On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 23:45, Sean Hunt wrote:
> On 11-03-19 11:29 PM, Aaron Goldfein wrote:
>
>> As I'm sure all have noticed, Agoran activity is very low. When I first
>> joined the game only two short years ago, the game was very active and
>> fantastically entertaining for all involved. Howev
On 11-03-19 11:29 PM, Aaron Goldfein wrote:
As I'm sure all have noticed, Agoran activity is very low. When I first
joined the game only two short years ago, the game was very active and
fantastically entertaining for all involved. However, that is not so
much the case anymore, as Agora has been
As I'm sure all have noticed, Agoran activity is very low. When I first
joined the game only two short years ago, the game was very active and
fantastically entertaining for all involved. However, that is not so much
the case anymore, as Agora has been in a prolonged slump since about the
start of
scshunt wrote:
> On 11-03-19 10:16 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
>>- if the Justiciar has published an opinion on the case
>> clearly marked as the Justiciar's Opinion and indicating a
>> valid judgement, and that judgement is the same as one given
>> by at least one pane
On 11-03-19 10:16 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
- if the Justiciar has published an opinion on the case
clearly marked as the Justiciar's Opinion and indicating a
valid judgement, and that judgement is the same as one given
by at least one panel member (other than the Jus
On 11-03-19 09:33 PM, omd wrote:
On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 9:31 PM, Sean Hunt wrote:
NoV: I accuse Tanner L. Swett of violating the power-3 Rule 2170 by making
the above-quoted public statement intended to mislead Agorans as to the
identity of its publisher.
I contest this. It's extremely unli
On 19 March 2011 20:10, Charles Walker wrote:
> And WHEREAS, with the recent and lamentable departure of ais523, there
> ought to be an increase in players from across the pond, ready to
> uphold and preserve the inexplicable Agoran tendency to use British
> spellings such as judgement,
what's al
On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 4:10 PM, Charles Walker
wrote:
> And WHEREAS, in any case I couldn't think of any more,
Welcome back, H. Walker'); DROP TABLE Players;--!
On 11-03-19 03:30 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
The President being required to do impossible actions seems rare enough
not to worry about it until a specific example comes up. (The "any
first-class player" clause doesn't include the IMPOSSIBLE bit either.)
What about the Agoran Consent or without obje
scshunt wrote:
> On 11-03-19 02:57 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
>>The Speaker CAN, by announcement, cause the President to take
>>an action that is not otherwise IMPOSSIBLE. If there is no
>>Speaker, then the player who was most recently Speaker (if
>>any) CAN, by announce
On 11-03-19 02:57 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
The Speaker CAN, by announcement, cause the President to take
an action that is not otherwise IMPOSSIBLE. If there is no
Speaker, then the player who was most recently Speaker (if
any) CAN, by announcement, cause the President to
Roujo wrote:
> I vote FOR all of these a number of times equal to my voting limit.
>
> Question: If I just say "I vote FOR all of these", do I implicitely do
> it "a number of times equal to my voting limit"?
Yes, Rule 2280 still exists.
> Other question: Is there any reason for me not to vote
The probability of the job almost certainly not getting done if the
President holds it aside, will publishing a report this week change your
mind?
On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 09:31, Jonathan Rouillard <
jonathan.rouill...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I also vote for The President. Sorry Yally. =P
>
> ~ Roujo
13 matches
Mail list logo
