Re: Fwd: DIS: Re: Fwd: Re: BUS: Weekly maintenance

2019-01-29 Thread Timon Walshe-Grey
The _coin balances_ have self-ratified. Historical transactions themselves generally don't. -twg ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On Tuesday, January 29, 2019 6:12 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > Support. Has the transfer itself self-ratified? > > On 1/29/2019 10:02 AM, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote:

Re: DIS: Unlasting Damage

2019-01-29 Thread D. Margaux
I think this works. Punishment for violation could be to permit the aggrieved player to act on behalf of the violator to transfer to the aggrieved player a number of coins sufficient (but not more than necessary) to enable the aggrieved player to put emself in the same position with respect to

DIS: Unlasting Damage

2019-01-29 Thread Kerim Aydin
Proto-contract: Unlasting Damage (does this work? thoughts, edits?) When a combatant is a member of this contract, when they initiate a space battle with another member, they can specify that the combat uses Anti- Entropy. Members of this contract agree that, for any space battle in which

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] Court Gazette

2019-01-29 Thread Reuben Staley
And I would have reconsidered if the motion had gone through. -- Trigon On Tue, Jan 29, 2019, 10:47 D. Margaux > > > On Jan 29, 2019, at 12:28 PM, Reuben Staley > wrote: > > > > Interesting that I judged 3592 more recently than 83 or 84 but it's not > > recorded anywhere. > > Oops. The

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] Court Gazette

2019-01-29 Thread D. Margaux
> On Jan 29, 2019, at 12:28 PM, Reuben Staley wrote: > > Interesting that I judged 3592 more recently than 83 or 84 but it's not > recorded anywhere. Oops. The decision in 3692 was recorded in the Court Gazette of 20 January, but I forgot to add it to the list of recently judged CFJs. Will

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Referee] The Police Blotter

2019-01-29 Thread Timon Walshe-Grey
Oic lol. I thought you were trying to sneakily make it seem to a casual observer as though you _were_ the one with unjustly self-ratified blots, by removing the contextualising quote. -twg ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On Tuesday, January 29, 2019 5:34 PM, Cuddle Beam wrote: > Oh fuck

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Referee] The Police Blotter

2019-01-29 Thread Cuddle Beam
Oh fuck lmao, I was wrong, I was thinking that I had been inactive but apparently I haven't actually deregistered (and thus been a fugitive) at any point. On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 6:33 PM Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: > As I said, it's Kenyon who's the fugitive and ought to have had some of > eir

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Referee] The Police Blotter

2019-01-29 Thread Reuben Staley
I object to that answer, just in case. -- Trigon On Tue, Jan 29, 2019, 10:33 Timon Walshe-Grey As I said, it's Kenyon who's the fugitive and ought to have had some of > eir blots destroyed, not you. > > -twg > > > ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ > On Tuesday, January 29, 2019 5:30 PM, Cuddle

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Referee] The Police Blotter

2019-01-29 Thread Timon Walshe-Grey
As I said, it's Kenyon who's the fugitive and ought to have had some of eir blots destroyed, not you. -twg ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On Tuesday, January 29, 2019 5:30 PM, Cuddle Beam wrote: > Why do you object lol > > On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 6:29 PM Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: > > > On

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Referee] The Police Blotter

2019-01-29 Thread D. Margaux
I object to that question. E doesn’t need to explain emself. Object object object! > On Jan 29, 2019, at 12:30 PM, Cuddle Beam wrote: > > Why do you object lol > > >> On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 6:29 PM Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: >> >> On Tuesday, January 29, 2019 5:27 PM, Cuddle Beam >> wrote:

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Referee] The Police Blotter

2019-01-29 Thread Cuddle Beam
Why do you object lol On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 6:29 PM Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: > On Tuesday, January 29, 2019 5:27 PM, Cuddle Beam > wrote: > > > Ah, no worries. Ratification can be solved with ratification. > > > > I intend to ratify without objection the following document: > > > > The

DIS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] Court Gazette

2019-01-29 Thread Reuben Staley
Interesting that I judged 3592 more recently than 83 or 84 but it's not recorded anywhere. -- Trigon On Tue, Jan 29, 2019, 10:16 D. Margaux COURT GAZETTE (Arbitor's weekly report) > > Date of last report: 20 Jan 2019 > Date of this report: 29 Jan 2019 > > Disclaimer: Informational only. No

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Referee] The Police Blotter

2019-01-29 Thread Timon Walshe-Grey
You are a player and therefore not a fugitive. However, Kenyon indeed ought to have lost some blots - you're correct that I didn't see that clause in the rules. Eir blots have self-ratified into existence now but I will remember for next quarter. Thank you. -twg ‐‐‐ Original Message

DIS: Re: BUS: Spaceship intents

2019-01-29 Thread Madeline
You can't make them battle each other, as 'opponent' is determined by player so you can't be your own opponent. The transfer does go through though as the "You can transfer anything in lost and found" rule has a lower ID than the "You can't transfer fixed assets" rule. Would let you have two

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Resolution of Proposals 8146-8151

2019-01-29 Thread Kerim Aydin
On 1/29/2019 8:48 AM, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: > Oh, you're right. I didn't realise that second condition was a thing, I > don't think there's been a proposal with AI < 1 since I registered. I wondered if you missed that, it's pretty hidden and non-intuitive. There's really no benefit to having

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Can we put the Orinoco River in space so I can sing Enya

2019-01-29 Thread Madeline
Yeah, that ought to go through and then we just need to figure out where my Spaceship actually started. On 2019-01-30 03:54, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: On Tuesday, January 29, 2019 4:51 PM, Telnaior wrote: (I'm guessing the spaceship from zombie-me was self-ratified out

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Can we put the Orinoco River in space so I can sing Enya

2019-01-29 Thread Timon Walshe-Grey
On Tuesday, January 29, 2019 4:51 PM, Telnaior wrote: > (I'm guessing the spaceship from zombie-me was > self-ratified out of existence by now regardless, which simplifies > things a little) Sorry, no such luck - the previous Astronomor report did in fact include it. But

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Resolution of Proposals 8146-8151

2019-01-29 Thread Timon Walshe-Grey
Oh, you're right. I didn't realise that second condition was a thing, I don't think there's been a proposal with AI < 1 since I registered. Revision to be published shortly - apologies for the confusion. -twg ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On Tuesday, January 29, 2019 4:45 PM, Reuben Staley

DIS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Resolution of Proposals 8146-8151

2019-01-29 Thread Reuben Staley
3 votes FOR and 12 votes... This satisfies the first condition for an AI majority decision (0.25 is greater than 0.1) but not the second (0.25 is not greater than 1). -- Trigon On Tue, Jan 29, 2019, 09:34 Timon Walshe-Grey I resolve the Agoran Decisions to adopt each of Proposals 8146-8151 as

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Can we put the Orinoco River in space so I can sing Enya

2019-01-29 Thread D. Margaux
> On Jan 29, 2019, at 11:36 AM, Madeline wrote: > > Are you sure? The Spaceship I possessed as a zombie was deemed to have been > destroyed the moment it entered the L office upon my deregistration two > weeks ago. Under Rule 2576 (power=3), “Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, the Lost

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Can we put the Orinoco River in space so I can sing Enya

2019-01-29 Thread Timon Walshe-Grey
Oh, I do remember someone (Ørjan?) suggesting that, yes. But I don't think it holds up - the rule defining the Lost and Found Department states pretty clearly that the Lost and Found Department CAN own any asset, "rules to the contrary notwithstanding". You are welcome to CFJ it. -twg

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Can we put the Orinoco River in space so I can sing Enya

2019-01-29 Thread Madeline
Are you sure? The Spaceship I possessed as a zombie was deemed to have been destroyed the moment it entered the L office upon my deregistration two weeks ago. On 2019-01-30 03:29, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: No, it's in Sector 16. The one in Sector 5 was created the _first_ time you registered

DIS: Scam CFJs

2019-01-29 Thread D. Margaux
Does any player favour resolving the CFJs relating to my politics scam? I’m required to assign them to someone. I’ll assign them to the first eligible player who favors it, or else choose randomly among day/weekend judges (excluding me).

DIS: Re: BUS: Can we put the Orinoco River in space so I can sing Enya

2019-01-29 Thread Timon Walshe-Grey
No, it's in Sector 16. The one in Sector 5 was created the _first_ time you registered today, and is now property of the Lost and Found Department. I've also just realised that the rule doesn't specify 10 as the default for Armour (which it should). Annoyingly, everyone else's (except, newly,

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: space battle result?

2019-01-29 Thread Kerim Aydin
I'll publish it formally a bit later today I hope, but on the zombie one, my reasoning hasn't changed so I'm going to find that zombies can't send messages/communicate, so can't submit energy. On 1/29/2019 8:03 AM, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: Yes. I was planning some sort of scam where the

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: With that dealt with,

2019-01-29 Thread Kerim Aydin
On 1/29/2019 7:52 AM, ais...@alumni.bham.ac.uk wrote: On Tue, 2019-01-29 at 07:49 -0800, Kerim Aydin wrote: Several I think, but the results are mixed. ("[X] is/is not a player" is the most common phrase in CFJ statements after all). How does it compare to "This is a CFJ"? (Admittedly,

DIS: space battle result?

2019-01-29 Thread Kerim Aydin
Speaking of overdue stuff, there was a Space Battle between twg and myself that D. Margaux was supposed to resolve? [I know I've got a couple CFJs overdue on the subject, but I was kinda hoping to see how that one played out in case it affected arguments on the whole "private communications"

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: With that dealt with,

2019-01-29 Thread ais...@alumni.bham.ac.uk
On Tue, 2019-01-29 at 07:49 -0800, Kerim Aydin wrote: > Several I think, but the results are mixed. ("[X] is/is not a > player" is the most common phrase in CFJ statements after all). How does it compare to "This is a CFJ"? (Admittedly, the numbers on that one are somewhat deflated by the fact

DIS: Re: BUS: With that dealt with,

2019-01-29 Thread Kerim Aydin
On 1/29/2019 7:43 AM, Telnaior wrote: I register as a player, and cause myself to receive a Welcome Package. (After all that I can't really be bothered coming up with a silly CFJ condition - I assume there's precedent for not being able to register by just starting to perform actions that

Re: DIS: Cantus Cygneus

2019-01-29 Thread Kerim Aydin
On 1/29/2019 7:09 AM, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: One of my favourite AWJ entries: THE AGORAN WEEKLY JOURNAL VOLUME 51, BACK ISSUE 3 Sunday, December 31, 2006 December 15: Goethe publishes a Cantus Cygneus. This triggers a CFJ on whether e can be deregistered for it (the

Re: DIS: Cantus Cygneus

2019-01-29 Thread Madeline
Glad this isn't going completely to waste, generating outrage on demand is hard! Hi though, I'll probably hop back in for real once the whole FAGE thing gets sorted out. (I actually happened to go through the NetHack TAS turn-by-turn report yesterday which never ceases to be hilarious, so I

DIS: Cantus Cygneus 2

2019-01-29 Thread Telnaior
I register as a player. The following is my Cantus Cygneus, to be published by the Registrar in a timely fashion: Alright, so let's get one thing straight here. I haven't actually been playing this game in MONTHS. Yeah, sure, the whole zombie system has been keeping me alive for a little

Re: DIS: Cantus Cygneus

2019-01-29 Thread Timon Walshe-Grey
One of my favourite AWJ entries: > THE AGORAN WEEKLY JOURNAL > VOLUME 51, BACK ISSUE 3 > Sunday, December 31, 2006 > December 15: Goethe publishes a Cantus Cygneus. This triggers a > CFJ on whether e can be deregistered for it (the Writ of FAGE > procedure involves the

Re: DIS: Cantus Cygneus

2019-01-29 Thread ais...@alumni.bham.ac.uk
On Wed, 2019-01-30 at 01:58 +1100, Telnaior wrote: > Honestly, this makes me mad. Doubly mad because if I were to deregister > by announcement, I'd have to wait around a full month before I could > come back. So let's do it this way - it gets the point across and lets > me skip the timer (at

Re: DIS: Cantus Cygneus

2019-01-29 Thread Madeline
:( On 2019-01-30 02:00, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: Actually, the Registrar did deregister you a couple of weeks ago. There just hasn't been a report since then. -twg ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On Tuesday, January 29, 2019 2:58 PM, Telnaior wrote: The following is my Cantus Cygneus,

Re: DIS: Cantus Cygneus

2019-01-29 Thread Timon Walshe-Grey
Actually, the Registrar did deregister you a couple of weeks ago. There just hasn't been a report since then. -twg ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On Tuesday, January 29, 2019 2:58 PM, Telnaior wrote: > The following is my Cantus Cygneus, to be published by the Registrar in > a timely

DIS: Cantus Cygneus

2019-01-29 Thread Telnaior
The following is my Cantus Cygneus, to be published by the Registrar in a timely fashion: Alright, so let's get one thing straight here. I haven't actually been playing this game in MONTHS. Yeah, sure, the whole zombie system has been keeping me alive for a little while, but did you notice my

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: yes

2019-01-29 Thread Madeline
Ugh why am I still a player now I can't do the obligatory "am I a player or not" CFJ On 2019-01-30 01:32, Madeline wrote: I vote: yes On 2019-01-29 23:37, Cuddle Beam wrote: I create the following proposal: ---*--- Title: yes Content: yes ---*---

DIS: Re: BUS: yes

2019-01-29 Thread Madeline
I vote: yes On 2019-01-29 23:37, Cuddle Beam wrote: I create the following proposal: ---*--- Title: yes Content: yes ---*---