse the power, would you be the one to get the Pink > Slip as they'd be abusing the power of the Referee on your behalf? A

DIS: CFJs 3502 , 3503 judged

On May 20, 2017, at 3:47 PM, Alex Smith wrote: > On Sat, 2017-05-20 at 07:04 +, Quazie wrote: >> I CFJ on the following Two Linked Statements: >> It is possible to create an agency such that its acronym contains at least >> one integer symbol (e.g. 0-9). >> It is

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: CFJ 3482 found FALSE.

> On May 22, 2017, at 2:58 AM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote: > > > > On Mon, 22 May 2017, Owen Jacobson wrote: >> Oy. What a hash I’ve made, all by failing to search for a single term. > > Yah, that rule has two fairly buried definitions; t

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Referee] Weekly Report

It does. Note the date of the report and the date of the Card. -o > On May 22, 2017, at 1:59 AM, Quazie <quazieno...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I take it the pink slip makes next week's report? > > > On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 22:56 Owen Jacobson <o...@grimoire.ca > &l

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] Full Logical Ruleset

> On May 21, 2017, at 11:20 PM, Quazie wrote: > > I COE on this FLR - it contains an intent to win by apathy, which I believe > wouldn't have worked and would have instead added garbage to the ruleset. As the Referee, I am extremely disappointed with our Rulekeepor for

Re: DIS: Etiquette for huge plaintext?

Generally, just send it. The list has a message size limit, but it’s hefty, and you’ll get a bounce message if you exceed it. There are precedents allowing multiple messages to be treated as a single action. If the reason it’s huge is that it contains a huge number of actions, one of two

DIS: Re: BUS: [Herald] Let us begin the winning

I am, in fact, tired of winning. > On May 21, 2017, at 6:10 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus > wrote: > > I hereby initiate a Victory Election with all players or announced > non-players as valid options and the Herald as the vote collector. I

DIS: Re: BUS: Ok so maybe everyone in the universe is playing Nomic

I’ll note that you appear to be reproducing Peter Suber’s thesis, one piece at a time, and adding paradoxical constraints in the process: > If appropriate qualifications are made for the informality of custom and > etiquette, a case could be made that normal social life is just a system of >

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Ribbons

> On May 21, 2017, at 12:44 AM, Nic Evans wrote: > > I read the rule as having two mechanisms: 1 where you qualify by virtue of > never having it, and therefore being able to award it, 2 where anyone can > award it to anyone regardless of qualificaiton if they haven't

DIS: Re: BUS: Hello and proposal

Welcome! This appears to be very similar to the Reportor (r. 2446), and this proposal would be improved by making it clear how the office of Digestive System differs from that office. -o > On May 21, 2017, at 12:17 AM, James Beirne wrote: > > I'd like to register

DIS: Re: BUS: CFJ: Call for Piñata

Quis tonsoriet ipsos tonsores? Or something. My latin’s never been anything but shit. -o > On May 20, 2017, at 11:27 PM, CuddleBeam wrote: > > Employing the power of Rule 991/17, I submit a Call for Judgement for the > following statement: > > "Can this statement

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Super Election Season

Sold. After I finish up the current Secretary’s weekly reports, I’ll put what I have on Github. We can refine from there. I’d prefer changes by pull request over commits, please. I’m still responsible for the correctness of the report. -o > On May 20, 2017, at 7:28 PM, Publius Scribonius

DIS: Re: OFF: CFJ 3469 judged DISMISS

On May 20, 2017, at 11:06 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote: > I judge CFJ 3469 DISMISS because of the typo. In final and complete satisfaction of my pledge, if I inherited G.’s Shinies, I pay Publius Scribonius Scholasticus 20 shinies for

Re: DIS: Proto-proposal: Some economic suggestions

I need to write a more comprehensive reply to this, but as it’s been three days and I still haven’t read all of the followups, I’m going to throw this out first while it’s still semi-fresh: On May 17, 2017, at 11:17 PM, Alex Smith wrote: > > Create a new rule, "Tax

Re: DIS: Proto: Faster Vote Resolution

On May 20, 2017, at 2:50 AM, Gaelan Steele wrote: > Perhaps I’m impatient, but 7 days is an awfully long time to wait when most > players vote within a day or two of the decision being announced. I protose > this: > > Create a rule named “Early Resolution” with power 3.1: >

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Re: [Arbitor] OFF: [Deputy Arbitor] Judge assignments

misspelled. Hence: yes, I believe I conditionally paid you 40 Shinies. Or that I conditionally failed to do so. Definitely one of them. -o > On May 20, 2017, at 2:27 AM, Gaelan Steele <g...@canishe.com> wrote: > > So you conditionally paid me 40? > > Gaelan > >> On May

Re: DIS: Programmable actions:

> On May 19, 2017, at 4:02 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus > wrote: > > So, does that mean that this does not allow exceeding mailing list thresholds. I’m not aware of any precedent giving the technical limits of a specific forum any

Re: DIS: The Gmail (or really modern web mail) problem

On May 19, 2017, at 2:13 PM, Quazie wrote: > Proto-Proposal: This time to a public forum > Create a new rule, power .5 entitled "Traveling Message Infraction" with the > following text: > {{{ > Players SHOULD NOT muddy up the waters by sending messages first to a >

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Re: [Arbitor] OFF: [Deputy Arbitor] Judge assignments

t G's shinies? Did you pay me 20, and pay 20 to my nonexistent doppelgänger > with no taste in vowels? > > GaelAn > >> On May 19, 2017, at 10:35 PM, Owen Jacobson <o...@grimoire.ca> wrote: >> >> In partial satisfaction of my pledge to pay for judgements on

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: 蘭亭社の憲章の修正箇条 2017/05/19

On May 19, 2017, at 11:08 AM, Gaelan Steele wrote: > I think that at least one of these are true: > - unclear (obvious reasons) > - ambiguous (any translation between languages is inherently ambiguous) > - depends on information which is unreasonably difficult to determine (a

DIS: Re: BUS: A new agency approaches

> On May 18, 2017, at 7:25 PM, Quazie wrote: > > I establish the following Agency: (This is my 24 hours notice) > > Title: G is Overloard of Dunce (GOD) Spelled thus? -o signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

DIS: Re: BUS: [ADoP] Resolution of Surveyor Election Decision

Thank you. I look forward to serving. -o > On May 18, 2017, at 5:32 PM, Nic Evans wrote: > > I resolve the Agoran decision of electing Surveyor with o as the winner. > What follows is the IRV results. > >

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: (no subject)

It’d be nice if those links included an effective date or some other revision identifier, to make them stable against future rule changes. Maybe I’ll hack something up. Since it appears that P.S.S. has broken at least one rule regardless of eir beliefs about eir job, and for lack of a better

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Deputy Tailor] Ribbons

I would be required to Card you for the broken pledge. I don’t particularly _want_ to, but I could be carded in return for failing to do so, and I’ve a sneaking suspicion Gaelan would be watching for it. Cards have some weird incentives. -o > On May 18, 2017, at 3:22 PM, Publius Scribonius

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Cyan Ribbons of the Grand Deputies

I run my own mail infrastructure (fx: waits for the gasps of shock to die down) and I didn’t get that, either. I’ll have to check what got eaten by spamd, but I think we might have a delivery problem. -o > On May 18, 2017, at 2:20 AM, Quazie wrote: > > We have Cyans

Re: DIS: Proto-proposal: Some economic suggestions

> On May 17, 2017, at 11:26 PM, Gaelan Steele wrote: > > The only problem I see is that the secretary is free to cheat on the > randomness with no accountability. It’s possible to generate verifiable > randomness (hash of the Bitcoin block mined immediately after the

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   >