On Thu, Feb 7, 2019 at 2:58 PM Aris Merchant
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 7, 2019 at 2:28 PM Kerim Aydin wrote:
> > > > When a Victory Announcement ratifies, or a judgement confirming
> > > > the veracity of a victory announcement has been in effect and
> > > > unappealed for one week the person(
On Thu, Feb 7, 2019 at 2:59 PM Aris Merchant
wrote:
> Please note the "for the purpose of which attempt". Under that
> circumstance, I'd expect the ruling to be that the person couldn't
> possibly have been plotting the specific attempt at that time.
Ah, thanks, this works fine, I hadn't thought
Oops, the bottom got cut off.
>
> Right now you already destroy Ribbons to win. You've left the Coins
> and Balloons as "pay to win" so those are self-cleaning. Why not keep
> this one as "destroy to win" to match? (I also rather like the Raise
> the Banner color in this one).
The basic proble
Hmm... Yeah, that is a problem. Maybe go to a first to declare model,
and then wait until all the decelerations are final? Alternatively, we
could just make Laureled last till the next month/quarter, and then
have the PM pick a laureled player at the beginning of every new
month/quarter. I think so
On Thu, Feb 7, 2019 at 2:28 PM Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> Comments inline.
>
> On Thu, Feb 7, 2019 at 1:47 PM Aris Merchant
> wrote:
> > > If a rule states that a person "achieves victory by X", it is to be
> > > construed as meaning that mean that the specified person satisfies
> > > the Winni
Just thought of something else: If win conditions are achieved
simultaneously, this gives (via CFJs, etc.) the ability for players to
mess with the Laureled status by delaying some determinations over
others, which is really messy for the P.M. and everyone (or even if
the wins aren't simultaneous,
Comments inline.
On Thu, Feb 7, 2019 at 1:47 PM Aris Merchant
wrote:
> > If a rule states that a person "achieves victory by X", it is to be
> > construed as meaning that mean that the specified person satisfies
> > the Winning Condition of X for a period of one month, beginning
> > at th
On Thu, Feb 7, 2019 at 2:02 PM D. Margaux wrote:
>
>
> > On Feb 7, 2019, at 4:47 PM, Aris Merchant <
> thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Y’all, come on. Surely you have an opinion?
> >
> > -Aris
>
> I like it in general.
>
> Under Rule 2201, the publisher of an optional self-rati
> On Feb 7, 2019, at 4:47 PM, Aris Merchant
> wrote:
>
> Y’all, come on. Surely you have an opinion?
>
> -Aris
I like it in general.
Under Rule 2201, the publisher of an optional self-ratifying claim (like this
one) SHOULD resolve any claims of error, and that doesn’t seem like a good id
Pretty buxom but in a nice way. I’d FOR.
On Thu, 7 Feb 2019 at 22:47, Aris Merchant <
thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Y’all, come on. Surely you have an opinion?
>
> -Aris
>
> On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 at 4:56 PM Aris Merchant <
> thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > So I was l
Mornington Crescent!
On Thu, Feb 7, 2019 at 3:47 PM Aris Merchant <
thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Y’all, come on. Surely you have an opinion?
>
> -Aris
>
> On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 at 4:56 PM Aris Merchant <
> thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > So I was looking at the best
Y’all, come on. Surely you have an opinion?
-Aris
On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 at 4:56 PM Aris Merchant <
thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> So I was looking at the best ways to handle the illegal win problem,
> and I decided to bring back an older set of somewhat more complicated
> victory rul
So I was looking at the best ways to handle the illegal win problem,
and I decided to bring back an older set of somewhat more complicated
victory rules. They involve Winning Conditions, Losing Conditions,
Victory Announcements, and Cleanup Procedures. Basically, if you
satisfy a Winning Condition
13 matches
Mail list logo
