On Nov 25, 2007 10:48 PM, Kerim Aydin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> I object to all of the below. -Goethe
NttPF.
-root
On Sun, 25 Nov 2007, Josiah Worcester wrote:
> Surely I can deputise for the past several months? :p
Actually, I'm not sure you can. There's only a single requirement
out there, which is for me to publish a report this month (the
fact that it's all "screwed up" as you put it after the last N
mon
I object to all of the below. -Goethe
On Sun, 25 Nov 2007, Josiah Worcester wrote:
> I create a contest which is a private dependent contract.
> I create a contest which is a private dependent contract.
> I create a contest which is a private dependent contract.
> I create a contest which is a
On Sunday 25 November 2007 22:42:57 Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> On Sun, 25 Nov 2007, Josiah Worcester wrote:
> > I intend to deputise to publish this report (if there are any errors, let
me
> > know):
>
> The time limit has not passed for me publishing this report. I became
> the holder of this offi
On Sun, 25 Nov 2007, Josiah Worcester wrote:
> I intend to deputise to publish this report (if there are any errors, let me
> know):
The time limit has not passed for me publishing this report. I became
the holder of this office in November, so I have until the end of November.
If I have failed
On Sunday 25 November 2007 22:21:23 Ian Kelly wrote:
> On Nov 25, 2007 2:12 PM, Josiah Worcester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Minister Without Portfolio, held by
> > Human Point Two, Murphy, root, Eris
> > Above won before Minister Without Portfolio, so no win-date recorded.
> > r
On Nov 25, 2007 2:12 PM, Josiah Worcester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Minister Without Portfolio, held by
> Human Point Two, Murphy, root, Eris
> Above won before Minister Without Portfolio, so no win-date recorded.
> root (Nov 24, 2007, 23:29:13) (in debate, see CFJ 1787 and CFJ 1
On Sunday 25 November 2007 20:20:24 Ed Murphy wrote:
> pikhq wrote:
>
> > Without two objections, I intend to form a contract for the purposes of a
> > contest.
>
> I object to all your intents to form a contest within the past 24
> hours.
>
> The AFO objects to all your intents to form a conte
On Sunday 25 November 2007 20:19:14 Ed Murphy wrote:
> pikhq wrote:
>
> > On Sunday 25 November 2007 17:07:15 Ed Murphy wrote:
>
> >> I also feel obliged to point out that I object to the repeal of
> >> monthly decay. (I proposed monthly decay in the first place, to
> >> prod Zefram to stop hoar
The AFO objects to all your intents to form a contest within the
past 24 hours.
Whoops, forgot non-first-class players can't do that.
pikhq wrote:
On Sunday 25 November 2007 17:07:15 Ed Murphy wrote:
I also feel obliged to point out that I object to the repeal of
monthly decay. (I proposed monthly decay in the first place, to
prod Zefram to stop hoarding.)
I was introducing the harder VVLOP changes to *try* and reduce t
pikhq wrote:
On Sunday 25 November 2007 16:36:48 Ed Murphy wrote:
Proto-Proposal: Marks for one-time VLOP
I like this rule quite a lot, myself. Especially the part where I could
feasibly vote several thousand times on a single ordinary proposal. ;)
Inflation in a single color won't help
On Sunday 25 November 2007 19:16:55 comex wrote:
> On Sunday 25 November 2007, Josiah Worcester wrote:
> > On Sunday 25 November 2007 19:10:26 comex wrote:
> > > On Sunday 25 November 2007, Josiah Worcester wrote:
> > > > I create a contest which is a private dependent contract.
> > >
> > > Not to
On Sunday 25 November 2007, Josiah Worcester wrote:
> On Sunday 25 November 2007 19:10:26 comex wrote:
> > On Sunday 25 November 2007, Josiah Worcester wrote:
> > > I create a contest which is a private dependent contract.
> >
> > Not to be rude but read the voting res
ults. Specifically, to make
On Sunday 25 November 2007 19:10:26 comex wrote:
> On Sunday 25 November 2007, Josiah Worcester wrote:
> > I create a contest which is a private dependent contract.
>
> Not to be rude but read the voting results. Specifically, to make a
> dependent contract you have to make the contract without
On Sunday 25 November 2007 18:15:44 comex wrote:
> On Sunday 25 November 2007, Josiah Worcester wrote:
> > The AFO consents to be contest-master of all of these contests.
>
> These are not contests if you read the recent voting results; you'd need to
> make them dependently, although I think my s
On Sunday 25 November 2007, Josiah Worcester wrote:
> The AFO consents to be contest-master of all of these contests.
These are not contests if you read the recent voting results; you'd need to
make them dependently, although I think my silly proposal will be amended
away fairly soon.
signatur
On Sunday 25 November 2007 17:07:15 Ed Murphy wrote:
> pikhq wrote (in the Agora's Child forum):
>
> > I retract "No decay!", and submit the following proposal (also titled "No
> > decay!"):
> > Adoption index = 2
> > Interest index = 2
> > Co-author is avpx
> > In rule 2126:
> >* Remove mont
pikhq wrote (in the Agora's Child forum):
I retract "No decay!", and submit the following proposal (also titled "No
decay!"):
Adoption index = 2
Interest index = 2
Co-author is avpx
In rule 2126:
* Remove monthly decay
* Change "N+1 to increase another player's VVLOP by N"
to "N
On Sunday 25 November 2007 16:27:37 Ed Murphy wrote:
> Proto-Proposal: The Accountor
> (AI = 2, please)
>
> Amend Rule 2137 (The Assessor) to read:
>
>The Assessor is an office; its holder is responsible for
>collecting votes on proposals.
>
> Create a rule titled "The Accountor
On Sunday 25 November 2007 16:36:48 Ed Murphy wrote:
> Proto-Proposal: Marks for one-time VLOP
>
> Amend the rule "Marks" by appending this text to the list of ways to
> spend Marks:
>
>b) A player may spend 10 Marks in each of N+1 different colors
> to increase another player'
We ought to at least craft up a specific fix. Wouldn't it be as simple
as saying that once the adoption index is set in the initial proposal,
a later increase in the adoption index cannot make it democratic?
avpx
On Nov 25, 2007 3:20 PM, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> avpx wrote:
>
> >
On Sunday 25 November 2007 16:26:09 Ed Murphy wrote:
> Proposal: Do we still need this?
> (AI = 2, please)
>
> Repeal Rule 1450 (Separation of Powers).
>
Since we still *have* an Assesor and a Promotor, I'd say the rule is still
relevant. This, of course, does not say whether or not its needed
The machine where I read email and handle Agora business has been
offline for the past couple of days, being rebuilt after a security
breach was discovered. I should be back in operation sometime on Monday.
Until then I don't know what's queued up for me.
I anticipate distributing the next propos
On Sunday 25 November 2007 16:17:37 Josiah Worcester wrote:
> This initiates the voting period on proposal 305.
>
> 305. Rule 304 shall be amended so that the sentence saying "The First
> Ambassador and the Second Ambassador may act on behalf of Agora's Child to
> satisfy such obligations and to
On Sunday 25 November 2007 15:26:28 comex wrote:
> On Sunday 25 November 2007, Josiah Worcester wrote:
> > Finally, if my above deputisation goes through, I intend to nominate
> > Murphy as CotC.
>
> You don't need to do that dependently.
>
>
I don't want the nomination to occur until I deputis
pikhq wrote:
I submit the following proposal, entitled "No decay!":
Amend rule 2126 to read:
When a proposed amendment leaves most of a rule the same, it's
customary to specify just the changes. This makes its net effect
easier to determine, and avoids the risk that it will inadvertently
w
On Sunday 25 November 2007, Josiah Worcester wrote:
> Finally, if my above deputisation goes through, I intend to nominate
> Murphy as CotC.
You don't need to do that dependently.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
On Sunday 25 November 2007 15:14:53 Ed Murphy wrote:
> pikhq wrote:
>
> > On Sunday 25 November 2007 13:32:11 comex wrote:
> >> On Sunday 25 November 2007, Josiah Worcester wrote:
> >>> I intend to deputise for the CotC in the assignment of criminal case
> >>> 1804. The time limit for assignment r
avpx wrote:
According to rule 106:
"A Proposal with an Adoption Index of less than 2 is Ordinary. All
other Proposals are Democratic."
This seems fine and all, except that the powers of the Wielder of Veto
describe (2019):
"The Wielder of Veto CAN veto an ordinary proposal in its voting
period
pikhq wrote:
On Sunday 25 November 2007 13:32:11 comex wrote:
On Sunday 25 November 2007, Josiah Worcester wrote:
I intend to deputise for the CotC in the assignment of criminal case
1804. The time limit for assignment runs out in nearly 24 hours, so 48
hours after my declaration of intent, I
On Sunday 25 November 2007 14:23:46 comex wrote:
> On Sunday 25 November 2007, Josiah Worcester wrote:
> > On Sunday 25 November 2007 14:15:05 comex wrote:
> > > On Sunday 25 November 2007, Josiah Worcester wrote:
> > > > I intend to deputise to publish this report (if there are any
> > > > errors,
On Sunday 25 November 2007, Josiah Worcester wrote:
> On Sunday 25 November 2007 14:15:05 comex wrote:
> > On Sunday 25 November 2007, Josiah Worcester wrote:
> > > I intend to deputise to publish this report (if there are any
> > > errors, let me know):
> >
> > I believe I hold the title "Sorceror
On Sunday 25 November 2007 14:15:05 comex wrote:
> On Sunday 25 November 2007, Josiah Worcester wrote:
> > I intend to deputise to publish this report (if there are any errors,
> > let me know):
>
> I believe I hold the title "Sorceror's Apprentice" per Proposal 5262.
>
That is not a currently-d
On Sunday 25 November 2007, Josiah Worcester wrote:
> I intend to deputise to publish this report (if there are any errors,
> let me know):
I believe I hold the title "Sorceror's Apprentice" per Proposal 5262.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
On Sunday 25 November 2007 13:32:11 comex wrote:
> On Sunday 25 November 2007, Josiah Worcester wrote:
> > I intend to deputise for the CotC in the assignment of criminal case
> > 1804. The time limit for assignment runs out in nearly 24 hours, so 48
> > hours after my declaration of intent, I will
On Sunday 25 November 2007, Josiah Worcester wrote:
> I intend to deputise for the CotC in the assignment of criminal case
> 1804. The time limit for assignment runs out in nearly 24 hours, so 48
> hours after my declaration of intent, I will be allowed to deputise.
Hmm...
http://www.fysh.org/
"
According to rule 106:
"A Proposal with an Adoption Index of less than 2 is Ordinary. All
other Proposals are Democratic."
This seems fine and all, except that the powers of the Wielder of Veto
describe (2019):
"The Wielder of Veto CAN veto an ordinary proposal in its voting
period by announcemen
38 matches
Mail list logo
