It’d be interesting to hear the H. Arbitor’s opinion on this. IMO, officers
should use this mechanism iff it’s a substantially new interpretation, so that
we have a log of what we’ve decided about how new rules work, instead of having
to find the threads where we figured it out last time.
Gaela
On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 at 07:34, Gaelan Steele via agora-discussion
wrote:
> I submit this proposal: {
> Title: Calls with Memoranda
> AI: 2
> Co-authors: Aris, G, Alexis
>
> Create a new Power-2 rule titled “Administrative Opinions”: {
> An officer may publish an Administrative Opinion for a judicia
I submit this proposal: {
Title: Calls with Memoranda
AI: 2
Co-authors: Aris, G, Alexis
Create a new Power-2 rule titled “Administrative Opinions”: {
An officer may publish an Administrative Opinion for a judicial case,
specifying a valid judgement for that case. Officers SHOULD only assign
Admi
On Sun, Feb 9, 2020 at 3:31 PM Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion <
agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
>
>
> On 2/9/2020 3:01 PM, Alexis Hunt via agora-discussion wrote:
> > I strongly oppose this. In my view, inquiry cases should generally
> > *not* be the officer making the initial interpreta
On 2/9/2020 3:01 PM, Alexis Hunt via agora-discussion wrote:
> I strongly oppose this. In my view, inquiry cases should generally
> *not* be the officer making the initial interpretation, at least not
> preferentially. Inquiry cases are effectively the fallback appeal
> mechanism, and should rem
Here’s another proto: {
Title: Calls with Memoranda
AI: 2
Co-authors: Aris, G, Alexis
Create a new Power-2 rule titled “Administrative Opinions”: {
An officer may publish an Administrative Opinion for a judicial case,
specifying a valid judgement for that case. Officers SHALL [SHOULD?] only
assi
On Sun, Feb 9, 2020 at 3:02 PM Alexis Hunt via agora-discussion
wrote:
>
> On Sun, 9 Feb 2020 at 17:59, Gaelan Steele via agora-discussion
> wrote:
> > I mean, didn’t we just do that, without any explicit rule at all? All we
> > need is an informal policy that we go with the officer’s interpreta
On 2/9/2020 2:59 PM, Gaelan Steele via agora-discussion wrote:
> Amend rule 991 by appending “All other things being equal, the Arbitor SHOULD
> assign Calls for Judgement to the officer most concerned with its content.”
> after the sentence "The Arbitor SHALL assign judges over time such that
On Sun, 9 Feb 2020 at 17:59, Gaelan Steele via agora-discussion
wrote:
> I mean, didn’t we just do that, without any explicit rule at all? All we need
> is an informal policy that we go with the officer’s interpretation unless a
> CfJ decides otherwise.
>
> Alternatively, here’s a lightweight at
On Sun, 2020-02-09 at 14:59 -0800, Gaelan Steele via agora-discussion
wrote:
> I mean, didn’t we just do that, without any explicit rule at all? All
> we need is an informal policy that we go with the officer’s
> interpretation unless a CfJ decides otherwise.
>
> Alternatively, here’s a lightweigh
I mean, didn’t we just do that, without any explicit rule at all? All we need
is an informal policy that we go with the officer’s interpretation unless a CfJ
decides otherwise.
Alternatively, here’s a lightweight attempt to implement memoranda, either as
an alternative to the above informal mec
Alexis wrote:
> I will be treating this as invalid, per R2510:
>
> > A player CAN publish a Notice of Honour. ... When a Notice of Honour is
> > published...
>
> and R2466:
>
> > ... A person CANNOT act
> > on behalf of another person to do anything except perform a game
> > action; in particular
On 2/9/2020 2:22 PM, Alexis Hunt via agora-discussion wrote:
> On Sun, 9 Feb 2020 at 17:19, Timon Walshe-Grey via agora-business
> wrote:
>> On Bernie's behalf, Notice of Honour:
>> -1 Gaelan (applying the CSS for eir ruleset primarily via arbitrary
>>emoji. I don't know why you woul
For the record, the CSS here is applied using CSS Modules [0], which randomizes
class names in order to avoid conflicts between classes of the same name
defined in different places. It normally uses an alphanumeric string, but it
has an option for doing emoji instead, so why the hell not? Also,
On Sun, 9 Feb 2020 at 17:19, Timon Walshe-Grey via agora-business
wrote:
> On Bernie's behalf, Notice of Honour:
> -1 Gaelan (applying the CSS for eir ruleset primarily via arbitrary
>emoji. I don't know why you would do this)
> +1 Jason (having to assess two consecutive large proposal
15 matches
Mail list logo
