DIS: Re: OFF: End of June Zombie Auction

2019-06-14 Thread James Cook
Warning: I don't think paying Agora for one's prize will cause that zombie's Master switch to be flipped to the payer, and I plan to call a CFJ about it once someone tries to claim their zombie (easier to phrase the CFJ after that's happened). (I think the winners are still obligated to pay for

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: End of June Zombie Auction

2019-06-14 Thread James Cook
Your message to the discussion list said 8, but on agora-business I see "Anyway I bid 7 coins on the ongoing zombie auction". On Fri., Jun. 14, 2019, 22:13 Rebecca, wrote: > Coe I bid eight coins so I should win the third zombie > > On Sat, 15 Jun 2019, 12:09 P

Re: DIS: Idea: Notice and comment

2019-06-14 Thread James Cook
On Sat, 15 Jun 2019 at 01:13, omd wrote: > On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 5:58 PM James Cook wrote: > > Requiring notice and comment would make it a bit more complicated and > > time-consuming to judge a CFJ, which might not make sense for simple > > ones. > > Well, most simp

Re: DIS: Idea: Notice and comment

2019-06-14 Thread James Cook
Requiring notice and comment would make it a bit more complicated and time-consuming to judge a CFJ, which might not make sense for simple ones. How about this: * The judge assigned to a CFJ CAN publish a draft judgement, and is ENCOURAGED to do so for difficult cases. * Publishing a draft

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: End of June Zombie Auction

2019-06-14 Thread James Cook
. > > On Sat, 15 Jun 2019, 12:09 PM James Cook wrote: > > > Warning: I don't think paying Agora for one's prize will cause that > > zombie's Master switch to be flipped to the payer, and I plan to call a > > CFJ about it once someone tries to claim their zombie (easier to p

Re: Fw: Re: DIS: Re: OFF: End of June Zombie Auction

2019-06-16 Thread James Cook
ch removed a sentence but > I'm not sure which one. > > > > -twg > > > > ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ > > > > On Saturday, June 15, 2019 5:52 AM, omd c.ome...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 10:40 PM James Cook jc...@cs.berk

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: End of June Zombie Auction

2019-06-14 Thread James Cook
On Sat, 15 Jun 2019 at 03:26, omd wrote: > On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 7:44 PM James Cook wrote: > > Could you elabourate? Even if we should pretend zombies are assets, it's > > not always true that an asset's owner CAN transfer it. E.g. if I had blots > > and auctioned th

DIS: Re: BUS: Fw: BUS: Ribbon claims

2019-06-16 Thread James Cook
> > > TTttPF. > > > >I award myself a cyan ribbon. > > > > Thank you for reminding me. -Rance > > > > > > > > On Sunday, June 9, 2019, 2:29:24 PM CDT, James Cook > > wrote: > > > > I award myself a green ribbon and a blue ribbon. > >

DIS: Re: BUS: It's served its purpose

2019-06-16 Thread James Cook
I'm interested, but I'd like a way to leave the contract, at least after The Ritual is gone. I realize the contract doesn't really do much after that point, but it bugs me anyway that I'll continue to be bound by it. On Sun, 16 Jun 2019 at 12:13, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: > > I consent to the

DIS: Zombie auction status (unofficial report)

2019-06-10 Thread James Cook
On Tue, 11 Jun 2019 at 02:06, James Cook wrote: > 2019-06-07T17:01Z. Rance. 7 Coins. Oops, I forgot to reformat that. That notation means it was at 17:01 UTC on June 7.

DIS: Re: BUS: Fw: CFJ: Can The Ritual be banished?

2019-06-10 Thread James Cook
It's hard to tell that the rest of your message is quoted. I suspect Yahoo mail interacts badly with the mailing list somehow. Maybe it doesn't format the text version of the email very well. On Mon, 10 Jun 2019 at 03:36, Rance Bedwell wrote: > > I withdraw the below CFJ. omd has shown me the

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Zombie auction status (unofficial report)

2019-06-11 Thread James Cook
:40 AM > To: Agora Nomic discussions (DF) > Subject: DIS: Re: BUS: Zombie auction status (unofficial report) > > i bid 8 coins > > On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 12:06 PM James Cook wrote: > > > There is one ongoing zombie auction. > > > > Lots: > > 1. Pu

DIS: Re: BUS: Minor currency fixes

2019-06-09 Thread James Cook
> Replace all instances of the text "Agora's official currency" with > the text "the official currency of Agora". How about removing the quotation marks too? They might be taken to imply it should be phrased exactly that way, which might lead us back to the same situation next time the

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Referee] Weekly Report

2019-06-18 Thread James Cook
Wait, I'm confused. omd's revised judgement says "so it seems that imposing the Cold Hand of Justice is impossible after all.", and I think this is because omd realized that the new "only using the methods" clause means attempts to impose the CHoJ actually don't work. Or did I get something

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Referee] Weekly Report

2019-06-18 Thread James Cook
Sorry, just saw the other thread. Seems R. Lee is now in agreement that the CHoJ is broken. On Wed, 19 Jun 2019 at 00:38, James Cook wrote: > > Wait, I'm confused. omd's revised judgement says "so it seems that > imposing the Cold Hand of Justice is impossible after all.&q

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Referee] Weekly Report (rev. 1)

2019-06-17 Thread James Cook
On Mon, 17 Jun 2019 at 05:04, Jason Cobb wrote: > (This means that Corona was not a player from ~10 June to ~13 June > because ratification.) I don't think the "fugitive" vs. "player" distinction in the Referee weekly report is self-ratifying. It would be self-ratifying in a Registrar's report

Re: DIS: Fwd: Re: OFF: BUS: Plagarism

2019-06-17 Thread James Cook
On Mon, 17 Jun 2019 at 09:17, Edward Murphy wrote: > > Falsifian wrote: > > > I publish the below report, which was originally published by Trigon > > on June 6. I earn 5 Coins for publishing it. > > > > (The report fulfilled Trigon's duty to publish a weekly report, so it > > is a

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Registrar] Agoran Directory

2019-06-18 Thread James Cook
On Tue, 18 Jun 2019 at 05:56, Jason Cobb wrote: > I point my finger at Falsifian for the Crime of Making My Eyes Bleed. > > [Yes this is silly, but the rule (Rule 2143) is silly.] > > Jason Cobb Sorry about that! Do you mean the "Due to Flip to Agora" heading that spills over to the next line,

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: Dollar Auction

2019-06-19 Thread James Cook
On Tue, 18 Jun 2019 at 12:06, D. Margaux wrote: > > On Jun 14, 2019, at 2:29 AM, David Seeber wrote: > > > > If this is accepted, { > > > > { I cfj the following: > > > > "Trigon is the winner of the auction" > > > > Argument in favour : > > > > Trigon bid two coins, which is more than

DIS: Extricability and the History of R2517

2019-06-19 Thread James Cook
The history of R2517 ("Conditionals and Extricability" indicates it was repealed in July 2018, and doesn't say anything about it being enacted again after. Was that a mistake? (Of course it's there now because we ratified an SLR earlier this year.) Also, maybe related to the "Dollar Auction"

DIS: Re: BUS: Fixing pledges

2019-06-25 Thread James Cook
On Mon, 24 Jun 2019 at 05:08, Jason Cobb wrote: > for 60 days. If the Cold Hand of Justice is imposed on a Player for > violating a certain pledge, then that pledge ceases to be a pledge. A pledge can still be violated multiple times, even with this text, during the window of time

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8188-8195

2019-06-24 Thread James Cook
> > CFJ: "There exists a proposal with the title 'It's caused enough > > trouble already' and with a valid adoption index." > > > > CFJ: "There exists an Agoran Decision to adopt a proposal with the > > title 'It's caused enough trouble already' and with a valid adoption > > index." Sorry! I

DIS: History of "The rules SHALL NOT be interpreted..."

2019-06-20 Thread James Cook
Summary: I can't find any particular reason it's phrased that way. Before voting on any decisions to change R2125's wording "The rules SHALL NOT be interpreted so as to proscribe unregulated actions.", I wanted to understand why it's written that way. (Versus finding some other phrasing that

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: CFJ 3737: non-binding agoran decision

2019-06-20 Thread James Cook
I put equal weight on TRUE and DISMISS. (Sorry, this email is more of an argument than a vote.) It may be TRUE by R. Lee's argument about limits. (Sorry if I got TRUE/FALSE mixed up there.) If not, it should be DISMISS. First of all, I think this business of judges not legally being able to

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: I'm broke!

2019-06-20 Thread James Cook
On Fri, 21 Jun 2019 at 05:26, David Seeber wrote: > Cool.. Does that mean I committed a crime? I'm not sure, but I think no. The phrasing "would be impossible" is a little strange. The word "would" could indicate it's referring to some hypothetical scenario, but I'm not sure what scenario that

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Judgement of CFJ 3737

2019-06-21 Thread James Cook
I don't think sending a message saying you flip a switch causes the switch to flip just because you said it and it's unregulated. I think this is the "I say I do, therefore I do" (ISIDTID) fallacy someone told me about on this list recently. If I understand right, the only reason to describe

DIS: Re: OFF: I'm broke!

2019-06-20 Thread James Cook
On Thu, 20 Jun 2019 at 06:40, David Seeber wrote: > I also cause myself to receive a Welcome pack since I have not received one > since I returned from being a zombie. I don't think you ever stopped being a zombie, so I think this doesn't succeed. You probably want to take advantage of this

DIS: Re: OFF: I'm broke!

2019-06-20 Thread James Cook
On Thu, 20 Jun 2019 at 06:40, David Seeber wrote: > I cfj the following > > {Baron von Vaderham's bid of 11 coins in the most recent zombie auction of > June 6th was UNSUCCESSFUL} > > Argument in favour: > > Baron von Vaderham possessed 0 coins at the time of the auction, since he was > fleeced

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Election Intents

2019-06-22 Thread James Cook
I'm happy to give up Treasuror if anyone is interested, or maybe Registrar if someone really wants it. On Sat, 22 Jun 2019 at 04:08, Reuben Staley wrote: > Is anyone else interested in Rulekeepor right now? If you are, I'm good > with letting an election play out, though I really do enjoy the

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: [Assessor] Resolution of Proposals 8180-8187

2019-06-22 Thread James Cook
Same comment as to Jason Cobb: I don't think this worked. On Sat, 22 Jun 2019 at 20:33, D. Margaux wrote: > > I earn (8-1)*1.7 = 12 coins for this proposal > > > On Jun 22, 2019, at 2:43 PM, D. Margaux wrote: > > > > PROPOSAL 8181 (Referee CAN Impose Fines (v1.1)) > > FOR: R. Lee#, D. Margaux,

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: It's served its purpose

2019-06-23 Thread James Cook
On Sun, 23 Jun 2019 at 02:52, Jason Cobb wrote: > I note that the Ritual has been performed for 5 continuous weeks. The ruleset has in the past been Appeased for 5 continuous weeks, but I had been assuming R2596's "has been continuously appeased at the moment of banishment" meant it had to be

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposal 8177

2019-06-22 Thread James Cook
Nitpick: I believe the ratification you quote failed, but D. Margaux's earlier Astronomor report did self-ratify, which is just as good. See the section "D. Margaux's attempt to ratify without objection failed." in my judgement of CFJ 3726 at https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/?3726

DIS: Re: BUS: The ruleset is too long so

2019-06-22 Thread James Cook
On Sat, 22 Jun 2019 at 02:52, Rebecca wrote: > Title: Spaceships > AI: 1.1 Why 1.1?

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Zombie auction fix

2019-06-23 Thread James Cook
Oops, thanks. I'll make sure the next Registrar report accounts for zombies being transferred. I think everyone but Rance collected their zombies. On Sun, 23 Jun 2019 at 20:11, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > Hi folks, > > I thought we'd done this before, quite recently in fact (unless I'm >

DIS: Re: BUS: Zombie auction fix

2019-06-23 Thread James Cook
> the items in that lot to that winner at will, or if the > Auctioneer is Agora, e immediately does so; otherwise, e SHALL > do so in a timely fashion. > > } > > > Jason Cobb > > On 6/23/19 12:17 PM, James Cook wrote: > > I create a proposal with the following attributes

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: It's served its purpose

2019-06-23 Thread James Cook
, Jason Cobb wrote: > > At the time that I will complete the action? That's a ridiculous > > requirement... > > > > Jason Cobb > > > > On 6/23/19 2:33 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > >> > >> On 6/22/2019 11:02 PM, James Cook wrote: > >>> On S

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Zombie auction fix

2019-06-23 Thread James Cook
Maybe the best solution is your proposal and secure Master at power threshold 1 instead of 2. If we want auction rules to be able to govern zombies, it seems hacky to try to keep the power threshold above that rule's power. On Sun., Jun. 23, 2019, 10:41 James Cook, wrote: > That rule is o

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: humble agoran farmer goes to uni, Attn. Herald

2019-06-08 Thread James Cook
I enjoyed both essays, and not having much experience with nomics, I found them informative. The beginner's strategy guide seems pretty straightforward, its individual parts obvious in retrospect, but I think there's a lot of value in seeing everything in one place --- I think if you ask me what

DIS: Re: OFF: [Treasuror] Forbes 500

2019-06-12 Thread James Cook
The below report is also missing D. Margaux's 2019-06-03 reward, but it won't self-ratify because it's already CoE-ed. The "fresh" report at [0] already includes the update. [0] https://agoranomic.org/Treasuror/reports/weekly/fresh.txt On Tue, 11 Jun 2019 at 01:59, James Cook wr

Re: DIS: [idea] Agora owning Blots

2019-06-15 Thread James Cook
On Sat, 15 Jun 2019 at 02:36, Jason Cobb wrote: > > [As with most things, I have no idea if this has been tried or suggested > before.] > > Seeing the recent issue with the Ritual and how no individual person > could be assigned blame for the failure got me wondering if it would be > a viable to

Re: Failures to Reenact (was Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8152-8163)

2019-06-15 Thread James Cook
On Wed, 13 Feb 2019 at 23:01, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: > Also, CFJ: "Rule 2571 is guilty of violating Rule 105." This is not really > relevant in the scheme of things, I just want it to show up in G.'s CFJ > history to bewilder future historians. Did this ever get judged? I can't find any more

DIS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposal 8176

2019-05-09 Thread James Cook
> IDAuthor(s) AITitle > --- > 8176 G. 2.0 Zombies take care of this now On Proposal 8176 I vote AGAINST if a Notice of Veto has been published specifying Proposal 8176, otherwise FOR.

DIS: Re: BUS: Election

2019-05-11 Thread James Cook
> Can you have an election for imposed offices? I thought Comptrollor was > imposed, but not 100% sure. Yes, Comptrollor is imposed. I sent a message about it at 04:24 UTC.

Re: DIS: Missing messages from Murphy

2019-05-10 Thread James Cook
On Sat, 11 May 2019 at 03:49, James Cook wrote: > These messages appear in the archive but I never received them. > Pointing this out in case others haven't either: > > 2019-04-28 > * Transferred karma to Falsifian.* Awarded efficiency favours. > * Published ADoP's weekly r.po

DIS: Missing messages from Murphy

2019-05-10 Thread James Cook
These messages appear in the archive but I never received them. Pointing this out in case others haven't either: 2019-04-28 * Transferred karma to Falsifian.* Awarded efficiency favours. * Published ADoP's weekly r.port. 2019-05-09: * Initiated a bunch of elections. * Voted FOR Proposal 8176. *

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Election

2019-05-11 Thread James Cook
Thanks, I'll try that. Though in this case I didn't even find it in spam. On Sat, 11 May 2019 at 16:36, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > I also received the original message (via an enterprise gmail if it > matters). > > Note a couple months ago when I migrated to gmail I had to explicitly > whitelist

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Side-Game Suspension Act

2019-05-11 Thread James Cook
> I think all the R105 requirements are satisfied by publishing the rule that > contains the change, i.e. it's if there was an SLR published in the 4-60 day > time window beforehand. Oh, that's interesting. Let me check my understanding... R105 says the full text of the rule change, and the

DIS: Re: BUS: Church of Ritual

2019-05-14 Thread James Cook
> I propose the following as a contract and agree to be bound by it if it is > accepted before next Saturday. I modified it to eliminate some of the > potentially dangerous stuff. This is not a scam. This is a cool contract, so I feel I should say why I haven't joined: * I like Coins (more

DIS: Proto-contract: The People's Ritual Committee

2019-05-14 Thread James Cook
Following up on the reply I just sent, here's a contract that's more in line with my own goals right now. Suggestions very welcome: it's probably buggy; I wonder if it could be simplified; and the flavour could probably be improved. I think it would be funny if both this contract and the Church

Re: DIS: the end never games

2019-05-21 Thread James Cook
It seems unclear how long the change lasts. Does the change to voting strength persist if the stone's power drops back to 0? On Tue, 21 May 2019 at 05:32, Aris Merchant wrote: > > 3 is currently the default, so it's only an increase of 2 actually. > > -Aris > > On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 8:45 AM

Re: DIS: the end never games

2019-05-21 Thread James Cook
>- Reality Stone (monthly, 40%): Specify a valid value for an > instance of any unsecured switch; that switch is flipped to that > value. We probably want to secure Ribbon Ownership first, so you can't win the game just by winning the Reality Stone in the auction. Maybe

Re: DIS: the end never games

2019-05-21 Thread James Cook
Duplicity Stone (monthly, 50%): Specify a player and a contract they are party to. The player ceases to be a party to the contract.

Re: DIS: the end never games

2019-05-21 Thread James Cook
Sloth Stone (monthly, 70%): Wielding the stone fulfills all of the wielder's monthly duties, except any duty to publish a Collection Notice. Stone of Obligation (weekly, 25%): Specify a player. That player MUST perform The Ritual in the following Agoran week. (I'm not sure if this works, since

DIS: Re: BUS: return None

2019-05-23 Thread James Cook
On Thu, 23 May 2019 at 02:16, Owen Jacobson wrote: > I register myself. > > -o Welcome, o! I cause you to receive a Welcome Package.

Re: DIS: What to do to start?

2019-05-19 Thread James Cook
On Sun, 19 May 2019 at 17:28, Bernie Brackett wrote: > I joined Agora a month ago or so, but I got overwhelmed by not having any > idea what was going on despite reading the ruleset. I also didn't have very > much time to see what was going on, but now I do. What's something I could > do to start

DIS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] Full Logical Ruleset: May 2019

2019-05-17 Thread James Cook
The history for R2138 is missing Proposal 8176. That probably means the version number is wrong too. On Fri., May 17, 2019, 20:54 Reuben Staley, wrote: > THE FULL LOGICAL RULESET > > These rulesets are also online at http://agoranomic.org/ruleset/ > > Date of last official ruleset of this type:

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposal 8177

2019-05-20 Thread James Cook
> [* the rules must define a switch for it to exist, and a rule with no > force or effect includes no force or effect for its definitions - note > R1586 is only power-2 so this "no force or effect" clause would overrule > R1586. So if the switch doesn't exist while the rule is suspended, it is >

DIS: Re: BUS: Side-Game Suspension Act

2019-05-09 Thread James Cook
For what it's worth, I'm interested in Spaaace!, but not enough to put time yet into assembling a new Astronomor's report when more basic officers' duties are unfilled. Is there much harm in just leaving the Astronomor office (effectively) vacant until someone finds the time? Not that I feel

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Side-Game Suspension Act

2019-05-09 Thread James Cook
> - "Automatic rules repeals" are a little dangerous because > if there's uncertainty as to the conditions the ruleset may change > automagically without visible trace. It's generally better to tie ruleset > changes to a required statement of change that can be hunted up in > the lists, and even

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Zombie Auction Status (unofficial report)

2019-05-09 Thread James Cook
) > > > On 5/9/2019 4:53 PM, James Cook wrote: > > Two zombie auctions are ongoing. > > > > > > First auction. Initiated 2019-05-04. > > > > Lots: > > 1. Tarhalindur > > > > Bids: > > 2019-05-04 15:44 UTC. Falsifian. 1 Coin

DIS: Re: BUS: Zombie Auction

2019-05-20 Thread James Cook
> I apologize if this message comes through as a duplicate. I sent it earlier > then received a message that my mailing list membership had been disabled. I received the message the first time. If you're ever unsure, you can check the mailing list archives, linked to from

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposal 8177

2019-05-20 Thread James Cook
> R217 covers this via the precedent initially set in CFJ 1500, asserts > that words go back to having their common language meaning when not > defined by the rules. Amusingly, CFJ 1500 covered the exact word > "politician" (and if we had to respect that ancient and entirely > different meaning,

DIS: Re: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposal 8177

2019-05-20 Thread James Cook
On Mon, 20 May 2019 at 12:08, Kerim Aydin wrote: > I vote AGAINST 8177. > I act on behalf of Telnaior to vote AGAINST 8177. > > As commented earlier, I was knocked out of space early on, as have > others. Willing to sit out of a subgame this long, but not through > a whole revival. Separate

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: ADoP's weekly report (temporary deputisation)

2019-05-01 Thread James Cook
I wasn't sure if the date of last change or of last election are still required (R2138) if they're "never". On Wed., May 1, 2019, 09:12 Kerim Aydin, wrote: > > On 4/30/2019 9:26 PM, James Cook wrote: > > CoE: If G.'s attempt to resolve Proposal 8170 was successful, I s

DIS: Re: BUS: Resignations

2019-04-26 Thread James Cook
On Fri, 26 Apr 2019 at 19:24, D. Margaux wrote: > With regret I resign the offices of Arbitor and Registrar. Very sorry all, > but life has gotten quite busy recently. Hopefully I can engage more with > Agora again soon. Thanks for your service, and for helping to keep the game interesting.

DIS: Re: OFF: deputy-[Assessor] Resolution of Proposals 8165-8174

2019-04-26 Thread James Cook
> For the following tallies, all voters below have a voting strength of 3, > except for G. who has 4 (Prime Minister) and twg with 0 (9 blots). Unofficial claims of error about voting strength, sent to the discussion list since I don't think they affect anything but it's good to keep track: *

Re: DIS: Has someone already started a Git repo for reports?

2019-04-29 Thread James Cook
> If you tell us your GitHub username, > one of us will add you to the organization. Thanks, my GitHub username is falsifian.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Email Weirdness Etc

2019-04-29 Thread James Cook
Besides the original never appearing in my inbox, all the replies, like this one, seem to end up in my Gmail spam folder. On Mon, 29 Apr 2019 at 18:45, Gaelan Steele wrote: > > I received it as well (Fastmail here). > > > On Apr 28, 2019, at 1:53 PM, Aris Merchant > > wrote: > > > > I haven't

DIS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8174A and 8175

2019-05-04 Thread James Cook
Reminder: I believe the voting period ends in 29 hours. Any thoughts on SLR ratification? On Sun, 28 Apr 2019 at 21:19, Aris Merchant wrote: > > I hereby distribute each listed proposal, initiating the Agoran > Decision of whether to adopt it, and removing it from the proposal > pool. For this

Re: DIS: Office Apportionment

2019-05-04 Thread James Cook
On Sun, 28 Apr 2019 at 03:58, James Cook wrote: > > On Sun, 28 Apr 2019 at 02:39, Aris Merchant > wrote: > > We need to decide who will take which offices. Currently we need a new > > ADoP, Arbitor, Assessor, Astronomor, Clork, Herald, Referee, Registrar, > > Tailo

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: ADoP's weekly report (temporary deputisation)

2019-04-27 Thread James Cook
ould I try to use Ratification Without Objection to ratify it? On Sun, 28 Apr 2019 at 01:45, James Cook wrote: > > CoE: I forgot to include G's deputisation as Referee. > > Here's a revised version of the report I published: > > > > This is a somewhat m

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Re: OFF: deputy-[Assessor] Resolution of Proposals 8165-8174

2019-04-27 Thread James Cook
and I may have failed. > > I think the fact that this stems from yet another office's lateness > (the ADoP) crosses my personal line of "I'm not carrying this whole goddam > thing myself". > > Someone else can resolve this. Sorry. > > On 4/26/2019 7:51 PM, James Co

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: Prime Minister Transition

2019-04-27 Thread James Cook
: > > I think this claim is correct; I furthermore stand for PM. Campaign > statement: I'm an active player who is taking steps to coordinate a > response to the current inactivity crisis, as will be seen shortly. > > -Aris > > On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 6:30 PM James Cook wrote

DIS: How often do lulls like this happen?

2019-04-27 Thread James Cook
Starting a new thread so as not to derail the business of figuring out who will do what. First of all, thanks Aris for assessing our situation, and thanks again G. for working to get things moving. Does anyone know how often it happens that most of the important offices are vacant or essentially

Re: DIS: Office Apportionment

2019-04-27 Thread James Cook
On Sun, 28 Apr 2019 at 02:39, Aris Merchant wrote: > We need to decide who will take which offices. Currently we need a new > ADoP, Arbitor, Assessor, Astronomor, Clork, Herald, Referee, Registrar, > Tailor, and Treasuror. That's 10 vacant or essentially vacant offices. Of > those, I would

DIS: Re: OFF: deputy-[Assessor] Resolution of Proposals 8165-8174

2019-04-27 Thread James Cook
For those who aren't following closely: that report is mostly G.'s work, so credit mostly to G. I just fiddled with the numbers. On Sun, 28 Apr 2019 at 02:05, James Cook wrote: > > I temporarily deputise for Assessor to resolve, as described below, whichever > of the Agoran decisions

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: deputy-[Assessor] Resolution of Proposals 8165-8174

2019-04-27 Thread James Cook
e offices are vacant or > essentially so anyway. If you can’t keep up with the office, you can always > drop it when you want to. > > -Aris > > > > On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 7:05 PM James Cook wrote: > > > I temporarily deputise for Assessor to resolve, as described below,

DIS: Has someone already started a Git repo for reports?

2019-04-28 Thread James Cook
I'm thinking of starting a git* repository to hold officer reports for myself and anyone else interested, both as a way to host a copy of the report on the web and because I like the ability to track history. Does such a thing already exist? *It doesn't have to be git specifically.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Email Weirdness Etc

2019-04-28 Thread James Cook
I never received it. On Sun, 28 Apr 2019 at 21:41, Ørjan Johansen wrote: > > I received it, so it at least got out of the server. > > Greetings, > Ørjan. > > On Sun, 28 Apr 2019, Aris Merchant wrote: > > > I haven't gotten this email yet [1]. It shows up in the archive, but > > not in my inbox.

Re: DIS: Summary Judgment is broken

2019-07-04 Thread James Cook
On Wed, 3 Jul 2019 at 15:52, Jason Cobb wrote: > Rule 2531 ("Referee Accountability") has higher power than Rule 2479 > ("Official Justice"), so all of the former's requirements apply to > Summary Judgment. However, the entire point of Summary Judgment is that > it doesn't need to have a reason

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [proposal] Regulated actions reform

2019-06-27 Thread James Cook
On Thu, 27 Jun 2019 at 04:33, Jason Cobb wrote: > Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, a binding entity CAN only > require or forbid an action that it does not define; it CANNOT > modify anything else about the action in any way. I don't understand this part. As far as I can tell,

DIS: Re: BUS: Intent

2019-07-11 Thread James Cook
On Wed, 10 Jul 2019 at 00:56, Rebecca wrote: > Does the CHoJ work now btw? It's unclear, since R2557 may not give a method for levying fines. See my proposal "Police Power" with Jason Cobb.

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: kwang

2019-07-14 Thread James Cook
On Sun, 14 Jul 2019 at 07:47, Reuben Staley wrote: > I earn 5 coins for the publication of the SLR for the twenty-seventh > week of 2019. I think it is the 28th week right now. I'm not sure whether this is successful. Maybe try again just to be sure?

Re: BUS: Fwd: DIS: [Promotor] Draft

2019-07-14 Thread James Cook
On Sun, 14 Jul 2019 at 11:23, D. Margaux wrote: > I withdraw my AFK proposal and propose this in its place: > > Title: AFK Reform Act v1.1 What's the purpose of this proposal?

DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: July Zombie Auction

2019-07-07 Thread James Cook
> I bid 2 coins. > > On Sun, Jul 7, 2019 at 7:49 PM Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: > > > I bid 35 coins. > > > > -twg > > > > > > ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ > > On Saturday, July 6, 2019 2:41 PM, James Cook > > wrote: > > > >

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Judgement of CFJ 3751

2019-07-07 Thread James Cook
On Sat., Jul. 6, 2019, 21:15 Kerim Aydin, wrote: > > On 7/5/2019 9:21 PM, James Cook wrote: > > On Sat, 6 Jul 2019 at 04:18, James Cook wrote: > >> I judge CFJ 3751 FALSE. > > > > However, I think the answer to the question Murphy was trying to ask > >

DIS: Re: BUS: Zombie auction status (unofficial report)

2019-07-08 Thread James Cook
[0]: > https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-business/2019-July/040814.html > > [1]: > https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-business/2019-July/040817.html > > Jason Cobb > > On 7/8/19 8:34 PM, James Cook wrote: > > On 2019-07-06

Re: DIS: DMARC bounces (attn Murphy)

2019-07-02 Thread James Cook
On Thu, 6 Jun 2019 at 02:08, omd wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 5, 2019 at 6:30 PM James Cook wrote: > > (I'm not suggesting we use Discourse, just that maybe similar options are > > available with the current software.) > > It seems Mailman does support something like that: &

Re: DIS: Fwd: Re: BUS: Kwang

2019-07-02 Thread James Cook
On Wed, 3 Jul 2019 at 03:33, Edward Murphy wrote: > There was a past rule and/or CFJ to the effect that this type of > ambiguous ordering is still effective, provided that the choice > doesn't make any substantive difference to the gamestate. (In this > case, either order would lead to D. Margaux

DIS: Re: BUS: Mandatory intent to banish the Ritual

2019-07-03 Thread James Cook
On Wed, 3 Jul 2019 at 04:12, Jason Cobb wrote: > Also, was the Ritual performed last week? No, I don't think so.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Promotor] Distribution of Proposals 8196-8201

2019-07-03 Thread James Cook
On Wed, 3 Jul 2019 at 04:15, Ørjan Johansen wrote: > Your proposal numbers have some off-by-100 errors. Whoops! Revised votes below. > >> IDAuthor(s) AITitle > >> --- > >> 8196 Jason Cobb, Falsifian

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Assessor] Resolution of Proposals 8180-8187

2019-07-02 Thread James Cook
I don't think so. On Tue, 2 Jul 2019 at 06:08, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > Did the below proposals ever get resolved? -G. > > On 6/22/2019 4:37 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > > CoE: This leaves out my votes on Telnaior's behalf, which change the > > outcome of at least one proposal I think (8184).

DIS: Re: BUS: ADoP Deputisation

2019-07-02 Thread James Cook
In the ongoing election for ADoP, I vote [Murphy]. On Mon, 1 Jul 2019 at 02:00, Rebecca wrote: > > Having intended to do so days ago, I deputise for ADoP to initiate an > agoran decision for the election of the position of ADoP. The voting method > is instant run-off, the ADoP is the vote

DIS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] CFJ 3750 Assigned to twg

2019-07-02 Thread James Cook
Gratuitous: I don't think I understood G.'s argument. As far as I can tell, this is straightforward. R2579 says "To perform a fee-based action, an entity ... must announce", and later "Upon such an announcement". I think the first excerpt is clearly only talking about fee-based actions, and the

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Birthday Ribbon

2019-06-29 Thread James Cook
On Sat, 29 Jun 2019 at 19:24, ais...@alumni.bham.ac.uk wrote: > On Sat, 2019-06-29 at 12:19 -0700, Bernie Brackett wrote: > > Happy Birthday Agora! It's Agora's birthday, so I get a Magenta > > ribbon. > > I'm not convinced that statement's clear enough to be an action-by- > announcement. You

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Proposal pool CoE

2019-07-07 Thread James Cook
On Sat, 6 Jul 2019 at 07:02, Aris Merchant wrote: > You're right. I was waiting for the dust to settle before trying to > sort things out. Does the following look correct? > > Also, feel free to just withdraw "no power is all powerful" if you > want to; it would simplify things a bit in some

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Arbitor] CFJ 3753 Assigned to omd

2019-07-07 Thread James Cook
On Sun, 7 Jul 2019 at 21:12, Aris Merchant wrote: > > On Sat, Jul 6, 2019 at 3:36 PM omd wrote: > > > > On Sat, Jul 6, 2019 at 7:52 AM James Cook wrote: > > > Withdraw Rule 2597 (Line-item Veto). > > > > Why that rule? It's only a few months

DIS: Re: BUS: [proposal] Fixing base values of crimes

2019-07-07 Thread James Cook
On Sun, 7 Jul 2019 at 10:53, Jason Cobb wrote: > I withdraw this proposal ("Sane crime base values, please") because it > conflicts with Falsifian's proposal, and I might want to find a way to > allow R. Lee to vote for it. > > Jason Cobb Sorry, I missed that. I haven't been closely following

DIS: Re: BUS: My Spaceship

2019-07-14 Thread James Cook
On Sun, 14 Jul 2019 at 22:04, nch wrote: > It's also not clear what the default of the > armour value is. If my spaceships armour value is less than 10, I pay 1 > coin to repair it, increasing its armour switch to 10. Welcome! I think armour currently defaults to zero. There was a proposal to

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: My Spaceship

2019-07-14 Thread James Cook
; ship might not be pilotable, but I see no reason to think 0 is a more > (or less) likely number than 10 in the rules. > > On 7/14/19 8:42 PM, James Cook wrote: > > On Sun, 14 Jul 2019 at 22:04, nch wrote: > >> It's also not clear what the default of the > >> arm

<    1   2   3   4   >