Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Secretary] Basic income distribution revision 2 (attn ais523)

2017-10-27 Thread Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
Thank you for the reminder, I missed that. On 10/26/2017 11:49 PM, Owen Jacobson wrote: >> On Oct 25, 2017, at 3:26 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus >> wrote: >> >> The other thing to note is that he was previously a player and continued >> to take player-like actions. Additionally, he state

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Secretary] Basic income distribution revision 2 (attn ais523)

2017-10-26 Thread Owen Jacobson
> On Oct 27, 2017, at 2:02 AM, Owen Jacobson wrote: > > # Recipient Gaelan PT[1] (registration order, earliest-to-latest) > - > 0 4 sh. 0 sh. > 1 PT[1]4 sh. 1 sh. > 10 PT[1]4 sh. 2 sh. > 13 PT[1]4 sh. 3 sh. > 16 PT[1]

DIS: Re: BUS: [Secretary] Basic income distribution revision 2 (attn ais523)

2017-10-26 Thread Owen Jacobson
> On Oct 25, 2017, at 2:14 AM, Owen Jacobson wrote: > > On Oct 25, 2017, at 12:30 AM, Owen Jacobson wrote: > >> I cause Agora to make the following payments, which I believe can be >> uniquely decomposed into the individual payments required by “Passive >> Income”: >> >> * 8 sh. to ProofTec

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Secretary] Basic income distribution revision 2 (attn ais523)

2017-10-26 Thread Owen Jacobson
> On Oct 25, 2017, at 3:26 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus > wrote: > > The other thing to note is that he was previously a player and continued > to take player-like actions. Additionally, he stated that he had > observed his inclusion in the Registrar's report and had knowingly not > CoEe

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Secretary] Basic income distribution revision 2 (attn ais523)

2017-10-26 Thread Owen Jacobson
> On Oct 25, 2017, at 10:41 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > > On Wed, 25 Oct 2017, Owen Jacobson wrote: >> On Oct 25, 2017, at 12:30 AM, Owen Jacobson wrote: >> >>> I cause Agora to make the following payments, which I believe can be >>> uniquely decomposed into the individual payments require

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Secretary] Basic income distribution revision 2 (attn ais523)

2017-10-25 Thread Alex Smith
On Wed, 2017-10-25 at 13:47 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote: > In fact, I'd be more inclined to say this *new* action (now being > unambiguous intent to play) is in fact the Registration message. I thought of that argument. However, is it unambiguous intent to *become* a player *now*? It's more an inten

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Secretary] Basic income distribution revision 2 (attn ais523)

2017-10-25 Thread Nic Evans
On 10/25/17 17:49, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > On Wed, 25 Oct 2017, Nic Evans wrote: >> I favor this case. > Given how many game facts playerhood drives are you able to turn this one > around pretty quickly (within 4 days)? If so I'll assign right away. > > Yes. I actually feel this is pretty clea

DIS: Re: BUS: [Secretary] Basic income distribution revision 2 (attn ais523)

2017-10-25 Thread Kerim Aydin
On Wed, 25 Oct 2017, Nic Evans wrote: > I favor this case. Given how many game facts playerhood drives are you able to turn this one around pretty quickly (within 4 days)? If so I'll assign right away.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Secretary] Basic income distribution revision 2 (attn ais523)

2017-10-25 Thread Alexis Hunt
I disfavour this case. On Wed, 25 Oct 2017 at 18:32 Publius Scribonius Scholasticus < p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com> wrote: > I think the key is a pattern of behaviour resembling consent. If ais523 > had not expressed a pattern of behaviour or engaged in the pattern of > behaviour from the

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Secretary] Basic income distribution revision 2 (attn ais523)

2017-10-25 Thread Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
I think the key is a pattern of behaviour resembling consent. If ais523 had not expressed a pattern of behaviour or engaged in the pattern of behaviour from the beginning, I would not accept it. On 10/25/2017 04:44 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > How long after the fact are you comfortable with accept

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Secretary] Basic income distribution revision 2 (attn ais523)

2017-10-25 Thread Kerim Aydin
In fact, I'd be more inclined to say this *new* action (now being unambiguous intent to play) is in fact the Registration message. On Wed, 25 Oct 2017, Kerim Aydin wrote: > How long after the fact are you comfortable with accepting evidence of > consent? (obviously this works for any future r

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Secretary] Basic income distribution revision 2 (attn ais523)

2017-10-25 Thread Kerim Aydin
How long after the fact are you comfortable with accepting evidence of consent? (obviously this works for any future ratification). What if OscarMeyr came back and said - you know back in May and that other CFJ - well actually I consent. On Wed, 25 Oct 2017, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wr

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Secretary] Basic income distribution revision 2 (attn ais523)

2017-10-25 Thread Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
However, this action should still be taken into account. On 10/25/2017 04:22 PM, VJ Rada wrote: > This doesn't affect the actual CFJ I called (because, as we all know, > CFJs are judged on the facts of their calling) but THIS might be the > player-like action we need to ratify ais523 in. > > On We

DIS: Re: BUS: [Secretary] Basic income distribution revision 2 (attn ais523)

2017-10-25 Thread VJ Rada
This doesn't affect the actual CFJ I called (because, as we all know, CFJs are judged on the facts of their calling) but THIS might be the player-like action we need to ratify ais523 in. On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 10:40 PM, Alex Smith wrote: > On Wed, 2017-10-25 at 02:14 -0400, Owen Jacobson wrote:

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Secretary] Basic income distribution revision 2 (attn ais523)

2017-10-25 Thread Kerim Aydin
The "previously-a-player" isn't enough, OscarMeyr was the subject of CFJ 3456 and was a longtime player. Not sure what "player-like" actions you're referring to, non-players have also CFJ'd and commented while they clearly didn't intend to be players. The "observed eir own inclusion" without kn

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Secretary] Basic income distribution revision 2 (attn ais523)

2017-10-25 Thread Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
The other thing to note is that he was previously a player and continued to take player-like actions. Additionally, he stated that he had observed his inclusion in the Registrar's report and had knowingly not CoEed. On 10/25/2017 10:47 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > On Wed, 25 Oct 2017, Publius Scrib

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Secretary] Basic income distribution revision 2 (attn ais523)

2017-10-25 Thread Kerim Aydin
On Wed, 25 Oct 2017, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote: > Actually, when this came up, e made a statement that could have been > consent and I believe G. may have mentioned that he thought it could count. No - not after the fact. The situation that CFJ 3456 allows this to work is is if a pe

DIS: Re: BUS: [Secretary] Basic income distribution revision 2 (attn ais523)

2017-10-25 Thread Kerim Aydin
On Wed, 25 Oct 2017, Owen Jacobson wrote: > On Oct 25, 2017, at 12:30 AM, Owen Jacobson wrote: > > > I cause Agora to make the following payments, which I believe can be > > uniquely decomposed into the individual payments required by “Passive > > Income”: > > > > * 8 sh. to ProofTechnique >

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: [Secretary] Basic income distribution revision 2 (attn ais523)

2017-10-25 Thread Cuddle Beam
Not that it matters too much but I don't think you can bar someone a posteriori like that because "When a person initiates a Call for Judgment, e CAN optionally bar one person

DIS: Re: BUS: [Secretary] Basic income distribution revision 2 (attn ais523)

2017-10-25 Thread Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
Actually, when this came up, e made a statement that could have been consent and I believe G. may have mentioned that he thought it could count. On 10/25/2017 03:18 AM, VJ Rada wrote: > By the way, I'm pretty sure that ais523 isn't a player? E was only > made a player by ratification, and CFJ 345