On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 11:19 PM, Paul VanKoughnett wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 1:06 PM, Aaron Goldfein
> wrote:
>> On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 11:01 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
>>> I vote PRESENT in the Anarchist election. (This is effective
>>> iff my previous attempt was not.)
>>
>> I CFJ on the fol
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 1:06 PM, Aaron Goldfein wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 11:01 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
>> I vote PRESENT in the Anarchist election. (This is effective
>> iff my previous attempt was not.)
>
> I CFJ on the following sentence. Murphy cast two votes in the recent
> Anarchist elec
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 11:46 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
> [Tiger is sitting, thus I cannot honor eir favoring without violating
> the prohibition against assigning a poorly qualified judge. I could
> wait for the next rotation, but at risk of violating the requirement
> to assign a judge ASAP. Tiger,
I think that if we retire Notes, we should retire Rests too. As it
stands, Rests are the only punishment Agora has to offer for any
infraction whatsoever, which is pretty bad. Consider:
Distributability is a mess and has significantly removed the
attractiveness of submitting proposals. It is an ov
On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 10:21 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> I transfer one prop from myself to CotC Murphy for not getting all my ducks
> in a row before the CFJ:
>
> Another gratuitous argument on my most recent CFJ:
>
> There was indeed at least one proposal that went into the pool between
> the ann
On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 6:58 PM, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
> I spend D# D# D# to flip the Distributability of the Proposal entitled
> "No More Distributability" to Undistributable.
>
> II-2 is unreasonable for a proposal that replaces a rule with the
> exact text it had very recently. This required no
2009/6/15 Geoffrey Spear :
> On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 6:48 PM, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
>> I create a digit ranch with a seed of 9 in BobTHJ's possession.
>> I create a digit ranch with a seed of 7 in BobTHJ's possession.
>
> One of these was a purchase. I revoke 3 points from BobTHJ (I believe
> eir
On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 5:15 PM, Jonatan
Kilhamn wrote:
> If any of the above harvesting actions failed, I do those actions
> again using Xs where needed.
This isn't necessary; X crop usage is now implied if necessary.
2009/6/14 Benjamin Caplan :
> Gratuitous: contracts, including pledges, generally don't require public
> messages. It's possible to make a pledge to a-d, or by private email. If
> G.'s intent was to make a pledge immediately, then that's probably what
> happened.
>
> Or does that not work anymore n
2009/6/14 Alex Smith :
> On Sun, 2009-06-14 at 02:21 -0400, Warrigal wrote:
>> I cease to agree to all non-binding agreements.
> As the notary, I think the only effect this has is to cancel any
> contract creation attempts you made in the past which failed because
> they weren't taken up by other p
Kerim Aydin wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Jun 2009, Alex Smith wrote:
>>> I'll amend that; If elected, I pledge not to let material bribes made to
>>> myself (or persons I specify) while I hold office (e.g. assets, votes on
>>> proposals, props, or promises of same) affect whom I promote; I can
>>> terminate
2009/6/14 Sean Hunt :
> This does not apply to bribes made prior to em being elected, meaning e
> could be buying votes.
Bit defensive of your office there? C'mon, I know you don't like G.,
but that's an unfounded accusation.
Kerim Aydin wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Jun 2009, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>> On Sun, 14 Jun 2009, C-walker wrote:
>>> On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 4:25 PM, Charles Walker <
>>> charles.w.wal...@googlemail.com> wrote:
On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 4:16 PM, Aaron Goldfein
wrote:
>
>>> If no player has posted a pr
On Sun, 2009-06-14 at 02:21 -0400, Warrigal wrote:
> I cease to agree to all non-binding agreements.
As the notary, I think the only effect this has is to cancel any
contract creation attempts you made in the past which failed because
they weren't taken up by other players.
--
ais523
Notary
On Sat, 2009-06-13 at 15:24 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Jun 2009, Charles Walker wrote:
> >> Again, I object. -G.
> >
> > I feel this is grossly unfair. I am a new player with very few notes
> > and intend to gain most my Notes/ new currency of them through
> > proposals. If I have to p
Alex Smith wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-06-11 at 20:04 +0200, Jonatan Kilhamn wrote:
>> 2009/6/11 Rodlen :
>> > I CFJ on the following:
>> > "What is forced by rule 2029 to Dance a Powerful Dance?"
>> Ye Marvy, of course.
>
> I call for judgement on the statement "A Powerful Dance is an
> instrument.".
>
On Mon, 2009-06-08 at 15:34 -0600, Roger Hicks wrote:
> NOTE: The above contest thresholds are based on how the contract
> awards points. AAA and 3-Scroll both award points based on limited
> actions that members are permitted to perform, thus awards are limited
> by the contract mechanisms. Cookie
On Sun, 14 Jun 2009, Sean Hunt wrote:
> This is a public contract and a pledge, entitled coppro's Grand Poobah
> Promotion/Demotion Policy.
I'll come out and say this; if you're looking for a scrupulously spelled-
out policy, I am not your candidate.
In the end, I'm guessing several first-clas
On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 11:19 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> It's just an oxymoron, like jumbo shrimp.
Jumbo shrimp aren't an oxymoron. You're thinking of swiss cheese.
On Sun, 14 Jun 2009, Sean Hunt wrote:
> Kerim Aydin wrote:
>> On Sun, 14 Jun 2009, comex wrote:
>>> On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 2:31 AM, Sean Hunt wrote:
I'm saying "I dislike this contract, because it is binding to anyone who
becomes party to it."
>>> I think non-binding contracts were judg
Kerim Aydin wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Jun 2009, comex wrote:
>> On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 2:31 AM, Sean Hunt wrote:
>>> I'm saying "I dislike this contract, because it is binding to anyone who
>>> becomes party to it."
>> I think non-binding contracts were judged to spontaneously implode at
>> some point.
On Sun, 14 Jun 2009, comex wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 2:31 AM, Sean Hunt wrote:
>> I'm saying "I dislike this contract, because it is binding to anyone who
>> becomes party to it."
>
> I think non-binding contracts were judged to spontaneously implode at
> some point.
It's just an oxymoron,
On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 2:31 AM, Sean Hunt wrote:
> I'm saying "I dislike this contract, because it is binding to anyone who
> becomes party to it."
I think non-binding contracts were judged to spontaneously implode at
some point.
On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 1:32 PM, Charles Walker <
charles.w.wal...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> I transfer a prop from myself to BobTHJ because I really like his
> Proposal Review Board idea, and I've stolen parts of it for this
> proto:
>
What do people think about a proto pool in general? Something
> 1. Cards are dealt from an infinite deck (with set probabilities) and
> destroyed when played. Reason: the reason cards broke so often in the
> * Title: Discard Picking (30)
> Exploit: Indicate a card that was played or discarded in the
> past 72 hours.
On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 10:56 PM, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 11:11 AM, Charles
> Walker wrote:
> > I submit the following proposal and intend to make it Distributable
> > without objection:
>
> I agree to the following:
>
> {{
> This is a public contract governed by the rules
On Sat, 2009-06-13 at 19:15 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> On Sat, 13 Jun 2009, Sean Hunt wrote:
> > I disfavor this case (I really don't want to go look through the
> > archives to find the situation of things).
>
> Me neither necessarily; I think there's a lot in the archives about when
> a sing
Kerim Aydin wrote:
> Result: strategy, more cards can be defined with probabilities a mix of
> choice and random.
>
> What do you think, worth the complication with it getting as cross-matrixed
> as notes but associated with specialties? A better way to do committees?
> Yes/no/maybe?
Interestin
28 matches
Mail list logo
