On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 7:42 AM, Sean Hunt wrote:
> Charles Walker wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 12:29 AM, Sean Hunt wrote:
>>>
>>> This message serves to initiate the Agoran Decision to decide the
>>> holder of the office of Insulator. For this Decision, the
>>> eligible voters are all th
Charles Walker wrote:
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 12:29 AM, Sean Hunt wrote:
This message serves to initiate the Agoran Decision to decide the
holder of the office of IADoP. For this Decision, the
eligible voters are all the active first-class players, each with a
voting limit of one. The Intergala
Charles Walker wrote:
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 12:29 AM, Sean Hunt wrote:
This message serves to initiate the Agoran Decision to decide the
holder of the office of Insulator. For this Decision, the
eligible voters are all the active first-class players, each with a
voting limit of one. The Inter
Kerim Aydin wrote:
On Sun, 20 Sep 2009, ais523 wrote:
I still don't think I'm incorrect. Giving notice that I plan to do
something via means X is still giving notice that I plan to do it; it's
a logical implication. See also CFJ 2624, which also found that an
intent to do something via an incorr
ais523 wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-09-15 at 07:04 -0700, Ed Murphy wrote:
>> I retract my proposal "Kill it with fire".
>>
>> I submit the following proposal, and intend (without objection) to
>> make it distributable:
>>
>> Proposal: Kill it with fire
>> (AI = 2, II = 0, please)
>>
>> Terminate the
> On Sun, 20 Sep 2009, ais523 wrote:
>> I still don't think I'm incorrect. Giving notice that I plan to do
>> something via means X is still giving notice that I plan to do it; it's
>> a logical implication. See also CFJ 2624, which also found that an
>> intent to do something via an incorrect mea
On Sun, 20 Sep 2009, ais523 wrote:
> On Sat, 2009-09-19 at 16:07 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>> Now if you had said "I intend to... by any means" or left the means
>> blank, it would have covered it, but not qualified as a dependent
>> action intent. If you had said "w/o objection or another means"
Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 20, 2009, at 5:37 PM, ais523
wrote:
As for your two-possibilities argument; giving notice that there's a
possibility that something might happen is still notice. There are two
possibilities; but if either leads to something happening, the
notice is
there. After
Fails, it imposes on me the obligation of not awarding points other
than at my discretion (such as if I were mousetrapped, and someone
acted on my behalf to award points).
Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 20, 2009, at 6:51 PM, ais523
wrote:
On Wed, 2009-09-16 at 21:26 -0400, comex wrote:
I
Geoffrey Spear wrote:
On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 7:29 PM, Sean Hunt wrote:
The candidates are: coppro, BobTHJ.
I cast a conditional vote endorsing coppro if the IADoP election in
progress at the time this vote is being cast has been resolved without
a No Confidence card ending it, for BobTHJ oth
On Tue, 2009-09-15 at 09:45 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Sep 2009, Jonatan Kilhamn wrote:
> > For each public contract that I am a party to, I leave it.
>
> The standards on communicating conditional actions are getting
> ridiculous. I'm tempted to post "I perform all the actions I CAN,
On Sat, 2009-09-19 at 16:07 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> On Sat, 19 Sep 2009, ais523 wrote:
> > On Sat, 2009-09-19 at 13:13 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> >> If I say "I intend to take the train to Buffalo" I have not made any
> >> implication, announcement of intent, nor given any notice whatsoever
>
On Sun, 2009-09-20 at 00:59 +0100, Elliott Hird wrote:
> 2009/9/19 ais523 :
> > Points Party requires "4 days notice" for me to be able to amend it (not
> > With Notice, but rather the ordinary-language sense); I gave the notice,
> > and here's the amendment. As there have now been 4 days of notice
Walker wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 6:09 PM, Sean Hunt wrote:
>> Charles Walker wrote:
>>> On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 9:03 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
== CFJ 2689 ==
The most recent Scorekeepor's report was correct in reporting
14 matches
Mail list logo
