On 4/17/23 18:30, juan via agora-discussion wrote:
> New version. Fixed most things people mentioned in response to the
> previous version, plus changed a bit how the thing works.
>
> Now, instead of Golems activating by themselves and acting on behalf of
> people, we have players activating the
stone is transferred to the wielder. When this happens, the
Anti-Equatorial Stone's mossiness is incremented by 1.
- Score Stone (Weekly, 3): When wielded, a specified player's
(defaulting to the wielder if not specified) Score is increased
by 3.
}
}
--
Jason Cobb
Assessor, Mad Engineer, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
tly decide/declare that they want that grouping to
> also count as an Agoran person?)
>
I think (hope) this wording includes that. My initial draft was "for the
purpose of forming..." which definitely excludes that.
--
Jason Cobb
Assessor, Mad Engineer, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
On 11/13/22 00:37, Jason Cobb via agora-official wrote:
> VOTING STRENGTHS
>
>
> Strength is 3 unless otherwise noted.
> ^: player has voting strength 6
Correction: the Dream of Power should give 2 voting strength, rather than 3.
This doesn't change any outcomes
appy to get feedback.
Design looks fine to me, but I'm not the right person to ask at all.
--
Jason Cobb
Assessor, Mad Engineer, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
On 10/23/22 18:50, Jason Cobb via agora-official wrote:
> EXPERIMENT 00056 RULE SELECTION
This should be 00057, my bad.
--
Jason Cobb
Assessor, Mad Engineer, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
On 10/16/22 23:00, Jason Cobb via agora-official wrote:
> 2022-09-04 21:10:47 Jason Sabotage 1
> 2022-09-04 21:10:47 Jason Wealth1
Whoops, these shouldn't have been included.
I don't think this makes anything fail.
--
Jason Cobb
Assesso
On 10/16/22 16:32, Jason Cobb via agora-official wrote:
> [I don't know how this slipped past me, I'm sorry. This is late but
> still required, and the decision has met quorum now.]
>
> I hereby issue a humiliating public reminder to the following slackers
> who have not voted on
delineated criteria
I'm sure I'm missing some, but I think those are at least a reasonable
start.
--
Jason Cobb
Arbitor, Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
On 9/12/22 23:18, secretsnail9 via agora-discussion wrote:
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Sep 12, 2022, at 10:14 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion
>> wrote:
>>
>> On 9/12/22 22:31, secretsnail9 via agora-discussion wrote:
>>>> On Sep 12, 2022
On 9/12/22 22:31, secretsnail9 via agora-discussion wrote:
> On Sep 12, 2022, at 9:12 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion
> wrote:
>> On 9/12/22 20:31, secretsnail9 via agora-business wrote:
>>> There's also the clause in Rule 2630 "The Administrative State": &q
T violate requirements that
> auction's method that are clearly intended to be punishable as rules
> violations", the typo aside.
SHALL (NOT)s do not create regulated actions anymore.
--
Jason Cobb
Arbitor, Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
; years, our commitment to this principle has led us to use gender-neutral
> pronouns, which you will find throughout these Rules.))
I support something like like this.
--
Jason Cobb
Arbitor, Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
3.0 Voter Protection
>> 8852~ 4st, Jason 2.0 Fix infractions
>> 8853* Jason 3.0 Unfortunately
>> 8854* Jason 3.0 Attainder
>> 8855~ Jason 1.0 Extermination v1.1
>> 8856~ 4st
ession.
> Destroy all stamps in Madrid's possession.
> Grant Madrid 100 blots.
> Remove all patent titles from Madrid.
> }
>
Blots cannot be created at power 1.
--
Jason Cobb
Arbitor, Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
On 8/29/22 13:23, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion wrote:
> We now have a player who is directly responsible for three FAGEs. I
> believe that it's time we discuss a mechanism similar to the one below.
Correction on this: directly responsible for one successful FAGE and one
attempte
.
}
}
--
Jason Cobb
Arbitor, Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
On 8/21/22 18:10, Edward Murphy via agora-discussion wrote:
> Jason
>
>> I respond to each petition that I am required to respond to as follows:
>> "No. For more information please reread this response.".
> Proto: Don't.
No.
--
Jason Cobb
Arbitor, Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
On 8/16/22 12:05, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote:
> On 8/16/22 10:20, Rose Strong via agora-business wrote:
>> I CFJ: The Militia Court created by Madrid is a valid alternative to the
>> current CFJ system.
>
> The above is CFJ 3985.
>
> I assign CFJ 3985 to Murph
’d nevertheless prefer it to be
> consent or objections instead of support - the potential for a 3-person cabal
> to make unilateral rule changes is scary.
>
> Gaelan
That's fair, and actually has the benefit of preventing accidental
violations of the four days rule.
--
Jason Cobb
Arbitor, Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
On Mon, Aug 8, 2022 at 8:18 AM Forest Sweeney via agora-business <
agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> I vote FOR on all proposals up for voting this period. (I have not updated
> the spreadsheet, sorry.)
>
> On Sun, Aug 7, 2022, 3:59 PM Edward
> Murphy via agora-business wrote:
>
> > >
ge in the function of the rule. Would this
> information be obscured/lost under this proposal?
I'd be inclined to record it as a single amendment, but I could
potentially include "amended (title)" or "amended (text/title)"?
In any case that would require me to write more code *grumble grumble*.
--
Jason Cobb
Arbitor, Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
On 7/24/22 18:49, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote:
> Pseudo-coe: I think this is missing the Cfj called by snail with the
> subject line [Proposal?]. If so and it’s not taken I favor that one. -G.
>
Acknowledged and assigned, thank you.
--
Jason Cobb
Arbitor, Assessor, Rule
ntity. (Side note, we really ought to have some kind of vague
> definition for an entity, even if it doesn't cover everything, just so we
> can have some agreement. There's probably plenty of precedent about the
> nature of entities that could be used. This case could be an example.)
You can't "create" an already existing coin. You can create a new coin,
and, if it's owned by the same person as an existing coin, not have to
keep track of which is which (this is where fungibility matters), but
there are still two coin entities.
A vague definition is worse than no definition. If it's vague enough
that the goals is for it to come down to "what a judge thinks" anyway,
then all it can do is
--
Jason Cobb
Arbitor, Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
is atextual given it's not any actual rules, and the rules already say you
> CAN create a proposal if you specify everything so it should work.
No? That's not what "creating" something means. If I have a document,
and I make a copy of it, I haven't "created" the original, I
On 7/11/22 19:24, Forest Sweeney via agora-business wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 11, 2022 at 3:26 PM secretsnail9 via agora-business <
> agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Jul 11, 2022 at 4:55 PM Jason Cobb via agora-business <
>> agora-busin...@agoranomic.or
On 7/7/22 19:04, ais523 via agora-discussion wrote:
> On Thu, 2022-07-07 at 18:56 -0400, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion
> wrote:
>> On 7/5/22 13:59, secretsnail9 via agora-business wrote:
>>> Repeal Rule 2618 (Promises).
>>>
>>> Repeal Rule 1742 (Contra
On 7/8/22 00:03, secretsnail9 via agora-discussion wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 7, 2022 at 10:37 PM Jason Cobb via agora-discussion <
> agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
>
>> On 7/7/22 19:58, secretsnail9 via agora-discussion wrote:
>>> As it has no mention
be regulated. It is
IMPOSSIBLE to take an action with N support if the rules do not permit
you to do so. You might have another method to do so if it's
unregulated, but that won't be "with N support".
--
Jason Cobb
Arbitor, Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
ledges and promises, in my opinion.
>
> --
> secretsnail
They all serve different purposes and are useful under different
circumstances. Repealing contracts alone could be part of a reasonable
attempt to restructure the game away from economic contracts, but that
doesn't seem to be what's happening here.
--
Jason Cobb
Arbitor, Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
ding, which seems to be a
reasonable reading to me. You merely assert that it's a different
question, but when you argue that it's unclear what the text means, it's
not at all clear to me that it's not even a possible reading.
--
Jason Cobb
Arbitor, Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
inuous conditions while earns is for
instantaneous ones. I think the effects are limited because we don't
have glitter, but this would make the qualification for
Platinum/Green/Transparent extend for 7 days beyond when the condition
was fulfilled, which would have implications for Transparent.
--
ed "Constant Magic Output" with the text:
> {
> The sum of a player's Magic Levels MUST be 9.
> If the sum of a player's Magic Levels are NOT 9,
> each of the player's Magic Levels are flipped to 3.
> }
This should not use "MUST", which suggests a requirement
On 7/2/22 00:04, secretsnail9 via agora-business wrote:
> When a stone is cascaded, the Rule defining that stone applies the effects in
> that stone's scroll.
This doesn't work due to power.
--
Jason Cobb
Arbitor, Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
On Wed, Jun 22, 2022, 9:39 PM Forest Sweeney via agora-business <
agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> I intend to clean, each without objection, each of the following:
> correct the spelling of 'statment' in Rule 2471 "No Faking" to 'statement'
> correct the spelling of 'niether' in Rule 2661
clear that
> cat==Jason to some people make it FALSE to that standard?
>
> Recently (but before you re=joined maybe? can't remember) I think we had
> someone post something from an unknown email account and say "I swear I'm
> a registered agoran under a different email account,
ins the game via such an
> announcement, all players' scores are set to their default."
> to
> "If at least one player wins the game via such an
> announcement, all players' scores are set to their default."
> }
> (Please, notice how it says 'a least' instead of 'at le
in (1) from taking place.
Doesn't affect the point, but R2651 has a mismatching number/title.
--
Jason Cobb
Arbitor, Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
Eir Voting Strength is 1 greater.
> }
>
> (My intent here is to provide specialization, but also the game of Chicken,
> who is willing to leave the Ministry of Victories alone?
> Who wants sweet sweet points? Suggestions, etc, are welcome.)
Overall, I have some concerns. These don't seem particularly balanced
and may be overly specific. I'm not even sure if I want to go back to a
focus-based game immediately.
--
Jason Cobb
Arbitor, Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
> 8682& secretsnail 1.0 Temptation
> DEFEAT
>
*annoyed Assessor noises*
I'm going to operate under the assumption this "clearly identifies a
valid vote" and count it as AGAINST.
--
Jason Cobb
Arbitor, Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
as an option than the author of the proposal).
CFJs aren't completely analogous, since a person initiates a CFJ, while
only an instrument enacts rules.
--
Jason Cobb
Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
urrent type to a different type (such as welcome device)", "the device
> changes from its current title to a different title", "the device changes
> from its current time window to a different time window", etc. It needs to
> be more specified for anything to actually h
There are specific
provisions for rule changes, but general gamestate changes can be
arbitrarily unclear or nonspecific.
However, the most natural reading is probably that the Device itself is
flipped.
--
Jason Cobb
Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
On 5/1/22 23:09, ais523 via agora-discussion wrote:
> Any suggestions? I'm partial to changing "As this title..." to "As this
> Device...", but maybe you have a better idea.
FOR
--
Jason Cobb
Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
repeal this
> regulation by announcement.
> }
>
> {
> HR4: Employee of the Year
>
> The ADoP CAN award the patent title of Employee of the Year 2021 with 2
> Agoran Consent. When e does so, e CAN and MUST also repeal this
> regulation by announcement.
> }
>
Administrative Regulations cannot provide for their own repeal.
--
Jason Cobb
Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
On 4/18/22 11:57, juan via agora-discussion wrote:
> I vote FOR in both referenda.
Not to the public forum.
--
Jason Cobb
Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
On 4/11/22 13:49, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote:
> On 4/11/2022 10:40 AM, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote:
>> No, it's not reasonable to expect new players to read through decades of
>> judgements. However, that doesn't eliminate the fact that the precedent
>&
41:31 PM GMT-03:00, Jason Cobb via agora-business
> wrote:
>> This... probably fails? It doesn't clearly cite which proposal is being
>> withdrawn.
Sure, I happen to know what proposal it's referring to because I've read
the thread. But a person who hasn't the context (wh
On 4/8/22 14:05, ais523 via agora-discussion wrote:
> On Fri, 2022-04-08 at 13:54 -0400, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote:
>> I submit, but do not pend, the following proposal:
>>
>> Title: No finger pointing on behalf
> FWIW, I'd prefer to expand the set of actio
secret "contracts", currently...
As I understand our current precedents, allowing someone to send mail
from your email address doesn't change the fact that the email is _from_
them. What matters is the last entity involved that has free will.
--
Jason Cobb
Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
On 4/5/22 18:10, ais523 via agora-discussion wrote:
> On Tue, 2022-04-05 at 18:07 -0400, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion
> wrote:
>> On 4/5/22 18:03, ais523 via agora-business wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2022-04-06 at 00:00 +0200, nethack4.org dicebot via agor
wing for the fact that there are two rules
> with unassigned numbers, Stamps and Birds).
>
The ruleset has been updated since those proposals were assessed.
Stamps is 2659, Birds is 2660-2665, and there are 153 rules as of the
latest ruleset.
--
Jason Cobb
Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
f to support/object/withdraw. So unless I'm
missing something (or the rule changes later) these don't do anything?
--
Jason Cobb
Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
On 4/3/22 21:21, juan via agora-discussion wrote:
> On 2022-04-03 20:10, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote:
>> CoE: either none of these Snailpoints exist, or they are all owned by
>> the Lost and Found Department. Any purported creation of Snailpoints
>> would result in
t;
>> Unfocused (default): All other active players
>> [Inactive/nonplayers do not have this switch]
>>
> pseudo-COE: I forgot to adjust the numbers in parenthesis, but I don't
> think that's substantive or affects the self-r
auction (already in
the rule), but that would have to at least include a win card, which
would probably mess up the economy.
Otherwise: "The device MUST do so at least once a month, and SHOULD do
so at least twice each month.", but that probably creates impossible
obligations for the Engineer.
--
Jason Cobb
Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
0 0 0 0 0
> SEAMSTRESS[12] 246 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Dragon QuickExchange no longer exists.
--
Jason Cobb
Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
of the message. A person SHALL NOT create such a public document unless
e reasonably believes that there is a non-frivolous argument for its
truth; doing so is the Class 6 Crime of Falsifying Laurels.
}
--
Jason Cobb
Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
On 3/24/22 17:37, ais523 via agora-discussion wrote:
> On Thu, 2022-03-24 at 17:28 -0400, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote:
>> I transfer all of my win cards and winsomes to ais523 for the sole
>> purpose of depositing them into Obstructive Pooling.
> Just to confirm, is thi
tance of a switch would otherwise fail to have a possible
device, it comes to have its default device."
"A singleton device is a device for which Agora Nomic is the only entity
possessing an instance of that device."
"A device switch is a switch with values True and False."
"Attempting to flip an instance of a device to a value it already has
does not flip the device."
--
Jason Cobb
Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
emselves in the
set, so if Alice specifies only Bob to win, the time limit would not
trigger. Although unlikely, it's not inconceivable this could happen
with sufficient bribes.
Overall this just seems grindy, difficult to track, and not particularly
fun to play. It also screws over anybody who joins in the middle of the
round, and it's potentially significantly damaging to miss even a week
with a free move if other players aren't willing to sell you assets to
catch up.
--
Jason Cobb
Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
On 3/16/22 18:09, Trigon via agora-discussion wrote:
> El 16/03/2022 a las 22:05, Jason Cobb via agora-official escribió:
>> Hot Potato gain 8 coins if transferred to a player who has not
>> owned the stone since the last time Agora owned it.
>>
On 3/13/22 16:13, Jason Cobb via agora-official wrote:
> Power Jason2021-10-04
Correction: the Power Stone was wielded by Jason on 2022-03-08. This
will be reflected in future reports.
--
Jason Cobb
Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
On 3/6/22 20:28, secretsnail9 via agora-discussion wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 6, 2022 at 7:13 PM Jason Cobb via agora-discussion <
> agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
>
>> If I send an email to your email address, but all of your devices are
>> offline for the 4 da
t.
If I send an email to your email address, but all of your devices are
offline for the 4 day period, is the email sent "to" you?
--
Jason Cobb
Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
rs of foreign nomics or deliberately misrepresent their status
as Ambassador At-Large or any delegate; doing either is the class 2
crime of Unauthorized Diplomacy.
}
--
Jason Cobb
Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
standing.
>
Yeah, in the specific case of proposals being enacted, that's probably
fine. But there are other ways to cause rule changes, and those matter, too.
I understand the problem. I don't understand your proposed solution. Are
you suggesting that non-explicit rule changes should just be excluded
from the minimal modification, but that the ratification should
otherwise proceed normally?
--
Jason Cobb
Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
On 2/28/22 22:11, Ørjan Johansen via agora-discussion wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Feb 2022, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion wrote:
>
>> I present the following draft to clean up the ratification rule.
>>
>> The only intended semantic change is securing all retroactive
>>
to
be part of the document for the purposes of ratification; such
definitions are secured with power threshold 3.
Ratification is secured with power threshold 3.
}
--
Jason Cobb
Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
er is responsible for collecting votes and keeping track of related
properties."
If you go with this, please don't put it in the "device is on" section.
I'd prefer to not cease to exist at the end of my time window (though I
guess we all will eventually...).
--
Jason Cobb
Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
On 2/8/22 15:28, ATMunn via agora-discussion wrote:
> On 2/8/2022 15:16, Jason Cobb via agora-official wrote:
>> Well it looks like we're going with recording people reading the ruleset.
>>
>> Reading will be done using the Short Logical Ruleset published on 8 Feb
>>
On 2/2/22 14:18, ais523 via agora-discussion wrote:
> On Wed, 2022-02-02 at 14:07 -0500, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion
> wrote:
>> Title: Deputisation rwrite
> I'd prefer to go down a bit of a different path – I agree with barring
> deputisation for very old duties, but think t
new office, and to
prevent rapid-fire changes resulting from deputisation fights.]
}
--
Jason Cobb
Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
just
what R879 says right now.
--
Jason Cobb
Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
ts of tracking it.
Further arguments in favor of this point: rules can cease being rules
without being destroyed (since we can re-enact them).
--
Jason Cobb
Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
/oppose one of the above
ideas, please let met know!
--
Jason Cobb
Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
to reconsider CFJ 3938.
>>>
>>>
>>> Prior to CFJ 3583 cited below, CFJ 3455 independently says the same thing
>>> - no ratification of registration without consent, due to R1551's
>>> "inconsistencies cause ratification to fail" clause:
>>
On 1/24/22 22:28, Ørjan Johansen via agora-discussion wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Jan 2022, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote:
>
>> I create the following proposal, then pay a fee of one pendant to cause
>> it to become pending.
>>
>> Title: Auction Self-Ratification
&g
my discretion in the direction of change to punish people who
do that.
--
Jason Cobb
Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
for self-ratification.
This procedure would take less than 4 weeks and is reasonable for a
single player to perform. Thus Agora is not ossified if there is a
single player, and there is no lower number of players where Agora would
not be ossified. TRUE.
--
Jason Cobb
Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
On Sun, Jan 16, 2022 at 2:12 PM ais523 via agora-official <
agora-offic...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> The Device is on.
>
> I intend, with Agoran Consent, to cause rule 2655 to amend the rule
> "The Device" by appending the following as a list item to the "When the
> device is off:" list:
> {{{
>
d rules from defining methods for non-persons voting.
R683 requires entities casting ballots to be players and secures the
casting of ballots at power 3.
--
Jason Cobb
Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
like it here. My fellow players are
>> pretty cool. The moment these happy thoughts cross my mind, I feel the
>> inexorable power of my spirit lifting me upward.
>>
>> I award myself a white ribbon.
>>
>> I Raise a Banner.
>>
>> -Aspen
>>
> Congrat
stions?
>
"The Short Logical Device (SLR) is a format of the device."
"Devices are assigned to, ordered within, or moved between categories,
and categories are added, changed, or empty categories removed, as the
Devicekeepor sees fit."
--
Jason Cobb
Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
a player.
3. The ballot clearly identifies the matter to be deviced.
4. The ballot clearly identifies a valid vote, as determined by the
voting method.
5. The ballot clearly sets forth the voter's intent to place the
identified vote.
6. The voter has no other valid ballots on the same device.
}
--
Jason Cobb
Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
office PodNomic Correspondent.
>
> If PodNomic is not an active nomic whose ruleset makes provision for other
> nomics to appoint correspondents, any player may cause this rule to repeal
> itself by announcement.
> }
>
> Gaelan
The "may" should be a "CAN".
ke more
> things regulated, so maybe it would work.
>
I don't think that affects the power-3 implications of actions being
"regulated", but it might mean that the power-1 rule attempts to impose
all restrictions that the definition implies?
--
Jason Cobb
Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
On 11/21/21 00:00, Aspen via agora-business wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 8:13 PM Jason Cobb via agora-business <
> agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
>
>> On 11/10/21 14:36, Aspen via agora-official wrote:
>>> CONTAINS A REVISED PROMOTOR'S REPORT, EFFECTIVE AS
On 11/3/21 19:45, Ørjan Johansen via agora-discussion wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Nov 2021, Jason Cobb via agora-official wrote:
>
>> THE BILLBOARD ROCK CHART (STONEMASON'S WEEKLY REPORT)
>> Summary of stone functions:
> This summary seems to miss the new stones.
>
> Greeting
on it).
There is, of course, a nomic on there already. Feel free to join and
mess around.
Invite link:
https://agora-zulip.randomcat.org/join/irl2lks6o7ndf7wgux3uf45j/
--
Jason Cobb
Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
ly the Device itself, and we
> could presumably recreate it by proposal.
>
I don't think the sole instance of a singleton switch can be permanently
destroyed by an instantaneous destruction. Even if the destruction
worked, the rule defining the switch should immediately recreate it (in
the same way that it immediately creates it when first coming into
effect after being enacted).
--
Jason Cobb
Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
On 10/18/21 12:16, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote:
> On 10/18/2021 9:11 AM, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion wrote:
>> On 10/18/21 06:18, ais523 via agora-business wrote:
>> We fixed the case where a proposal might be applied twice:
>>
>>> 4. (if the
On 10/18/21 06:18, ais523 via agora-business wrote:
> On Sun, 2021-10-17 at 21:43 -0400, Jason Cobb wrote (to
> m...@agoranomic.groups.io):
>> RESOLUTION OF PROPOSALS 8607-8629
>> =
> CoE: You did this already, to agora-official.
>
> (I d
This message contains no game actions.
--
Jason Cobb
Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
On 10/7/21 22:29, Ørjan Johansen via agora-discussion wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Oct 2021, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion wrote:
>
>> Here's a proto to not erase player's festivity when they win by ribbons:
>>
>> Amend Rule 2438 by appending the following to the paragraph begi
:
* ais523
* Alexis
* G.
* Jason
* Murphy
* twg
--
Jason Cobb
Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
On 10/6/21 19:27, Jason Cobb via agora-official wrote:
> Power G.40% EEscapes
Whoops, this is Jason's stone. I don't think this affects anything.
--
Jason Cobb
Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
>
> Seems appropriate somehow.
>
> --
>
> Fickle Owl
>
The intended use was contracts authorizing act-on-behalf to create blots
as a form of punishment without Referee involvement.
--
Jason Cobb
Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
r both CFJs:
> https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/?3869
> https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/?3866
>
> --
>
> Shy Owl
>
>
Thanks.
This will be fixed in the next FLR.
--
Jason Cobb
Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
here (if anyone had performed, I'd have voted for it, but the contestants
> literally ignored it all).
>
The version up for vote doesn't include the extension, only the changes
that ensure tournaments always actually conclude.
--
Jason Cobb
Assessor, Rulekeepor, Stonemason
1 - 100 of 1166 matches
Mail list logo
