On 31 October 2014 00:14, Ørjan Johansen wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Oct 2014, Jonatan Kilhamn wrote:
>
>> The Rulekeepor, Speaker and Prime Minister each have a
>> spending power of 2. The Promotor has a spending power of
>> 4.
>>
>> Changes to imminence and spending power both are se
On Fri, 2014-10-31 at 02:56 +, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> Once again, I vaguely remember a past CFJ that asked how much of
> a report could be missing and still be a considered a report (with
> missing data) versus an entirely missing report.
The gist of my TRUE argument is that R2143 doesn't say t
On Fri, 31 Oct 2014, Eritivus wrote:
> On Thu, 2014-10-30 at 02:24 +, Eritivus wrote:
> > CFJ: The Promotor failed to perform a weekly duty during the week of
> > 20 Oct. Deputisation to perform this duty is generally possible,
> > given sufficient notice as per R2160(c), and given that the d
On Oct 30, 2014, at 8:55 PM, omd wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 6:27 PM, Luis Ressel wrote:
>> 7711 omd1.0 Wordplay
>
> By the way, it was pointed out that this violates the recently
> arguably reestablished custom of installing an officer, so I probably
> should have changed it. But
On Oct 30, 2014, at 4:00 PM, Henri Bouchard wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 2:22 PM, Tanner Swett wrote:
>>
>> On Oct 30, 2014 1:02 PM, "Henri Bouchard" wrote:
>>> If it is that difficult for the recordkeepors, couldn't we just raise
>>> the salary of the recordkeepors in order to compensate fo
On Thu, 30 Oct 2014, omd wrote:
By the way, it was pointed out that this violates the recently
arguably reestablished custom of installing an officer, so I probably
should have changed it. But in any case, I volunteer to recordkeep
this, and since I'm pretty sure King Azaz cannot even theoretic
On Oct 30, 2014, at 3:43 AM, Jonatan Kilhamn wrote:
> On 30 October 2014 04:45, Tanner Swett wrote:
>> On Oct 24, 2014, at 2:02 PM, Jonatan Kilhamn wrote:
>>> I punch the Bard in the face.
>>
>> Inside the inn, we find the Bard and some unknown character, whom we
>> designate AQ. The Bard is sin
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 6:27 PM, Luis Ressel wrote:
> 7711 omd1.0 Wordplay
By the way, it was pointed out that this violates the recently
arguably reestablished custom of installing an officer, so I probably
should have changed it. But in any case, I volunteer to recordkeep
this, and s
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 6:27 PM, Luis Ressel wrote:
> The proposal pool currently contains the following proposals (with
> preliminary IDs):
Though it's of course the Promotor's prerogative to choose when to
distribute, I'm curious why you didn't distribute all of them.
On Thu, 30 Oct 2014, Jonatan Kilhamn wrote:
The Rulekeepor, Speaker and Prime Minister each have a
spending power of 2. The Promotor has a spending power of
4.
Changes to imminence and spending power both are secured.
Set the spending power of the Promotor to 3.
Are these
On Thu, 30 Oct 2014, Henri Bouchard wrote:
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 3:08 AM, Alex Smith wrote:
On Sat, 2014-10-25 at 22:23 -0400, omd wrote:
[...]
7700 1 Henri Office Salary
AGAINST; we've attempted this sort of rule quite a lot, and it's never
been worth the recordkeepor issue
[...
On 2014-10-30 16:55, Sean Hunt wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 6:27 PM, Luis Ressel wrote:
>> IDAuthor(s) AI Title
>>
>> 7711 omd1.0 Wordplay
> PRESENT
>> 7712 Murphy 1.0 Full disclosure
> FOR
>> 7713
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 6:27 PM, Luis Ressel wrote:
> IDAuthor(s) AI Title
>
> 7711 omd1.0 Wordplay
PRESENT
> 7712 Murphy 1.0 Full disclosure
FOR
> 7713 Warrigal 3.0 Speedliness
FOR
> 7714 Tiger
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 2:48 AM, Eritivus wrote:
> On Mon, 2014-10-27 at 06:22 +, Eritivus wrote:
>> > 7706 3 omd Fast Track
>> ENDORSE scshunt
>
> If this was a valid ballot [*], I retract it.
>
> I vote FOR 7706.
>
> [*] It seems scshunt isn't registered?
After a bit of research -
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 4:23 PM, Henri Bouchard wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 3:08 AM, Alex Smith wrote:
>> On Sat, 2014-10-25 at 22:23 -0400, omd wrote:
> [...]
>>> 7701 1 Henri Credits
>> AGAINST; broken, amendments cannot be made simultaneously
> [...]
>
> Wait, why not?
>
> -Henri
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 3:08 AM, Alex Smith wrote:
> On Sat, 2014-10-25 at 22:23 -0400, omd wrote:
[...]
>> 7701 1 Henri Credits
> AGAINST; broken, amendments cannot be made simultaneously
[...]
Wait, why not?
-Henri
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 4:07 PM, Sean Hunt wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 4:06 PM, Henri Bouchard wrote:
>> Testing. Are you all getting this message? When I simply reply to
>> messages I get from the mailing list, my messages don't appear in my
>> inbox, but when I change the subject of the em
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 4:06 PM, Henri Bouchard wrote:
> Testing. Are you all getting this message? When I simply reply to
> messages I get from the mailing list, my messages don't appear in my
> inbox, but when I change the subject of the email and reply, I get my
> message, so I'm confused.
>
>
Testing. Are you all getting this message? When I simply reply to
messages I get from the mailing list, my messages don't appear in my
inbox, but when I change the subject of the email and reply, I get my
message, so I'm confused.
-Henri
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 2:22 PM, Tanner Swett wrote:
>
> On Oct 30, 2014 1:02 PM, "Henri Bouchard" wrote:
>> If it is that difficult for the recordkeepors, couldn't we just raise
>> the salary of the recordkeepors in order to compensate for the burden?
>> Isn't that the purpose of the variable of
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 2:22 PM, Tanner Swett wrote:
>
> On Oct 30, 2014 1:02 PM, "Henri Bouchard" wrote:
>> If it is that difficult for the recordkeepors, couldn't we just raise
>> the salary of the recordkeepors in order to compensate for the burden?
>> Isn't that the purpose of the variable of
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 2:22 PM, Tanner Swett wrote:
>
> On Oct 30, 2014 1:02 PM, "Henri Bouchard" wrote:
>> If it is that difficult for the recordkeepors, couldn't we just raise
>> the salary of the recordkeepors in order to compensate for the burden?
>> Isn't that the purpose of the variable of
On 30 October 2014 19:05, omd wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 1:07 PM, Jonatan Kilhamn
> wrote:
>> I retract the proposal "Restricted distribution". I submit the
>> following proposal (an edited version):
>
> Still contains the "swich" typo. Regarding the attributes thing,
> since this proposal
Oscarosaurus grazes in the farmland near the inn. E tries to determine if
the strange music has a good STOMP beat. (It's hard to enjoy music any
other way when you lack opposable thumbs or nimble ankles.)
[I'm kind of planning to make my character something out of Dinotopia (
http://en.wikipedia
On Oct 30, 2014 1:02 PM, "Henri Bouchard" wrote:
> If it is that difficult for the recordkeepors, couldn't we just raise
> the salary of the recordkeepors in order to compensate for the burden?
> Isn't that the purpose of the variable office salary?
Well, we can increase salaries all we want, but
As my 'nomic' time budget will be used on CFJ catchup,
I will not post GNP odds for the current week. I expect
to post odds for next week in the neighborhood of Tue-Wed.
-G.
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 1:07 PM, Jonatan Kilhamn
wrote:
> I retract the proposal "Restricted distribution". I submit the
> following proposal (an edited version):
Still contains the "swich" typo. Regarding the attributes thing,
since this proposal is already AI 3,
can't you just make a simple wo
On 30 October 2014 18:07, Jonatan Kilhamn wrote:
> I retract the proposal "Restricted distribution". I submit the
> following proposal (an edited version):
> [...]
I didn't come up with any good solution for the rule about not
changing the attribute of proposals after their creation. I think it
m
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 3:08 AM, Alex Smith wrote:
> On Sat, 2014-10-25 at 22:23 -0400, omd wrote:
[...]
>> 7700 1 Henri Office Salary
> AGAINST; we've attempted this sort of rule quite a lot, and it's never
> been worth the recordkeepor issue
[...]
>> 7702 1 Henri Minister for Soc
On Thu, 2014-10-30 at 15:25 +, Sprocklem wrote:
> E did, however, fail to, "as part of eir weekly duties, distribute all
> pending proposals", something that the rules say e SHALL do.
omd distributed the only pending proposal, "Ribbons 2014". I don't
think this duty could enable deputisation a
On 2014-10-30 00:39, Eritivus wrote:
> On Thu, 2014-10-30 at 02:24 +, Eritivus wrote:
>> The Promotor failed to publish all such information. In particular,
>> e did not publish that "Wordplay" was in the Proposal Pool.
>
> Counterarguments:
>
> The information required is 'a list of all prop
On 30 October 2014 04:45, Tanner Swett wrote:
> On Oct 24, 2014, at 2:02 PM, Jonatan Kilhamn wrote:
>> I punch the Bard in the face.
>
> Inside the inn, we find the Bard and some unknown character, whom we
> designate AQ. The Bard is singing merrily, and AQ, evidently growing
> impatient with ei
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 2:39 AM, Eritivus wrote:
> Counterarguments:
>
> The information required is 'a list of all proposals in the Proposal
> Pool, along with their text and attributes', not each individual
> fact that list represents, such as 'that "Wordplay" was in the
> Proposal Pool'.
>
> Th
33 matches
Mail list logo
