root wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 5:44 PM, ehird <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> FOR*2 + FOR*-1 = FOR*1
>
> It's not algebra. You wrote "FOR*2, FOR*-1", which is shorthand for
> "I cast 2 votes FOR, then I cast -1 vote FOR." The first half of that
> is sensible, the second is not.
"FOR*-1" co
On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 5:44 PM, ehird <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> FOR*2 + FOR*-1 = FOR*1
It's not algebra. You wrote "FOR*2, FOR*-1", which is shorthand for
"I cast 2 votes FOR, then I cast -1 vote FOR." The first half of that
is sensible, the second is not.
-root
On 3 Oct 2008, at 00:30, Ian Kelly wrote:
On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 4:36 PM, ehird
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Are these valid?
It's impossible to cast a negative number of votes. Other than that,
the ones that aren't in excess of your voting limit would appear to be
valid.
-root
FOR*2 + F
On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 4:36 PM, ehird <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Are these valid?
It's impossible to cast a negative number of votes. Other than that,
the ones that aren't in excess of your voting limit would appear to be
valid.
-root
On 30 Sep 2008, at 18:02, Elliott Hird wrote:
On 30 Sep 2008, at 16:57, The PerlNomic Partnership wrote:
This distribution of proposals 5727-5730 initiates the Agoran
Decisions on whether to adopt them. The eligible voters for ordinary
proposals are the active players, the eligible voters fo
On Tue, 30 Sep 2008, Ben Caplan wrote:
> On Tuesday 30 September 2008 10:53:00 pm Kerim Aydin wrote:
>> On Tue, 30 Sep 2008, Ben Caplan wrote:
5731 D 0 3.0 Goethe Loss of Privileges
>>>
>>> AGAINST. Still feels rough around the edges.
>>
>> How can something be rough that was par
On Tuesday 30 September 2008 10:53:00 pm Kerim Aydin wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Sep 2008, Ben Caplan wrote:
> >> 5731 D 0 3.0 Goethe Loss of Privileges
> >
> > AGAINST. Still feels rough around the edges.
>
> How can something be rough that was part of Agora for at least 10
> years? -G.
If
On Tue, 30 Sep 2008, Ben Caplan wrote:
>> 5731 D 0 3.0 Goethe Loss of Privileges
> AGAINST. Still feels rough around the edges.
How can something be rough that was part of Agora for at least 10
years? -G.
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 4:39 PM, ihope <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 1:11 PM, Ian Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> 5727 D 1 2.0 Ivan Hope CXXVIILegal Tender
>> AGAINST (at least allow currencies the chance to opt out)
>
> Legal tender assets are defined by the currenc
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 1:11 PM, Ian Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> 5727 D 1 2.0 Ivan Hope CXXVIILegal Tender
> AGAINST (at least allow currencies the chance to opt out)
Legal tender assets are defined by the currency's backing document,
not by the legal tender assets' backing document. T
On Tue, 2008-09-30 at 15:37 -0400, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 2:55 PM, ais523 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Tue, 2008-09-30 at 14:53 -0400, comex wrote:
> >> On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 1:12 PM, Geoffrey Spear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> > I challenge this message's claim t
On 30 Sep 2008, at 20:47, ais523 wrote:
Actually I posted that to a-d deliberately, it was a bit too frivolous
for the Public Forum IMO. (It was partly an illusion to the
spoon-discussion memes that blow up out of nowhere in B every now and
then, such as players signing messages in s-d as from ea
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 2:55 PM, ais523 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-09-30 at 14:53 -0400, comex wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 1:12 PM, Geoffrey Spear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > I challenge this message's claim that it was not published by tusho.
>>
>> I challenge this message
On Tue, 2008-09-30 at 20:05 +0100, Elliott Hird wrote:
> On 30 Sep 2008, at 19:55, ais523 wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 2008-09-30 at 14:53 -0400, comex wrote:
> >> On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 1:12 PM, Geoffrey Spear
> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>> I challenge this message's claim that it was not publi
On 30 Sep 2008, at 19:55, ais523 wrote:
On Tue, 2008-09-30 at 14:53 -0400, comex wrote:
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 1:12 PM, Geoffrey Spear
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I challenge this message's claim that it was not published by tusho.
I challenge this message's claim that it was not pubilshed
On Tue, 2008-09-30 at 14:53 -0400, comex wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 1:12 PM, Geoffrey Spear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I challenge this message's claim that it was not published by tusho.
>
> I challenge this message's claim that it was not pubilshed by root.
I challenge any claim this
On 30 Sep 2008, at 18:12, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
I challenge this message's claim that it was not published by tusho.
I am not Dvorak Herring, nor [EMAIL PROTECTED], nor Annabel.
I am Phill, previously known as tusho. That's it.
17 matches
Mail list logo
