On 1/11/2020 8:54 AM, James Cook via agora-business wrote:
> I initiate an election for the office of Treasuror.
>
> This quarter is a bit busy for me. I am probably going to resign as
> Treasuror in a week or two if nobody has already taken the office. I
> plan to continue as Registrar. I might
On Sat, 11 Jan 2020 at 17:20, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion
wrote:
> On 1/11/2020 8:54 AM, James Cook via agora-business wrote:
> > I initiate an election for the office of Treasuror.
> >
> > This quarter is a bit busy for me. I am probably going to resign as
> > Treasuror in a week or two
On Sat, 11 Jan 2020 at 13:25, Jason Cobb via agora-business <
agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> I suppose. I was considering keeping them to try to bribe people, but
> since they're pretty useless, that would be pointless. I perform the
> following action 18 times: { If I have more than 1000
On 1/11/2020 10:53 AM, Alexis Hunt wrote:
> On Sat, 11 Jan 2020 at 13:25, Jason Cobb wrote:
>
>> I suppose. I was considering keeping them to try to bribe people, but
>> since they're pretty useless, that would be pointless. I perform the
>> following action 18 times: { If I have more than 1000
G. wrote:
> When Jason Cobb pulled the 18K scam there was some bit of discussion that we
> might be over coins or ready for something new there - what do people think.
> My opinion is that the zombie system is working reasonably, and we need some
> manner to allocate zombies (preferably weighted by
On 1/11/20 12:13 AM, James Cook wrote:
> Oh right, yes, that would be nice.
>
> I'm confused about a couple of things:
>
> * A module has a list of dependencies (does that mean "things that
> depend on it"?), and each rule has a "Parent". Are "Parents" the same
> thing as "dependencies"? Can module
On Sat, 11 Jan 2020 at 14:26, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion <
agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
>
> On 1/11/2020 10:53 AM, Alexis Hunt wrote:
> > On Sat, 11 Jan 2020 at 13:25, Jason Cobb wrote:
> >
> >> I suppose. I was considering keeping them to try to bribe people, but
> >> since
On Sat, Jan 11, 2020 at 11:26 AM Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion
wrote:
>
>
> On 1/11/2020 10:53 AM, Alexis Hunt wrote:
> > On Sat, 11 Jan 2020 at 13:25, Jason Cobb wrote:
> >
> >> I suppose. I was considering keeping them to try to bribe people, but
> >> since they're pretty useless, that w
On Sat, 11 Jan 2020 at 21:30, Aris Merchant via agora-discussion <
agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 11, 2020 at 11:26 AM Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 1/11/2020 10:53 AM, Alexis Hunt wrote:
> > > On Sat, 11 Jan 2020 at 13:25, Jason Cobb wrote:
> >
On 1/11/2020 8:08 PM, Alexis Hunt via agora-discussion wrote:
Speaking of which, did the proposal that authorized D. Margaux's victory
actually do that? The rules at the moment don't seem to allow victory by
proposal, nor are victories self-ratifying any more.
FWIW we did ratify the Scroll a
On Sat, 11 Jan 2020 at 14:38, Kerim Aydin via agora-official <
agora-offic...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
>
> I recuse omd from CFJ 3783 (I know you put forward some preliminary
> thoughts on the case omd, which is why I waited a bit, but it's been a
> long time on this case now).
>
> I assign CFJ 3783
On Sun, 12 Jan 2020 at 04:36, Alexis Hunt via agora-discussion
wrote:
> I would like to ask for arguments for an issue completely unaddressed in
> arguments: How does Rule 2602's use of a continuously-evaluated condition,
> as in Rule 2350 and part of Rule 103, affect the operation of the "once"?
On Sun, 12 Jan 2020 at 06:05, James Cook wrote:
> However, the use of the word "it" in the text "but already owned it"
> in R2602 indicates to me that the text of the rule is written with the
> point of view that there's only one of each ribbon colour. Otherwise
> it could have been written "but a
On Sun, 12 Jan 2020 at 01:07, James Cook wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Jan 2020 at 06:05, James Cook wrote:
> > However, the use of the word "it" in the text "but already owned it"
> > in R2602 indicates to me that the text of the rule is written with the
> > point of view that there's only one of each ri
On Sun, 12 Jan 2020 at 06:13, Alexis Hunt wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Jan 2020 at 01:07, James Cook wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, 12 Jan 2020 at 06:05, James Cook wrote:
>> > However, the use of the word "it" in the text "but already owned it"
>> > in R2602 indicates to me that the text of the rule is written wi
On Sun, 12 Jan 2020 at 06:25, James Cook wrote:
> I don't think this is a case of "once for each time the condition is
> fulfulled".
(Or, maybe I should have said: I think this is a case where "once per
time the condition is fulfilled" is given an explicit definition by
the rule in question.)
On Sun, 12 Jan 2020 at 01:25, James Cook wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Jan 2020 at 06:13, Alexis Hunt wrote:
> > On Sun, 12 Jan 2020 at 01:07, James Cook wrote:
> >>
> >> On Sun, 12 Jan 2020 at 06:05, James Cook wrote:
> >> > However, the use of the word "it" in the text "but already owned it"
> >> > in
17 matches
Mail list logo
