On Sun, 19 Nov 2017, Aris Merchant wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 19, 2017 at 5:53 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> > My main motivation - we've literally spent the last few months on shiny
> > bugs, ironed many out, and I'm just paranoid about going through such
> > a thing again. It's
On Mon, 2017-11-20 at 09:48 -0800, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> You can see how it would work better for hard-coded matters of
> economic policy: "if elected, I'll double the supply of land/halve
> the cost of pending proposals" or whatever (though if most of the
> campaign proposals are like that,
Also, what is the point of campaign proposals? (Except for proposing
overpowered powers for yourself and ensuring nobody else gets them)
Seems like tying a proposal coming into force to your being elected
will lower the chances of either happening; players who like one, but
not the other are IMO
On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 11:10 AM, Kerim Aydin
wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 20 Nov 2017, ATMunn wrote:
> > Office Holder Since Last Election
> >
> -
>
On Mon, 20 Nov 2017, Cuddle Beam wrote:
> By announcement I make all players candidates.
(this fails and does nothing)
On Sun, 19 Nov 2017, Aris Merchant wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 19, 2017 at 4:19 PM, Reuben Staley
> wrote:
> > 1. every player with an amount of papers less than 2 an amount of
> > papers so that eir paper balance is equal to 2.
> >
> > [ This makes it so that
On Mon, 20 Nov 2017, ATMunn wrote:
> Office Holder Since Last Election
> -
> Herald VACANT 2017-11-17[4] Ongoing
>
I contracted to do it (or not to do it, but to informally do it and have
Fire-Fox publish it).
On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 9:50 AM, ATMunn wrote:
> How is it your fault?
>
>
> On 11/20/2017 3:08 PM, VJ Rada wrote:
>
>> Reportor 天火狐 8 Days
I was honestly pretty tempted to, but about to become Clork and that
seems hectic enough :P
On 2017-11-21 03:10, Kerim Aydin wrote:
On Mon, 20 Nov 2017, ATMunn wrote:
Office Holder Since Last Election
I concur. It is easy to track and you get to dive into history.
On 11/20/2017 11:10 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> On Mon, 20 Nov 2017, ATMunn wrote:
>> Office Holder Since Last Election
>>
How is it your fault?
On 11/20/2017 3:08 PM, VJ Rada wrote:
Reportor 天火狐 8 Days 2017-11-19
Oh god this is my fault isn't it. Oh dear.
On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 1:39 AM, ATMunn wrote:
You may notice that this week's ADoP report
On Mon, 20 Nov 2017, Alex Smith wrote:
> On Mon, 2017-11-20 at 09:48 -0800, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> > You can see how it would work better for hard-coded matters of
> > economic policy: "if elected, I'll double the supply of land/halve
> > the cost of pending proposals" or whatever (though if
I made great use of my campaign proposal. IDK what all these other scrubs
are doing haha.
On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 5:56 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 20 Nov 2017, Alex Smith wrote:
> > On Mon, 2017-11-20 at 09:48 -0800, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> > > You can see how it
Really nice to finally put back a requirement to track theses! (even
if it's just a SHOULD) It's nobody's job now, a long time ago it used
to be the Rulekeepor funnily enough:
> The Rulekeepor shall retain a copy of each Thesis approved by
> its Thesis Committee.
On Mon, 20 Nov
(I forgot to mention that only one player supported the intent, me)
On 11/20/2017 7:53 PM, ATMunn wrote:
2 things:
first of all, in my next ADoP report, should I just note this as one report or
a report and a revision?
Also, 14 days have passed since your intent to levy fines on me and
You shouldn't feel ashamed, it's just the rules.
On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 12:07 PM, VJ Rada wrote:
> Nope! The fine has to be levied. E can pay the money if e wants to pay
> it, but that doesn't satisfy any obligation. There's only an
> obligation to pay if the fine is levied.
Nope! The fine has to be levied. E can pay the money if e wants to pay
it, but that doesn't satisfy any obligation. There's only an
obligation to pay if the fine is levied.
On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 12:06 PM, Aris Merchant
wrote:
> If you want to pay it, you
I missed it :(
On Mon, 20 Nov 2017 at 21:07 Madeline wrote:
> I said this ages ago and no one believed me!
>
>
> On 2017-11-21 12:33, VJ Rada wrote:
> > "Rule 2531/0 (Power=1.0)
> > Referee Accountability
> > History:
> > Enacted by Proposal 7934 "Poetry Duel Challenge Writ"
Huh. I somewhat feel like maybe players just missed it, but I guess I shouldn't
complain about not having to pay a fine. I just don't like seeing it there in
the Referee's report...
On 11/20/2017 8:01 PM, VJ Rada wrote:
Yes, the fines are forever unpaid. If Agora doesn't want you to pay
the
On Mon, 20 Nov 2017 at 20:33 VJ Rada wrote:
> "Rule 2531/0 (Power=1.0)
> Referee Accountability
> History:
> Enacted by Proposal 7934 "Poetry Duel Challenge Writ" (天火狐), Nov 06,
> 2017"
>
> Obviously, it was not enacted by that proposal. The actual rule
> "Poetry Duel
I said this ages ago and no one believed me!
On 2017-11-21 12:33, VJ Rada wrote:
"Rule 2531/0 (Power=1.0)
Referee Accountability
History:
Enacted by Proposal 7934 "Poetry Duel Challenge Writ" (天火狐), Nov 06,
2017"
Obviously, it was not enacted by that proposal. The actual rule
"Poetry Duel
darnit, I was just about to point my finger at em. :P
On 11/20/2017 7:13 PM, VJ Rada wrote:
I issue 天火狐 a Green Card by Summary Judgement for not publishing a Reportor
report last week. This would be a green card anyway, but note the
mitigating circumstance: I agreed to write eir reports.
If you want to pay it, you certainly can. V.J., you would mark it as paid
then, right?
-Aris
On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 5:04 PM ATMunn wrote:
> Huh. I somewhat feel like maybe players just missed it, but I guess I
> shouldn't complain about not having to pay a fine. I
2 things:
first of all, in my next ADoP report, should I just note this as one report or
a report and a revision?
Also, 14 days have passed since your intent to levy fines on me and Alexis.
Here's the problem: Rule 2506 states that
"When a Blue Card is issued, as a penalty, within the next 7
Yes, the fines are forever unpaid. If Agora doesn't want you to pay
the fine, you won't pay it.
On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 11:54 AM, ATMunn wrote:
> (I forgot to mention that only one player supported the intent, me)
>
>
> On 11/20/2017 7:53 PM, ATMunn wrote:
>>
>> 2
> On Nov 21, 2017, at 12:42 AM, VJ Rada wrote:
>
>> AGAINST. By my read, this would change the restriction
>
>>6. The voter has no other valid ballots on the same decision.
>
>> to
>
>>6. The voter has no other invalid ballots on the same decision.
>
>> which is
Ya I was just going to give myself a win and put Smash Mouth All Star
in the ruleset for a while for that exact reason: an absurd
dictatorship would be disastrous at this point.
On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 4:44 PM, Owen Jacobson wrote:
>
>> On Nov 21, 2017, at 12:42 AM, VJ Rada
>AGAINST. By my read, this would change the restriction
> 6. The voter has no other valid ballots on the same decision.
>to
> 6. The voter has no other invalid ballots on the same decision.
>which is obvious nonsense.
DARN. Knew I should have bribed you again.
Alright show's over boys
On Nov 19, 2017, at 3:01 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>> AP-CFJ: "If a proposal specifies an amendment to a rule consisting of
>> multiple parts, one of which is a title change, then the entire amendment
>> fails."
>
> This is CFJ 3599.
>
>
>> Shiny-CFJ: "If a proposal
> On Nov 19, 2017, at 11:40 PM, Aris Merchant
> wrote:
>
> On the off chance that this works, I claim a 5 shiny reward from Agora
> for my Promotor report.
Close! But Agora had four shinies, not five.
-o
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with
> On Nov 20, 2017, at 7:09 PM, Josh T wrote:
>
> I collect a reward of 5 Shinies for the quoted report, and if I
> successfully had collected said reward, pay VJ Rada 5 Shinies as per
> contract.
Unfortunately, you did not, and therefore did not. My apologies for
>Reportor 天火狐 8 Days 2017-11-19
Oh god this is my fault isn't it. Oh dear.
On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 1:39 AM, ATMunn wrote:
> You may notice that this week's ADoP report looks a bit different!
>
> This is because I've done a little
This looks pretty cool :D
I think I prefer the consolidation number as a "diversity" percentage,
but that's just a minor quibble.
On 2017-11-21 01:39, ATMunn wrote:
You may notice that this week's ADoP report looks a bit different!
This is because I've done a little bit of reformatting, and
I think that's what I had it at before, but a few people said they preferred
this way. I'm not sure what the majority of people actually want. :P
On 11/20/2017 9:44 AM, Madeline wrote:
This looks pretty cool :D
I think I prefer the consolidation number as a "diversity" percentage, but
that's
34 matches
Mail list logo