Re: DIS: Re: BUS: CFJs 3697 and 3698 assigned
I believe it was my idea, from when we were cleaning up some minigame re-enactment (I think it was PAoAM), so that we could converge the rules without worrying about whether or not the original proposal actually worked or not. AFIAK it hasn’t been used since, although I think it needs to stay in the rules to prevent the Rulekeepor from being obligated to figure it out. Gaelan > On Jan 30, 2019, at 3:48 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > Huh - I've never seen that used and forgot or didn't know it existed. I > meant it in the wholly informal sense of "now the coin balances are the same > regardless of how I got there". > >> On 1/30/2019 2:50 PM, Gaelan Steele wrote: >> It’s not clear if you meant for it to be one, but this isn’t a convergence >> in the rules sense—you need to designate it as one with 3 Consent. >> Gaelan >>> On Jan 30, 2019, at 1:28 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: >>> >>> >>> Coin Convergence: >>> I earn 5 coins for judging CFJ 3698. >>> On 1/30/2019 1:16 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: CFJ: Prior to calling this CFJ, G. earned 5 coins for judging CFJ 3698. Arguments: R2496 reads in part: > A player CAN earn the set of assets associated with a reward > condition exactly once in a timely fashion each time e fulfills it > by stating how many assets e earns as a result of this action. [...] > * Judging a CFJ that e was assigned to without violating a time >limit to do so: 5 coins. There's no public requirement whatsoever for "stating". Therefore I note as evidence, under penalty of No Faking, that immediately after submitting my timely judgement for CFJ 3698 (and confirming that it had reached the lists) but before beginning to compose this message, I stated out loud to myself that I earned 5 coins for the judgement.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: CFJs 3697 and 3698 assigned
Huh - I've never seen that used and forgot or didn't know it existed. I meant it in the wholly informal sense of "now the coin balances are the same regardless of how I got there". On 1/30/2019 2:50 PM, Gaelan Steele wrote: It’s not clear if you meant for it to be one, but this isn’t a convergence in the rules sense—you need to designate it as one with 3 Consent. Gaelan On Jan 30, 2019, at 1:28 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: Coin Convergence: I earn 5 coins for judging CFJ 3698. On 1/30/2019 1:16 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: CFJ: Prior to calling this CFJ, G. earned 5 coins for judging CFJ 3698. Arguments: R2496 reads in part: A player CAN earn the set of assets associated with a reward condition exactly once in a timely fashion each time e fulfills it by stating how many assets e earns as a result of this action. [...] * Judging a CFJ that e was assigned to without violating a time limit to do so: 5 coins. There's no public requirement whatsoever for "stating". Therefore I note as evidence, under penalty of No Faking, that immediately after submitting my timely judgement for CFJ 3698 (and confirming that it had reached the lists) but before beginning to compose this message, I stated out loud to myself that I earned 5 coins for the judgement.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: CFJs 3697 and 3698 assigned
> On Jan 30, 2019, at 1:39 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > I wouldn't feel that you had to wait > more than say 48 hours before resorting to an arbitrary/random assignment > (And if you want, as a policy, to encourage more frequent favoring, that's > totally cool but you'll probably have to remind people to be more > proactive). Thanks for the tip—that makes sense. My only reason for delaying in assigning these CFJs was that I was obviously a highly interested party, and I didn’t want there to be any suggestion of my exercising undue influence over how they are determined. So I thought I’d wait for someone to express some interest before assigning it randomly in this specific circumstance.
