DIS: Re: BUS: An Indulgent CFJ

2017-11-27 Thread Alexis Hunt
On Mon, 27 Nov 2017 at 06:21 Alex Smith wrote: > Gratuitous arguments (made without reading forwards in the thread, so > apologies if they've already been made): The mere fact that you seem to > have come to a paradoxical conclusion here implies the "If…" > conditional

DIS: Re: BUS: An Indulgent CFJ

2017-11-26 Thread Kerim Aydin
I favor this one. On Sun, 26 Nov 2017, Alexis Hunt wrote: > I spend a shiny to create the following contract, entitled "No > Self-Indulgence": > {{{ > Alexis SHALL NOT pend any proposal e authored. > Alexis CAN revoke this contract by announcement. > }}} > > I submit the following proposal: >

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: An Indulgent CFJ

2017-11-26 Thread Alexis Hunt
Per rule 591, CFJs are based on the time they are called. On Sun, 26 Nov 2017 at 13:22 ATMunn wrote: > You withdrew the proposal and contract though right? Wouldn't it be false > then since you can't pend a proposal that doesn't exist? Or would the CFJ > be judged from

DIS: Re: BUS: An Indulgent CFJ

2017-11-26 Thread ATMunn
You withdrew the proposal and contract though right? Wouldn't it be false then since you can't pend a proposal that doesn't exist? Or would the CFJ be judged from when you called it? On 11/26/2017 1:12 PM, Alexis Hunt wrote: I spend a shiny to create the following contract, entitled "No