That doesn't do it. Agency and agency actions are defined by the rules. Saying
this excludes a specific instance of an agency is like saying "since the rules
don't define
the exact amount of shinies in your possession, shiny transfers aren't entirely
defined by the rules."
On Wed, 4 Oct 2017,
On Wed, 4 Oct 2017, Alex Smith wrote:
> On Tue, 2017-10-03 at 23:54 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> > Yup. It only pauses it for 48 hours though, so in current context
> > useless unless I keep renewing it, and it's been around a while.
>
> Is it even possible to object to the same intent twice? Ru
You're right, I'm tired. That would almost certainly work. It might not, in
the basis that transferring shinies is defined by the rules, but I think
that argument in unlikely to succeed.
On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 12:07 AM Gaelan Steele wrote:
> I have the “action defined entirely by the rules” clau
I have the “action defined entirely by the rules” clause in there for exactly
this reason.
Gaelan
> On Oct 4, 2017, at 12:03 AM, Aris Merchant
> wrote:
>
> Agency:
> Director: Conspirator 1
> Agent: Conspirator 2
> Text: If Agora has more than 10,000 shinies, the power to transfer 1 shiny
>
On Tue, 2017-10-03 at 23:54 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> Yup. It only pauses it for 48 hours though, so in current context
> useless unless I keep renewing it, and it's been around a while.
Is it even possible to object to the same intent twice? Rule 2124 used
to use "objector" which is precisely
Agency:
Director: Conspirator 1
Agent: Conspirator 2
Text: If Agora has more than 10,000 shinies, the power to transfer 1 shiny
from Conspirator 1 to Conspirator 2.
-Aris
On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 11:59 PM Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
>
> Remember that intent can be posted before conditions are true, and
Remember that intent can be posted before conditions are true, and
last 14 days. If I post staggered intents (first ones before this is adopted),
then any time the economy goes low I can get a win instantly.
On Tue, 3 Oct 2017, Gaelan Steele wrote:
> Fair enough. I’ll put out a revised version
On Tue, 2017-10-03 at 23:44 -0700, Gaelan Steele wrote:
> Curious about how you intend to pull off that win. I tried to avoid
> trivial abuse (create an agency with “do X as long as agora has less
> that 1000 shines”) by having the “defined entirely by the rules”
> clause; does Agora actually owe y
Fair enough. I’ll put out a revised version once I give everyone else a chance
to give feedback.
> On Oct 3, 2017, at 11:53 PM, Aris Merchant
> wrote:
>
> I'd just make it With Notice. Seems fair to give people some more time to
> attempt a fix.
>
> -Aris
>
> On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 11:52 PM
Yup. It only pauses it for 48 hours though, so in current context useless
unless
I keep renewing it,
and it's been around a while.
But I've thought of about 3 ways to win using this, which I'll keep to myself
since
you've proposed this already (and combo of assessor and ability to speaker-del
On Wed, 2017-10-04 at 16:52 +1000, VJ Rada wrote:
On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 4:49 PM, Gaelan Steele
> wrote:
> > Wait, the speaker can object to Notice? I’m not sure how I feel
> > about that.
>
> Yup, the speaker can stop the amendment or creation of any agency.
> Quazie could have stopped me much ea
I'd just make it With Notice. Seems fair to give people some more time to
attempt a fix.
-Aris
On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 11:52 PM VJ Rada wrote:
> Yup, the speaker can stop the amendment or creation of any agency.
> Quazie could have stopped me much easier.
>
> On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 4:49 PM, Gael
Yup, the speaker can stop the amendment or creation of any agency.
Quazie could have stopped me much easier.
On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 4:49 PM, Gaelan Steele wrote:
> Wait, the speaker can object to Notice? I’m not sure how I feel about that.
>
> On Oct 3, 2017, at 11:41 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
>
Wait, the speaker can object to Notice? I’m not sure how I feel about that.
> On Oct 3, 2017, at 11:41 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, 4 Oct 2017, Alex Smith wrote:
>> On Tue, 2017-10-03 at 21:44 -0700, Gaelan Steele wrote:
>>> I create this proposal and pend it with AP:
>>>
>>> ---
>>
On Wed, 2017-10-04 at 16:40 +1000, VJ Rada wrote:
> It is a real sort. "With T notice" is a type, and includes such
> things as agencies.
Huh, I checked and you're right. (This also implies that "with 4 days'
notice" is a different sort of dependent action from "with notice",
which wouldn't have b
Curious about how you intend to pull off that win. I tried to avoid trivial
abuse (create an agency with “do X as long as agora has less that 1000 shines”)
by having the “defined entirely by the rules” clause; does Agora actually owe
you enough shinies to make itself bankrupt, or are you going t
It is a real sort. "With T notice" is a type, and includes such things
as agencies.
On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 4:35 PM, Alex Smith wrote:
> On Tue, 2017-10-03 at 21:44 -0700, Gaelan Steele wrote:
>> I create this proposal and pend it with AP:
>>
>> ---
>> Name: Another Economy Fix Attempt
>> Author:
17 matches
Mail list logo
