Janet Cobb via agora-discussion [2024-04-23 00:59]:
> On 4/23/24 00:55, mqyhlkahu via agora-discussion wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > Janet (randomnetcat) responded to our Declaration of Intent to Push the
> > Boulder[1] with the following[2]:
> >
> >> this is *very* close to accidentally being a tabled
On 4/23/24 00:55, mqyhlkahu via agora-discussion wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Janet (randomnetcat) responded to our Declaration of Intent to Push the
> Boulder[1] with the following[2]:
>
>> this is *very* close to accidentally being a tabled intent under R1728 rather
>> than actually pushing the bolder.
>
Hello,
Janet (randomnetcat) responded to our Declaration of Intent to Push the
Boulder[1] with the following[2]:
> this is *very* close to accidentally being a tabled intent under R1728 rather
> than actually pushing the bolder.
To our understanding, our action is not a Tabled Action[3] because
On 4/23/24 00:21, mqyhlkahu via agora-business wrote:
> Hello,
>
> We formally declare our intent to perform the following action(s):
> {{{
> In accordance with [1], we announce that we Push the Boulder, thereby
> increasing its Height by 1.
>
>[1] Rule 2683/1 (Power=0.5)
> }}}
>
>
On 10/12/23 20:17, Ned Strange via agora-discussion wrote:
> This is not a working link if you aren't aware.;
>
> Regards
>
> On Fri, Oct 13, 2023 at 9:18 AM nix via agora-business <
> agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
>
>> file:///tmp/Screenshot_2023-10-12_17-16-26.png
>>
>
>
Yea, we dis
This is not a working link if you aren't aware.;
Regards
On Fri, Oct 13, 2023 at 9:18 AM nix via agora-business <
agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> file:///tmp/Screenshot_2023-10-12_17-16-26.png
>
--
>From R. Lee
> On Jul 25, 2023, at 3:14 PM, Battadia via agora-discussion
> wrote:
>
> I express my desire to register!
> Once the registration process is complete, I award myself a Welcome Package.
>
>> On Wed, 26 Jul 2023 at 00:55, juan via agora-discussion <
>> agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
Battadia via agora-discussion [2023-07-26 08:13]:
> I express my desire to register!
> Once the registration process is complete, I award myself a Welcome Package.
Welcome Battadia! You are registered.
--
juan
I express my desire to register!
Once the registration process is complete, I award myself a Welcome Package.
On Wed, 26 Jul 2023 at 00:55, juan via agora-discussion <
agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> Battadia via agora-business [2023-07-25 20:08]:
> > I award myself a Welcome Package.
>
Battadia via agora-business [2023-07-25 20:08]:
> I award myself a Welcome Package.
I don't know if this is enough to register. Someone may know more, but
as far as I understand, you must clearly put forth intent to register.
--
juan
Registrar
Aenet
Thank you for the welcome package Trigon
On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 7:41 PM Reuben Staley via agora-business <
agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> On 3/16/21 5:33 PM, Aidan Anthony via agora-business wrote:
> > I register
> >
>
> I cause the above player to gain a Welcome Package.
>
> Wha
(...did this create a proposal? It was sent to business but doesn't
say "proposal".)
Thank you for the package, whatever it may contain (I'm still working my
way through the current game-state). I'm deciding to play again while
starting both a new job and a graduate degree (after all, I'll need some
sort of equally-stressful distraction when those things stress me out),
so I mi
I thought it might be you :) Welcome back!!!
On 7/14/2019 2:24 PM, nch wrote:
You're right, I'm rusty. And regrettably the Protonmail IMAP bridge doesn't
have a Linux release yet, so I guess I'll revive this account. I register
with the name nch.
On 7/14/19 3:37 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
If
If you were hoping that the cc would register you, it likely doesn't:
actions can only be taken "within" messages (within the bodies).
You can refer to other parts of the email in the body (e.g. "I do
what the subject line says") but you can't straight-out take actions
without some indication in
Welcome to the game!
Just doing a reply works. The one thing to remember is that by default your
reply will go to agora-discussion. If you want to reply to the same list as
the previous email for some reason, make sure you change the address.
Failing to change the adress is in fact such a common m
Bernie is fine. Also, how do I reply to you? I just pressed the reply
button on gmail, so I'm hoping that works.
On Sat, Apr 6, 2019 at 9:12 AM Reuben Staley
wrote:
> Welcome, again.
>
> What would you like others to refer to you as? Is "Bernie" okay?
>
> --
> Trigon
>
> On Sat, Apr 6, 2019, 06:
Doesn't Rule 2240 imply the opposite of your argument?
In a conflict between clauses of the same Rule, if exactly one
claims precedence over the other, then it takes precedence;
otherwise, the later clause takes precedence.
Greetings,
Ørjan.
On Tue, 21 Nov 2017, Kerim Aydin wr
I agree with this intepretation, but I believe it is problematic and
should be fixed.
On 11/21/2017 01:32 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> I shiny-CFJ on the following statement:
>
> G. CAN assign this CFJ to emself by announcement.
>
>
> ARGUMENTS
>
> Rule 991 last paragraph paraphrases as follow
True, I missed that. Thanks.
-Aris
On Sun, Nov 5, 2017 at 1:21 PM, Alexis Hunt wrote:
> On Sun, 5 Nov 2017 at 16:06 Aris Merchant
> wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 6:57 PM, Alexis Hunt wrote:
>> > Proposal: A Most Ingenious Paradox (AI=1.7)
>> > {{{
>> > Text in square brackets is not a p
On Sun, 5 Nov 2017 at 16:06 Aris Merchant <
thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 6:57 PM, Alexis Hunt wrote:
> > Proposal: A Most Ingenious Paradox (AI=1.7)
> > {{{
> > Text in square brackets is not a part of this proposal and has no
> > effect.
> >
> > Enact a ne
On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 6:57 PM, Alexis Hunt wrote:
> Proposal: A Most Ingenious Paradox (AI=1.7)
> {{{
> Text in square brackets is not a part of this proposal and has no
> effect.
>
> Enact a new power-1 rule entitled "Win by Paradox":
>
> If a CFJ has been assigned a judgment of PARADOXIC
On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 6:57 PM, Alexis Hunt wrote:
> Proposal: A Most Ingenious Paradox (AI=1.7)
Do you want to pend this?
-Aris
"nor is it appropriate if the undecidability arises from the case itself."
On Sun, 29 Oct 2017, VJ Rada wrote:
> I suppose that's IRRELEVANT.
>
> On Sun, Oct 29, 2017 at 1:09 PM, VJ Rada wrote:
> Doesn't this allow for making statements that include well-known
> logical paradoxes that
Doesn't this allow for making statements that include well-known logical
paradoxes that have no bearing on the game itself? (Eg: A barber who must
shave all who do not shave themselves and nobody else, cannot shave emself)
On Sun, Oct 29, 2017 at 12:57 PM, Alexis Hunt wrote:
> Proposal: A Most I
I suppose that's IRRELEVANT.
On Sun, Oct 29, 2017 at 1:09 PM, VJ Rada wrote:
> Doesn't this allow for making statements that include well-known logical
> paradoxes that have no bearing on the game itself? (Eg: A barber who must
> shave all who do not shave themselves and nobody else, cannot shav
On Sun, 22 Oct 2017, Aris Merchant wrote:
I submit the following proposal, and pend it for 1 AP.
An entity's tax amount is, at any given time, (max(ceil(T% of (S - 10)), 0)),
where max is the maximum of its inputs, ceil is the operation of rounding up
to the nearest integer, T is the tax r
>entity's shiny abalance.
abalance should be balance?
On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
wrote:
> Then, we need to rename the Tax Rate.
>
>
> On 10/22/2017 07:43 PM, Aris Merchant wrote:
>> Not apart from deregistration and administrative fees, neither of
>> which
Then, we need to rename the Tax Rate.
On 10/22/2017 07:43 PM, Aris Merchant wrote:
> Not apart from deregistration and administrative fees, neither of
> which would normally be considered taxes.
>
> -Aris
>
>
>
> On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 4:41 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> wrote:
>> We alr
Not apart from deregistration and administrative fees, neither of
which would normally be considered taxes.
-Aris
On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 4:41 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
wrote:
> We already have taxes.
>
>
> On 10/22/2017 07:39 PM, Aris Merchant wrote:
>> I submit the following propos
We already have taxes.
On 10/22/2017 07:39 PM, Aris Merchant wrote:
> I submit the following proposal, and pend it for 1 AP.
>
> -Aris
> ---
> Title: It's death _and_ taxes
> Adoption index: 1.0
> Author: Aris
> Co-author(s):
>
>
> Lines beginning with hashmarks ("#") and comments in square brack
On Nov 19, 2016, at 7:54 PM, Josh T wrote:
> 皆さん、
>
> I announce the formation of the Organization with name "蘭亭社" and the
> following Charter:
>
> 1. この憲章には、以下の同じ行に書かれている用語が同意義です。
> * Agora, アゴラ, 阿呉羅
> * Announcement, 公表
> * Appropriate, ふさわしい, 相応しい
> * The Budget Switch for t
On 03/05/2012 12:21 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> Transfer "half from each first-class person rounded down,
> and half from each golem rounded up?"
I like this last one.
On Mon, 5 Mar 2012, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> On Sun, 4 Mar 2012, FKA441344 wrote:
> > I submit a proposal with title {Only Some Players} and text
> > {
> > Amend Rule 2362 by replacing the text
> > {
> > At the start of each week, half of each person's rubles (rounded
> > down to the near
On Sun, 4 Mar 2012, FKA441344 wrote:
> I submit a proposal with title {Only Some Players} and text
> {
> Amend Rule 2362 by replacing the text
> {
> At the start of each week, half of each person's rubles (rounded
> down to the nearest integer) are destroyed, then two rubles are
>
I don't recall reading any message that did that, though my memory is probably
faulty.
On Feb 23, 24 Heisei, at 5:31 PM, omd wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 6:24 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
>>> I cash the promise titled {Anyone Can Mislead The Leader}.
>>
>>
>> Note to H. Promotor omd: if this
On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 6:24 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
>> I cash the promise titled {Anyone Can Mislead The Leader}.
>
>
> Note to H. Promotor omd: if this was effective (I don't remember
> anyone causing the President to taunt the police), then it caused
> FKA441344 to submit two proposals.
441344 p
On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 3:02 PM, 441344 <441...@gmail.com> wrote:
> *Enact a Power-3 rule with title {Causing Agora To Act} and text
> {
> When Agora is a person, any player CAN cause em to take actions that
> are not otherwise IMPOSSIBLE Without Objection.
I might suggest "any player CAN
On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 5:28 PM, 441344 <441...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I initiate a criminal case naming omd as the Accused, failing to
> publish the Promotor's report during the week Mon. 16 - Sun. 22 and
> distribute the proposals currently in the proposal pool that were in
> there at the beginning
On 01/22/2012 03:28 PM, 441344 wrote:
> I intend to deputise for Horton to publish Horton's weekly report for
> the week Mon. 23 - Sun. 29.
> I intend to deputise for the Promotor to publish the Promotor's report
> for the week Mon. 16 - Sun. 22 and distribute the proposals currently
> in the prop
On 1/18/12, Pavitra wrote:
> On 01/18/2012 04:14 PM, 441344 wrote:
>> *Pavrita
> Probably effective anyway.
>
Oops, sorry about that.
>> Golem by announcement, specifying it's Alarm.
> its Alarm.
>
Thanks for the correction.
>> Decreasing the Alarm
>> of a Clock Golem is
>> secured.
> Can I in
On 01/18/2012 04:14 PM, 441344 wrote:
> *Pavrita
Probably effective anyway.
> Golem by announcement, specifying it's Alarm.
its Alarm.
> Decreasing the Alarm
> of a Clock Golem is
> secured.
Can I increase the Alarm of someone else's Clock Golem, since it's not
secured?
> The Golemkeepor's
>
On 01/17/2012 06:27 PM, Arkady English wrote:
> And the thing here is that total votes DO matter. There are Tv = Vf+Va
> voters, so if 1 person votes against (i.e. Va = 1) the highest
> possible adoption index that could be reached is (T-1). Thus by
> setting the adoption index greater than (T-1) a
On 17 January 2012 23:39, Pavitra wrote:
> On 01/17/2012 05:03 AM, Arkady English wrote:
>> On 15 January 2012 15:24, Tanner Swett wrote:
>>> On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 9:15 AM, 441344 <441...@gmail.com> wrote:
Amend Rule 1950 by replacing the text
{
Adoption index is a switch poss
On 01/17/2012 05:03 AM, Arkady English wrote:
> On 15 January 2012 15:24, Tanner Swett wrote:
>> On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 9:15 AM, 441344 <441...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Amend Rule 1950 by replacing the text
>>> {
>>> Adoption index is a switch possessed by Agoran decisions, whose value is
>>> ei
On 15 January 2012 15:24, Tanner Swett wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 9:15 AM, 441344 <441...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Amend Rule 1950 by replacing the text
>> {
>> Adoption index is a switch possessed by Agoran decisions, whose value is
>> either "none" (default) or an integral multiple of 0.1
On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 9:15 AM, 441344 <441...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Amend Rule 1950 by replacing the text
> {
> Adoption index is a switch possessed by Agoran decisions, whose value is
> either "none" (default) or an integral multiple of 0.1 from 1.0 to 9.9.
> } with the text
> {
> Adoption
omd wrote:
Proposal: The rule already says that N is 1 unless otherwise specified (AI=3)
Amend Rule 1728 by removing:
("Without Objection" is shorthand for this method with N = 1.)
and by removing:
("With Support" is shorthand for this method with N = 1.)
But then only "Witho
omd wrote:
This doesn't work because Rule 105 prevents persons from making Rule
Changes. In general, what is this supposed to fix?
FYI for 441344: the usual workaround is "any player CAN by announcement
cause this rule to repeal itself".
Maybe it would be better that Agora was not actually a person at all. I don't
see why it has to be one.
On Jan 14, 24 Heisei, at 7:06 AM, 441344 <441...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I submit a promise with title {Anyone Can Mislead The Leader} and
> conditions {The president has taunted the police, and
On 14 January 2012 21:30, 441344 <441...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Any player CAN, with Agoran Consent, cause Agora to post a blog post
> (specifying its title, text, and list of categories) or comment
> (specifying its text) to BlogNomic.
Not really. If this was done, then Agora's gamestate would ce
I wrote:
teucer wrote:
Sorry, that was 441344; for some reason, I thought e had re-registered
with this implicit nickname, rather than that a first-time player had
registered.
teucer wrote:
I initiate an inquiry CFJ on the statement {No actions were performed
by announcement due to the first 6 lines of the above-quoted message}
with arguments {Any specification of an action in those lines is
unclear due to, if those lines are an encoded message rather than just
gibber
On 01/13/2012 06:08 PM, Elliott Hird wrote:
> On 13 January 2012 20:07, 441344 <441...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I declare intent to, with Agoran Consent, cause the President to taunt
>> the police specifying 6.
>
> I supplant.
This fails because you are not the Speaker.
On Fri, 2012-01-13 at 16:05 -0700, Eric Stucky wrote:
> V PSW: V nz n cynlre.
>
> Nethzragf: Nygubhtu pnfr 2062 jnf whqtrq GEHR, n cevznel zbgvingvba
> sbe gung qrpvfvba jnf gung gur nhgube fgngrq vg jnf rapbqrq va n
> cnegvphyne znaare, juvpu guvf zrffntr qbrf abg. (Bs pbhefr, guvf
> nffhzrf pnfr
On 01/13/2012 04:01 PM, Arkady English wrote:
> How about we put to the test:
>
> CFJ: {The statement "Amend Rule /yy" is equivalent to "Amend Rule
> IFF its revision number is yy.}
Missing trailing quote.
On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 11:52 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> At first I thought "putting on the revision number means it breaks if
> another proposal changes the revision number in the meantime" but then
> I thought "is it even possible to amend a specific revision number of
> a rule?" so maybe it break
On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 11:52 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> At first I thought "putting on the revision number means it breaks if
> another proposal changes the revision number in the meantime" but then
> I thought "is it even possible to amend a specific revision number of
> a rule?" so maybe it break
On Fri, 13 Jan 2012, Elliott Hird wrote:
> On 13 January 2012 01:31, 441344 <441...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I submit a proposal with title {fix to 1023/28} and text {Amend Rule
> > 1023/28 by replacing the text {Agoran weeks begin at midnight UTC on
> > Monday.} with {Agoran weeks begin when Monday
On 13 January 2012 01:31, 441344 <441...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I submit a proposal with title {fix to 1023/28} and text {Amend Rule
> 1023/28 by replacing the text {Agoran weeks begin at midnight UTC on
> Monday.} with {Agoran weeks begin when Mondays begin.} and replacing
> the text {Agoran months b
On Fri, 2012-01-13 at 01:31 +, 441344 wrote:
> I hereby register.
> I declare an intent to sit without objection.
> I submit a proposal with title {fix to 1023/28} and text {Amend Rule
> 1023/28 by replacing the text {Agoran weeks begin at midnight UTC on
> Monday.} with {Agoran weeks begin whe
On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 8:31 PM, 441344 <441...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I submit a proposal with title {fix to 1023/28} and text {Amend Rule
> 1023/28 by replacing the text {Agoran weeks begin at midnight UTC on
> Monday.} with {Agoran weeks begin when Mondays begin.} and replacing
> the text {Agoran m
On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 8:31 PM, 441344 <441...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I hereby register.
> I declare an intent to sit without objection.
> I submit a proposal with title {fix to 1023/28} and text {Amend Rule
> 1023/28 by replacing the text {Agoran weeks begin at midnight UTC on
> Monday.} with {Agora
Welcome!
Charles Walker
Sent from my mobile.
On 30 Mar 2011 19:00, "Tedd Williams" wrote:
> I wish to register. I am a first-class person, being composed mostly of
Carbon, Oxygen, and Hydrogen. I wish to be known as "Wofi", or "Woofie" if
that is not available.
On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 9:04 PM, omd wrote:
> I was going to deregister,
> So I'll just twiddle a line of CotC's report.
Thank you.
--
Taral
"Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you."
-- Unknown
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 1:49 PM, Jonathan Rouillard
wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 12:01 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Thu, 21 Oct 2010, ais523 wrote:
>>> On Thu, 2010-10-21 at 08:34 -0400, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
>>> > On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 11:52 PM, omd wrote:
>>> > > On Wed, Oct 20, 20
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 12:01 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 21 Oct 2010, ais523 wrote:
>> On Thu, 2010-10-21 at 08:34 -0400, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
>> > On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 11:52 PM, omd wrote:
>> > > On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 10:52 PM, Zac Sipes wrote:
>> > >> zac0...@gmail.com
>> > >
>
On Thu, 21 Oct 2010, ais523 wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-10-21 at 08:34 -0400, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 11:52 PM, omd wrote:
> > > On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 10:52 PM, Zac Sipes wrote:
> > >> zac0...@gmail.com
> > >
> > > Do you want to register as a player? If so, you should sa
On Thu, 2010-10-21 at 08:34 -0400, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 11:52 PM, omd wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 10:52 PM, Zac Sipes wrote:
> >> zac0...@gmail.com
> >
> > Do you want to register as a player? If so, you should say so--
> > sorry, I think this is a bit too uncle
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 11:52 PM, omd wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 10:52 PM, Zac Sipes wrote:
>> zac0...@gmail.com
>
> Do you want to register as a player? If so, you should say so--
> sorry, I think this is a bit too unclear.
What, no CFJ? :)
On 10-10-20 11:52 PM, omd wrote:
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 10:52 PM, Zac Sipes wrote:
zac0...@gmail.com
Do you want to register as a player? If so, you should say so--
sorry, I think this is a bit too unclear.
Yes, yes it is.
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 10:52 PM, Zac Sipes wrote:
> zac0...@gmail.com
Do you want to register as a player? If so, you should say so--
sorry, I think this is a bit too unclear.
Am Donnerstag, den 16.09.2010, 20:07 -0400 schrieb comex:
> Proposal: individualism (AI=2, II=0, Distributable)
>
> Repeal Rule 2303 (Teams), Rule 2304 (The Referee), Rule 2305 (Fans),
> and Rule 2306 (Team Tactics).
II=0?
--
Keba
thespyguy wrote:
> Hey guys, I'm new. What's up?
[snip]
> I register
Friend of yours, comex?
2009/5/19 thespyguy :
> I register
Your HTML email is no match for my client.
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 2:29 PM, ais523 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-07-10 at 17:35 -0700, Quazie wrote:
>> I post the following Sell Ticket:
>> 1 VP, I will object or support a change to the
>> ?? pledge. This ticket may be filled
>> mutiple times, th
2008/7/10 Sgeo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> This doesn't seem to require that the supporters or objectors of an
> amendment to this contract be parties to this contract.
>
Correct
On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 2:26 PM, Elliott Hird
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I agree to the following, known as "??":
> {
> This is a public contract.
>
> This is a pledge iff it has one party.
>
> Any person may join or leave this contract by announcement.
>
> This co
On 8/6/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
79 matches
Mail list logo
