Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Proto: Nerf Zombies

Doesn't G. have 5 votes by himself? He is PM and has 3 zombies. ~Corona On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 1:47 AM, Ned Strange wrote: > I think G and I with our 6 votes between us can block anything, or at > least anything with more than 1 AI. Funny. > > On Tue, May 1, 2018 at

Re: DIS: Land Unit Negligence Act

On Tue, 2018-05-01 at 02:25 +0200, Ørjan Johansen wrote: > On Mon, 30 Apr 2018, Reuben Staley wrote: > > > 1. Transfer all land units that have not had any of their > > switches > > flipped, have not had a facility built on them, and/or > > have not > > had any of its

Re: DIS: Land Unit Negligence Act

On Mon, 30 Apr 2018, Reuben Staley wrote: 1. Transfer all land units that have not had any of their switches flipped, have not had a facility built on them, and/or have not had any of its facility's switches flipped since the last Land Transfiguration event to

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Proto: Nerf Zombies

On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 5:03 PM, Alex Smith wrote: > On Mon, 2018-04-30 at 16:59 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote: >> Ribbon ownership really isn't a good method of protection - I noticed >> that when we thought about a festival during Gaelan's April Fools >> joke. > > Well, it

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: CFJ re "pay"

On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 5:01 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > >> The ruling isn't unreasonable, and comports with the >> interest of the game. Intend, with both 2 support and Agoran consent, to >> enter this judgement into moot. I object to my own intent. > > What's the Agoran

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: CFJ re "pay"

On Mon, 30 Apr 2018, Aris Merchant wrote: > Well, that's interesting. You're ineligible, but I that isn't a requirement > for using certiorari. Yah I figured that if Cabinet orders are inherently political, having the Prime Minister judge eir own case wasn't outside of the spirit of that so

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Proto: Nerf Zombies

On Mon, 2018-04-30 at 16:59 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote: > Ribbon ownership really isn't a good method of protection - I noticed > that when we thought about a festival during Gaelan's April Fools > joke. Well, it was intended to protect against non-Agorans, possibly via recruiting former Agorans to

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Proto: Nerf Zombies

On Tue, 1 May 2018, Alex Smith wrote: > On Tue, 2018-05-01 at 09:47 +1000, Ned Strange wrote: > > I think G and I with our 6 votes between us can block anything, or at > > least anything with more than 1 AI. Funny. > > Hint: How many Ribbons do the zombies have? A zombie apocalypse isn't > that

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Proto: Nerf Zombies

On Tue, 2018-05-01 at 09:47 +1000, Ned Strange wrote: > I think G and I with our 6 votes between us can block anything, or at > least anything with more than 1 AI. Funny. Hint: How many Ribbons do the zombies have? A zombie apocalypse isn't that much different from an invasion of humans. (Of

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Proto: Nerf Zombies

I think G and I with our 6 votes between us can block anything, or at least anything with more than 1 AI. Funny. On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 9:45 AM, Aris Merchant wrote: > Alright. You can consider it weakened in the way I suggested. However, > I need to see which

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Proto: Nerf Zombies

Alright. You can consider it weakened in the way I suggested. However, I need to see which of these changes has has consensus. Anyone else have an opinion on the matter? I'll save this for next week's distribution, given that your basic nerf is probably sufficient in the near term. -Aris On

Re: DIS: Proto: Nerf Zombies

The point is that e is required to do it by announcement if possible (this is only possible for expired zombies). I don't know how to word that. I was under the impression that we had a cannon of construction that people were not in general required to try to amend the rules. Was I wrong about

Re: DIS: Proto: Nerf Zombies

On Tue, 1 May 2018, Alex Smith wrote: > b) If a dictatorship scam exists in the ruleset, the Registrar is > required to use it. Ooh yah I thought that looked pretty open-ended and hard for an officer to obey but didn't connect the dots that far. yikes. I was thinking the best way to fix this

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Setting up money-printing machine

Any volunteers? -Aris On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 4:21 PM Ned Strange wrote: > I have all my assets back but I have no idea how many lol. Treasurors > are important. > > On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 9:02 AM, Kerim Aydin > wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, 1

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Setting up money-printing machine

I have all my assets back but I have no idea how many lol. Treasurors are important. On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 9:02 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > On Tue, 1 May 2018, Corona wrote: >> Consent - Rule 2519, maybe? > > The thing is, I think it requires a contract to pass on

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Setting up money-printing machine

On Tue, 1 May 2018, Corona wrote: > Consent - Rule 2519, maybe? The thing is, I think it requires a contract to pass on act-on-behalf, and quazie can't consent or sign a contract? I really dunno. Someone else have an idea if one-sided consent be given by some mechanism, that a zombie can then

Re: DIS: Proto: Nerf Zombies

On Sun, 2018-04-29 at 22:41 -0700, Aris Merchant wrote: > This is an attempt at a significant reduction in zombie power (so we > don't need to repeal such a fun mechanic). I have attempted to keep > them usable while at the same time not making them overpowered. Some fun, possibly unintentional

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Setting up money-printing machine

Consent - Rule 2519, maybe? Is that so? I can just destroy the assets myself tomorrow, I​'m about to hit the hay now. ~Corona On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 12:01 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > On Mon, 30 Apr 2018, Corona wrote: > > I give consent to Quazie to transfer... assets

DIS: Re: BUS: Setting up money-printing machine

On Mon, 30 Apr 2018, Corona wrote: > I give consent to Quazie to transfer... assets from any of my facilities > to emself until the end of this month. How do you give consent? But more importantly, this has firmly passed my threshold of abuse too. Corona, once a bug has been pointed out,

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Proto: Nerf Zombies

Most of them at this point. There's a few that are worse than others, some especially bad for returning zombies (forcing a returning zombie to deregister? what's that about?). But the version I proposed is what I'll personally vote for in this next proposal batch, nothing further. On Mon,

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Proto: Nerf Zombies

Which provision most bothers you? I might be willing to drop the one zombie limit if it strikes you as reasonable, it's probably unneeded with the dependent actions change. I'd even consider extending the expiration to 90 days, although having one just seems like common sense to me. Those are as

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: CFJ re "pay"

This CFJ doen't answer the question. The question is: If the Rule says you CAN do something by "paying" without specifying a destination, can you do it by paying anyone? (the important thing is triggering the CAN that's tied to the action). On Mon, 30 Apr 2018, Corona wrote: > also in the >

Re: DIS: Land Unit Negligence Act

This is easily abused by flipping its ownership switch between you and contract/zombie. Couldn't an actual economic victory condition encourage building etc.? ~Corona On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 8:21 AM, Reuben Staley wrote: > I want to get land circulating and used.

DIS: Re: BUS: CFJ re "pay"

also in the ​"​ doesn't THIS apply to "pay" without a destination? ​"​ thread ~Corona On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 10:34 AM, Ned Strange wrote: > > I call a CFJ with the statement "To "pay" assets is to transfer them to anyone" > > many arguments in the recent Setting up

DIS: Re: BUS: Paying upkeep (also looting)

I (unconditionally) looted the mine (1,1) an hour earlier, sorry. ~Corona On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 1:18 AM, Reuben Staley wrote: > Actually, I think those last actions failed due to undefined terms. > > I destroy a corn to travel from to (0, -1), and then to (0, 0), and

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Setting up money-printing machine

​I'm confused too, that's why I had to do this whole conditional thing, and I couldn't converge the gamestate, because I bought (using the maybe-scam) all these upgrades that I can't *actually* pay for by destroying assets. I favor the "pay w/o destination = transfer to anyone" interpretation,

DIS: Re: BUS: Setting up money-printing machine

I'm not going to pretend like I'm smart enough to know what we've decided to do about the whole pay-without-a-target thing, so if someone wants to explain which of these actions happened, I would really appreciate it. If there is no solution because there's been no consensus, then someone tell

DIS: Land Unit Negligence Act

I want to get land circulating and used. Therefore, I submit the following proto: Name: Land Unit Negligence Act AI: 1 Author: Trigon Co-authors: Amend rule 2022 by prepending the following list item and adjusting the list numbering accordingly. 1. Transfer all land units that have not