Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Watcher to Player

2012-07-16 Thread Benjamin Schultz
On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 12:26 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > On Fri, 13 Jul 2012, ais523 wrote: > > On Thu, 2012-07-12 at 19:04 -0600, WoodsPam wrote: > > > I am now a player. > > > Does that work? > > > > I'm pretty sure it does; nobody CFJ it, let's make this the first > > uncontroversial registra

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Watcher to Player

2012-07-13 Thread Kerim Aydin
On Fri, 13 Jul 2012, ais523 wrote: > On Thu, 2012-07-12 at 19:04 -0600, WoodsPam wrote: > > I am now a player. > > Does that work? > > I'm pretty sure it does; nobody CFJ it, let's make this the first > uncontroversial registration in ages ;) CFJ: This is the first uncontroversial registration

DIS: Re: BUS: Watcher to Player

2012-07-12 Thread ais523
On Thu, 2012-07-12 at 19:04 -0600, WoodsPam wrote: > I am now a player. > Does that work? I'm pretty sure it does; nobody CFJ it, let's make this the first uncontroversial registration in ages ;) -- ais523

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Watcher registration

2009-01-19 Thread bd_
On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 12:45:50PM -0800, Taral wrote: > On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 8:16 PM, bd_ wrote: > > Er? > > > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- > > Is it really necessary to double-sign the messages? It's only signed once, using the MIME encapsulation. Some mail clients may interpret it a bit

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Watcher registration

2009-01-19 Thread Taral
On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 8:16 PM, bd_ wrote: > Er? > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Is it really necessary to double-sign the messages? -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Watcher registration

2009-01-19 Thread Geoffrey Spear
On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 11:45 PM, bd_ wrote: > Hah, well, suffice it to say I'm not intending to register until I have > an idea as to what ambiguities, loopholes, and paradoxes are in the spotlight > at the moment - but if a CFJ says I'm registered already, well, that's that :) I don't believe t

DIS: Re: BUS: Watcher registration

2009-01-19 Thread Elliott Hird
On 19 Jan 2009, at 03:41, bd_ wrote: I request listing as a Watcher. Whoa hi bd_! IRCNomic!

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Watcher registration

2009-01-18 Thread bd_
On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 08:31:35PM -0800, Ed Murphy wrote: > bd_ wrote: > > > On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 11:13:14PM -0500, comex wrote: > >> On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 10:41 PM, bd_ wrote: > >>> I request listing as a Watcher. > >> ehird: no. > >> > > > > Er? > > http://zenith.homelinux.net/cotc/view

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Watcher registration

2009-01-18 Thread comex
On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 11:31 PM, Ed Murphy wrote: > http://zenith.homelinux.net/cotc/viewcase.php?cfj=1882 > http://zenith.homelinux.net/cotc/viewcase.php?cfj=2343 > > The first of these was legitimately ambiguous on multiple points, the > second wasn't. Not to mention, http://zenith.homelinux.n

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Watcher registration

2009-01-18 Thread Ed Murphy
bd_ wrote: > On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 11:13:14PM -0500, comex wrote: >> On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 10:41 PM, bd_ wrote: >>> I request listing as a Watcher. >> ehird: no. >> > > Er? http://zenith.homelinux.net/cotc/viewcase.php?cfj=1882 http://zenith.homelinux.net/cotc/viewcase.php?cfj=2343 The fir

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Watcher registration

2009-01-18 Thread bd_
On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 11:13:14PM -0500, comex wrote: > On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 10:41 PM, bd_ wrote: > > I request listing as a Watcher. > > ehird: no. > Er? signature.asc Description: Digital signature

DIS: Re: BUS: Watcher registration

2009-01-18 Thread comex
On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 10:41 PM, bd_ wrote: > I request listing as a Watcher. ehird: no.

DIS: Re: BUS: Watcher WoodsPam

2009-01-12 Thread comex
On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 4:32 AM, Alex Smith wrote: > I support. (Yes, I know this doesn't do anything, but IIRC it's > possible.) AOL!

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Watcher WoodsPam

2009-01-10 Thread Kerim Aydin
On Sat, 10 Jan 2009, Benjamin Schultz wrote: > On Jan 10, 2009, at 2:56 PM, Royce Wood wrote: > >> My name is WoodsPam. >> I would like to be an official watcher. >> >> ---WoodsPam > > Welcome to the gallery, WoodsPam. Don't mind the calls for judgment, around > here even saying "have a nice da

DIS: Re: BUS: Watcher WoodsPam

2009-01-10 Thread Benjamin Schultz
On Jan 10, 2009, at 2:59 PM, Elliott Hird wrote: On 10 Jan 2009, at 19:56, Royce Wood wrote: I would like to be an official watcher. CFJ: { WoodsPam is a Player } Arguments: We should be lenient with the registration laws to the point of absurdity, because an artificially inflated player

DIS: Re: BUS: Watcher WoodsPam

2009-01-10 Thread Benjamin Schultz
On Jan 10, 2009, at 2:56 PM, Royce Wood wrote: My name is WoodsPam. I would like to be an official watcher. ---WoodsPam Welcome to the gallery, WoodsPam. Don't mind the calls for judgment, around here even saying "have a nice day" can trigger several inquiries. - Benjamin Schultz KE

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Watcher WoodsPam

2009-01-10 Thread Elliott Hird
On 10 Jan 2009, at 20:19, Pavitra wrote: I believe it is fairly clear in this case that WoodsPam is not a player of Agora. Counterpoint: You're a member of the PBA and thus a filthy mutant commie traitor. All your opinions must be disregarded.

DIS: Re: BUS: Watcher WoodsPam

2009-01-10 Thread Pavitra
On Saturday 10 January 2009 13:59:20 Elliott Hird wrote: > On 10 Jan 2009, at 19:56, Royce Wood wrote: > > I would like to be an official watcher. > > CFJ: { WoodsPam is a Player } > Arguments: We should be lenient with the registration laws to the > point of absurdity, because an artificially infl

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Watcher

2008-01-25 Thread Ben Caplan
On Friday 25 January 2008 2:06 Geoffrey Spear wrote: > I think a system where unofficial custom can override something > explicitly defined in the Rules is almost completely unworkable, not > to mention a huge burden to new players. Who defines what exactly is > "custom"? If I start posting messa

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Watcher

2008-01-25 Thread Geoffrey Spear
On Jan 25, 2008 2:47 PM, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Zefram wrote: > > > Ed Murphy wrote: > >> CFJ 1659 found that even a contract can't override an explicit rule > >> definition, much less a long-standing but still unlegislated custom. > > > > And as a result we amended the rule that

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Watcher

2008-01-25 Thread Ed Murphy
Zefram wrote: Ed Murphy wrote: CFJ 1659 found that even a contract can't override an explicit rule definition, much less a long-standing but still unlegislated custom. And as a result we amended the rule that led to that judgement. Contextual modifications now can override rule definitions.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Watcher

2008-01-25 Thread Zefram
Ian Kelly wrote: >Yes, but we still require explicit redefinition, don't we? There's no rule saying so. -zefram

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Watcher

2008-01-25 Thread Ian Kelly
On Jan 25, 2008 12:00 PM, Zefram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ed Murphy wrote: > >CFJ 1659 found that even a contract can't override an explicit rule > >definition, much less a long-standing but still unlegislated custom. > > And as a result we amended the rule that led to that judgement. > Context

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Watcher

2008-01-25 Thread Zefram
Ed Murphy wrote: >CFJ 1659 found that even a contract can't override an explicit rule >definition, much less a long-standing but still unlegislated custom. And as a result we amended the rule that led to that judgement. Contextual modifications now can override rule definitions. -zefram

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Watcher

2008-01-25 Thread Ed Murphy
Zefram wrote: Ian Kelly wrote: R869 is pretty clear on the definition of "to be registered", so I'm interpreting this as a successful registration as a player. I think "to be registered as a watcher" can perfectly well have a different meaning from the rule-defined "to be registered". What m

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Watcher

2008-01-25 Thread Geoffrey Spear
On Jan 24, 2008 10:53 PM, Josiah Worcester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Thursday 24 January 2008 20:51:39 Ian Kelly wrote: > > On Jan 24, 2008 8:47 PM, Ben Caplan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I request to be registered as a "watcher". > > > If the above causes me to be registered as a play

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Watcher

2008-01-25 Thread Ian Kelly
On Jan 25, 2008 10:14 AM, Zefram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ian Kelly wrote: > >R869 is pretty clear on the definition of "to be registered", so I'm > >interpreting this as a successful registration as a player. > > I think "to be registered as a watcher" can perfectly well have a > different mea

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Watcher

2008-01-25 Thread Zefram
Ian Kelly wrote: >R869 is pretty clear on the definition of "to be registered", so I'm >interpreting this as a successful registration as a player. I think "to be registered as a watcher" can perfectly well have a different meaning from the rule-defined "to be registered". What meaning that is is

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Watcher

2008-01-24 Thread Ian Kelly
On Jan 24, 2008 8:53 PM, Josiah Worcester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > As am I. I'm guessing that Ben Caplan here wants to be known as 'watcher'. Perhaps, but e signed as Pavitra, so that's how I'm recording em. -root

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Watcher

2008-01-24 Thread Josiah Worcester
On Thursday 24 January 2008 20:51:39 Ian Kelly wrote: > On Jan 24, 2008 8:47 PM, Ben Caplan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I request to be registered as a "watcher". > > If the above causes me to be registered as a player, then I switch my > > posture to Leaning. > > R869 is pretty clear on the def

DIS: Re: BUS: Watcher

2008-01-24 Thread Ian Kelly
On Jan 24, 2008 8:47 PM, Ben Caplan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I request to be registered as a "watcher". > If the above causes me to be registered as a player, then I switch my > posture to Leaning. R869 is pretty clear on the definition of "to be registered", so I'm interpreting this as a succ

DIS: Re: BUS: Watcher Listing.

2007-06-17 Thread Zefram
Endymion wrote: > I might become a player shortly after >the next FLR posting. An up-to-date FLR is at , if that's all you're waiting for. -zefram