Josiah Worcester wrote:
On 08:40 Mon 18 Feb , Levi Stephen wrote:
I awared the AFO the Patent Title of Three Months Long Service Leave if e
does not already bear it.
I awared Levi the Patent Title of Three Months Long Service Leave if e does
not already bear it.
I awared zefram the
Geoffrey Spear wrote:
On Jan 31, 2008 1:43 PM, Ian Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Jan 31, 2008 11:32 AM, Geoffrey Spear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Jan 31, 2008 12:35 PM, Charles Reiss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I vote for the first candidate on the following list who has the most
votes
Geoffrey Spear wrote:
On Jan 30, 2008 3:02 PM, Roger Hicks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Making the public statement 'This statement is a lie' would
cause the person making that statement to violate Rule 2149.
Soliciting comments on this CFJ.
Judge BobTHJ
I agree with H. Zefram's anal
Ed Murphy wrote:
Levi wrote:
I initiate an Agoran Decision to resolve the holder of the Assessor
office. The eligible voters are the active players. The vote collector
is the IADoP.
The valid options are BOBTHJ and ROOT.
This voting period has ended. Please resolve it with all due speed.
> since
making a public statement is not a rule-defined action.
I'm not sure I follow this. How would it be possible to violate Rule
2149 if the act of 'making a public statement' is not defined by the rules?
Levi
I agree to REMAND also.
Is it also worth considering the possibility that the registration
notice registered a player 'Pavitra', rather than 'watcher'? (I believe
this was the initial interpretation from the registrar?)
Levi
I agree to this judicial decision of REMAND, with the added note t
Kerim Aydin wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jan 2008, Ian Kelly wrote:
Create a new Rule, at Power=4, titled "Spectator", with the text:
Any person CAN and may at any time by observing this rule make
any change whatsoever to the gamestate, including but not
limited to enacting, repealing, or am
NUM FL AI SUBMITTER TITLE
5417 D0 2Murphy No notes for disinterested proposals
FOR
Levi
comex wrote:
Proposal: Generalize Game Actions (AI=3)
Create a new Rule, at Power=4, titled "Dictator", with the text:
comex CAN and may at any time by announcement make any explicit
change whatsoever to the gamestate, including but not limited to
enacting, repealing, or amendi
Josiah Worcester wrote:
On Wednesday 23 January 2008 15:56:54 Levi Stephen wrote:
This notice resolves the Agoran Decision for the holder of the Clerk of
the Courts office.
Votes:
ZEFRAM: Zefram, root, Eris
COMEX: Iammars
MURPHY: Goethe, Murphy, OscarMeyr, Wooble, avpx, BobTHJ, comex
The
Ed Murphy wrote:
woggle wrote:
They would self-ratify. Quoth R2034:
A public document purporting to resolve an Agoran decision is
self-ratifying.
No they wouldn't, because messages purporting to resolve Agoran
decisions generally aren't public documents. Fix proposal coming up.
Josiah Worcester wrote:
I intend to ratify the Short Logical Ruleset published last Wednesday.
This doesn't solve the IADoP's issues of who has been nominated for and
constend to what offices.
It's looking like it might not be possible to sort this out without a
CFJ on whether the initial n
Josiah Worcester wrote:
On Monday 21 January 2008 19:37:28 Ian Kelly wrote:
On Jan 21, 2008 7:21 PM, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I intend to ratify my message alleging to announce the voting results
of proposals 5390-5404.
Support: me (implicitly)
Object: none
I hereby ratify the m
Ed Murphy wrote:
Levi wrote:
I initiate an Agoran Decision to resolve the holder of the Assessor
office.
The valid options are BOBTHJ, ROOT and MURPHY.
Did I consent to this? In any case, I don't want it (thus triggering
pikhq's conditional).
Yeah, root brought this up also. So, it look
Ed Murphy wrote:
I wrote:
I intend to ratify my message alleging to announce the voting results of
proposals 5390-5404.
Support: me (implicitly)
Object: none
I hereby ratify the message described above.
So are we now at the point where the original publication of the voting
results was
Ian Kelly wrote:
On Jan 21, 2008 3:15 PM, Levi Stephen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I initiate an Agoran Decision to resolve the holder of the Assessor office.
The valid options are BOBTHJ, ROOT and MURPHY.
The eligible voters are the active players.
The vote collector is the IADoP
I
Josiah Worcester wrote:
If Murphy's initial attempt to resolve the voting period for those proposals
was correct, you are now obligated to initiate a few elections. (Mad
Scientist and Tailor)
Is there a CFJ on this?
Currently the state of nominates/elections requires is quite different
in ea
I think the following awards are due:
Three months long service:
AFO
Levi
Zefram
Six months, Nine months long service:
Zefram
But, I believe Zefram may have already been awarded some of these, but
they are not reflected in the most recent Herald's report.
Levi
I nominate Murphy for Conductor.
IADoP notes on this one: Murphy has installed emself as Conductor. There
were no other nominations, so it's probably not necessary to resolve
this one.
Levi
Levi Stephen wrote:
As no attempt was made last quarter,
I nominate comex, Zefram and pikhq for Promotor
Levi
I'm not going to bother with resolving this, as comex and pikhq refused
eir nominations.
Levi
Ed Murphy wrote:
root wrote:
Registrar
-
Thu 12 Jul 17:25:19 root nominated by Human Point Two
Tue 17 Jul 06:18:01 root installed by Human Point Two
Fri 7 Sep 18:25:49 PPnominated by comex
Mon 31 Dec 10:55:53 avpx nominated by Murphy
Levi, you appear to be
Ian Kelly wrote:
On Jan 17, 2008 4:08 AM, Levi Stephen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Assessor
Sun 29 Apr 20:31:01 Office created by Proposal 4939
Sun 29 Apr 20:31:01 Murphyinstalled by Proposal 4939
Thu 12 Jul 17:25:19 BobTHJnominated by Human Point Two
Fri 7 Sep 18:25:
Zefram wrote:
Levi Stephen wrote:
Assessor AFO 23 Sep 07 16 Jan 08 T
Claim of error: Murphy installed BobTHJ on 15 Jan 08 (message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>). The office then became vacant when
BobTHJ was deregistered by writ.
Ok, will be cor
comex wrote:
On Jan 15, 2008 5:08 PM, Levi Stephen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I interpret this as meaning at the time of this message.
Conditional messages are only allowed when the rules allow them, which
is currently only with R2127 votes.
Ok. R2127, does say that the condit
Except that Murphy's prerogative assignment ignored me.
Ah, forgot about that.
So, either way, no MWPs have prerogatvies then.
Levi
Roger Hicks wrote:
On Jan 15, 2008 2:58 AM, Levi Stephen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I initiate an Agoran Decision to resolve the holder of the CotC office.
The valid options are ZEFRAM, COMEX and MURPHY.
If there are at least 2 other votes for COMEX I vote COMEX. Otherwise
I vote
Josiah Worcester wrote:
You're late.
Sincerely, Minister Without Portfolio (but not Champion) pikhq.
Am I the speaker now?
Who are the MWPs?
I've lost track again :(
Levi
Ian Kelly wrote:
On Jan 14, 2008 6:40 PM, Zefram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I hereby assign the judicial panel of Levi, Murphy, and root as judge
of CFJ 1870a.
Detail: http://zenith.homelinux.net/cotc/viewcase.php?cfj=1870a
I intend to cause the panel to judge REMAND, as requested by the prio
Ian Kelly wrote:
On Jan 14, 2008 3:51 PM, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Levi wrote:
Is it worth considering the decision that was almost made before for
this appeal?
Yes, I had forgotten about this. (I wasn't on the panel at the time,
so I just filed it away in case it led to an actua
Ed Murphy wrote:
root wrote:
On Jan 14, 2008 9:15 AM, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I intend to cause the panel to judge REASSIGN, on the basis that
comex apparently did not make the reasonable effort to ask pikhq
whether the alleged event occurred.
I would prefer REMAND. There's no
Taral wrote:
With agreement, I would like to have the panel judge REASSIGN. I think
a fresh look on this would be valuable
I agree to this
On 12/20/07, Zefram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I hereby assign the judicial panel of Goddess Eris, Levi, and root as
judge of CFJ 1840a.
My initial thought is REMAND.
Probably on the grounds that there may be more issues to be considered
than those presented by the caller.
But, I'm really not sure yet.
Levi
Ian Kelly wrote:
On Dec 19, 2007 8:45 PM, Josiah Worcester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It is reasonable to assume that there was evidence of the act when Agora's
Child submitted that CFJ. . .
Considering that I myself caused Agora's Child to do so. ;)
Speculation about motive is poor evidence.
Apparently, this test case is testing whether an assertion that an action
happened outside of the public forum can even be evidenced in the game. . .
Intriguing.
An assertion on whether an action happened on the public forum IMO
wouldn't be sufficient evidence either, but the archives wo
Josiah Worcester wrote:
On Wednesday 19 December 2007 20:43:10 Levi Stephen wrote:
I'm happy that SLIPPERY was the appropriate decision. The defandant's
assertion/admittance that the alleged act occured was not available at
the time that judgement occured. Is REMAND appropriate if ne
I'm happy that SLIPPERY was the appropriate decision. The defandant's
assertion/admittance that the alleged act occured was not available at
the time that judgement occured. Is REMAND appropriate if new evidence
is available?
Levi
My reasoning for creating Fookiemyartug was that I was within the 30
day window of prohibited registration after my voluntary
deregistration. I wanted to start playing again immediately and set
out to find a way to do so. In my defense, I believed Fookiemyartug's
retroactivity clause to be a leg
FOR
Levi
Red is okay, but green and blue marks need drastic increases in payout, and
we need more colors. Two usable colors of marks is boring. There should
be more interesting and esoteric ways to earn Marks than VCs, not the
other way around.
And more ways to spend them. Even 140 Marks per mo
comex wrote:
On Dec 13, 2007 6:05 PM, Levi Stephen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
(b) The number and color of Marks being wagered, which MUST be
less than or equal to the number of Marks possessed by that
player, and
What if I make a Wager then give aw
Ed Murphy wrote:
Would anyone be interested in starting a new game using the rules
below? Are there any problems that would kill it before it started?
I'd be interested. I don't see any game killers. A few things I'd
probably do differently, but that's what proposals are for ;)
Levi
Iammars wrote:
On Dec 11, 2007 9:47 PM, Levi Stephen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
TTttPF
What's that for?
This Time to the Public/Proper Forum
--
-Iammars
www.jmcteague.com <http://www.jmcteague.com>
NUM FL AI SUBMITTER TITLE
5358 D1 2Murphy 1 is 1
FOR
5359 D1 2Murphy Concurring opinions
FOR
5360 O1 1.7 Murphy Clarify judicial precedent
10xFOR
5361 O1 1.7 Goethe Dissent!
10xFOR
5362 O1 1.5 rootContracting out locations
10xFOR
5
Levi Stephen wrote:
Josiah Worcester wrote:
I suggest that all Agorans come to aid our fellow nomic, B Nomic, in a
time of need. Currently, its rules seem to be breaking down. The Grand
Chancellor of B has taken control of the game state. Therefore, I
request that all true Agorans search for
Josiah Worcester wrote:
I suggest that all Agorans come to aid our fellow nomic, B Nomic, in a time of
need. Currently, its rules seem to be breaking down. The Grand Chancellor of
B has taken control of the game state. Therefore, I request that all true
Agorans search for any loopholes in its c
I think this was missing a couple of things. This adds a recordkeepor
and an expiry time.
{{{
Create a rule titled 'Permissions' with the following text:
A Permission is fixed asset. The recordkeepor of Permissions is
the Registrar. Each Permission is associated with a
regu
Thanks Murphy. Better wordings than mine ;)
(b) The number and color of Marks being wagered, which MUST be
less than or equal to the number of Marks possessed by that
player, and
Can multiple colors be wagered at once?
My intention was yes. e.g., I wager 3
Add on the ability to wager up to the amount of marks you have plus
100 times
the amount of VCs you have, and force VC->mark conversion.
> You can change VCs into marks? I was under the impression that it was
> only a one-way transfer.
Pretty much. Converting Marks to VCs is volu
Create a rule titled 'Permissions' with the following text:
A Permission is fixed asset. Each Permission is associated with a
regulated action.
The owner of a Permission MAY perform the action associated with
that Permission. Once the action has been performed the
Quite rough at the moment.
Create a rule titled 'Making Wagers' with the following text:
A Wager MAY be offered by any player by announcement.
To be a valid the Wager announcement MUST contain the following:
(a) A statement that is, or will become, true or false,
Ed Murphy wrote:
pikhq wrote:
Of these, I think that the requirement to transfer some other sort of
Mark is the most equitable. Therefore, I make the following judgement:
"Murphy SHALL transfer a mark of some color he possesses as soon as
possible. To encourage em to do this, he MAY NOT do any
Josiah Worcester wrote:
I hereby inform the parties to the Green Mark Contract (H. Champions Murphy
and Levi, insofar as I am aware) of the equity case 1825 concerning this
contract.
The contract, as far as I have been made aware of it, is:
Levi, I agree to the following binding agreement if y
comex wrote:
On Monday 03 December 2007, Kerim Aydin wrote:
TIYAEOTISIDTIDFTHPAFALT.
This is why...
Agora...
hmm...
I think I got it.
This is yet another example of the I say I do therefore I do fallacy
that has plagued agora for a long time.
Levi
Josiah Worcester wrote:
On Sunday 02 December 2007 16:54:55 Levi Stephen wrote:
Josiah Worcester wrote:
If Agora's Child was not a player before, the AFO announces the following:
Agora's Child registers as a player.
I'm not sure this achieves anything.
I believe to register a
Ed Murphy wrote:
I intend, with the consent of all other partners, to amend the AFO
charter by replacing clause 3 with this text:
3. The AFO may incur obligations, rights, and privileges under the
rules of other nomics. The Partners may act on behalf of the AFO
to satisfy such obligations and t
CHAMPION
Andre, Blob, Chuck, Dave Bowen, elJefe, Elysion, favor, Garth,
Goddess Eris, Goethe (twice), Goethe (by Paradox), Ian, Jeffrey,
Kelly, KoJen, Michael, Morendil, Murphy (by Paradox), Oerjan,
OscarMeyr (twice), root (twice), root (by paradox), Steve (t
Taral wrote:
On 11/29/07, Josiah Worcester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
We surrendered?
Not that I know of. :)
Of course, we could make a proposal celebrating the surrender of B Nomic
to Agora.
Whether it happend or not is irrelavant ;)
Levi
Ed Murphy wrote:
Eris wrote:
On 11/28/07, Levi Stephen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I spend 2 Green VCs to gain 200 Green Marks
I don't think this works.
Correct. Again, voluntary conversion is one-way in the Marks -> VCs
direction.
Oops. Misread it from the assessors
Might be invalid, because you misspelled "decrease"
Hmmm... is 'decreating' the AFO's VVLOP regulated? Might be a criminal
CFJ :P
Lev
Josiah Worcester wrote:
On Wednesday 28 November 2007 19:22:25 Levi Stephen wrote:
I resolve the decision on the holder of the Scorekeepor office:
The votes are as follows
WOOBLE:
PIKHQ: pikhq, Murphy, AFO, root, zefram
COMEX: Wooble
FOOKIEMYARTUG: BobTHJ, Fookiemyartug, OscarMeyr
The option
Ed Murphy wrote:
I nominate pikhq and Wooble for Ambassador.
Levi, any luck with the reports for IADoP and/or Herald?
Working on IADoP report and elections etc., now.
Goethe is now Herald I believe.
Levi
Ed Murphy wrote:
pikhq wrote:
On Friday 23 November 2007 15:41:55 Ed Murphy wrote:
The AFO retracts all CFJs that it called within the past 24 hours.
Fortunately, the marks are still in existence. :)
Unfortunately, I still have to process all the actions in comex's
long message. :(
Wou
I'm liking Levi's permission-as-a-state idea, although I don't think
that there's any reason that permissions should be assets...unless we
go way overboard with it. :-)
Liquid assets, no doubt.
I had chosen Assets because permissions would share the concept of 'being owned'
I guess. Each
Ian Kelly wrote:
On Nov 18, 2007 8:21 PM, Ian Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Nov 18, 2007 6:51 PM, Levi Stephen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Thanks. I think CAN does better describe what I'm trying to achieve here.
CAN isn't sufficient; there's still no mechanis
Josiah Worcester wrote:
On Sunday 18 November 2007 19:37:18 comex wrote:
On Sunday 18 November 2007, Levi Stephen wrote:
I CFJ on the following statements, requesting linked assignment, barring
pikhq.
Gratuitous arguments:
http://cfj.qoid.us/1722
http://cfj.qoid.us/1714
I note that
Levi Stephen wrote:
I CFJ on the following statements, requesting linked assignment, barring
pikhq.
Actually, CotC Zefram, upon rereading, although they concern the same action,
they seem to concern separate issues, so linked assignment does not seem
appropriate. I'll trust your judg
Ed Murphy wrote:
comex wrote:
On Sunday 18 November 2007, Levi Stephen wrote:
(g) If the outcome is APPROVED, then the vote collector MUST
perform the action as soon as possible after resolving the decision.
add CAN
Replace with CAN, actually. A player intending to perform a
comex wrote:
On Sunday 18 November 2007, Ian Kelly wrote:
According to R1728, e already did:
(g) If the outcome is APPROVED, then the vote collector performs
the action upon resolving the decision.
The fact that this action did not result in a physical message at the
B Nomic pu
I intend with Agoran Consent to cause Agora to unconditionally
surrender to B Nomic.
I OBJECT
Levi
yable?
But by then, it might be too late for the rule if that happend ;)
On Fri, 16 Nov 2007, Levi Stephen wrote:
I submit the following interested proposal with AI=1:
{{{
Goethe is coauthor of this proposal.
Create a rule with the following text and Power 1:
A player MAY NOT initiate or enco
I'm not sure increasing quorum is the appropriate measure. I think Rule 2168
would just double the voting period.
It would double, then still fail because quorum was impossible to achieve.
Not perfect, I know! Least complex way I could find.
Ah yes, it would work. I was thinking there was
by the way, I was serious about defining "traitor" as "anyone that is
a member of another nomic who votes FOR or makes a proposal FOR hostile
action against Agora." And punishing by deregistration.
I like this sort of idea. Might be better to leave it to the judicial system to
decide punish
Kerim Aydin wrote:
---
Proto: Rubicon
Enact a rule entitled "The Senate" with the following text and a
power of 2:
A Senator is any Player who has been registered continuously for
the immediately preceding thirty d
Josiah Worcester wrote:
On Thursday 15 November 2007 22:48:00 Kerim Aydin wrote:
Could flooding work against Agora in its current state?
It might be worth it to write a quick and dirty defensive proposal
to get it distributed quickly. It's probably an overreaction but we
can always vote it dow
NUM FL AI SUBMITTER TITLE
5296 O1 1.7 rootDecidable Undetermination
6xFOR
5297 D1 3Murphy root is a Cretan
FOR
5298 O1 1Murphy More prerogatives
6xAGAINST
5299 D1 2Murphy Micropayments
FOR
5300 O1 1Murphy No multiple MwP's
6x
comex wrote:
On Thursday 15 November 2007, Josiah Worcester wrote:
At the time, I was thinking that it could be useful in a scam against B
Nomic. It would no longer be necessary to be in the AFO, but anyways. .
. I would create several factions with me and the AFO, where I make all
actions on be
comex wrote:
On Thursday 15 November 2007, Levi Stephen wrote:
I think, as defendant you don't need supporters, but
I SUPPORT this.
Levi
Actually he hasn't even judged it yet (nttpf), so .
Levi, you going to support or object to his attempt to join the AFO?
Undecided so f
Ed Murphy wrote:
I agree to be bound by the following contract:
1) The name of this contest is Bake The Traitor.
2) The contestmaster of this contest is Murphy.
3) Any contestant other than comex who becomes a contestant
ceases to be a contestant one second later.
4) The contestm
Roger Hicks wrote:
On Nov 13, 2007 6:47 PM, comex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tuesday 13 November 2007, Taral wrote:
On Nov 13, 2007 5:30 PM, Levi Stephen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
I intend with Agoran consent to send the message "Chickens" to the
bnomic-business mai
comex wrote:
On Tuesday 13 November 2007, Kerim Aydin wrote:
Actually, the proposal in question is:
B hereby declares war on Agora, bombing will commence in thirty
minutes.
submitted by comex.
1. Anyone have the patent title "traitor" handy?
2. Anyone want to pull the old guillotine rules
Zefram wrote:
There would normally be a proposal distribution at this time, but
there are no proposals to distribute.
Proposal ID numbers:
highest orderly: 5286
disorderly: none
Proposal pool: empty
I had a proposal in the message
http://www.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private
Ed Murphy wrote:
Levi wrote:
Change Rule 402 to read:
The Speaker is the active player who has borne the Patent Title
of Minister Without Portfolio the longest, with ties broken in
favor of the player who has been registered the longest.
You should also amend R1922(e) so th
Ed Murphy wrote:
Zefram wrote:
Levi Stephen wrote:
If they're assigned Default Justice does this mean an inactive player
is going to be required to be a member of the judicial panel?
No. An inactive player, or a non-player, is categorically unqualified
to judge. For that matter,
comex wrote:
On 10/28/07, Ian Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 10/28/07, Levi Stephen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Actually, I'm not sure this is the case. Speaker is the player who has held the
title of Minister Without Portfolio the longest.
So, I think Eris was Speaker
Hmmm, I was probably meant to assign people to the prerogatives now that
the proposal was adopted, but not being speaker since AFO's win, it's
now eir reponsibility :)
Levi
Actually, I'm not sure this is the case. Speaker is the player who has held the
title of Minister Without Portfolio t
Ed Murphy wrote:
Levi wrote:
The IADoP's report includes the following:
b) The stability of each office.
Already covered by Rule 2162 (c).
Thanks (and root also for your answer)
I was looking for something like that, but was looking in the officer's
reporting rules.
Levi
Ian Kelly wrote:
On 10/28/07, Levi Stephen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Is someone responsible for tracking who the current Ministers Without Portfolio
are and publishing this information? I can't see where this is in the rules.
It's a patent title, so it's tracked by th
On 10/27/07, Levi Stephen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Office Holder Since Last R2154 Stability
Speakerroot16 Sep 077 Sep 07 T
With the adoption of "Minist
NUM FL AI SUBMITTER TITLE
5254 O1 1.5 AFO Resurrect the Notary
PRESENT
5255 D1 2AFO Encourage contests
AGAINST
5256 D1 2AFO Use it or lose it
FOR
5257 D1 3AFO Ministers Without Portfolio
PRESENT
5258 O1 1AFO Deregi
NUM FL AI SUBMITTER TITLE
5245 D1 3comex
AGAINST
Levi
Ed Murphy wrote:
Eris wrote:
On 9/26/07, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
b) Any other votes are unprotected. The vote collector CAN
invalidate or change an unprotected vote by announcement
when e resolves the decision.
Actually, I'm just tired of people
Ed Murphy wrote:
6) As soon as possible after a member requests credit, the Bankor
SHALL create in eir possession, for each color of VC in eir
possession, minimum(100*X-Y,0) kopecks of that color, where X is
the number of VCs of that color in eir possession, and Y is the
number of ko
It is a dependent action, and it's true that as such there's an Agoran
Decision initiated on which players can vote SUPPORT or OPPOSE.
However, if the action can be done with 2 support, the result of the
decision on whether to do it is APPROVED if there are 2 or more
supports even if there are
Geoffrey Spear wrote:
On 9/19/07, Roger Hicks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 9/18/07, comex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I intend, with 2 support, to call for the appeal of CFJ 1741.
I vote OBJECT
Not to the proper forum, but this would be ineffective in any case
since an appeal can be brough
The purpose here is to provide a mechanism where unfair contests can be stopped.
Not sure of the best wording to take points earned in a bad contest away from
players and also to stop that contest.
I have taken the approach here that the agreement that defines the contest still
exists, but no
comex wrote:
On 8/29/07, Levi Stephen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
No points may be awarded by the contestmaster of a contest that is
declared a Shenanigan.
Ever?
Well, I would assume, after the contest was declared a Shenanigan, they would
remove themselves from that c
Allow all First-class players to join contests as a minimum requirement.
{{{
In Rule 2136 replace the following text:
A contest is an agreement that identifies itself as such, and
identifies exactly one party as its contestmaster; all other
parties are its contestants.
with:
Ian Kelly wrote:
Here and Gone Again: a Registrar's Report
Date of this Report: Tue 28 Aug 2007
Date of last Report: Sat 18 Aug 2007
Date last ratified : Tue 03 May 2005
Ratified Report: Thu 28 Apr 2005
(All times are in UTC. Precision in timing not guaranteed.)
EVENT HISTORY
16 A
Ian Kelly wrote:
On 8/27/07, Levi Stephen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ian Kelly wrote:
On 8/27/07, comex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 8/27/07, comex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Therefore, I intend to cause the panel to judge AFFIRM on the appeal
of CFJ 1711.
I also intend
Ian Kelly wrote:
On 8/27/07, comex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 8/27/07, comex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Therefore, I intend to cause the panel to judge AFFIRM on the appeal
of CFJ 1711.
I also intend to cause the panel to register.
Panels are not persons and so cannot register. I consid
1 - 100 of 125 matches
Mail list logo
