Perfectly legitimate usage, just wondering. ---- Publius Scribonius Scholasticus p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com
> On Sep 23, 2017, at 7:44 AM, VJ Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote: > > forum shopping tbh. > > On Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 8:23 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus > <p.scribonius.scholasti...@googlemail.com> wrote: >> Why did you bar me and not o? >> ---- >> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus >> p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com >> >> >> >>> On Sep 23, 2017, at 2:47 AM, VJ Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> I call a CFJ with the following statement: "The Green card o. issued >>> emself in the below message was illegally issued, as the green card e >>> issued nichdel was legally issued". >>> >>> I think the most natural reading of "that reason" is the act itself, >>> not the particular rule breached. That is, someone can be carded twice >>> for breaking the same pledge on two totally seperate occasions. There >>> is also a question as to the interpretation of the pledge rule itself. >>> It says "a pledge is considered broken if...", which may mean that the >>> pledge is permanently broken, and cannot be broken more than once. >>> >>> I bar Publius and use AP. >>> >>> On Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 4:17 PM, Owen Jacobson <o...@grimoire.ca> wrote: >>>> On Sep 22, 2017, at 11:45 PM, Nic Evans <nich...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> As for the gerontocracy argument: Money is an inherently gerontocratic >>>>> system. It abstracts value from labor in a way that allows arbitrary >>>>> allocation. >>>>> >>>>> I'm about 95% sure this is the gist of my partner’s argument when she said >>>>> “inventing money is _rude_” about the original Shinies proposal. >>>>> >>>>> I’m not sure I fully appreciated Spending Power while we had it. The >>>>> debate >>>>> and adoption predates me. I’ve long had a fascination with >>>>> throughput-based >>>>> monetary systems like Total Annihilation’s metal economy, where the >>>>> driving >>>>> numbers are the amount of money in per time, not the amount of money in >>>>> the >>>>> pile, and SP is as close as I’ve ever seen to that in a political system. >>>> >>>> On Sep 23, 2017, at 12:30 AM, VJ Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I point the finger at nichdel. He replied to CB in discussion again. >>>> >>>> As recently discussed, this is over a pledge under rule 2450, made by >>>> nichdel, which reads: >>>> >>>>> I pledge to not acknowledge any messages Cuddle Beam sends to a-d, or to >>>>> respond in a-d to anything CB does. >>>> >>>> This pledge was previously broken, and punishment for that breach issued >>>> from this office on Sep 20, 2017, at 1:39 AM Eastern Daylight Time. >>>> >>>> The message quoted above is, indeed, in response to a message from >>>> Cuddlebeam, and violates the above-quoted pledge. Issuing a second card >>>> for the same pledge appears to violate rule 2426, which reads in part: >>>> >>>>> A person SHALL NOT issue a Card unless: >>>>> >>>>> … >>>>> >>>>> * there has not already been a Card issued for that reason; and >>>> >>>> Therefore, as issuing a card would be ILLEGAL, I find this finger-pointing >>>> to be Shenanigans. >>>> >>>> I issue nichdel a green card by summary judgement, as required by rule >>>> 2478, for violating rule 2450. >>>> >>>> I issue myself a green card by summary judgement for violating rule 2426, >>>> as cited above. >>>> >>>> I’ll note that I’ve now issued nichdel a card by summary judgement twice >>>> in a week, and myself a card twice in a week. It is no longer possible for >>>> me to card either of us for the remainder of the week, rules requiring me >>>> to do so notwithstanding. >>>> >>>> -o >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> From V.J. Rada >> > > > > -- > From V.J. Rada
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
