On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 11:02 PM, Josh T wrote:
> Assuming that Contracts are now a thing, I am going to reinstate the fox's
> vote shoppe.
>
> If Contracts exist, I create the following contract, titled "狐票店", by paying
> Agora 1 Shiny:
> {{{
> The player 天火狐 is the proprietor of 狐票店 (intended pr
On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 11:02 PM, Josh T wrote:
> Assuming that Contracts are now a thing, I am going to reinstate the fox's
> vote shoppe.
>
> If Contracts exist, I create the following contract, titled "狐票店", by paying
> Agora 1 Shiny:
> {{{
> The player 天火狐 is the proprietor of 狐票店 (intended pr
Just a draft to make sure I haven't messed something up again.
-Aris
---
I hereby distribute each listed proposal, initiating the Agoran
Decision of whether to adopt it, and removing it from the proposal
pool. For this decision, the vote collector is the Assessor, the
quorum is 8.0 and the valid
well if you want to do the FLR you can still deputise for rulekeepor
and yoink it from PSS...
On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 2:36 PM, Reuben Staley wrote:
> As PSS has beaten me to the publishing of an SLR by deputisation, this
> doesn't really count, but I tried to fix some of the errors and make it lo
Will you be resolving 7922 soon?
On Sun, 22 Oct 2017 at 08:31 Publius Scribonius Scholasticus <
p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I resolve the decision(s) to adopt proposal(s) 7923-7929 below.
>
>
>
> [This noti
That text was removed by Aris's proposal in any case.
On Sun, 22 Oct 2017 at 21:22 Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, 22 Oct 2017, Aris Merchant wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 5:57 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> > wrote:
> > > I deputise for he Rulekeepor to publish the below SLR:
> >
On Sun, 22 Oct 2017 at 20:57 Publius Scribonius Scholasticus <
p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I deputise for he Rulekeepor to publish the below SLR:
>
> THE SHORT LOGICAL RULESET
Errors I've found:
The Floating Value rule is missing its ID number.
The text of rule 2309 is wholly
On Sun, 2017-10-22 at 18:26 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> ais523 (or someone else): you are the only person to do a Masters
> thesis - do you have a copy handy? (I vaguely remember it might have
> been part of a CFJ, but that might have been your dissertation).
>
> Alexis's recent thesis is right
ais523 (or someone else): you are the only person to do a Masters
thesis - do you have a copy handy? (I vaguely remember it might have
been part of a CFJ, but that might have been your dissertation).
Alexis's recent thesis is right on B.N. level IMO, but e's already
got that, I'm trying to dec
On Sun, 22 Oct 2017, Aris Merchant wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 5:57 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> wrote:
> > I deputise for he Rulekeepor to publish the below SLR:
> >
> > THE SHORT LOGICAL RULESET
>
> CoE: There are brackets in R2520, in clear contravention of the
> beginning of t
On Sun, 2017-10-22 at 18:15 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> I submit the following proposal, AI-3, "I've never seen this done":
>
> =
> [I mean, *literally* never].
>
> Amend Rule 1728 by deleting:
> The actor SHOULD publish a
On Mon, 23 Oct 2017, Alexis Hunt wrote:
> I believe the report is overdue though, traditionally, we are lax on officers
> who take over midweek.
In an old system, we had a strong precedent or rule (can't remember) that
you can't ding an officer for missing something in eir first objection perio
I believe the report is overdue though, traditionally, we are lax on
officers who take over midweek.
Note that the new rules regarding your report mean you'll likely need to go
through some mailing list history to pick up the date that elections ended
for each office.
On Sun, 22 Oct 2017 at 21:09
oh. I wasn't sure whether or not "I ratify the below document, which is:
{Just now, ATMunn won an election for ADoP. Just now, Alexis won an
election for Prime Minister}." actually meant that I hold ADoP and Alexis
holds PM. I guess I should have figured that out, however, since Alexis's
vote count
Pardon me if I'm missing something, but this doesn't seem to be pended.
-Aris
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 12:05 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
>
> I submit the following Proposal, AI-3, "Registration fix finally":
>
> --
> [It looks like
>entity's shiny abalance.
abalance should be balance?
On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
wrote:
> Then, we need to rename the Tax Rate.
>
>
> On 10/22/2017 07:43 PM, Aris Merchant wrote:
>> Not apart from deregistration and administrative fees, neither of
>> which
I agree with this and have written o, asking em, if e needed interim help.
On 10/22/2017 07:49 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> On Mon, 23 Oct 2017, VJ Rada wrote:
>> By the by, I forgot o. is also the agronomist. I intend to deputize
>> for the position to publish its weekly report.
> I have to say, o
Then, we need to rename the Tax Rate.
On 10/22/2017 07:43 PM, Aris Merchant wrote:
> Not apart from deregistration and administrative fees, neither of
> which would normally be considered taxes.
>
> -Aris
>
>
>
> On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 4:41 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> wrote:
>> We alr
On Mon, 23 Oct 2017, VJ Rada wrote:
> Hey fun fact: there's still a use of Organisations in the rule
> post-this. The reason being, my "Estate Auction Fix" is listed after
> "Contracts" and amends the rule "Estate Auctions" to mention Orgs.
Um, actually, Contracts first overwrote the text that
Fair enough on that last point - I shouldn't talk I grabbed Herald from
PSS last month for the same reasons (i.e. I needed the cash).
On Mon, 23 Oct 2017, VJ Rada wrote:
> It is 4 and 14 days, isn't it? That still gives em 3 to 4 days, if I
> prepare a report immediately after I'm allowed, which
Hey fun fact: there's still a use of Organisations in the rule
post-this. The reason being, my "Estate Auction Fix" is listed after
"Contracts" and amends the rule "Estate Auctions" to mention Orgs.
On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 11:31 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
wrote:
> I resolve the decisio
I create the following and pend it with AP.
Title: I Demand Faster Auctions
AI:2
Co-author: o.
Text: In rule 2491, replace "At the start of each month" with "At the
start of each week"
On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 10:56 AM, Aris Merchant
wrote:
> As Promotor, I remove "Faster Auctions", by o, from th
Yeah, lost and gone. I also just lost superintendent and PM rip. Bad two days.
On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 10:57 AM, Alexis Hunt wrote:
> E already did. You're the ADoP now!
>
> On Sun, 22 Oct 2017 at 19:57 ATMunn . wrote:
>>
>> That's true. I think I'd agree on that, especially for you, since you'l
Especially given that e is the Referee and the Secretary, which are
VERY important to publish each week, given the 7-day statute of
limitations and the Floating Value (and general effects of economic
uncertainty). I feel little guilt, honestly, and now that we have
excellent electoral systems I'm s
E already did. You're the ADoP now!
On Sun, 22 Oct 2017 at 19:57 ATMunn . wrote:
> That's true. I think I'd agree on that, especially for you, since you'll
> soon lose ADoP.
>
> On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 7:54 PM, VJ Rada wrote:
>
>> It is 4 and 14 days, isn't it? That still gives em 3 to 4 days,
That's true. I think I'd agree on that, especially for you, since you'll
soon lose ADoP.
On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 7:54 PM, VJ Rada wrote:
> It is 4 and 14 days, isn't it? That still gives em 3 to 4 days, if I
> prepare a report immediately after I'm allowed, which I doubt.
>
> I don't deny o's go
It is 4 and 14 days, isn't it? That still gives em 3 to 4 days, if I
prepare a report immediately after I'm allowed, which I doubt.
I don't deny o's good officerlyness, I have complimented em on it many
times. Having said that, e is also the richest Agoran, a holder of 5
offices currently. It seem
Agronomy in Agora can still go a long way, and I don't think it should
be repealed. At most, it needs to be reworked. The sentiment among
Agorans is that we need a more player-centric economy, so that shinies
can trade hands between players rather than between Agora and a player.
On 10/22/2017
On Mon, 23 Oct 2017, VJ Rada wrote:
> By the by, I forgot o. is also the agronomist. I intend to deputize
> for the position to publish its weekly report.
I have to say, o has been a conscientious and hard-working Officer that
hasn't missed deadlines generally - it seems churlish to grab offices
No I love the buying and selling of voting power idea there. If we
maybe made it cheaper and easier to understand, and increased the
number of Estates perhaps, it would maybe work. Problem, of course, is
buy-in.
On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 10:46 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 23 Oct 2017, VJ Ra
This, this is why I hate Gmail.
On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 7:23 PM, Alexis Hunt wrote:
> On Sat, 21 Oct 2017 at 20:11 Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, 21 Oct 2017, Ørjan Johansen wrote:
>> > In a below quoted message of 19 October, ATMunn succeeded in
>> changing
>> > eir votes.
>>
>>
On Mon, 23 Oct 2017, VJ Rada wrote:
> We should probably just repeal Agronomy? It's a really complicated
> modification of five things that creates so many empty reports that
> the reportor forgot to publish them until last week. And the person
> whose idea it was left immediately after coming up
>From now on, I will "create the following and spend a shiny to pend it"
On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 10:42 AM, ATMunn . wrote:
> Also, "create and spend a shiny to pend the following" implies that you're
> creating a shiny, and then spending it, which is IMPOSSIBLE.
>
> On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 5:53 P
On Sun, 22 Oct 2017, Alexis Hunt wrote:
>
> Contracts passed, and was enacted unless my CFJ turns out true (G., any
> likelihood
> of expediting that one and possibly linking it with my previous one about the
> Promotor's report?)
Might not be today, but should get it out by tomorrow.
But I
Not apart from deregistration and administrative fees, neither of
which would normally be considered taxes.
-Aris
On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 4:41 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
wrote:
> We already have taxes.
>
>
> On 10/22/2017 07:39 PM, Aris Merchant wrote:
>> I submit the following propos
Also, "create and spend a shiny to pend the following" implies that you're
creating a shiny, and then spending it, which is IMPOSSIBLE.
On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 5:53 PM, Aris Merchant <
thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think you mean pend, not spend.
>
> -Aris
>
> On Sun, Oct 22, 201
We already have taxes.
On 10/22/2017 07:39 PM, Aris Merchant wrote:
> I submit the following proposal, and pend it for 1 AP.
>
> -Aris
> ---
> Title: It's death _and_ taxes
> Adoption index: 1.0
> Author: Aris
> Co-author(s):
>
>
> Lines beginning with hashmarks ("#") and comments in square brack
On Sun, 22 Oct 2017, Alexis Hunt wrote:
> Proposal: No List Prefixes (AI=1)
> {{{
> The Distributor is hereby requested to disable the DIS, BUS, and OFF
> prefixes automatically added to mail sent by the agoranomic.org mailing
> lists.
> }}}
Subject lines wander a long way from their purpose -
On Sun, 22 Oct 2017, Aris Merchant wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 4:31 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> >
> >
> > The regkeepor should be monthly not weekly - if you want a sinecure
> > it's that - a completely empty weekly report for the last two months.
>
> The Regkeepor has been diligently doing e
Did it? OK, fair enough.
We should probably just repeal Agronomy? It's a really complicated
modification of five things that creates so many empty reports that
the reportor forgot to publish them until last week. And the person
whose idea it was left immediately after coming up with it.
On Mon, O
Contracts passed, and was enacted unless my CFJ turns out true (G., any
likelihood of expediting that one and possibly linking it with my previous
one about the Promotor's report?)
On Sun, 22 Oct 2017 at 19:36 VJ Rada wrote:
> Superintendent still exists and Secretary does pending Contracts
> act
On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 4:31 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
>
> The regkeepor should be monthly not weekly - if you want a sinecure
> it's that - a completely empty weekly report for the last two months.
The Regkeepor has been diligently doing eir work unpaid, except for
those weeks in which e forgets
Superintendent still exists and Secretary does pending Contracts
actually passing, of course.
On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 10:34 AM, Alexis Hunt wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Oct 2017 at 19:32 Kerim Aydin wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> The regkeepor should be monthly not weekly - if you want a sinecure
>> it's that - a co
On Sun, 22 Oct 2017 at 19:32 Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
>
> The regkeepor should be monthly not weekly - if you want a sinecure
> it's that - a completely empty weekly report for the last two months.
>
> We just repealed organizations, right? So that's the Secretary gone.
>
Superintendent is gone now
The regkeepor should be monthly not weekly - if you want a sinecure
it's that - a completely empty weekly report for the last two months.
We just repealed organizations, right? So that's the Secretary gone.
I thought for a while that the Herald and Tailor should be merged, but
now with Karma
TTttPF
On Sun, 22 Oct 2017 at 19:23 Alexis Hunt wrote:
> On Sat, 21 Oct 2017 at 20:11 Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, 21 Oct 2017, Ørjan Johansen wrote:
>> > In a below quoted message of 19 October, ATMunn succeeded in
>> changing
>> > eir votes.
>>
>> This is CFJ 3581. I assign i
On Sat, 21 Oct 2017 at 20:11 Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, 21 Oct 2017, Ørjan Johansen wrote:
> > In a below quoted message of 19 October, ATMunn succeeded in changing
> > eir votes.
>
> This is CFJ 3581. I assign it to Alexis.
>
>
> > Argument: The plain text version of the message h
Thanks.
On Sun, 22 Oct 2017 at 17:35 VJ Rada wrote:
> To answer your question, Alexis, here is the Rulekeepor resolution.
>
> On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 5:45 PM, VJ Rada wrote:
> > I resolve the agoran decisions for the determination of the registrar,
> > superintendent, surveyor, arbitor, rulekee
So make a length or substance requirement or something. Our current
reportor is doing quite an excellent job. Also, offices aren't bad so
long as they do _something_. This one tells people what's going on in
an interesting way, and provides an archive for future generations of
Agorans [1].
[1] htt
It's literally a complete sinecure. We have 20 offices now, I think.
And 20 players. It seems like pruning non-essential offices is sorely
needed, and this one is the least essential possible. While all the
other offices have a report containing information, this office is
just "make a report!" "wi
I concur. We finally have an active reportor, now is not the time to
repeal the newspaper.
-Aris
On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 3:01 PM, Reuben Staley wrote:
> Why though? Even if it isn't an entirely useful of the game, I still enjoy
> reading the newspaper every week.
>
> On 10/22/2017 3:52 PM, VJ Ra
Why though? Even if it isn't an entirely useful of the game, I still
enjoy reading the newspaper every week.
On 10/22/2017 3:52 PM, VJ Rada wrote:
I create and spend a shiny to spend the following
Name: Repeal the Reportor
AI: 1
Author: me
Text: Repeal rule 2446 "The Agoran Newspaper"
--
Tri
At least let me do the things I want to do with the office that I've held
off doing since I wanted to wait until Contracts was out.
天火狐
On 22 October 2017 at 17:55, VJ Rada wrote:
> I _spend_ a shiny to _pend_ "Repeal the Reportor"
>
> On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 8:53 AM, Aris Merchant
> wrote:
>
I think you mean pend, not spend.
-Aris
On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 2:52 PM, VJ Rada wrote:
> I create and spend a shiny to spend the following
> Name: Repeal the Reportor
> AI: 1
> Author: me
> Text: Repeal rule 2446 "The Agoran Newspaper"
>
> --
> From V.J. Rada
To answer your question, Alexis, here is the Rulekeepor resolution.
On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 5:45 PM, VJ Rada wrote:
> I resolve the agoran decisions for the determination of the registrar,
> superintendent, surveyor, arbitor, rulekeepor, referee, promotor and
> tailor. The quorum was 2.0, the val
Surely so! I strongly remember resolving that batch, it was a huge one.
On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 7:15 AM, Alexis Hunt wrote:
> Depitizing for rulekeepor entails taking the office over (unless you resign
> after of course). I think we'd all appreciate the short term work but it's
> one of the harde
Depitizing for rulekeepor entails taking the office over (unless you resign
after of course). I think we'd all appreciate the short term work but it's
one of the hardest jobs to do on an ongoing basis.
That said, was the last election ever resolved? I see VJ initiated it on
September 14 but can't
(Oh gosh. What have I gotten myself into?)
I don't understand the significance of your message. What should I wait
to do? Do you mean I shouldn't work on the ruleset?
On 10/22/2017 1:50 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
Not you specifically, primarily Trigon, but really anyone who wa
Not you specifically, primarily Trigon, but really anyone who wanted it.
On 10/22/2017 03:45 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> (was this meant to be just to me?) I'm not planning on doing anything
> myself to start an election or anything... I mainly didn't want Trigon
> to put work into it or think e
I understand your concerns and even share some of them. That's why I'm
only testing the waters a bit right now with the deputisation. If it
turns out to be too much work and I don't want to handle it, than
someone else should definitely take the job. That being said, I'm fairly
certain that tha
Yes, regardless of who deputizes in the short-term I think this one definitely
deserves an election.
On Sun, 22 Oct 2017, Alexis Hunt wrote:
>
> I agree. I'm considering putting myself up for election on it as a result.
>
> On Sun, Oct 22, 2017, 15:20 Kerim Aydin, wrote:
>
>
> I should
The problem is, by R208 it isn't actually a proposal resolution if
it doesn't "provides a tally of the voters' valid ballots."
Note that it's a bit weird - the tally of valid ballots isn't actually
what self-ratifies - that's in R2034. So the tally is more platonic,
if it was incorrect, the res
I agree. I'm considering putting myself up for election on it as a result.
On Sun, Oct 22, 2017, 15:20 Kerim Aydin, wrote:
>
>
> I should say I'm a bit nervous with someone who hasn't been an Officer
> before starting with rulekeepor. It's an unholy blend of a lot of work,
> in big bursts, with
Per rule 208, an invalid tally must invalidate the decision.
On Sun, Oct 22, 2017, 15:17 Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, <
p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I believed it was a revision of the previously published document
> because the outcomes were not changed.
>
>
> On 10/22/2017
I should say I'm a bit nervous with someone who hasn't been an Officer
before starting with rulekeepor. It's an unholy blend of a lot of work,
in big bursts, with timeliness being a big issue, and it requires some
pretty finicky understanding of the rules (e.g. it's the primary person
responsi
I believed it was a revision of the previously published document
because the outcomes were not changed.
On 10/22/2017 02:34 PM, Alexis Hunt wrote:
> I spend a shiny to CFJ "In the below-quoted message, PSS resolved an
> Agoran Decision".
>
> Arguments: See also CFJ 3576 about revisions of report
Aris, I'll pay you back for a fix proposal if you find that oerjan is
correct and if you can get it into this week's distribution.
On Sat, 21 Oct 2017 at 19:58 Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 16 Oct 2017, Ørjan Johansen wrote:
> > I make two CFJ, and request that they be linked:
>
>
> > T
You deputize by actually performing the action (e.g. actually publishing
an up-to-date Ruleset that's overdue). Multiple people might announce
their intent to do so ahead of time, but that doesn't make the office
change (or reserve it for them).
So you'd do it by saying "I deputize for the Rule
You can do as you intended, making the "if it is still possible" clause in
PSS' pledge false, thus alleviating eir duty to become Rulekeepor. Think of
it as "if you don't do it, they will".
天火狐
On 22 October 2017 at 10:44, Reuben Staley wrote:
> Oh. Then it's PSS' responsibility now and not min
Oh. Then it's PSS' responsibility now and not mine?
--
Trigon
On Oct 22, 2017 8:40 AM, "Alexis Hunt" wrote:
That was only an intent; you haven't actually done it yet.
On Sun, 22 Oct 2017 at 10:34 Reuben Staley wrote:
> Are people still not getting my messages? It's in a thread with the title
That was only an intent; you haven't actually done it yet.
On Sun, 22 Oct 2017 at 10:34 Reuben Staley wrote:
> Are people still not getting my messages? It's in a thread with the title
> "Deputising for the rulekeepor".
>
> --
> Trigon
>
> On Oct 22, 2017 8:31 AM, "Alexis Hunt" wrote:
>
>> Huh?
Are people still not getting my messages? It's in a thread with the title
"Deputising for the rulekeepor".
--
Trigon
On Oct 22, 2017 8:31 AM, "Alexis Hunt" wrote:
> Huh? When?
>
> On Sun, Oct 22, 2017, 10:26 Reuben Staley,
> wrote:
>
>> I don't think it's possible, as I have already deputized
Huh? When?
On Sun, Oct 22, 2017, 10:26 Reuben Staley, wrote:
> I don't think it's possible, as I have already deputized for rulekeepor.
>
> --
> Trigon
>
> On Oct 22, 2017 5:42 AM, "Publius Scribonius Scholasticus" <
> p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I pledge to deputize for the
I don't think it's possible, as I have already deputized for rulekeepor.
--
Trigon
On Oct 22, 2017 5:42 AM, "Publius Scribonius Scholasticus" <
p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com> wrote:
I pledge to deputize for the rulekeepor on October 19, 2017, if it is
still possible.
On 10/22/2017 12:14
Hm, I'm not sure if the rules specifically say that the Assessor has to do
that. If they did, I would CoE it, but they only say "its holder is
responsible for collecting votes and keeping track of related properties."
On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 8:35 AM, Madeline wrote:
> You missed Contracts v8 in
You missed Contracts v8 in this list of passed proposals D:
On 2017-10-22 23:31, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
I resolve the decision(s) to adopt proposal(s) 7923-7929 below.
[This notice resolves the Agoran dec
I would be willing to do secretary.
On 10/22/2017 12:46 AM, VJ Rada wrote:
> I intend, in between 2 and 14 days, to deputize for the positions of
> Referee and Surveyor, for the purposes of publishing the weekly
> reports of each of those positions.
>
> I encourage someone with a stronger heart t
Mine is sort of up to date. The Registrar's report should be there, but
I need to find my SSH key password to push again.
On 10/22/2017 12:10 AM, VJ Rada wrote:
> The FLR hasn't had them in a long time: certainly not since I've been
> a player. I think Gaelan took them out.
>
> JDGA: I'm ironical
True, I suppose. I have a feeling "can by regulation" would probably
allow regulations either by announcement or with notice, but that's
not the end of the world.
-Aris
On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 12:22 AM, Alex Smith wrote:
> On Sun, 2017-10-22 at 00:16 -0700, Aris Merchant wrote:
>> Again, voting
On Sun, 2017-10-22 at 00:16 -0700, Aris Merchant wrote:
> Again, voting for both this and contracts is a rather bad idea,
> because they conflict. This removes regulations, which contracts
> uses.
The contracts proposal doesn't /need/ regulations for anything
fundamental, though. It'd be easy enou
On Sat, Oct 21, 2017 at 6:22 AM, ATMunn . wrote:
> I'm just going to make sure my vote actually changes.
>
> If, despite the aforementioned October 19 post, my vote on proposals
> 7922-7929 has not changed, I vote as follows:
...
> 7925: FOR
Again, voting for both this and contracts is a rather b
It's a report of all regulations. Regulations are intended as a way to
grant power under the rules to officers. They were enacted partly at
the request of a few players, who wished to use them for game systems
they were working on. Those systems didn't go anywhere, so right now
regulations don't do
82 matches
Mail list logo
