Re: DIS: Quick question about rule 1728

[Nicholas Evans]

Messages to a-d don't count for deregistration, iirc, but you can make a
filter for your own name and just object when anyone attempts the
deregistration.

On Oct 19, 2017 4:17 PM, "Cuddle Beam"  wrote:

> Random message to keep self alive.
>
> On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 4:05 PM, ATMunn .  wrote:
>
>> Ah, I see. Okay.
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 9:46 AM, Alexis Hunt  wrote:
>>
>>> Nope, read the rest of the rule. This rule only provides a definition of
>>> what those terms mean; it does not apply anywhere where the terms aren't
>>> used.
>>>
>>> We used to have a rule implying that you could weaken the conditions
>>> (e.g. perform independent actions dependently, or perform an action with
>>> more support or without more fewer objections than required) but it was
>>> removed.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Oct 19, 2017, 09:11 ATMunn .,  wrote:
>>>
 Rule 1728 states the following:

>  A rule which purports to allow a person (the performer) to
>   perform an action by a set of one or more of the following
>   methods (N is 1 unless otherwise specified):
>
>1. Without N Objections, where N is a positive integer no
>   greater than 8.  ("Without Objection" is shorthand for this
>   method with N = 1.)
>2. With N Supporters, where N is a positive integer.  ("With
>   Support" is shorthand for this method with N = 1.)
>3. With N Agoran Consent, where N is an integer multiple of 0.1
>   with a minimum of 1.
>4. With Notice.
>5. With T Notice, where T is a time period.
>
>   [snip]
>
> ​Now, the sentence at the top basically says that a rule can allow a
 person to perform an action by one of the methods in the list. However, I
 was wondering whether or not a person can perform an action by one of those
 methods WITHOUT a rule requiring em to, specifically With Notice/With T
 Notice.​

>>>
>>
>

Re: DIS: Quick question about rule 1728

[VJ Rada]

You're definitely alive, CB.

On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 8:17 AM, Cuddle Beam  wrote:
> Random message to keep self alive.
>
> On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 4:05 PM, ATMunn .  wrote:
>>
>> Ah, I see. Okay.
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 9:46 AM, Alexis Hunt  wrote:
>>>
>>> Nope, read the rest of the rule. This rule only provides a definition of
>>> what those terms mean; it does not apply anywhere where the terms aren't
>>> used.
>>>
>>> We used to have a rule implying that you could weaken the conditions
>>> (e.g. perform independent actions dependently, or perform an action with
>>> more support or without more fewer objections than required) but it was
>>> removed.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Oct 19, 2017, 09:11 ATMunn .,  wrote:

 Rule 1728 states the following:
>
>  A rule which purports to allow a person (the performer) to
>   perform an action by a set of one or more of the following
>   methods (N is 1 unless otherwise specified):
>
>1. Without N Objections, where N is a positive integer no
>   greater than 8.  ("Without Objection" is shorthand for this
>   method with N = 1.)
>2. With N Supporters, where N is a positive integer.  ("With
>   Support" is shorthand for this method with N = 1.)
>3. With N Agoran Consent, where N is an integer multiple of 0.1
>   with a minimum of 1.
>4. With Notice.
>5. With T Notice, where T is a time period.
>
>   [snip]

 Now, the sentence at the top basically says that a rule can allow a
 person to perform an action by one of the methods in the list. However, I
 was wondering whether or not a person can perform an action by one of those
 methods WITHOUT a rule requiring em to, specifically With Notice/With T
 Notice.
>>
>>
>



-- 
>From V.J. Rada

Re: DIS: Quick question about rule 1728

[Cuddle Beam]

Random message to keep self alive.

On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 4:05 PM, ATMunn .  wrote:

> Ah, I see. Okay.
>
> On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 9:46 AM, Alexis Hunt  wrote:
>
>> Nope, read the rest of the rule. This rule only provides a definition of
>> what those terms mean; it does not apply anywhere where the terms aren't
>> used.
>>
>> We used to have a rule implying that you could weaken the conditions
>> (e.g. perform independent actions dependently, or perform an action with
>> more support or without more fewer objections than required) but it was
>> removed.
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 19, 2017, 09:11 ATMunn .,  wrote:
>>
>>> Rule 1728 states the following:
>>>
  A rule which purports to allow a person (the performer) to
   perform an action by a set of one or more of the following
   methods (N is 1 unless otherwise specified):

1. Without N Objections, where N is a positive integer no
   greater than 8.  ("Without Objection" is shorthand for this
   method with N = 1.)
2. With N Supporters, where N is a positive integer.  ("With
   Support" is shorthand for this method with N = 1.)
3. With N Agoran Consent, where N is an integer multiple of 0.1
   with a minimum of 1.
4. With Notice.
5. With T Notice, where T is a time period.

   [snip]

 ​Now, the sentence at the top basically says that a rule can allow a
>>> person to perform an action by one of the methods in the list. However, I
>>> was wondering whether or not a person can perform an action by one of those
>>> methods WITHOUT a rule requiring em to, specifically With Notice/With T
>>> Notice.​
>>>
>>
>

Re: DIS: Quick question about rule 1728

[ATMunn .]

Ah, I see. Okay.

On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 9:46 AM, Alexis Hunt  wrote:

> Nope, read the rest of the rule. This rule only provides a definition of
> what those terms mean; it does not apply anywhere where the terms aren't
> used.
>
> We used to have a rule implying that you could weaken the conditions (e.g.
> perform independent actions dependently, or perform an action with more
> support or without more fewer objections than required) but it was removed.
>
> On Thu, Oct 19, 2017, 09:11 ATMunn .,  wrote:
>
>> Rule 1728 states the following:
>>
>>>  A rule which purports to allow a person (the performer) to
>>>   perform an action by a set of one or more of the following
>>>   methods (N is 1 unless otherwise specified):
>>>
>>>1. Without N Objections, where N is a positive integer no
>>>   greater than 8.  ("Without Objection" is shorthand for this
>>>   method with N = 1.)
>>>2. With N Supporters, where N is a positive integer.  ("With
>>>   Support" is shorthand for this method with N = 1.)
>>>3. With N Agoran Consent, where N is an integer multiple of 0.1
>>>   with a minimum of 1.
>>>4. With Notice.
>>>5. With T Notice, where T is a time period.
>>>
>>>   [snip]
>>>
>>> ​Now, the sentence at the top basically says that a rule can allow a
>> person to perform an action by one of the methods in the list. However, I
>> was wondering whether or not a person can perform an action by one of those
>> methods WITHOUT a rule requiring em to, specifically With Notice/With T
>> Notice.​
>>
>

Re: DIS: Quick question about rule 1728

[Alexis Hunt]

Nope, read the rest of the rule. This rule only provides a definition of
what those terms mean; it does not apply anywhere where the terms aren't
used.

We used to have a rule implying that you could weaken the conditions (e.g.
perform independent actions dependently, or perform an action with more
support or without more fewer objections than required) but it was removed.

On Thu, Oct 19, 2017, 09:11 ATMunn .,  wrote:

> Rule 1728 states the following:
>
>>  A rule which purports to allow a person (the performer) to
>>   perform an action by a set of one or more of the following
>>   methods (N is 1 unless otherwise specified):
>>
>>1. Without N Objections, where N is a positive integer no
>>   greater than 8.  ("Without Objection" is shorthand for this
>>   method with N = 1.)
>>2. With N Supporters, where N is a positive integer.  ("With
>>   Support" is shorthand for this method with N = 1.)
>>3. With N Agoran Consent, where N is an integer multiple of 0.1
>>   with a minimum of 1.
>>4. With Notice.
>>5. With T Notice, where T is a time period.
>>
>>   [snip]
>>
>> ​Now, the sentence at the top basically says that a rule can allow a
> person to perform an action by one of the methods in the list. However, I
> was wondering whether or not a person can perform an action by one of those
> methods WITHOUT a rule requiring em to, specifically With Notice/With T
> Notice.​
>

DIS: Quick question about rule 1728

[ATMunn .]

Rule 1728 states the following:

>  A rule which purports to allow a person (the performer) to
>   perform an action by a set of one or more of the following
>   methods (N is 1 unless otherwise specified):
>
>1. Without N Objections, where N is a positive integer no
>   greater than 8.  ("Without Objection" is shorthand for this
>   method with N = 1.)
>2. With N Supporters, where N is a positive integer.  ("With
>   Support" is shorthand for this method with N = 1.)
>3. With N Agoran Consent, where N is an integer multiple of 0.1
>   with a minimum of 1.
>4. With Notice.
>5. With T Notice, where T is a time period.
>
>   [snip]
>
> ​Now, the sentence at the top basically says that a rule can allow a
person to perform an action by one of the methods in the list. However, I
was wondering whether or not a person can perform an action by one of those
methods WITHOUT a rule requiring em to, specifically With Notice/With T
Notice.​