On 16 Nov 2008, at 04:24, Ed Murphy wrote:
Yes, it did:
The pledge at the start of this thread.
--
ehird
On Nov 15, 2008, at 10:22 PM, Taral wrote:
On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 3:22 PM, Benjamin Schultz
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
OK, then, how should I rephrase it so that it is an equation?
Like a contract. X shall Y.
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please let me know if there's any further trouble I
On 16 Nov 2008, at 15:39, Benjamin Schultz wrote:
I nominate comex and ehird for Notary.
Absolutely happy to take it. Nothing can be as hard as Coinkeepor.
--
ehird
I think the AAA report is on a web page somewhere, but I lost the
URL. Somebody please repost it.
-
Benjamin Schultz KE3OM
OscarMeyr
On 16 Nov 2008, at 15:45, Benjamin Schultz wrote:
I think the AAA report is on a web page somewhere, but I lost the
URL. Somebody please repost it.
http://nomictools.com
--
ehird
On Nov 16, 2008, at 10:46 AM, Elliott Hird wrote:
http://nomictools.com
I don't see the farm on there. Do I have to get an account and log in?
-
Benjamin Schultz KE3OM
OscarMeyr
On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 10:53 AM, Elliott Hird
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 16 Nov 2008, at 15:52, Benjamin Schultz wrote:
I don't see the farm on there. Do I have to get an account and log in?
Apparently it's unlinked. http://www.nomictools.com/agora/aaa
That page is out of date and
On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 7:33 PM, Ed Murphy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For each of the 100 partnerships P1 through P100, I intend (with
Agoran consent) to deregister that partnership per Rule 2144.
I'll deregister them myself once the success of all this has been established.
ehird wrote:
2008/11/17 Ed Murphy [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Aha. I initiate an inquiry case on the following statement,
disqualifying comex:
Neither Proposal 5956 nor Proposal 5962 has been adopted.
Arguments:
Strong precedent is that one-off increases work.
What strong precedent? I
On Mon, 17 Nov 2008 01:03:02 +
Elliott Hird [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2008/11/17 Joshua Boehme [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
The question is, does the so in the second sentence refer to
deregister[ing] or to deregister[ing] by announcement? If the latter,
then even deregistrations by means of a
On Thu, 13 Nov 2008 10:04:19 -0500
Geoffrey Spear [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This message serves to initiate the Agoran Decision to choose the
holders of the IADoP and Tailor offices. The eligible voters are the
active players and the vote collector is the IADoP.
For IADoP, the valid options
2008/11/17 Sgeo [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Possibly, the declaration of invalidity did not work.. I remember some
rule against tampering with these things, though that might be from
Canada..
There is a rule specifically allowing ballots to be declared invalid.
On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 20:47:59 -0500
Sgeo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 8:44 PM, Elliott Hird
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2008/11/17 Geoffrey Spear [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
CoE:
This is missing most of the votes that were cast on this proposal.
I intend, with 2 support, to
2008/11/17 Joshua Boehme [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Is this what you were thinking of?
Other rules may place further constraints on the validity of
ballots. This rule takes precedence over any rule that would
loosen the constraints specified by this rule.
root wrote:
On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 1:07 PM, Elliott Hird
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I agree to the following:
{
This is a public contract and a pledge.
Anyone can join or leave this contract.
Votes of the form RANDOM(vote), RANDOM(vote,vote), RANDOM(vote,vote,vote)
and so on are
ehird wrote:
2008/11/17 Sgeo [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Possibly, the declaration of invalidity did not work.. I remember some
rule against tampering with these things, though that might be from
Canada..
There is a rule specifically allowing ballots to be declared invalid.
You may as well say if
On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 8:49 PM, Joshua Boehme [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Rule 2034/4 (Power=3)
Vote Protection and Cutoff for Challenges
Any proposal that would otherwise change the validity of any
existing vote on any specific unresolved Agoran decision is
wholly without
On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 8:40 PM, Geoffrey Spear [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
CoE:
This is missing most of the votes that were cast on this proposal.
I intend, with 2 support, to initiate a criminal case alleging that
the AFO violated Rule 2215 by publishing the below message in an
attempt to
root wrote:
On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 6:55 PM, Ed Murphy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
root wrote:
On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 1:07 PM, Elliott Hird
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I agree to the following:
{
This is a public contract and a pledge.
Anyone can join or leave this contract.
Votes of the
On Sun, 16 Nov 2008, Ed Murphy wrote:
2008/11/17 Ed Murphy [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Aha. I initiate an inquiry case on the following statement,
disqualifying comex:
Neither Proposal 5956 nor Proposal 5962 has been adopted.
Arguments:
Strong precedent is that one-off increases work.
On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 10:41 PM, Kerim Aydin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 17 Nov 2008, Elliott Hird wrote:
2008/11/17 Elliott Hird [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Clinching evidence:
The player did not deregister. The registrar deregistered the player.
Wasn't this the source of BobTHJs
21 matches
Mail list logo
