On Thu, 2008-07-10 at 22:36 -0400, ihope wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 10:29 PM, Sgeo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I agree to the following pledge
> > {
> > I pledge to, upon a player giving me eir entire supply of a currency,
> > give said player all of my supply of that currency, including w
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 9:22 AM, ais523 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think it can be argued that, although it's certainly possible to make
> a contract in a-d (I've made an Agoran contract over IRC before, for
> instance), the context of that particular pledge seems to show that it
> might not ne
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 9:22 AM, ais523 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think it can be argued that, although it's certainly possible to make
> a contract in a-d (I've made an Agoran contract over IRC before, for
> instance), the context of that particular pledge seems to show that it
> might not ne
On Thu, 10 Jul 2008, Elliott Hird wrote:
> 2008/7/10 Elliott Hird <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> 2008/7/10 Elliott Hird <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>> 2008/7/10 Elliott Hird <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
2008/7/10 Elliott Hird <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> 2008/7/10 Nick Vanderweit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> I agree
On Thu, 10 Jul 2008, Sgeo wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 4:27 PM, Ian Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 2:07 PM, Sgeo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> I go on hold. I come off hold. I repeat the last two actions 999 more times.
>>
>> I'm just going to infer from CFJ 1774
On Thu, 10 Jul 2008, Ian Kelly wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 2:57 PM, Sgeo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> I will note that performing the same action 1,000 times takes at least
>>> 9 copies and 14 pastes; the same action 10,000 times takes at least 13
>>> copies and 17 pastes, which is not sig
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 12:34 PM, Elliott Hird
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2008/7/11 Kerim Aydin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> As Kelly once told some Pirates, can you take these silly games somewhere
>> else? To paraphrase yourself to David, this isn't a forum for every
>> random little nonsense game
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 10:41 AM, Kerim Aydin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 10 Jul 2008, Ian Kelly wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 2:57 PM, Sgeo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I will note that performing the same action 1,000 times takes at least
9 copies and 14 pastes; the same
On Thu, 10 Jul 2008, comex wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 4:57 PM, Sgeo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> for i in range(1000):
>>print "I go on hold. I come off hold."
>
> for((i=0;i<1000;i++)); do echo 'I go on hold. I come off hold.'; done
++>++>++<<[->[->[->[->+
On Thu, 10 Jul 2008, Sgeo wrote:
> I think the cultural/socual block might just be an effect of needing
> to send multiple messages to do so many actions. If multiple messages
> are not needed, then I don't see any cultural/social consequences of
> one message with a lot of lines.
We obviously ne
On Fri, 11 Jul 2008, Elliott Hird wrote:
> 2008/7/11 Kerim Aydin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> As Kelly once told some Pirates, can you take these silly games somewhere
>> else? To paraphrase yourself to David, this isn't a forum for every
>> random little nonsense game from minor subsets of players th
On Thu, 10 Jul 2008, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
> Don't make me recontestify brainfuck golf.
Note to self: read through entire threads before getting distracted
with something. -Goethe
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 11:15 AM, Sgeo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I post the following ticket:
>
> Action: As soon as possible, I SHALL either perform the action
> requested by the filler of this ticket OR give the filler of this
> ticket 2VP.
> Cost: 2VP
> This ticket doesn't expire until revoke
On Fri, 2008-07-11 at 14:20 -0400, comex wrote:
> I CFJ on the statement: w/ o objection I
>{{This is Agora}}(www.poolappeal.tv)
> I CFJ on the statement: intend to rat-ify this /products.aspx
>{{This is Agora}} report:
root wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 4:31 PM, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Note the following excerpt from the judgement of 1774:
>>
>>> If the effort is an obvious or apparent scam or abuse of other
>>> player's time and efforts, and the scam wholly depends on ISIDTID
>>> to absolve t
Ivan Hope wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 11:14 PM, Quazie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 8:02 PM, ihope <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> I call an equity case.
>>>
>>> Pledge: the above.
>>> Parties: Sgeo and me.
>>> State of affairs: Sgeo could stash all the currency I didn
On Fri, 2008-07-11 at 11:49 -0700, Ed Murphy wrote:
> Ivan Hope wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 11:14 PM, Quazie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 8:02 PM, ihope <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>> I call an equity case.
> >>>
> >>> Pledge: the above.
> >>> Parties: Sgeo an
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 12:27 PM, ais523 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 2008-07-11 at 14:20 -0400, comex wrote:
>> I CFJ on the statement: w/ o objection I
>>{{This is Agora}}(www.poolappeal.tv)
>> I CFJ on the statement: intend to ra
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 2:49 PM, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ivan Hope wrote:
>
>> Rule 2191: "An equity case regarding a pledge CAN be initiated by a
>> non-party, provided that all other requirements for initiating an
>> equity case are met. The initiator of such a case is considered
On Fri, 11 Jul 2008, comex wrote:
> Disclaimer: Some or all of the statements in this message may be false.
By CFJ 1971 precedent, it is very likely all these can be ignored.
-Goethe
On Fri, 11 Jul 2008, Ian Kelly wrote:
>> Stay on your guard, people, for all I know there may be others...
>>
>> Oh, and my spam-detector marked this as exactly as spammy as half the
>> stuff I send to a-d for some reason...
>
> My spam filter didn't touch it.
My Agora-filter operates before my s
On Thursday 10 July 2008 08:18:54 pm Sgeo wrote:
>this amount of the currency, specifies a
>maximum FINE amount, and the amount is no greater than the
Should be:
>this amount of the currency, and the backing document specifies
>a maximum FINE amount, and the amount
On Thursday 10 July 2008 06:41:15 pm Ian Kelly wrote:
> I never understood the attraction of that meme in the first place.
There's a pretty good analysis of it here:
http://gameshelf.jmac.org/2008/02/i-lose.html
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 9:42 AM, Ben Caplan
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thursday 10 July 2008 08:18:54 pm Sgeo wrote:
>>this amount of the currency, specifies a
>>maximum FINE amount, and the amount is no greater than the
>
> Should be:
>>this amount of the currency, and
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 3:49 PM, Roger Hicks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 9:42 AM, Ben Caplan
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Thursday 10 July 2008 08:18:54 pm Sgeo wrote:
>>>this amount of the currency, specifies a
>>>maximum FINE amount, and the amount i
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 1:59 PM, Sgeo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If a contract wants to allow full judicial discretion, it can just
> specify an incredibly huge max. fine amount.. unless you want just any
> currency to be finable?
>
Wasn't that the point of ensuring that any currency could be fin
On Friday 11 July 2008 02:49:19 pm Roger Hicks wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 9:42 AM, Ben Caplan wrote:
> > On Thursday 10 July 2008 08:18:54 pm Sgeo wrote:
> >>this amount of the currency, specifies a
> >>maximum FINE amount, and the amount is no greater than the
> >
> > Should
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 3:49 PM, Roger Hicks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Why have a maximum fine amount?
Because without it I can't create a shell corporation to hold all of
my assets, giving me some arbitrary currency in exchange and setting a
really low maximum fine amount for that currency.
Any opinions on what the maximum fine amount for notes should be?
Also, what II should the proposal be?
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 2:04 PM, Ben Caplan
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> We want to restrict fines to currencies whose backing documents opt-in
> to fineability. Now, we could make it binary rather than scalar
> (instead of "The maximum FINE amount of VP is 7", "VP are fineable"),
> if you want to
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 4:08 PM, Geoffrey Spear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 3:49 PM, Roger Hicks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Why have a maximum fine amount?
>
> Because without it I can't create a shell corporation to hold all of
> my assets, giving me some arbitrary curr
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 4:09 PM, Roger Hicks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 2:04 PM, Ben Caplan
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> We want to restrict fines to currencies whose backing documents opt-in
>> to fineability. Now, we could make it binary rather than scalar
>> (instead
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 2:11 PM, Sgeo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What if the backing document of a currency doesn't want such an
> auction? See my suggestion for how VP could be finable.
>
The backing document could still define its own methods for
transferring currency from the L&FD. It could al
On Friday 11 July 2008 03:08:13 pm Geoffrey Spear wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 3:49 PM, Roger Hicks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Why have a maximum fine amount?
>
> Because without it I can't create a shell corporation to hold all of
> my assets, giving me some arbitrary currency in exchange
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 4:20 PM, Ben Caplan
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That wouldn't be an effective scam, unless the judge was in on it. E's
> under no obligation to specify your shell corporation's currency for
> the fine. E could just as easily fine you in something you care about,
> such as V
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 4:28 PM, Geoffrey Spear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 4:20 PM, Ben Caplan
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> That wouldn't be an effective scam, unless the judge was in on it. E's
>> under no obligation to specify your shell corporation's currency for
>>
COE: you are missing the following sell ticket from me:
1 VP, I will object or support a change to the
?? pledge. This ticket may be filled
mutiple times, though only 1 time per change. This ticket does not
expire until I say it does.
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 2:30 PM, ais523 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-07-10 at 17:26 -0600, Nick Vanderweit wrote:
>> I lose.
> I act on behalf of tusho to cause tusho to think about The Game.
> --
> ais523
>
Well this isn't so much ISIDTID, by saying you do, you really do do,
because
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 3:36 PM, Quazie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 2:30 PM, ais523 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Thu, 2008-07-10 at 17:26 -0600, Nick Vanderweit wrote:
>>> I lose.
>> I act on behalf of tusho to cause tusho to think about The Game.
>> --
>> ais523
>>
>
>
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 3:07 PM, Geoffrey Spear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I OBJECT to any action comex has attempted to take in the past 7 days.
>
> CoE: the message to which I'm replying contains at least one error on each
> line.
Denied. Although some parts of the message (e.g. "Murphy play
Proposal: Chambers II
AI: 3
II: 1
{
Remove all but the last paragraph from R2196
Create a new rule titled "Chambers" with Power=3 and the following text:
{{
A rule may define a chamber by specifying:
1) The class of eligible voters on agoran decisions to adopt
proposals within that chamber
2) T
2008/7/11 Roger Hicks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Proposal: Chambers II
> AI: 3
> II: 1
Cliff's Notes?
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 4:27 PM, Elliott Hird
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2008/7/11 Roger Hicks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> Proposal: Chambers II
>> AI: 3
>> II: 1
>
> Cliff's Notes?
>
Allows more chambers to be created beyond the democratic and the
ordinary. Secondary proposals create a champions cha
2008/7/11 Roger Hicks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 4:27 PM, Elliott Hird
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> 2008/7/11 Roger Hicks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>> Proposal: Chambers II
>>> AI: 3
>>> II: 1
>>
>> Cliff's Notes?
>>
> Allows more chambers to be created beyond the democratic and
comex wrote:
> By the way, I had to read the entire third part of my message to make
> sure it didn't contain any attempts at actions. Reading nonsense is
> somewhat fun, you should try it.
There was at least one instance of "proposal" in that section that could
be interpreted in a non-nonsensic
ais523 wrote:
> Ah, I was wondering what you were trying to change there. (Incidentally,
> what happens in situations where the wrong parties are listed and so the
> wrong parties are informed, under the new rule?)
All informs have been sent to the PF, so no worries on that front.
Ivan Hope wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 2:49 PM, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Ivan Hope wrote:
>>
>>> Rule 2191: "An equity case regarding a pledge CAN be initiated by a
>>> non-party, provided that all other requirements for initiating an
>>> equity case are met. The initiator of s
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 3:41 PM, Roger Hicks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 10:43 AM, Roger Hicks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I destroy 1 WRV in Iammmars' possession. I destroy An-Havva Township,
>> Fire-lit Thicket, and Graven Cairns in Iammars' possession. I intend
>> witho
ehird wrote:
> No, like, what are Chambers?
"Chamber" used to be the rule-defined name for "whether a proposal is
ordinary or democratic".
2008/7/12 Quazie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I object, only because I there should be a way to get to their stuff.
> Can we come up with a way to get access to an inactive farmer's loot?
> If a farmer ceases to be a farmer their possessions get donated to the
> bank?
>
Too late.
BobTHJ wrote:
> Remove all but the last paragraph from R2196
The essential-parameters clause should be retained somewhere. You
add chamber to R1607, but I think you drop AI.
> Create a new rule titled "Chambers" with Power=3 and the following text:
> {{
> A rule may define a chamber by specifyi
On Fri, 11 Jul 2008, comex wrote:
> Although I would like to note that the mentioned precedent is Goethe's
> own, I unfortunately concur with it (if I had remembered that CFJ, I
> wouldn't have included such a broad disclaimer).
I may have written a gratuitous argument, but it was Judge BobTHJ t
Sgeo wrote:
> In a spirit of generosity, I vote FOR 5588
Past the end of the voting period.
Quazie wrote:
>>> 5635 O1 1.7 SgeoImpeachment
> Endorse Murphy x 3, Denounce comex x2, Support Agora x 1 (where
> Support Agora means I vote in whichever way the majority of Players
> vote)
That last vote is beyond your VLOP. Also, the DB has been refactored to
support mixed endorse/d
Goethe wrote:
> I vote:
>>> 5634 O1 1.7 Taral Specific crinimality
> FORx5
>>> 5635 O1 1.7 SgeoImpeachment
> AGAINSTx5
I think your voting limit is still 4 on these, will fix if I'm wrong.
The PerlNomic Partnership wrote:
> 5590 AGAINST
> 5591 AGAINST
> 5593 FOR
> 5594 FOR
> 5596 FOR
> 5597 AGAINST
> 5598 PRESENT
These (and 5589 from the previous method) missed the voting period.
56 matches
Mail list logo
