I oppose putting it in the ruleset, but I would happy to enter a pledge or informal agreement. ---- Publius Scribonius Scholasticus p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com
> On Jul 24, 2017, at 3:45 PM, Alex Smith <ais...@alumni.bham.ac.uk> wrote: > > I reassign CFJ 3537 to o. > > See below for relevant context. (I apologise for the formatting; it > seems that our various email clients have been fighting each other > about it. We used to use a consistent format for Agora; perhaps we > should mandate or at least recommend a suggested email formatting in > the ruleset.) > > On Thu, 2017-07-06 at 10:38 +0100, V.J Rada wrote: >> I'm recused now, the judgement doesn't count. I refused because I'm on >> mobile and don't really want to deal with the linked deputization issue. I >> recommend both cfjs be assigned to the same person. I arbitrarily recommend >> quazie. >> >> The point PSS raised doesn't matter though. In a car auction, the >> auctioneers have to give you the car. The auction still leads to the sale. >> In CB'S auction, there can be no sale or expectation of a sale. I would >> really like the next judgement to track this 9ne, if a little more lucidly. >> >>> On Thursday, July 6, 2017, Cuddle Beam <cuddleb...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> I mean I support the moot. Sorry. >>> >>> On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 10:12 AM, Cuddle Beam <cuddleb...@gmail.com >>>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','cuddleb...@gmail.com');>> wrote: >>> >>>> I move reconsideration too. >>>> >>>> I also point my nose at VJ Rada and wiggle it for the crime of breaking >>>> his pledgerino. >>>> >>>> So many crimes going on lol - y'all goddamn criminals, the lot of you. >>>> >>>> On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 9:53 AM, V.J Rada <vijar...@gmail.com >>>>>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','vijar...@gmail.com');>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I move reconsideration. >>>>> >>>>> I recuse myself. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Thursday, July 6, 2017, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus < >>>>> p.scribonius.scholasti...@googlemail.com >>>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','p.scribonius.scholasti...@googlemail.com');>> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> TTttPF >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Jul 5, 2017, at 5:16 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus >>>>>>> <p.scribonius.scholasti...@googlemail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I move to enter this judgement into moot. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Jul 5, 2017, at 4:35 PM, V.J Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This contains my motion to reconsider and my >>>>>>>> adressing your argument (although cursorily) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 6:42 PM, V.J Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> I move to reconsider (you can't, you cndan intend to move >>>>>>>> and wait for two support. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I'm judging this FALSE. GASP! Surprise rocks the nation. >>>>>>>> I'm not judging it FALSE because auctioning is a regulated >>>>>>>> action though. It seems to me that despite the auction >>>>>>>> provisions, people could auction their own property >>>>>>>> without breaching the rules. I'm judging it based on the fact >>>>>>>> that Estate ownership is regulated, and CB's attempt to auction >>>>>>>> off Estates owned by another entity (Agora) and person (Josh) >>>>>>>> does not work. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> "A player who owns an Estate can and may transfer it to any >>>>>>>> player, to any Organization, or to Agora, by announcement" >>>>>>>> from rule 2489 regulates Estate ownership, as does the auction >>>>>>>> provision. This, mixed with the fact that the ordinary meaning of >>>>>>>> the word "Owner" means someone who can control their >>>>>>>> property, precludes anyone from taking an Estate from its owner >>>>>>>> or causing it to be taken from em, unless specifically authorized >>>>>>>> by rule (such as the auction provision). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> CB raises the additional argument that an auction still can be >>>>>>>> called even if the winner cannot have the property transferred >>>>>>>> to them. Auction is undefined. The ordinary meaning is >>>>>>>> "a public sale in which goods or property are sold to the highest >>>>>>>> bidder.". A sale cannot exist unless the property is actually >>>>>>>> given to the winner of the auction. I have already explained that >>>>>>>> this cannot happen. Therefore, an auction has not been called >>>>>>>> here. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 5:34 PM, Cuddle Beam <cuddleb...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> I motion to reconsider. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Whether the winning bid can actually make a transfer or not shouldn't >>>>>>>> affect if there is actually an *auction* or not in the first place, I >>>>>>>> believe. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 11:14 AM, V.J Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> I'm judging this FALSE. GASP! Surprise rocks the nation. >>>>>>>> I'm not judging it FALSE because auctioning is a regulated >>>>>>>> action though. It seems to me that despite the auction >>>>>>>> provisions, people could auction their own property >>>>>>>> without breaching the rules. I'm judging it based on the fact >>>>>>>> that Estate ownership is regulated, and CB's attempt to auction >>>>>>>> off Estates owned by another entity (Agora) and person (Josh) >>>>>>>> does not work. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> "A player who owns an Estate can and may transfer it to any >>>>>>>> player, to any Organization, or to Agora, by announcement" >>>>>>>> from rule 2489 regulates Estate ownership, as does the auction >>>>>>>> provision. This, mixed with the fact that the ordinary meaning of >>>>>>>> the word "Owner" means someone who can control their >>>>>>>> property, precludes anyone from taking an Estate from its owner >>>>>>>> or causing it to be taken from em, unless specifically authorized >>>>>>>> by rule (such as the auction provision). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 12:12 AM, Alex Smith <ais...@alumni.bham.ac.uk> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> On Sun, 2017-07-02 at 02:21 +0200, CuddleBeam wrote: >>>>>>>>> The moment is ripe to attempt something like this, because it's >>>>>>>>> Auction >>>>>>>>> time. Let's go: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Putting Estates up to Auction is an unregulated action, much like >>>>>>>>> withdrawing. (I don't personally believe this - because I believe all >>>>>>>>> actions in the universe are Regulated - but many others do, so I'm >>>>>>>>> going >>>>>>>>> off that). In case its of doubt, the following states an obligation >>>>>>>>> for the >>>>>>>>> Surveyor to perform, so its not a description of "circumstances under >>>>>>>>> which >>>>>>>>> the action would succeed or fail": >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> "At the start of each month, if Agora owns at least one Estate, the >>>>>>>>> Surveyor shall put one Estate which is owned by Agora up for auction, >>>>>>>>> by >>>>>>>>> announcement. Each auction ends seven days after it begins." >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Additionally, the state of being in an auction or not is tracked by >>>>>>>>> nobody, >>>>>>>>> so it doesn't infringe "would, as part of its effect, modify >>>>>>>>> information >>>>>>>>> for which some player is required to be a recordkeepor" >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Therefore: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> - I put every Estate up for Auction, (even those owned by other >>>>>>>>> players, if >>>>>>>>> possible). >>>>>>>>> - I then bid a million shinies on each of them. >>>>>>>>> - I then bid one shiny on each of them. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I have absolutely no defense towards other people bidding more than a >>>>>>>>> million and using my own "scam" to win auctions, which only works >>>>>>>>> versus >>>>>>>>> the "conventional" way of winning them by bidding amounts of cash you >>>>>>>>> actually own. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I CFJ: "There is currently more than one auction for Estates" >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> That's all. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This is CFJ 3537. I assign it to V.J. Rada. > > -- > ais523 > Arbitor
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
