DIS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] Short Logical Ruleset - 22 Mar 2024

On 3/22/24 14:35, Janet Cobb via agora-official wrote: > > Rule 2689/0 (Power=3.0) > Offices > > Delegate is an Office switch with possible values of "None" and > any active player, and default value of "None".

DIS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] Short Logical Ruleset - 12 Mar 2023

On Sat, Mar 11, 2023 at 11:02 PM Janet Cobb via agora-official < agora-offic...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > THE SHORT LOGICAL RULESET > ... I declare the ritual number to be 2!

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] Short Logical Ruleset - 23 May 2020

On second thought I'm happy to leave that finger unpointed On Wed, Jun 3, 2020 at 8:59 PM Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion wrote: > On Wed, Jun 3, 2020 at 12:20 AM Rebecca via agora-discussion > wrote: > > > > On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 10:39 AM Jason Cobb via agora-official <

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] Short Logical Ruleset - 23 May 2020

On Wed, Jun 3, 2020 at 12:20 AM Rebecca via agora-discussion wrote: > > On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 10:39 AM Jason Cobb via agora-official < > agora-offic...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > > THE SHORT LOGICAL RULESET > > > > These rulesets are also online at http://agoranomic.org/ruleset/ > > > > Date of

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] Short Logical Ruleset: Eighth Week of 2019

Oh, another thing. https://agoranomic.org/ruleset is updated now with the data about February 22nd's rulesets. On 3/1/19 9:34 PM, Reuben Staley wrote: I worded my response poorly. When I said to check the archives on agoranomic.org I really meant the mailman archives. The mail-archive

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] Short Logical Ruleset: Eighth Week of 2019

I worded my response poorly. When I said to check the archives on agoranomic.org I really meant the mailman archives. The mail-archive archives are the ones that it falls through on. It is possible to remove the login requirement -- I know because of other mailman lists I've subscribed to do

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] Short Logical Ruleset: Eighth Week of 2019

On Thu, 28 Feb 2019 at 04:11, Reuben Staley wrote: > The logical rulesets are very long documents. Lots of times, the rulesets > slip through because of that. Check the archives on agoranomic.com. When I > get around to updating the ruleset site, it'll also be there. I'm sure you mean

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] Short Logical Ruleset: Eighth Week of 2019

The logical rulesets are very long documents. Lots of times, the rulesets slip through because of that. Check the archives on agoranomic.com. When I get around to updating the ruleset site, it'll also be there. -- Trigon On Wed, Feb 27, 2019, 21:07 James Cook I don't see this message in the

DIS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] Short Logical Ruleset: Eighth Week of 2019

I don't see this message in the public archive at https://www.mail-archive.com/agora-official@agoranomic.org/maillist.html or at https://www.mail-archive.com/agora-official@agoranomic.org/maillist.html . Same for Trigon's FLR publication around the same time. Does anyone know why?

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] Short Logical Ruleset: Second Week of 2019

Indeed it is. I blame the gmail client. I was out of town at that point and didn't think I was going to be back in town before the week was up. I apologize for this misinformation; it was not intentional. I'm going to submit a revision in a few minutes. On 1/11/19 7:32 PM, Ørjan Johansen

DIS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] Short Logical Ruleset: Second Week of 2019

On Fri, 11 Jan 2019, Reuben Staley wrote: THE SHORT LOGICAL RULESET I think that's a bit shorter than you intended. Greetings, Ørjan.

DIS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] Short Logical Ruleset -- December 7

Has anyone pointed out this error yet: > * Having a Thesis pass peer-review and be granted a Degree based >on its merit: 20 shinies.

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] Short Logical Ruleset

On Sat, 18 Nov 2017 at 21:43 ATMunn wrote: > Unofficial CoE: Miscelaneous is spelled wrong, it should be miscellaneous. Noted, but I want to redo these categories anyhow.

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] Short Logical Ruleset

Agreed - I've just been trying to get the dates right in my head, so was noting it. On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 23:01 Gaelan Steele wrote: > Meh. I don’t believe that’s rule-mandated information; don’t think it’s > worth resubmitting for that. > > Gaelan > > On Jun 22, 2017, at

DIS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] Short Logical Ruleset

Meh. I don’t believe that’s rule-mandated information; don’t think it’s worth resubmitting for that. Gaelan > On Jun 22, 2017, at 11:00 PM, Quazie wrote: > > > On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 22:58 Gaelan Steele > wrote: > THE SHORT

DIS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] Short Logical Ruleset

On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 22:58 Gaelan Steele wrote: > THE SHORT LOGICAL RULESET > > Most Recent Ruleset Change Recorded: > Adoption of Proposal 7857, 22 June 2017 Note: it's the 23rd utc

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] Short Logical Ruleset

On Tuesday, October 25, 2016, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > Oops, yes, I just copy/pasted 2139 text from the recent proposal > and didn't notice it was a space short. Will fix for next copy. > > Extra spaces come when I'm fixing indenting probably, should probably > add the

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] Short Logical Ruleset

Oops, yes, I just copy/pasted 2139 text from the recent proposal and didn't notice it was a space short. Will fix for next copy. Extra spaces come when I'm fixing indenting probably, should probably add the filter to my script. Thanks on both counts! Never worry about even smallest details

DIS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] Short Logical Ruleset

Hello G., thanks for the new {S,F}LR. Unfortunately, I'm a bit of a formatting nazi sometimes, so here's a pedantic complaint: I can't help but notice you've changed the indentation of R2139 since the last ruleset; it's now indented by one space less than all other rules. Also, you've added a

DIS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] Short Logical Ruleset

> Rule 2139/8 (Power=2) > The Registrar [snip] > The Registrar's duties and abilities also include: > > * Changing the publicity of a forum, as described in Rule 478. > > * Publishing Cantus Cygnei and Writs of FAGE as described in >Rule 1789. NB: Cross-referencing

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] Short Logical Ruleset

On Sat, 7 Jun 2014, Henri Bouchard wrote: So will I. -scshunt Replying without quoting at all is rather annoying, especially when messages are coming in a day late in random order... Greetings, Ørjan.

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] Short Logical Ruleset

On Jun 7, 2014 11:32 AM, Henri Bouchard henrib...@gmail.com wrote: CoE: Rule 2138 was amended on 6 May 2014 so that any instance of Interstellar in its text and title was replaced with Interoffice. -Henri I'm voting Henri for IADoP. -Henri

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] Short Logical Ruleset

So will I. -scshunt

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] Short Logical Ruleset

It's right here. You supported it: On Tue, May 6, 2014 at 5:02 PM, omd c.ome...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, May 6, 2014 at 4:21 PM, Henri Bouchard henrib...@gmail.com wrote: I intend, with Agoran Consent, to cause Rule 2138 to amend itself by replacing any instance of Interstellar in its text and

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] Short Logical Ruleset

Oh. -Henri

DIS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] Short Logical Ruleset

On Sat, Jun 22, 2013 at 5:12 PM, woggle woggl...@gmail.com wrote: THE SHORT LOGICAL RULESET CoE: In rule 1871, the word Jusiticar should be CotC. -scshunt

DIS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] Short Logical Ruleset

On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 10:20 PM, woggle woggl...@gmail.com wrote: THE SHORT LOGICAL RULESET Are you going to keep the web ruleset at https://www.eecs.berkeley.edu/~charles/agora/current_flr.txt updated?

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] Short Logical Ruleset

On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 9:54 PM, omd c.ome...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 10:53 PM, woggle woggl...@gmail.com wrote: THE SHORT LOGICAL RULESET It would be nice if this document contained a link to the online FLR... which apparently I never did. Oops. I thought I started doing

DIS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] Short Logical Ruleset

On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 10:53 PM, woggle woggl...@gmail.com wrote: THE SHORT LOGICAL RULESET It would be nice if this document contained a link to the online FLR... which apparently I never did. Oops. I thought I started doing that at some point.

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] Short Logical Ruleset (Part 2 of 2)

On 5 January 2011 07:01, Taral tar...@gmail.com wrote: If there is no objection, yes, it can be raised. I object to 1 megabyte messages; perhaps 512 kilobytes at the maximum?

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] Short Logical Ruleset (Part 2 of 2)

On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 05:33, Elliott Hird penguinoftheg...@googlemail.com wrote: On 5 January 2011 07:01, Taral tar...@gmail.com wrote: If there is no objection, yes, it can be raised. I object to 1 megabyte messages; perhaps 512 kilobytes at the maximum? I find this to be a reasonable

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] Short Logical Ruleset (Part 2 of 2)

On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 9:08 AM, Roger Hicks pidge...@gmail.com wrote: I find this to be a reasonable compromise BobTHJ Someone make a proposal? -- Taral tar...@gmail.com Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you.     -- Unknown

Re: BUS: Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] Short Logical Ruleset (Part 2 of 2)

I'd vote for it. On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 9:45 AM, Elliott Hird penguinoftheg...@googlemail.com wrote: Proposal: All Clogged Up (AI 1, II 0, co-author BobTHJ) { H. Distributor Taral is requested to increase the size limit of the messages sent to the Agora mailing lists hosted at agoranomic.org

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] Short Logical Ruleset (Part 2 of 2)

On 4 January 2011 07:32, Roger Hicks pidge...@gmail.com wrote: Could the size limit just be increased to 1MB? That would solve the ruleset issue and most other large messages that get hung. In today's age it's hard to find an e-mail client that won't handle 1MB messages That's like

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] Short Logical Ruleset (Part 2 of 2)

On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 11:32 PM, Roger Hicks pidge...@gmail.com wrote: Could the size limit just be increased to 1MB? That would solve the ruleset issue and most other large messages that get hung. In today's age it's hard to find an e-mail client that won't handle 1MB messages If there

DIS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] Short Logical Ruleset (Part 2 of 2)

Way to bypass the size limit. =) ~ Roujo On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 9:41 PM, Geoffrey Spear geoffsp...@gmail.com wrote: [Two part SLR]

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] Short Logical Ruleset (Part 2 of 2)

On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 11:30 PM, Jonathan Rouillard jonathan.rouill...@gmail.com wrote: Way to bypass the size limit. =) ~ Roujo Way to bypass a limit that does not need to be bypassed, as e could have just asked Taral?

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Rulekeepor] Short Logical Ruleset (Part 2 of 2)

On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 22:19, omd c.ome...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 11:30 PM, Jonathan Rouillard jonathan.rouill...@gmail.com wrote: Way to bypass the size limit. =) ~ Roujo Way to bypass a limit that does not need to be bypassed, as e could have just asked Taral? Could the