DIS: Re: BUS: CFJ: 蘭亭社's highest allowable budget

[Josh T]

I have no ill against you barring me, just that I wasn't familiar with the
procedure.

天火狐

On 27 April 2017 at 22:04, Owen Jacobson  wrote:

> That’s pretty much it. You’re best-placed to actually provide insight into
> the truthiness of the statement, which is why I barred you: I’m actually
> trying to figure out how Agora as a whole interprets the 蘭亭社 charter.
> Having you step in and answer directly somewhat defeats the purpose.
>
> -o
>
> On Apr 27, 2017, at 2:51 AM, Josh T  wrote:
>
> This sounds like an issue where I sit on the sideline and eat popcorn and
> maybe attempt to correct if everyone is horribly off-mark. Wonderful.
>
> On 27 April 2017 at 02:46, Alex Smith  wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 2017-04-27 at 02:43 -0400, Josh T wrote:
>> > I am confused by the wording "barring 天火狐", and seek clarification
>> > on the issue.
>>
>> When you call a CFJ, you can choose one player who will not be able to
>> judge that CFJ; that's called "barring a player". Normally you do that
>> if the CFJ is about that player or something that that player is
>> associated with (to avoid conflicts of interest), or if the eligibility
>> of the player to judge the CFJ would depend on the result of the CFJ.
>> However, you don't have to state your reason, and there doesn't even
>> have to be a reason.
>>
>> --
>> ais523
>>
>
>
>

DIS: Re: BUS: CFJ: 蘭亭社's highest allowable budget

[Owen Jacobson]

That’s pretty much it. You’re best-placed to actually provide insight into the 
truthiness of the statement, which is why I barred you: I’m actually trying to 
figure out how Agora as a whole interprets the 蘭亭社 charter. Having you step in 
and answer directly somewhat defeats the purpose.

-o

> On Apr 27, 2017, at 2:51 AM, Josh T  wrote:
> 
> This sounds like an issue where I sit on the sideline and eat popcorn and 
> maybe attempt to correct if everyone is horribly off-mark. Wonderful.
> 
> On 27 April 2017 at 02:46, Alex Smith  > wrote:
> On Thu, 2017-04-27 at 02:43 -0400, Josh T wrote:
> > I am confused by the wording "barring 天火狐", and seek clarification
> > on the issue.
> 
> When you call a CFJ, you can choose one player who will not be able to
> judge that CFJ; that's called "barring a player". Normally you do that
> if the CFJ is about that player or something that that player is
> associated with (to avoid conflicts of interest), or if the eligibility
> of the player to judge the CFJ would depend on the result of the CFJ.
> However, you don't have to state your reason, and there doesn't even
> have to be a reason.
> 
> --
> ais523
> 



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: CFJ: 蘭亭社's highest allowable budget

[Alex Smith]

On Thu, 2017-04-27 at 02:43 -0400, Josh T wrote:
> I am confused by the wording "barring 天火狐", and seek clarification
> on the issue.

When you call a CFJ, you can choose one player who will not be able to
judge that CFJ; that's called "barring a player". Normally you do that
if the CFJ is about that player or something that that player is
associated with (to avoid conflicts of interest), or if the eligibility
of the player to judge the CFJ would depend on the result of the CFJ.
However, you don't have to state your reason, and there doesn't even
have to be a reason.

-- 
ais523

DIS: Re: BUS: CFJ: 蘭亭社's highest allowable budget

[Josh T]

I am confused by the wording "barring 天火狐", and seek clarification on the
issue.

天火狐

On 27 April 2017 at 00:27, Owen Jacobson  wrote:

> I CFJ, barring 天火狐, on the statement
>
> 蘭亭社's highest allowable budget for a single player is 50.
>
> I present no arguments, largely out of spite.
>