Proto: The Supreme Court (AI=2)
[Cases can be appealed to the Supreme Court, a fixed (elected) set of
three justices. Appeal can be made by announcement but court doesn't
have to accept the appeal. If they do, they need to address the issue
in detail. Compared to normal appeals, the court has mo
On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 4:53 PM, Dice server wrote:
> # Wooble 2
> # 1: Government Ball
> # 2-30: On the Nod
> # 31-35: Debate-o-Matic
> # 36-40: No Confidence
> # 41-50: Kill Bill
> # 51-60: Cross the Lobby
> # 61-80: Extra Vote
> # 81-100: Local Election
> # Oops, forgot Wooble's extras.
> 8
On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 5:47 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
> Yally wrote:
>
>> I really can't say I have a clear idea of what "zooping" means. I
>> don't know if it's something from a contract, some foreign word, some
>> strange nomic word I'm not familiar with, or just a way to add a silly
>> word that me
On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 3:02 PM, Sean Hunt wrote:
>> I really can't say I have a clear idea of what "zooping" means. I
>> don't know if it's something from a contract, some foreign word, some
>> strange nomic word I'm not familiar with, or just a way to add a silly
>> word that means nothing. For
On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 3:01 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
> Ah, you're right. The other point stands, though; I added RO 4c
> to formally allow for latecomers that clearly intended to join,
> but the proxy case basically ignored "intent" in RO 2. Which is
> fine, it just demonstrates the extent to which
coppro wrote:
> In my rather short stint with the FRC, the rules seem to have been
> followed pretty well. Currently the Regular Ordinances allow
> transferring of judgeship without an overruling procedure.
Ah, you're right. The other point stands, though; I added RO 4c
to formally allow for lat
> I really can't say I have a clear idea of what "zooping" means. I
> don't know if it's something from a contract, some foreign word, some
> strange nomic word I'm not familiar with, or just a way to add a silly
> word that means nothing. For that matter, I opine that 2736 is FALSE.
>
> -Yally
>
On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 2:33 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
> Wooble wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 1:30 AM, Sean Hunt wrote:
>>> The one thing, however, that is truly common to every nomic, and that is
>>> pedanticism.
>>
>> Clearly you haven't played Blognomic, where they'll gladly handwave
>> away
Wooble wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 1:30 AM, Sean Hunt wrote:
>> The one thing, however, that is truly common to every nomic, and that is
>> pedanticism.
>
> Clearly you haven't played Blognomic, where they'll gladly handwave
> away any obvious bugs.
Or the Fantasy Rules Committee, where th
G. wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009, Ed Murphy wrote:
>> coppro wrote:
>>
>>> But what about Murphy and myself? We are both very close to a victory;
>>> Murphy in particular needs only bribe a newbie to win.
>> I believe the list of eligible "newbies" is a subset of ais523, c.,
>> coppro, Edmond Dante
> The Propositional Nomic
> an Agoran Thesis
> by Sean "coppro" Hunt
>
> Please note that this thesis requires UTF-8. I also apologize if my idea
> is not novel; a cursory search indicated it was, but such things are
> frequently misleading.
There was http://www.nomic.net/~nomicwiki/index.php/For
> If I have at least one Ribbon of each color defined by Rule 2199
> and do not satisfy any Losing Conditions, then I destroy one of
> each such color to satisfy the Winning Condition of Renaissance.
>
>
You have a Dunce Cap (lol).
-coppro
On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 7:07 AM, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 4:36 PM, Sean Hunt wrote:
>> These are the draws earned by players for eir services as officers last week:
>>
>> Player Deck #
>> -
>> c. Justice
On Tue, 2009-11-24 at 13:54 -0700, Sean Hunt wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 1:51 PM, ais523 wrote:
> > On Tue, 2009-11-24 at 13:45 -0700, Sean Hunt wrote:
> >> I create an Offer:
> >> Selling: - Mill
> >> For costs: A 0, 2, 6, or 5 Ranch, or 350zm.
> >> Repeats: 2
> >> -coppro
> >
> > I'll
On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 1:51 PM, ais523 wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-11-24 at 13:45 -0700, Sean Hunt wrote:
>> I create an Offer:
>> Selling: - Mill
>> For costs: A 0, 2, 6, or 5 Ranch, or 350zm.
>> Repeats: 2
>> -coppro
>
> I'll buy these for zm, if I have the zm and you tell me how to do it.
>
>
On Tue, 2009-11-24 at 13:45 -0700, Sean Hunt wrote:
> I create an Offer:
> Selling: - Mill
> For costs: A 0, 2, 6, or 5 Ranch, or 350zm.
> Repeats: 2
> -coppro
I'll buy these for zm, if I have the zm and you tell me how to do it.
--
ais523
On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 2:35 PM, Pavitra wrote:
> Geoffrey Spear wrote:
>> I CFJ on: {{It is POSSIBLE to assign a judgment of UNDETERMINED to this
>> CFJ.}}
>
> Trivially TRUE. It may or may not be an *appropriate* judgment.
No interpretation of Agoran Law may allow a judge to assign a
judgement
Geoffrey Spear wrote:
> I CFJ on: {{It is POSSIBLE to assign a judgment of UNDETERMINED to this CFJ.}}
Trivially TRUE. It may or may not be an *appropriate* judgment.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On Tue, 24 Nov 2009, comex wrote:
> I think "has been a player continuously for X" is supposed to mean "is a
> player, and has been so continuously for X". e.g. if I deregister, I
> wouldn't
> say "I've been a player of Agora for three months."
Heh, is c. arguing for what it's "supposed to me
I think "has been a player continuously for X" is supposed to mean "is
a player, and has been so continuously for X". e.g. if I deregister,
I wouldn't say "I've been a player of Agora for three months."
Sent from my iPhone
On Nov 24, 2009, at 11:19 AM, Kerim Aydin
wrote:
On Tue, 24 N
On Tue, 24 Nov 2009, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 11:30 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>> ? If Taral's eligible, wouldn't you and I be too Murphy ? -G.
>
> Taral's not eligible (was previously a player from 3 Apr 00 to 13 Dec
> 06). Not that I'm likely to have a No Confidence card fas
On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 1:30 AM, Sean Hunt wrote:
> The one thing, however, that is truly common to every nomic, and that is
> pedanticism.
Clearly you haven't played Blognomic, where they'll gladly handwave
away any obvious bugs.
On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 11:30 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> ? If Taral's eligible, wouldn't you and I be too Murphy ? -G.
Taral's not eligible (was previously a player from 3 Apr 00 to 13 Dec
06). Not that I'm likely to have a No Confidence card fast enough to
fulfill my pledge to try to become Regis
23 matches
Mail list logo
