2008/7/26 Charles Reiss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Googlebot isn't a person, so in that case, we must analyze a step
> backwards to determine who is most directly responsible for sending
> the message. Some candidates: the person who setup the state for the
> script last or whoever is most responsible
On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 05:53, Geoffrey Spear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 10:59 PM, Charles Reiss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> For all the current ways the PNP sends message there
>> is usually a clear (if tricky to identify) first-class person who
>> triggers the script t
On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 3:58 AM, Elliott Hird
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2008/7/21 Charles Reiss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> Your argument that the PNP is its own executor wouldn't work even if
>> you removed "first-class" from the definition. The PNP that Agora
>> recognizes is a contract. A documen
2008/7/21 Sgeo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> This is why POST is supposed to be used.
>
It's not a bad thing. The votes should get sent out ASAP.
We'd do it via cron if we could. It's useful to have googlebot submit them.
Note that GET requests don't have to be non-effective, just that
multiple GETs sh
On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 7:57 AM, Elliott Hird
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2008/7/21 Geoffrey Spear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> Is Googlebot a first-class person? It's attempted to update Agora on
>> the PNP's membership and text of the contract at least once
>> (http://209.85.215.104/search?q=cache:b
2008/7/21 Geoffrey Spear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Is Googlebot a first-class person? It's attempted to update Agora on
> the PNP's membership and text of the contract at least once
> (http://209.85.215.104/search?q=cache:bvcyYEB-92wJ:nomic.info/perlnomic/update_agora.cgi+site:nomic.info+agora&hl=en&
On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 10:59 PM, Charles Reiss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> For all the current ways the PNP sends message there
> is usually a clear (if tricky to identify) first-class person who
> triggers the script that sends the message (activating a proposal or
> running one of the CGI progr
2008/7/21 Charles Reiss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Your argument that the PNP is its own executor wouldn't work even if
> you removed "first-class" from the definition. The PNP that Agora
> recognizes is a contract. A document. It can't do anything. The
> abstract entity that is doing those actions is
On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 9:05 PM, Quazie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hmm, then I think that Executor can/should be modified to take into
> account the PNP and other partnerships of that nature, as I've always
> (until now) seen the PNP as its own executor.
Your argument that the PNP is its own exe
On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 7:59 PM, Charles Reiss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 8:25 PM, Quazie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [snip]
>> In the PNP i believe that the PNP is indeed the Executor of its own
>> messages, as it has an e-mail address set up specifically for it, and
>>
On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 8:25 PM, Quazie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snip]
> In the PNP i believe that the PNP is indeed the Executor of its own
> messages, as it has an e-mail address set up specifically for it, and
> it sends its own messages. I see no reason that partnerships be
Read the defini
On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 11:30 AM, Charles Reiss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 12:25 PM, Charles Reiss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 1:13 AM, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> Detail: http://zenith.homelinux.net/cotc/viewcase.php?cfj=2097
>>>
>>>
On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 12:25 PM, Charles Reiss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 1:13 AM, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Detail: http://zenith.homelinux.net/cotc/viewcase.php?cfj=2097
>>
>> == CFJ 2097 ==
>>
>>
On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 1:13 AM, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Detail: http://zenith.homelinux.net/cotc/viewcase.php?cfj=2097
>
> == CFJ 2097 ==
>
>The Executor of a message that contains a CFJ is also the
>Initiator of that
14 matches
Mail list logo
