Yeah, I see what you mean. I just found that in the last land auction, I
just wanted *a* land unit, not even looking at what the individual ones
were, yet I always ended up getting outbid to the point where I felt it
wasn't worth it to try to bid anymore. Besides, most players were simply
biddi
On Thu, 12 Apr 2018, Reuben Staley wrote:
> This gag is already old, but the point is that I could go on. Separate
> auctions encourage more competitive play. Imagine if these were all lots in
> the same auction. Every bid would be a shot in the dark. You couldn't
> strategize and attempt to get
Here's my argument on why separate land auctions are better:
Imagine that land unit 1 has a Rank 4 facility on it, but land unit 2
has nothing. More people will bid on land unit 1. This is completely
justified since land unit 1 is definitely more valuable than land unit
2. So someone might get
Haven't read any of the other posts yet, but I would say that I would
probably prefer it to be a single auction.
On 4/12/2018 4:53 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
Reading R2004, it looks like it was *supposed* to be a single auction?
That's definitely not how the announcement below reads, and not how
I was to choose 5 land units and set them as separate lots in the same
auction. Even if two of the auctions had valid lots, both of them fail
to have the necessary amount of lots for the situation. Therefore, by my
interpretation, both auctions are invalid.
On 4/12/2018 3:18 PM, Kerim Aydin wr
Do you suppose you started one (the first accurate one?) or do you think the
whole
thing failed? Not sure myself...
On Thu, 12 Apr 2018, Reuben Staley wrote:
> Because it's clear that I have not used the correct Agoran Term, I amend my
> statement:
>
> This is simply a case of Trigon writing
Because it's clear that I have not used the correct Agoran Term, I amend
my statement:
This is simply a case of Trigon writing down a thing that e didn't
actually mean and everyone else not realizing until after the passing of
the proposal. I wanted there to be five auctions, but clearly the p
You CANNOT do that. The rule doesn't allow you to. So you failed to
initiate five. You said you did in the announcement, but you didn't.
Maybe you initiated one (the first accurate one, AUCTION 2), or maybe
the collection was so ambiguous it all failed.
On Thu, 12 Apr 2018, Reuben Staley wro
This is simply a case of Trigon writing down a thing that e didn't
actually mean and everyone else not realizing until after the passing of
the proposal. I wanted there to be five auctions, but clearly the passed
text does not reflect my intent. I, working under the assumption that
the rules ca
On Thu, 12 Apr 2018, Reuben Staley wrote:
> > I terminate the ongoing land auction
>
> I think this intent FAILS as there are in fact 5 going on right now.
By R2004 you only CAN initiate 1 each week. At least that's my reading of
"each Agoran week... the Cartographer CAN and SHALL initiate an
Reading R2004, it looks like it was *supposed* to be a single auction?
That's definitely not how the announcement below reads, and not how
people have been bidding, so I don't know what actually happened.
(R2004 only allows 1 auction to be started each week).
I'm also looking for anything that
> I terminate the ongoing land auction
I think this intent FAILS as there are in fact 5 going on right now.
On Thu, Apr 12, 2018, 14:33 Aris Merchant <
thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I agree with G.'s interpretation. I believe that Rule 2549's statement
> that "An Auction also CANN
Oops, you're right. You know, it seems pretty likely that those ones
just never began in the first place.
-Aris
On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 1:38 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
>
> These are independent auctions so only the incorrect ones were just
> terminated I think? (Auctions 1,3,4).
>
> On Thu, 12 Ap
These are independent auctions so only the incorrect ones were just
terminated I think? (Auctions 1,3,4).
On Thu, 12 Apr 2018, Aris Merchant wrote:
> I agree with G.'s interpretation. I believe that Rule 2549's statement
> that "An Auction also CANNOT be initiated unless the Auctioneer is
> abl
My interpretation:
You describe a particular lot as a "white land unit at ". You do not have
a "white land unit at " to transfer, so anyone can terminate the auction.
If no one terminates it, I'm not sure whether you can satisfy your obligation
to transfer by transferring a black land u
I'd say that these data are less relevant than the coordinates of the land
units, so it would not invalidate it. But that may just be me but wanting
to do work to fix it.
On Thu, Apr 12, 2018, 11:24 Corona wrote:
> Wait, I just looked it up (in your own report) and:
>
> AUCTION 1: The lot is t
16 matches
Mail list logo
