On 4/22/24 00:56, Katherina Walshe-Grey via agora-discussion wrote:
> I'm not sure why it doesn't currently include any spendies. Maybe an
> oversight? I haven't been following the drafting of that subsystem.
As a general rule any economic proposal I make is slightly
under-specified. This is both
On 4/22/24 01:56, Katherina Walshe-Grey via agora-discussion wrote:
> On 22/04/2024 06:41, mqyhlkahu via agora-discussion wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> We received the following response to Our Registration[1]:
>>> Hello! I cause the above-registering person to receive a welcome package.
>> We would like
On 22/04/2024 06:41, mqyhlkahu via agora-discussion wrote:
> Hello,
>
> We received the following response to Our Registration[1]:
>> Hello! I cause the above-registering person to receive a welcome package.
> We would like to ask what a 'welcome package' is.
>
> Thank you.
A welcome package is
On 4/22/24 01:41, mqyhlkahu via agora-discussion wrote:
> Hello,
>
> We received the following response to Our Registration[1]:
>> Hello! I cause the above-registering person to receive a welcome package.
> We would like to ask what a 'welcome package' is.
>
> Thank you.
>
>
>[1]
> https://ma
On 22/04/2024 06:49, mqyhlkahu via agora-discussion wrote:
> Hello,
>
> We would like to ask about the posted objection[2] to our test e-mail[1].
> Specifically, we would like to ask upon what grounds the test was objected to,
> and whether we have performed some misdeed which must be rectified.
>
Hello,
We would like to ask about the posted objection[2] to our test e-mail[1].
Specifically, we would like to ask upon what grounds the test was objected to,
and whether we have performed some misdeed which must be rectified.
Thank you.
[1]
https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/
Hello,
We received the following response to Our Registration[1]:
> Hello! I cause the above-registering person to receive a welcome package.
We would like to ask what a 'welcome package' is.
Thank you.
[1]
https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-business/2024-April/05
On Tue, Apr 11, 2023 at 12:12 PM ais523 via agora-discussion
wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2023-04-11 at 13:54 -0500, nix via agora-discussion wrote:
> > Your client itself will normally display the timestamp attached by the
> > sending machine. This is usually assumed to be honest, but could
> > actually be
On Tue, 2023-04-11 at 13:54 -0500, nix via agora-discussion wrote:
> Your client itself will normally display the timestamp attached by the
> sending machine. This is usually assumed to be honest, but could
> actually be forged (to amusing results, such as pushing a new email way
> back in your
On 4/11/23 13:59, Yachay Wayllukuq via agora-discussion wrote:
How bad would it be to send several emails in a short period of time with
the hope that one of them has the best timing?
Oh also, depending on what client you're using, you can schedule emails.
That's probably a better bet than doing
On Tue, Apr 11, 2023 at 11:59 AM Yachay Wayllukuq via agora-discussion
wrote:
> How bad would it be to send several emails in a short period of time with
> the hope that one of them has the best timing?
I think it's logical to try, but if it's a necessary strategy it
points to problem with the ga
On 4/11/23 13:59, Yachay Wayllukuq via agora-discussion wrote:
How bad would it be to send several emails in a short period of time with
the hope that one of them has the best timing?
Unless you were sending from entirely different networks, you would not
see different timings generally.
I thi
How bad would it be to send several emails in a short period of time with
the hope that one of them has the best timing?
On Tue, Apr 11, 2023 at 8:55 PM nix via agora-discussion <
agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> On 4/11/23 13:46, Yachay Wayllukuq via agora-discussion wrote:
> > Is the t
On Tue, Apr 11, 2023 at 11:47 AM Yachay Wayllukuq via agora-discussion
wrote:
> Is the timestamp of the mailing list itself the one that appears on the
> archive website?
Yes for private archives, though with a UTC conversion.
There's been some tension on this over Agora's history. The timestam
On 4/11/23 13:46, Yachay Wayllukuq via agora-discussion wrote:
Is the timestamp of the mailing list itself the one that appears on the
archive website?
So if you download an email and open it in plaintext, or click "view
headers" or "view source" on your client, you will see a ton of metadata
Is the timestamp of the mailing list itself the one that appears on the
archive website?
On Tue, Apr 11, 2023 at 8:45 PM nix via agora-discussion <
agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> On 4/11/23 13:34, Yachay Wayllukuq via agora-discussion wrote:
> > How do you determine which action was ma
On 4/11/23 13:34, Yachay Wayllukuq via agora-discussion wrote:
How do you determine which action was made first on a certain Agoran day
when multiple competing actions try to be the first message sent on that
day?
Emails are time-stamped by each device that touches them, generally
speaking the
On Tue, 2023-04-11 at 20:34 +0200, Yachay Wayllukuq via agora-discussion wrote:
> How do you determine which action was made first on a certain Agoran day
> when multiple competing actions try to be the first message sent on that
> day?
Emails have timestamps in their email headers, added by the v
Oh, I meant when different competing players try to be the first person to
send a message on a certain Agoran day.
On Tue, Apr 11, 2023 at 8:42 PM Janet Cobb via agora-discussion <
agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> On 4/11/23 14:34, Yachay Wayllukuq via agora-discussion wrote:
> > How do
On 4/11/23 14:34, Yachay Wayllukuq via agora-discussion wrote:
> How do you determine which action was made first on a certain Agoran day
> when multiple competing actions try to be the first message sent on that
> day?
Per R478/41:
> Any action performed by sending a message is performed
How do you determine which action was made first on a certain Agoran day
when multiple competing actions try to be the first message sent on that
day?
On 8/19/2020 10:43 AM, ais523 via agora-discussion wrote:
On Wed, 2020-08-19 at 10:08 -0700, Nathan LastName via agora-discussion wrote:
Hello! I had a question about Agoran Birthdays. Today is the date on which
I joined Agora. After one year of playing Agora, one celebrates their 1st
Agoran Bir
On Wed, 2020-08-19 at 10:08 -0700, Nathan LastName via agora-discussion wrote:
> Hello! I had a question about Agoran Birthdays. Today is the date on which
> I joined Agora. After one year of playing Agora, one celebrates their 1st
> Agoran Birthday. Considering that today is an occurance of the da
Hello! I had a question about Agoran Birthdays. Today is the date on which
I joined Agora. After one year of playing Agora, one celebrates their 1st
Agoran Birthday. Considering that today is an occurance of the date upon
which I joined Agora, and that on occurrences of the date upon which one
join
I'm pretty sure I actually have a lime ribbon with written proposals
On Wed, Jun 3, 2020 at 11:00 PM Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via
agora-discussion wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 3, 2020 at 8:51 AM Alex Smith via agora-discussion
> wrote:
> >
> > On Wednesday, 3 June 2020, 11:44:08 GMT+1, Publius
On Wed, Jun 3, 2020 at 8:51 AM Alex Smith via agora-discussion
wrote:
>
> On Wednesday, 3 June 2020, 11:44:08 GMT+1, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> via agora-discussion wrote:
> > For the purposes of lime ribbons, does being an author count as being
> > a co-author?
>
> Lime Ribbons were int
On Wednesday, 3 June 2020, 11:44:08 GMT+1, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via
agora-discussion wrote:
> For the purposes of lime ribbons, does being an author count as being
> a co-author?
Lime Ribbons were intended for being someone who improved other people's
proposals, rather than writing
On 6/3/20 6:43 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion
wrote:
> For the purposes of lime ribbons, does being an author count as being
> a co-author?
>
> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
I find it unlikely because R2350 says that co-authors "must be persons
other than the auth
For the purposes of lime ribbons, does being an author count as being
a co-author?
Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
On Sun, Feb 9, 2020 at 3:58 PM Alexis Hunt via agora-discussion
wrote:
>
> If resubmitting an failed proposal without changes, do you prefer to
> have it repeated or is it enough to let you copy-paste it?
Letting me copy-paste it would be easier (I can keep the formatting),
but please give the nu
If resubmitting an failed proposal without changes, do you prefer to
have it repeated or is it enough to let you copy-paste it?
Alexis
> On Nov 17, 2017, at 2:05 PM, Corona wrote:
>
> Ah, I suppose it would ve rude of me not to introduce myself; my
> (nick)name is Corona, and I've been reading the rules & mail for a
> while.
Drat.
I believe I’ve misnamed you a handful of times now. I apologize: I mistook the
“10something” in
Welcome Corona. Yes, G is right that the loophole is fixed: but I'm glad
I'm still a player.
On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 7:11 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, 17 Nov 2017, Corona wrote:
> > Ah, I suppose it would ve rude of me not to introduce myself; my
> > (nick)name is Corona, and I've been r
On Fri, 17 Nov 2017, Corona wrote:
> Ah, I suppose it would ve rude of me not to introduce myself; my
> (nick)name is Corona, and I've been reading the rules & mail for a
> while.
Hi Corona, and welcome to posting in Agora! (given that you've been watching
for a while already...) -G.
Sorry, mis-type. I meant Proposal 7931:
> 7931* G. 3.0 Registration fix finally G. 1 sh.
On Fri, 17 Nov 2017, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> It was fixed by Proposal 7936, adopted November 6, unless there were
> CoE's on the voting results that I missed.
>
>
> On Fri, 17 No
It was fixed by Proposal 7936, adopted November 6, unless there were
CoE's on the voting results that I missed.
On Fri, 17 Nov 2017, Reuben Staley wrote:
> It never was voted on. The loophole still exists.
>
> --
> Trigon
>
> On Nov 17, 2017 12:23 PM, "Alex Smith" wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 2017
It never was voted on. The loophole still exists.
--
Trigon
On Nov 17, 2017 12:23 PM, "Alex Smith" wrote:
> On Fri, 2017-11-17 at 11:02 -0800, Corona wrote:
> > Hello, is CFJ 3558 "V.J Rada is a Player" still relevant, or has some
> > rule change since then made it impossible to register immedi
On Fri, 2017-11-17 at 11:02 -0800, Corona wrote:
> Hello, is CFJ 3558 "V.J Rada is a Player" still relevant, or has some
> rule change since then made it impossible to register immediately
> after deregistering using the method V.J Rada did? I didn't want to
> CFJ this, as it would presumably take
Ah, I suppose it would ve rude of me not to introduce myself; my
(nick)name is Corona, and I've been reading the rules & mail for a
while.
On 11/17/17, Corona wrote:
> Hello, is CFJ 3558 "V.J Rada is a Player" still relevant, or has some
> rule change since then made it impossible to register imm
Hello, is CFJ 3558 "V.J Rada is a Player" still relevant, or has some
rule change since then made it impossible to register immediately
after deregistering using the method V.J Rada did? I didn't want to
CFJ this, as it would presumably take longer to be answered that way.
---
Relevant case:
=
I haven't; I'm currently working through cleaning up the history data,
discovering that the requirements regarding what must go in the FLR are
poorly written (for reasons I'll explain alongside a fix proposal once I
decide what the fix should be), and then working on new formatting code.
On Sun, 2
Rulekeepor Candidate Alexis,
Have you published a draft SLR or FLR? I've seen the other candidates'
contributions. (sorry if I''ve missed yours!)
-G.
On Sun, 1 Oct 2017, Alexis Hunt wrote:
> Where are you getting your old rules from? Do you know where to find archives
> of, say, 2011-era rulesets?
> Thanks!
Zefram's archives (linked through agoranomic page) go from beginning to 2008.
After 2008 it's just
browsing the FLRs in the archives
Where are you getting your old rules from? Do you know where to find
archives of, say, 2011-era rulesets?
Thanks!
On Mon, 26 Jan 2015, Trainphreak wrote:
> Hi all, new Watcher here.
>
> I just finished reading through the ruleset and the saga of Rule 2437 and CFJ
> 3429.
> Can someone explain why it's ambiguous whether Rule 2437 was repealed or not?
>
> The only answer I could come up with is that there
Also, apologies for any typos caused by my overzealous autocorrect.On Jan 26,
2015 8:32 PM, Trainphreak wrote:
>
> Hi all, new Watcher here.
>
> I just finished reading through the ruleset and the saga of Rule 2437 and CFJ
> 3429. Can someone explain why it's ambiguous whether Rule 2437 was repe
Hi all, new Watcher here.
I just finished reading through the ruleset and the saga of Rule 2437 and CFJ
3429. Can someone explain why it's ambiguous whether Rule 2437 was repealed or
not?
The only answer I could come up with is that there game may or may not have
been won by ais's attempted co
On Sat, 31 Aug 2013, Henri Bouchard wrote:
> Is there a penalty for deputising incorrectly?
Not a penalty, but if it's done incorrectly, it fails
(it will be deemed afterwards not to have happened),
which would leave a mess to re-figure out. In any case,
I decided to jump on the job for the mom
Is there a penalty for deputising incorrectly?
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 12:51 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
>
> There is currently no reward for Deputisation (except we might say thanks :)
> ).
>
> The relevant part of Rule 1607 is here:
>
>The Mutability Index (MI) is a Budget Switch.
>
>
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 11:49 AM, Henri Bouchard wrote:
> If the Promotor office is vacant, how are we making and voting on
> proposals? From my understanding, the Promotor is responsible for
> recieving and distributing proposals. If there is no Promotor, who is
> receiving and distributing propo
If the Promotor office is vacant, how are we making and voting on
proposals? From my understanding, the Promotor is responsible for
recieving and distributing proposals. If there is no Promotor, who is
receiving and distributing proposals at this time?
-Henri
There is currently no reward for Deputisation (except we might say thanks :) ).
The relevant part of Rule 1607 is here:
The Mutability Index (MI) is a Budget Switch.
A proposal that was in the Proposal Pool at the beginning of a
given week is a pending proposal.
Th
Also, what is the meaning of MI?
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 12:03 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, 30 Aug 2013, Sean Hunt wrote:
>> On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 11:49 AM, Henri Bouchard wrote:
>> If the Promotor office is vacant, how are we making and voting on
>> proposals? From my unde
On Fri, 30 Aug 2013, Sean Hunt wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 11:49 AM, Henri Bouchard wrote:
> If the Promotor office is vacant, how are we making and voting on
> proposals? From my understanding, the Promotor is responsible for
> recieving and distributing proposals. If the
Are there any personal gains if you deputise?
On Tue, 2 Jul 2013, Charles Walker wrote:
> If an officer is required to perform a specific action (e.g. award N
> Yaks to Walker) and the office changes hands, does that specific
> requirement go along with it? Or is the new officer NOT GUILTY if e
> fails to award me those particular Yaks? What
Yes.
On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 12:48 PM, Charles Walker
wrote:
> If an officer is required to perform a specific action (e.g. award N
> Yaks to Walker) and the office changes hands, does that specific
> requirement go along with it? Or is the new officer NOT GUILTY if e
> fails to award me those par
If an officer is required to perform a specific action (e.g. award N
Yaks to Walker) and the office changes hands, does that specific
requirement go along with it? Or is the new officer NOT GUILTY if e
fails to award me those particular Yaks? What if the office changes
hands one day before the end
On Sun, Jun 2, 2013 at 12:33 PM, Charles Walker
wrote:
> Do you intend to distribute all proposals as usual, or will you distribute
> only those with positive distributability as if P2425 hadn't failed to amend
> R1607?
I am required to distribute them all, at least this week. Next week,
since y
Do you intend to distribute all proposals as usual, or will you distribute
only those with positive distributability as if P2425 hadn't failed to
amend R1607?
-- Walker
Math321 wrote:
> People refer to some CFJs like they were rules, but they aren't really
> rules. If there isn't any particular reason for this, can we make them
> actual rules?
In addition to the comments already made, some CFJ precedents are
obsolete because the relevant rules have been repealed
On Thu, 2011-06-30 at 17:00 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> There's nothing to stop someone from calling the same CFJ over and over
> again, hoping for the opposite answer. Sometimes people have done that
> in the past... once or twice. We deal with that by saying "once an
> answer is given, you shou
On Fri, 1 Jul 2011, Elliott Hird wrote:
> On 1 July 2011 00:09, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
> > Except that it's not, because in common law jurisdictions the rulings
> > actually have legitimate power, while in Agora you're just allowed to
> > possibly consider them in interpreting the rules.
>
> Yea
On 1 July 2011 00:09, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
> Except that it's not, because in common law jurisdictions the rulings
> actually have legitimate power, while in Agora you're just allowed to
> possibly consider them in interpreting the rules.
Yeah, but is that power actually codified anywhere, or ju
On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 7:00 PM, Elliott Hird
wrote:
> On 30 June 2011 23:50, Joshua Murphy wrote:
>> People refer to some CFJs like they were rules, but they aren't
>> really rules. If there isn't any particular reason for this, can we make
>> them actual rules?
>
> It's a similar situation to
On 30 June 2011 23:50, Joshua Murphy wrote:
> People refer to some CFJs like they were rules, but they aren't really rules.
> If there isn't any particular reason for this, can we make them actual rules?
It's a similar situation to common law.
On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 17:50, Joshua Murphy wrote:
> People refer to some CFJs like they were rules, but they aren't really rules.
> If there isn't any particular reason for this, can we make them actual rules?
CFJ procedure is codified in the rules. A CFJ itself can be called by
any player to
On Thu, 2011-06-30 at 15:50 -0700, Joshua Murphy wrote:
> People refer to some CFJs like they were rules, but they aren't
> really rules. If there isn't any particular reason for this, can we
> make them actual rules?
They aren't binding; rather, they're a reflection of what most players
think the
People refer to some CFJs like they were rules, but they aren't really rules.
If there isn't any particular reason for this, can we make them actual rules?
On Tue, 11 Aug 2009, comex wrote:
> The whole system would be simpler if
> either everything were a message, or, more practically, everything
> were an action.
Michael used to say (maybe first in a CFJ) "the only action we ever
actually take is sending messages, everything else is just a fanta
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 9:45 PM, comex wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 9:22 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>> No offense taken, I'll be careful of the pattern. Though I'm not sure
>> may was an error in the original (when it was a pragmatic "MAY publish"
>> with no support issues - the pre-great-repeals
2009/8/12 comex :
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 9:22 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>> No offense taken, I'll be careful of the pattern. Though I'm not sure
>> may was an error in the original (when it was a pragmatic "MAY publish"
>> with no support issues - the pre-great-repeals legal system had a lot
>> of
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 9:22 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> No offense taken, I'll be careful of the pattern. Though I'm not sure
> may was an error in the original (when it was a pragmatic "MAY publish"
> with no support issues - the pre-great-repeals legal system had a lot
> of Kelly-influenced "if yo
On Tue, 11 Aug 2009, comex wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 6:04 PM, Pavitra wrote:
>> comex wrote:
>>> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 5:17 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
�1) We somehow forgot about the rising support requirement to publish
� � � multiple NoVs in the same week.
>>>
>>> Didn't forget. Th
Pavitra wrote:
> For an idea of how badly platonism isn't fail-safe, look up the Annabel
> Crisis, due to which ratification was invented.
The concept of ratification dates back to at least Rule 352:
http://agora.qoid.us/rule/352#521323
and a general mechanism was protoed as early as 1998:
ht
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 6:04 PM, Pavitra wrote:
> comex wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 5:17 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
>>> �1) We somehow forgot about the rising support requirement to publish
>>> � � � multiple NoVs in the same week.
>>
>> Didn't forget. The extra NoVs were, IIRC, ILLEGAL but VALID
On Tue, 2009-08-11 at 18:04 -0400, Pavitra wrote:
> comex wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 5:17 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
> >> �1) We somehow forgot about the rising support requirement to publish
> >> � � � multiple NoVs in the same week.
> >
> > Didn't forget. The extra NoVs were, IIRC, ILLEGAL bu
comex wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 5:17 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
>> �1) We somehow forgot about the rising support requirement to publish
>> � � � multiple NoVs in the same week.
>
> Didn't forget. The extra NoVs were, IIRC, ILLEGAL but VALID (because
> the Rule used MAY, which is nearly always a
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 5:17 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
> 1) We somehow forgot about the rising support requirement to publish
> multiple NoVs in the same week.
Didn't forget. The extra NoVs were, IIRC, ILLEGAL but VALID (because
the Rule used MAY, which is nearly always a mistake)
--
-c.
comex wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 3:46 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
>>> On Tue, 11 Aug 2009, Elliott Hird wrote:
2009/8/11 Sgeo :
> I haven't been paying much attention. What offices have you scammed?
CotC, majorly.
>>> Do you mean overriding random assignments to get favorable judges o
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 5:03 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
> Which one was that, again?
http://www.mail-archive.com/agora-busin...@agoranomic.org/msg13200.html
--
-c.
Ed Murphy wrote:
> comex wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 3:46 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
On Tue, 11 Aug 2009, Elliott Hird wrote:
> 2009/8/11 Sgeo :
>> I haven't been paying much attention. What offices have you scammed?
> CotC, majorly.
Do you mean overriding random assignment
comex wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 3:46 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
>>> On Tue, 11 Aug 2009, Elliott Hird wrote:
2009/8/11 Sgeo :
> I haven't been paying much attention. What offices have you scammed?
CotC, majorly.
>>> Do you mean overriding random assignments to get favorable judges o
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 3:46 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
>> On Tue, 11 Aug 2009, Elliott Hird wrote:
>>> 2009/8/11 Sgeo :
I haven't been paying much attention. What offices have you scammed?
>>> CotC, majorly.
>>
>> Do you mean overriding random assignments to get favorable judges or
>> something mor
G. wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Aug 2009, Elliott Hird wrote:
>> 2009/8/11 Sgeo :
>>> I haven't been paying much attention. What offices have you scammed?
>> CotC, majorly.
>
> Do you mean overriding random assignments to get favorable judges or
> something more insidious? Because the former is just an o
On Tue, 11 Aug 2009, Elliott Hird wrote:
> 2009/8/11 Sgeo :
>> I haven't been paying much attention. What offices have you scammed?
>
> CotC, majorly.
Do you mean overriding random assignments to get favorable judges or
something more insidious? Because the former is just an office perk;
like th
2009/8/11 Sgeo :
> I haven't been paying much attention. What offices have you scammed?
CotC, majorly.
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 2:09 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
> ehird wrote:
>
>> 2009/8/11 Ed Murphy :
>>> When you try to scam an office, you should expect reprisals
>>
>> Pot, kettle.
>
> What I meant to add (but may have mistakenly left out when I went on to
> discuss hypotheticals) is that, yes, I have tr
ehird wrote:
> 2009/8/11 Ed Murphy :
>> When you try to scam an office, you should expect reprisals
>
> Pot, kettle.
What I meant to add (but may have mistakenly left out when I went on to
discuss hypotheticals) is that, yes, I have tried to scam offices myself
(sometimes successfully) and I exp
2009/8/11 Ed Murphy :
> When you try to scam an office, you should expect reprisals
Pot, kettle.
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 2:29 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> Yeah, but that's how the Rest penalty is more or less balanced; to do
> a massive win manipulation that resets everyone's caste earns the rests
> to get you a ways (or without mitigating circumstances) all the way out
> the door. Maybe add to t
Kerim Aydin wrote:
> seems like it should be and (2) if this went through would it count as
> a r101 penalty and block rests? (or vice versa).
Quite likely; thanks for pointing that out.
-coppro
On Mon, 10 Aug 2009, Ed Murphy wrote:
> ehird wrote:
>> On Tuesday, August 11, 2009, Sean Hunt wrote:
>>> Elliott Hird wrote:
What is the Bill of Attainder proposal's purpose?
>>> To get angry at me for my attempted Grand Poobah scam.
>>>
>>
>> Classy.
>
> When you try to scam an office, you
ehird wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 11, 2009, Sean Hunt wrote:
>> Elliott Hird wrote:
>>> What is the Bill of Attainder proposal's purpose?
>> To get angry at me for my attempted Grand Poobah scam.
>>
>> -coppro
>>
>
> Classy.
When you try to scam an office, you should expect reprisals, esp.
with
On Tuesday, August 11, 2009, Sean Hunt wrote:
> Elliott Hird wrote:
>> What is the Bill of Attainder proposal's purpose?
> To get angry at me for my attempted Grand Poobah scam.
>
> -coppro
>
Classy.
Elliott Hird wrote:
> What is the Bill of Attainder proposal's purpose?
To get angry at me for my attempted Grand Poobah scam.
-coppro
What is the Bill of Attainder proposal's purpose?
On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 20:48, comex wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 10:46 PM, comex wrote:
>> http://nomic.bob-space.com/agoralog.aspx?player=c. says I have 3
>> Change draws, but
>> http://nomic.bob-space.com/agoralog.aspx?contract=Change does not
>> explain how I got them. Why?
>
> ...because I
On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 10:46 PM, comex wrote:
> http://nomic.bob-space.com/agoralog.aspx?player=c. says I have 3
> Change draws, but
> http://nomic.bob-space.com/agoralog.aspx?contract=Change does not
> explain how I got them. Why?
...because I fail at reading and searched for "change", neglectin
http://nomic.bob-space.com/agoralog.aspx?player=c. says I have 3
Change draws, but
http://nomic.bob-space.com/agoralog.aspx?contract=Change does not
explain how I got them. Why?
--
-c.
1 - 100 of 111 matches
Mail list logo
