Re: BUS: (no subject 2)

[Kiako via agora-business]

On 10/14/2023 3:42 PM, nix via agora-business wrote:

On 10/12/23 17:20, nix via agora-business wrote:
An image of me registering for Agora that is also my registration for 
Agora. 

If I am not already registered, I register as a player of Agora.



I grant nix a welcome package!

--
kiako

Re: BUS: (no subject 2)

[nix via agora-business]

On 10/12/23 17:20, nix via agora-business wrote:
> An image of me registering for Agora that is also my registration for Agora.

If I am not already registered, I register as a player of Agora.

-- 
nix

Re: BUS: (no subject)

[Trigon via agora-business]

El 07/02/2022 a las 05:02, Tab Chesnut via agora-business escribió:

I would like to register. My preferred alias is TABBAT.


Hello! I cause TABBAT to recieve a welcome package.

--
Trigon

 ¸¸.•*¨*• Play AGORA QUEST





I’m always happy to become a party to contracts.
I LOVE SPAGHETTI
transfer Jason one coin
nch was here
I hereby
don't... trust... the dragon...
don't... trust... the dragon...
Do not Construe Jason's message with subject TRIGON as extending this

Re: BUS: (no subject)

[Trigon via agora-business]

On 13/06/2021 06:37, Aris Merchant via agora-business wrote:

I grant Trigon the following promise:
{

Cashing conditions:
* The bearer is Trigon.
* It is strictly before 14 June 2021 UTC.
* The bearer has, in the message in which e cashed this promise,
transferred me 1 voting card for the sole purpose of cashing this promise.

I transfer the bearer 300 coins.
}

-Aris



I transfer one voting card to Aris for the sole purpose of cashing this 
promise. I cash this promise. I transfer Aris 20 coins.


--
Trigon

 ¸¸.•*¨*• Play AGORA QUEST

I’m always happy to become a party to contracts.
I LOVE SPAGHETTI
transfer Jason one coin
nch was here
I hereby
don't... trust... the dragon...
don't... trust... the dragon...
Do not Construe Jason's message with subject TRIGON as extending this

Re: BUS: (no subject)

[Aidan Anthony via agora-business]

Aenet

Thank you for the welcome package Trigon

On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 7:41 PM Reuben Staley via agora-business <
agora-business@agoranomic.org> wrote:

> On 3/16/21 5:33 PM, Aidan Anthony via agora-business wrote:
> > I register
> >
>
> I cause the above player to gain a Welcome Package.
>
> What is your preferred name that you would like us to refer to you as?
>
> --
> Trigon
>
>   ¸¸.•*¨*• Play AGORA QUEST
>
> I’m always happy to become a party to contracts.
> I LOVE SPAGHETTI
> transfer Jason one coin
> nch was here
> I hereby
> don't... trust... the dragon...
> don't... trust... the dragon...
> Do not Construe Jason's message with subject TRIGON as extending this
>

Re: BUS: (no subject)

[Reuben Staley via agora-business]

On 3/16/21 5:33 PM, Aidan Anthony via agora-business wrote:

I register



I cause the above player to gain a Welcome Package.

What is your preferred name that you would like us to refer to you as?

--
Trigon

 ¸¸.•*¨*• Play AGORA QUEST

I’m always happy to become a party to contracts.
I LOVE SPAGHETTI
transfer Jason one coin
nch was here
I hereby
don't... trust... the dragon...
don't... trust... the dragon...
Do not Construe Jason's message with subject TRIGON as extending this

Re: BUS: (No Subject)

[Falsifian via agora-business]

On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 09:17:32PM +, nix via agora-business wrote:
> I intend, without objection, to Declare Apathy specifying the empty set of 
> players.
> 
> --
> nix
> Prime Minister, Webmastor

I object.

-- 
Falsifian

Re: BUS: (No Subject)

[ATMunn via agora-business]

On 9/11/2020 5:17 PM, nix via agora-business wrote:

I intend, without objection, to Declare Apathy specifying the empty set of 
players.

--
nix
Prime Minister, Webmastor



I supportn't.

--
ATMunn
friendly neighborhood notary :)

Re: BUS: (no subject)

[Falsifian via agora-business]

On 2020-08-31 11:47, Dmargaux000--- via agora-business wrote:
> I flip my master switch to myself :P

Master switches don't exist any more. You'll want to transfer the
talisman for D. Margaux to yourself.

-- 
Falsifian

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: (No Subject)

[Reuben Staley]

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)

[Kerim Aydin]

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)

[nch]

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)

[Reuben Staley]

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: BUS: (no subject)

[Reuben Staley]

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: BUS: (no subject)

[Alex Smith]

On Sun, 2017-10-29 at 01:57 +, Alexis Hunt wrote:
> Proposal: A Most Ingenious Paradox (AI=1.7)

I'd recommend reintroducing the old requirement that the CFJ must be on
the subject of whether an action is possible or legal (or if you want
to mix it up a bit while still achieving the same basic goal, require
the CFJ to be about recordkeepor information). That way, the paradox
has to "leak into" the gamestate to work. I'd also recommend adding a
second requirement that the paradox not be about which judgements for a
CFJ are appropriate (this shuts down most of the uninteresting paradox
attempts I've seen).

I'd also recommend, instead of banning paradoxes that "arise from the
case itself" (which is far too prone to rules lawyering), require the
paradox to occur /before/ the case is initiated (equivalently, the CFJ
to talk about a past gamestate). Again, that's just for making
something subjective more objective.

-- 
ais523

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: (no subject)

[Aris Merchant]

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: BUS: (no subject)

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

I establish the above agency, 24 hours having past.


Publius Scribonius Scholasticus

On Sat, May 20, 2017 at 11:34 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus <
p.scribonius.scholasti...@googlemail.com> wrote:

> I establish the following Agency: (This is my 24 hours notice)
>
> Title: Publius Registers for Nomic (PRN)
> Agents: All Persons
> Powers: If Publius Scribonius Scholasticus is not a player, any person
> may register em as a player.
> 
> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
>

Re: BUS: (no subject)

[Alex Smith]

On Sat, 2013-10-19 at 17:43 -0700, Nich Del Evans wrote:
> I become active, I sit. From: Alex Smith

CoE: I did not send that message.

(It's obvious what happened here, but let's just make sure your phone's
email app doesn't cause any accidental self-ratifications.)

-- 
ais523

RE: BUS: (no subject)

[Nich Del Evans]

I become active, I sit. From: Alex Smith
Sent: 10/19/2013 7:31 PM
To: agora-business@agoranomic.org
Subject: Re: BUS: (no subject)
On Sat, 2013-10-19 at 19:25 -0500, Nich Del Evans wrote:
> I stand, if I may do so.

You can't stand directly, otherwise it'd be possible for the CotC to do
it in between assigning CfJs in order to assign them all to emself.

You can sit, and then you become standing when more judges are
necessary.

Also, you might be inactive; I have no idea given how there are no
officer reports at the moment, but you might want to explicitly become
active to make sure.

-- 
ais523

Re: BUS: (no subject)

[Alex Smith]

On Sat, 2013-10-19 at 19:25 -0500, Nich Del Evans wrote:
> I stand, if I may do so.

You can't stand directly, otherwise it'd be possible for the CotC to do
it in between assigning CfJs in order to assign them all to emself.

You can sit, and then you become standing when more judges are
necessary.

Also, you might be inactive; I have no idea given how there are no
officer reports at the moment, but you might want to explicitly become
active to make sure.

-- 
ais523

Re: BUS: (no subject)

[Sean Hunt]

On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 12:44 PM, Ed Murphy  wrote:
> FKA441344 wrote:
>
>> I intend to deputise for the Assessor to publish eir weekly report. I
>> intend to, without two objections, make the office of Assessor vacant.
>
>
> I object to the latter intent.  (I've been busy cleaning up after a
> departed colleague, will most likely catch up on Agora on Sunday.)
>

I object as well.

-scshunt

Re: BUS: (no subject)

[Ed Murphy]

FKA441344 wrote:


I intend to deputise for the Assessor to publish eir weekly report. I
intend to, without two objections, make the office of Assessor vacant.


I object to the latter intent.  (I've been busy cleaning up after a
departed colleague, will most likely catch up on Agora on Sunday.)

Re: BUS: (no subject)

[Elliott Hird]

On 5 June 2012 12:16, FKA441344 <441...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I intend to, Without Objection, destroy the Promise titled (2011-04-25 
>> ehird).
> Without Objection I do so.

I didn't notice this intent buried in all the others, but I don't see
why (harmless) currency needs to be destroyed like this.

I create a pledge with text {I deregister.} and transfer it to ais523.

Re: BUS: (no subject)

[FKA441344]

On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 10:13 PM, FKA441344 <441...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I intend to, Without Objection, destroy the Golem named Number Two.
Without Objection I do so.
> I intend to, Without Objection, destroy the Golem named the Cayman Islands.
This was objected to.
> I intend to, Without Objection, destroy the Golem named The Diplomat.
Without Objection I do so.
> I intend to, Without Objection, destroy the Golem named Ur.
This was objected to.
> I intend to, Without Objection, destroy the Promise titled (2012-03-31 Ghost 
> 1).
Without Objection I do so.
> I intend to, Without Objection, destroy the Promise titled (2011-04-25
> ais523 1).
This was objected to.
> I intend to, Without Objection, destroy the Promise titled (2011-04-25 ehird).
Without Objection I do so.

Re: BUS: (no subject)

[Kerim Aydin]

On Fri, 1 Jun 2012, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Jun 2012, FKA441344 wrote:
> > I intend to, Without Objection, destroy the Golem named the Cayman Islands.
> 
> I object.  -G.

Oh, and I transfer all my rubles to the Cayman Islands.
-G.

Re: BUS: (no subject)

[Kerim Aydin]

On Fri, 1 Jun 2012, FKA441344 wrote:
> I intend to, Without Objection, destroy the Golem named the Cayman Islands.

I object.  -G.

Re: BUS: (no subject)

[Sean Hunt]

On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 5:13 PM, FKA441344 <441...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I intend to, Without Objection, destroy the Golem named Ur.
I object.

-scshunt

Re: BUS: (no subject)

[ais523]

On Fri, 2012-06-01 at 22:13 +0100, FKA441344 wrote:
> I intend to, Without Objection, destroy the Promise titled (2011-04-25
> ais523 1).
I object. I could easily recreate it, but I'd prefer to keep it around
to trade with other players.

-- 
ais523

Re: BUS: (no subject)

[Geoffrey Spear]

On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 8:18 PM, FKA441344 <441...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I intend to, without objection, cause the office of Registrar to become 
> vacant.

I object, mostly because this was done in a message with the subject
"(No subject)" in a thread with a bunch of scam actions.
-- 
Wooble

Re: BUS: (no subject)

[Ed Murphy]

FKA441344 wrote:


I cash the promise titled {Anyone Can Mislead The Leader}.


Note to H. Promotor omd:  if this was effective (I don't remember
anyone causing the President to taunt the police), then it caused
FKA441344 to submit two proposals.

Re: BUS: (no subject)

[FKA441344]

On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 5:46 PM, FKA441344 <441...@gmail.com> wrote:
> [...]
> I intend to, Without Objection, destroy Tweedledee.
> [...]
Having received no objection, I do so.

I cash the promise titled {Anyone Can Mislead The Leader}.

Re: BUS: (no subject)

[441344]

I withdraw my proposals titled {Alternate fix for Wisdom Of The
Elders} and {fix for Wisdom Of The Elders}.

I withdraw my previous proposal titled {Clock Golems}. I submit a
proposal with adoption index 2 and title {Clock Golems} and text
{
 Create a rule with title {Clock Golems} and text
 {
  Clock Golems are a class of second-class persons and a class of
assets. Golemkeepor is an elected Office. The Golemkeepor is the
recordkeepor for Clock Golems. Alarm is a Clock Golem timer. The Alarm
of a Clock Golem is counting down iff it is not zero. When the Alarm
of a Clock Golem becomes zero, that Clock Golem cashes all promises in
eir possession that e CAN cash, and is then destroyed. Any player CAN
create a Clock Golem by announcement, specifying its Alarm. Decreasing
the Alarm of a Clock Golem is secured. Causing a Clock Golem to act is
secured. The Golemkeepor's report includes the Alarm and set of
promises owned by each Clock Golem. The Golemkeepor CAN destroy any
Clock Golem Without Objection.
 }.
}.

Re: BUS: (no subject)

[441344]

On 1/13/12, 441344 <441...@gmail.com> wrote:
> [...]
> I declare intent to, with Agoran Consent, cause the President to taunt
> the police specifying 6.
>
I publish the following list of Supporters for the above intent:
*Arkady
*Pavrita
*Machiavelli

I publish the following list of Objectors for the above intent:
*Turiski may or may not be an Objector, see CFJ 3150

I, with Agoran Consent, cause the President to taunt
the police specifying 6.

I submit a proposal with adoption index 3 and title
{Another alternate fix for Wisdom Of The Elders} and text
{
 Amend Rule 1950 by replacing the text
 {
  Adoption index is a switch possessed by Agoran decisions, whose value is
  either "none" (default) or an integral multiple of 0.1 from 1.0 to 9.9.
 } with the text
 {
  Adoption index is a switch possessed by Agoran decisions, whose value is
  either "none" (default) or an integral multiple of 0.1 from 1.0 to
9,999,999.9.
 }.
}.


I submit a proposal with adoption index 2 and title {Clock Golems} and text
{
 Create a rule with title {Clock Golems} and text
 {
  Clock Golems are a class of second-class persons and a class of
assets. Golemkeepor is
  an elected Office. The Golemkeepor is the recordkeepor for Clock
Golems. Alarm is a
  Clock Golem timer. The Alarm of a Clock Golem is counting down iff
it is not zero. When
  the Alarm of a Clock Golem becomes zero, that Clock Golem cashes all
promises in eir
  possession that e CAN cash, and is then destroyed. Any player CAN
create a Clock
  Golem by announcement, specifying it's Alarm. Decreasing the Alarm
of a Clock Golem is
  secured. Causing a Clock Golem to act is secured. The Golemkeepor's
report includes the
  Alarm of every Clock Golem and the text, author, and owner of every
promise owned by a
  Clock Golem. The Golemkeepor CAN destroy any Clock Golem Without Objection.
 }.
}.

Re: BUS: (no subject)

[Eric Stucky]

> If Turiski is a player, I intend to flip em to Inactive without objection.

I object. [Not too sure where you were going with that]

-Turiski

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: (no subject)

[Ed Murphy]

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: BUS: (no subject)

[441344]

On 1/13/12, 441344 <441...@gmail.com> wrote:
> [...]
> I declare an intent to sit without objection.
> [...]
I publish this list of Objectors for the above intent:
*Turiski may or may not be an Objector, see CFJ 3150
*There are no other Objectors.

If there are no Objectors to the above intent, I sit without objection.

If Turiski is a player, I intend to flip em to Inactive without objection.

Re: BUS: (no subject)

[441344]

On 1/14/12, 441344 <441...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I submit a proposal with adoption index 3 and title {The Person Agora,
> The Misguiding Therof, And Eir Security} and text
> {
>  Retitle Rule 2339 to {The Person Agora}.
>  Amend Rule 2339 to {Agora is a person.}.
>  Enact a rule with title {Causing Agora To Act} and text {When Agora
> is a person, any player CAN cause em to take actions that are not
> otherwise IMPOSSIBLE Without Objection or with Agoran Consent. Causing
> Agora to perform ILLEGAL actions in this manner is the Class-7 Crime
> of Misguiding Agora.}.
>  Amend Rule 2351 by appending the sentence {Causing Agora to act is
> secured.} to the end of it.
> }.
>
I submit a proposal with title {The Power Of Agora} and text
{
 Create a rule with title {The Power Of Agora} and text
 {
  If Agora is a person, Agora has power equal to the power of this rule.
 }.
}

I submit a proposal with adoption index 3 and title {Agora Is Quite
Powerful} and text {If a rule with title {The Power Of Agora} exists
and the power of that rule is less than 3, change the power of that
rule to 3}

I submit a proposal with adoption index 4 and title {Agora Is Very
Powerful} and text {If a rule with title {The Power Of Agora} exists
and the power of that rule is less than 4, change the power of that
rule to 4}

I submit as gratuitous arguments to case 3144 the text {This is FALSE
due to Rule 105 and case 1499 and the fact that Agora does not
currently have a power.}.

Re: BUS: (no subject)

[441344]

On 1/14/12, omd  wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 4:30 PM, 441344 <441...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I submit a proposal with adoption index 3 and title {Ambassador fix} and
>> text
>> {
>>  Amend Rule 2352 by removing the last paragraph.
>>  Retitle Rule 2352 to {The Ambassador Part I}
>>  Create a Rule with title {The Ambassador Part II} and text
>>  {
>>  Any player CAN, with Agoran Consent, cause Agora to post a blog post
>>  (specifying its title, text, and list of categories) or comment
>>  (specifying its text) to BlogNomic.
>>  If no rule titled {The Ambassador Part I} exists, the Rulekeepor CAN and
>>  SHOULD repeal this rule by announcement in a timely fashion from the last
>>  time there was a rule with that title. If e fails to do so, any player
>>  CAN repeal this rule Without Objection or With Agoran Consent.
>>  }.
>> }.
>
> This doesn't work because Rule 105 prevents persons from making Rule
> Changes.  In general, what is this supposed to fix?
>
>> I submit a proposal with adoption index 3 and title
>> {Alternate Ambassador fix} and text
>> {
>>  If Rule 2352 contains the text
>>  {
>>  Any player CAN, with Agoran Consent, cause Agora to post a blog post
>>  (specifying its title, text, and list of categories) or comment
>>  (specifying its text) to BlogNomic.
>>  } then change the power of Rule 2352 to 3.
>> }.
>
> This doesn't do anything - Agora is not actually allowed to post blog
> posts or comments regardless of Power.
>
These proposals were supposed to address the fact that if my earlier
proposal makes {causing Agora to act} secured then the last part of
Rule 2352 becomes ineffective. If it was ineffective anyway then I
retract the above two proposals and submit a proposal with title
{That Doesn't Do Anything Anyway} and text {Amend Rule 2352 by
removing its last paragraph.}.

>> I submit a proposal with adoption index 3 and title
>> {Clarify/Explicate Agoran Consent} and text
>> {
>>  Amend Rule 1728 by replacing the text
>>  {
>>  3) With N Agoran Consent, where N is an integer multiple of 0.1 with a
>>  minimum of 1.
>>  } with
>>  {
>>  3) With N Agoran Consent, where N is an integer multiple of 0.1 with a
>>  minimum of 1.  ("With Agoran Consent" is shorthand for this method with
>>  N=1.).
>>  }.
>> }.
>
> Proposal: The rule already says that N is 1 unless otherwise specified
> (AI=3)
>
> Amend Rule 1728 by removing:
>
>   ("Without Objection" is shorthand for this method with N = 1.)
>
> and by removing:
>
>   ("With Support" is shorthand for this method with N = 1.)
>
>
>> I submit a proposal with adoption index 2 and title
>> {Clarify/Explicate Elder Support} and text
>> {
>>  Amend Rule 2357 by inserting between the first and second paragraphs
>>  the text
>>  {
>>  For any positive integer N:
>>   *If a rule says that a person CAN perform an action with N Elder
>>Support, e CAN perform that action With N Elder Support
>>With N Supporters.
>>   *Only Elders are eligible to Support an intention to perform an action
>>With N Elder Support With N Supporters.
>>   *When a person performs an action With N Elder Support
>>With N Supporters, e thereby performs that action with N Support.
>>   *If a rule says that a person CAN perform an action with N Elder Support
>>it does not thereby allow em to perform that action by announcement or
>>any other method, except as allowed by other rules including this rule.
>
> This is unnecessary.
At present the rules don't seem to say anything about what "Elder
Support" actually means.
>
>> I submit a proposal with adoption index 3 and title
>> {fix for Wisdom Of The Elders} and text
>> {
>>  Amend Rule 1950 by replacing the text
>>  {
>>  Adoption index is a switch possessed by Agoran decisions, whose value is
>>  either "none" (default) or an integral multiple of 0.1 from 1.0 to 9.9.
>>  } with the text
>>  {
>>  Adoption index is a switch possessed by Agoran decisions, whose value is
>>  either "none" (default) or an integral multiple of 0.1 from 1.0 to 9.9
>>  or the integer 4294967296.
>>  }.
>
> Nice catch, although this is a silly patch.
>

Re: BUS: (no subject)

[omd]

On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 4:30 PM, 441344 <441...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I submit a proposal with adoption index 3 and title {Ambassador fix} and text
> {
>  Amend Rule 2352 by removing the last paragraph.
>  Retitle Rule 2352 to {The Ambassador Part I}
>  Create a Rule with title {The Ambassador Part II} and text
>  {
>  Any player CAN, with Agoran Consent, cause Agora to post a blog post
>  (specifying its title, text, and list of categories) or comment
>  (specifying its text) to BlogNomic.
>  If no rule titled {The Ambassador Part I} exists, the Rulekeepor CAN and
>  SHOULD repeal this rule by announcement in a timely fashion from the last
>  time there was a rule with that title. If e fails to do so, any player
>  CAN repeal this rule Without Objection or With Agoran Consent.
>  }.
> }.

This doesn't work because Rule 105 prevents persons from making Rule
Changes.  In general, what is this supposed to fix?

> I submit a proposal with adoption index 3 and title
> {Alternate Ambassador fix} and text
> {
>  If Rule 2352 contains the text
>  {
>  Any player CAN, with Agoran Consent, cause Agora to post a blog post
>  (specifying its title, text, and list of categories) or comment
>  (specifying its text) to BlogNomic.
>  } then change the power of Rule 2352 to 3.
> }.

This doesn't do anything - Agora is not actually allowed to post blog
posts or comments regardless of Power.

> I submit a proposal with adoption index 3 and title
> {Clarify/Explicate Agoran Consent} and text
> {
>  Amend Rule 1728 by replacing the text
>  {
>  3) With N Agoran Consent, where N is an integer multiple of 0.1 with a
>  minimum of 1.
>  } with
>  {
>  3) With N Agoran Consent, where N is an integer multiple of 0.1 with a
>  minimum of 1.  ("With Agoran Consent" is shorthand for this method with
>  N=1.).
>  }.
> }.

Proposal: The rule already says that N is 1 unless otherwise specified (AI=3)

Amend Rule 1728 by removing:

  ("Without Objection" is shorthand for this method with N = 1.)

and by removing:

  ("With Support" is shorthand for this method with N = 1.)


> I submit a proposal with adoption index 2 and title
> {Clarify/Explicate Elder Support} and text
> {
>  Amend Rule 2357 by inserting between the first and second paragraphs
>  the text
>  {
>  For any positive integer N:
>   *If a rule says that a person CAN perform an action with N Elder
>    Support, e CAN perform that action With N Elder Support
>    With N Supporters.
>   *Only Elders are eligible to Support an intention to perform an action
>    With N Elder Support With N Supporters.
>   *When a person performs an action With N Elder Support
>    With N Supporters, e thereby performs that action with N Support.
>   *If a rule says that a person CAN perform an action with N Elder Support
>    it does not thereby allow em to perform that action by announcement or
>    any other method, except as allowed by other rules including this rule.

This is unnecessary.

> I submit a proposal with adoption index 3 and title
> {fix for Wisdom Of The Elders} and text
> {
>  Amend Rule 1950 by replacing the text
>  {
>  Adoption index is a switch possessed by Agoran decisions, whose value is
>  either "none" (default) or an integral multiple of 0.1 from 1.0 to 9.9.
>  } with the text
>  {
>  Adoption index is a switch possessed by Agoran decisions, whose value is
>  either "none" (default) or an integral multiple of 0.1 from 1.0 to 9.9
>  or the integer 4294967296.
>  }.

Nice catch, although this is a silly patch.

Re: BUS: (no subject)

[441344]

On 1/13/12, Eric Stucky  wrote:
> V PSW: V nz n cynlre.
>
> Nethzragf: Nygubhtu pnfr 2062 jnf whqtrq GEHR, n cevznel zbgvingvba sbe gung
> qrpvfvba jnf gung gur nhgube fgngrq vg jnf rapbqrq va n cnegvphyne znaare,
> juvpu guvf zrffntr qbrf abg. (Bs pbhefr, guvf nffhzrf pnfr 3143 vf whqtrq
> GEHR)
>
> I object to every intent declared by 441344.
>
> -Turiski
>
>
>
>

I initiate an inquiry CFJ on the statement {No actions were performed
by announcement due to the first 6 lines of the above-quoted message}
with arguments {Any specification of an action in those lines is
unclear due to, if those lines are an encoded message rather than just
gibberish, the encoding that has been applied to those lines.} and
evidence {Rule 478, the above-quoted message}.

I initiate an inquiry CFJ on the statement {Initiating a CFJ on one's
own playerhood does not reasonably unambiguously indicate intent to
become a player} with arguments {A person might initiate such a CFJ
due to doubt as to whether e had previously registered or as to
whether an attempt by em to deregister had been successful} and
evidence {Rule 869}. I also submit my arguments for this CFJ as
gratuitous arguments for CFJ 3143.

I initiate an inquiry CFJ on the statement {No person registered in
accordance with Rule 869 due to the above-quoted message} with
arguments {Any indication that any person intended to become a player
in the above-quoted message is not reasonably clear due to, if the
first 6 lines of the above-quoted message are an encoded message
rather than just gibberish, the encoding that has been applied to
those lines.} and evidence {Rule 869, the above-quoted message}.

I initiate an inquiry CFJ on the statement {There are currently no
Objectors to any of my declared intents.} with arguments {Turiski was
not a player when e made or attempted to make the above-quoted
objection or attempted objection, and in accordance with Rule 2124
only first-class players can be Objectors to a dependent action(unless
modified by the document authorizing the dependent action, and there
is no such modification).} and evidence {The most recent Census, Rule
2124, Rule 1728, the January 2012 archives of the agora-buisness
mailing list, the results of all CFJs other than this one initiated in
this message}.

I recommend that all of the CFJs initiated in this message should be
judged TRUE. This is not a regulated action.

I declare intent to sit without two objections.

Re: BUS: (no subject)

[Elliott Hird]

On 13 January 2012 20:07, 441344 <441...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I declare intent to, with Agoran Consent, cause the President to taunt
> the police specifying 6.

I supplant.

Re: BUS: (no subject)

[Eric Stucky]

V PSW: V nz n cynlre.

Nethzragf: Nygubhtu pnfr 2062 jnf whqtrq GEHR, n cevznel zbgvingvba sbe gung 
qrpvfvba jnf gung gur nhgube fgngrq vg jnf rapbqrq va n cnegvphyne znaare, 
juvpu guvf zrffntr qbrf abg. (Bs pbhefr, guvf nffhzrf pnfr 3143 vf whqtrq GEHR)

I object to every intent declared by 441344.

-Turiski

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: (no subject)

[Arkady English]

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)

[Arkady English]

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: BUS: (no subject)

[Tanner Swett]

On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 3:07 PM, 441344 <441...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I declare intent to, with Agoran Consent, cause the President to taunt
> the police specifying 6.

I support.

—Machiavelli

Re: BUS: (no subject)

[Pavitra]

On 01/13/2012 02:07 PM, 441344 wrote:
> I declare intent to, with Agoran Consent, cause the President to taunt
> the police specifying 6.

I support.

Re: BUS: (no subject)

[Arkady English]

On 13 January 2012 20:07, 441344 <441...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> I declare intent to, with Agoran Consent, cause the President to taunt
> the police specifying 6.

This could be amusing: I support.

Re: BUS: (no subject)

[Elliott Hird]

On 21 October 2010 03:52, Zac Sipes  wrote:
> zac0...@gmail.com

I support.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: (no subject)

[Benjamin Schultz]

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: BUS: (no subject)

[Elliott Hird]

2008/7/10 Elliott Hird <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I agree to the following, known as "??":
> {
> This is a public contract.
>
> This is a pledge iff it has one party.
>
> Any person may join or leave this contract by announcement.
>
> This contract can be amended with 1.0 Agoran Consent.
> }
>

I leave this contract, dissolving it.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: (no subject)

[Zefram]

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)

[Zefram]

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)

[Quazie]

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)

[ais523]

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)

[Taral]

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)

[Sgeo]

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)

[comex]

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)

[Quazie]

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)

[Taral]

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)

[Elliott Hird]

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)

[ais523]

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)

[Benjamin Schultz]

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