Re: DIS: Re: BUS: (No Subject)
Your ruleset annotations have been updated. You will be credited as nch in all future distributions. On 7/14/19 3:24 PM, nch wrote: You're right, I'm rusty. And regrettably the Protonmail IMAP bridge doesn't have a Linux release yet, so I guess I'll revive this account. I register with the name nch. On 7/14/19 3:37 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: If you were hoping that the cc would register you, it likely doesn't: actions can only be taken "within" messages (within the bodies). You can refer to other parts of the email in the body (e.g. "I do what the subject line says") but you can't straight-out take actions without some indication in the message body itself. On 7/14/2019 12:09 PM, Nich wrote: Empty Message -- Trigon
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: (No Subject)
I award nch a Welcome Package. On 7/14/2019 2:24 PM, nch wrote: You're right, I'm rusty. And regrettably the Protonmail IMAP bridge doesn't have a Linux release yet, so I guess I'll revive this account. I register with the name nch. On 7/14/19 3:37 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: If you were hoping that the cc would register you, it likely doesn't: actions can only be taken "within" messages (within the bodies). You can refer to other parts of the email in the body (e.g. "I do what the subject line says") but you can't straight-out take actions without some indication in the message body itself. On 7/14/2019 12:09 PM, Nich wrote: Empty Message
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: (No Subject)
You're right, I'm rusty. And regrettably the Protonmail IMAP bridge doesn't have a Linux release yet, so I guess I'll revive this account. I register with the name nch. On 7/14/19 3:37 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: If you were hoping that the cc would register you, it likely doesn't: actions can only be taken "within" messages (within the bodies). You can refer to other parts of the email in the body (e.g. "I do what the subject line says") but you can't straight-out take actions without some indication in the message body itself. On 7/14/2019 12:09 PM, Nich wrote: Empty Message
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: (no subject)
In that case, I cause Bernie to receive a welcome package per rule 2499. Also, Aris covered the replying situation rather well. -- Trigon On Sat, Apr 6, 2019, 20:00 Bernie Brackett wrote: > Bernie is fine. Also, how do I reply to you? I just pressed the reply > button on gmail, so I'm hoping that works. > > On Sat, Apr 6, 2019 at 9:12 AM Reuben Staley > wrote: > > > Welcome, again. > > > > What would you like others to refer to you as? Is "Bernie" okay? > > > > -- > > Trigon > > > > On Sat, Apr 6, 2019, 06:34 Bernie Brackett wrote: > > > > > I register > > > > > >
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: (no subject)
You're right. I wasn't thinking about that, because it's really wealth
distribution, not taxes. I retract "It's death _and_ taxes". Maybe
next week.
-Aris
On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 5:12 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
wrote:
> Then, we need to rename the Tax Rate.
>
>
> On 10/22/2017 07:43 PM, Aris Merchant wrote:
>> Not apart from deregistration and administrative fees, neither of
>> which would normally be considered taxes.
>>
>> -Aris
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 4:41 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
>> wrote:
>>> We already have taxes.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 10/22/2017 07:39 PM, Aris Merchant wrote:
I submit the following proposal, and pend it for 1 AP.
-Aris
---
Title: It's death _and_ taxes
Adoption index: 1.0
Author: Aris
Co-author(s):
Lines beginning with hashmarks ("#") and comments in square brackets ("[]")
have no effect on the behavior of this proposal. They are not part of any
rules
created or amended herein, and may be considered for all game purposes to
have been removed before its resolution.
[I have yet to hear a reason why we can't have both supply reform and
spending reform. It's true that too much taxation will stop all
accumulation,
but my proposal should hopefully just provide another incentive to spend.
Frankly, while giving money meaning and giving people something to spend on
are nice, it's also important that people get paid. I've dropped the
inactivity
tax from this proposal.]
Enact a rule, entitled "Taxes", power = 1.0, with the following text:
The tax rate is a singleton switch, with possible values of integers
between
0 and 25 (default 10). The tax rate can be set to any possible value in a
regulation promulgated by the Treasuror.
An entity's tax amount is, at any given time, (max(ceil(T% of (S - 10)),
0)),
where max is the maximum of its inputs, ceil is the operation of
rounding up
to the nearest integer, T is the tax rate, and S is that entity's shiny
abalance.
A taxable entity is any entity that possesses shinies, except for Agora
and contracts exempt for sustenance payments.
The Treasuror CAN, once per Agoran month, collect taxes by announcement.
E SHALL do so in the first week of each Agoran month. When taxes are
collected, for each taxable entity, that entity's tax amount in shinies
is
transferred to Agora.
>>>
>
>
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: (no subject)
Arkady wrote: And the thing here is that total votes DO matter. There are Tv = Vf+Va voters, so if 1 person votes against (i.e. Va = 1) the highest possible adoption index that could be reached is (T-1). Thus by setting the adoption index greater than (T-1) a proposal can only pass unanimously (even if T is unknown). I think this whole line of discussion stems from implicitly considering different aspects of R1950: a) why it imposes limits on AIs at all (more convenient formatting of reports) b) why it imposes those particular limits (the practical difference between any disallowed value and the nearest allowed value is small enough that we don't lose much by disallowing it) Proposal: Grumpy Old Men (AI = 2, co-author = Arkady) Amend Rule 2357 (Wisdom of the Elders) by replacing "4294967296" with "8". [The current clause is ineffective due to Rule 1950.]
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: (no subject)
On 13 January 2012 22:08, Pavitra wrote:
> On 01/13/2012 04:01 PM, Arkady English wrote:
>> How about we put to the test:
>>
>> CFJ: {The statement "Amend Rule /yy" is equivalent to "Amend Rule
>> IFF its revision number is yy.}
>
> Missing trailing quote.
I withdraw the aforementioned CFJ and instead call a CFJ on:
{The statement "Amend Rule /yy" is equivalent to "Amend Rule
>> IFF its revision number is yy."}
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: (no subject)
How about we put to the test:
CFJ: {The statement "Amend Rule /yy" is equivalent to "Amend Rule
IFF its revision number is yy.}
My arguments: This seems to be the most obvious interpretation.
On 13 January 2012 20:30, Tanner Swett wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 11:52 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>> At first I thought "putting on the revision number means it breaks if
>> another proposal changes the revision number in the meantime" but then
>> I thought "is it even possible to amend a specific revision number of
>> a rule?" so maybe it breaks regardless. Rulekeepor opinion? -G.
>
> "Amend Rule /yy" would make a convenient shorthand for "Amend Rule
> , but only if its current revision number is yy". I suggest
> interpreting it that way by default from now on.
>
> —Machiavelli
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: (no subject)
On Jul 10, 2008, at 5:52 PM, Benjamin Schultz wrote: On Jul 10, 2008, at 2:45 PM, Elliott Hird wrote: 2008/7/10 Sgeo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: This doesn't seem to require that the supporters or objectors of an amendment to this contract be parties to this contract. Correct That being the case, and hoping nobody beat me to it, I propose amending the text of ?? to include the following paragraph: ehird, while a member of this contract / pledge, SHALL submit all eir actions to ratification by Agoran Consent; if Agoran Consent is not provided, eir action is cancelled. - Benjamin Schultz KE3OM OscarMeyr Under my reading of R2124/7, my proposing the change means I do not count towards support. Supporting: ais523 Objecting: Taral, the person usually known as ehird. Satisfaction index is 0.5, so Agoran Consent is NOT achieved. My attempt fails. - Benjamin Schultz KE3OM OscarMeyr
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: (no subject)
Benjamin Schultz wrote: >That being the case, and hoping nobody beat me to it, I propose >amending the text of ?? to include >the following paragraph: > >ehird, while a member of this contract / pledge, SHALL submit all eir >actions to ratification by Agoran Consent; if Agoran Consent is not >provided, eir action is cancelled. I support. (Presumably "action" includes announcing intent to act.) -zefram
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: (no subject)
comex wrote: >With Agoran Consent, I intend to amend the text of >? by adding this paragraph: > >If ehird is ever a player, any person CAN act on behalf of em to >deregister em by announcement. I support. -zefram
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: (no subject)
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 2:29 PM, ais523 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, 2008-07-10 at 17:35 -0700, Quazie wrote: >> I post the following Sell Ticket: >> 1 VP, I will object or support a change to the >> ?? pledge. This ticket may be filled >> mutiple times, though only 1 time per change. This ticket does not >> expire until I say it does. > (Acting under instructions from tusho.) > I fill this ticket twice, that is once for each of the two proposed > changes to that pledge, choosing 'object' in each instance. > -- > ais523 > I Object to each of the first two proposed changes to ??, fulfilling my obligation.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: (no subject)
On Thu, 2008-07-10 at 17:35 -0700, Quazie wrote: > I post the following Sell Ticket: > 1 VP, I will object or support a change to the > ?? pledge. This ticket may be filled > mutiple times, though only 1 time per change. This ticket does not > expire until I say it does. (Acting under instructions from tusho.) I fill this ticket twice, that is once for each of the two proposed changes to that pledge, choosing 'object' in each instance. -- ais523
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: (no subject)
On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 5:45 PM, comex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > With Agoran Consent, I intend to amend the text of > ? by adding this paragraph: > > If ehird is ever a player, any person CAN act on behalf of em to > deregister em by announcement. I object. -- Taral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: (no subject)
On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 8:45 PM, comex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 5:52 PM, Benjamin Schultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> That being the case, and hoping nobody beat me to it, I propose amending the >> text of ?? to include the following >> paragraph: >> >> ehird, while a member of this contract / pledge, SHALL submit all eir >> actions to ratification by Agoran Consent; if Agoran Consent is not >> provided, eir action is cancelled. > > With Agoran Consent, I intend to amend the text of > ? by adding this paragraph: > > If ehird is ever a player, any person CAN act on behalf of em to > deregister em by announcement. I object. I also object to the lists putting DIS in front of a-b emails. Stop doing that, allow the occasional BUS: DIS dagnabit!
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: (no subject)
On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 5:52 PM, Benjamin Schultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > That being the case, and hoping nobody beat me to it, I propose amending the > text of ?? to include the following > paragraph: > > ehird, while a member of this contract / pledge, SHALL submit all eir > actions to ratification by Agoran Consent; if Agoran Consent is not > provided, eir action is cancelled. With Agoran Consent, I intend to amend the text of ? by adding this paragraph: If ehird is ever a player, any person CAN act on behalf of em to deregister em by announcement.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: (no subject)
On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 2:52 PM, Benjamin Schultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Jul 10, 2008, at 2:45 PM, Elliott Hird wrote: > >> 2008/7/10 Sgeo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >>> >>> This doesn't seem to require that the supporters or objectors of an >>> amendment to this contract be parties to this contract. >>> >> >> Correct > > > That being the case, and hoping nobody beat me to it, I propose amending the > text of ?? to include the following > paragraph: > > ehird, while a member of this contract / pledge, SHALL submit all eir > actions to ratification by Agoran Consent; if Agoran Consent is not > provided, eir action is cancelled. > - > Benjamin Schultz KE3OM > OscarMeyr > I post the following Sell Ticket: 1 VP, I will object or support a change to the ?? pledge. This ticket may be filled mutiple times, though only 1 time per change. This ticket does not expire until I say it does.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: (no subject)
On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 2:52 PM, Benjamin Schultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > That being the case, and hoping nobody beat me to it, I propose amending the > text of ?? to include the following > paragraph: > > ehird, while a member of this contract / pledge, SHALL submit all eir > actions to ratification by Agoran Consent; if Agoran Consent is not > provided, eir action is cancelled. I object. -- Taral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: (no subject)
2008/7/10 Benjamin Schultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > ehird, while a member of this contract / pledge, SHALL submit all eir > actions to ratification by Agoran Consent; if Agoran Consent is not > provided, eir action is cancelled. I object. Anyone up for VP bribing?
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: (no subject)
On Thu, 2008-07-10 at 17:52 -0400, Benjamin Schultz wrote: > On Jul 10, 2008, at 2:45 PM, Elliott Hird wrote: > > > 2008/7/10 Sgeo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >> This doesn't seem to require that the supporters or objectors of an > >> amendment to this contract be parties to this contract. > >> > > > > Correct > > > That being the case, and hoping nobody beat me to it, I propose > amending the text of ?? to include > the following paragraph: > > ehird, while a member of this contract / pledge, SHALL submit all eir > actions to ratification by Agoran Consent; if Agoran Consent is not > provided, eir action is cancelled. > - > Benjamin Schultz KE3OM > OscarMeyr Does that work? I support, anyway. -- ais523
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: (no subject)
On Jul 10, 2008, at 2:45 PM, Elliott Hird wrote: 2008/7/10 Sgeo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: This doesn't seem to require that the supporters or objectors of an amendment to this contract be parties to this contract. Correct That being the case, and hoping nobody beat me to it, I propose amending the text of ?? to include the following paragraph: ehird, while a member of this contract / pledge, SHALL submit all eir actions to ratification by Agoran Consent; if Agoran Consent is not provided, eir action is cancelled. - Benjamin Schultz KE3OM OscarMeyr
