On 2/27/2024 10:23 AM, Kiako via agora-business wrote:
[ At some point, "weekly" and "monthly" started getting capitalized,
but only in "The Rulekeepor" and "The Stones". It appears that
lowercase is the standard, as all other office reports use lowercase
and all other stones use lowercase. ]
On Fri, 2023-11-17 at 16:21 -0800, 4st nomic via agora-business wrote:
> I intend to clean rule 2480 ("Festivals") by replacing
> "grater" with "greater".
For the intent to work, you need to specify the mechanism, e.g. "I
intend without objection to clean…"
--
ais523
On Sun, Jun 25, 2023 at 9:38 AM secretsnail9 via agora-business
wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jun 25, 2023, at 11:20 AM, Kerim Aydin via agora-business
> > wrote:
> >
> > I object. I don’t think this fixes the issue that nix is fixed as
> > surveyor, has abandoned the tournament, and can’t be replaced?
There's actually two criteria to think about here. One is the
criteria for intent announcements (R1728). but the other is the
criteria for rule change specifications in R105, specifically:
> A rule change is wholly prevented from taking effect unless its
> full text was published, along
I don't think that "re-submission" or "editting" intents are a thing but
the language seems to refer to just one single possible outcome, even if
its not worded precisely.
I want this to be good enough to work, but I'm not sure if CfJs are on my
side on this.
On Thursday, May 18, 2023, beokirby a
On 5/18/23 14:44, beokirby agora via agora-discussion wrote:
> I re-submit my intent but edited to be replacing " ore " with " or "
>
> -Beokirby
First, this was sent to DIS (agora-discussion), so it doesn't work as an
action.
Second, the communication standard for intents is extremely high, so
I re-submit my intent but edited to be replacing " ore " with " or "
-Beokirby
On Thu, May 18, 2023 at 2:38 PM Janet Cobb via agora-business <
agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> On 5/18/23 14:36, beokirby agora via agora-business wrote:
> > I intend to clean Rule 2675 ("Dream of Wandering")
Suggestion: match more text:
EG "16 ore" to "16 or"
On Thu, May 18, 2023 at 11:38 AM Janet Cobb via agora-business <
agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> On 5/18/23 14:36, beokirby agora via agora-business wrote:
> > I intend to clean Rule 2675 ("Dream of Wandering") by replacing "ore"
> with
On 4/17/23 15:46, Forest Sweeney via agora-business wrote:
On Wed, Mar 15, 2023 at 8:05 PM Forest Sweeney via agora-business <
agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
I intend to, without objection, clean Rule 2553 ("Win By Paradox"), by
replacing "judgment" with "judgement".
Also, our website c
On 4/17/23 15:43, Forest Sweeney via agora-business wrote:
On Wed, Mar 15, 2023 at 9:19 PM Forest Sweeney via agora-business <
agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
I intend to, without objection, clean Rule 2675 ("Dream of Wandering")
by replacing "onceexpunge" with "once expunge".
--
4st
@
On Sun, Mar 5, 2023 at 2:49 PM Janet Cobb via agora-business
wrote:
> > CFJ 831 (called 10 Nov 1995): 'The Date: header of a message is not
> > necessarily the time at which the message takes effect.'
>
> Why is this now inaccurate? We've held that not all Date headers are to
> be trusted, rig
On 2/7/2022 3:34 PM, ais523 via agora-business wrote:
> An FLR annotation to rule 1789 references CFJ 1594, whose appeal found
> that players could be deregistered in a Writ of FAGE even if there were
> no Registrar.
>
> However, rule 1789 looked a little different at the time – it stated
> that
On 1/6/2022 2:14 AM, Sarah S. via agora-discussion wrote:
> Must be noted that I don't think anything whatsoever that's in the FLR that
> isn't in the SLR has legal effect
Not exactly what scope you're considering "legal effect" but the date on
which a rule change was made has legal effect and i
Must be noted that I don't think anything whatsoever that's in the FLR that
isn't in the SLR has legal effect
On Thu, Jan 6, 2022 at 6:58 PM ais523 via agora-business <
agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> On Sun, 2022-01-02 at 03:10 +, ais523 via agora-official wrote:
> > I intend, with A
On 6/27/2020 2:37 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote:
> On 6/23/20 12:01 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote:
>> I intend, with 2 Agoran consent, to award G. the Patent Title of
>> Tapecutter for Proposal 8407, "no stinking auction definitions".
>>
>
> Seeing 3 support and no objections
Well, maybe it would be better to make the Git repository the public
forum and maybe have it be hosted not on GitHub to resolve the outside
of TDoC and interface questions.
On 06/20/2018 05:36 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> Additional gratuity:
>
> There are currently several people who can push to th
Additional gratuity:
There are currently several people who can push to those links (via GitHub)
without the push/overwrite being visible or evident to someone following the
link. However, the underlying github repo (not findable from those links)
would show the commit history that can be cros
I, for one, would be willing to experiment with it, if we made sure that
there was strict protections both technically and in the rules to avoid
tampering or loss of information.
On 06/20/2018 05:17 PM, Alex Smith wrote:
> On Wed, 2018-06-20 at 17:11 -0400, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> wrote:
On Wed, 2018-06-20 at 17:11 -0400, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
wrote:
> I raised the issue of having a certain GitHub repository as a public
> forum and people opposed it because it would not be within the TDoC
> of a member and it would break the precedent of mailing lists being
> public fora.
I favor this with significant deference to anyone else.
On 06/20/2018 03:16 PM, Aris Merchant wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 12:10 PM Alex Smith
> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 2018-06-20 at 12:04 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>>> The FLR and SLR are up to date (up to Proposal 8052, and including
>>> revisio
I raised the issue of having a certain GitHub repository as a public
forum and people opposed it because it would not be within the TDoC of a
member and it would break the precedent of mailing lists being public fora.
On 06/20/2018 03:32 PM, Alex Smith wrote:
> On Wed, 2018-06-20 at 12:23 -0700, K
Just as some added fun, note that I found an error (in the "last change" date,
so not something required to be reported) - I pushed the fix so the current
*document* behind the link is not the one it was when I published the links.
Probably a moot point but there it is.
On Wed, 20 Jun 2018, Ar
On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 1:21 PM Alex Smith wrote:
> On Wed, 2018-06-20 at 13:17 -0700, Aris Merchant wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 12:33 PM Alex Smith
> > wrote:
> > > For what it's worth, I've opened the FLR in question so you couldn't
> > > now change it and have me see the new version (a
On Wed, 2018-06-20 at 13:17 -0700, Aris Merchant wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 12:33 PM Alex Smith
> wrote:
> > For what it's worth, I've opened the FLR in question so you couldn't
> > now change it and have me see the new version (and the use of Github as
> > an intermediary, who keep backups
On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 12:33 PM Alex Smith
wrote:
> On Wed, 2018-06-20 at 12:23 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> > Well considering I've still got a terminal window open, I could
> > change the link contents instantly to anything before most people
> > will have seen it. Definitely not out of my TDO
On Wed, 20 Jun 2018, Alex Smith wrote:
> Right, the message needs to contain enough context to find the action.
> I don't think that's a problem with the message in question, though.
So first, I don't think you could argue that I published a Document that
contained a report. So for the purpose
On Wed, 2018-06-20 at 12:23 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> Well considering I've still got a terminal window open, I could
> change the link contents instantly to anything before most people
> will have seen it. Definitely not out of my TDOC if the content of
> those links is the only evidence.
>
>
On Wed, 20 Jun 2018, Alex Smith wrote:
> On Wed, 2018-06-20 at 12:04 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> > The FLR and SLR are up to date (up to Proposal 8052, and including
> > revision for the recent CoE on the Treasuror Rule):
> >
> > https://agoranomic.org/ruleset/slr.txt
> > https://agoranomic.org
On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 12:10 PM Alex Smith
wrote:
> On Wed, 2018-06-20 at 12:04 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> > The FLR and SLR are up to date (up to Proposal 8052, and including
> > revision for the recent CoE on the Treasuror Rule):
> >
> > https://agoranomic.org/ruleset/slr.txt
> > https://agor
On Wed, 2018-06-20 at 12:04 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> The FLR and SLR are up to date (up to Proposal 8052, and including
> revision for the recent CoE on the Treasuror Rule):
>
> https://agoranomic.org/ruleset/slr.txt
> https://agoranomic.org/ruleset/flr.txt
>
> I'm not publishing them, because
After looking a bit, I think
(1) the person complaining may have been confused about Nichdel's
erroneous assessment of Sep 7, or possibly just complaining that the SLR
was late.
(2) however, the current SLR does not include any of the results from the
_correct_ assessment of Sep 12, posted sho
This is also missing the farming stuff, which was one of several things
someone else complained was missing in the _previous_ Ruleset. (That's the
one thing I recall. I didn't save the message.)
Greetings,
Ørjsn.
On Thu, 28 Sep 2017, Gaelan Steele wrote:
THE SHORT LOGICAL RULESET
[snip]
On Fri, 29 Sep 2017, VJ Rada wrote:
> Another error, this ruleset does not include "Blue cards" and "black
> cards" although it does include the rest of the changes from "card
> reform and expansion v4"
(ok, will hold off dice rolls for a day maybe...)
Another error, this ruleset does not include "Blue cards" and "black
cards" although it does include the rest of the changes from "card
reform and expansion v4"
On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 10:39 AM, Gaelan Steele wrote:
> Bleh, I thought I fixed that. Will fix it when off mobile.
>
> Gaelan
>
>> On S
Bleh, I thought I fixed that. Will fix it when off mobile.
Gaelan
> On Sep 28, 2017, at 5:37 PM, VJ Rada wrote:
>
> Error (although not in the rules themselves)
>
> "Last Ruleset Ratification:
> Short Logical Ruleset of 2017-09-26"
>
> The ratification happened at that time but the ruleset
Error (although not in the rules themselves)
"Last Ruleset Ratification:
Short Logical Ruleset of 2017-09-26"
The ratification happened at that time but the ruleset itself was from
December 2016
On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 10:30 AM, Gaelan Steele wrote:
> THE SHORT LOGICAL RULESET
>
> Most Recent
On 24 October 2011 03:27, omd wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 5:44 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
>> I support and do so, nominating omd.
>
> I accept.
>
Wait - I ended up as Rulekeepor too... I missed that :-S
(I need to pay more attention to what goes on here, sometimes, and not
just skim read reports
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 7:43 PM, Aaron Goldfein wrote:
> I initiate an election for Rulekeepor. I nominate myself as Rulekeepor.
>
> -Yally
>
Fails; you cannot do so.
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 10:01 PM, Aaron Goldfein wrote:
> The IADoP's report says that an election hasn't been initiated since
> May. I guess that's incorrect.
The recently-ended election was initiated at the end of July.
--
-c.
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 8:55 PM, comex wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 9:43 PM, Aaron Goldfein
> wrote:
>> I initiate an election for Rulekeepor. I nominate myself as Rulekeepor.
>
> You need 4 support.
>
> --
> -c.
The IADoP's report says that an election hasn't been initiated since
May. I gues
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 9:43 PM, Aaron Goldfein wrote:
> I initiate an election for Rulekeepor. I nominate myself as Rulekeepor.
You need 4 support.
--
-c.
On 12/18/07, Levi Stephen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Having received at most one objection I flip the stability of Rulekeepor
> to Perpetual.
I don't think this is a valid resolution of the decision.
--
Taral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you
On Dec 9, 2007 8:25 PM, Josiah Worcester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > http://objection.mrdictionary.net/go.php?n=2338927
> I CFJ on the following: The above was a valid vote on the stability of
> Rulekeepor.
Gratuitous evidence: The link in question:
(1) had "objection" in the URL
(2) led to a p
43 matches
Mail list logo
