I am pretty annoyed that nch did the exact same scam I was aiming for (I
was co-conspiring with two other players for days to pull it off but it
didn't get off the ground before nch's attempt at the exact same thing...).
On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 8:05 AM omd via agora-business <
agora-busin...@agora
On 6/21/20 4:08 PM, Kerim Aydin via agora-business wrote:
>
> On 6/21/2020 1:05 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>>
>> On 6/21/2020 12:45 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
>>> -5 Falsifian <= HONOURLESS WORM
>>
>> 1. This ain't right.
>
> Erm, since I just sent the above to Business for the N
On Sun, Oct 20, 2019 at 6:45 PM Nch wrote:
>
> ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
> On Sunday, October 20, 2019 8:43 PM, Nch wrote:
>
> > ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
> > On Sunday, October 20, 2019 5:01 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@uw.edu wrote:
> >
> > > Herald's Weekly report
> > > Date of Last Re
Isn’t this ISIDTID?
> On Feb 18, 2019, at 11:03 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
>
> On 2/17/2019 1:34 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>> Herald’s Weekly report
>> Date of Last Report: 04 Feb 2018
>> Date of This Report: 17 Feb 2019
>
> I state what is necessary to be Rewarded for the above-referenced report.
I think R217 should say that every person CAN always call 2 CFJs
free per week, no matter what. And get rid of AP.
On Mon, 11 Dec 2017, Alex Smith wrote:
> On Mon, 2017-12-11 at 01:07 +, Alexis Hunt wrote:
> > Another argument in favour of making CFJ calls less fundamentally
> > conditional
On Sun, 2017-12-10 at 20:17 -0500, ATMunn wrote:
> On 12/10/2017 8:12 PM, Alex Smith wrote:
> > On Mon, 2017-12-11 at 01:07 +, Alexis Hunt wrote:
> > > Another argument in favour of making CFJ calls less fundamentally
> > > conditional.
> >
> > Perhaps we should pragmatise CFJs? If you call th
This is how excess cases work, presumably for this exact reason.
On Sun, Dec 10, 2017, 20:13 Alex Smith, wrote:
> On Mon, 2017-12-11 at 01:07 +, Alexis Hunt wrote:
> > Another argument in favour of making CFJ calls less fundamentally
> > conditional.
>
> Perhaps we should pragmatise CFJs? If
What if the Arbitor just refused all CFJs? Or none of them?
On 12/10/2017 8:12 PM, Alex Smith wrote:
On Mon, 2017-12-11 at 01:07 +, Alexis Hunt wrote:
Another argument in favour of making CFJ calls less fundamentally
conditional.
Perhaps we should pragmatise CFJs? If you call them, they a
On Mon, 2017-12-11 at 01:07 +, Alexis Hunt wrote:
> Another argument in favour of making CFJ calls less fundamentally
> conditional.
Perhaps we should pragmatise CFJs? If you call them, they always go
through unless explicitly refused by the Arbitor for not having
payment.
This would allow "p
On Sun, Dec 10, 2017, 19:50 Alex Smith, wrote:
> On Mon, 2017-12-11 at 00:17 +, Aris Merchant wrote:
> > If this proposal is not already pending, I pend it for 1 AP.
> This works as intended even without the conditional, under our current
> rulings; you can't pay to pend a proposal if it's al
On Mon, 2017-12-11 at 00:17 +, Aris Merchant wrote:
> If this proposal is not already pending, I pend it for 1 AP.
This works as intended even without the conditional, under our current
rulings; you can't pay to pend a proposal if it's already pending.
> If I have not already done so, I call t
If this proposal is not already pending, I pend it for 1 AP. If I have not
already done so, I call this case for 5 shinies. If Alexis has been awarded
a card, I point my finger at the Referee.
-Aris
On Sun, Dec 10, 2017 at 4:13 PM ATMunn wrote:
> What would be an example of a "basic" conditiona
What would be an example of a "basic" conditional action?
On 12/10/2017 7:04 PM, Aris Merchant wrote:
On Sun, Dec 10, 2017 at 4:00 PM Alex Smith wrote:
On Mon, 2017-12-11 at 10:55 +1100, Madeline wrote:
On 2017-12-11 03:54, Corona wrote:
I cause ACU to transfer to me 5-(no. of Agora's shini
On Mon, 2017-12-11 at 10:55 +1100, Madeline wrote:
> On 2017-12-11 03:54, Corona wrote:
> > I cause ACU to transfer to me 5-(no. of Agora's shinies) shinies,
> > destroying ten times that number of bills.
> "Number of Agora's shinies" isn't something I'm expected to know. ;_;
It strikes me that it
On Sun, Dec 10, 2017 at 4:00 PM Alex Smith wrote:
> On Mon, 2017-12-11 at 10:55 +1100, Madeline wrote:
> > On 2017-12-11 03:54, Corona wrote:
> > > I cause ACU to transfer to me 5-(no. of Agora's shinies) shinies,
> > > destroying ten times that number of bills.
> > "Number of Agora's shinies" is
"Number of Agora's shinies" isn't something I'm expected to know. ;_;
On 2017-12-11 03:54, Corona wrote:
I cause ACU to transfer to me 5-(no. of Agora's shinies) shinies,
destroying ten times that number of bills.
Then, I spend those shinies on gaining favor with the Party holding
Economy, and
I didn't modify the subject line when I replied, fwiw.
On Tue, 23 Nov 2010, ais523 wrote:
> > Additionally, I don't see why everyone's annoyed with me for not judging
> > this sooner.
My apologies; when you set up your subject-line trick you indicated you
were pretty sure it was true, so I thought you had a judgement all thought
out and set and were
On Mon, 2010-11-22 at 20:33 -0800, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> > > DISCLAIMER: The below is based on the interpretation that ehird was
> > > not a Rebel; CFJ 2897's judgment is ambiguous and under
> > > reconsideration. If it is determined that e was a Rebel, ehird was
> > > the 5th Rebel, Wooble was the
19 matches
Mail list logo