Recommend changing to paragraphs. Not sure if that's enough of an
ambiguity to make it fail.
-scshunt
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 2:43 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
[added 'unconditional' because conditional voting makes this trivial]
I remove my proposal, Back to Basics, from
On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 1:51 AM, omd c.ome...@gmail.com wrote:
7649 scshunt 2 I always thought these already ratifie
I wrote this proposal, not scshunt; I don't think this affects
validity of distribution.
Unfortunately it does, sigh. It's an essential parameter so it must
On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 12:57 AM, omd c.ome...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 12:53 AM, Sean Hunt scsh...@csclub.uwaterloo.ca
wrote:
NumAuthor AI Title
7652 scshunt 3 Deputy Cleanup
AGAINST
You're just being difficult, right?
On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 12:08 PM, Sean Hunt scsh...@csclub.uwaterloo.ca wrote:
7656 scshunt 1 Clairty
AGAINST until precedent is cleared up. increase should be replaced by
simply change if its meant to go both directions.
If the precedent is that you can't increase
On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 7:20 PM, omd c.ome...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 6:34 PM, Sean Hunt scsh...@csclub.uwaterloo.ca
wrote:
with For this decision, the valid options are the players. Upon the
resolution of this decision, its outcome, if a player, is installed
into office
Rule 2143
On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 1:59 PM, Henri Bouchard henrib...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 11:47 PM, omd c.ome...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 6:52 PM, Henri Bouchard henrib...@gmail.com wrote:
Proposal: Scorekeepor Reports (Adoption Index=9.9)
Append the
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 12:11 PM, Henri Bouchard henrib...@gmail.com wrote:
I CfJ: The Assessor, scshunt, failed to end the voting period for
proposals 7641-7642 in 7 days, thereby violating Rules 107 and 2143.
Scshunt has therefore committed the Class-2 Crime of Tardiness.
I bar scshunt.
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 3:12 PM, Alex Smith ais...@bham.ac.uk wrote:
On Fri, 2014-05-09 at 15:05 -0400, omd wrote:
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 12:11 PM, Henri Bouchard henrib...@gmail.com
wrote:
I CfJ: The Assessor, scshunt, failed to end the voting period for
proposals 7641-7642 in 7 days,
Pretty sure it's FAILED QUORUM?
On May 6, 2014 5:48 PM, omd c.ome...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 5:04 PM, omd c.ome...@gmail.com wrote:
I initiate the Agoran decision to determine the new Speaker. For this
decision, the vote collector is the IADoP; as with all decisions, the
Why wasn't it, and doesn't the pseudo-self-ratification kick in?
On May 6, 2014 5:59 PM, omd c.ome...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, May 6, 2014 at 5:52 PM, Sean Hunt scsh...@csclub.uwaterloo.ca
wrote:
Pretty sure it's FAILED QUORUM?
My mistake. CoE: There were 3 out of 4 votes, so the voting
The precedent is that SHALL - CAn and SHALL.
On May 6, 2014 6:04 PM, omd c.ome...@gmail.com wrote:
As far as I can tell, Rule 2154 requires me as IADoP to initiate
Agoran decisions to determine the new officeholders of Prime Minister
and Referee within a week. However, nothing actually
Hey everyone,
I've started a repository at https://github.com/scshunt/agoranomic to
keep track of my reporting, and I encourage others to use their own
repositories for the same. Currently I haven't added score because
it's basically easier to do that by hand.
One of the problems that automated
On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 10:04 AM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
E should be required to do it by specific announcement, not just in
the ruleset (description ok, like I renumbered R768), so all
changes can be traced back to a specific event.
The intent is to allow it to be done by
Free points to the author of the fix proposal...
-scshunt
On May 1, 2014 4:48 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
On Thu, 1 May 2014, omd wrote:
- Prime Minister: Sinecure like the previous office of Speaker, but
the last winner (me, I think) gets an extra vote.
Note
On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 9:35 AM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
I'm not *too* annoyed, though I wanted the job.
scshunt, what do you think of the result of this system: if an
office is vacant, there is a race for a doable duty and that
supersedes any election? (In the old system,
On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 4:53 PM, omd c.ome...@gmail.com wrote:
[It would be nice to have an up-to-date players list...]
I assign CFJ 3407 to scshunt:
On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 1:59 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
I CFJ on the following: omd assigned CFJ 3406 using a process
On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 5:29 AM, Alex Smith
callforjudgem...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
Yahoo! mangled the Promotor's message so badly
I'm not even going to attempt to quote it; but I vote as follows:
This appears to actually have been gmail's fault. The HTML is awful
(but the plain text version is
On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 3:16 PM, x1122334455 x1122334...@writing.com wrote:
Since I have no real idea what is going on, I'm abstaining from the vote if
that is still allowed.
It is in fact required, as you cannot vote on a proposal unless it was
distributed at a time when you were a player. See
Not I.
On Apr 22, 2014 3:56 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
On Tue, 22 Apr 2014, omd wrote:
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 11:56 AM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu
wrote:
I deputize for the Arbitor to assign the below case CFJ 3405 and
assign the case to myself (G.).
On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 1:26 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
I vote:
Num Author AI Title
7632 scshunt 3 All Activity is Good Activity
AGAINST.
Bug: If someone registers for the first time in April, can I
deregister them instantly because they didn't post
On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 1:29 PM, omd c.ome...@gmail.com wrote:
- Yellow Card, intended for less serious or justifiable
infractions. When a person who has received a Yellow Card in
the current week receives points, e only earns half as many as
e otherwise would,
On Sun, Apr 13, 2014 at 11:01 PM, Ed Murphy emurph...@socal.rr.com wrote:
scshunt wrote:
judicial functions to a new office (maybe not the Clerk... the Arbitor
or something. This would remove the connotation of impartiality that
Murphy gave the Clerk). Then we can look at figurehead reform
On Sun, Apr 13, 2014 at 11:08 PM, Sean Hunt scsh...@csclub.uwaterloo.cawrote:
*7631 Nichdel 2 Missing Vote
CoE: scshunt was the author. This does not affect the resolution.
-scshunt
On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 12:35 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.eduwrote:
On Fri, 11 Apr 2014, omd wrote:
Herald: G.
I resign from this office.
Any reason why?
Speaker: G.
I resign from this office (pointless now).
Removing the voting limit increase was an accident, and you'll notice
On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 1:05 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
After munging the complex numbers game up just for lack of timely reports,
I've decided to take a page out of ais523's book and just hope someone
else runs reports and things for a while, and I'll just be an ordinary
On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 2:30 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
My Next Big Idea was Officers' Policies:
1. Loosen up Rules restrictions on Officers. Allow Promotor to
decide which proposals to distribute for example, as long as none
sits for longer than (say) 3 weeks. CotC
On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 1:48 AM, omd c.ome...@gmail.com wrote:
Enact a new power-2 rule entitled Score, reading as follows:
Score is a player switch, with default 0 and possible values all
non-negative integers.
Hmm... this would make Score momentarily defined by both this rule
On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 1:09 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
Just an opinion this time. YMMV.
Bringing it back *as CotC* seems wholly unimaginative and boring, and
just what we don't want to go back to. That's why I suggested moving
the winner to Gov. Waste and keeping
On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 2:30 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
On Tue, 25 Mar 2014, Sean Hunt wrote:
I am a big fan of the figurehead model of Speaker.
I've been a fan like that for a long time, but was thinking during the
re-write: how many times has a figurehead Speaker done
On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 1:25 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
With this clause, making assumption automatic, I would't do a one-off
deputization.
Suggestion: make it opt-in, not opt-out (the deputy CAN take over the
office if e does so in the message in which e deputizes).
My
On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 8:55 AM, Jonatan Kilhamn
jonatan.kilh...@gmail.com wrote:
I find the thought that Agora maybe just accidentally ended hilarious.
Almost so much that I want it to be true. But I think we're safe. The
game of agora, and of nomics in general, is well-established as not
On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 10:41 PM, Geoff Schmidt ge...@geoffschmidt.com wrote:
As a new Agoran I have learned two things.
- Small, easily overlooked words such as currency can be very important.
This is pretty tame, as scams go. Every word matters.
- It is never safe to assume that players
On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 11:46 PM, Geoff Schmidt ge...@geoffschmidt.com wrote:
word that appears neither in the Short Logical Ruleset nor in all Scrabble
The SLR is not a unique document; you would have to go with most
recently published SLR (which might open it up to scamming by the
rulekeepor)
On Jan 17, 2014 3:32 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
As per the Operations Manual, I award the following Operators
to the following active players:
ais523 1
Bayushi +
G. 6
Henri-
Khoyo0
Ludwig
On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 7:54 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
Question 1: I assume currently active is dynamic and assessed at the
time of resolution. debate on this point?
I agree, because that clause is always speaking, so quorum is assessed
instantaneously. And resolutions
On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 6:43 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
Num Author AI Ch Title
7615 Henri 1 O The Initiation of the Great Reset...
AGAINST
7616 G. 2 O Mostly Simple Judging v2.3
ENDORSE the voter who most recently judged a case.
Sean
On Jan 8, 2014 8:46 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
On Wed, 8 Jan 2014, Sean Hunt wrote:
ENDORSE the voter who most recently judged a case.
Hmm, can't remember, would most recently here be the
most recently:
1. since before this vote were cast;
2. since before
On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 7:17 PM, Fool fool1...@gmail.com wrote:
Upon a true
announcement that one or more specified players have achieved
Numberwang
You have just redeemed yourself, sir.
Which reminds you, I still need to send you something.
-scshunt
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 11:36 AM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.eduwrote:
I think for score, the safest thing to do is self-ratify, and if no-one
brings up the falsehood in a week, well, someone got away with something
and that's that.
_
On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 11:44 PM, Ørjan Johansen oer...@nvg.ntnu.no wrote:
If the Quorum is higher than number of players actually voting, then it is
impossible for Proposals to pass, even if everyone votes FOR.
This can easily happen when Agora is in a lull due to many people losing
time or
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 11:33 AM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.eduwrote:
I assume the office of Herald.
I initiate an election for Herald.
Advertisement: Herald is a very easy office for a newbie. One
report a month I think! I'll catch the records up in the next
week, then am happy
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 1:39 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
On Fri, 25 Oct 2013, Sean Hunt wrote:
I'm pretty sure that catching up with the records consists of finding
my last report and publishing it.
I wasn't sure if ais523's degree were in there yet, but yes, now I
On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 3:09 PM, Nicholas Evans nich...@gmail.com wrote:
Registrar VACANT 19 Aug 13 19 Aug 13Assumed 150
CoE: omd is the Registrar.
CoE: This report is missing the date when all officer's reports were last
published (required by Rule 2138)
-scshunt
On Oct 19, 2013 10:17 PM, omd c.ome...@gmail.com wrote:
REGISTRAR'S REPORT
1 Aug: scshunt becomes active
7 Aug: scshunt registers
??
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 11:49 AM, Henri Bouchard henrib...@gmail.comwrote:
If the Promotor office is vacant, how are we making and voting on
proposals? From my understanding, the Promotor is responsible for
recieving and distributing proposals. If there is no Promotor, who is
receiving and
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 5:53 PM, Ed Murphy emurph...@socal.rr.com wrote:
This was a reference to a rule from a few years ago: basically, your
voting limit varied based on a rock-paper-scissors type interaction
between your chamber and that of the proposal's author.
The colors refer to the
CoE: omd is Speaker.
On Aug 25, 2013 11:30 AM, Charles Walker charles.w.wal...@gmail.com
wrote:
IADoP'S REPORT
This report: 25 Aug 13
Last report: 18 Aug 13
ELECTED OFFICES
---
Office Holder Since Last report Assumption Salary
On Sat, Aug 24, 2013 at 4:13 PM, Charles Walker
charles.w.wal...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't understand. My reports on Okinawa and Parties have never been late
and neither of these aspects of the game are overly complicated, although
they may be flawed in other ways. The problem we have is not
On Sat, Aug 24, 2013 at 4:33 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
Should have been more specific: trivial avoidance is of course part of
the issue.
A past version was that the only way a proposal could be free was w/o
objection (and common practice at the time was to object to
On Sat, Aug 24, 2013 at 7:31 PM, Charles Walker
charles.w.wal...@gmail.com wrote:
I just think we're having the wrong conversation. We should be talking about
new gameplay ideas.
No. New gameplay ideas are for when the core is working. It is not
right now. The four most important offices are
On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 2:51 PM, Jonathan Rouillard
jonathan.rouill...@gmail.com wrote:
Detail: http://cotc.psychose.ca/viewcase.php?cfj=3386a
Appeal 3386a
Panelist: ais523
Decision:
Panelist:
On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 11:47 PM, Fool fool1...@gmail.com wrote:
On 12/08/2013 3:39 PM, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
I hereby initiate a criminal CFJ alleging that omd, the Registrar, did
violate Rule 1789 by failing to public my Cantus Cygneus in a timely
fashion after receiving it.
I deregister.
On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 12:31 AM, Fool fool1...@gmail.com wrote:
I judge this FALSE / 'cuz it's ambiguous / it's of no effect if it's unclear
/ I judge this FALSE / 'cuz it's ambiguous / it's of no effect if it's
unclear / I judge this FALSE / 'cuz it's ambiguous / it's of no effect if
it's
On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 3:26 AM, James Beirne james.m.bei...@gmail.com wrote:
CFJ: Fool violated Rule 101 by failing to treat Agora right good forever, by
purporting to deregister all other players and subsequently lock them out of
the game.
Judgement: GUILTY/EXILE
I assign the maximum
On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 6:14 AM, Charles Walker
charles.w.wal...@gmail.com wrote:
I suggest the judge file a motion to reconsider (Rule 2318) and assign
the correct judgement, as any ambiguity here is not a good idea.
I think two mutually-contradictory actions should be enough to
consider it
On Aug 7, 2013 9:29 AM, Charles Walker charles.w.wal...@gmail.com wrote:
I hereby resolve the election for the office of Government Waste. The
votes were as follows:
woggle - Machiavelli, woggle, Walker, G.
ais523 - ais523, Roujo
ehird - ehird
Ienpw III - Ienpw III
woggle is the option
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 2:25 AM, Max Schutz maxschutz...@gmail.com wrote:
i mean insane in terms of readability
I don't think that makes what teucer said any less true.
-scshunt
On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 10:12 PM, Fool fool1...@gmail.com wrote:
reasonably soon? If so, that would be reassuring, modulo other concerns;
my main issue here is that unlike any other dictator I can remember, you
have attempted to break the game without describing any such plan.
It means let the
On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 10:25 PM, Fool fool1...@gmail.com wrote:
Okay, that's a bit more plausible. But then it means Sean's messages trying
to get me to pass it was still an intentional trap, unless he wasn't in on
this discussion. I think he's on IRC a fair bit though.
(Just because I'm
On Sat, Aug 3, 2013 at 8:03 PM, woggle woggl...@gmail.com wrote:
You can purportedly keep your dictatorship without purportedly preventing the
normal play of Agora from continuing.
- woggle
Or you can sit around and let us not do anything in -game, letting the
rest of us reconstruct elements
On Sat, Aug 3, 2013 at 8:08 PM, Fool fool1...@gmail.com wrote:
Exactly, I tend to agree with Sean. I'm not sure there is even a normal play
of Agora at this point, independent of my scam.
Oh, I didn't mean I want you to do that, inasmuch as it give us a
better chance of actually defeating your
On Sat, Aug 3, 2013 at 8:16 PM, Charles Walker
charles.w.wal...@gmail.com wrote:
woggle- (1+1)*(1+1+1)*(1+1)*(1+1+1)+1
Ienpw III - 100+100+100+70+1
Yally - 200+200+100
scshunt - (5+5)*100
Roujo - 5*10^5
ais523- 10^9
ehird - G
I pick a random number between 1 and 7 and
On Aug 3, 2013 8:28 PM, Fool fool1...@gmail.com wrote:
On 03/08/2013 8:17 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
For a scam a couple years back where I deregistered everyone, I did so,
fixed the problem, gave myself and helpers patent titles, and rebooted
back to where we were in a couple messages. If it
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 12:40 PM, omd c.ome...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 10:45 PM, Fool fool1...@gmail.com wrote:
Agora pulls a B (AI=3.1, PF=0, disi.)
In rule 1551 (Ratification, Power=3.1), replace the sentence:
Ratifying a public document is secured.
with:
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 1:37 PM, Sean Hunt scsh...@csclub.uwaterloo.ca wrote:
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 1:34 PM, omd c.ome...@gmail.com wrote:
I assume Promotor, just in case.
I hereby distribute the following proposal, initiating the Agoran
Decision of whether to adopt it. For this decision
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 10:33 PM, Fool fool1...@gmail.com wrote:
On 30/07/2013 5:57 PM, Sean Hunt wrote:
I fail to see the alleged biconditional.
As discussed, promise destruction is secured. There is no other
instrument allowing a promise to be destroyed.
How about cashing
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 10:41 PM, Fool fool1...@gmail.com wrote:
On 31/07/2013 10:34 PM, Sean Hunt wrote:
The question is specifically whether _I_ can destroy the promise, and the
promise belongs to the Tree.
You can transfer it to yourself and cash it.
It doesn't work that way anymore
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 12:18 AM, Max Schutz maxschutz...@gmail.com wrote:
sorry for being a pain but in lamens terms he tried to have us all
deregistered and kicked is that it sorry my learning disability makes it a
pain when there are a lot of words surrpounding a point
Yes, but see Rule 101
On Jul 30, 2013 6:35 AM, Fool fool1...@gmail.com wrote:
On 29/07/2013 11:30 PM, Sean Hunt wrote:
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 4:26 PM, Foolfool1...@gmail.com wrote:
The sentences in question are not directly self-referential or even
mutually-referential. This is more of a Curry-flavoured
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 4:26 PM, Fool fool1...@gmail.com wrote:
The sentences in question are not directly self-referential or even
mutually-referential. This is more of a Curry-flavoured confused deputy,
with rule 2337 as the deputy. It says that the author can destroy a promise
with notice
On Jul 26, 2013 4:06 PM, omd c.ome...@gmail.com wrote:
I intend, without objection, to deregister each of:
Pavitra
Kolja
Wooble
I object re Wooble.
I suggest ratifying the most recent report w/o objection.
-scshunt
On Jul 22, 2013 11:52 AM, Tanner Swett swe...@mail.gvsu.edu wrote:
On Jul 22, 2013, at 10:12 AM, Charles Walker wrote:
Thanks! I transfer 50 Yaks to G.. But didn't some players specify (lat,
long) and others specify other
On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 11:47 AM, Charles Walker
charles.w.wal...@gmail.com wrote:
Since I missed the time limit for initiation by a few hours, the
decision was never actually initiated.
I believe the precedent is that the CAN lasts until the action is
performed, as the obligation persists as
On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 12:21 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
I just remember the result, and that's how we've been playing in
general (e.g. if I awarded a Herald award after a time limit,
no one said it failed). I don't remember logic or rules needed to
back it up, so I don't
On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 2:10 PM, omd c.ome...@gmail.com wrote:
Amend Rule 2389 (Ordinary Chamber) to read:
Voting Tokens are a class of assets tracked by the Assessor.
Each Voting Token has an ID number and an Expiration Date, upon
which it is automatically destroyed.
How
On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 2:48 PM, omd c.ome...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 2:34 PM, Sean Hunt scsh...@csclub.uwaterloo.ca
wrote:
How about a timer to expiration?
Could use a timer, but not much point, since there is no reason for an
expiration timer to pause.
More flexibility
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 12:47 PM, Tanner Swett swe...@mail.gvsu.edu wrote:
I use the player ability Activate, targeting myself.
—Machiavelli
In response, I use the *REDACTED* ability Interception, targeting
your ability and omd.
-scshunt
On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 10:16 AM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
A wise move, in making a large scale forum change that happens to
support a current in-game profit, be out of keeping with all agoran
history and usages, as well as the expected functioning of email systems
in general,
On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 4:27 PM, omd c.ome...@gmail.com wrote:
maybe I should make it default only if you're using Gmail? that
sounds like a lot of magic.
This isn't about the carbon copy, which anyone can configure. A default is fine.
On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 4:53 PM, Ed Murphy emurph...@socal.rr.com wrote:
I destroy this promise.
You need notice.
-scshunt
On Jul 16, 2013 4:00 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
I spend 3 VCs to increase Walker's VVLOP by 3.
INEFFECTIVE as all VCs were destroyed.
I vote for Fool in the General Election.
INEFFECTIVE, as the posting period is over. Same for the rest of the
message.
-scshunt
You appear to be correct by about 30 seconds.
-scshunt
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 4:11 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
On Tue, 16 Jul 2013, Sean Hunt wrote:
I vote for Fool in the General Election.
INEFFECTIVE, as the posting period is over. Same for the rest of the message
On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 4:23 PM, omd c.ome...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 3:48 PM, Sean Hunt scsh...@csclub.uwaterloo.ca
wrote:
There is an additional wrinkle in the Agoran context. Rule 101 says
that that no interpretation of Agoran law or binding agreement may
substantially
On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 4:57 PM, John Smith spamba...@yahoo.com wrote:
Did you miss the point of the arguments?
no interpretation of Agoran law or
binding agreement may substantially limit
= interpretations of Agoran law or
binding agreement MAY NOT substantially limit
=
On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 5:01 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
The form of R101 was written at the same time the equity courts were
created, so it would have been possible to say if you agreed to X,
but now think it violates your rights, you could apply for relief
to equity courts.
On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 6:26 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
On Mon, 15 Jul 2013, Sean Hunt wrote:
I vote ENDORSE G. in all Agoran Decisions currently in their voting periods
(yes, even the non-proposal ones).
You might need to retract a previous vote before I buy that last bit
On Jul 13, 2013 12:55 PM, Ørjan Johansen oer...@nvg.ntnu.no wrote:
On Sat, 13 Jul 2013, Tanner Swett wrote:
On Jul 13, 2013, at 4:01 AM, Ørjan Johansen wrote:
On Sat, 13 Jul 2013, omd wrote:
Proposal: The Wisconsin Line-Item Veto (AI=2)
When a Signed Copy is submitted, its Power is
On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 10:04 AM, Benjamin Schultz
ben.dov.schu...@gmail.com wrote:
I disagree. Upholding agreements would be consistent with the Spirit of the
Game. Enforcing them would be a matter for an equity CFJ.
Which were repealed long ago.
-scshunt
On Jul 11, 2013 3:29 PM, John Smith spamba...@yahoo.com wrote:
I attempt to cause Buckybot to object. This fails if Buckybot is not an
Elder.
-Bucky
It also fails if BuckyBot does not exist, as is the case.
-scshunt
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 12:18 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
It's *evaluated* at the end of the voting period, but that could easily
mean at the end of the voting period, evaluate who was the 'current promotor'
at the time the vote was cast. I would personally read it that way.
On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 1:03 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
On Tue, 9 Jul 2013, Sean Hunt wrote:
Ribbon Holdings
===
ok, is this repealed, or isn't it. I've completely lost track.
Me too. I posted for safety's sake.
-scshunt
On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 7:08 PM, Lindar Greenwood
lindartheb...@gmail.com wrote:
I create a promise with the following text, where [N] is
representative of the player cashing this promise:
You would have to put this condition into the text of the promise as
once created the promise is a text
On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 10:00 PM, Fool fool1...@gmail.com wrote:
I guess this is the Agoran version of tits or GTFO?
Well I'm afraid this judg(e)ment cannot be appealed, check the rules.
Well I'm not sure that you made one at all, but that's because I
stopped reading after HER
-scshunt
On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 2:25 AM, Aaron Goldfein aarongoldf...@gmail.com wrote:
I submit the following proposal and pay the Distributability Fee to increase
the Distributability of this proposal by one.
Dislike. Adds a lot of complexity for little value.
-scshunt
On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 10:25 AM, Max Schutz maxschutz...@gmail.com wrote:
I cast my vote for scshunt for the office of harold
Counting as succesful due to only being a spelling error.
-scshunt
On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 2:44 PM, omd c.ome...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 2:32 PM, Jonathan Rouillard
jonathan.rouill...@gmail.com wrote:
Let the order of votes be known as a rank, such as the first person to
have voted on a proposal be the Rank 1 voter, and so forth.
For every
On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 2:31 AM, woggle woggl...@gmail.com wrote:
###
Quantity: 10
Title: Hats
Text:
I change my vote on proposal X to Y, where X and Y are specified
by the casher when cashing this promise.
On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 5:40 PM, omd c.ome...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 5:16 PM, Lindar Greenwood
lindartheb...@gmail.com wrote:
I initiate a CFJ on the following:
The common vernacular for someone who does something is Xor, where a Xor Xes.
By rule 2408 the 'recordkeepor' is
On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 5:43 PM, omd c.ome...@gmail.com wrote:
By the way, that rule is quite broken as it prohibits discussing votes
even after the end of the voting period.
:D
On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 10:08 PM, omd c.ome...@gmail.com wrote:
(dunno why I'm bothering for 50 yaks, I think that reward should be at
least twice as high.)
It is for normal people.
101 - 200 of 1518 matches
Mail list logo
