It's not an explicit formal obligation anywhere right now as far as I'm
aware, but feel free to CFJ it to confirm that I actually have to.
On a more very super duper important note: It's recordKEEPor, not
recordGIVEor - my records of all existence are mine, mine!!!
On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 8:06 AM
No one said anything about CuddleBeam's report being self ratifying.
Also, CuddleBeam, the same very strong custom which says that a
recordkeepor tracks something indicates that they have to report on it
somehow, either by request or in a regular report. Someone with more
expirence can correct me
On Tue, 2018-10-02 at 07:43 +0200, Cuddle Beam wrote:
> Ok don't freak out now, but you have exactly $8,008,135 by the way.
Do we have to CoE this to stop it self-ratifying? Or can we ratify an
Agoran legal fiction that G. has that much? Would an actual bank acknow
ledge the resulting self-ratific
Ok don't freak out now, but you have exactly $8,008,135 by the way.
Yeah, I know, I'm amazing - how does Cuddles do it? Pshe. It's child's play
for someone as dapper and swagg'n as me.
On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 1:16 AM Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 1 Oct 2018, Cuddle Beam wrote:
> > I pledge th
Aha! I was ready for this.
I am required to track - but not to show what I'm tracking! These are
unreasonable demands!
Now, please leave me alone as I perform my godly duty, there's a lot to
track out there.
On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 1:34 AM D Margaux wrote:
> > I think that once a person have be
Maybe you can re-break it because “the time window of a pledge is 60 days”
(unless otherwise specified), not “the earlier of 60 days and when it is
broken.” So maybe the pledge stays in effect. The same conduct cannot give
rise to repeated fines, but different breaches of the same pledge maybe
can.
The crime isn't "failure to track", it's "breaking a pledge" (by failing
to track). Once a pledge is broken, it's broken...? Can you re-break it?
On Mon, 1 Oct 2018, D Margaux wrote:
> > I think that once a person have been punished for breaking a pledge, the
> > pledge is done (as e can't be
> I think that once a person have been punished for breaking a pledge, the
> pledge is done (as e can't be punished twice, there's no requirement
> anymore). So the result of the finger-point, if e is punished, is to end
> the pledge. (Whether this is true is a general question about pledges,
> m
On Mon, Oct 1, 2018 at 2:23 PM D Margaux wrote:
> > Your argument is something like saying that since we only
> > defined what foo(int x) does, you are free to interpret the entity
> > "foo" to mean the separate, hitherto by rules undefined function
> > foo(char c).
>
> I think this is on the rig
> Your argument is something like saying that since we only
> defined what foo(int x) does, you are free to interpret the entity
> "foo" to mean the separate, hitherto by rules undefined function
> foo(char c).
I think this is on the right track for why it doesn’t work.
Putting it slightly diffe
Oh hello there!
And, don't worry about butting from the outside! I am too pretty lol. I get
what you mean with "king of a country", but the issue is that the term used
is simply "king", not "king of country". It's a recordkeepor of assets, not
a plain recordkeepor, and a plain "recordkeepor" is th
On Mon, 1 Oct 2018 at 19:13, Cuddle Beam wrote:
>
> I pledge the following: I pledge to be the recordkeepor of absolutely
> everything.
>
> I then CFJ the following: Non-regulated actions cannot be performed.
>
> Grat. Arguments for that CFJ:
> - From R2125: (3) the action would, as part of its ef
"CFJ 1911-1914 (called Mar 18, 2008): Physical realities supersede the
Rules by default."
Maybe this helps? But yeah, it would be amusing that a mere pledge can be
so incredibly dangerous that it has to be stopped by the ossification rule.
I'm quite curious now to see if I've actually triggered i
The CFJ answer must be no, because otherwise Agora would cease to exist and
become ossified. If all actions are regulated, then they CAN be performed
only in the manner described by the rules. The rules do not describe how to
send or receive an email, etc. So if the CFJ is TRUE, then it would be
IN
Oh wait. I spoke too soon, without understanding the upshot of your pledge.
This is a hilarious and awesome pledge/CFJ. Very cool!
On Mon, Oct 1, 2018 at 1:49 PM D Margaux wrote:
> Hmm. I think the CFJ is trivially false. “Perform” is not defined, so we
> give it its ordinary meaning. Speaking fo
Hmm. I think the CFJ is trivially false. “Perform” is not defined, so we give
it its ordinary meaning. Speaking for myself, I perform (in the sense of “do”)
a great many unregulated actions on a daily basis (e.g., waking up, getting
dressed, eating meals, reading books, talking to people other t
Oh nice, thanks.
On Mon, Oct 1, 2018 at 6:30 PM Reuben Staley
wrote:
> Actually, if you don't mind, I'm going to promote my unofficial ruleset, up
> to date as of August 3, 2018. Should have the relevant information.
>
> https://github.com/AgoraNomic/ruleset/blob/trigon/slr.txt
>
> On Mon, Oct 1
Actually, if you don't mind, I'm going to promote my unofficial ruleset, up
to date as of August 3, 2018. Should have the relevant information.
https://github.com/AgoraNomic/ruleset/blob/trigon/slr.txt
On Mon, Oct 1, 2018, 10:25 Cuddle Beam wrote:
> I appreciate knowing that but I was wondering
I appreciate knowing that but I was wondering if you had a copy of the
latest version of those rules because you seem to know what they are.
On Mon, Oct 1, 2018 at 3:39 PM Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
>
> We applied some patches in late July following the birthday tournament.
> (the Rules worked for tha
We applied some patches in late July following the birthday tournament.
(the Rules worked for that, but a CFJ pointed out the need for the
patch). We read them pretty carefully and *think* they're ok and
straightforward, but no one has tried one since then so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
On Mon, 1 Oct 2018, Cu
How are the Tournament rules currently?
On Mon, Oct 1, 2018 at 3:16 PM Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, Sep 30, 2018 at 9:06 PM Alex Smith
> wrote:
> > What about this: we have repeated instances of a subgame each lasting a
> > week or so, and some easy way to amend the rules of the subgame (ea
On Sun, Sep 30, 2018 at 9:06 PM Alex Smith wrote:
> What about this: we have repeated instances of a subgame each lasting a
> week or so, and some easy way to amend the rules of the subgame (easier
> than a proposal;
Oh, and by the way: this can be done without changing a single rule,
it's ca
On Sun, 30 Sep 2018, Aris Merchant wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 30, 2018 at 9:06 PM Alex Smith wrote:
> > What about this: we have repeated instances of a subgame each lasting a
> > week or so, and some easy way to amend the rules of the subgame (easier
> > than a proposal;
For me, the "perfect" game
On Sun, 30 Sep 2018, Aris Merchant wrote:
> Okay, poll for everyone:
>
> 1. Have you ever been involved in the economy because it was required
> to take main game actions?
> 2. If so, did you enjoy it?
Yes. I've both enjoyed and not enjoyed. There were some (required to
participate) that I
> 1. Have you ever been involved in the economy because it was required
to take main game actions?
Yes.
> 2. If so, did you enjoy it?
It was pretty overwhelming, I was in ecstasy the whole time and it got hard
to write because my eyes kept on rolling back and my drool got on the
keyboard as my f
25 matches
Mail list logo
