tusho wrote:
2008/7/25 Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Such language!
Sorry. Was agitated IRL when typing.
A player joining will have zero VP. Not undefined, zero.
I disagree. They're not bound by the contract defining VP.
Irrelevant. You can possess a contract-defined asset without
Charles Reiss wrote:
Also, there should be a strong presumption that excersizing R101
rights is equitable in order to avoid abridging those rights in an
equity judgment.
Aha, finally some judicial precedent on what R101 rights mean.
An excellent principle.
-zefram
Taral wrote:
Proto-Proposal: Clarify REMAND vs REASSIGN
That's not a clarification, it's a shift in the balance between these
two options. I like the balance where it is, and don't have your
objection to gratuitous REASSIGNments.
{Note that these say judgement, not arguments. As worded, neither
2008/7/26 Ed Murphy [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Irrelevant. You can possess a contract-defined asset without
belonging to that contract (I possess some chits, for instance).
Ah, true.
This means that contracts can affect non-parties.
Creepy...
On Sat, Jul 26, 2008 at 11:36 AM, Zefram [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I hereby vote:
5664 D2 3BobTHJ Chambers II
AGAINST
Anything about this in particular that I could change to get your vote?
BobTHJ
Ivan Hope wrote:
I agree to the following: {This is a pledge. Ivan Hope CXXVII can
leave this contract by announcement. The Beast is a fixed asset. Ivan
Hope CXXVII can cause it to be owned by anyone by announcement.}
I cause The Beast to be owned by Elliott Hird. (Precedent is that you
On Sat, Jul 26, 2008 at 3:06 PM, Ed Murphy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ivan Hope wrote:
I agree to the following: {This is a pledge. Ivan Hope CXXVII can
leave this contract by announcement. The Beast is a fixed asset. Ivan
Hope CXXVII can cause it to be owned by anyone by announcement.}
I
Pavitra wrote:
On Tuesday 22 July 2008 08:53:03 pm Zefram wrote:
5651 O1 1Quazie Left in a lull
AGAINSTx1
5652 D1 2comex Awful proposal
AGAINST
5653 O1 1.5 BobTHJ Department of Corrections
denounce comex x5
5654 D0 2ais523 none
FOR
5655 D1 2
I have three inquiry cases, four criminal cases (including 2091-92 as a
set), and one equity case (2039, unassignable until a new judge joins
the pool) waiting to be assigned. Supine players are politely requested
to consider sitting up before the next rotation.
Roger Hicks wrote:
Anything about this in particular that I could change to get your vote?
I dislike the general concept of a profusion of chambers, so no.
-zefram
Power-3 proposal:
{In Rule 2170, Who Am I?, put the following before the last paragraph:
A person can act on behalf of another person (the Absentee) to send a
message if and only if the Absentee consents to this. The Absentee
agreeing to (or being, in the case of partnerships) a contract
2008/7/26 Benjamin Schultz [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
In 2082, ehird's threat merits a strong response from Agora. I am strongly
considering exile.
Oh yeah?? Well I'll exile YOU!
On Jul 26, 2008, at 5:23 PM, Elliott Hird wrote:
2008/7/26 Benjamin Schultz [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
In 2082, ehird's threat merits a strong response from Agora. I am
strongly
considering exile.
Oh yeah?? Well I'll exile YOU!
You can't do that; I recall filing charges against you for
2008/7/26 Benjamin Schultz [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
You can't do that; I recall filing charges against you for roughing the
passer, offsides, and related technicalities such as treason.
-
Benjamin Schultz KE3OM
OscarMeyr
Mornington Crescent.
On Jul 26, 2008, at 5:32 PM, Elliott Hird wrote:
2008/7/26 Benjamin Schultz [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
You can't do that; I recall filing charges against you for
roughing the
passer, offsides, and related technicalities such as treason.
-
Benjamin Schultz KE3OM
OscarMeyr
Mornington Crescent.
On Sat, Jul 26, 2008 at 1:13 PM, Roger Hicks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 4:40 PM, Benjamin Schultz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
#! /usr/bin/perl6
Use Agora.pm;
Use Agora/ROoA.pm;
IF (milling 4 * 8 produces an X crop) == TRUE # otherwise refigure the
modulo 11 multiplication
On Sat, Jul 26, 2008 at 12:05 AM, ihope [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gratuitous arguments, just in case nobody else has already said this
(maybe I have and then forgotten): If somebody states I CFJ on this
statement, they're taking the action I CFJ on this statement not
because they're CFJing on
2008/7/26 Geoffrey Spear [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
CoE: syntax error.
So we've discussed.
I wrote:
I intend to deputize for the Assessor to resolve the Agoran decisions
to adopt proposals 5585-5650.
I believe the results are as follows. Proofreading is suggested, at
least for proposals where the results are close enough that an error
could conceivably affect the overall
On Sat, Jul 26, 2008 at 2:07 PM, Ed Murphy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Proposal: But what is truth?
(AI = 2, please)
Bravo. A well-thought-out balance.
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you.
-- Unknown
20 matches
Mail list logo
