On Mon, Jun 3, 2024 at 9:58 PM 4st nomic via agora-business <
agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 3, 2024 at 3:47 PM Jaff via agora-official <
> agora-offic...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
>
> > THE BILLBOARD ROCK CHART (STONEMASON'S WEEKLY REPORT)
> >
> > StoneOwner
On Mon, Jun 3, 2024 at 7:22 PM Paul McDowell via agora-business <
agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> I pay a fee of 7 spendies to transfer the minty stone to myself.
>
> I wield the minty stone, specifying myself.
>
> — literallyAmbiguous
I think this doesn't work because the Minty Stone
My wielding of the minty stone failed, right? Because snail had wielded it
three days prior?
On Tue, 4 June 2024, 8:36 am 4st nomic via agora-business, <
agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 3, 2024 at 3:18 PM Jaff via agora-official <
> agora-offic...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
>
> >
On 6/3/24 3:27 PM, nix via agora-discussion wrote:
On 6/3/24 14:25, Janet Cobb via agora-business wrote:
what I
0wrote last time
0wrote
Unforgivable
Agoran dendrochronology
--
Mischief
On 6/3/24 14:25, Janet Cobb via agora-business wrote:
> what I
> 0wrote last time
> 0wrote
Unforgivable
--
nix
Arbitor, Spendor
I think Rule 2509 is relevant here? 'A "number of (items)", where (items)
is a set of discrete entities, is considered to refer to a non-negative
integer, unless otherwise explicitly specified.'
-Aris
On Sat, Jun 1, 2024 at 12:58 PM Janet Cobb via agora-business <
agora-busin...@agoranomic.org>
On 6/1/24 17:25, Mischief via agora-discussion wrote:
> On 6/1/24 3:57 PM, Janet Cobb via agora-business wrote:
>
>> Actually, the fee-based actions rules don't have any special cases for
>> negative values, and you can't destroy a negative number of assets. So I
>> think if the required fee is
On 6/1/24 3:57 PM, Janet Cobb via agora-business wrote:
Actually, the fee-based actions rules don't have any special cases for
negative values, and you can't destroy a negative number of assets. So I
think if the required fee is negative, it's just not possible to do (and
this is... not a crazy
On 6/1/24 14:20, secretsnail9 via agora-business wrote:
> The minimum is 0 just because of how paying fees work. You can't possibly
> create spendies or anything.
>
>> On Jun 1, 2024, at 6:08 AM, Mischief via agora-business
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Additionally, I just realized there's no minimum on
On 6/1/24 7:07 AM, Mischief wrote:
On 5/31/24 7:26 PM, Janet Cobb via agora-business wrote:
On 5/26/24 21:33, Janet Cobb via agora-business wrote:
On 5/25/24 13:39, Janet Cobb via agora-business wrote:
9115~ snail 2.0 Lode Stone
Well:
I change my vote on the
On 5/31/24 4:23 PM, nix via agora-discussion wrote:
What was the cost of this stone when you did that? Shouldn't it be 9
because I transferred it to myself last week? Or is the SLR out of date
on this?
The latter is true. (I haven't been tracking the stone movements closely enough
to say
On 5/30/24 18:58, secretsnail9 via agora-business wrote:
> I pay a fee of 7 spendies to transfer the radiance stone to myself.
> --
> snail
What was the cost of this stone when you did that? Shouldn't it be 9
because I transferred it to myself last week? Or is the SLR out of date
on this?
--
As the Geologist, I object! Stones have nothing to do with the Geologist,
I'll have none of it.
/j
This is the exerpt from the last stonemason's report, from the 26th of May.
I believe "the beginning of the week" has since decreased these costs by 1,
but also, if a stone was transferred, it gets
On 5/29/24 12:18 PM, Paul McDowell via agora-discussion wrote:
Indeed, I was on digest mode so I didn't see it right away. Happy to be here!
Welcome!
You may wish to use the 10 Spendies from your welcome package soon (e.g., on
Stamps, radiance, or stones) since they expire at the end of the
Indeed, I was on digest mode so I didn't see it right away. Happy to be here!
On 5/29/24 08:08, Paul McDowell via agora-business wrote:
> I, literallyAmbiguous, grant myself a welcome package.
Welcome! Looks like Janet beat you to it by a few minutes. Either way,
you've got one.
--
nix
Arbitor, Spendor
On 5/28/24 16:16, Matt Smyth via agora-business wrote:
> Oh - does it still count cus I updated the spreadsheet?
The spreadsheet has no legal effect - it doesn't override messages sent
to the lists. Tho, you may be able to argue it impacts the context? A
bit unlikely imo. It would be most
Oh - does it still count cus I updated the spreadsheet?
On Tue, 28 May 2024, 11:13 pm Janet Cobb via agora-business, <
agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> On 5/27/24 19:12, Matt Smyth via agora-business wrote:
> > I vote as such:
> > vote as follows:
> >>> 9114~ snail
On 5/27/24 14:18, Quadrantal via agora-business wrote:
> CoE: Þe above quoted report is predicated on þe L having owned a blob
> stamp on May 5th. However, in þe below quoted email, ais523 transferred
> þis stamp to emself.
Good catch, I'll fix soon. Thanks!
--
nix
Arbitor, Spendor
On 5/26/24 18:49, Agora amdw42 via agora-business wrote:
> I reach for the minty stone
"Reaching" is no longer a thing. You now transfer them to yourself from
their current owner by paying their cost. Check the most recent
Stonemason report for cost. You currently have 20 spendies, so you could
On 5/26/24 8:03 PM, nix via agora-discussion wrote:
On 5/15/24 15:48, Joshua Boehme via agora-business wrote:
In the past I went by Elysion, but that nickname feels like it belongs
to another era. This time I'll go by Mischief, and for ease I'll be
using agoran.misch...@gmail.com as my email
On 5/19/24 16:47, Edward Murphy via agora-business wrote:
> (Yachay transferred 5 Spendies to me on May 15, but I don't remember
> whether I still had any before that.)
You did not.
> Two times, I pay a fee of 2 Spendies to gain 1 Radiance.
>
> If I have at least 2 Spendies, then I pay a fee of
On 5/15/24 15:48, Joshua Boehme via agora-business wrote:
> In the past I went by Elysion, but that nickname feels like it belongs
> to another era. This time I'll go by Mischief, and for ease I'll be
> using agoran.misch...@gmail.com as my email address instead of this one.
Oops, sorry that I
On 5/5/24 13:41, Edward Murphy via agora-business wrote:
> If the L owns a blob stamp, then I pay a fee of 5 Spendies to
> transfer it to myself.
Looks like it did, so this succeeds.
> If I did not transfer a stamp above, then two times, I pay a fee of 2
> Spendies to increase my radiance by 1.
On 5/5/24 18:10, Janet Cobb via agora-business wrote:
> H. Arbitor, I kindly request not to be assigned CFJs until June.
>
> Thank you!
Understood
--
nix
Arbitor, Spendor
On 5/5/24 04:36, Yachay Wayllukuq via agora-business wrote:
> Sorry for not being around and missing my CFJ deadline.
Let me know if you'd like to be re-added to the interested judges list.
--
nix
Arbitor, Spendor
On 5/25/24 22:11, 4st nomic via agora-business wrote:
> In an effort to reduce the ruleset, what if we offload things that only
> affect the officer of a report, or rather, leave the specifics of mechanics
> to the officer that tracks it?
>
> I submit the following proposal:
> {
> Title: Geologist
Right. However, the proposal gives some rule defined parameters for the
operation of crystals, leaving the exact details to regulations. Eg
"crystals increase in size when rules are amended or repealed" does not
specify precisely how or how much, leaving those details to the regulation.
On Sun,
On 5/25/24 10:11 PM, 4st nomic via agora-business wrote:
In an effort to reduce the ruleset, what if we offload things that only
affect the officer of a report, or rather, leave the specifics of mechanics
to the officer that tracks it?
Could you explain a little about more how you see this
... whoops
On Sun, 26 May 2024 at 11:43, 4st nomic <4st.no...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> sorry Juniper, this was to DIS, make sure you send votes to BUS
>
> On Sat, May 25, 2024 at 6:42 PM Matt Smyth via agora-discussion
> wrote:
>>
>> I vote as follows:
>>
>> >
>> > > 9114~ snail
sorry Juniper, this was to DIS, make sure you send votes to BUS
On Sat, May 25, 2024 at 6:42 PM Matt Smyth via agora-discussion <
agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> I vote as follows:
>
> >
> > > 9114~ snail 2.0 Grind Stone
> >
> FOR
>
> >
> >
> >
> > > 9115~ snail
I vote as follows:
>
> > 9114~ snail 2.0 Grind Stone
>
FOR
>
>
>
> > 9115~ snail 2.0 Lode Stone
>
FOR
>
> > 9116~ snail, juan...[1] 1.0 A friendly game v2
>
FOR
>
> > 9117~ Mischief1.0 Self-Elimination
>
> PRESENT
>
>
>
On Sat, May 25, 2024 at 5:04 PM Matt Smyth via agora-discussion <
agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> Hey, did this proposal count as invalid or something??
>
> > juniper :)
> >
>
Ah The subject line didn't contain the usual "[Proposal]" or mention
the promotor so i missed it.
Hey, did this proposal count as invalid or something??
On Wed, 15 May 2024, 4:00 pm Matt Smyth via agora-business, <
agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> I just had the great idea of paying people for their labour.
> I submit the following proposal:
> {{{
> Title: Labour Payment
> Adoption
>
>
> > 9118~ juniper 1.0 Recursion
>
> PRESENT (for the moment)
>
> I'm not following the train of thought for why the proposed rule wouldn't
> work. To me it reads like a sequence of events: 1) a player creates a
> proposal; 2) e does not vote for it; 3) it passes. (The
On 5/25/24 7:05 AM, Yachay Wayllukuq via agora-business wrote:
9119* Mischief3.0 Say It Once Mk II
PRESENT, I am not aware of the full implications of this change.
It's meant to remove a redundancy. Rule 1950 secures Adoption Index twice...
Adoption index (AI) is an
On Sat, May 25, 2024 at 5:24 AM Yachay Wayllukuq via agora-business <
agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> I withdraw my latest Proposal too, the one about Weapons. I was too
> excited, and sloppy. Although I still like the idea and would enjoy
> expanding the Bang game.
>
I think it's a
On Wed, May 15, 2024 at 12:34 AM ais523 via agora-discussion <
agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 2024-05-14 at 06:55 -0500, secretsnail9 via agora-business wrote:
> > A ghostly player CAN incarnate by announcement, which means
> > to flip eir Vitality to Invulnerable, provided
Okay. I'll keep this in mind. However, I should then withdraw this
(later). I'm trying to create a Diplomacy-style second-guessing
scheme, where you want to do things not because the results help you
but because the actual action helps you. Metarule means it's a rule
about rules, and nothing else.
On 5/15/24 5:48 PM, 4st nomic via agora-discussion wrote:
FWIW, Welcome back!
Why I declare, apathy, you have manners befitting a true Southern gentlespivak.
(Deliberately NttPF, but someone needed to make a joke along these lines
eventually)
--
Mischief
wunst wrote:
Am 13.05.24 um 01:00 schrieb ais523 via agora-discussion:
On Sun, 2024-05-12 at 15:32 -0700, Edward Murphy via agora-business
wrote:
Proposal: No apathetic apathy
Amend Rule 2465 (Victory by Apathy) by appending this text:
A player SHALL NOT announce intent to Declare
Ah, since Rule 2642 says “transferred”, but not specifying a particular
cause. Understood.
- Jaff
On Sun, May 19, 2024 at 2:08 PM Janet Cobb via agora-business <
agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> On 5/12/24 13:03, Jaff via agora-official wrote:
> > StoneOwnerLast
On Wed, May 15, 2024 at 1:49 PM Joshua Boehme via agora-business <
agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
>
> I register as a player
>
> In the past I went by Elysion, but that nickname feels like it belongs to
> another era. This time I'll go by Mischief, and for ease I'll be using
>
I'm not trying to do anything meritorious, I'm just trying to be annoying.
:D
On Wed, May 15, 2024, 3:13 AM Yachay Wayllukuq via agora-business <
agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> Since we have a player named "apathy" now,
>
> I object to each intent to perform an action described in Rule
>
> The eliminated player has no obvious use for the granted bang, as it
> will be destroyed before they next become alive. Is this intended to
> give em something to trade with?
>
I believe so too, and I think that it's a good design because it gives
(dead) players something to keep playing the
On Tue, 2024-05-14 at 06:55 -0500, secretsnail9 via agora-business wrote:
> A ghostly player CAN incarnate by announcement, which means
> to flip eir Vitality to Invulnerable, provided there are only
> Invulnerable or Ghostly players.
[snip]
> When the match is reset, each player is set to
I like it.
" A ghostly player CAN incarnate by announcement, which means to flip eir
Vitality to Invulnerable"
I'd remove "means" from there and just use phrasing that already exists in
other rules, because I have the suspicion that it's very dangerous (or at
least, prone to bugs) to redefine
I think the goal is to make it possible to shoot yourself in the foot
with apathy.
Intended effect (probably?):
1. A intents apathy
2. nobody objects
3. A has forgotten about intent, does nothing -> infraction
But the current phrasing would also make unsuccessful attempts illegal
as it says
On Sun, 2024-05-12 at 15:32 -0700, Edward Murphy via agora-business
wrote:
> Proposal: No apathetic apathy
>
> Amend Rule 2465 (Victory by Apathy) by appending this text:
>
> A player SHALL NOT announce intent to Declare Apathy and then
> fail to Declare Apathy before that intent
On 5/10/24 14:31, ais523 via agora-business wrote:
> On Fri, 2024-05-10 at 17:00 +0200, Janet Cobb via agora-business wrote:
>
>>
>
> For each intent to declare apathy that has been made within the past 21
> days, I object to it. (Probably an apparently empty message can't hide
> one of those,
That's incredibly cool
On Sun, May 5, 2024 at 10:02 PM ais523 via agora-discussion <
agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> On Sun, 2024-05-05 at 21:38 +0200, Yachay Wayllukuq via agora-
> discussion wrote:
> > It's crazy to me how they've made a whole video game based on an
> > Agoran
On Sun, 2024-05-05 at 21:38 +0200, Yachay Wayllukuq via agora-
discussion wrote:
> It's crazy to me how they've made a whole video game based on an
> Agoran subgame.
BF Joust escaped its origins as an Agoran subgame and became something
that received intermittent play for over seven years. I'm
It's crazy to me how they've made a whole video game based on an Agoran
subgame.
On Sun, May 5, 2024 at 8:43 PM Edward Murphy via agora-business <
agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> I push the boulder.
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sy2mHfQBfLA
>
On 5/2/24 10:15, nix via agora-discussion wrote:
> Joint awards are a normal thing in real life, and the announcement would
> be pretty much identical to that intent. I really don't see any
> specificity issue.
I originally read, and still read, the intent as intending to award a
separate title
On 5/2/24 01:39, Janet Cobb via agora-discussion wrote:
> On 5/1/24 13:19, nix via agora-discussion wrote:
I intend to award Employee of the Year to snail and Janet.
>>> I object, sorry. I think these need to be phrased as separate intents.
>>>
>> I don't think that's true. The rule text says
On 5/1/24 13:19, nix via agora-discussion wrote:
>>> I intend to award Employee of the Year to snail and Janet.
>> I object, sorry. I think these need to be phrased as separate intents.
>>
> I don't think that's true. The rule text says awardable to "the
> persons", plural. Nothing indicates it
On 5/1/24 00:06, Janet Cobb via agora-business wrote:
> On 4/28/24 16:56, Edward Murphy via agora-business wrote:
>> Janet wrote:
>>
>>> I petition the ADoP to solicit nominations for Employee of the Year 2023.
>> I intend to award Employee of the Year to snail and Janet.
>
>
> I object, sorry.
On 4/29/24 22:30, Janet Cobb via agora-business wrote:
> I vote as follows:
>> 9102~ juniper 1.0 An Overpowering Proposal
> AGAINST
>
>
>> 9103~ juniper 1.0 Dictator Takes the Quorum
> AGAINST
As requested:
I have voted against these because I don't want
Mostly just throwing fuel on the fire and poking things, for fun :) (That's
why I'm not objecting officially.)
Firstly, "Ownership" takes precedence (by power) over "Promises", and the
actions happen in sequence, so Ownership takes precedence over Promises
which attempts to change the owner of
On Tue, 2024-04-30 at 09:52 -0700, 4st nomic via agora-discussion
wrote:
> I object.
> Per Rule 2576 "Ownership", the asset goes into abeyance as soon as the
> owner is ambiguous.
> The owner becomes ambiguous at step 2, wherein we are not sure if ais523
> can take the asset due to the ensuing
On Tue, Apr 30, 2024 at 10:03 AM nix via agora-discussion <
agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> On 4/30/24 11:52, 4st nomic via agora-business wrote:
> > I object.
> > Per Rule 2576 "Ownership", the asset goes into abeyance as soon as the
> > owner is ambiguous.
> > The owner becomes
On 4/30/24 11:52, 4st nomic via agora-business wrote:
> I object.
> Per Rule 2576 "Ownership", the asset goes into abeyance as soon as the
> owner is ambiguous.
> The owner becomes ambiguous at step 2, wherein we are not sure if ais523
> can take the asset due to the ensuing contradiction.
>
On Tue, Apr 30, 2024 at 9:52 AM 4st nomic via agora-discussion <
agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> I object.
> Per Rule 2576 "Ownership", the asset goes into abeyance as soon as the
> owner is ambiguous.
> The owner becomes ambiguous at step 2, wherein we are not sure if ais523
> can take
I object.
Per Rule 2576 "Ownership", the asset goes into abeyance as soon as the
owner is ambiguous.
The owner becomes ambiguous at step 2, wherein we are not sure if ais523
can take the asset due to the ensuing contradiction.
Therefore, both CFJs should be FALSE, as neither party can cash a
On 4/30/24 02:43, wunst via agora-business wrote:
>> 9102~ juniper 1.0 An Overpowering Proposal
> AGAINST
>> 9103~ juniper 1.0 Dictator Takes the Quorum
> AGAINST
>> 9104~ snail 1.0 Stamp Raffle fix
> FOR
>> 9105~ snail
I support each intent.
- Jaff
On Sun, Apr 28, 2024 at 11:34 PM Janet Cobb via agora-business <
agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> I intend, with support from Jaff, to flip the Delegate of Assessor to Jaff.
>
> I intend, with support from Jaff, to flip the Delegate of Stonemason to
> Jaff.
On Sun, 2024-04-28 at 15:38 -0700, Edward Murphy via agora-business wrote:
> I was looking for (but couldn't find) one or two other cases that G. was
> involved in, along the lines of:
>
> * A player plays card X which gives em card Y, then plays card Y
> which retroactively negates eir
If I am not mistaken, then chain of ownership since the last time Agora
owned the stone is:
Gaelan -> ais523 -> Murphy -> Jaff -> Janet -> Ben
So I am not a valid target.
- Jaff
On Sun, Apr 28, 2024 at 4:14 AM Agora amdw42 via agora-business <
agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> I wield
On 4/22/24 23:11, Kiako via agora-business wrote:
> I recuse myself from CFJs 4075 and 4076, if able, with the following
> statement:
>
> I seem to have gotten distracted from Agora, and I don't think I have
> a good enough grasp of Agora's handling of paradoxes (and am perhaps too
>
Janet Cobb via agora-discussion [2024-04-23 00:59]:
> On 4/23/24 00:55, mqyhlkahu via agora-discussion wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > Janet (randomnetcat) responded to our Declaration of Intent to Push the
> > Boulder[1] with the following[2]:
> >
> >> this is *very* close to accidentally being a
On 4/23/24 00:55, mqyhlkahu via agora-discussion wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Janet (randomnetcat) responded to our Declaration of Intent to Push the
> Boulder[1] with the following[2]:
>
>> this is *very* close to accidentally being a tabled intent under R1728 rather
>> than actually pushing the bolder.
>
Hello,
Janet (randomnetcat) responded to our Declaration of Intent to Push the
Boulder[1] with the following[2]:
> this is *very* close to accidentally being a tabled intent under R1728 rather
> than actually pushing the bolder.
To our understanding, our action is not a Tabled Action[3] because
On 4/23/24 00:21, mqyhlkahu via agora-business wrote:
> Hello,
>
> We formally declare our intent to perform the following action(s):
> {{{
> In accordance with [1], we announce that we Push the Boulder, thereby
> increasing its Height by 1.
>
>[1] Rule 2683/1 (Power=0.5)
> }}}
>
Hello,
> Under what name do you wish to be known?
Any names listed in set [1] are acceptable. Please note that the listed names
are _not_ case-insensitive — they are all fully lower-cased, even when they
appear in contexts which would typically require upper-casing or title-casing,
such as at
On Sun, Apr 21, 2024 at 9:08 PM Jaff via agora-discussion <
agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> I will point out that there are multiple ways to take actions of an office
> without holding it which this wouldn't cover, such as delegation. I think a
> safer fix would be preventing a player
On 4/21/24 22:43, secretsnail9 via agora-discussion wrote:
>> Spending Stone: As the Stonemason, I don't want to incentivize massive
>> numbers of wieldings in the same message because that increases my
>> workload.
>>
> This one doesn't make sense, the stones would probably be wielded anyways,
>
On Sun, Apr 21, 2024 at 9:10 PM Janet Cobb via agora-discussion <
agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> On 4/21/24 18:04, secretsnail9 via agora-discussion wrote:
> > On Sun, Apr 21, 2024 at 3:12 PM Janet Cobb via agora-business <
> > agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> >
> >>> 9099~
On Sun, Apr 21, 2024 at 7:41 PM Matt Smyth via agora-discussion <
agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> And at what point in the rules does it say when you are able to close
> registration for the raffle? The emails seem to show that you started,
> registered, then closed the raffle within
On 4/21/24 20:11, Matt Smyth via agora-discussion wrote:
> I edit the proposal as such:
>
> On Mon, 22 Apr 2024, 9:41 am Matt Smyth via agora-business, <
> agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
>
>> I submit the following proposal:
>>
>> {{{
>> Title: An Overpowering Proposal
>> Adoption Index:
On 4/21/24 18:04, secretsnail9 via agora-discussion wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 21, 2024 at 3:12 PM Janet Cobb via agora-business <
> agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
>
>>> 9099~ snail 2.0 Quantum Superstone
>> AGAINST
>>
>>
>>> 9100~ snail 2.0 Spending
I will point out that there are multiple ways to take actions of an office
without holding it which this wouldn't cover, such as delegation. I think a
safer fix would be preventing a player who holds an office from taking
actions corresponding to another office such that holding both would make
And at what point in the rules does it say when you are able to close
registration for the raffle? The emails seem to show that you started,
registered, then closed the raffle within about ten minutes. Surely there's
something to prevent this from happening?
On Mon, 22 Apr 2024, 10:37 am
On Sun, Apr 21, 2024 at 7:06 PM Matt Smyth via agora-discussion <
agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Apr 2024, 10:04 am secretsnail9 via agora-business, <
> agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
>
> > I temporarily deputize as Collector to publish the following Raffle
> Result.
I edit the proposal as such:
On Mon, 22 Apr 2024, 9:41 am Matt Smyth via agora-business, <
agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> I submit the following proposal:
>
> {{{
> Title: An Overpowering Proposal
> Adoption Index: 1.0
> Author: juniper
> Co-authors:
>
>
> Amend Rule 2472 (Office
I'll modify the proposal
On Mon, 22 Apr 2024, 10:05 am Matt Smyth, wrote:
> My idea was quorum-minus-one times default voting, so that it takes e.g.
> if there were eleven voters then dictator would count as 5 votes (or voting
> strength, etc.) if one person has one vote. This means it requires
On Mon, 22 Apr 2024, 10:04 am secretsnail9 via agora-business, <
agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> I temporarily deputize as Collector to publish the following Raffle Result.
>
> Raffle Participants:
> snail
>
> Raffle Winner:
> snail
> --
> snail
>
So you collected your own stamp?
___
My idea was quorum-minus-one times default voting, so that it takes e.g. if
there were eleven voters then dictator would count as 5 votes (or voting
strength, etc.) if one person has one vote. This means it requires the
Dictator and one player to vote the same way for a proposal to pass.
On Mon,
I object to any attempts to declare apathy
——
Ben
From: agora-business on behalf of
secretsnail9 via agora-business
Sent: Sunday, April 21, 2024 7:56:24 PM
To: agora-busin...@agoranomic.org
Cc: secretsnail9
Subject: BUS: (@collector) raffle time
I enter the
On Sun, Apr 21, 2024 at 6:41 PM Matt Smyth via agora-business <
agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> I submit the following proposal:
>
> {{{
> Title: An Overpowering Proposal
> Adoption Index: 1.0
> Author: juniper
> Co-authors:
>
>
> Amend Rule 2472 (Office Incompatibilities) by appending
>
On Sun, Apr 21, 2024 at 3:12 PM Janet Cobb via agora-business <
agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> > 9099~ snail 2.0 Quantum Superstone
>
> AGAINST
>
>
> > 9100~ snail 2.0 Spending Stone
>
> AGAINST
>
>
> > 9101~ snail 2.0
On 4/18/24 08:26, 4st nomic via agora-discussion wrote:
> I think crystal poaching is fine: it's competitive teamwork! I've poached
> Janet for example. Perhaps coauthors need to be rewarded also?
I mean, I wasn't thrilled by that. I think it's reasonable to want to
reap the rewards from your
I think crystal poaching is fine: it's competitive teamwork! I've poached
Janet for example. Perhaps coauthors need to be rewarded also?
On Wed, Apr 17, 2024, 11:01 PM secretsnail9 via agora-discussion <
agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
>
> > 9094~ snail, R. Lee 1.0 More
> 9094~ snail, R. Lee 1.0 More instability with a hyphen
> PRESENT, but I'm quite peeved - it would have been polite to let me know
> about the error so I could correct it instead of submitting your own
> proposal and getting the crystal benefits therefrom.
The trouble with this
Deregistering players, fine
But insisting on being a player but not doing much is a little confusing to
me
On Tue, Apr 16, 2024, 6:22 AM juan via agora-discussion <
agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> 4st nomic via agora-discussion [2024-04-15 21:57]:
> > I'm confused about the reasoning
4st nomic via agora-discussion [2024-04-15 21:57]:
> I'm confused about the reasoning behind doing this...?
What part of it?
> On Mon, Apr 15, 2024, 1:17 PM Rose Strong via agora-business <
> agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
>
> > I activate myself.
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 15, 2024, 4:03 PM
I'm confused about the reasoning behind doing this...?
On Mon, Apr 15, 2024, 1:17 PM Rose Strong via agora-business <
agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> I activate myself.
>
> On Mon, Apr 15, 2024, 4:03 PM juan wrote:
>
> > As per rule 2646, for each of the following players, who have been
On 4/14/24 23:11, Quadrantal via agora-business wrote:
> For each proposal below, I vote as follows, if I am so eligible.
>
> //Pretty sure I registered before all of þese, but one can never be too
> careful
Just to clarify, you are eligible for all of them, because you only need
to be
Hah! Even here, I'm not safe from linguistics; I suppose I brought þis
on myself.
My limited knowledge of phonology would agree wiþ you, though I'm no
expert. Unfortunately for linguistic accuracy, however, my use of þe
þorn is mostly currently limited to replacements by an autohotkey
On Sat, 2024-04-13 at 22:11 -0400, Quadrantal via agora-business wrote:
> I push þe boulder.
>
> --
>
> The above message shall be read, to the fullest extent possible, as if
> it was sent with the digraph "th" in place of all occurrences of the
> character thorn ("þ"), and such digraphs were
1 - 100 of 30795 matches
Mail list logo
