I recognize that that is obviously the intent. I'm not familiar with all
of the rules around determinacy, so I can't say with certainty whether
that that is actually what happens, though.
Jason Cobb
On 7/8/19 10:13 PM, Rebecca wrote:
surely it just means that the player has published no previ
surely it just means that the player has published no previous valid
notices of honour in the said week!
On Tue, Jul 9, 2019 at 12:03 PM Jason Cobb wrote:
> Rule 2510 ("Such is Karma") reads:
>
> >A player CAN publish a Notice of Honour. For a Notice of Honour
> >to be valid, it
Rule 2510 ("Such is Karma") reads:
A player CAN publish a Notice of Honour. For a Notice of Honour
to be valid, it must:
1. Be clear that it is a Notice of Honour, and be the first valid
Notice of Honour that player has published in the current week;
It certainly could be so done, but it would add text to the ruleset so I
didn't propose it :P
On Tue, Jul 9, 2019 at 11:53 AM Jason Cobb wrote:
> Is there a reason that this Rule says that the Herald has to do it? The
> paydays rule (Rule 2559) just says that "at the beginning of each month,
> a
Is there a reason that this Rule says that the Herald has to do it? The
paydays rule (Rule 2559) just says that "at the beginning of each month,
a Payday occurs.", and the Treasuror is just expected to keep track of
it. Is there something preventing the Karma rule from doing this?
Jason Cobb
You're right. I didn't know that was a rule, sorry.
Jason Cobb
On 7/8/19 9:06 PM, James Cook wrote:
I think those failed because e was the master of a zombie. [0]
[0]
https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-discussion/2019-July/054699.html
On Tue, 9 Jul 2019 at 00:36, Ja
I think those failed because e was the master of a zombie. [0]
[0]
https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-discussion/2019-July/054699.html
On Tue, 9 Jul 2019 at 00:36, Jason Cobb wrote:
>
> You missed R. Lee's bids of 2 coins [0] and 4 coins [1].
>
> [0]:
> https://mailman
I just missed the window for this - it's still the case that with this sort
of writing, once I get out of the time window I CANNOT do it - right?
> In a timely fashion after the beginning of each Quarter, the
> Herald CAN and SHALL by announcement, perform the following tasks
> i
Eh just see if there's a majority who want to get rid of it if you're going
to go this far to make it useless - I can't imagine anyone who wants to keep
the rule will go for this - it's not a middle-ground at all.
On 7/8/2019 5:00 PM, James Cook wrote:
I create a proposal as follows.
Title: S
agree
On Tue, Jul 9, 2019 at 2:54 AM Jason Cobb wrote:
> I'm personally fine with it, and it makes it slightly more searchable to
> have it all in email.
>
> Jason Cobb
>
> On 7/8/19 11:44 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> >
> > On 7/7/2019 5:19 PM, Jason Cobb wrote:
> >> Ah, another week, another 5 CFJs
On 7/7/2019 9:18 PM, James Cook wrote:
>
Well, G. said e proposed the rule to illustrate a security hole in
R106, which eir "power-limit precedence" proposal, soon to be adopted,
is meant to fix.
That was the inspiration, but now that it's (about to be) nerfed to
working on power=1 things on
I'm personally fine with it, and it makes it slightly more searchable to
have it all in email.
Jason Cobb
On 7/8/19 11:44 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
On 7/7/2019 5:19 PM, Jason Cobb wrote:
Ah, another week, another 5 CFJs
srsly, what do people think is the amount of court email traffic on
Offi
On 7/7/2019 5:19 PM, Jason Cobb wrote:
Ah, another week, another 5 CFJs
srsly, what do people think is the amount of court email traffic on Official
too spammy or is it an improvement? An option is to leave off posting the
case results (just posting the gazette + links).
13 matches
Mail list logo
