Someone willing to Favor with intent for fast turnaround?
On Wed, 22 Nov 2017, Aris Merchant wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 1:48 PM Alexis Hunt wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 22 Nov 2017 at 16:45 Aris Merchant <
> > thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Is it worth CFJing then? It's ce
On Thu, 23 Nov 2017, VJ Rada wrote:
> it wasn't going to be rule-breaking (was pledge-breaking). I did
> actually commit 3,000 infractions and give myself 3,000 actual cards.
> just gmail sucks. thaks obama.
omd used to have a size-limit on messages that e explicitly turned off
for the Rulekeep
Well, I do get it.
If someone is the Banker in Monopoly, and says "I win" and you know for a fact
that e just took all the money from the bank, a reasonable response is to grab
eir money and put it back in the bank (which would also be "against the rules").
[At least that's the excuse I'm stick
Oh, is there a finger-pointing that I should be doing something about
because of this clause:
> When a Finger, other than the Arbitor's, is Pointed over
> an allegation related to the official duties or powers of the
> Referee, then the Arbitor CAN, by announcement, take ov
On Wed, 22 Nov 2017, Corona wrote:
> Indeed, if one is not willing to participate in the questionable
> practice of trading wins (I'll support your proposal to award yourself
> a win if you support mine), every win in nomics must involve some
> level of deceit, as one can't force a win, or offer
> reeferee's power.
>
> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 9:33 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> >
> >
> > Oh, is there a finger-pointing that I should be doing something about
> > because of this clause:
> >
> >> When a Finger, other than the
h would,
> IMO, imply that ILLEGAL actions are IMPOSSIBLE, yet Agorans keep the
> distinction, as was explained to me by somebody, because an ILLEGAL
> action and its consequences do not have to be rolled back if it's
> inconsequential or even beneficial to preserving the spirit of Agora
&
We've had plenty of games that don't need any deceit or trading of wins.
Simple trivia or puzzle contests for example.Farming games where everyone
invests in a different portfolio, and portfolio success has random elements.
I think, as impossible as it is to define algorithmically, it's no
On Wed, 22 Nov 2017, Corona wrote:
> I'll concede that my argument only applies if players think them
> winning would be, by far, the most fun/ desirable experience. If
> another player has done a lot for Agora, it will be natural to say "It
> would be awesome if e were rewarded for eir effort".
> And yes, "thanks Obama" is not a view on the real Obama. And your hard
> >> anti-meme stance, PSS, is irreconcilable with the fact that there is
> >> more than one politician in our very game right now with jokes
> >> referencing real politicians ("
I was trying to figure this out and I'm not sure, but I think that the rule
is written with a single SHALL and two sub parts, so failing to do either
or both is only one infraction.
On Thu, 23 Nov 2017, VJ Rada wrote:
> I point the finger at trigon for failing to name a silly person last week.
Trying to get infinite stuff has a good history if it's legal go for it,
there's several rulings that may stop that kind of thing but you
never know.
The shinies system was broken in subtle ways, but some big
systems have big loopholes from the start we just shrug and reset,
better now then aft
You're in on it.
I knew it.
Traitor.
On Wed, 22 Nov 2017, Aris Merchant wrote:
> Isn't it possible that e was trying to test the size of different
> whitespace characters to make a report table line up? That's what it
> looks like to me.
>
> -Aris
>
> On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 4:53 PM, Publius
On Thu, 23 Nov 2017, Aris Merchant wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 9:15 PM, Aris Merchant
> wrote:
> > Have you considered the advantages and disadvantages of having
> > combined vs. separate proposal and CFJ currencies? Many systems I've
> > seen separate the two. In fact The Economic System
major plans, when the
> > underlying structure is like an airplane made out of cardboard and duct
> > tape trying to fly from San Fransisco to Tokyo.
> >
> > Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> > p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com
> >
> >
> >
>
I don't recall who drew that particular image. But the heraldic description was
mandated by a proposal by GreyKnight adopted in 2007 (it was later made into
a rule):
Proposal 4898 by Greyknight, AI=1, Ordinary
Agoran Arms
The coat of arms of Agora is defined by the following blazon:
Tie
On Thu, 23 Nov 2017, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> When any Player requires an image that e may use to represent Agora or
> the interests thereof, e must use an image which accurately depicts the
> blazon presented here.
Note the context of "representing Agora" was that we had an ac
In true Agoran fashion and as formal Herald, I'll quibble. As pointed out
by Zefram in Proposal 5037, it's not a coat of arms. It's an escutcheon:
https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-official/2007-June/003061.html
(I just re-learned this after wondering why I was hav
On Mon, 27 Nov 2017, VJ Rada wrote:
> So that's it: G. wins by ribbons (when e logs on). Congratulations.
Well it was a fair deal - it gave quite a few people the same part of
the same win condition - just happened to be last piece needed in
my case. (Probably a bit of a "scam" in that it only
I favor this one.
On Sun, 26 Nov 2017, Alexis Hunt wrote:
> I spend a shiny to create the following contract, entitled "No
> Self-Indulgence":
> {{{
> Alexis SHALL NOT pend any proposal e authored.
> Alexis CAN revoke this contract by announcement.
> }}}
>
> I submit the following proposal:
> P
On Sun, 26 Nov 2017, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
> I deputise for the Herald to give G. the title of Champion.
>
This is the uncertain Champion award for the Victory Election CFJ you
just recused yourself from, I'm guessing? (just trying to keep track
of dependencies!)
On Sun, 26 Nov 2017, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
> This doesn't matter here because the exact phrasing of the proposal was
> that we earned it, not that we became eligible for it.
Rule 2438 doesn't use "earned" that way. We "earned" it by the proposal,
which means that for the next
; > I will change that. Quick question: Have you been keeping the GH repo up to
> > date for the Herald?
> >
> > Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> > p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com
> >
> >
> >
> >> On Nov 26, 2017, at 4:53 PM, Kerim Ayd
On Sun, 26 Nov 2017, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
> Actually no, it is for you raising the banner, but depending on the result I
> will change
> that. Quick question: Have you been keeping the GH repo up to date for the
> Herald?
I never raised the banner, which is why I was asking.
Here from R2449:
The Herald is then authorized to
award those persons the Patent Title of Champion.
Here from Rule 649:
Awarding or revoking a Patent Title is secured. A person permitted
and enabled to award (revoke) a Patent Title SHALL do so in a
timely fashion af
> I create the following proposal
> Title: Bribery
> AI: 1
> Text: {Make each player who voted unconditionally FOR this proposals
> win the game except V.J. Rada, then make V.J. Rada win the game.}
I'm not sure if a Proposal can directly award a win without a Rule.
>From R2449:
When the
Watching the actions of the past week, including extensive use of
conditionals, e.g.:
https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-business/2017-November/037396.html
makes me feel like we've suddenly allowed beyond-a-reasonable-effort
hard-to-interpret conditionals that we didn
Well, if you read only the Rules, you'd wonder why everyone keeps doing
things with if/then clauses, because strictly speaking there's nothing
that allows them, and the Fora clause on "announcement" pretty much
implies that conditionals don't work, at all (except for voting),
because that rule st
On Mon, 27 Nov 2017, Alexis Hunt wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Nov 2017 at 19:22 Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> > Well, if you read only the Rules, you'd wonder why everyone keeps doing
> > things with if/then clauses, because strictly speaking there's nothing
> > that a
On Mon, 27 Nov 2017, Alexis Hunt wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Nov 2017 at 19:31 Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> > My memory is that there are a few out there, that amount to "if it's
> > within a reasonable effort for the typical Agoran to resolve a conditional
> > with inform
On Sun, 26 Nov 2017, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Nov 2017, Alexis Hunt wrote:
> > On Sun, 26 Nov 2017 at 19:31 Kerim Aydin wrote:
> >
> > > My memory is that there are a few out there, that amount to "if it's
> > > within a reasonable effort for
On Mon, 27 Nov 2017, Ørjan Johansen wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Nov 2017, Aris Merchant wrote:
> > b) Without 2 Objections. Players SHOULD object unless paying
> > with shinies is a significant barrier to the Caller's
> > ability to seek a resolution to the controversy.
>
> I might not be cal
This time's economy is indeed the first time we've ever charged for CFJs
in history, I'm going with the spirit of the experiment but just as happy to
take it out again (preferably bringing in Blots as a replacement).
Meantime, is 2 per week (free) for a non-player about a good compromise?
On M
"Compromise - an agreement or a settlement of a dispute that is reached by
each side making concessions."
On Mon, 27 Nov 2017, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
> No, currently they get 5.
>
> On 11/26/2017 10:30 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> >
> > This tim
> Oh, I misunderstood what you meant the compromise was.
>
> On 11/27/2017 01:01 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> >
> > "Compromise - an agreement or a settlement of a dispute that is reached by
> > each side making concessions."
> >
> > On Mon, 27 Nov 2017, Publi
Nov 2017, Alexis Hunt wrote:
>
> I've frequently called more. Two is in my opinion not enough.
>
> On Mon, Nov 27, 2017, 17:52 Kerim Aydin, wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Ah, gotcha. I was racking by brain for any situation in the last N years
> > where 1/week f
On Mon, 27 Nov 2017, Alexis Hunt wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Nov 2017 at 18:53 ATMunn wrote:
>
> > When? I couldn't find the message.
> >
>
> E purported to deputize for Herald to award Champion, but whether or not
> that worked is dependent on the CFJ currently assigned to me.
It didn't work anyway,
On Mon, 27 Nov 2017, ATMunn wrote:
> > What's the problem? Apparently it is rule 2125's (Regulated Actions)
> > most recent amendment. That rule now states (in relevant part) that "A
> > Restricted Action CAN only be performed as described by the Rules, and
> > only using the methods explicitly s
On Tue, 28 Nov 2017, VJ Rada wrote:
> I deputise for Herald to publish the following weekly report (unless
> PSS is the Herald).
You should clearly know this to be false. It updates nothing.
It is questionable whether you can call this the weekly report for the
appropriate (missing) week.
Als
On Mon, 27 Nov 2017, Aris Merchant wrote:
>
> Civil language please, although I do agree with the general sentiment.
>
Apologies to all, you're right of course I should let such things fester in
my drafts folder...
On Tue, 28 Nov 2017, Alexis Hunt wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Nov 2017 at 19:40 VJ Rada wrote:
>
> > I accept Telnaior and PSS's CoE. The following is a fixed report. Sorry
> > folks.
> >
>
> This fails, you did not announce you were doing it by deputization.
>
That depends on whether the first one f
On Tue, 28 Nov 2017, Alexis Hunt wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Nov 2017 at 19:29 Alexis Hunt wrote:
>
> > I point my finger at V.J. Rada for violating Rule 2143 by publishing a
> > document purporting to be a Herald's report containing incorrect
> > information.
> >
> > -Alexis
> >
>
> I'm going to make
Oh sorry I meant Pink Slip!
On Mon, 27 Nov 2017, ATMunn wrote:
> By the arguments in my most recent CFJ judgement, black cards CANNOT be issued
> to players, as intended.
>
> On 11/27/2017 7:51 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Tue, 28 Nov 2017, Alexis Hu
On Tue, 28 Nov 2017, VJ Rada wrote:
> However I take your point, I do take it. I shouldn't have done it,
> probably. I do take your point. I know the way I take this game is less
> than serious, which can be at times a slap in the face to those who
> recognize the decades-long history of the game
On Mon, 27 Nov 2017, ATMunn wrote:
> It's alright, we all make mistakes. I think we all have acted too fast before,
> and honestly I think we all might have just done that with the amount of
> Notices of Honour that were just made.
Nice test once the dust settles - comments when I was drafting H
On Tue, 28 Nov 2017, Madeline wrote:
> Not that it matters in this case, but what happens to the assets held by a
> contract when it's destroyed?
"If an asset would otherwise lack an owner, it is owned by Agora."
On Tue, 28 Nov 2017, Madeline wrote:
> On 2017-11-28 13:05, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 28 Nov 2017, Madeline wrote:
> > > Not that it matters in this case, but what happens to the assets held by a
> > > contract when it's destroyed?
> > "
On Tue, 28 Nov 2017, VJ Rada wrote:
> The Gazette is not self-ratifying and CFJ ID numbers are not required. The
> only consequence of that failure is that we now have an informal opinion
> that the Door cannot be Slammed, not a CFJ stating as such.
Before CFJs were paid for, it used to be a bit
On Tue, 28 Nov 2017, VJ Rada wrote:
> Actually, G, if the CFJ is TRUE, it's not a CFJ because I can't take game
> actions. So by judging this CFJ you've implicitly recognized that I can
> indeed take game actions.
1. If you're not a player, does the fact that you claimed to use AP to
call it inv
Oooh, yes - that's very far reaching and precisely the sort of thing that
clause is meant to stop. I need to go do Something Else now and this
deserves some thoughts about arguments, but if no one gets to it before me,
I'll call it tomorrow-ish.
On Tue, 28 Nov 2017, VJ Rada wrote:
> Would lik
On Tue, 28 Nov 2017, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 2:23 PM, VJ Rada wrote:
> >
> >> It's not just can't register, it's CAN'T TAKE ANY GAME ACTIONS.
Ok, sending a message to a public forum is a game action, right?
(or is it - I'm a bit confused about that).
That was actually my request, so no! (I should have put "by G." after
"Gratuitous arguments"). Much appreciated.
On Tue, 28 Nov 2017, Aris Merchant wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 4:53 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 28 Nov 2017, Publius Scriboniu
On Tue, 28 Nov 2017, Alex Smith wrote:
> On Tue, 2017-11-28 at 09:09 -0800, Corona wrote:
> > I was about to call that myself. How much is bribery of the Arbitor
> > or a judge (or of other persons with official duties) frowned upon?
>
> Bribing a judge (except to put extra detail into a judgeme
On Tue, 28 Nov 2017, Corona wrote:
> I doubt and CoE the Clork's and Treasuror's last weekly reports and
> any other self-ratifying reports that do not recognize that all
> actions attempted in my message with the header "Bid" succeeded and/or
> explicitly or implicitly assert that at least one
On Wed, 29 Nov 2017, VJ Rada wrote:
> Paradoxes are easy.
Yup - if you can put arbitrary text into something with legal status,
it's trivial.
Need to drag out the reasons from old precedents that basic contract
loopiness from trivial paradoxes doesn't trigger PARADOXICAL wins, and
see if that l
On Wed, 29 Nov 2017, VJ Rada wrote:
> You obviously dismissed the CFJ I called that may or may not have
> existed. But Telnaior also called a CFJ questioning whether or not
> that CFJ existed. I request _that_ CFJ be urgently assigned, given the
> interference with my rights as an Agoran currentl
With that in mind I'll hold off as assigning it as that won't move things any
faster
and might confuse things more.
On Wed, 29 Nov 2017, Aris Merchant wrote:
> G. has assigned me a CFJ, and asked me to resolve all the issues in one
> place. I'll have a full judgement out in the next day or so (
29 Nov 2017, Alexis Hunt wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 28 Nov 2017 at 20:24 Ørjan Johansen wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, 28 Nov 2017, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> > > > Gratuitous Arguments
> > > >
> > > > H. Judge, I request you examine all the re
On Wed, 29 Nov 2017, Aris Merchant wrote:
> Thoughts appreciated, although I'm not going to make substantial
> changes unless the arguments are extremely compelling. H. Arbitor, I
> am not interested in judging any more cases (unless I explicitly favor
> them or change my mind) till the end of th
t;
> >> If it actually _is_ a problem, it's terribly complicated to fix, possibly
> >> impossible (we might not be able to _find_ every contributor). Agora was
> >> created during a time when no one cared about copyright for stuff like
> >> this.
> >> Barn door
Coe: I submitted a proposal called ribbon fix a week ago, in
the same message where I called the CFJ.
On Sun, 3 Dec 2017, VJ Rada wrote:
> Can someone goddamn fix ribbons please?
>
> On Sun, Dec 3, 2017 at 8:19 PM, Aris Merchant
> wrote:
> > My not-very-weekly draft follows.
> >
> > -Aris
> >
one
> who already has an office another office, and 2) you did a great job as
> Arbitor.
>
> On 12/3/2017 1:09 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> >
> >
> > I announce my intent to resign Arbitor while appointing PSS to
> > the office, with 3 support. Supporters, please don't announce
> > "I do so" so the transition can be timed cleanly.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
support, regretfully. You've been a great Arbitor, G., and I hope
> you'll do it again someday.
>
> -Aris
>
> On Tue, Dec 5, 2017 at 8:57 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> >
> >
> > Much appreciated, genuinely.
> >
> > Need to take a real life br
You can deny thing like you support or object to them. It's
a natural speech act. Obviously you can publish something
any publishing it - you don't " publish by announcement" you
just publish it because R478 says how you can do that. And
the CAN for inquiry cases is elsewhere.
On Wed, 6 Dec 201
The actual hole is that nowhere does it say you have to do
the denial publicly, that's how I was intending to get a black
ribbon back when I was tailor.
On Tue, 5 Dec 2017, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> You can deny thing like you support or object to them. It's
> a natural speech act
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017, Ørjan Johansen wrote:
> This could be bad.
>
> Seriously, the current Rule 2125 is more trouble than it's worth.
2125 doesn't cover missing CANs. It covers missing "by announcements"
or other methods (all of which are explicitly described in this case as I just
mentioned, w
On Sat, 9 Dec 2017, Madeline wrote:
> I'm probably not the best choice for this CFJ, given I have somewhat of a
> stake in it. I'll judge it if you're sure, but...
Honestly I think the Officer is the best initial person to decide if a
conditional is too hard for em to resolve. And I think *ever
On Sat, 9 Dec 2017, VJ Rada wrote:
> I understand that part of this is my distractions' fault.
Dude, the triggering of r217 to undo the black card rule was
the coolest thing to happen all fall. This might be the first time
it was triggered successfully - can't quite remember but it
might have b
I think R217 should say that every person CAN always call 2 CFJs
free per week, no matter what. And get rid of AP.
On Mon, 11 Dec 2017, Alex Smith wrote:
> On Mon, 2017-12-11 at 01:07 +, Alexis Hunt wrote:
> > Another argument in favour of making CFJ calls less fundamentally
> > conditional
We've defined (by precedent) that the standards for clarity for R478
include simple conditionals. R478 is power-3, and lower-powered
definitions are only "guidance". I find it hard to believe that the
simplest conditionals (e.g. "If I did not just succeed with method A,
I do it with method B")
on, 11 Dec 2017, Aris Merchant wrote:
> Or we could just stick with the precedent that conditionals need to be
> reasonable (some combination of being comprehensible to the general
> public and being easily resolvable by the responsible officer).
>
> -Aris
>
> On Mon, Dec 11,
On Mon, 11 Dec 2017, Alexis Hunt wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Dec 2017 at 13:23 Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> > Oh I personally don't want to change the current situation except use
> > CFJs to reign in the more unreasonable conditionals. But I *really*
> > don't want a b
On Mon, 11 Dec 2017, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> > Rule 217 says "the text of the rule*s* takes precedence" (emphasis mine).
Just as a side note: I never realized it before, but R217's "text of the
rules takes precedence" is actually in direct conflict (potent
https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-business/2017-May/034843.html
On Tue, 12 Dec 2017, ATMunn wrote:
> I seem to remember a post by G. that had a link to eir current thesis, which
> was talking about an old economic system from when e joined the game. I think
> e also po
On Sat, 16 Dec 2017, Telnaior wrote:
> > ---
> > 7993* Alexis 1.0 Conditional Ban Alexis 1 AP
> FOR. It should be interesting.
There's a class of pretty-obvious paradoxical sentences that play on
On Sun, 17 Dec 2017, Corona wrote:
> For every Politician (In case I run out partway: This is done in
> descending order by rank and then alphabetical order by names) I am
> not the Advisor of, I spend the lowest amount of NPR favors I can
> spend to have more Influence with em than any other pla
What's wrong with it, exactly? It worked for several proposals AFAIK
no one claimed it wasn't working...
On Sun, 17 Dec 2017, ATMunn wrote:
> If you vote AGAINST, it would be nice if you instead proposed a fix proposal.
> The rule is still quite broken.
>
> On 12/17/2017 5:17 PM, Alexis Hunt w
Hey, welcome back!!
It turns out the black card rule doesn't exist btw, it was judged to violate
R217 and thus was never enacted.
On Sun, 17 Dec 2017, Edward Murphy wrote:
> Proto-Proposal: Pulling the Thread
> (AI = 3)
>
> Amend Rule 2438 (Ribbons) by replacing the sentence starting "While a
It was actual gameplay. At the same time zombies were adopted,
the standard for deregistering silent players switched from without
objection to with 3 Agoran consent. There was a run on the bank
just when zombie actions were nearing (due to stamps), and some
players in poor auction position,
[Hey Corona, I was midway through writing the below when I noticed your
earlier actions - so it was on my mind when you tried those, I didn't
mean to single you out as the only one who does it!]
Anyway, I've been musing this on and off this week, and wondering where
to draw the line defining "co
On Mon, 18 Dec 2017, Alex Smith wrote:
> On Sun, 2017-12-17 at 17:35 -0800, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> > Anyway, I've been musing this on and off this week, and wondering where
> > to draw the line defining "conditionally". In particular, I'm thinking
> >
On Mon, 18 Dec 2017, Alex Smith wrote:
> On Sun, 2017-12-17 at 17:50 -0800, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> > So you would allow Corona's recent action, quoted below? Because in
> > terms of knowable facts it's no different than saying "all", is it?
> >
>
On Sun, 17 Dec 2017, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> > I wouldn't. The conditional here is that the action stops when the
> > resulting Influence is higher than that of the next-highest player.
> > That isn't related to how many NPR favors Corona has, which is the only
>
On Thu, 21 Dec 2017, Ørjan Johansen wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Dec 2017, ATMunn wrote:
>
> > actually, crap. If there's no Assessor, then unless only one person runs for
> > the office, there will be no way to resolve it.
>
> How doesn't deputization work?
Hmm. It's generally accepted that a Deputy
On Wed, 20 Dec 2017, ATMunn wrote:
>
> Would you like to stay interim for now, or should I initiate an election?
>
I was thinking of giving it a go for the longer-term, but absolutely
no hurry in running an election (esp given the Assessor question...)
Maybe start it in Jan?
On Thu, 21 Dec 20
On Wed, 20 Dec 2017, Aris Merchant wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 3:27 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Thu, 21 Dec 2017, Ørjan Johansen wrote:
> >> On Wed, 20 Dec 2017, ATMunn wrote:
> >>
> >> > actually, crap. If there's n
This conversation seems to happen every year or so. With the 25th
Anniversary coming up, it's worth another round of improvement on
the Agoranomic webpage IMO - yet again many of the reports there
are out of date, and the front page is fairly text heavy and not all that
text is useful. It woul
Nomic world was a MOO:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOO
On Sun, 24 Dec 2017, Madeline wrote:
> I wish I knew what these acronyms were. GNDT? MOO?
>
>
> On 2017-12-24 09:30, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> >
> > This conversation seems to happen every year or so. With the 25t
On Sat, 23 Dec 2017, Aris Merchant wrote:
> GNDT = Generic Nomic Data Tracker, how BlogNomic tracks its gamestate with
> no officers. Basically a web interface.
> https://wiki.blognomic.com/index.php?title=New_Player_Guide#What_is_the_GNDT.3F
>
> MOO = MUD, Object-oriented. A MUD based on a obje
ot. I'd make it work
> via Contract too, I love that shit. Lets me make and test rules/mechanics
> without needing to prod into the ruleset.
>
> On Sun, Dec 24, 2017 at 12:13 AM, Kerim Aydin
> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On Sat, 23 Dec 2017, Aris Merchant wr
On Sun, 24 Dec 2017, ATMunn wrote:
> When would a player not be eligible for being assigned a CFJ?
Later in the same paragraph of - the caller and the barred person
are ineligible.
On Sat, 23 Dec 2017, David Nicol wrote:
> Initially, (1994?) Nomic World was a MUD, before MUDs started getting
> called MOOs. Synchronous communication was difficult with players from lots
> of different time zones, and voting was done with some persistent game
> objects. A lot of serious discu
2017 9:26 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> >
> >
> > On the first day of Nomic, the Forum gave to me
> >
> > - A ruleset of perfect clarity.
> >
> > (To be continued)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
On Mon, 25 Dec 2017, Alex Smith wrote:
> On Mon, 2017-12-25 at 07:01 -0800, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> > I have a few (but far from all) in mind - will publish and/or
> > choose from any alternates provided - maybe people can
> > vote on the best... (private submission to me prefe
On Mon, 25 Dec 2017, Ørjan Johansen wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Dec 2017, Cuddle Beam wrote:
>
> > If I've getting this correctly, FRC is heavily roleplay-based, yes? Like,
> > it's less about playing the rules than just making them for aesthetics and
> > fantasy.
>
> Back when I played, that varied fr
I have a vague feeling that we did something like that before, but can't
place the context - anyone else remember?
Alternative: invert the assumption, in the switches rule, define player
switches
to include Agora unless Agora is explicitly excepted?
On Wed, 27 Dec 2017, Cuddle Beam wrote:
>
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018, Reuben Staley wrote:
> The main reason I'm not doing much for the game is because nothing much is
> happening, but I would also take a crack at any position to keep Agora
> alive. Besides, it's an inactive period so it wouldn't be that hard.
> Although once I stop being lazy
On Fri, 12 Jan 2018, Alex Smith wrote:
> On Fri, 2018-01-12 at 12:58 -0500, Benjamin Schultz wrote:
> > I'm curious about that next-to-last paragraph: "anyone can deputise
> > to bootstrap an office (or even the game if there are ever no
> > players)." Even me?
> >
> > Still lacking the time t
Didn't we decide that the type of grammar in that rule meant you can
do it generally, and shall in a timely fashion? (In other words, you can
still do it but you're late).
On Mon, 15 Jan 2018, Corona wrote:
> Oh, you're right, a new quarter began. Well, since I'm technically not
> allowed to r
On Thu, 18 Jan 2018, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> [
> For any given payday, the total shinies S(t) will be governed by:
>S(t+1) = 10*Players + 3*Offices - 0.5*S(t)
> This has a stable equilibrium at (10*Players+3*Offices)/1.5 (if
> rounding isn't taken into account).
> ]
301 - 400 of 8209 matches
Mail list logo
