of eir weekly
> report is to create a more informed population.
>
> On Sat, May 20, 2017 at 9:18 PM James Beirne
> wrote:
>
>> I'd like to register as a player for about the fifth time.
>>
>> I'd also like to submit a proposal entitled "Reader&#x
auctorem vero vitae interfecistis quem deus suscitavit a mortuis cuius nos
testes sumus
> While a person owns all types of Ribbon, that person can Raise a Banner
> by announcement. This causes that person to win the game and a new game
> begins. That person's Ribbon Ownership becomes the empty set.
> ...
> White (W): A player qualifies for a White Ribbon if e has never
> previously ow
> > InmytypicalfashionIdeclaremyintenttoregisterinamannerthatiss
lightlyannoyingtoprocessbutthatisstilllegalprovidedthatIamin
terpretingtherulesetcorrectly.
> Welcome back, Ienpw!
Woo, thanks! As always, I hope *this* time I'll be more active!
>So, our system is that we basically just have one player playing the game
who optionally takes advice on how to play it? That doesn't seem very
nomicy to me (even if it's the best way for us to play chess).
>I'd prefer some sort of move voting system, perhaps where everyone can
vote on one of the
>When Agora's turn begins, the Grandmastor SHALL submit Agora's move to the
nommitian Outlander-Speaker within 7 days.
Oh, that's much neater.
>Also, we can probably do both bits in one Rule.
I just separated them for my own convenience above, as I'd like to have the
first part as close to verba
The general bit, to be adopted by both nomics:
{{
The Agora-nommit Chess Game is a game of chess played between Agora and
nommit. The Agoran Ambassador-at-Large and the nommitian Outlander-Speaker
shall determine which nomic will be White, after which the game will begin.
On its turn, each nomic S
ement?
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 5:53 PM, Charles Walker
wrote:
> On 29 Aug 2013, at 21:10, James Beirne wrote:
> > I become active, make the following judgement, and then become inactive
> again.
> >
> > ---
> >
> > In ruling on the case originally I probably p
FTR, nommit's turnaround time is under a week (voting begins every Friday).
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 4:39 PM, Jonathan Rouillard <
jonathan.rouill...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 3:23 PM, Max Schutz
> wrote:
> > wait explain how the deuce they are faster than us at proposals a nom
On 2013-08-29 2:32 PM, "Benjamin Schultz" wrote:
>
> I think it would be properly Agoran to have our move adopted by proposal.
Though we would need some mechanism to resolve simultaneous proposals.
>
> --
> OscarMeyr
One potential problem with that would be if there was insufficient interest
to
C-walker and I have been discussing the possibility of a nommit-Agora chess
game as an initial attempt at internomic relations. Basically, each nomic
would have a (part of a) rule that looks like this:
The nommit-Agora chess game is played between those two nomics. Each nomic
shall submit its move
I don't mind becoming active to judge the case. I should be able to get to
it this weekend.
On 2013-08-27 4:04 PM, "Kerim Aydin" wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, 27 Aug 2013, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> > Appeal 3383a
> > - REMAND without prejudice (Woggle)
> > - no opinion (Walker, Wooble)
> > - With n
As the recently-appointed Outlander Speaker of nommit (
http://www.reddit.com/r/nommit), I have the pleasure of informing you that
you have been officially recognized (and declared NEUTRAL) by our
burgeoning nomic. Following as it does your recent recognition of us, I am
confident that we have a st
On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 5:54 PM, Craig Daniel wrote:
> > Absolutely! Nothing wrong with it, any more than there's something
>> wrong with playing two games of chess at once.
>>
>> Now I'm getting ideas for Bughouse nomic
>>
>> Any rule that gets repealed from Nomic A becomes a part of Nomic B?
> Absolutely! Nothing wrong with it, any more than there's something wrong
with playing two games of chess at once.
Now I'm getting ideas for Bughouse nomic
> Well, unless there's a rule in one of the Nomics that prevent you from
joining another. =P
I lololed
> Gerontocracy is the current pref
Yeah, I struggled a lot with this. I decided 21 in the end after comparing
other sentences of TIME OUT. 7-14 days seems typical for repeated neglect
of duties and this seemed a bit more extreme to me.
On 2013-08-07 9:57 PM, "Craig Daniel" wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 4:06 PM, Tanner Swett wro
For the record, I support an appeal.
On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 6:14 PM, Charles Walker
wrote:
> On 7 August 2013 20:18, omd wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 6:28 AM, James Beirne
> wrote:
> >> Judgement: GUILTY/TIME OUT (21 days)
> >
> > I intend to appeal this
> Two of the lists are backups in case the first three go down (yeah, we
take things very seriously)
"we take things very seriously" might be a bit intimidating for new
players. I also think it;s worth mentioning the irc channel.
- Ien
On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 7:06 PM, Michael Slone wrote:
> On
On Sat, Aug 3, 2013 at 9:25 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, 3 Aug 2013, James Beirne wrote:
> > If I were to propose, say, a rule that randomly altered the power of
> random rules, there's no chance in hell it would
> > pass. Which is all nice and responsible,
> What is your general view of advertising Agora?
> Where is it appropriate to advertise Agora? What kind of fora? Any
specific sites?
> What kind of things would you say in a message to possible recruits?
My thoughts on recruiting follow:
- Don't be annoying
- We don't want an influx of players w
On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 8:16 AM, Fool wrote:
> On 01/08/2013 5:03 PM, James Beirne wrote:
>
>> FOR*1
>>
>
> I think you need to retract your previous vote first.
>
>
I do so and vote FOR*1
On Sun, Jul 28, 2013 at 7:44 PM, Charles Walker
wrote:
> On 28 July 2013 23:39, Aaron Goldfein wrote:
>> On Sun, Jul 28, 2013 at 6:44 AM, Charles Walker
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I hereby initiate the Agoran decision to elect the holder of the
>>> Government Waste office. The eligible voters are the act
Also, I'll note that a more accurate breakdown of my proposed salary
is 241.56+102.64+78.39/3+0.67, per my analysis.
- Ienpw III
On Sun, Jul 28, 2013 at 10:44 AM, Charles Walker
wrote:
> I hereby initiate the Agoran decision to elect the holder of the
> Government Waste office. The eligible vote
d
wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 2:52 PM, Charles Walker
> wrote:
>> On 24 Jul 2013 18:11, "James Beirne" wrote:
>>>
>>> >The panel (and future judges) should consider that the defendant recently
>>> > made emself inactive, rendering TIME O
Oh, I misunderstood. Yes, it is, but again, I don't see why the rules
permit overruling if it's considered to be inappropriate.
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 3:03 PM, Tanner Swett wrote:
> On Jul 24, 2013, at 1:11 AM, James Beirne wrote:
>> I'm not sure that I have introduced
>The panel (and future judges) should consider that the defendant recently made
>emself inactive, rendering TIME OUT most likely ineffectual.
E was not inactive at the time of the original sentencing, though.
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 7:07 AM, Charles Walker
wrote:
> On 24 Jul 2013 08:3
e,
the defendant did not resign.
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 4:16 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, 24 Jul 2013, James Beirne wrote:
>> >but that we also wish to avoid making a decision on sentencing on our own
>>
>> Is that not exactly what the text of rule 911 states
>but that we also wish to avoid making a decision on sentencing on our own
Is that not exactly what the text of rule 911 states we should do?
My ruling was based on rule 911, which states, in part:
>OVERRULE with a valid replacement judgement for the prior
>case, appropriate if the prior judgement was inappropriate in
>the prior case and the replacement judgement is appropriate
>for the prior case; the re
>Just say 12 weeks
Personally, I prefer the date to be as consistent as possible rather
than the day of the week.
Not that the elections are obliged to be then, of course, but it's
just my preference.
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 10:37 PM, James Beirne wrote:
>> I'd definitely
> I'd definitely prefer just saying "within 3 months before" and letting the
> IADoP handle any disputes.
> —Machiavelli
And I suppose it would only be a problem something like 5 days per
year, and even then only if there was supposed to be an election.
As an aside, are non-integer denominations of Yaks permitted?
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 4:39 AM, James Beirne wrote:
> Oh, I missed this. I nominate myself.
>
> After an in-depth examination and assessment of the office, I have
> determined that I will require Y241.56 as my bas
Oh, good, I was worried I'd done something wrong.
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 5:42 PM, omd wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 4:40 PM, James Beirne
> wrote:
>> Is there any particular reason that "Standardized election days (sort
>> of, not really)" is not included
Is there any particular reason that "Standardized election days (sort
of, not really)" is not included in the pool?
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 5:26 PM, omd wrote:
> The Proposal Pool contains the following proposals:
>
> NUM AI PF C D AUTHOR TITLE
>
> 7548 2 25 O 1 Walker Recruitment S
nt for any irrational numbers we
can actually describe.
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 12:47 PM, Tanner Swett wrote:
> On Jul 22, 2013, at 1:51 AM, James Beirne wrote:
>> Proposal: Π & Co.:
>>
>> Remove the word "rational" from rule 1688.
>
> Why would we want to d
clunky solution to a trivial problem.
- Ienpw III
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 6:08 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 22 Jul 2013, James Beirne wrote:
>> >a) by announcement, if e is the IADoP, or the office is vacant
>> > or assumed, or no election has
Having only skimmed the offices rules, I am not sure if this is legal,
but if it is:
I assume the office of Government Waste.
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 2:45 AM, Sean Hunt wrote:
> I go on hold.
>
> I resign all my offices.
>
> -scshunt
>World Wide Web
That takes me back
On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 5:15 PM, Tanner Swett wrote:
> I submit a proposal, titled "Public Displays":
>
> Amend Rule 2143 "Official Reports and Duties" by appending the following
> paragraph: "Officers SHOULD maintain a publicly visible copy of their
> report
>If the rules were to change to allow players to be bound to a constitution
they did not agree to, why would that be considered an "agreement"?
If two people agreed to that party's constitution it would be an agreement,
just not one that all bound players agreed to.
- Ienpw III
On Fri, Jul 19,
I vote for omd.
On Sat, Jul 13, 2013 at 4:34 PM, woggle wrote:
> On 7/9/13 12:57 , Charles Walker wrote:
> > I hereby initiate the general election, in which the valid options are
> the
> > party leaders, omd and Fool, and NO CHANGE; the eligible voters are the
> > active players other than the
I object to making me inactive.
On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 2:47 PM, omd wrote:
> I intend, without objection, to make Henri inactive.
> I intend, without objection, to make Ienpw III inactive.
>
> (As a reminder to the players in question, it is normal to object if
> you don't want to be inactive.
Thanks! I have a history of registering and idling out of things, so here's
hoping this time's different.
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 3:30 AM, Charles Walker
wrote:
> On 14 May 2013, at 02:28, James Beirne wrote:
>
> > I, reasonably clearly and reasonably unambiguously, a
...by the way, and I'd like be referred to by that name (if it's not too
much trouble).
I'm a blognomic player.
Our rules state that "anybody" can be a player. To me, at least, a
game is not "anybody", but this question of interpretation would
likely be settled by CFJ.
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 12:15 PM, Charles Walker
wrote:
> On 11 August 2011 16:10, Jonatan Kilhamn wrote:
>> On 11
s in HTML Format
--
James Beirne
On 17/12/2009 10:46 PM, comex wrote:
12:26< benuphoenix> For the record, I have been having trouble
reading anything from "schrodingers.katana at gmail dot com" due to
volume of mailing lists.
Can't you just use filters/labels? My account handles being
subscribed to loads of (mostly unread) m
Aaron Goldfein wrote:
Sat 14 Nov 20:38 yuri_dragon_17 changes eir nickname to lenpw III
Note that this is an I, not an L.
My Monopoly-nomic fusion got me thinking about Nomopoly. After viewing
the ruleset, I thought that I'd give it a try.
It's located here: http://groups.google.com/group/nomopoly-iv
Elliott Hird wrote:
2009/11/15 James Beirne :
And it's probably easier not to ask what it means.
I don't know, my email client makes it very easy to reply to messages.
what does it mean?
what does it all MEAN?
Easy to ask, maybe. Not easy to answer.
Elliott Hird wrote:
there isn't a big enough nomic landscape to do it nowadays, anyway.
That's a shame, too.
Kerim Aydin wrote:
On Sun, 15 Nov 2009, James Beirne wrote:
Just wondering what Agora's historical opinion and stance towards them has
been.
Do you mean a subnomic or a supernomic (in relation to Agora)? We've tried
both a couple times but they haven't been sustained
Just wondering what Agora's historical opinion and stance towards them
has been.
Ed Murphy wrote:
c. wrote:
I intend, without three objections, to flip the contestmaster of
Cookie Jar to none.
I object. Why not submit guesses yourself?
I object.
James Beirne wrote:
smarc smarc smarc smarc smarc smarc smarc smarc
Believe me, I did not mean to send this to this mailing list.
I promise to be more careful in the future.
And it's probably easier not to ask what it means.
smarc smarc smarc smarc smarc smarc smarc smarc
So now my NEW NAME is Ienpw III.
- yuri_dragon_17
56 matches
Mail list logo
