On Sun, Jun 29, 2008 at 3:16 PM, Roger Hicks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Activate the PRS
AI: 1
II: 1
{
Upon the adoption of this proposal the contract known as the Points
Relay Service becomes a contest with BobTHJ as its contestmaster
}
I don't think this works...
--
Taral [EMAIL
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 12:05 AM, Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Jun 29, 2008 at 3:43 PM, Ian Kelly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I intend to ratify the Registrar's Report of June 29, 2008 without objection.
Major ratifications like this should be accompanied by a reason.
It hasn't been
On Sun, Jun 29, 2008 at 11:19 PM, Ian Kelly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It hasn't been ratified in over 3 years. If an old inconsistency like
the one Quazie thought e found comes up, I don't want to have to
recalculate everything that's happened since 2005. And with recent
events involving
On Sun, 29 Jun 2008, Taral wrote:
On Sun, Jun 29, 2008 at 3:16 PM, Roger Hicks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Activate the PRS
AI: 1
II: 1
{
Upon the adoption of this proposal the contract known as the Points
Relay Service becomes a contest with BobTHJ as its contestmaster
}
I don't think this
I submit the following proto-proposals:
Proposal - 'Capitol 1' - AI = 1, II=0
---
Change all instances of 'ruleset' to 'Ruleset' in R1681
Change all instances of 'ruleset' to 'Ruleset' in R1750
Change all instances of 'ruleset' to 'Ruleset' in R2200
Change all instances of 'Contestmaster' to
Ben Caplan wrote:
This strikes me as not within the spirit of the game of Werewolf. Wolves need
to be able to lie with impunity.
See who fears information getting out. I propose to lynch Pavitra.
-zefram
Ben Caplan wrote:
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2008 23:12:23 -0500
http://www.timezoneconverter.com/cgi-bin/tzc.tzc
thinks that the time as I write this is 04:10 Jun 30 (UTC)
or 16:10 Jun 29 (GMT +12).
That's wrong. The time according to your Date header is 2008-06-29
23:12:23 in UTC-5h, which is
On Sun, Jun 29, 2008 at 11:41 PM, Zefram [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ben Caplan wrote:
This strikes me as not within the spirit of the game of Werewolf. Wolves need
to be able to lie with impunity.
See who fears information getting out. I propose to lynch Pavitra.
-zefram
I second this,
Quazie wrote:
On Sun, Jun 29, 2008 at 11:41 PM, Zefram [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ben Caplan wrote:
This strikes me as not within the spirit of the game of Werewolf. Wolves
need
to be able to lie with impunity.
See who fears information getting out. I propose to lynch Pavitra.
-zefram
Alexander Smith wrote:
Happy Birthday, Agora!
Late.
Doesn't +1200 push it from midday on the 30th to midday on the 1st?
The +12:00 means that it occurs 12 hours earlier than that date occurs
in UTC.
-zefram
Alexander Smith wrote:
Well, in that case, I publically state that I did not have Internet access
during Agora's Birthday. This prevented me from participating in the fora
So your personal circumstances have abridged your R101 right. How naughty
of them. Of course, that's not a binding
Zefram wrote:
So your personal circumstances have abridged your R101 right. How naughty
of them. Of course, that's not a binding agreement or interpretation
of Agoran law, so R101 does not forbid it from abridging your rights.
No, Rule 2199's abridged my R101 right, by not allowing me
On Mon, 2008-06-30 at 10:14 -0400, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
I CFJ on the following statement: ais523 was a person on Agora's birthday.
Argument against: By eir own admission, e was not capable of
communicating in English via email during Agora's birthday.
--Wooble
Heh, I hope that comes up
On Mon, 30 Jun 2008, Zefram wrote:
Alexander Smith wrote:
Well, in that case, I publically state that I did not have Internet access
during Agora's Birthday. This prevented me from participating in the fora
So your personal circumstances have abridged your R101 right. How naughty
of them.
5577 O1 1comex I don't deserve Scamster!
AGAINSTx2
5578 O1 1.5 Murphy Easier cleanup of one-off pledges
FORx2
5579 D0 3Quazie Race the Hare.
FOR
5580 D1 3SgeoHolidays are sacred
FOR
5581 D0 2SgeoRibbon Clarification
AGAINST (Is it uncommon
2008/6/30 Sgeo [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I support ais523 making Proposal 5582 Democratic.
AWESOME
BobTHJ wrote:
If the notary were to attempt to terminate the equation of CFJ 1927 I
would not object.
Without objection, I intend to terminate the equation of CFJ 1927.
--
Notary ais523, who can take a hint
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 2:09 AM, Ed Murphy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
See who fears information getting out. I propose to lynch Pavitra.
-zefram
I second this, support this, whatever the proper wording is.
Pavitra is just as eager to lynch ehird. Also, I get to save my own,
townsperson,
On Mon, 2008-06-30 at 12:19 -0400, Sgeo wrote:
I support ais523 making Proposal 5582 Democratic.
With support from Sgeo and from Quazie (which is 2 support), I make the
Agoran Decision on whether to adopt proposal 5582 Democratic.
--
ais523
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 8:32 AM, Alexander Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Heh, I hope that comes up FALSE too, it would cause a massive gamestate
recalculation based on unknown data due to all the assets that are
restricted to people (there must be some), and the precedent that
non-persons
Goethe, I've noticed a problem with Vote Goethe; it seems to require an
expenditure of 2VP to cause you to vote on a proposal you've already
voted on of your own accord. Was this deliberate?
--
ais523
Quazie wrote:
Proposal - 'Capitol 1' - AI = 1, II=0
We're moving away from Capitalising Important Words. I'd favour
lowercasing some of the existing capitalised words.
Proposal 'Non-newbies deserve Ribbons' AI =2 ii = 1
I think white ribbons should not be available to new players, only
to
On Mon, 2008-06-30 at 10:50 -0600, Ian Kelly wrote:
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 8:32 AM, Alexander Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Heh, I hope that comes up FALSE too, it would cause a massive gamestate
recalculation based on unknown data due to all the assets that are
restricted to people
NttPF.
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 10:40 AM, ais523 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 2008-06-30 at 12:19 -0400, Sgeo wrote:
I support ais523 making Proposal 5582 Democratic.
With support from Sgeo and from Quazie (which is 2 support), I make the
Agoran Decision on whether to adopt proposal 5582
Quazie wrote:
Proposal 'Another bribe?' AI=2 ii=1
Been done before. Boring.
-zefram
On Mon, 30 Jun 2008, ais523 wrote:
Goethe, I've noticed a problem with Vote Goethe; it seems to require an
expenditure of 2VP to cause you to vote on a proposal you've already
voted on of your own accord. Was this deliberate?
Yep! But you may negotiate that with me if you wish... -Goethe
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 9:53 AM, Zefram [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Quazie wrote:
Proposal - 'Capitol 1' - AI = 1, II=0
We're moving away from Capitalising Important Words. I'd favour
lowercasing some of the existing capitalised words.
I'll attempt to remove the capitols instead.
Proposal
On Mon, 30 Jun 2008, ais523 wrote:
BUY TICKET
Cost: 1VP
Target: Goethe
Action: Retract all the filler's votes on the Agoran decision on whether
to adopt Proposal 5582, vote FOR on that decision, and do not retract
that vote during the that decision's voting period
I will vote as indicated
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 10:52 AM, ais523 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
BUY TICKET
Cost: 1VP
Target: BobTHJ
Action: Retract all the filler's votes on the Agoran decision on whether
to adopt Proposal 5582, vote FOR on that decision, and do not retract
that vote during the that decision's voting
2008/6/30 Quazie [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Proposal 'Homo sapiens' AI=3 ii=0
We're not speciesist here. We have precedent for a blob of (biological)
mauve goo being a player.
Also, you spelled the binomial name correctly in the title but not in
the body of the proposal. The specific epithet is
On Mon, 2008-06-30 at 09:59 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
On Mon, 30 Jun 2008, ais523 wrote:
BUY TICKET
Cost: 1VP
Target: Goethe
Action: Retract all the filler's votes on the Agoran decision on whether
to adopt Proposal 5582, vote FOR on that decision, and do not retract
that vote during
On Mon, 30 Jun 2008, Quazie wrote:
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 9:56 AM, Zefram [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Quazie wrote:
Proposal 'Another bribe?' AI=2 ii=1
Been done before. Boring.
-zefram
I was just surprised to find that Bribing wasn't illegal, thats all,
so I decided to see what would
Quazie wrote:
This is just to ensure that dead humans can be considered people if
they need to be.
But they're not people. They have no social personality and no capacity
to act on their own behalf. They should correspondingly have no legal
personality. It's vitally important that we recognise
On Mon, 30 Jun 2008, ais523 wrote:
On Mon, 2008-06-30 at 09:59 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
On Mon, 30 Jun 2008, ais523 wrote:
I'm willing to bear the risk of being outbid on this. (It would still
cost 2VP for someone else to retract and revote on your behalf, right?)
Yep! You did it right.
Quazie wrote:
I was just surprised to find that Bribing wasn't illegal, thats all,
so I decided to see what would happen.
Precedent is that it gets voted down. The *first* bribery attempt of
a novel type generally succeeds, but reiterations are frowned upon.
(Your prisoners' dilemma proposal
On Mon, 30 Jun 2008, Zefram wrote:
Quazie wrote:
I was just surprised to find that Bribing wasn't illegal, thats all,
so I decided to see what would happen.
Precedent is that it gets voted down. The *first* bribery attempt of
a novel type generally succeeds, but reiterations are frowned
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 11:08 AM, Kerim Aydin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On the other hand, we *are* trying to model a fair judicial system, so
bribery for judges is a different (i.e. more frowned-upon) matter.
I'm curious why one and not the other?
BobTHJ
Here are my ideas on how to fix problems I perceive in the Vote Market.
This would also contain a self-repealing paragraph to fix OV holdings
for the new definitions and to remove VPs (VPs are more valuable than
OVs, and anyway need to be balanced); also, if my fill-lots-of-times
scam worked, I'd
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 1:08 PM, Kerim Aydin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well it's classic Nomic prisoners dilemma etc., but I disagree that
it's boring, any more than playing Werewolf (that's been played many
times before) is boring.
The prisoner's dilemma gets a lot less interesting when you
2008/6/30 comex [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hmph. So many accusations! But ehird has still not accepted my offer of
chits!
I nominate EHIRD.
And I also nominate ZEFRAM, because coming out of the blue to nominate
Pavrita is... a little suspicious.
Your arguments suck.
ehird
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 11:54 AM, comex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 1:38 PM, Elliott Hird
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I nominate comex for lynching.
Why?
E was the one who told me to nominate Wooble (after Wooble nominated em).
E said that if I did, e'd vote against any
comex wrote:
And I also nominate ZEFRAM, because coming out of the blue to nominate
Pavrita is... a little suspicious.
Damn, rumbled. Yep, I'm a werewolf. In fact, I'm both werewolves.
Pavitra gave sufficient reason to suspect em of lupine tendencies.
-zefram
14. Whenever a party owns more than 40 OVs, any party may transfer the
OVs e owns in excess of 40 to the Lost and Found department by
announcement.
I think the wording is a bit awkward..
On Sun, Jun 29, 2008 at 6:21 PM, Ed Murphy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Speaking personally, the more effort it takes, the less often anyone
will bother. I suggest amending the Vote Market so that, instead of
a three-step specific process:
Alice I offer to sell my vote on 6000 for 1 VP
Bob
On Mon, 30 Jun 2008, Roger Hicks wrote:
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 11:08 AM, Kerim Aydin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On the other hand, we *are* trying to model a fair judicial system, so
bribery for judges is a different (i.e. more frowned-upon) matter.
I'm curious why one and not the other?
2008/6/30 Kerim Aydin [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Keeping in mind there are some who have frowned upon legislative play too,
and believe 1 person/1 vote
Democratic revolutionaries! :P
ehird
Keeping in mind there are some who have frowned upon legislative play too,
and believe 1 person/1 vote and no bribery for all proposals should be
relatively sacred. And of course those who don't mind bribing judges :).
I fully support legislative play for ordinary decisions, but not
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 12:24 PM, Kerim Aydin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 30 Jun 2008, Roger Hicks wrote:
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 11:08 AM, Kerim Aydin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On the other hand, we *are* trying to model a fair judicial system, so
bribery for judges is a different (i.e.
2008/6/30 Roger Hicks [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Haven't you followed modern american judicial proceedings? The law be
damned. Legislation from the bench is the new politically correct
wave. It is a convenient way to override the inconvenient majority.
BobTHJ
Let's adopt it posthaste.
ehird
On Mon, 30 Jun 2008, Elliott Hird wrote:
2008/6/30 Roger Hicks [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Haven't you followed modern american judicial proceedings?
Religiously (ooh, bad word choice). I'd agree with you if you say the
modern trend began with Marbury v. Madison (1803).
-Goethe
2008/6/30 Sgeo [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I fully support legislative play for ordinary decisions, but not
democratic decisions. As far as I'm concerned, the point of the
distinction is to have a playground for decisions on things that won't
completely change things, but when there are important
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 12:49 PM, Kerim Aydin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm working on a proto that brings back the three-tiered Ordinary-
Democratic - Sane. Along with cards. Stay tuned. But yes, I fully
agree that there should *always* be a high-powered safe mode that is a
straight-up
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 12:51 PM, Roger Hicks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Haven't you followed modern american judicial proceedings? The law be
damned. Legislation from the bench is the new politically correct
wave. It is a convenient way to override the inconvenient majority.
Not to turn this
2008/6/30 Kerim Aydin [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Religiously (ooh, bad word choice)
Somehow I think the dead persons = people debate will go that way.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] death
ehird
On Mon, 30 Jun 2008, Ian Kelly wrote:
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 12:49 PM, Kerim Aydin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm working on a proto that brings back the three-tiered Ordinary-
Democratic - Sane. Along with cards. Stay tuned. But yes, I fully
agree that there should *always* be a
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 12:56 PM, Kerim Aydin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 30 Jun 2008, Elliott Hird wrote:
2008/6/30 Roger Hicks [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Haven't you followed modern american judicial proceedings?
Religiously (ooh, bad word choice). I'd agree with you if you say the
modern
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 1:01 PM, Ian Kelly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 12:51 PM, Roger Hicks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Haven't you followed modern american judicial proceedings? The law be
damned. Legislation from the bench is the new politically correct
wave. It is a
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 1:09 PM, Sgeo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a conflict between Rules with different Power, the Rule with
the higher Power takes precedence over the Rule with the lower
Power, unless the Rule with the higher Power says otherwise.
We don't need this.
On Mon, 2008-06-30 at 13:25 -0600, Roger Hicks wrote:
I believe such actions would be interesting to experiment with here in
Agora. I strongly believe such actions should not be experimented with
at the State or Federal level of a world superpower.
Well, B Nomic has Oracularities, which is
On Mon, 2008-06-30 at 13:31 -0600, Ian Kelly wrote:
In general, drafting with precedence deferral is bad form, because it
has the potential to bring about complex webs of precedent that must
be unraveled in order to interpret the rules. If the rules are
instead drafted to eliminate conflicts,
On Mon, 2008-06-30 at 12:40 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
This following is a win announcement: My nickname is Goethe!
Ah, a correct announcement clearly labeled as a win announcement.
Unfortunately, I don't think it meets any of the Winning Conditions, so
despite it being a win announcement it
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 1:40 PM, Kerim Aydin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This following is a win announcement: My nickname is Goethe!
-Goethe
Huh? I thought you were the champion of the anti-ISIDTID crowd?
BobTHJ
Just checking, I'm assuming:
1. When someone ceases to be MwoP, they hold onto their previous prerogatives;
2. When someone ceases to be a player, they hold onto their previous
prerogatives;
Someone tell me if I'm assuming wrong, please.
-Goethe
2008/6/30 Roger Hicks [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Huh? I thought you were the champion of the anti-ISIDTID crowd?
BobTHJ
It IS a win announcement, though. Maybe e's doing a scam involving one.
ehird
On Mon, 30 Jun 2008, Roger Hicks wrote:
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 1:40 PM, Kerim Aydin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This following is a win announcement: My nickname is Goethe!
-Goethe
Huh? I thought you were the champion of the anti-ISIDTID crowd?
What? I did actually make a correct
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 3:40 PM, Kerim Aydin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This following is a win announcement: My nickname is Goethe!
I'd think the Herald would want to avoid setting a precedent of
explicitly labeling random announcements as win announcements. Stuff
like The following is a win
On Mon, 2008-06-30 at 15:53 -0400, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 3:40 PM, Kerim Aydin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This following is a win announcement: My nickname is Goethe!
I'd think the Herald would want to avoid setting a precedent of
explicitly labeling random
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 1:53 PM, Geoffrey Spear [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 3:40 PM, Kerim Aydin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This following is a win announcement: My nickname is Goethe!
I'd think the Herald would want to avoid setting a precedent of
explicitly labeling
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 1:56 PM, Kerim Aydin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
the not-quite-birthday HERALD'S REPORT - June 30, 2008
HERALD'S HISTORY CORNER (*NEW!*)
DID YOU
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 1:56 PM, Kerim Aydin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--
UNDEFINED BUT HELD PATENT TITLES
--
: Andre
Admiral:Goethe
Agoran Spy:
On Mon, 2008-06-30 at 14:02 -0600, Ian Kelly wrote:
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 1:56 PM, Kerim Aydin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--
UNDEFINED BUT HELD PATENT TITLES
--
You've omitted ehird's
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 2:02 PM, Ian Kelly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Left in a Huff: Waggie, Gecko, Kelly (x3!), Swann, KoJen, Zefram,
Vlad, Andre, Goethe
You've omitted ehird's new Plagiarist title from Proposal 5568.
-root
Also, didn't I get a Left in a Huff, or Came
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 2:06 PM, Roger Hicks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Also, didn't I get a Left in a Huff, or Came Back in a Puff (or
something similar) title by proposal some time back for my 'scam' of
using a WRIT of FAGE to circumvent the 30 day self-imposed exile for
voluntary
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 4:06 PM, ais523 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 2008-06-30 at 14:02 -0600, Ian Kelly wrote:
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 1:56 PM, Kerim Aydin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--
UNDEFINED BUT HELD PATENT TITLES
On Mon, 30 Jun 2008, Roger Hicks wrote:
Also, didn't I get a Left in a Huff, or Came Back in a Puff (or
something similar) title by proposal some time back for my 'scam' of
using a WRIT of FAGE to circumvent the 30 day self-imposed exile for
voluntary deregistration?
Ah yes, I believe so; I
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 2:07 PM, ais523 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
TTttPF
On Mon, 2008-06-30 at 21:06 +0100, ais523 wrote:
On Mon, 2008-06-30 at 14:02 -0600, Ian Kelly wrote:
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 1:56 PM, Kerim Aydin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 11:07 PM, Ian Kelly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
NUM FL AI SUBMITTER TITLE
*5434 O1 1Murphy Left in a Huff
Text of adopted proposals:
}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{
Proposal 5434 (Ordinary, AI=1, Interest=1) by
On Mon, 2008-06-30 at 14:17 -0600, Ian Kelly wrote:
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 2:07 PM, ais523 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
TTttPF
On Mon, 2008-06-30 at 21:06 +0100, ais523 wrote:
On Mon, 2008-06-30 at 14:02 -0600, Ian Kelly wrote:
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 1:56 PM, Kerim Aydin [EMAIL
How does this motivate any parties to act in any way? What value do Reeds have?
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 2:18 PM, Roger Hicks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 11:07 PM, Ian Kelly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
NUM FL AI SUBMITTER TITLE
*5434 O1 1Murphy Left in a Huff
Text of adopted proposals:
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 2:21 PM, ais523 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hmm... patent titles aren't assets AFAIR, so the Herald probably isn't
the recordkeepor of them and so it probably doesn't self-ratify. But
CoEing is still useful due to the potential of deliberate ratification,
plus I think it's
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 2:25 PM, Ian Kelly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 2:18 PM, Roger Hicks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 11:07 PM, Ian Kelly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
NUM FL AI SUBMITTER TITLE
*5434 O1 1Murphy Left in a Huff
Text of
On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 12:14 PM, Ian Kelly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 9:20 PM, Josiah Worcester [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
BobTHJ Came Back in a Puff
Champion*
Minister Without Portfolio*
*Dependent on BobTHJ being a player.
On Mon, 30 Jun 2008, Ian Kelly wrote:
}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{
Proposal 5434 (Ordinary, AI=1, Interest=1) by Murphy
Left in a Huff
Amend Rule 1922 (Defined Regular Patent Titles) by appending this text:
(f) Left in a Huff, to be awarded
2008/6/30 Sgeo [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I agree::Agora to this contract::Agora and register::Flapjack
This is Flapjack::unintelligable.
ehird
On Mon, 2008-06-30 at 17:24 -0400, Sgeo wrote:
I agree::Agora to this contract::Agora and register::Flapjack
I'm going to act as though this failed, because it's not obvious what
you're agreeing to.
--
ais523
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 2:37 PM, Sgeo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
With Agoran Consent, I act on behalf of Agora to award a win to myself
and all persons who support my acting on behalf of Agora in this way.
I object. I also object to others supporting this.
I submit the following proposal 'I
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 3:41 PM, Quazie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 2:37 PM, Sgeo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
With Agoran Consent, I act on behalf of Agora to award a win to myself
and all persons who support my acting on behalf of Agora in this way.
I object. I also
Goethe wrote:
This following is a win announcement: My nickname is Goethe!
*checks* It is. It doesn't cause you to satisfy any Win Conditions,
though.
Sgeo wrote:
With Agoran Consent, I act on behalf of Agora to award a win to myself
and all persons who support my acting on behalf of Agora in this way.
Doesn't work that way, you have to declare intent first. (This could
be interpreted as an implicit declaration of intent.)
root wrote:
Wait, isn't there supposed to be a two-day discussion period first?
Also, does it make a difference that neither the nomination nor the
second were to the PF? The contract uses the phrase by announcement
without redefining it...
Right on both counts, I think. Relevant
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 3:55 PM, Ian Kelly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 3:37 PM, Sgeo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
With Agoran Consent, I act on behalf of Agora to award a win to myself
and all persons who support my acting on behalf of Agora in this way.
You can't, because
BobTHJ wrote:
Casting a vote of SELL (X) on a proposal is equivalent to posting a
Sell Ticket with a cost of X and endorsing the filler of that Sell
Ticket.?
Sounds good for the sell side, but I'd still like to see I buy up to
X VP worth of votes in the obvious optimal fashion refactored as
ais523 wrote:
On Mon, 2008-06-30 at 13:31 -0600, Ian Kelly wrote:
In general, drafting with precedence deferral is bad form, because it
has the potential to bring about complex webs of precedent that must
be unraveled in order to interpret the rules. If the rules are
instead drafted to
Ben Caplan wrote:
On Sun, Jun 29, 2008 at 10:07 PM, Geoffrey Spear [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2008/6/29 Ed Murphy [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Happy birthday, Agora!
45 seconds late, I believe.
Wait, what?
Does GMT +1200 mean + 1,200 hours? I assumed it meant + 12:00, i.e.,
+ 12 hours.
GMT +12 as
2008/7/1 Michael Norrish [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
It's +12 (hours) because I started the game from Wellington, New Zealand.
Michael.
Hi there!
ehird
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 4:23 PM, Cctoide [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I hereby register under the nickname cctoide.
Well, it's about time. You've been lurking for what, 2 years now?
Welcome to Agora. :-)
-root
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 12:12 PM, Roger Hicks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, I know the Note Exchange exists, but it is rather convoluted.
This attempts to boil that concept down to something simple enough
that people might participate.
What I thought was that the Note Exchange isn't working
All the credit goes to me, naturally, since I pushed em to do it. :P
On 01/07/2008, Ian Kelly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 4:23 PM, Cctoide [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I hereby register under the nickname cctoide.
Well, it's about time. You've been lurking for what, 2 years
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 12:22 PM, Geoffrey Spear [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The option chosen by Agora is ERIS. I install em as Tailor.
You bastards. I have to do work?
--
Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you.
-- Unknown
1 - 100 of 104 matches
Mail list logo
