Main thing I can think is you're assigned to this case and judgement
is slightly late:
> 3648 called by G. 24 June 2018: "The fine levied on Corona for late
> Herald Tournament Regulations is unforgivable for the purposes of
> R2559." - assigned to ATMunn
Other stuff:
- Since you're the Tailor
On Tue, 3 Jul 2018, ATMunn wrote:
> On 7/1/2018 8:04 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> > On Mon, 2 Jul 2018, Rebecca wrote:
> > > Also
> > > add in a new paragraph "Rules and Contracts notwithstanding, no
> > > Announcer may ever bid on an Auction they ar
>
> ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
>
> On July 3, 2018 10:58 PM, Reuben Staley wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Obviously, it is ess-aych-ay-five-twelve.
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 3, 2018, 08:11 ATMunn iamingodsa...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > > On 7/1/2
The fact is, there is such a glut of paper that no one who is "playing"
the minigame is bothering to try to produce it. It's not a barrier.
It is, as you say, a "stop and think" barrier. That's a good thing.
And it's not a requirement to "play" given that no one is using the
paper to "play".
t; ~Corona
>
> On Mon, Jul 2, 2018 at 9:22 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > I bid 32 coins in auction 5.
> >
> > On Mon, 2 Jul 2018, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> > > I bid 25 coins in auction 5.
> > >
> > > On Mon, 2 Jul 2018, Reuben S
AM, Corona wrote:
> > > What about just resetting the economy (to the same state as when it was
> > > enacted) while implementing Trigon's planned reforms?
> > >
> > > ~Corona
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 4:44 PM, Kerim Aydin
d tests,
> count me with the repeal-the-whole-dang-thing crowd. I think lots of us here
> would agree.
>
> I know I said that I wanted to preserve the Arcadian mechanics as long as I
> could but I'm beginning to think that it really is time to get rid of these
> mechanics.
t repeated
> > tests, count me with the repeal-the-whole-dang-thing crowd. I think lots
> > of us here would agree.
> >
> > I know I said that I wanted to preserve the Arcadian mechanics as long
> > as I could but I'm beginning to think that it really is ti
ssues might not even the biggest
> > >> problem. A lack of knowledge on how these mechanics will effect the game
> > >> is. We. Don't. Playtest. And I don't know how keen others would be on
> > >> trial and error to find a balanced set of mechanics. That
[I'm going to send my initial judgement to Discussion each time to keep
chatter in BUS down - will finalize in BUS ~once a day.]
The Court finds this VALID and instructs the Clerk to number it FRC-1.
Fits the style - be it hereby noted that this is granted +1 Style as a
baseline for future en
On Thu, 5 Jul 2018, Aris Merchant wrote:
> I'd suggest we make proposals free, drop zombies, and go back to the one
> blot per week removal scheme. Then we enact another enconomy, and see if
> the zombies are not so OP in that system.
How are they OP since the reforms?
So the Tournament rules still reference the ACORN. Further, the new
definition of Regulations requires an Officer while Free Tournaments
implies that no officer is needed for that kind of Tournament.
Aris, can you give a read of the tournament rules w.r.t. the new
Regulations rule and opine
On Fri, 6 Jul 2018, Rebecca wrote:
> >>If P8062 is REJECTED, FOR; otherwise AGAINST.
>
> These conditionals do not work because these are evaluated at the end of
> the voting period, which is before the resolution of proposals.
Some language used in the past was "If the outcome of this would
;ll write up a fix proposal when I get a chance, and I'm
> planning another distribution soon.
>
> -Aris
>
> On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 4:12 PM Kerim Aydin wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > So the Tournament rules still reference the ACORN. Further, the new
&
ertaining traditions of
> Agora's birthday now.
> On Fri, Jul 6, 2018 at 1:44 PM Kerim Aydin wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > Aris wrote:
> > > > CFJ: The Herald may amend the tournament regulations without objection.
> > > > CFJ: At least one Agoran regul
On Fri, 6 Jul 2018, Corona wrote:
> Ooh sorry, I misinterpreted it as you bidding negative 17 coins!
Heh I need to be careful with my choice of bullet character I guess...
(I'm *so* not going to CFJ what those bids count as).
t;
> > I become a candidate for Prime Minister.
> >
> > Platform: Not being the other guy, who currently supports unpopular and
> > somewhat misguided reforms.
> >
> > ~Corona
> >
> > On Fri, Jul 6, 2018 at 8:43 AM, Aris Merchant <
> > th
r players. I hope that this will allow a greater level of
> historical knowledge and thus fuel scholarship and more insightful
> play.
> On Mon, Jul 2, 2018 at 10:40 AM Kerim Aydin wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > I nominate myself for Herald. -G.
> >
> > Nomi
On Fri, 6 Jul 2018, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
> Just a quick question, where does my rule bind the court? The only
> binding statement was on the submitter of rules.
"bind" was probably the wrong word. In character, it was a judicial
"harumph, the Counsellor expects me to track mu
Erk.
If the July 1 ADoP Report self-ratified, then ratification beats the
Distributor rule in ratifying the Distributor officeholder at its default
value.
EXCEPT. Double-erk. R1006 doesn't explicitly define a default value for
Officeholder switches. Either we indirectly infer "vacant" as th
*sigh* nvm there was an ADoP published to BAK on June 17, which was
just after the proposal made omd the Distributor, so that was the
one that would have self-ratified (unless someone CoE'd on that one).
On Sun, 8 Jul 2018, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> Actually, we've got a few hours to
27;t *explicitly* say that
> there are no other offices.
>
> -Aris
> On Sun, Jul 8, 2018 at 3:17 PM Kerim Aydin wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > *sigh* nvm there was an ADoP published to BAK on June 17, which was
> > just after the proposal made omd the Distributor, s
s like a prolific source of
> loopholes - but I don't believe there's anything to immediately panic about.)
>
> -twg
>
>
> ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
>
> On July 8, 2018 9:45 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Erk.
> >
a list of switches, it's purporting to be a
partial list of switches. Therefore, it was never subject to self-
ratification.
And in a poof of technical-correctness the crisis entirely disappears...
On Sun, 8 Jul 2018, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> This is a very interesting case. I'm not sure you
I don't think Less Critical Patching is a good idea. Specifically,
we had a plague of switch indeterminacy/uncertainty some (long) time
ago, which is exactly why the "would otherwise fail... it comes to
have its default value" clause exists in the first place (especially
whenever Paradox wins
Sorry, hit send to soon. My suggestion is something like: "If a
default isn't specified, then RttCN 'null' is a possible value
for the switch, and is the default."
On Sun, 8 Jul 2018, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> I don't think Less Critical Patching is a good idea.
AL"?
>
> ~Corona
>
> On Mon, Jul 9, 2018 at 6:06 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Persons who haven't entered yet still have a few hours!
> >
> >
> > #5 Publius Scribonius Scholasticus 7 Jul 2018 19:34:47 -0400
> > In the inte
Note there were some land bids placed at the end of this report.
On Mon, 9 Jul 2018, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> Herald’s Weekly report
> [snip]
>
> END OF HERALD'S WEEKLY REPORT
>
> I bid 66 Coins in t
nomics" including FRC and Blognomic
> -Agora has an excellent and dedicated playerbase.
> -Agora is superior to all board games because it is itself, currently a
> board game.
>
> On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 4:43 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On Mon, 9
On Mon, 9 Jul 2018, Aris Merchant wrote:
> Oh, also, can you increase the player starting bonus 100, or like quarter
> the coins to points ratio? This is going to be hideously unbalanced for a
> long time if we keep this big a coin starting advantage, because it's
> vastly easier to get coins no
hm can't remember what I intended I'll ponder and respond.
On Tue, 10 Jul 2018, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
> While not explicitly stated in the rules, I read them as suggesting
> that an INVALID rule can not have style points awarded.
> On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 1
1 - Yes, definitely. 2 - Yes, definitely. 3 - Sorry, can't.
On Mon, 9 Jul 2018, Aris Merchant wrote:
> I'm in the _very_ early stages of looking into creating a new MU* for
> Agora. The codebase would be hosted on the Agora GitHub org, and any
> player would be free to contribute code. My ski
; -Agora is far more in line with the initial Suberian intent than other
> > "nomics" including FRC and Blognomic
> > -Agora has an excellent and dedicated playerbase.
> > -Agora is superior to all board games because it is itself, currently a
> > board game.
> &g
On Tue, 10 Jul 2018, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote:
> I am a little disappointed that you're making Points totally replace
> Economics and the rest of PAoaM - not because I'm utterly against a full
> repeal in itself, but because I've been spending the last few days
> working on a series of proposals
ssage ‐‐‐
>
> On July 9, 2018 7:45 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Note there were some land bids placed at the end of this report.
> >
> > On Mon, 9 Jul 2018, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> >
> > > Herald’s Weekly report
> > &g
oh yah it's pretty obvious - no (0) style for invalid rules.
On Tue, 10 Jul 2018, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> hm can't remember what I intended I'll ponder and respond.
>
> On Tue, 10 Jul 2018, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
> > While not explicitly state
Thanks!
On Tue, 10 Jul 2018, Reuben Staley wrote:
> I transfer all the fabric from the loom I'm on to myself and then transfer
> it all to G..
>
> On Tue, Jul 10, 2018, 12:54 Timon Walshe-Grey wrote:
>
> > Fails; you need to transfer the fabric from the loom to yourself first.
> >
> > -twg
these two messages?
>
> On Tue, Jul 10, 2018, 12:40 Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Many apologies, but this is missing all the bids I submitted in the last
> > hour
> > of the auction. Those were submitted here:
> >
> > https://www.mail-archive.c
Really sorry, but the auction results are still incorrect. I don't think
you won any of the auctions.
Yesterday, I first bid like this:
> AUCTION 1: the land unit at (-6, -1)
> If I am not the current highest bidder in this auction, I bid
> 46 coins.
>
> AUCTION 2: the land unit at (-6, +1)
>
milar to the one above
> in each land auction announcement.
>
> On Tue, Jul 10, 2018, 14:26 Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Really sorry, but the auction results are still incorrect. I don't think
> > you won any of the auctions.
> >
> >
VALID afaict (sorry for brevity, better judgement when I have time later
but wanted to opine before deadline)
On Wed, 11 Jul 2018, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
> I present the following procedural argument to the court:
>
> Your Honor, My Fellow Counselors V.J. Rada and Aris seem to
This is VALID but I need to further ponder it's effect. In particular,
I'll have to think about whether the construction "ask the court to rule...
shall" directly imposes a shall on later rules (as the court, I can't
directly impose rule conditions other than by style).
On Thu, 12 Jul 2018, R
appears VALID (again, formal response later).
On Wed, 11 Jul 2018, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
> I present the following argument on the first docket to the court:
>
> Your Honor, My Fellow Counselor V.J. Rada seems to have made a fatal
> error in the presentation of eir reasons for
While this public submission to the court is greatly appreciated, entering the
contest was closed 2 days ago, so the Hon. CuddleBeam can no longer become a
contestant. Close reading of the tournament regulations implies this is an
automatically-INVALID rule (as opposed to being "not a rule").
(though I encourage Counsellors to respond to invalid arguments that are
interesting
as this one is, as they will be part of the record even if they cannot make any
limitations) Also on this one: More respect for the Most Heroic Suber as per
#6.
On Wed, 11 Jul 2018, Kerim Aydin wrote
Anyone have ore?
Anyone want Coins?
* Refineries have no carrying capacity.
* I'm standing on a Rank-5 refinery that can make 13 Coins from every ore.
* Let's see if we can get people back in the Coins game!
* (yes, this is a last-ditch attempt to diversify land ownership).
This is a prot
Where is it in the initial (not the first invalid one, but in the
"resubmission with corrections" message)?
"resubmission" is not a formal thing so independence is assumed. And if
SHALLS were allowed to be fulfilled after-the-fact, many corrections
could have been made once they were pointed
On Thu, 12 Jul 2018, Alex Smith wrote:
> On Wed, 2018-07-11 at 21:05 -0400, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
> > The invalid one was the one that I was referencing. As for why I think
> > ti can be done after-the-fact, I think that it is different because so
> > far, it has been fulfilled
Yes.
On Fri, 13 Jul 2018, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
> Will you announce once someone has gone out?
> On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 8:22 PM Kerim Aydin wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > https://agoranomic.org/Herald/birthday_tournament_2018.txt
> >
> >
Counselor, the Court is moved by your arguments (not now, Bernard) and
their appeal to "fun" as an underlying human principle (not NOW,
Bernard), and therefore finds this VAL... hold on.
(what IS it, Bernard?! I'm judging here, you'd better... ok ok I'll
read it... where did I say that befor
elieve that I should have received a strike for #12 as the
> violation was of a rule that was put in place, less than an hour
> before.
> On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 8:22 PM Kerim Aydin wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > https://agoranomic.org/Herald/birthday_tou
Also in the tournament-bug category: I deeply regret not making a 24-hour
limit on all challenges, not just impossibility-based ones.
I'm tempted (in character) to find some kind of statute-of-limitations
appropriate.
Be that as it may, I'll opine on our Pronoun Trouble (both in this one
and
f I get there first, I'll say:
"I overnight [13*N] coins to [you]"
and boom! riches.
(only technicality is numbers must be precise, no referencing with
'all my ore' or similar).
On Fri, 13 Jul 2018, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> I consent/agree to the below document with
of address - in fact it's the opposite,
it's speaking *for* a group of people, not *to* a group of people.
The rest of the rule details how certain people must be "referred to"
(for which Us would qualify) but the detail list doesn't include
counselors in general.
On Fri, 13 Jul 2018, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> Actually, #12 and #20 (by Aris) are suitable different, that I'll address
> #12.
(correction: #11 by V.J. Rada, not #12. Is this your handwriting, Bernard?)
I know it just sounded odd.
On Fri, 13 Jul 2018, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
> I was using G.A.N. in those instances as Great and Ancient Nomics.
> On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 8:46 PM Kerim Aydin wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > Nothing wrong that I see Counselor;
On Fri, 13 Jul 2018, Reuben Staley wrote:
> While this does technically bring everyone closer to the same amount of
> money, I'm not sure this is the best way to do it. This also doesn't fix
> the gap in land ownership. I really think we need to do a map reset to
> achieve maximum equality.
So
Honestly I'm about to take a 6-week+ near total internet break (may
drop in once or twice but otw won't be engaged). Enough time left in
this next week to finish the tournament and dispose of some land but
that's it.
So you've got my general opinions on balance (keep zombies, auctions,
don't
Yah sorry about that, the first draft regs used original FRC timing which
seemed far too long - holiday tournaments have sometimes worked best
as blitz versions but this was too short, somewhere in the middle would
have been best.
On Sun, 15 Jul 2018, Rebecca wrote:
> damn time limits!! thi
PM Aris Merchant
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I agree about the short times as well. Sorry everyone. Now we just
> > > have
> > > > > to
> > > > > > see who wins on points...
> > > &
There's at least two messages that weren't received by me in the last 24 hours:
- Aris's pend-with-paper that I can't even find in the archives.
- twg's receiving of coins from Foundry (which is in the archives at least).
(I'm inferring the existence of both of these from twg's Report).
On Mo
Oh sorry, Aris's is deeply-hidden in the distribution message. Bad Aris.
(that goes beyond my personal bounds for ambiguity, but I'm not the officer
so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ )
twg's definitely wasn't delivered to me (or caught in spam at my end).
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018, Kerim Aydin
Looks sharp/nice/correct to me.
With the usual exception of that Japanese line (but it's less out-of-line
then other reports have been).
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote:
> I figured it might be interesting to see whether Unicode box-drawing
> characters
> actually have wide supp
I'll leave it up the the herald, but "Tournaments" are basically synonymous
with "championship" (they used to be called "championship contests").
But "championship" is completely unintuitive so I'd rename em all to
tournament or maybe the more historically-used "contest"?
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018, A
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018, Aris Merchant wrote:
> I thought I'd modify the regulations to fix all the problems we found,
> and to make them more generic.
I *was* planning to do that you know. :)
But you get most of what I noticed needed fixing. I'll work a bit on
#6 and #11 because there's a couple
on an [frc] thread once the game started,
badges are kind of meant to be an "I was there" thing).
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
> I think I am going to take the approach of renaming it all as a contest.
> On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 9:16 PM Kerim Aydin wro
I did not receive either reply to the voting results that's in
the BUS archives. By recent precedent, if a # of people didn't
receive them the CoE's weren't made.
I'll check back but I'm likely out of time to fix stuff before I
need to resign (i.e. respond to CoEs).
You know that sort of paragraph written weekly or biweekly is the most
useful form of newspaper. nothing fancy.
I'd add that the current batch of proposals up for vote has major
land changes - looks likely to pass unless a major bug is found that
changes people's minds. When the last batch's
On Thu, 19 Jul 2018, Ørjan Johansen wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Jul 2018, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> > I did not receive either reply to the voting results that's in
> > the BUS archives. By recent precedent, if a # of people didn't
> > receive them the CoE's w
On Thu, 19 Jul 2018, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote:
> Well, if the resolution message actually is self-ratifying, I see no reason
> why the following shouldn't work, assuming this message actually is received
> by a "reasonable number" of people. (So please confirm receipt!)
Received. [OFF seems to b
I just went to my preferences on the BUS list and found this:
> Note: your list delivery is currently disabled; it was disabled due to
> excessive bounces.
> The last bounce was received on 18-Jul-2018.
I don't know how this plays into the "did enough people get it for it to be
public"
ques
There would be no need
> for a conditional imposition in R2560 if that rule meant to impose the null
> fee.
>
> No argument on CFJ 1 yet, although I agree that interpretation 3 seems
> rather unlikely. I favor interpretation 2, but haven't come up with a
> non-trivial argument fo
the fee, which is clearly not a fee-based action. If
> there's no fee-based action, then the fee-based actions rule is
> inapplicable. I'm not alleging that that's the case, but it is plausible.
>
> -Aris
>
> On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 12:08 PM Kerim Aydin wrote:
I didn't remind the new Herald that this could be done and it's timed
out I'm afraid... if the Herald wants to try again.
On Mon, 2 Jul 2018, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> Silver Quill works poorly as an election process, but it's a good title
> when deserved.
>
> I ann
You can fix decision uncertainty, but this unavoidably perpetuates the quorum
uncertainty. Any votes now are valid if and only if the voting period has been
extended, so their validity for determining quorum in the next batch will be
uncertain...
(Personally I'm abstaining on purpose so I'm de
On Tue, 24 Jul 2018, Rebecca wrote:
> Dude it's 5.0. Uncontested CFJs ruled that those votes didn't count.
>
> Anyway if I must I vote PRESENT on each agoran decision.
>
> On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 12:50 AM, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote:
> > Quorum on the Agoran Decisions on whether or not to adop
Sorry this is from memory I'm not in a place to go digging but IIRC:
PSS (I think PSS?) delivered a judgement that would have invalidated one
of the votes. The logic of that judgement didn't apply (for some reason
I forget) to the other questionable votes (I think it was kind of odd
logic but do
Ok found it --- Discussion is here:
https://www.mail-archive.com/agora-discussion@agoranomic.org/msg44022.html
On Tue, 24 Jul 2018, Rebecca wrote:
> I call a CFJ with the statement: Quorum on the Agoran Decisions on
> whether or not to adopt Proposals 8066-8076
> was 5.0.
>
> There were two CF
tone came across wrong - read that with a smiley, not genuinely annoyed :)
On Thu, 26 Jul 2018, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> Since the current Prime Minister seems to favor pure legislative theft,
> I see no reason to play "nice" here:
>
> I bid 75 coins in every one of the b
Just FYI, Aris and Assessor twg, I misread the list because I think
you have authorship wrong for 8080? (I misread 8081 as being v3 by Aris).
On Thu, 26 Jul 2018, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> Aaand ... misread the list. I change my vote on 8081 to FOR.
>
>
> On Thu, 26 Jul 2018, Kerim
ch of the decisions to adopt Proposals 8066-8076 is 5.
> }
>
> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 11:48 AM Kerim Aydin wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > Ok sure i withdraw this objection.
> >
> > On Mon, 23 Jul 2018, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> > > I object. I would not object to the highest quorum value.
> >
> >
>
I thought I remembered CFJing on this question in the last few months, but
don't remember seeing the result (and couldn't find it in a quick Gazette
search). Anyone remember? Boy I really really really need to get the CFJ
database up-to-date again.
On Fri, 27 Jul 2018, Rebecca wrote:
> I was
eak of the email troubles).
On Thu, 26 Jul 2018, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> I thought I remembered CFJing on this question in the last few months, but
> don't remember seeing the result (and couldn't find it in a quick Gazette
> search). Anyone remember? Boy I really really really need
If the proposal results were wrong, then it's still the old way (incense)
to do that. (I also don't know what the heck I paid in refinery upkeep).
On Fri, 27 Jul 2018, Rebecca wrote:
> I expunge a blot from myself
>
> --
> From V.J. Rada
>
In adding the switch layer you need to put in a "by announcement" somewhere
as it's no longer implied as it is with payments/fees.
It's also a but unclear on cause and effect - do people decrease their EP to
cause
movement, or move and as a result have their EP decrease - This affects
whethe
Land from the beginning has had little purpose, now that it's completely
removed from the
rest of the game it has no purpose at all. There's always been a kind of "if
we build it, a
purpose will show up" but so far - nope - currencies have in fact become less
useful, not
more (e.g. Paper).
unit.
>
> On 08/01/2018 11:05 AM, Corona wrote:
> > I'd prefer the shorter version ("I move to (x, y)), as that decreases the
> > potential for mistakes by automatically using the correct amount of
> > resources.
> >
> > On Wednesday, August 1, 2018, Ke
a community. I'm thinking we could bring
> back Sente and Gote and weather and then maybe connect it to what you're
> saying here somehow.
>
> Just some more things for future readers to think about.
>
> On 08/01/2018 11:02 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> >
> >
> &g
The old precedents don't apply. Previously the rules said something
like "a proposal is created by publishing a body of text that is clearly
marked as a proposal" which meant that you could accidentally do that
if you marked something as a proposal when you distributed. Now it
says "create by
wrote:
> On Mon, 2018-08-13 at 01:44 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> > I CFJ on the following: 8077a-8081a are distributed proposals.
> > I bar Aris.
>
> Gratuitous:
>
> We used to have a rule forcing numbers to be allocated sequentially,
> but it was repealed. Is t
ems to inexplicably submit these to BUS...
> >
> > -Aris
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 10:12 AM Aris Merchant <
> > thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 2:06 AM Alex Smith ais...@alumni.bham.ac.uk
> > &g
018 at 2:06 AM Alex Smith wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 2018-08-13 at 01:44 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> > > I CFJ on the following: 8077a-8081a are distributed proposals.
> > > I bar Aris.
> >
> > Gratuitous:
> >
> > We used to have a rule forcing number
gt;
> On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 12:28 PM Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Appeals never had ID numbers - they're considered part of the record
> > of the same case, in fact, for moots (that have fewer formal arguments
> > than the old appeals system) I ju
On Mon, 13 Aug 2018, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote:
> As disappointing as it may be to me, I admit that Arcadia seems to be
> becoming a little unpopular - Murphy and I were the only people that
> performed land-related actions this week.
>
> Perhaps it will be reinvigorated a little when this propos
On Tue, 14 Aug 2018, Aris Merchant wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 2:35 AM Kerim Aydin wrote:
> > On Mon, 13 Aug 2018, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote:
> > > As disappointing as it may be to me, I admit that Arcadia seems to be
> > > becoming a little unpopular - Murphy
Again, take the tone here as a bemused prod to sort this, not anger or
anything. If nothing's materialized by mid Sept I can have a go
with the M.U.L.E. idea (also had some thoughts on more things to bid on).
On Wed, 15 Aug 2018, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> I missed that, Despite reading
I think the permanent recognition should be patent-title based.
I'm not sure I'd ever want to win as it's written if the price is
giving up all my land.
As written, doesn't have a very strong mutual goal - But that also
kind of depends on the various ways to achieve prestige (I like that
name
Proto: Royal Charter.
[Basically brings back high-rank facilities, but such that only one
player can ever have the high-ranking facility and a player can only
specialize in one type. Idea is to promote specialization and
cooperation (e.g. like the Foundry).]
(Bringing back something like th
On Fri, 24 Aug 2018, Ørjan Johansen wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Aug 2018, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> >It is IMPOSSIBLE for a player to have more than one Royal
> >Charter of any type in eir portfolio. If e would receive
> >a Royal Charter when there is already one in
On Fri, 24 Aug 2018, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Aug 2018, Ørjan Johansen wrote:
> > On Thu, 23 Aug 2018, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> >
> > >It is IMPOSSIBLE for a player to have more than one Royal
> > >Charter of any type in eir portfolio. If e would
801 - 900 of 8209 matches
Mail list logo
