Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: CFJ 3924 Assigned to Cuddlebeam [@Cuddlebeam]
Cuddlebeam wrote: I also claim Blue Glitter. I award 7 boatloads of coins (154 coins) to Cuddlebeam.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: CFJ 3924 Assigned to Cuddlebeam [@Cuddlebeam]
Cuddlebeam wrote: I claim a Blue Ribbon by the way. I also claim Blue Glitter. Ribbon for the first judgment and Glitter for the second, I assume? I submit the following proposals and pay one (1) pendant to pend it. Proposal: Reasons for Ribbons (AI = 3) Amend Rule 2438 (Ribbons) by replacing this text: While a person qualifies for a type of Ribbon: - If e has not owned that type of Ribbon within the preceding 7 days, any player CAN, by announcement, award em that type of Ribbon. with this text: While a person qualifies for a type of Ribbon and has not owned that type of Ribbon within the preceding 7 days, any player CAN, by announcement, award em that type of Ribbon. This announcement SHOULD specify how e qualifies for it (e.g. for Blue, which CFJ e judged). Amend Rule 2602 (Glitter) to read: Each type of Ribbon has a corresponding type of Glitter with the same name. A player qualifies for a type of Glitter when e qualifies for the same type of Ribbon while already owning such a Ribbon. If a player has not been awarded that type of Ribbon or the corresponding type of Glitter since e last earned or came to qualify for that type of Ribbon, and has not been so awarded five or more times within the past 24 hours, any player CAN award em that type of Glitter by announcement. This announcement SHOULD specify how e qualifies for that type of Ribbon. When a player gains a type of Glitter, the Tailor CAN once by announcement and SHALL in an officially timely fashion award em N/2 boatloads of coins rounded up, where N is the number of players that did not own the corresponding type of Ribbon at the time of the award. The amount payable for each type of Glitter is tracked in the Tailor's weekly report.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: CFJ 3924 Assigned to Cuddlebeam [@Cuddlebeam]
I claim a Blue Ribbon by the way. I also claim Blue Glitter. On Mon, Aug 9, 2021 at 4:44 PM Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion < agora-discuss...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > On 8/9/2021 7:36 AM, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion wrote: > > On 8/9/21 9:17 AM, Cuddle Beam via agora-business wrote: > >> Alright, re-Judging: > >> > >> I Judge FALSE. > >> > >> Backed by the arguments provided, I have become convinced that it is > >> possible to try to simultaneously flip a Switch. However, doing so would > >> attempt to make it an indeterminate value, and by R2126, such attempts > >> would instead cause the switch to take on its last determinate and > possible > >> value if any, or its default otherwise. > >> > >> Since it would instead take on its last determinate value, there ain't > no > >> flippin' flipping, because attempting to flip an instance of a switch > to a > >> value it already has does not flip the switch (R2126). > > > > > > E didn't try to simultaneously flip switches, e tried to simultaneously > > plan to flip switches, so I don't think that clause applies. > > > > I think it applies in terms of what happens at the beginning of the month? > It's the beginning-of-the-month trigger that's doing the "trying to > simultaneously flip", not my planning action. > > This judgement means that two simultaneous plans were laid and that both > count as being the most recent, so you get an "momentarily indeterminate > -> back to previous value" thing happening at the beginning of the month. > Which is slightly different than the interpretation "there was no single > latest plan, so no temporary indeterminacy happens". > >
Re: BUS: Re: OFF: CFJ 3924 Assigned to Cuddlebeam [@Cuddlebeam]
Alright, re-Judging: I Judge FALSE. Backed by the arguments provided, I have become convinced that it is possible to try to simultaneously flip a Switch. However, doing so would attempt to make it an indeterminate value, and by R2126, such attempts would instead cause the switch to take on its last determinate and possible value if any, or its default otherwise. Since it would instead take on its last determinate value, there ain't no flippin' flipping, because attempting to flip an instance of a switch to a value it already has does not flip the switch (R2126). On Mon, Aug 9, 2021 at 2:52 PM ais523 via agora-business < agora-business@agoranomic.org> wrote: > On Mon, 2021-08-09 at 22:48 +1000, Ned Strange via agora-business > wrote: > > I too support > > With support from R. Lee and G. (and unofficially cuddlybanana), I > group-file a Motion to Reconsider CFJ 3924. > > -- > ais523 > >
Re: BUS: Re: OFF: CFJ 3924 Assigned to Cuddlebeam [@Cuddlebeam]
On Mon, 2021-08-09 at 22:48 +1000, Ned Strange via agora-business wrote: > I too support With support from R. Lee and G. (and unofficially cuddlybanana), I group-file a Motion to Reconsider CFJ 3924. -- ais523
Re: BUS: Re: OFF: CFJ 3924 Assigned to Cuddlebeam [@Cuddlebeam]
On Mon, 2021-08-09 at 12:45 +0100, ais523 via agora-business wrote: > On Mon, 2021-08-09 at 13:31 +0200, Cuddle Beam via agora-business > wrote: > > I Judge FALSE. > > I intend, with 2 support, to group-file a Motion to Reconsider this; > the statements that this makes about the judgement of CFJ 2086 are > not correct. With support from cuddlybanana and G., I group-file a Motion to Reconsider CFJ 3924. -- ais523
