Hello all!
OOC: I technically have everything ready, and could start the
tournament literally right now. That said, I'm going to be driving
home from a vacation tomorrow, and wouldn't have the time to get
things started properly. So I'm thinking to wait till tomorrow
evening.
IC: Agora is
1. A party to this contract CAN cease being a contract by announcement.
Whoops, just realized I wrote this. I cease being a contract :P (this
does nothing, doubly so because this isn't to the public forum).
On 8/3/19 7:37 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
We added "rules to the contrary notwithstanding" to
R2140 to solve that - but R2140 still only applies to instruments below
power-3.
How does that solve the problem? If I understand the issue correctly,
the power-1 rule wouldn't be blocked by R2140,
On 8/4/19 12:56 AM, Jason Cobb wrote:
[This is not a challenge, and is not sent to the public forum]
By my reading, by this rule each contest message must contain one
message _per Agoran God_. Is there a defined set of Agoran Gods
anywhere? Because if not, there might be an issue.
Never
> Okay, a few things.
>
> * Defining “unconditional announcement” is probably overkill; any sane
> judge would arrive at that that anyway, and it adds a bit to bloat.
> * You should probably say "Roshambo Score is an integer player switch" (R
> 2509)
> * You should probably say "increased by 1"
> Random "I" after "then at time T".
>
> Jason Cobb
Thanks, should be fixed in the draft I just published.
--
- Falsifian
On Fri, 2 Aug 2019 at 21:04, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> Actually, I wonder if we should think about some kind of "debugging"
> mechanism for victories. Something like "when a win method is first
> implemented (some mechanism, probably involving Agoran Consent, for
> figuring out whether the first win
On 8/3/19 2:16 PM, D. Margaux wrote:
In my opinion, a proposal "purporting to register nch" would
constitute an attempt to have nch "be registered" less than 30 days after
his voluntary deregistration. That attempt necessarily fails under Rule
849.
Please use spivak or gender neutral 'they'
On 8/3/19 2:36 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
On 8/3/2019 12:16 PM, D. Margaux wrote:
> Judged FALSE. NCH voluntarily deregistered less than 30 days ago. Under
> Rule 849, if a player does that, then "e CANNOT register or be
registered
> for 30 days." In my opinion, a proposal "purporting to register
On 8/3/2019 4:42 PM, Jason Cobb wrote:
> On 8/3/19 7:37 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>> We added "rules to the contrary notwithstanding" to
>> R2140 to solve that - but R2140 still only applies to instruments below
>> power-3.
>
>
> How does that solve the problem? If I understand the issue
On 8/4/19 12:49 AM, Reuben Staley wrote:
I create the following Fantasy Rule: {
The final paragraph of each contest message shall contain a message of
praise to each Agoran God mentioned previously in a contest message, plus
one not mentioned previously.
}
[This is not a challenge, and is
On 8/4/19 1:23 AM, James Cook wrote:
Whenever a player has not done so in the past 4 days, e CAN
Commune with the Wheel by announcement, specifying Rock, Paper or
Scissors. A player CAN Reach into the Past by announcement at any
time. If a player Communes the Wheel
On 8/4/19 12:24 AM, Rebecca wrote:
I submit myself to the Agoran Gods! I join the FRC and create the following
rule
O Hark, the commandments of the LORD are upon us! The LORD demanding the
respect he deserves, the LORD hereby decrees that all references to Agoran
Gods shall refer to em in ALL
On 8/3/19 2:16 PM, D. Margaux wrote:
On Fri, Aug 2, 2019 at 8:14 PM Kerim Aydin wrote:
The below CFJ is 3764. I assign it to D. Margaux.
=== CFJ 3764 ===
If a proposal purporting to register nch was adopted now, then one
On 8/3/2019 3:57 PM, Nich Evans wrote:
>> R849 clearly prohibits the registration. The "Comptrollor" ban we added
>> in R2140 recently to prevent lower-powered rules from prohibiting proposal
>> clauses in higher-powered proposals doesn't apply, because R2140 includes
>> the "below the power
On 8/3/19 9:58 PM, Jason Cobb wrote:
Excerpt from Rule 2202 ("Ratification Without Objection"):
Any player CAN, without objection, ratify a public document,
specifying its scope.
Whoops, I changed the statement while I was drafting and I no longer
actually use this as evidence. H. Arbitor,
On Sat, Aug 3, 2019 at 10:31 PM Jason Cobb wrote:
> On 8/4/19 1:23 AM, James Cook wrote:
> >Whenever a player has not done so in the past 4 days, e CAN
> >Commune with the Wheel by announcement, specifying Rock, Paper or
> >Scissors. A player CAN Reach into the Past by
In a decluttering effort, I'm going to start using this address.
--
Nich Evans
On 8/3/19 9:08 AM, Nich Evans wrote:
In a decluttering effort, I'm going to start using this address.
Confirming that I sent the above message.
On 8/3/19 10:39 AM, Nich Evans wrote:
On 8/3/19 10:12 AM, D. Margaux wrote:
On Aug 2, 2019, at 11:27 PM, Jason Cobb wrote:
The caller also provides this as an example:
"Repeal Rule 1698 (Ossification).
Enact a power 100 rule that procides, 'It is IMPOSSIBLE to change
the Rules,
rules
Sorry, sent this too early. Another email coming soon.
Jason Cobb
On 8/3/19 11:16 AM, Jason Cobb wrote:
On 8/3/19 11:12 AM, D. Margaux wrote:
The Ossification rule says "arbitrary rule changes to be made and/or
arbitrary proposals to be adopted"--that's plural changeS/proposalS.
Based on
On 8/2/2019 6:10 PM, Jason Cobb wrote:
> I don't need to make anything up, the answer to the question of what a
> rule change is lies in R105.
There is some ambiguity in R105 in terms of "compound" rule changes within a
single Rule, though it may not be relevant to your CFJ at all. For
=== CFJ 3761 ===
A party to the contract in evidence CAN create a gift by some
method.
==
Proto-judgement (used up my Motion so want to proto
On 8/3/2019 12:16 PM, D. Margaux wrote:
> Judged FALSE. NCH voluntarily deregistered less than 30 days ago. Under
> Rule 849, if a player does that, then "e CANNOT register or be registered
> for 30 days." In my opinion, a proposal "purporting to register nch" would
> constitute an attempt to
On 8/3/2019 11:06 AM, Jason Cobb wrote:
> On 8/3/19 1:56 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>>
>> In the current situation, Clause 3 of the contract successfully defines a
>> currency. By default (if there were no further clauses), the POSSIBLE
>> currency actions are in R2577, and include destruction and
On 8/3/19 11:12 AM, D. Margaux wrote:
The Ossification rule says "arbitrary rule changes to be made and/or arbitrary
proposals to be adopted"--that's plural changeS/proposalS. Based on the text of the
rule, Agora is Ossified if there is a combination of rule changes and/or proposals that
On 8/3/19 11:12 AM, D. Margaux wrote:
The Ossification rule says "arbitrary rule changes to be made and/or arbitrary
proposals to be adopted"--that's plural changeS/proposalS. Based on the text of the
rule, Agora is Ossified if there is a combination of rule changes and/or proposals that
are
On Sat, 2019-08-03 at 11:12 -0400, D. Margaux wrote:
> 2c. Enact a rule of power sufficient to give effect to its terms
> that states:
>
> "Any attempt to enact this rule is IMPOSSIBLE."
That example isn't impossible to enact even in the present gamestate.
You could write a proposal
On 8/3/19 1:56 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
In the current situation, Clause 3 of the contract successfully defines a
currency. By default (if there were no further clauses), the POSSIBLE
currency actions are in R2577, and include destruction and transfer of
currencies by announcement, but not
On 8/3/19 10:12 AM, D. Margaux wrote:
On Aug 2, 2019, at 11:27 PM, Jason Cobb wrote:
The caller also provides this as an example:
"Repeal Rule 1698 (Ossification).
Enact a power 100 rule that procides, 'It is IMPOSSIBLE to change the Rules,
rules to the contrary notwithstanding.'"
On Sat, 2019-08-03 at 16:19 +, ais...@alumni.bham.ac.uk wrote:
> On Sat, 2019-08-03 at 11:12 -0400, D. Margaux wrote:
> > 2c. Enact a rule of power sufficient to give effect to its
> > terms
> > that states:
> >
> > "Any attempt to enact this rule is IMPOSSIBLE."
>
> That example
Hello my bruddah and sistahs, please make way for my infinite swagger:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_izvAbhExY
On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 6:04 PM Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> On 8/1/2019 8:48 AM, James Cook wrote:
> > On Thu, 1 Aug 2019 at 15:46, James Cook wrote:
> >>
> >> No zombie auction is
> On Aug 2, 2019, at 11:27 PM, Jason Cobb wrote:
>
> The caller also provides this as an example:
>
>> "Repeal Rule 1698 (Ossification).
>> Enact a power 100 rule that procides, 'It is IMPOSSIBLE to change the Rules,
>> rules to the contrary notwithstanding.'"
>
> Again, this is not a rule
33 matches
Mail list logo
