I concur with Aris, this was a bit harsh, but I do concur with the sentiment. ---- Publius Scribonius Scholasticus p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com
> On Sep 6, 2017, at 8:15 PM, Nic Evans <nich...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On 09/06/17 19:05, Cuddle Beam wrote: >> >From a speech act theory standpoint, any speech act already encodes >> >conditionals (that the preconditions match, that the way I invoke it >> >performs it, that others recognizes the previous two points, that everyone >> >assumes genuine intent). Allowing more conditionals to be included is a >> >natural extension. >> >> I doubt enough people will be familiar with speech act theory to conclude >> from that that we can do conditional actions here on Agora. > > The idea of linguistics, and all other social sciences, is that they describe > things people naturally do. You don't need to learn the theory to use speech > acts. > >> >> >Your conditional doesn't meet it's own requirements. This arguably requires >> >me to look through all CFJs, to make sure the doctrine hasn't been >> >overturned >> >> lol, yes! That proves my point! >> >> With that, how is anyone supposed to know that it hasn't been overturned or >> not in order to know that we can even do it in the first place without that >> dredging? We're using conditionals without even knowing if we can actually >> do them or not! If they were in rules, it would be much more clear. >> >> >For someone concerned about implicit rules, you don't show much regard for >> >explicit ones. >> >> I've mentioned before that its less punishing for me to whacked with a >> correction with what I've missed than to dredge through everything to see if >> just in case I've missed something. > > Since you lack either empathy or theory of mind and only react to personal > damages: > > I pledge to vote AGAINST on all proposals created or pended by Cuddle Beam. > > I pledge to Object to all intentions by Cuddle Beam that I can object to. > > I pledge to not acknowledge any messages Cuddle Beam sends to a-d, or to > respond in a-d to anything CB does. > > I pledge to give a trust token and 5 shinies (as soon as possible) to any > other player who also performs the above three pledges, except Cuddle Beam. > >> >> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 1:53 AM, Nic Evans <nich...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On 09/06/17 18:16, Cuddle Beam wrote: >>> Note: we have explicit conditional voting, but not conditional explicit >>> action-doing in general. >>> >>> I'm in favor of conditional action-doing in general because it's another >>> useful tool for doing stuff (...and the rules are silent on the issue). >> >> Voting has an explicit conditional mechanism because it's a delayed action. >> The conditional for a vote doesn't need to be interpretable at time of >> declaration, but instead at time of resolution. >> >> Other things don't need explicit mechanisms because we don't generally care >> about the manner of an action. The exceptions being listed in the rules, >> when something need be 'by announcement' or with a previously announced >> intent. >> >> From a speech act theory standpoint, any speech act already encodes >> conditionals (that the preconditions match, that the way I invoke it >> performs it, that others recognizes the previous two points, that everyone >> assumes genuine intent). Allowing more conditionals to be included is a >> natural extension. >> >>> >>> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 12:58 AM, Aris Merchant >>> <thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> If there are no regulations, no part of this message beyond this >>> paragraph has any effect. >>> >>> I determine the regulations for the recent tournament to be in title >>> T1-2017, or, if that title name is invalid, 1-2017. If I am Regkeepor, >>> this is the official designation for that title; otherwise, I deputize >>> for the Regkeepor to assign this designation. >>> >>> I then assign the ID T1-2017-1 (or, if that is invalid, 1-2017-1) to >>> the only regulation in that title. If I am still not Regkeepor, I >>> deputize for Regkeepor to do so, and then repeat the actions attempted >>> in the previous paragraph. >>> >>> In accordance with Rule 2464, I repeal each regulation in title >>> T1-2017 (or, if invalid, 1-2017). >>> >>> -Aris >>> >> >> > >
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
