Re: DIS: Re: BUS: CFJ 3532 judged TRUE

Main problem is that Assessor and Rulekeepor are really demanding for different reasons and it may be difficult to get someone to fill a combined role consistently. On Jul 8, 2017 16:16, "Cuddle Beam" wrote: > "Ghost" Rulesets like the one we have now are disorientating. >

DIS: Idea Dump: RPG Proto, Joint Advertisement/Coordinating with Blognomic, More Thesis Ideas I really want to do

I have a big problem of having too many ideas and not enough time to actually do all of them so just dumping all of my ideas here. Anyway: - RPG Proto (going off Kerim's idea): Dungeonkeepor Office, generates mobs, an amount of players need to fight it by announcement and surpass the power of

DIS: Re: BUS: CFJ 3532 judged TRUE

"Ghost" Rulesets like the one we have now are disorientating. Proto: Merge Assesor and Rulekeepor, and have them publish the new ruleset once a proposal amending it is enacted. On Sat, Jul 8, 2017 at 10:56 PM, Aris Merchant < thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote: > Judge's arguments for

DIS: Re: BUS: CFJ judgement

You didn't cite which CFJ so I don't know what you actually did in the quoted message On Sat, Jul 8, 2017 at 11:34 AM V.J Rada wrote: > I call for reconsideration (again) and submit the following judgement of > FALSE > > 1. Facts > Despite (at the time, at least) not being

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: CFJ judgement

I agree I didn't successfully reconsider because I already did so. However I believe it was not ambiguous, as I am only assigned one CFJ, the content of which was clearly adressed in the body of the message. This is pointless quibbling though. If anyone thinks the previous reasoning is woefully

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: CFJ judgement

Okay, I now get it. But, you still didn’t successfully reconsider because it is ambiguous which CFJ this is for, while you don’t need to state the number, it needs to be clear and you haven’t even stated the statement. Publius Scribonius Scholasticus p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com >

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: CFJ judgement

https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-business/2017-July/035260.html is the message relevant here. Yeah just count the above as unofficial explanation and also note that I meant paragraph four to apply only to auctions of Agora's property, not of that belonging to private

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: CFJ judgement

no you're right it can be done once count it as supplementary reasoning. although i don't think it needs to say the number as CFJ numbering is totally unofficial. I am judging 1 CFJ right now. It's clear which one I mean. e attempted to say that auctions were totally unregulated and e could call

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: CFJ judgement

no the deputization was a different thing and a different cfj On Sat, Jul 8, 2017 at 7:39 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus < p.scribonius.scholasti...@googlemail.com> wrote: > You overlook the major point that he was attempting to put them up for > auction by deputisation not by announcement.

DIS: Re: BUS: CFJ judgement

You overlook the major point that he was attempting to put them up for auction by deputisation not by announcement. Also, you can't motion to reconsider given that a motion to reconsider has already occurred. Even if you could, you never state what CFJ this is for, therefore I believe this is

DIS: Re: BUS: CFJ judgement

"a person at a car auction grabbing the item they bought" seems pretty legit imo. On Sat, Jul 8, 2017 at 7:34 PM, V.J Rada wrote: > I call for reconsideration (again) and submit the following judgement of > FALSE > > 1. Facts > Despite (at the time, at least) not being the

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Thesis "Spivak Culture" Submission (Attn. Herald)

On Sat, 8 Jul 2017, V.J Rada wrote: I just said the exact same with regard to your second point lmao. Oops. Me and responding as I read... :P Greetings, Ørjan.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Thesis "Spivak Culture" Submission (Attn. Herald)

To clarify, I am now using the following peer review process: The thesis will be open for peer review for 14 days and it must receive at least three unique peers’ (they may be persons) reviews. After which, the submitter may make revisions and will either resubmit for peer review, distribute

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Thesis "Spivak Culture" Submission (Attn. Herald)

I just said the exact same with regard to your second point lmao. On Sat, Jul 8, 2017 at 7:24 PM, Ørjan Johansen wrote: > On Sat, 8 Jul 2017, Cuddle Beam wrote: > > This is my official submission of my Thesis "Spivak Culture". >> > > Hm. The current thesis process seems to

DIS: Re: BUS: Thesis "Spivak Culture" Submission (Attn. Herald)

On Sat, 8 Jul 2017, Cuddle Beam wrote: This is my official submission of my Thesis "Spivak Culture". Hm. The current thesis process seems to be very loosely described with few "official" parts. I guess this is still the peer-review stage (which the Herald is supposed to coordinate).

Re: DIS: gaelan's rulekeeping agency

gotcha sorry On Sat, Jul 8, 2017 at 7:17 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus < p.scribonius.scholasti...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > Gaelan Is Impatient (GII) > Head: Gaelan > Agents: All Players > Powers: Perform any actions Gaelan has listed as Performable By > Agency, subject to any

Re: DIS: gaelan's rulekeeping agency

Gaelan Is Impatient (GII) Head: Gaelan Agents: All Players Powers: Perform any actions Gaelan has listed as Performable By Agency, subject to any restrictions e has specified in that announcement, if Gaelan has not specified more than 24 hours prior that the action is no longer

DIS: gaelan's rulekeeping agency

So I would publish an SLR but I can't exactly find the place where Gaelan established a valid agency with the name, the agents etc. Only the place where e specified rulekeeping as a power. Can someone find it?

DIS: Re: BUS: Thesis "Spivak Culture" Submission (Attn. Herald)

Your two uses of "they" in our ruleset are both for plural nouns: "officers" and "persons". The only use of they as a pronoun is in Green Cards with "whenever a person receives a Green Card, they are ENCOURAGED to travel to the United States". Perhaps the next proposal should cursorily amend this.

Re: DIS: Trollmode Arbitor

On Sat, 8 Jul 2017, Nicholas Evans wrote: > CFJs aren't really that powerful. They're guidelines, not legally binding. If > the guideline > is absurd everyone ignores it. > > On Jul 8, 2017 06:25, "Cuddle Beam" wrote: > Yes, but the Arbitor could then CFJ "I've

Re: DIS: Trollmode Arbitor

On Sat, 8 Jul 2017, Cuddle Beam wrote: > What would happen in the following case (and has it been tried before?) > I'm Arbitor for example, and then CFJ "I've achieved victory and won every > ribbon" and then assign it to myself and judge it as TRUE, for bogus reasons. It was the very very

Re: DIS: Trollmode Arbitor

CFJs aren't really that powerful. They're guidelines, not legally binding. If the guideline is absurd everyone ignores it. On Jul 8, 2017 06:25, "Cuddle Beam" wrote: > Yes, but the Arbitor could then CFJ "I've gotten Pink Slipped" and judge > it as FALSE. > > What would

Re: DIS: Trollmode Arbitor

Ah, nvm, those are really hard to trollmode. "A public document defined by the rules as self-ratifying is ratified when it is continuously undoubted for one week." and such On Sat, Jul 8, 2017 at 1:30 PM, Cuddle Beam wrote: > Ah, I see. I guess the issue would then be

Re: DIS: Trollmode Arbitor

Ah, I see. I guess the issue would then be what has precedence, CFJs or Ratified things. (And if it Ratified things, couldn't you just trollmode via those instead?) On Sat, Jul 8, 2017 at 1:26 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus < p.scribonius.scholasti...@googlemail.com> wrote: > No, because

Re: DIS: Trollmode Arbitor

No, because someone else would have become the arbiter already OR the referee issues their report and it self-ratifies. Publius Scribonius Scholasticus p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com > On Jul 8, 2017, at 7:24 AM, Cuddle Beam wrote: > > Yes, but the Arbitor

Re: DIS: Trollmode Arbitor

Yes, but the Arbitor could then CFJ "I've gotten Pink Slipped" and judge it as FALSE. What would happen then? (I believe CFJs supercede what people percieve things to be - for example, if you think that something should be interpreted one way and me another, if a CFJ to solve it appears and it

Re: DIS: Trollmode Arbitor

A pink slip is issued to you and someone takes your spot. Publius Scribonius Scholasticus p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com > On Jul 8, 2017, at 6:24 AM, Cuddle Beam wrote: > > What would happen in the following case (and has it been tried before?) > > I'm

DIS: Trollmode Arbitor

What would happen in the following case (and has it been tried before?) I'm Arbitor for example, and then CFJ "I've achieved victory and won every ribbon" and then assign it to myself and judge it as TRUE, for bogus reasons. I'd likely get that challenged and get carded, but what if I then CFJ