Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Got some new toys.
Never!
On 6/12/2018 12:32 PM, Benjamin Schultz wrote:
Stop it, stop it! This sketch is too silly!
OscarMeyr
On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 9:48 AM, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote:
I actually knew that already, so I'm not sure what I was thinking when I
wrote that. Thanks for the correction, though.
-twg
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On June 12, 2018 12:35 PM, Corona wrote:
FYI: The Spivak pronoun nominative is "e", not "ey" (reflecting "he" and
"she"), though you can, of course, use any pronouns you want.
I favor the CFJ called by V.J. Rada in this thread.
On Tuesday, June 12, 2018, Timon Walshe-Grey m...@timon.red wrote:
I become a party to the contract "Sillyness by contract".
I act on behalf of V.J. Rada to perform the following actions: {
Destroy 1 apple to move V.J. Rada to (0, -1).
Destroy 1 apple to move V.J. Rada to (-1, -1).
Transfer all liquid assets from the mine at (-1, -1) to V.J. Rada.
Transfer 3 stone and 2 ore from V.J. Rada to Trigon.
}
This meets the requirement of being extremely silly because it is only
necessary due to a minor grammatical error on Trigon's part, and it
meets
the requirement of not harming V.J. Rada's standing in the game
significantly because eir only loss from these actions is 2 apples
(which
ey already have plenty of) and the right to transfer assets from a
preserved facility before next Friday (which ey already have enough
assets
not to have much need of).
-twg
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On June 12, 2018 10:31 AM, Ned Strange edwardostra...@gmail.com wrote:
it doesn't, do it again
On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 8:25 PM, Reuben Staley
reuben.sta...@gmail.com
wrote:
Could you guys let me do one thing in this game without pointing
out
how I
messed up?
Okay, okay. Here's a flimsy argument for why this works:
I could only possibly transfer items to myself from a facility on a
land
unit I'm on. Therefore, "that unit" should mean "the unit I'm on"
since
that's the only option for transferring. Therefore, the attempt
succeeds.
On Tue, Jun 12, 2018, 04:13 Timon Walshe-Grey m...@timon.red wrote:
On June 12, 2018 8:25 AM, Reuben Staley reuben.sta...@gmail.com
wrote:
I destroy a coin to make (-2, -1) black and switch the
alternating
type.
I transfer the mine on that unit's resources to myself.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe this fails, because (-2,
-1)
doesn't have a mine on it, and wasn't where you were standing
anyway. I
think you meant to reference the mine at (-1, -1), but I can't
come
up with
a parsing where "that unit" refers to anything other than (-2,
-1).
-twg
--
From V.J. Rada
--
~Corona
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Got some new toys.
Stop it, stop it! This sketch is too silly!
OscarMeyr
On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 9:48 AM, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote:
> I actually knew that already, so I'm not sure what I was thinking when I
> wrote that. Thanks for the correction, though.
>
> -twg
>
>
> ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
>
> On June 12, 2018 12:35 PM, Corona wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > FYI: The Spivak pronoun nominative is "e", not "ey" (reflecting "he" and
> >
> > "she"), though you can, of course, use any pronouns you want.
> >
> > I favor the CFJ called by V.J. Rada in this thread.
> >
> > On Tuesday, June 12, 2018, Timon Walshe-Grey m...@timon.red wrote:
> >
> > > I become a party to the contract "Sillyness by contract".
> > >
> > > I act on behalf of V.J. Rada to perform the following actions: {
> > >
> > > Destroy 1 apple to move V.J. Rada to (0, -1).
> > >
> > > Destroy 1 apple to move V.J. Rada to (-1, -1).
> > >
> > > Transfer all liquid assets from the mine at (-1, -1) to V.J. Rada.
> > >
> > > Transfer 3 stone and 2 ore from V.J. Rada to Trigon.
> > >
> > > }
> > >
> > > This meets the requirement of being extremely silly because it is only
> > >
> > > necessary due to a minor grammatical error on Trigon's part, and it
> meets
> > >
> > > the requirement of not harming V.J. Rada's standing in the game
> > >
> > > significantly because eir only loss from these actions is 2 apples
> (which
> > >
> > > ey already have plenty of) and the right to transfer assets from a
> > >
> > > preserved facility before next Friday (which ey already have enough
> assets
> > >
> > > not to have much need of).
> > >
> > > -twg
> > >
> > > ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
> > >
> > > On June 12, 2018 10:31 AM, Ned Strange edwardostra...@gmail.com wrote:
> > >
> > > > it doesn't, do it again
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 8:25 PM, Reuben Staley
> reuben.sta...@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Could you guys let me do one thing in this game without pointing
> out
> > > > >
> > > > > how I
> > > >
> > > > > messed up?
> > > > >
> > > > > Okay, okay. Here's a flimsy argument for why this works:
> > > > >
> > > > > I could only possibly transfer items to myself from a facility on a
> > > > >
> > > > > land
> > > >
> > > > > unit I'm on. Therefore, "that unit" should mean "the unit I'm on"
> since
> > > > >
> > > > > that's the only option for transferring. Therefore, the attempt
> > > > >
> > > > > succeeds.
> > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Jun 12, 2018, 04:13 Timon Walshe-Grey m...@timon.red wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > On June 12, 2018 8:25 AM, Reuben Staley reuben.sta...@gmail.com
> > > > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > > > I destroy a coin to make (-2, -1) black and switch the
> alternating
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > type.
> > > >
> > > > > > > I transfer the mine on that unit's resources to myself.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe this fails, because (-2,
> -1)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > doesn't have a mine on it, and wasn't where you were standing
> > > > > >
> > > > > > anyway. I
> > > >
> > > > > > think you meant to reference the mine at (-1, -1), but I can't
> come
> > > > > >
> > > > > > up with
> > > >
> > > > > > a parsing where "that unit" refers to anything other than (-2,
> -1).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -twg
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > >
> > > > From V.J. Rada
> >
> > --
> >
> > ~Corona
>
>
>
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Got some new toys.
I actually knew that already, so I'm not sure what I was thinking when I wrote
that. Thanks for the correction, though.
-twg
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On June 12, 2018 12:35 PM, Corona wrote:
>
>
> FYI: The Spivak pronoun nominative is "e", not "ey" (reflecting "he" and
>
> "she"), though you can, of course, use any pronouns you want.
>
> I favor the CFJ called by V.J. Rada in this thread.
>
> On Tuesday, June 12, 2018, Timon Walshe-Grey m...@timon.red wrote:
>
> > I become a party to the contract "Sillyness by contract".
> >
> > I act on behalf of V.J. Rada to perform the following actions: {
> >
> > Destroy 1 apple to move V.J. Rada to (0, -1).
> >
> > Destroy 1 apple to move V.J. Rada to (-1, -1).
> >
> > Transfer all liquid assets from the mine at (-1, -1) to V.J. Rada.
> >
> > Transfer 3 stone and 2 ore from V.J. Rada to Trigon.
> >
> > }
> >
> > This meets the requirement of being extremely silly because it is only
> >
> > necessary due to a minor grammatical error on Trigon's part, and it meets
> >
> > the requirement of not harming V.J. Rada's standing in the game
> >
> > significantly because eir only loss from these actions is 2 apples (which
> >
> > ey already have plenty of) and the right to transfer assets from a
> >
> > preserved facility before next Friday (which ey already have enough assets
> >
> > not to have much need of).
> >
> > -twg
> >
> > ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
> >
> > On June 12, 2018 10:31 AM, Ned Strange edwardostra...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > > it doesn't, do it again
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 8:25 PM, Reuben Staley reuben.sta...@gmail.com
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Could you guys let me do one thing in this game without pointing out
> > > >
> > > > how I
> > >
> > > > messed up?
> > > >
> > > > Okay, okay. Here's a flimsy argument for why this works:
> > > >
> > > > I could only possibly transfer items to myself from a facility on a
> > > >
> > > > land
> > >
> > > > unit I'm on. Therefore, "that unit" should mean "the unit I'm on" since
> > > >
> > > > that's the only option for transferring. Therefore, the attempt
> > > >
> > > > succeeds.
> > >
> > > > On Tue, Jun 12, 2018, 04:13 Timon Walshe-Grey m...@timon.red wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On June 12, 2018 8:25 AM, Reuben Staley reuben.sta...@gmail.com
> > > > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > > > I destroy a coin to make (-2, -1) black and switch the alternating
> > > > > >
> > > > > > type.
> > >
> > > > > > I transfer the mine on that unit's resources to myself.
> > > > >
> > > > > Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe this fails, because (-2, -1)
> > > > >
> > > > > doesn't have a mine on it, and wasn't where you were standing
> > > > >
> > > > > anyway. I
> > >
> > > > > think you meant to reference the mine at (-1, -1), but I can't come
> > > > >
> > > > > up with
> > >
> > > > > a parsing where "that unit" refers to anything other than (-2, -1).
> > > > >
> > > > > -twg
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > From V.J. Rada
>
> --
>
> ~Corona
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Got some new toys.
FYI: The Spivak pronoun nominative is "e", not "ey" (reflecting "he" and
"she"), though you can, of course, use any pronouns you want.
I favor the CFJ called by V.J. Rada in this thread.
On Tuesday, June 12, 2018, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote:
> I become a party to the contract "Sillyness by contract".
>
> I act on behalf of V.J. Rada to perform the following actions: {
>
> Destroy 1 apple to move V.J. Rada to (0, -1).
>
> Destroy 1 apple to move V.J. Rada to (-1, -1).
>
> Transfer all liquid assets from the mine at (-1, -1) to V.J. Rada.
>
> Transfer 3 stone and 2 ore from V.J. Rada to Trigon.
>
> }
>
> This meets the requirement of being extremely silly because it is only
> necessary due to a minor grammatical error on Trigon's part, and it meets
> the requirement of not harming V.J. Rada's standing in the game
> significantly because eir only loss from these actions is 2 apples (which
> ey already have plenty of) and the right to transfer assets from a
> preserved facility before next Friday (which ey already have enough assets
> not to have much need of).
>
> -twg
>
>
> ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
>
> On June 12, 2018 10:31 AM, Ned Strange wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > it doesn't, do it again
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 8:25 PM, Reuben Staley reuben.sta...@gmail.com
> wrote:
> >
> > > Could you guys let me do one thing in this game without pointing out
> how I
> > >
> > > messed up?
> > >
> > > Okay, okay. Here's a flimsy argument for why this works:
> > >
> > > I could only possibly transfer items to myself from a facility on a
> land
> > >
> > > unit I'm on. Therefore, "that unit" should mean "the unit I'm on" since
> > >
> > > that's the only option for transferring. Therefore, the attempt
> succeeds.
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jun 12, 2018, 04:13 Timon Walshe-Grey m...@timon.red wrote:
> > >
> > > > On June 12, 2018 8:25 AM, Reuben Staley reuben.sta...@gmail.com
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I destroy a coin to make (-2, -1) black and switch the alternating
> type.
> > > > >
> > > > > I transfer the mine on that unit's resources to myself.
> > > >
> > > > Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe this fails, because (-2, -1)
> > > >
> > > > doesn't have a mine on it, and wasn't where you were standing
> anyway. I
> > > >
> > > > think you meant to reference the mine at (-1, -1), but I can't come
> up with
> > > >
> > > > a parsing where "that unit" refers to anything other than (-2, -1).
> > > >
> > > > -twg
> >
> > --
> >
> > From V.J. Rada
>
>
>
--
~Corona
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Got some new toys.
I'm not offended.
On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 8:51 PM, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote:
> I wasn't aware of that definition of "silly" (I can't find it in the FLR, so
> I assume the rule was repealed). But in any case, I think common sense
> indicates that your own assessment of what "significantly harms" you is more
> accurate than mine, so since you disagree, I believe that means my actions on
> your behalf fail.
>
> I didn't mean to cause any offense, I just thought it was amusing. :)
>
> -twg
>
>
> ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
>
> On June 12, 2018 10:47 AM, Ned Strange wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> I call a CFJ with the statement "The four below actions are each
>>
>> extremely silly, and none significantly harm my standing in the game".
>>
>> None of them are remotely silly. Silly in an Agoran context is a
>>
>> common-law term of art related to Silly proposals. Even if not, no
>>
>> ordinary meaning of the word silly encompasses these game actions. And
>>
>> also, even if losing two apples doesn't harm me, losing 3 stone, two
>>
>> ore and 2 apples does. The actions must all be evaluated seperately,
>>
>> so even if the first three actions work, the fourth should not.
>>
>> Anyway, significantly should be interpreted as "not de minimis", and
>>
>> any asset loss is more than a minimal effect on my standing in the
>>
>> game.
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 8:39 PM, Timon Walshe-Grey m...@timon.red wrote:
>>
>> > I become a party to the contract "Sillyness by contract".
>> >
>> > I act on behalf of V.J. Rada to perform the following actions: {
>> >
>> > Destroy 1 apple to move V.J. Rada to (0, -1).
>> >
>> > Destroy 1 apple to move V.J. Rada to (-1, -1).
>> >
>> > Transfer all liquid assets from the mine at (-1, -1) to V.J. Rada.
>> >
>> > Transfer 3 stone and 2 ore from V.J. Rada to Trigon.
>> >
>> > }
>> >
>> > This meets the requirement of being extremely silly because it is only
>> > necessary due to a minor grammatical error on Trigon's part, and it meets
>> > the requirement of not harming V.J. Rada's standing in the game
>> > significantly because eir only loss from these actions is 2 apples (which
>> > ey already have plenty of) and the right to transfer assets from a
>> > preserved facility before next Friday (which ey already have enough assets
>> > not to have much need of).
>> >
>> > -twg
>> >
>> > ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
>> >
>> > On June 12, 2018 10:31 AM, Ned Strange edwardostra...@gmail.com wrote:
>> >
>> > > it doesn't, do it again
>> > >
>> > > On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 8:25 PM, Reuben Staley reuben.sta...@gmail.com
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > Could you guys let me do one thing in this game without pointing out
>> > > > how I
>> > > >
>> > > > messed up?
>> > > >
>> > > > Okay, okay. Here's a flimsy argument for why this works:
>> > > >
>> > > > I could only possibly transfer items to myself from a facility on a
>> > > > land
>> > > >
>> > > > unit I'm on. Therefore, "that unit" should mean "the unit I'm on" since
>> > > >
>> > > > that's the only option for transferring. Therefore, the attempt
>> > > > succeeds.
>> > > >
>> > > > On Tue, Jun 12, 2018, 04:13 Timon Walshe-Grey m...@timon.red wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > > On June 12, 2018 8:25 AM, Reuben Staley reuben.sta...@gmail.com
>> > > > > wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > > I destroy a coin to make (-2, -1) black and switch the alternating
>> > > > > > type.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > I transfer the mine on that unit's resources to myself.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe this fails, because (-2, -1)
>> > > > >
>> > > > > doesn't have a mine on it, and wasn't where you were standing
>> > > > > anyway. I
>> > > > >
>> > > > > think you meant to reference the mine at (-1, -1), but I can't come
>> > > > > up with
>> > > > >
>> > > > > a parsing where "that unit" refers to anything other than (-2, -1).
>> > > > >
>> > > > > -twg
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > >
>> > > From V.J. Rada
>>
>> --
>>
>> From V.J. Rada
>
>
--
>From V.J. Rada
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Got some new toys.
I wasn't aware of that definition of "silly" (I can't find it in the FLR, so I
assume the rule was repealed). But in any case, I think common sense indicates
that your own assessment of what "significantly harms" you is more accurate
than mine, so since you disagree, I believe that means my actions on your
behalf fail.
I didn't mean to cause any offense, I just thought it was amusing. :)
-twg
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On June 12, 2018 10:47 AM, Ned Strange wrote:
>
>
> I call a CFJ with the statement "The four below actions are each
>
> extremely silly, and none significantly harm my standing in the game".
>
> None of them are remotely silly. Silly in an Agoran context is a
>
> common-law term of art related to Silly proposals. Even if not, no
>
> ordinary meaning of the word silly encompasses these game actions. And
>
> also, even if losing two apples doesn't harm me, losing 3 stone, two
>
> ore and 2 apples does. The actions must all be evaluated seperately,
>
> so even if the first three actions work, the fourth should not.
>
> Anyway, significantly should be interpreted as "not de minimis", and
>
> any asset loss is more than a minimal effect on my standing in the
>
> game.
>
> On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 8:39 PM, Timon Walshe-Grey m...@timon.red wrote:
>
> > I become a party to the contract "Sillyness by contract".
> >
> > I act on behalf of V.J. Rada to perform the following actions: {
> >
> > Destroy 1 apple to move V.J. Rada to (0, -1).
> >
> > Destroy 1 apple to move V.J. Rada to (-1, -1).
> >
> > Transfer all liquid assets from the mine at (-1, -1) to V.J. Rada.
> >
> > Transfer 3 stone and 2 ore from V.J. Rada to Trigon.
> >
> > }
> >
> > This meets the requirement of being extremely silly because it is only
> > necessary due to a minor grammatical error on Trigon's part, and it meets
> > the requirement of not harming V.J. Rada's standing in the game
> > significantly because eir only loss from these actions is 2 apples (which
> > ey already have plenty of) and the right to transfer assets from a
> > preserved facility before next Friday (which ey already have enough assets
> > not to have much need of).
> >
> > -twg
> >
> > ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
> >
> > On June 12, 2018 10:31 AM, Ned Strange edwardostra...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > > it doesn't, do it again
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 8:25 PM, Reuben Staley reuben.sta...@gmail.com
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Could you guys let me do one thing in this game without pointing out
> > > > how I
> > > >
> > > > messed up?
> > > >
> > > > Okay, okay. Here's a flimsy argument for why this works:
> > > >
> > > > I could only possibly transfer items to myself from a facility on a land
> > > >
> > > > unit I'm on. Therefore, "that unit" should mean "the unit I'm on" since
> > > >
> > > > that's the only option for transferring. Therefore, the attempt
> > > > succeeds.
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Jun 12, 2018, 04:13 Timon Walshe-Grey m...@timon.red wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On June 12, 2018 8:25 AM, Reuben Staley reuben.sta...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I destroy a coin to make (-2, -1) black and switch the alternating
> > > > > > type.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I transfer the mine on that unit's resources to myself.
> > > > >
> > > > > Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe this fails, because (-2, -1)
> > > > >
> > > > > doesn't have a mine on it, and wasn't where you were standing anyway.
> > > > > I
> > > > >
> > > > > think you meant to reference the mine at (-1, -1), but I can't come
> > > > > up with
> > > > >
> > > > > a parsing where "that unit" refers to anything other than (-2, -1).
> > > > >
> > > > > -twg
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > From V.J. Rada
>
> --
>
> From V.J. Rada
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Got some new toys.
Sorry. :P I just figured it would be more helpful to speak up now instead of risking the possibility that the Treasuror would rule against it in eir next report without pointing it out to anyone. I don't know whether your argument is valid (or even whether mine was in the first place). -twg ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On June 12, 2018 10:25 AM, Reuben Staley wrote: > Could you guys let me do one thing in this game without pointing out how I > messed up? > > Okay, okay. Here's a flimsy argument for why this works: > > I could only possibly transfer items to myself from a facility on a land unit > I'm on. Therefore, "that unit" should mean "the unit I'm on" since that's the > only option for transferring. Therefore, the attempt succeeds. > > On Tue, Jun 12, 2018, 04:13 Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: > >> On June 12, 2018 8:25 AM, Reuben Staley wrote: >> >>> I destroy a coin to make (-2, -1) black and switch the alternating type. >>> >>> I transfer the mine on that unit's resources to myself. >> >> Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe this fails, because (-2, -1) doesn't >> have a mine on it, and wasn't where you were standing anyway. I think you >> meant to reference the mine at (-1, -1), but I can't come up with a parsing >> where "that unit" refers to anything other than (-2, -1). >> >> -twg
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Got some new toys.
it doesn't, do it again On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 8:25 PM, Reuben Staley wrote: > Could you guys let me do one thing in this game without pointing out how I > messed up? > > Okay, okay. Here's a flimsy argument for why this works: > > I could only possibly transfer items to myself from a facility on a land > unit I'm on. Therefore, "that unit" should mean "the unit I'm on" since > that's the only option for transferring. Therefore, the attempt succeeds. > > On Tue, Jun 12, 2018, 04:13 Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: > >> On June 12, 2018 8:25 AM, Reuben Staley wrote: >> >> > I destroy a coin to make (-2, -1) black and switch the alternating type. >> > >> > I transfer the mine on that unit's resources to myself. >> >> Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe this fails, because (-2, -1) >> doesn't have a mine on it, and wasn't where you were standing anyway. I >> think you meant to reference the mine at (-1, -1), but I can't come up with >> a parsing where "that unit" refers to anything other than (-2, -1). >> >> -twg >> -- >From V.J. Rada
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Got some new toys.
Could you guys let me do one thing in this game without pointing out how I messed up? Okay, okay. Here's a flimsy argument for why this works: I could only possibly transfer items to myself from a facility on a land unit I'm on. Therefore, "that unit" should mean "the unit I'm on" since that's the only option for transferring. Therefore, the attempt succeeds. On Tue, Jun 12, 2018, 04:13 Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: > On June 12, 2018 8:25 AM, Reuben Staley wrote: > > > I destroy a coin to make (-2, -1) black and switch the alternating type. > > > > I transfer the mine on that unit's resources to myself. > > Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe this fails, because (-2, -1) > doesn't have a mine on it, and wasn't where you were standing anyway. I > think you meant to reference the mine at (-1, -1), but I can't come up with > a parsing where "that unit" refers to anything other than (-2, -1). > > -twg >
