Or just like not at all ever. On Tuesday, July 11, 2017, Cuddle Beam <cuddleb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I have to agree tbh, and I regret a degree what I've done, given that I'm > aware that there was a better way to do it. I should've sent that message > as a hypothetical case to a-d an claim the would-be merit through there > rather than a-b. > > But oh well, next time. > > On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 6:55 PM, Josh T <draconicdarkn...@gmail.com > <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','draconicdarkn...@gmail.com');>> wrote: > >> While I haven't been paying attention to your scams of late due to real >> life drama and bad timing (family issues; I'm flying to go be with them for >> a month starting Thursday), I feel that your welcome with such tactics has >> worn thin. >> >> 天火狐 >> >> On 10 July 2017 at 12:17, Cuddle Beam <cuddleb...@gmail.com >> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','cuddleb...@gmail.com');>> wrote: >> >>> Yes, they are definitely contradictory at times. I've mentioned before >>> that I don't have any objective measure to decide what interpretation is >>> best, so I just use one which does the most interesting thing for me in >>> hopes that a enough audience agrees with it or a CFJ about it is judged in >>> my favor, because I don't know which among the myriad of perfectly >>> reasonable interpretations I will be judged by. >>> >>> If you, nichdel and PSS, had opposite (and contradictory) >>> interpretations on something, I would believe that both are equally valid. >>> Now, I have many interpretations just like those in mind at any given time >>> (and many contradictory), and I have no tiebreaker. And even then, my own >>> opinion about what interpretation is best matters very little when it comes >>> to resolving my own actions, because in the end, its the audience who is my >>> judge - it's all of you who have the final word. >>> >>> And you all don't unanimously agree with each other. So of course that >>> the interpretations I use won't agree with each other either. >>> >>> So I just shrug and use the ones that are more convenient for me in >>> hopes that the audience would agree to it (whether I personally agree to it >>> or not matters little, just my judgement of whether others might be >>> convinced of it or not. Which in this case was woefully inaccurate, most >>> likely due to that I just winged it). >>> >>> On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 5:05 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus < >>> p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com >>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com');>> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> They also seem to contradict each other at times. >>>> >>>> On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 09:55 Nicholas Evans <nich...@gmail.com >>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','nich...@gmail.com');>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> The argument 'I wouldn't do all that work in order to fake' is >>>>> fallacious. Of course you would if you thought you could get away with it. >>>>> >>>>> I think you constantly violate no faking by purposely misconstruing >>>>> the rules to have meanings favorable to you, even when those meanings are >>>>> nonesense. Then you plead ignorance when someone calls it out, or you stop >>>>> responding and move onto the next bad faith attempt. >>>>> >>>>> I'd accept one or two peculiar interpretations from a single player as >>>>> good faith, but you've purported many unlikely beliefs, and somehow they >>>>> all favor your goals. >>>>> >>>>> Cut the bullshit out. >>>>> >>>>> On Jul 10, 2017 03:43, "Cuddle Beam" <cuddleb...@gmail.com >>>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','cuddleb...@gmail.com');>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> ...I totally understand why it could be be appropriate to card me for >>>>>> trying the stick-up, but @grok, I don't understand the card part of if I >>>>>> *fail* to deputize for Surveyor just yet. If the argument is that using a >>>>>> loophole to try to get the office is "bad", shouldn't I be carded >>>>>> *regardless* of if I fail or succeed? How does succeeding to get the >>>>>> office >>>>>> somehow spare me of getting a card? (Either way, I'll accept the carding, >>>>>> but I just want to understand that part better) >>>>>> >>>>>> All that aside, well, yeah. I accept all charges (except for the no >>>>>> faking part, I wouldn't have written that wall of text if I didn't >>>>>> believe >>>>>> it had at least a slither of chance of working. Or, on the flip side, I >>>>>> wouldn't have written a huge wall of text with the aim to get a card when >>>>>> just writing something way shorter is way easier. I totally get that it >>>>>> feels heinous to try to pull off a stick-up like this though, but then >>>>>> again, if it worked, it could all just pass quickly if people simply vote >>>>>> FOR lol. But yeah, pretty evil.) >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 4:09 AM, grok (caleb vines) < >>>>>> grokag...@gmail.com >>>>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','grokag...@gmail.com');>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sun, Jul 9, 2017 at 8:53 PM, Aris Merchant >>>>>>> <thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com >>>>>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com');>> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> > I point my finger at CuddleBeam for violation of Rule 2471. I argue >>>>>>> > that air actions were so implausible that e could not reasonably >>>>>>> have >>>>>>> > believed them, and that at the very least e is absurdly negligent. >>>>>>> > Given that this is having a huge impact on the players and the game >>>>>>> > (look at the deregistrations), I recommend a sentence of a Red >>>>>>> Card. >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > -Aris >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > On Sun, Jul 9, 2017 at 6:50 PM, Nic Evans <nich...@gmail.com >>>>>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','nich...@gmail.com');>> wrote: >>>>>>> >> I would support, with a fair implementation. >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> I point my finger at CB for failure to treat Agora Right Good >>>>>>> Forever. >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> I previously deregistered because I thought my explosive response >>>>>>> to CB >>>>>>> >> was my own issue, that e needed time to adjust, and I needed time >>>>>>> to >>>>>>> >> cool off. But I'm now convinced that's not the case. Everything >>>>>>> CB does >>>>>>> >> disrespects the time, effort, and feelings of every other player. >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> I challenge people who are on the fence about this to point to a >>>>>>> single >>>>>>> >> time that CB has considered other players, or done necessary >>>>>>> work, or >>>>>>> >> done anything at all to make the game better or more enjoyable to >>>>>>> anyone >>>>>>> >> but emself. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> With these two finger points in play now, I'd like to make a quick >>>>>>> reminder that I recommended Cuddlebeam be carded if eir attempt to >>>>>>> deputize as Surveyor fails[1]. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [1]: https://www.mail-archive.com/agora-business@agoranomic.org/m >>>>>>> sg28819.html >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -grok >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>> >> >
