>
> 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
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
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
On 4/10/24 10:06, Janet Cobb via agora-business wrote:
> The Officeholder of Spendor is hereby flipped to nix.
>
> }
For bystander context, I consented to this.
--
nix
Arbitor
Huh. You cannot officially require the referee to investigate a non-player
via noting.
On Mon, Mar 25, 2024, 12:14 PM Gaelan Steele via agora-business <
agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> I create the following proposal:
>
> ---
> Title: yes, yes, I got the memo
> Author: Gaelan
> AI: 1.7
>
> On Mar 25, 2024, at 8:53 PM, secretsnail9 via agora-discussion
> wrote:
>
> I suggest "un-noted" to prevent all instances of noting 1 infraction
> multiple times.
That doesn’t fix the original issue, as an infraction can be
investigated without being noted. And I don’t really think
> On Mar 25, 2024, at 8:06 PM, Katherina Walshe-Grey via agora-discussion
> wrote:
>
> On 25/03/2024 19:13, Gaelan Steele via agora-business wrote:
>> Amend rule 2478 (“Justice”) by replacing: {
>> A player CAN, by announcement, "note" an unforgiven infraction
>> committed by any other
On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 3:07 PM Katherina Walshe-Grey via agora-discussion <
agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> On 25/03/2024 19:13, Gaelan Steele via agora-business wrote:
> > Amend rule 2478 (“Justice”) by replacing: {
> > A player CAN, by announcement, "note" an unforgiven infraction
On 25/03/2024 19:13, Gaelan Steele via agora-business wrote:
> Amend rule 2478 (“Justice”) by replacing: {
> A player CAN, by announcement, "note" an unforgiven infraction
> committed by any other player in the last 14 days, specifying the
> incident and the rule it violates (or name of the
On 24/03/2024 12:44, Gaealn Steele via agora-discussion wrote:
>> On Mar 24, 2024, at 12:21 PM, Katherina Walshe-Grey via agora-discussion
>> wrote:
>> hmm... the "Optionally" removes any obligation, but does mean that if
>> there are any documents the Archivist deems worthy of archival (even
>>
> On Mar 24, 2024, at 12:21 PM, Katherina Walshe-Grey via agora-discussion
> wrote:
>
> On 24/03/2024 09:16, Gaelan Steele via agora-business wrote:> *
> Optionally, any other documents the Archivist deems worthy
>> of archival.
>
> hmm... the "Optionally" removes any obligation,
On 24/03/2024 09:16, Gaelan Steele via agora-business wrote:> *
Optionally, any other documents the Archivist deems worthy
> of archival.
hmm... the "Optionally" removes any obligation, but does mean that if
there are any documents the Archivist deems worthy of archival (even
non-Agoran
On 3/17/24 15:08, nix via agora-business wrote:
> [Right now, sentences like "Blank are an asset ownable by..." is
> interpreted to adding to a default within R2576. This seems unintuitive.
> This proposal makes that default only apply if there's no mention of
> ownership.]
That doesn't belong
On Sun, Jan 28, 2024 at 2:10 PM nix via agora-discussion <
agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> On 1/28/24 14:04, nix via agora-business wrote:
> > A player CAN flip the Delegate switch of a specified office to
> > emself with Agoran Consent. If the Delegate switch of an office is
>
On 1/28/24 14:04, nix via agora-business wrote:
> A player CAN flip the Delegate switch of a specified office to
> emself with Agoran Consent. If the Delegate switch of an office is
> set to "None", the holder of that office CAN flip the Delegate
> switch of that office to a
On 1/5/24 01:42, ais523 via agora-discussion wrote:
> On Fri, 2024-01-05 at 01:40 -0500, Janet Cobb via agora-business wrote:
>> * Inserting the following paragraph after the paragraph:
>>
>> {
>>
>> The basis of a person is the set of all persons that are (recursively)
>> part of em, in addition
On Fri, 2024-01-05 at 01:40 -0500, Janet Cobb via agora-business wrote:
> * Inserting the following paragraph after the paragraph:
>
> {
>
> The basis of a person is the set of all persons that are (recursively)
> part of em, in addition to emself. Rules to the contrary
> notwithstanding, a
On 2023-11-19 19:11, 4st nomic via agora-business wrote:
> oh wait. Maybe this did work. This proposal IS up for vote. Lol!
>
> On Sun, Nov 19, 2023 at 4:09 PM 4st nomic <4st.no...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> That's lovely! Unfortunately, due to the arcane beaurocracy presented by
>> the Law of
On 2023-11-19 19:09, 4st nomic via agora-business wrote:
> That's lovely! Unfortunately, due to the arcane beaurocracy presented by
> the Law of Agora,
> this proposal is not up for vote yet!
> The process currently in place is basically:
> Submit proposal (that's what snail did here) -> Promotor
On 11/19/23 18:44, Goren Barak via agora-discussion wrote:
> On 2023-11-19 16:24, secretsnail9 via agora-business wrote:
>> I submit the following proposal:
>>
>> //
>> Title: A simple fix
>> Adoption index: 1.0
>> Author: snail
On 2023-11-19 16:24, secretsnail9 via agora-business wrote:
> I submit the following proposal:
>
> //
> Title: A simple fix
> Adoption index: 1.0
> Author: snail
> Co-authors: nix
>
>
> [We tried to fix this back in April but
I think the proper way to repeal anything is to tweak and break it so
subtly it's finally scammed, then you repeal it. That seems to be the way
things go. Or at least the fun way. Maybe we just need new stones, after
all!
On Tue, Oct 31, 2023, 7:52 AM Yachay Wayllukuq via agora-business <
On 16/10/2023 17:37, Janet Cobb via agora-business wrote:> Adoption index:
>
> {
>
> The instance of the publicity switch possessed by the forum that can be
> sent to at "agoranomic at groups.io" is hereby flipped to Public.
>
> }
That's not a valid adoption index, and also you didn't give the
On Fri, Jun 2, 2023 at 12:19 PM Juan F. Meleiro via agora-business <
agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> I create the following proposal, entitled “Game Theory”:
>
> {
> Create a Power 1.0 rule called “The Button” with text:
> {
> The Buttonmastor is an office.
>
> The Button is a singleton
Which is why you press the button every 144 hours that are reliable to you:
or setup scheduled emails. I feel like also this is similar to apathy but
now you have to track it: anyone can block as long as they press the button
fre. 2. jun. 2023, 12:29 p.m. skrev ais523 via agora-discussion <
On Fri, 2023-06-02 at 14:18 -0300, Juan F. Meleiro via agora-business
wrote:
> I create the following proposal, entitled “Game Theory”:
>
> {
> Create a Power 1.0 rule called “The Button” with text:
This isn't really game theory, but "who has the most reliable Internet
connection / is best at
On 5/23/23 03:09, secretsnail9 via agora-business wrote:
> A player CAN, by paying a fee of 5 brights, turn a specified rule Radiant,
> provided its power is less than 2. Each referenda on a proposal that would
> amend or repeal a Radiant rule has its Adoption Index increased to 2, if it
> is ever
On 5/22/23 14:33, juan via agora-discussion wrote:
> Janet Cobb via agora-business [2023-05-21 01:28]:
>> Changes:
>> - Generally cleaned up wording
>> - Handle rice at Lost and Found
>> - Harvesting a plan now grants rice before revoking (handling the case
>> where a person is in both the up and
Janet Cobb via agora-business [2023-05-21 01:28]:
> Changes:
> - Generally cleaned up wording
> - Handle rice at Lost and Found
> - Harvesting a plan now grants rice before revoking (handling the case
> where a person is in both the up and down sets)
> - Use "CAN" for enabling
> - Use a by
I think the main time-consuming activity in the Rice Game would be
navigating its particularly challenging endgame (how do you get that last
Rice? diplomacy? scam?), rather than grinding for large amounts of Rice.
Even if we do end up going with this, and you end up getting 4 Rice, that
last fifth
ais523 wrote:
On Thu, 2023-05-18 at 21:32 +0100, ais523 via agora-discussion wrote:
On Thu, 2023-05-18 at 13:16 -0700, Kerim Aydin via agora-business
wrote:
I informally risk being guilty of favoritism 7 days from now, by
saying that the combination of CFJ calling and parenthetical reminder
This has been the best possible outcome
lør. 20. mai 2023, 11:07 p.m. skrev Janet Cobb via agora-discussion <
agora-discussion@agoranomic.org>:
> On 5/21/23 01:59, Forest Sweeney via agora-discussion wrote:
> > I counter by instead submitting the following proposal:
> >
> > {Adoption index = 3
>
On 5/21/23 01:59, Forest Sweeney via agora-discussion wrote:
> I counter by instead submitting the following proposal:
>
> {Adoption index = 3
>
> [Stop making small changes to fix things. This security issue happens all
> the time.]
Exactly what non-small change would you want here? Your
I counter by instead submitting the following proposal:
{Adoption index = 3
[Stop making small changes to fix things. This security issue happens all
the time.]
Enact the following rule:"By default and unless otherwise specified,
assets, switches, and eir properties are secured at the power
On Thu, 2023-05-18 at 21:32 +0100, ais523 via agora-discussion wrote:
> On Thu, 2023-05-18 at 13:16 -0700, Kerim Aydin via agora-business
> wrote:
> > I informally risk being guilty of favoritism 7 days from now, by
> > saying that the combination of CFJ calling and parenthetical reminder
> > that
On Thu, May 18, 2023 at 2:29 PM ais523 via agora-discussion wrote:
> Or perhaps this is just a case of "the ais523 who has been following
> Agora for over 15 years spots things that the ais523 who had been there
> for only one year didn't".
Lol, I meant to add myself that the rules underlying may
On Thu, 2023-05-18 at 14:01 -0700, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote:
> On Thu, May 18, 2023 at 1:32 PM ais523 via agora-discussion
> wrote:
> > That said, I suspect the word in R2029 is currently undefined: I don't
> > think "a definition that was in place at the time the rule was adopted"
On Thu, May 18, 2023 at 1:32 PM ais523 via agora-discussion
wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2023-05-18 at 13:16 -0700, Kerim Aydin via agora-business
> wrote:
> > I informally risk being guilty of favoritism 7 days from now, by
> > saying that the combination of CFJ calling and parenthetical reminder
> > that
Kerim Aydin via agora-business [2023-05-18 13:16]:
> On Thu, May 18, 2023 at 12:51 PM nix via agora-business
> wrote:
> >
> > On 5/18/23 14:43, Forest Sweeney via agora-business wrote:
> > > CFJ: This violates Rule 2029 ("Town Fountain").
> > > I note and investigate the infraction to be 2 blots.
On Thu, 2023-05-18 at 13:16 -0700, Kerim Aydin via agora-business
wrote:
> I informally risk being guilty of favoritism 7 days from now, by
> saying that the combination of CFJ calling and parenthetical reminder
> that it may fail is enough disclaimer to avoid no faking. I'll also
> note that
On 5/18/23 16:08, nix via agora-discussion wrote:
> On 5/18/23 15:03, Forest Sweeney via agora-discussion wrote:
>> I did call a CFJ on whether it created infractions, so I don't believe I
>> violated no faking as I had included sufficient carefulness. :3
> Sufficient carefulness would be not
On 5/18/23 15:03, Forest Sweeney via agora-discussion wrote:
I did call a CFJ on whether it created infractions, so I don't believe I
violated no faking as I had included sufficient carefulness. :3
Sufficient carefulness would be not investigating until the CFJ was
resolved, or your timer was
I did call a CFJ on whether it created infractions, so I don't believe I
violated no faking as I had included sufficient carefulness. :3
On Thu, May 18, 2023 at 12:52 PM nix via agora-business <
agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> On 5/18/23 14:43, Forest Sweeney via agora-business wrote:
>
On 5/18/23 14:51, nix via agora-business wrote:
On 5/18/23 14:43, Forest Sweeney via agora-business wrote:
CFJ: This violates Rule 2029 ("Town Fountain").
I note and investigate the infraction to be 2 blots. (and as we know,
this
investigation only occurs if it does indeed violate the rule).
On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 8:03 AM Yachay Wayllukuq via agora-discussion
wrote:
> Having such an unwieldy amount of arcana puts a lot of power in being able
> to give out 'hedonistic' Judgements; ones that are heavily based on "well
> this is best for the game"/"this makes it playable"/etc,
Having such an unwieldy amount of arcana puts a lot of power in being able
to give out 'hedonistic' Judgements; ones that are heavily based on "well
this is best for the game"/"this makes it playable"/etc, especially ones
that have to be that way because of ambiguity. Because we don't know for
On 5/12/23 06:59, Yachay Wayllukuq via agora-business wrote:
- Why would we make a special case just for Invisibilitating specifically?
What about other ancient things that may affect how other*current* things
of the game work too?
There might be. There's nothing that prevents us from looking
On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 5:00 AM Yachay Wayllukuq via agora-business
wrote:
>
> - It takes agency away from newer players and puts more into older ones
> which are more familiar with this obscure ancient arcana which has now
> supposedly been made relevant, which feels terrible.
>
Just on this
On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 1:31 AM Janet Cobb via agora-discussion <
agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> On 5/12/23 01:37, secretsnail9 via agora-discussion wrote:
> > And about "voting strength games", any player could reactivate voting
> > strength on the proposal if they would vote against
On 5/12/23 01:37, secretsnail9 via agora-discussion wrote:
> And about "voting strength games", any player could reactivate voting
> strength on the proposal if they would vote against it. Voting strength
> only matters when there's disagreement anyways, and if there is any, it'll
> get turned
On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 12:08 AM Janet Cobb via agora-discussion <
agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> On 5/12/23 01:02, secretsnail9 via agora-business wrote:
> > Each player CAN, with 2 support, flip an ordinary proposal's class
> to
> > expedited, provided it is in the Proposal
On 5/12/23 01:02, secretsnail9 via agora-business wrote:
> Proposals created since the enactment of this rule have a secured
> untracked Class switch with possible values ordinary (the default),
> expedited, and democratic.
Also, this opens up new voting strength games, since
On 5/12/23 01:02, secretsnail9 via agora-business wrote:
> Each player CAN, with 2 support, flip an ordinary proposal's class to
> expedited, provided it is in the Proposal Pool and e has not done so yet
> this week. Each player CAN, by announcement, flip an expedited proposal's
> class to
On 5/8/23 03:39, Yachay Wayllukuq via agora-discussion wrote:
> - It's very easy to find trades that are net beneficial for the traders.
> Most people seem to agree that trading Stamps 1-for-1 is generally
> reasonable and a good trade. Just have the same person do that enough times
> with
On Mon, 2023-05-08 at 13:55 +0100, ais523 via agora-discussion wrote:
> my current thoughts are along the lines of "add Radiance for
> participation actions like proposing / officiating / judging / even
> voting
And to clarify: by this I mean voting *at all*, not specifically for
contrary votes
On Mon, 2023-05-08 at 01:24 -0400, Janet Cobb via agora-business wrote:
> Given a new player winning within a month and a half by stamps by
> simply trading, something needs to change
I disagree with this part of your statement – I don't think that
there's anything inherently wrong with a new
I believe that a few things contributed to me winning:
- It's very easy to find trades that are net beneficial for the traders.
Most people seem to agree that trading Stamps 1-for-1 is generally
reasonable and a good trade. Just have the same person do that enough times
with different people and
On Sun, May 7, 2023 at 10:25 PM Janet Cobb via agora-business <
agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> I submit the following proposal:
>
> Title: Plan B
>
> Adoption index: 1.0
>
> Author: Janet
>
> Coauthors:
>
> {
>
> Amend Rule 2657 by, as a single amendment, removing the list items and
>
nix wrote:
On 5/1/23 15:05, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote:
When you do a job manually for a while, you start to use shortcuts, get
faster, streamline, then maybe join a couple of steps using a bit of code…
there’s really no sharp line between “automation” and plain old
“experience” -
On 5/7/23 16:46, Janet Cobb via agora-business wrote:
I agree, it's not surplusage. A finding that "amend" can include changes
other than those explicitly described in Rule 105 would render it surplus.
I guess this is the last time I try to write compromise text, if it's
going to be used to
nix via agora-business [2023-04-29 19:59]:
> Title: Registrar Tracks Birthdays
Oh no, work!
--
juan
On Mon, May 1, 2023 at 10:28 AM nix via agora-business
wrote:
> If an officer specified a Delegate when taking a Vacation, and the
> Delegate has publicly consented, then the Delegate can act as if e
> is the holder of the Office while the officer is On Vacation.
I'm still against
On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 9:17 AM Aspen via agora-business
wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 9:01 AM Janet Cobb via agora-discussion
> wrote:
> >
> > On 5/2/23 01:01, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote:
> > > On Mon, May 1, 2023 at 8:38 PM Janet Cobb via agora-business <
> > >
On 5/2/23 01:01, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote:
> On Mon, May 1, 2023 at 8:38 PM Janet Cobb via agora-business <
> agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
>
>> [Proposal 8639
>> failed to make this change because it used "amend" for a power change.
>
> If everyone involved including you
Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion [2023-05-01 11:46]:
> Maybe making the delegation subject to a public volunteer process - so it’s
> treated differently if more than one person want the job, so the
> hand-picking potential is more limited?
I suggest we treat this the same way as the list of
On Mon, May 1, 2023 at 8:38 PM Janet Cobb via agora-business <
agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> [Proposal 8639
> failed to make this change because it used "amend" for a power change.
If everyone involved including you knew what it meant at the time so as to
miss the “error” entirely,
On 5/1/23 14:46, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote:
> While I was supportive of the delegation idea on discord, I’m coming around
> to Yachay’s position. I’ve “taken breaks” from arbitor regularly - snail
> and Jason both did the job for a bit last year - but when it was
> technically
On 5/1/23 15:05, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote:
> When you do a job manually for a while, you start to use shortcuts, get
> faster, streamline, then maybe join a couple of steps using a bit of code…
> there’s really no sharp line between “automation” and plain old
> “experience” - the two
On Mon, May 1, 2023 at 12:37 PM nix via agora-discussion <
agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> On 5/1/23 14:36, nix via agora-discussion wrote:
> > Ideally, I think, everything is doable with automation. In practice tho,
> > I'm not sure what that looks like.
>
> Crucial typo. I think
On 5/1/23 14:49, Yachay Wayllukuq via agora-discussion wrote:
> I was actually about to post the same thing about #2 in an election getting
> the bench lol. It seems like the most effort-economic way to do it.
>
> And yeah, I think it could work as per-office.
I'd prefer just trusting the
On 5/1/23 14:18, Forest Sweeney via agora-discussion wrote:
> The other part of this is: Janet is Rulekeepor purely because no one has
> bothered to try to take the position properly. The Elections are meant to
> encourage shakeups, but without sufficient platforms for change, then we
> shalln't
On 5/1/23 13:28, nix via agora-business wrote:
> An officer is On Vacation from a specified office if e has taken a
> Vacation from that office in the last 30 days. The ADoP SHALL
> include which officers are On Vacation in weekly report.
Could just say that the set of officers on
Hrm, now that you mention it I think that would be better, yeah.
On Mon, May 1, 2023 at 9:38 PM nix via agora-discussion <
agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> On 5/1/23 14:36, nix via agora-discussion wrote:
> > Ideally, I think, everything is doable with automation. In practice tho,
> >
On 5/1/23 14:36, nix via agora-discussion wrote:
> Ideally, I think, everything is doable with automation. In practice tho,
> I'm not sure what that looks like.
Crucial typo. I think ideally everything is doable *without* automation.
--
nix
Prime Minister, Herald
On 5/1/23 14:28, Yachay Wayllukuq via agora-discussion wrote:
> Oh, I see now, that's very good.
>
> Hm. I wonder if there was a way to make offices significantly easier so
> that we didn't need to rely on these things or the apparent elitism that
> some offices require.
This will be
Oh, I see now, that's very good.
Hm. I wonder if there was a way to make offices significantly easier so
that we didn't need to rely on these things or the apparent elitism that
some offices require.
But besides resorting to just having everyone play on Google Sheets in
parallel to the regular
On 5/1/23 14:04, Yachay Wayllukuq via agora-discussion wrote:
> That seems to alludes that officers prefer to keep their tools to
> themselves or they don't design them to be easily shared in the first
> place, which I don't think is the best practice for Agora overall.
>
> Maybe we can encourage
That seems to alludes that officers prefer to keep their tools to
themselves or they don't design them to be easily shared in the first
place, which I don't think is the best practice for Agora overall.
Maybe we can encourage officers to make/use public tools and tutorials that
anyone can
On 5/1/23 13:49, Yachay Wayllukuq via agora-discussion wrote:
> I was actually about to post the same thing about #2 in an election getting
> the bench lol. It seems like the most effort-economic way to do it.
>
> And yeah, I think it could work as per-office.
My main concern is still the time
I was actually about to post the same thing about #2 in an election getting
the bench lol. It seems like the most effort-economic way to do it.
And yeah, I think it could work as per-office.
On Mon, May 1, 2023 at 8:45 PM nix via agora-discussion <
agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> On
While I was supportive of the delegation idea on discord, I’m coming around
to Yachay’s position. I’ve “taken breaks” from arbitor regularly - snail
and Jason both did the job for a bit last year - but when it was
technically resigning without the expectation of getting the job back I
think it
On 5/1/23 13:38, Yachay Wayllukuq via agora-discussion wrote:
> Perhaps a "bench" system like in team sports, where there is a main
> officer, but if they can't do their roles, or want to take a vacation, the
> person on the bench takes the spot until they come back.
>
> The bench positions are
Perhaps a "bench" system like in team sports, where there is a main
officer, but if they can't do their roles, or want to take a vacation, the
person on the bench takes the spot until they come back.
The bench positions are elected or otherwise offered to everyone equally
somehow.
On Mon, May 1,
Well... I'd like to see Janet take a break and we'll find out how this
process works anyways. It's all part of perfecting these processes
I don't imagine anyone would willingly volunteer to be a delegate,
considering that few even opted to become candidates in the recent
elections.
On Mon,
On 5/1/23 13:32, Yachay Wayllukuq via agora-discussion wrote:
> I'm not sure if my main point is coming across that the problem would be
> the "dynasty" thing, where the veteran gets to hand-pick themselves how the
> office continues rather than having a process that is more impartial.
Oh I see.
I'm not sure if my main point is coming across that the problem would be
the "dynasty" thing, where the veteran gets to hand-pick themselves how the
office continues rather than having a process that is more impartial.
On Mon, May 1, 2023 at 8:24 PM nix via agora-discussion <
On 5/1/23 13:20, nix via agora-discussion wrote:
> On 5/1/23 12:59, Yachay Wayllukuq via agora-discussion wrote:
>> I'm sure that this is well-intended but I feel like this strongly
>> encourages "dynasties" of officers where the veterans are de facto heads of
>> who will get the privilege of
On 5/1/23 12:59, Yachay Wayllukuq via agora-discussion wrote:
> I'm sure that this is well-intended but I feel like this strongly
> encourages "dynasties" of officers where the veterans are de facto heads of
> who will get the privilege of choose who get to be the next Delegate or
> not. Having
It's actually the opposite: right now we HAVE dynasties of players who just
have had these roles forever, and they've never taken a break. Encouraging
them to take a break, and specifying a different player, forces more
change-ups than we have currently, because we trust so much currently in
the
Wow, I did some major word soup there, I hope my point came across anyways
lol
On Monday, May 1, 2023, Yachay Wayllukuq wrote:
> I'm sure that this is well-intended but I feel like this strongly
> encourages "dynasties" of officers where the veterans are de facto heads of
> who will get the
I'm sure that this is well-intended but I feel like this strongly
encourages "dynasties" of officers where the veterans are de facto heads of
who will get the privilege of choose who get to be the next Delegate or
not. Having been Delegate seem like major boon to have towards actually
getting the
On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 8:15 PM secretsnail9 via agora-business <
agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> I submit the following proposal:
>
> {{{
> Title: Minty Stone
> Adoption Index: 2.0
> Author: snail
> Co-author(s):
>
> Amend Rule 2645 (The Stones) by replacing
>
> {{
> - Jockey Stone
What is Invisibilitating?
On Mon, Apr 24, 2023 at 6:42 PM Kerim Aydin via agora-business <
agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> I submit the following proposal, "now you don't see it", AI=1:
>
>
>
>
> Re-enact Rule
On 4/15/23 09:59, Yachay Wayllukuq via agora-discussion wrote:
I think the other forms to gain radiance seem alright, actually. This just
removes the "radiance conditions", of the which I'm not a huge fan of
(gaining radiance from proposals, mostly)
On Sat, Apr 15, 2023 at 6:31 PM Forest
I think the other forms to gain radiance seem alright, actually. This just
removes the "radiance conditions", of the which I'm not a huge fan of
(gaining radiance from proposals, mostly)
On Sat, Apr 15, 2023 at 6:31 PM Forest Sweeney via agora-discussion <
agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
lør. 15. apr. 2023, 6:20 a.m. skrev Yachay Wayllukuq via agora-business <
agora-busin...@agoranomic.org>:
> I create and submit the following Proposal:
>
> Title: Unradiance
> AI: 1.0
> Author: Yachay
> Co-Authors: None
>
> {
>
> Repeal Rule 2657
>
> }
>
I dislike this mostly because this isn't
On 4/10/23 14:57, Janet Cobb via agora-discussion wrote:
(Also, it might be better to include context rather than just "first
instance of 'may'".)
Why?
Eliminates any chance of accidentally changing the wrong thing due to a
concurrent proposal, and is clearer for the reader on what's being
On 4/10/23 15:51, juan via agora-discussion wrote:
> Janet Cobb via agora-business [2023-04-10 15:41]:
>> On 4/10/23 15:38, juan via agora-business wrote:
>>> I create and submit the following proposal:
>>>
>>> {
>>> Title: Standardizing CANs
>>> Author: juan
>>> A.I.: 3.0
>>>
>>>
1 - 100 of 2957 matches
Mail list logo
