On Sat, 23 Apr 2011, Eric Stucky wrote:
> I declare my name to be Turiski. [since if I am a player my name might
> see Aydin's CFJ in "Newbie." (Is he G.? I'm still getting used to
> everyone's names)]
Yes, the person whose email name shows up as "Kerim Aydin" currently
goes by the Agoran nic
On Fri, 22 Apr 2011, John Smith wrote:
> --- On Wed, 4/20/11, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> > In this case, the phrase "This statement causes" is not
> > true, as it is the person posting the statement to a forum that would
> > cause it, not the statement itself - if the statement were written on
> > a
On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 9:56 PM, Eric Stucky wrote:
> If (c) is true, the player(s) involved should get their original points back
> (up to fungibility), regardless of whether a betting market exists.
If no betting market exists, no points are destroyed.
On 24 April 2011 02:56, Eric Stucky wrote:
> Either all my messages go out in plaintext,
Sounds like a win-win to me. :)
> I switched over to automatic, we'll see how that goes.
Looks fine from here.
BLEH. I thought I had the plaintext problem figured out, but it's actually a
PITA. Either all my messages go out in plaintext, or I have to manually do each
one for Agora. I switched over to automatic, we'll see how that goes.
In case the last message was unreadable, here it is again:
> (a) [..
On 24 April 2011 02:33, Elliott Hird wrote:
> Please reconfigure your client to send plain text email to the Agora
> lists, not HTML. "« Plain Text" does this with Gmail.
Oh, closer inspection of the message tells me you're using Mail.app. I
think it's a global preference there, but I'm not sure.
On 24 April 2011 02:30, Eric Stucky wrote:
> -Turiski
Please reconfigure your client to send plain text email to the Agora
lists, not HTML. "« Plain Text" does this with Gmail.
Thanks :)
> (a) [...] a number of Points less than the number of Points the
> Better owns,
Less than or equal to?
> the previous vote collector SHALL inform the new collector of these
> Bets and their contents privately.
As soon as possible? Before the decision is resolved? Since the new vote
collector mu
On 24 April 2011 01:26, Eric Stucky wrote:
> Also, how do I control where in the thread I respond? I'm using mail-archive
> because the easiest for me to read, and omd's responses are deeper in the
> thread than mine are; not really sure how to control that.
Erm, you receive the messages in you
On 24 April 2011 01:23, omd wrote:
> Gratuitous silliness: If ehird is a rule, then thanks to Rule 105, e
> has not changed since 2007 in any way that affects eir operation.
> Luckily, eir mother narrowly escaped violating the rules by creating
> em, because rules were not explicitly defined at th
All quotes are from omd:
> Eh. That's stretching the definition of "content".
I concede that's possible.
> Well, that's actually a pretty good argument against your
> interpretation: how do you know whether some random entity can govern
> the state of the game, in order to know whether it's a r
On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 8:07 PM, Eric Stucky wrote:
> Gratuitous: Ratifications, by definition in 1551, make minimal possible
> changes to the game state. In particular it "cannot include a rule change
> unless the ratified document purports to include the text, title, and/or
> power of the rul
On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 4:28 PM, Charles Walker
wrote:
> c) at least one of the Bets was for the correct outcome.
So if everyone bets for the wrong outcome, nobody loses points?
> (or in the same message)
Not necessary to state.
Walker wrote:
> To be valid, a Bet must
[snip]
> c) be known only to the Better and the vote collector,
Dicey. Suggest "not be sent to anyone other than the Better and the
vote collector", and let Collusion cover situations where a Better
illegally tells someone else that e has place
On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 4:31 PM, omd wrote:
> Most of these "restrictions" are intended to explicitly empower rules
> to do things, not to restrict what might be a rule.
(And yes, this is a chicken and egg scenario.)
On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 1:36 PM, Eric Stucky wrote:
> First, I agree that ehird's content -is- a large bundle of cells and water,
> but I argue that it -takes the form- of text in the context of Agora, which
> is all that is required.
Eh. That's stretching the definition of "content".
> Secon
Proto:
{{ Betting (AI ?)
Enact a new Power-? Rule:
The betting period for a decision on the adoption of a proposal
or a degree begins when the proposal or thesis is submitted; the
betting period for an election begins when the nomination period
begins. The betting period
Turiski wrote:
> I CFJ: The FLR published on 12 April 2011 is incomplete.
Gratuitous: This hinges on interpreting Rule 2150 as
"A person is an entity (defined as such by rules) with power of at
least 2."
rather than the intended
"A person is an entity defined as such by (rules with pow
@ Walker: It may not have. I just chose that date because that was the last
time http://agora.qoid.us/current_flr.html was updated. I assumed that date was
when the ruleset was published, but I could be mistaken.
@ comexk: I think the case fails on the instrument aspect. I see now that 2150
sho
Oh my god I'm scared.
On 23 April 2011 06:50, Eric Stucky wrote:
> E may not have a title, but "If a rule ever does not have a title" is very
> strong evidence that this is not a requirement for rule-ness. Alternatively,
> e may have the title "ehird" or "Elliot Herd"
"Elliott Hird"
On Apr 23, 2011, at 1:50 AM, Eric Stucky wrote:
> quite extensive argument
Nice job on that, but:
- Persons don't have power 2; only the rules that define them as persons do.
- If anything, ehird's "content" takes the form of a large bundle of cells and
water; eir written communication is a s
On 23 April 2011 06:50, Eric Stucky wrote:
> This one's a little long :)
>
> I CFJ: The FLR published on 12 April 2011 is incomplete.
The FLR wasn't published on 12 April 2011, as far as I can see.
--
Charles Walker
22 matches
Mail list logo
