Rule 2150/6 seems contradictory
Personhood
A person is an entity defined as such by rules with power of at
least 2. A person CAN generally be the subject of rights and
obligations under the rules.
Any biological organism that is generally capable of
communicating by emai
Aaron Goldfein wrote:
> I appeal this judgment.
Since I spent a Note to remove one of your Rests in the belief that 3
Rests was excessive, I would ask that, if the judgment is overruled,
remanded, or reassigned, you repay me in some manner.
I have no way of enforcing this, but I will note if you
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 9:53 PM, Sean Hunt wrote:
> Rodlen wrote:
> > I judge CFJ 2541 FALSE and CFJ 2542 TRUE. In the first case, Quazie
> > attempted to announce that the rule repealed itself without causing it
> > to repeal itself. In the second case, e did cause it to repeal itself.
> > Pla
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 5:37 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
> ehird wrote:
>
> >>> I intend to appeal this as Rodlen clearly has not considered private
> >>> agreements taking effect as is the precedent. He seems to think this
> >>> CFJ asks "if Warrigal re-did the action in a-b, would it work?". It
> >>>
Sean Hunt wrote:
> (a) the Accused breached the specified rule via the specified act.
>
> In Yally's case, e published eir report, entitled [IADoP] Office Report,
> in both HTML and plain text through the use of a MIME multipart message.
> Rule 2143 states that
> Reports SHALL be published
Quazie wrote:
> On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 5:07 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
>> Yally wrote:
>>
>>> Prop2 AI = 2
>>> ---
>>> Create a new rule entitled 'Officer's Proposals' with the following
>>> text:
>>> "Any proposal submitted as part of an officer's duties has its
>>> Distributability flipped to Distrib
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 7:36 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
> Yally wrote:
>
>> At the time I submitted that report, I was fully aware of this rule but
>> I also legitamately thought that I was not breaching it. From my point
>> of view, I don't have very many options. There is a plaintext option in
>> Gmai
Yally wrote:
> At the time I submitted that report, I was fully aware of this rule but
> I also legitamately thought that I was not breaching it. From my point
> of view, I don't have very many options. There is a plaintext option in
> Gmail, but selecting this removes any capabilities to change f
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 17:52, Aaron Goldfein wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 6:41 PM, Sean Hunt wrote:
>>
>> Sean Hunt wrote:
>> > Ed Murphy wrote:
>> >> Detail: http://zenith.homelinux.net/cotc/viewcase.php?cfj=2545
>> >>
>> >> = Criminal Case 2545
>> >> =
On Fri, 29 May 2009, comex wrote:
> I recommend just using HTML/Javascript, there's nothing here that really
> requires an applet.
Yah I found enough javascript life versions that should be trivial to tweak.
will do in my copious free time. -G.
2009/5/29 Geoffrey Spear :
> [This file lists the contents of the proposal pool.
>
> File generated at 2009-05-29T14:42:50Z. Not necessarily up to date as
> of then; recent changes may be missing.
>
> NOT A SOURCE FILE: automatically generated, do not edit.
>
> just try and stop me!
>
> ]
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 2:08 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> On Fri, 29 May 2009, comex wrote:
>> On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 11:58 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>>> We played this a couple years ago and it was fun. Anyone interested
>>> enough for me to do a more complete contest description (tighten the
>>> A
I recommend just using HTML/Javascript, there's nothing here that
really requires an applet.
Sent from my iPhone
On May 29, 2009, at 2:05 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
On Fri, 29 May 2009, Quazie wrote:
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 12:37 PM, Benjamin Caplan
I suggest:
M=64
P=8
T=32
These sound abo
On Fri, 29 May 2009, comex wrote:
> On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 11:58 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>> We played this a couple years ago and it was fun. Anyone interested
>> enough for me to do a more complete contest description (tighten the
>> Agoran-legal language of the below and fiddle to find good va
On Fri, 29 May 2009, Quazie wrote:
> On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 12:37 PM, Benjamin Caplan
>> I suggest:
>> M=64
>> P=8
>> T=32
These sound about right; good justification on the T pegged to lightspeed
and M.
>> Points=relative proportion
>> This differentiates various strategies and gives more sha
On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 11:58 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> We played this a couple years ago and it was fun. Anyone interested
> enough for me to do a more complete contest description (tighten the
> Agoran-legal language of the below and fiddle to find good values for
> M,P,T, etc)?
There was a pro
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 12:37 PM, Benjamin Caplan
wrote:
> Kerim Aydin wrote:
>> We played this a couple years ago and it was fun. Anyone interested
>> enough for me to do a more complete contest description (tighten the
>> Agoran-legal language of the below and fiddle to find good values for
>>
Kerim Aydin wrote:
> We played this a couple years ago and it was fun. Anyone interested
> enough for me to do a more complete contest description (tighten the
> Agoran-legal language of the below and fiddle to find good values for
> M,P,T, etc)?
>
> Proto-contest: Conway's Life (competitive).
>
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 10:49 AM, Ed Murphy wrote:
> It does, but 2240 only applies to self-contradictory chains of
> precedence/deference clauses within a rule. If a rule simply
> reads "X, but notwithstanding that, Y", then 2240 does not apply,
> and common sense says that Y succeeds in taking
On Fri, 29 May 2009, Ed Murphy wrote:
> The interesting fact here is that a recordkeepor of assets has to list
> all the assets that exist. In the case of the Scorekeepor, therefore,
> the report has to account for the whereabouts of every point in
> existence. The specific error in root's report
comex wrote:
> On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 9:20 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
>> Proposal 6306 (Democratic, AI=2.0, Interest=1) by Murphy
>> Patch objections
>> ...
>> The above notwithstanding, if the action depends on objections,
>> and an objection to it has been withdrawn within the past 24
>>
On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 11:58 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> We played this a couple years ago and it was fun. Anyone interested
> enough for me to do a more complete contest description (tighten the
> Agoran-legal language of the below and fiddle to find good values for
> M,P,T, etc)?
>
> Proto-cont
22 matches
Mail list logo
