Re: BUS: Re: DIS: trustees
On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 11:53 PM, Charles Reiss [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 10:48 PM, Chester Mealer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm about to be busy and ehird gave me an idea. [...] 8. Any party with support of a majority of trustees and without objection from cdm014 may make an announcement about how the player cdm014 will act if e does not declare intent to act otherwise by announcing cdm014's intent to act in the form of cdm014 action the action must be one cdm014 is capable of making according to the rules and laws of agora. I'm buying a house and moving soon but I didn't want to deregister and I wanted to be able to remain an active participant and so I think this is an interesting idea, if I announce my intent to act according to the announcements made by the partnership. There's no reason for this to be a partnership as far as I can tell. The legislation on acting-on-behalf of first-class persons is pretty flimsy, but given the ease with which people can construct duplicate *sigh* s/legislation/regulations (mostly game custom and CFJs)/ -- so, no, cdm014, you didn't miss some piece in the rules about it. And I could've sworn I edited that piece. -woggle
Re: BUS: Re: DIS: trustees
On 6/23/08, Charles Reiss [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I call for judgement on the following: * It is possible for ehird to cause woggle to vote by announcing 'On behalf of woggle: woggle retracts eir votes on proposal 5568 and votes AGAINST x 6 on proposal 5568'. ~~ Oh, my... It really ought not to be possible to continually exploit the same paradox to get a win.
Re: BUS: Re: DIS: trustees
2008/6/23 comex [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Oh, my... It really ought not to be possible to continually exploit the same paradox to get a win. I guess woggle should be Plagiarist too. ehird
Re: BUS: Re: DIS: trustees
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 9:19 AM, comex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 6/23/08, Charles Reiss [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I call for judgement on the following: * It is possible for ehird to cause woggle to vote by announcing 'On behalf of woggle: woggle retracts eir votes on proposal 5568 and votes AGAINST x 6 on proposal 5568'. ~~ Oh, my... It really ought not to be possible to continually exploit the same paradox to get a win. You saw that e is arguing for a judgement of FALSE, right? -root
DIS: trustees
I'm about to be busy and ehird gave me an idea. I would announce intent to act according to the announcements unless I specify otherwise of the following when someone creates a partnership with the following clauses: 1. this Partnership shall be known as the cdm014 board of trustees. 2. No player may join this partnership if 5 first class players are already party to this contract. 3. Only first class players may join this contract, they may do so by announcing eir intent to join. 4. Parties to this contract are known as trustees. 5. No party may amend this contract without support of cdm014 and support of a majority of trustees. 6. All trustees shall act in the best interest of cdm014 when acting according to the terms of this contract. 7. this partnership shall act to ensure that cdm014 and this partnership fulfill all obligations and duties under Agoran rules and laws. 8. Any party with support of a majority of trustees and without objection from cdm014 may make an announcement about how the player cdm014 will act if e does not declare intent to act otherwise by announcing cdm014's intent to act in the form of cdm014 action the action must be one cdm014 is capable of making according to the rules and laws of agora. I'm buying a house and moving soon but I didn't want to deregister and I wanted to be able to remain an active participant and so I think this is an interesting idea, if I announce my intent to act according to the announcements made by the partnership. -- Chester Mealer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
