Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Proto: Return of the Son of Property Magnate

On 5/10/07, Benjamin Schultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: We could tinker with that proto as needed to say that an owner can own property, and that a trinket is a kind of property. I'd go into more detail, but I seem to have misplaced Maud's original proto at the moment. I'll have to get it from a

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Proto: Return of the Son of Property Magnate

On 5/10/07, Benjamin Schultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: We could tinker with that proto as needed to say that an owner can own property, and that a trinket is a kind of property. I'd go into more detail, but I seem to have misplaced Maud's original proto at the moment. I'll have to get it from a

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: Short Logical Ruleset

Benjamin Schultz wrote: Proto: One Champ To Rule Em All Delete the following text from R1922:       (d)  Champion, to be awarded to players who win the game. Any issues with this? - Benjamin Schultz KE3OM

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Proto: Return of the Son of Property Magnate

On May 10, 2007, at 7:48 PM, Zefram wrote: Benjamin Schultz wrote: I don't see "Trinket" or "Owner" in the SLR distributed today. Maud's proto, which started this thread. Duh. There it is. We could tinker with that proto as needed to say that an owner can own property, and that a trinke

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Proto: Return of the Son of Property Magnate

Benjamin Schultz wrote: >I don't see "Trinket" or "Owner" in the SLR distributed today. Maud's proto, which started this thread. -zefram

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: proposal: precedence takes precedence

Benjamin Schultz wrote: >Second draft. Looks fine to me. -zefram

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: votes on Proposals 4958-4969

Benjamin Schultz wrote: >I like this phrasing. Any comments, Zefram, on the phrase "widely >spoken Human language"? It's woolly. Pick a specific minimum number of native speakers and then we'll be getting into feasible territory. Wikipedia lists 35 languages with more than 30 million native s

DIS: Re: BUS: proposal: precedence takes precedence

OscarMeyr wrote: >i. All players have the obligation to abide by all the rules >currently in effect, in the form in which they are currently >in effect. The whole point of re-writing R101 to talk about contract law was so that Agoran Rules could be treated as a specific case

DIS: Winning through threats

I'm working out a concept on the fly here, to make another way to win. This'll need quite a bit of fleshing out. A player is eligible to win the game if all of the following conditions are true: * E is at least three different types of threats. (Needs enough elements to be interesting.) *

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Proto: Return of the Son of Property Magnate

On May 9, 2007, at 3:15 AM, Zefram wrote: Benjamin Schultz wrote: There are two relevant classes of entities: Owners and Property. Pick some term other than "Owner". That word is already used to refer to the entity that owns a particular Trinket. -zefram I don't see "Trinket" or "Owner"

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: proposal: precedence takes precedence

Second draft. Proto: The Obedience Clause (AI = 3) On May 8, 2007, at 9:23 PM, Benjamin Schultz wrote: Amend Rule 101 as follows: * Retitle it to "Agoran Rights, Privileges, and Obligations". * Increment the lower-case Roman numerals used to index paragraphs by 1. * insert before the new par

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: Short Logical Ruleset

Proto: One Champ To Rule Em All Delete the following text from R1922: (d) Champion, to be awarded to players who win the game. Any issues with this? - Benjamin Schultz KE3OM OscarMeyr

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: votes on Proposals 4958-4969

On May 9, 2007, at 6:35 PM, Roger Hicks wrote: Perhaps "widely spoken human language" or "commonly used human language"? I think both of those wordings would eliminate "I just made up a language where the name of each player translates to Bear". At least it should hold up under CfJ I like

DIS: Re: BUS: Inhuman rights campaign

On May 9, 2007, at 9:39 PM, Ed Murphy wrote: I intend, with Agoran consent, to make the Pineapple Partnership the holder of the Office of Registrar. I intend, with Agoran consent, to make Human Point Two the holder of the Office of International Associate Director of Personnel. I'm tempted to

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Proto: Bring Back Executors

Ed Murphy wrote: Zefram wrote: Ed Murphy wrote: "If an executee is prohibiting from performing an action, each of its executors is prohibited from performing the action on behalf of that executee." That's not the sentence I have trouble with. I was talking about Holding executorship o

Re: DIS: personhood

On 5/9/07, Zefram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Just wondering, Maud, as you've called for an interpretation of "person" that excludes partnerships, do you accept any non-human persons? For example, is Koko the gorilla a person? Koko has at times b

Re: DIS: Contracts & Partnerships

Ah, thanks. That had me confused. BobTHJ On 5/10/07, Kerim Aydin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Zefram wrote: > > Can someone point me to the proposals that established the contracts for the > > current partnerships? Just researching a bit of recent history. > > Contracts are not created by propo

DIS: Contracts & Partnerships

Zefram wrote: > > Can someone point me to the proposals that established the contracts for the > > current partnerships? Just researching a bit of recent history. > > Contracts are not created by proposal. They're created by mutual > agreement between players. For the announcement of the first p

Re: DIS: Contracts & Partnerships

Thanks! On 5/10/07, Zefram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Roger Hicks wrote: >Can someone point me to the proposals that established the contracts for the >current partnerships? Just researching a bit of recent history. Contracts are not created by proposal. They're created by mutual agreement be

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Proto: Bring Back Executors

Zefram wrote: Ed Murphy wrote: "If an executee is prohibiting from performing an action, each of its executors is prohibited from performing the action on behalf of that executee." That's not the sentence I have trouble with. I was talking about Holding executorship of another entity d

Re: DIS: Contracts & Partnerships

Roger Hicks wrote: >Can someone point me to the proposals that established the contracts for the >current partnerships? Just researching a bit of recent history. Contracts are not created by proposal. They're created by mutual agreement between players. For the announcement of the first partners

DIS: Contracts & Partnerships

Can someone point me to the proposals that established the contracts for the current partnerships? Just researching a bit of recent history. BobTHJ