On Sun, 29 Dec 2019 at 03:46, AIS523--- via agora-discussion
wrote:
> On Sat, 2019-12-28 at 18:48 -0800, Aris Merchant via agora-discussion
> wrote:
> > So, just to be clear here, we’re going to ratify the claim that a-o
> > and a-b stopped being public fora at the start time and resumed being
> >
On Sat, 28 Dec 2019 at 00:26, Aris Merchant
wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 27, 2019 at 11:28 AM James Cook wrote:
> > On Mon, 23 Dec 2019 at 04:55, Aris Merchant
> > wrote:
> > > Alright, everyone, this would seem to be as good a time as any to make
> > > the grand announcement, so here goes nothing. Agor
Archived at https://github.com/AgoraNomic/Reporter/tree/master/weekly_summaries
For the week 2019-12-23..29:
# Mailing list trouble
* omd diagnoses the recent trouble with the mailing list, and tries a
couple of ways to fix it. From-address rewriting for all messages has
been temporarily en
On Wed, 1 Jan 2020 at 06:09, Ørjan Johansen via agora-discussion
wrote:
> *Sigh* I seriously think considering history to be a part of game state
> may have been a mistake, but apparently there's now precedence for it...
I had assumed it wasn't until I did the research that became my
thesis. I th
I didn't get twg's message to BAK that Gaelan quoted. Did anyone else miss it?
On Wed, 1 Jan 2020 at 19:19, Gaelan Steele wrote:
> Hey, it’s not a proper Agoran return if there isn’t at least one CFJ involved.
>
> Gaelan
>
> > On Jan 1, 2020, at 9:29 AM, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote:
> >
> > *sigh*
On Tue, 7 Jan 2020 at 16:50, Alexis Hunt via agora-business
wrote:
>
> On Tue, 7 Jan 2020 at 02:04, James Cook via agora-official <
> agora-offic...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
>
> > I initiate a zombie auction, with the following lots (each zombie a
> > separate lot) ordered as follows (highest-bid fi
On Tue, 7 Jan 2020 at 18:56, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion
wrote:
> Would anyone complain/object if I ratified a "false" Herald's Report
> that claims the Notices of Honor received during the Troubles were
> successful?
>
> Looking at the message list that Murphy nicely assembled for Proposals
Archived at https://github.com/AgoraNomic/Reporter/tree/master/weekly_summaries
For the week 2019-12-30..2020-01-05:
# Voting
* Voting finishes on Proposals 8277-8279 (or possibly just 8278-8279 if
Proposal 8277 was successfully distributed during the mailing list
trouble).
# Scams and ru
On Wed, 8 Jan 2020 at 02:37, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion
wrote:
> On 1/7/20 6:10 PM, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote:
> > (2) dividing the ruleset itself so that rule categories
> > are more binding, and rules precedence works as "category then power"
> > (e.g. any rule in the "economy"
On Tue, 7 Jan 2020 at 23:12, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion
wrote:
> We've had a couple conversations along similar lines in the last year
> or two and people were generally positive. Specifically two ideas
> came up: (1) making each officer the "primary judge" on disputes
> about their report
On Wed, 8 Jan 2020 at 19:36, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion
wrote:
> This would also
> have the feature of making an officer's memoranda an election issue.
It would be fun to have something for candidates to debate. I suppose
Aris's v2 proto entails this, since it would allow a new officer to
r
On Thu, 9 Jan 2020 at 02:41, Aris Merchant via agora-discussion
wrote:
> Title: Administrative Adjudication v2
> Adoption index: 3.0
AI can be 2.0 now.
This sounds fun. There could be interesting struggles between
officers. E.g. I could imagine the Treasuror and ADoP arguing over who
gets to say
On Wed, 8 Jan 2020 at 20:25, Alexis Hunt via agora-discussion
wrote:
> (and
> possibly codifying an approach to "is history part of the game state").
Aris tried to do this in June with eir "Timeline Control Ordnance" [0]
which became Proposal 8195. I don't remember exactly why we voted it
down, e
On Sat, 11 Jan 2020 at 03:32, James Cook wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Jan 2020 at 04:34, Aris Merchant via agora-discussion
> wrote:
> > A draft report follows.
> >
> > -Aris
> > ---
> > I hereby distribute each listed proposal, initiating the Agoran
> > Decision of whether to adopt it, and removing it fro
On Thu, 9 Jan 2020 at 01:24, Aris Merchant via agora-discussion
wrote:
> Amend rule 2450, "Pledges", by adding at the end of the first paragraph
> "A pledge ceases to exist at the end of its time window."
Do we still need pledges? I think a one-party contract with a
provision that the party won't
On Thu, 9 Jan 2020 at 16:23, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion
wrote:
> Ørjan wrote:
> > Winning and patent titles can still be lost as a side effect of ratifying
> > a document published before they happen, when that removes a prerequisite
> > for their award.
>
> Oh of course oops - not sure if i
On Fri, 10 Jan 2020 at 07:50, David Seeber wrote:
> Oh dear. I seem to be a zombie again
>
> BVV
>
> David Seeber
Not quite. You just avoided it with that message.
- Falsifian
On Sat, 11 Jan 2020 at 04:04, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion
wrote:
> I recall you mentioning that you would like a
> system where judges could search topic-relevant rules and a few core
> rules instead of potentially anywhere in the ruleset.
Oh right, yes, that would be nice.
I'm confused abou
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 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 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.)
I think I withdhrew that CFJ recently.
On Sun, 12 Jan 2020 at 17:32, Kerim Aydin via agora-business
wrote:
>
>
> I wrote:
> > If Falsifian has not already done so, I call the CFJ indicated
> > below. I bar Falsifian.
> > [...]
> > Falsifian wrote:
> > > CFJ: I successfully earned 10 Coins in the
Fair enough!
I will note that I don't think I've missed a deadline on any Registrar
duty in my ~8 months in the office.
On the other hand, I haven't been very creative with the office. Even
my election-just-to-get-a-ribbon plan is simply copying the H. Arbitor
and Assessor, who did it in November
On Tue, 14 Jan 2020 at 00:59, Timon Walshe-Grey via agora-official
wrote:
>
> GLITTER (does not self-ratify)
>
>
> Currently, Glitter rewards are as follows:
>
> Red 12 coins
On Sun, 12 Jan 2020 at 23:12, Jason Cobb via agora-business
wrote:
> Notice of Honour:
>
> -1 Jason Cobb: managing to keep the gamestate uncertain for ~1 month
> with this scam attempt (sorry, H. Treasuror).
It wasn't just you. I only decided recently, based on G.'s suggestion,
to maybe not keep
On Mon, 13 Jan 2020 at 05:36, Gaelan Steele via agora-discussion
wrote:
> * 4 points for each switch defined by the rule and tracked by the office
You might want to say "type of switch" to make it clear this doesn't
count each instance. Maybe it would be better just to say "X points if
the rule d
On Tue, 14 Jan 2020 at 00:59, Timon Walshe-Grey via agora-official
wrote:
> pikhq
Interesting. I was curious to know why pikhq has on ribbons even
though (according to the Registrar monthly report) e has played a few
times in the past. But I see that R2438, "Ribbons", was first enacted
in 2014, a
On Tue, 14 Jan 2020 at 16:01, Alexis Hunt via agora-discussion
wrote:
> There's been some comments lately on the degree of difficulty of some
> offices, notably Treasuror, and it's definitely of note that twg proposed
> to maintain the Glitter rewards in eir report.
As Treasuror, I didn't feel pa
Archived at https://github.com/AgoraNomic/Reporter/tree/master/weekly_summaries
For the week 2020-01-06..12:
# Announcements
* Aris announces the official opening of the Agoran MUD e first
announced the week before last. Thread: "[MUD] MUD Opening!".
* The Arbitor requests that persons calli
Sure, I don't mind keeping pledges, at least while your new system is
still untested.
I probably shouldn't take on Notary now, but in 2-3 months I may have
more time, especially if Gaelan successfully takes over Registrar.
On Fri, 17 Jan 2020 at 04:50, Aris Merchant via agora-discussion
wrote:
>
On Thu, 16 Jan 2020 at 13:01, Jason Cobb via agora-business
wrote:
> On 1/16/20 12:55 AM, James Cook via agora-official wrote:
> > The January zombie auction has ended.
> >
> > On 2020-01-07 at 07:03 UTC, I initiated a zombie auction. It ended
> > 2020-01-14 at 07:03 UTC. Here are the lots, winner
On Thu, 16 Jan 2020 at 13:15, Timon Walshe-Grey via agora-discussion
wrote:
>
> Falsifian wrote:
> > * twg proposes a fix to R2602 (Glitter) to address unclear wording
> > Alexis found in eir judgement of CFJ 3783. Thread: "[Arbitor] CFJ
> > 3783 Assigned to Alexis".
>
> "CoE": Although I did
On Mon, 20 Jan 2020 at 03:29, Jason Cobb via agora-official
wrote:
> PROPOSAL 8286 (I Forbid Vetos!)
> FOR (3): Aris, Falsifian, twg
> AGAINST (6): Alexis, G., Gaelan, Jason Cobb, Rance, o
> PRESENT (0):
> BALLOTS: 9
> AI (F/A): 9/18 (AI=1.0)
> OUTCOME: REJECTED
Informal CoE: I changed my vote on
On Tue, 21 Jan 2020 at 04:41, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion
wrote:
> On 1/20/20 4:46 PM, James Cook wrote:
> > On Mon, 20 Jan 2020 at 03:29, Jason Cobb via agora-official
> > wrote:
> >> PROPOSAL 8286 (I Forbid Vetos!)
> >> FOR (3): Aris, Falsifian, twg
> >> AGAINST (6): Alexis, G., Gaelan, Jas
On Sun, 19 Jan 2020 at 04:34, Alexis Hunt via agora-discussion
wrote:
> A zombie has its voting strength halved.
Specify rounding? Otherwise R2422's provision that voting strength is
an integer might cause this provision to have no effect on zombies
with odd voting strength.
- Falsifian
On Sun, 19 Jan 2020 at 21:44, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion
wrote:
> Our precedents on message timing are pretty messy because we never had
> complete agreement there - but I'm pretty sure we set the final send date
> based on when the message "left your own control and headed to the PF".
> I.e
On Thu, 23 Jan 2020 at 02:11, Aris Merchant via agora-discussion
wrote:
> Why are we reading the date-stamping to refer to the date-stamp of the
> original message? I would think it obvious that the relevant message is the
> one to the public forum, not the original one which wasn’t to the public
Archived at https://github.com/AgoraNomic/Reporter/tree/master/weekly_summaries
For the week 2020-01-13..19:
# Voting
* Voting continues on Proposals 8280-8286. G. pleads for Rule 2597
("Line-item Veto") to not be repealed yet.
# Rules questions
* Debate continues on CFJ 3792, which is abo
On Thu, 23 Jan 2020 at 05:53, Aris Merchant via agora-discussion
wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 9:44 PM Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 1/22/2020 8:13 PM, James Cook via agora-discussion wrote:
> > > On Thu, 23 Jan 2020 at 02:11
On Fri, 24 Jan 2020 at 05:18, Aris Merchant via agora-business
wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 9:14 PM James Cook via agora-business
> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 23 Jan 2020 at 08:34, omd via agora-business
> > wrote:
> > > Note that I long assumed that the past was not part of the "gamestate"
> >
On Fri, 24 Jan 2020 at 05:41, Tanner Swett via agora-discussion
wrote:
> By the way, it's starting to seem awfully inconvenient that any
> contract must have at least two people on whose behalf the contract
> can effectively act.
You may have some more catching up to do on the ruleset after the
c
On Thu, 23 Jan 2020 at 21:54, Aris Merchant via agora-discussion
wrote:
> However, it can be blocked by only three objections, and the
> rule refuses to apply any abusive change, which on its own prevents it
> from being used as part of a scam.
Isn't it a memorandum's decision what it finds in th
On Tue, 28 Jan 2020 at 21:53, James Cook wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Jan 2020 at 21:54, Aris Merchant via agora-discussion
> wrote:
> > However, it can be blocked by only three objections, and the
> > rule refuses to apply any abusive change, which on its own prevents it
> > from being used as part of a
On Fri, 24 Jan 2020 at 22:04, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion
wrote:
> Over time I've managed to backfill in about half the cases in the
> 3400s, but took time off in the 3500-3600s, so there's still gaps
> there. Getting 10-20 old cases up per month or so, generally working
> backwards.
When I
Come back soon!
On Sat, 25 Jan 2020 at 13:31, Rebecca via agora-business
wrote:
>
> I deregister
>
> On Sat, Jan 25, 2020 at 8:12 PM Timon Walshe-Grey via agora-discussion <
> agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
>
> > Aris wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 3:25 PM Rebecca via agora-busines
It is interesting to consider changing our use of pronouns, but if
we're not changing anything, is there any reason to cover pronouns in
the editorial guidelines at all? I don't see any confusion or
inconsistency related to them, and I expect any new player who has
given the rules even a cursory re
On Tue, 28 Jan 2020 at 15:46, Timon Walshe-Grey via agora-discussion
wrote:
> Also relevant: CFJs 3411-3412.
I was hesitent to raise this morbid concern, but now that the subject
has been broached, are dead former players persons? R869 would seem to
say no. This may affect the accuracy of Tailor
On Tue, 28 Jan 2020 at 23:18, omd via agora-discussion
wrote:
> I can at least put it through the formal proposal process, by
> submitting a proposal expressing the sense of Agora that it's okay to
> publish players' email addresses on the web. However, that only
> accounts for current active pla
On Tue, 28 Jan 2020 at 23:54, Timon Walshe-Grey via agora-discussion
wrote:
> Falsifian wrote:
> > I was hesitent to raise this morbid concern, but now that the subject
> > has been broached, are dead former players persons? R869 would seem to
> > say no. This may affect the accuracy of Tailor rep
Archived at https://github.com/AgoraNomic/Reporter/tree/master/weekly_summaries
For the week 2020-01-20..26:
# Victory
* G. wins the game by paying a fee of 1000 coins, and tells the story
of eir coins. Thread: "bored of liquidity, need to invest"
# Voting
* The H. Assessor resolves Propos
Archived at https://github.com/AgoraNomic/Reporter/tree/master/weekly_summaries
(Sorry for the repeat email; I forgot the subject line the frist time.)
For the week 2020-01-20..26:
# Victory
* G. wins the game by paying a fee of 1000 coins, and tells the story
of eir coins. Thread: "bored of
On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 at 10:23, omd via agora-discussion
wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 9:07 PM Gaelan Steele via agora-discussion
> wrote:
> > Personally, I’m vaguely of the opinion that we should switch to they/them
> > instead of Spivak in general. Our use of Spivak now feels like using
> >
On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 at 04:00, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion
wrote:
> Rule 991 states:
>
> > At any time, each CFJ is either open (default), suspended, or
> > assigned exactly one judgement.
>
>
> What exactly does it mean for a CFJ to be "assigned exactly one
> judgement"? Specifical
On Thu, 30 Jan 2020 at 14:34, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion
wrote:
> Draft revision, since this is complicated:
>
> All of these CoEs are accepted.
>
> Revised resolutions for 8292-8307:
Shouldn't you also say that you resolve these decisions? My
understanding is that you're not publishing a re
On Thu, 30 Jan 2020 at 15:43, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion
wrote:
> On 1/30/20 10:21 AM, James Cook wrote:
> > Shouldn't you also say that you resolve these decisions? My
> > understanding is that you're not publishing a report here; you're
> > re-taking some by-announcement actions in case you
On Thu, 30 Jan 2020 at 16:55, Alexis Hunt via agora-discussion
wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Jan 2020 at 10:32, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion
> wrote:
> > Proto: "Pragmatic decisions", AI-3
> >
> > Amend R208 by replacing:
> > 4. It specifies the outcome, as described elsewhere, and, if there
> >
On Thu, 30 Jan 2020 at 17:03, James Cook wrote:
> Here's a somewhat different way we could do it:
>
> * An announcement resolving a decision doesn't need to specify
> anything other than the decision --- not even the outcome. That causes
> the decision to resolve to the (platonically) correct outc
On Thu, 30 Jan 2020 at 02:46, omd via agora-discussion
wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 1:45 PM Alexis Hunt via agora-business
> wrote:
> > Enact a new power-1 rule entitled "Default Mechanisms" reading as follows:
>
> I feel like this makes more sense in a high-power rule so it doesn't
> break w
On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 at 21:46, Alexis Hunt via agora-business
wrote:
> 3. Replacing "The action is to be performed with N Agoran consent, and
> the number
> of Supporters of the intent is less than or equal to N times the number of
> Objectors to the intent." with "The action is to be performed wit
On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 at 21:49, Alexis Hunt via agora-business
wrote:
> I have two other suggestions after thinking about how to reduce Cyan
> Ribbon shenanigans and make it a more interesting thing to obtain that
> genuinely requires working the officer's duties. First, make it so that a
> player
On Thu, 30 Jan 2020 at 03:25, Alexis Hunt via agora-business
wrote:
> Amend Rule 2574 (Zombie Life Cycle) by:
> - replacing the first two paragraphs with: {
> Any player CAN, with notice, putrefy player who has not made a public
missing word? "putrefy a player"
> announcement in the past 60 days
On Thu, 30 Jan 2020 at 03:50, Aris Merchant via agora-business
wrote:
> ---
> Title: Promotorial Assignment
> Adoption index: 2.0
> Author: Aris
> Co-author(s):
> Chamber: Legislation
>
> Amend the rule entitled "Proposal Chambers" by adding the text
> "If a proposal in the Proposal Pool has its c
Are we sure the first attempt at resolving the decisions didn't
succeed? I've lost track.
In case we're a the situation like Alexis outlined, where the first
succeeds platonically and this one succeeds via self-ratification, I
tried to work out what happened if these proposals were enacted twice.
On Fri, 31 Jan 2020 at 01:30, Tanner Swett via agora-discussion
wrote:
> then a legal fiction is established that the belief was true at the time of
> the earliest public message indicating the belief; and the gamestate is
> therefore altered as though the belief had been true at that time, in ord
On Thu, 30 Jan 2020 at 18:18, Alexis Hunt via agora-discussion
wrote:
> Well, the outcome is defined by a calculation given by the rules. So
> if, say, an AI=1 proposal has votes FOR equal to votes AGAINST, then
> its outcome is REJECTED. So ratifying outcome means ratifying that
> F>A. But what d
This is a counter-proto to Alexis's "Ratification by Legal Fiction", in
the sense that I think it also fixes the problem of ratification
failing due to minimal gamestate changes being ambiguous. It is a more
radical change and makes the use of ratification less concise, but in
my opinion the reward
Finally had time to read this sort-of-carefully. It do like it better
than the current "minimally modified" language for ratification.
Wasn't there a time in the past when ratification worked by the rules
simply declaring that when a document is ratified, it becomes true at
the time specified? I d
On Sat, 1 Feb 2020 at 16:30, ais...@alumni.bham.ac.uk
wrote:
> On Sat, 2020-02-01 at 16:17 +0000, James Cook via agora-discussion
> wrote:
> > This is a counter-proto to Alexis's "Ratification by Legal Fiction",
> > in the sense that I think it also fixes the pr
On Sat., Feb. 1, 2020, 12:57 James Cook, wrote:
> Finally had time to read this sort-of-carefully. It do like it better
> than the current "minimally modified" language for ratification.
>
> Wasn't there a time in the past when ratification worked by the rules
> simply declaring that when a docum
On Sat, 1 Feb 2020 at 18:20, James Cook wrote:
> Bah, sorry, I overlooked the stuff about ordering of facts when I wrote that.
I mean ordering the evaluation of legal fictions.
On Sat, 1 Feb 2020 at 03:15, omd via agora-business
wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 6:29 PM Aris Merchant via agora-official
> wrote:
> > 8308& Falsifian3.0 Imposing order on the order
> AGAINST; I think this is too vague to be a valid rule change
Are you referring to this pa
Comments inline. I think I agree with the gist of this, but there are
parts I'm confused about, and also, I don't quite buy one of your
arguments (but it could be because I'm confused).
> Rule 1551 states that the gamestate is "minimally modified to make the
> ratified document as true and accurat
On Sat, 1 Feb 2020 at 23:10, Jason Cobb via agora-business
wrote:
> JUDGEMENT IN CFJ 3788
Okay, completely different, updated comment:
I'm confused. This judgement doesn't seem to consider that
ratification involves two gamestate modifications. One is a
hypothetical "minimal" change, and the oth
On Sat, 1 Feb 2020 at 23:25, James Cook wrote:
> Wait, I'm confused. Which document are you talking about? And what
> does "solely through a lack of change by ratification" mean?
(These arguments are moot now that I've responded to the official
judgment, but ignore this particular argument especi
On Sun, 2 Feb 2020 at 00:35, Alexis Hunt via agora-discussion
wrote:
> On Sat, 1 Feb 2020 at 19:22, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion
> wrote:
> >
> > On 2/1/20 7:20 PM, James Cook wrote:
> > > I submit a proposal as follows:
> > >
> > > Title: Unrepetition
> > > AI: 3
> > > Chamber: Efficiency
> >
Questions for anyone interested in Agora:
1. Would you be interested in seeing an Agoran newsletter? Not like
"Last week in Agora"; I mean something more carefully written and
covering a longer span of time.
2. Do you think my "Last Week in Agora" summaries are useful? Any other
comments
On Sun, 2 Feb 2020 at 00:41, omd via agora-discussion
wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 1, 2020 at 8:17 AM James Cook via agora-discussion
> wrote:
> > This is a counter-proto to Alexis's "Ratification by Legal Fiction", in
> > the sense that I think it also fixes the proble
On Sun, 2 Feb 2020 at 13:27, Tanner Swett via agora-discussion
wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 1, 2020, 19:41 omd via agora-discussion <
> agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
>
> > A rule may state or imply that 'X is treated as if it
> > were Y', but this is considered an attempt to redefine
On Sun, 2 Feb 2020 at 01:10, Aris Merchant via agora-discussion
wrote:
> This is certainly a hell of a lot simpler than the alternative. You've
> dealt pretty convincingly with my complaint about generality; it's not
> general, but it looks like the lack of generality doesn't actually
> turn out t
Archived at https://github.com/AgoraNomic/Reporter/tree/master/weekly_summaries
Report for the week of 2020-01-27..02-02:
# Summary
Welcome Tcbapo!
A lot happened last week. twg won the game the hard way. Many parts of
the rules are changed after the adoption of twelve proposals, and
voting be
On Sun, 2 Feb 2020 at 22:56, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion
wrote:
> On 2/1/20 7:05 PM, Jason Cobb wrote:
> > On 2/1/20 6:57 PM, Aris Merchant via agora-business wrote:
> >> I intend, with 2 support, to group-file a motion to reconsider.
> > I self-file a motion to reconsider in CFJ 3788.
> >
> >
Thought of another comment:
On Sun, 2 Feb 2020 at 22:56, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion
wrote:
> that revert what it has already done. Additionally, this interpretation
> would likely break self-ratification of switch reports, which would be
> against the best interests of the game, so Rule 217
On Thu, 6 Feb 2020 at 17:34, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion
wrote:
> On 2/6/20 12:02 PM, James Cook wrote:
> > It's not clear to me your judgement would break self-ratification of
> > switch reports. Aris's documents were written in an unusual way: they
> > said that at some earlier date, the val
On Thu, 6 Feb 2020 at 17:58, Aris Merchant via agora-discussion
wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 9:47 AM James Cook via agora-discussion
> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 6 Feb 2020 at 17:34, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion
> > wrote:
> > > On 2/6/20 12:02 PM, James Cook
On Thu, 6 Feb 2020 at 18:52, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion
wrote:
> On 2/6/20 1:49 PM, James Cook wrote:
> > Title: Blink test v1.1
> > AI: 1
> > Chamber: Legislation
> > Text: {
> >
> > Amend Rule 2601 to read in full:
> >
> > If this is the only sentence in this rule, and it has been at
On Thu, 6 Feb 2020 at 18:09, James Cook wrote:
> Are we just going to let a steady stream of sufficiently dedicated
> players claim their standard victories? I say we raise the bar a
> little.
By the way, I don't mean for this comment to take away from G.'s
victory. G. built quite a large balance
> My apologies for the delayed reply here, but this was intentional and
> I would ask that everyone who voted against it for this reason
> consider voting in favour. This is done to match up with the way that
> proposals work: an AI=1 proposal requires a strict majority, but an
> AI=2 proposal can
> voting began on several more, including ways to make the decision
> process smoother.
Small correction: I think only one proposal currently being voted on
is related to improving the decision process.
- Falsifian
On Thu, 6 Feb 2020 at 23:52, Timon Walshe-Grey via agora-discussion
wrote:
> Falsifian wrote:
> > Welcome Tcbapo!
> >
> > A lot happened last week. twg won the game the hard way. Many parts of
> > the rules are changed after the adoption of twelve proposals, and
> > voting began on several more, i
On Sun, 2 Feb 2020 at 13:34, Tanner Swett via agora-discussion
wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 1, 2020, 21:25 James Cook via agora-discussion <
> agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
>
> > 2. Do you think my "Last Week in Agora" summaries are useful? Any other
>
On Sun, 2 Feb 2020 at 02:42, Aris Merchant via agora-discussion
wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 1, 2020 at 6:25 PM James Cook via agora-discussion
> wrote:
> >
> > Questions for anyone interested in Agora:
> >
> > 1. Would you be interested in seeing an Agoran newsletter?
On Fri, 7 Feb 2020 at 05:17, Aris Merchant via agora-discussion
wrote:
> > I had been imagining the more substantial newsletter being close to
> > quarterly. Looking at that blog, it looks like at least some of them
> > had shorter periods in mind. Any opinions on the relative benefits of
> > diff
On Fri, 7 Feb 2020 at 23:31, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion
wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 7, 2020 at 1:20 PM Aris Merchant via agora-discussion
> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 7, 2020 at 1:07 PM Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > The Archives are now CFJ 3805 compliant.
> >
> > After
> > Alternatively, it could be interesting to add a general mechanism for
> > public funding of private projects. E.g. have a singleton Budget
> > switch which lists contracts that get weekly payments. An example
> > might be [{my press contract, 5 Coins}, {Society for the Advancement
> > of Agora,
On Fri, 7 Feb 2020 at 21:22, Cuddle Beam via agora-business
wrote:
> I set my master to myself
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fNFzfwLM72c
Always a pleasure to have you back! If you're looking for something to do:
* You could try winning yourself in this month's zombie auction. It
wouldn't d
On Sat, 8 Feb 2020 at 21:15, Alexis Hunt via agora-discussion
wrote:
> On Sat, 8 Feb 2020 at 12:17, James Cook via agora-business
> wrote:
> >
> > This is an unofficial report on the ongoing zombie auction. All times UTC.
> >
> > Note: it is not clear that zombie auctions work. It is possible the
On Sun, 9 Feb 2020 at 19:04, Gaelan Steele via agora-business
wrote:
> The way zombie auctions work, you can’t bid for yourself—you just bid on the
> auction in general, and then whoever has the highest bid gets Trigon, whoever
> has the second highest gets Nch, whoever has the third highest get
On Sun, 9 Feb 2020 at 18:09, Edward Murphy via agora-discussion
wrote:
> On 1/24/2020 3:25 PM, Rebecca via agora-business wrote:
>
> > I, R. Lee, do register
>
> I have a registration recorded from 12/29/2019, I suppose that was also
> ineffective due to the Troubles, though?
In a couple of place
1 - 100 of 351 matches
Mail list logo
