On Wednesday 26 November 2008 10:19:56 pm Roger Hicks wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 16:04, Elliott Hird
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 26 Nov 2008, at 22:41, Michael Norrish wrote:
> >> I've never used Spivak by choice. English has perfectly good
> >> gender-neutral third person singular
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 10:33, The PerlNomic Partnership
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The PNP withdraws one 4 crop from the PBA for ^8.
> The PNP withdraws one 4 crop from the PBA for ^9.
Both of these fail. The PNP has insufficient coins for even one withdraw
> Using a Addition Mill, the PNP mill
BobTHJ wrote:
> In consensus with the arguments that have been presented I rule
> UNDETERMINED. I thought I had judged a case similar to this in the
> past but I can't seem to find it in the archive.
1860, as noted in woggle's gratuituous arguments.
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 11:19 PM, Roger Hicks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Now can we get rid of Spivak?
> I second this motion. It worked for B.
"they" is fine for unknown referents, but I'm not going to say "I
transfer a prop to ais523 because they did a fine job in their
judgement".
We could
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 16:04, Elliott Hird
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 26 Nov 2008, at 22:41, Michael Norrish wrote:
>
>> I've never used Spivak by choice. English has perfectly good
>> gender-neutral third person singular pronouns: "they", "them" etc. (Nor are
>> these some kind of PC inven
On Wed, 26 Nov 2008, Jamie Dallaire wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 1:34 PM, Charles Reiss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 08:52, Alex Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> A nomic ruleset is defined as follows:
>>> {{{
>>> A nomic ruleset is a set of explicit rules that
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 1:34 PM, Charles Reiss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 08:52, Alex Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I CFJ on the statement "The Ambassador CAN flip Wooble's Recognition to
> > Friendly without objection.".
> >
> > Arguments: This is really about whe
On 26 Nov 2008, at 22:50, Benjamin Schultz wrote:
Duly updated. And thanks for the historical note.
I believe the next step is "Douglas".
On 26 Nov 2008, at 22:41, Michael Norrish wrote:
I've never used Spivak by choice. English has perfectly good
gender-neutral third person singular pronouns: "they", "them" etc.
(Nor are these some kind of PC invention of the 20th century; they
occur used in this way in Shakespeare, the Ki
On Nov 26, 2008, at 5:48 PM, Warrigal wrote:
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 5:45 PM, Warrigal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 5:39 PM, Benjamin Schultz
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Warrigal of Escher
Drop the Escher; I've undergone a religious conversion and now
worship
Bach
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 5:45 PM, Warrigal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 5:39 PM, Benjamin Schultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Warrigal of Escher
>
> Drop the Escher; I've undergone a religious conversion and now worship
> Bach instead.
In case you're wondering, by the way
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 5:39 PM, Benjamin Schultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Warrigal of Escher
Drop the Escher; I've undergone a religious conversion and now worship
Bach instead.
--Warrigal
Elliott Hird wrote:
On 26 Nov 2008, at 04:46, Pavitra wrote:
On Tuesday 25 November 2008 01:27:59 pm Elliott Hird wrote:
time, unless the winner has transferred the VP to him.
Y'know, you B players really need to get used to the way we use
pronouns around here.
I started playing B much aft
On Nov 25, 2008, at 10:36 PM, Siege wrote:
I would like to register.
Welcome to Agora, Siege!
What brought you to this game? And do you go by Siege anywhere
else? I know a Siege on a certain message board I frequent.
-
Benjamin Schultz KE3OM
OscarMeyr
comex wrote:
> My mistake, I zoop a criminal case against myself alleging that I
> violated Rule 1742 by violating the P100 contract by causing P100 to
> register with the same basis as another player. (To be clear, this
> means I intend to initiate the case, then act on behalf of Sgeo and
> ehir
Okay, home access is back up and running again. Latest batch of
judgements are about to be recorded.
On 26 Nov 2008, at 20:55, Jamie Dallaire wrote:
Yep. Sorry what I said wasn't super clear. Don't construe that to
mean I think everyone here boycotts Windows. Probably some do, but
really I meant that it's unlikely to be EVERYONE's main working
environment. I only recently semi-weaned off x
Warrigal wrote:
> If a power-1 rule states that a certain person can do something "with
> 0 support" or "without 100 objections", the power-3 rule 1728 allows
> them to do it.
Not if another rule takes precedence over the power-1 rule and says
they can't (or, equivalently, secures the change with
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 3:36 PM, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Billy Pilgrim wrote:
>
> > Heh it definitely should. I'm on linux here and just can't imagine that
> > all these nomic players are running xp/vista...
>
> I process e-mail from XP, but my server runs Linux (Red Hat 9, because
Billy Pilgrim wrote:
> Heh it definitely should. I'm on linux here and just can't imagine that
> all these nomic players are running xp/vista...
I process e-mail from XP, but my server runs Linux (Red Hat 9, because
it was pre-installed and I dare not risk breaking it).
My home net access cut out last night, I think due to weather. If
it's still out when I leave the office, then I'll be offline until
it gets fixed.
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 1:37 PM, Jamie Dallaire
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> since how my program
> interacts with Kerim's program won't have any impact on whether or not
> Kerim's program chooses to cooperate with root's,
Allow each script to know the name of the author of the other!
Would be so
I agree entirely.
My initial proposal was to score according to totals, not to win
differentials, though I may not have expressed that clearly. i.e. it's
better to cooperate and get minorly exploited than to get locked into a
cycle of retaliation where hardly anyone gets any points in the entire
m
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 1:15 PM, Kerim Aydin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 26 Nov 2008, comex wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 12:42 PM, Charles Reiss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >> I would prefer the source be available for a post-mortem. For source
> >> submissions, probably the be
ais523 or others:
Can you point me to latest drafts of infraction reforms and also your
contract reforms (hierarchy of types of enforceable contracts IIRC)?
Happy to take a round as a coauthor for next drafts but I wasn't
following earlier discussions fully...
-Goethe
On Wed, 26 Nov 2008, comex wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 12:42 PM, Charles Reiss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I would prefer the source be available for a post-mortem. For source
>> submissions, probably the best scheme would be for people to send the
>> source to a discreet contestmaster.
>
>
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 12:42 PM, Charles Reiss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I would prefer the source be available for a post-mortem. For source
> submissions, probably the best scheme would be for people to send the
> source to a discreet contestmaster.
Concur. A dishonest contestmaster could j
While we're debating executables for this, I thought I'd raise another
issue: scoring.
One of the features of "cooperation" experiments is that, rationally,
how well your opponent does shouldn't affect you. For example, if your
opponent offers you $1 and keeps $19, the point of the game is tha
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 09:15, Elliott Hird
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 26 Nov 2008, at 17:05, Roger Hicks wrote:
>
>> I believe that Mono is the .NET library ported to unix based systems.
>> I could be wrong however.
>
> Yes, but you can't use a Windows binary. And revealing source would damag
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 10:15, Elliott Hird
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 26 Nov 2008, at 17:05, Roger Hicks wrote:
>
>> I believe that Mono is the .NET library ported to unix based systems.
>> I could be wrong however.
>
> Yes, but you can't use a Windows binary. And revealing source would damag
On Wed, 26 Nov 2008, Elliott Hird wrote:
> On 26 Nov 2008, at 16:26, Jamie Dallaire wrote:
>
>> So, I was wrong in my assumption, then, that you could compile a program
>> written in essentially any language into some sort of executable file that
>> could be run anywhere?
>
> llvm, java, etc...
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 12:15 PM, Elliott Hird
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yes, but you can't use a Windows binary. And revealing source would damage
> the contest, if I understand it.
Presumably everyone using a scripting language would reveal the source
to the contestmaster anyway.
On 26 Nov 2008, at 17:05, Roger Hicks wrote:
I believe that Mono is the .NET library ported to unix based systems.
I could be wrong however.
Yes, but you can't use a Windows binary. And revealing source would
damage
the contest, if I understand it.
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 09:31, Elliott Hird
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 26 Nov 2008, at 16:30, Roger Hicks wrote:
>
>> I can in my preferred language of choice.
>
> VB.Net, right? Does "everywhere" include "non-Windows systems"?
>
I believe that Mono is the .NET library ported to unix based sys
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 11:31 AM, Elliott Hird
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 26 Nov 2008, at 16:30, Roger Hicks wrote:
>> I can in my preferred language of choice.
> VB.Net, right? Does "everywhere" include "non-Windows systems"?
mono
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 11:31 AM, Elliott Hird <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 26 Nov 2008, at 16:30, Roger Hicks wrote:
>
> I can in my preferred language of choice.
>>
>
> VB.Net, right? Does "everywhere" include "non-Windows systems"?
Heh it definitely should. I'm on linux here and just can
On 26 Nov 2008, at 16:30, Roger Hicks wrote:
I can in my preferred language of choice.
VB.Net, right? Does "everywhere" include "non-Windows systems"?
On 26 Nov 2008, at 16:26, Jamie Dallaire wrote:
So, I was wrong in my assumption, then, that you could compile a
program written in essentially any language into some sort of
executable file that could be run anywhere?
llvm, java, etc...
Pick yer poison.
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 09:26, Jamie Dallaire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So, I was wrong in my assumption, then, that you could compile a program
> written in essentially any language into some sort of executable file that
> could be run anywhere?
>
I can in my preferred language of choice.
BobT
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 4:25 AM, Kerim Aydin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I think these are big enough cons, you really want round-robin multiple
> rounds. I don't think you have to worry too much about assembly, etc.,
> you're probably offering enough diversity if you offer a small range of
>
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 10:51 AM, Elliott Hird
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 26 Nov 2008, at 15:43, comex wrote:
>> Which is correct is up to ais523
>
> surely it'd be up to the notary?
>
> CFJ: The Vote Market exists
ais523 is the judge of CFJ 2288, a recent case of yours, identical to
the one
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 7:38 AM, Elliott Hird
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I started playing B much after Agora.
>
> I do not like Spivak.
Funny, I started playing B much before Agora.
When it used Spivak.
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 8:38 AM, Elliott Hird
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Zotting a CFJ" means "intending to appeal a CFJ, acting on behalf
> of every party to the Z house to support, and appealing it".
FWIW, I won't join because of this bit. Criminal cases may be
underused, but appeal cases ar
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 7:12 AM, Joshua Boehme <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Since I wasn't in on the discussion, could someone provide the context,
> please?
That was all of the context, and I was incorrect. The contestmaster
switch is tracked by the Notary, but the list of contestmasters is
par
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 05:39, Elliott Hird
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> bobthj scammed it as a contest by ratifying scorekeepor's report. Except...
> see wooble's quote.
>
>
Arguments: The PRS was a contest for quite some time before it ceased
to be one due to a ratification error on the Notary
Elysion wrote:
> Since I wasn't in on the discussion, could someone provide the
> context, please? Why do we think the PRS is not a contest? (I
> just looked at a Notary's report, which says it is a contest.)
It was decontestified by mistake when a Notary's Report listing
it as not a contest was ra
Murphy wrote:
> Again, bring back Infractions. (Yes, ais523's proto, but that brings
> up another issue that was observed several years back: one way to
> delay progress in a given area is to float a proto and then fail to
> submit it as a proposal.)
Sorry, I've been busy recently. Someone else f
On 26 Nov 2008, at 12:12, Joshua Boehme wrote:
On Tue, 25 Nov 2008 13:59:44 +
Elliott Hird <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
CFJ: The PRS is a contest
Arguments:
neat, PRS isn't a contest; Notary is recordkeepor of
contestmasters so ratifying the Scorekeepor report didn't make it a
contest.
a
On 26 Nov 2008, at 04:46, Pavitra wrote:
On Tuesday 25 November 2008 01:27:59 pm Elliott Hird wrote:
time, unless the winner has transferred the VP to him.
Y'know, you B players really need to get used to the way we use
pronouns around here.
I started playing B much after Agora.
I do not l
On Tue, 25 Nov 2008 13:59:44 +
Elliott Hird <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> CFJ: The PRS is a contest
>
> Arguments:
>
> neat, PRS isn't a contest; Notary is recordkeepor of
> contestmasters so ratifying the Scorekeepor report didn't make it a
> contest.
> and since the Scorekeepor report
On Tue, 25 Nov 2008, Charles Reiss wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 22:44, Roger Hicks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 23:32, Charles Reiss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> That's what I'd expect in this form given that expecting people to
>>> know how to program usually isn't
51 matches
Mail list logo
