DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Notary] Weekly Report
cool, I can't resolve these intents anyway as I am notary no longer On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 3:21 AM Kerim Aydin via agora-business < agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > On Tue, Jun 2, 2020 at 8:12 PM Rebecca via agora-business < > agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > > I intend to destroy the following pledges without objection > > Grok's gratuitous (arguments were submitted and he already gave the cash, > > also there's no such thing as a shiny) > > > > I object to this one. Your reasons for destroying it are in dispute (and > self-contradictory). -G. > -- >From R. Lee
DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Notary] Weekly report
On 2/9/20 1:48 PM, Edward Murphy via agora-business wrote:
> If Notary does not have Ministry set, then I set it to {Economy}.
I believe you can only do this without objection, per Proposal 8291's
rule "ministries".
--
Jason Cobb
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Notary] Weekly report
On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 at 20:50, Gaelan Steele via agora-discussion <
agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
>
> > On Jan 29, 2020, at 5:35 PM, Timon Walshe-Grey via agora-business <
> agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> >
> > Gaelan wrote:
> >> NOTARY'S REPORT OF JANUARY 29 2020
> >
> > Ooh, just occurred to me you don't have a Ministry set! That probably
> > wants doing. I reckon Economy probably fits best, since the Ministries
> > rule specifically calls out contracts ("private enterprise") as falling
> > under Economy.
> >
> > Only the ADoP can do that though, which might be tricky with Murphy
> > absent (hope e's ok). Proposal, or is this not that urgent?
>
> Proposals? Urgent? Are you sure we’re playing the same nomic?
>
> Seriously, IMO we should propose now, then withdraw/vote AGAINST if Murphy
> shows up again.
>
> Gaelan
>
> >
> > -twg
>
An alternative would be someone taking on the duties of ADoP... it's a
relatively easy office too.
-Alexis
DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Notary] Weekly report
> On Jan 29, 2020, at 5:35 PM, Timon Walshe-Grey via agora-business
> wrote:
>
> Gaelan wrote:
>> NOTARY'S REPORT OF JANUARY 29 2020
>
> Ooh, just occurred to me you don't have a Ministry set! That probably
> wants doing. I reckon Economy probably fits best, since the Ministries
> rule specifically calls out contracts ("private enterprise") as falling
> under Economy.
>
> Only the ADoP can do that though, which might be tricky with Murphy
> absent (hope e's ok). Proposal, or is this not that urgent?
Proposals? Urgent? Are you sure we’re playing the same nomic?
Seriously, IMO we should propose now, then withdraw/vote AGAINST if Murphy
shows up again.
Gaelan
>
> -twg
DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Notary] Weekly Report
On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 10:29 PM Owen Jacobson wrote: > I intend, with Agoran Consent, to destroy the contract isnack 2.0. On Nov 21, 2017, at 5:57 PM, ATMunn wrote: > I support and do so. r. 2728 (“Dependent Actions”): 2. If the action is to be performed Without N Objections, With N Agoran Consent, or With Notice, if the intent was announced at least 4 days earlier Gotta wait for the four day timeout to tick down. The earliest this intent can be resolved is Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 10:29 PM EST. -o signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Notary] Weekly Report
Agoran consent, not two support. On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 9:57 AM, ATMunn wrote: > I support and do so. > > > On 11/21/2017 3:11 PM, Corona wrote: >> >> I support >> >> On 11/20/17, Aris Merchant wrote: >>> >>> On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 10:29 PM Owen Jacobson wrote: >>> > On Nov 21, 2017, at 1:26 AM, VJ Rada wrote: > > This is my 48 hours notice. I intend to remove all parts of isnack2.0 > except the third paragaph, then add the text "this contract has no > effect". > > (o, you should destroy isnack2.0. only the notary can do so w/ agoran > consent i believe, although anyone can w/out objection) I intend, with Agoran Consent, to destroy the contract isnack 2.0. -o I support. >>> >>> >>> -Aris >>> > -- >From V.J. Rada
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Notary] Weekly Report
On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 11:11 AM, Ed Murphy wrote: > Okay, I went through this, and (if it's accurate) Rest holdings > as of 1/31/2010 were > > 2 BobTHJ According to CFJ 2727, BobTHJ did successfully destroy all eir rests on 10/24, so e has zero. I believe you're right about the rest but I'm going to double check. Thanks for working this out; I'll include a history section in future reports. -- -c.
DIS: Re: BUS: Re: OFF: [Notary] Weekly Report
I wrote:
> According to the Assessor DB, here are all Rest changes from
> October 2009 through the present ("rests" indicates the number
> of Rests owned by the player after the change):
>
> name| date | rests
> ++---
> Murphy | 2009-10-05 08:12:28-07 | 0
> Wooble | 2009-10-05 08:23:40-07 | 0
> Wooble | 2009-10-05 09:27:41-07 | 2
> coppro | 2009-10-06 08:32:34-07 | 1
> woggle | 2009-10-06 11:53:30-07 | 0
> BobTHJ | 2009-10-07 14:22:50-07 | 3
> BobTHJ | 2009-10-08 09:18:26-07 | 2
> coppro | 2009-10-08 12:51:20-07 | 0
> Pavitra| 2009-10-12 16:55:33-07 | 0
> BobTHJ | 2009-10-14 11:08:18-07 | 3
> Wooble | 2009-10-17 13:27:07-07 |26
> Wooble | 2009-10-17 13:29:49-07 |25
> Wooble | 2009-10-17 15:15:18-07 |26
> BobTHJ | 2009-10-21 12:57:01-07 | 2
> Wooble | 2009-10-31 17:00:00-07 |13
> Wooble | 2009-11-03 15:34:52-08 | 0
> Warrigal | 2009-11-04 21:34:27-08 | 0
> Quazie | 2009-11-06 14:11:08-08 | 0
> ehird | 2009-11-06 14:11:08-08 | 0
> Elde | 2009-11-13 13:58:13-08 | 1
> Time Agent | 2009-11-13 13:58:13-08 | 1
> Antimatter | 2009-11-13 13:58:13-08 | 1
> Proglet| 2009-11-13 13:58:13-08 | 1
> Macross| 2009-11-13 13:58:13-08 | 1
> Vlad | 2009-11-13 13:58:13-08 | 1
> Morendil | 2009-11-13 13:58:13-08 | 1
> Beefurabi | 2009-11-13 13:58:13-08 | 1
> elJefe | 2009-11-13 13:58:13-08 | 1
> Ziggy | 2009-11-13 13:58:13-08 | 1
> Evantine | 2009-11-13 13:58:13-08 | 1
> pTang | 2009-11-13 13:58:13-08 | 1
> Blaise | 2009-11-13 13:58:13-08 | 1
> Syllepsis | 2009-11-13 13:58:13-08 | 1
> neil | 2009-11-13 13:58:13-08 | 1
> Blob | 2009-11-13 13:58:13-08 | 1
> Magu | 2009-11-13 13:58:13-08 | 1
> Peekee | 2009-11-13 13:58:13-08 | 1
> Cainech| 2009-11-13 13:58:13-08 | 1
> Wes| 2009-11-13 13:58:13-08 | 1
> t | 2009-11-13 13:58:13-08 | 1
> Pakaran| 2009-11-13 13:58:13-08 | 1
> Sgeo | 2009-11-14 12:29:03-08 | 0
> coppro | 2009-11-14 16:11:36-08 | 2
> coppro | 2009-11-14 17:48:01-08 | 0
> Murphy | 2009-11-30 22:28:27-08 |10
> c. | 2009-11-30 22:28:27-08 | 9
> Murphy | 2009-12-01 04:43:55-08 | 0
> c. | 2009-12-07 15:17:41-08 | 1
> G. | 2009-12-07 15:27:51-08 | 2
> c. | 2009-12-07 15:31:04-08 | 0
> Murphy | 2009-12-14 15:00:07-08 | 1
> Murphy | 2010-01-19 06:47:03-08 | 2
> coppro | 2010-01-25 19:23:19-08 | 1
> coppro | 2010-01-25 19:31:59-08 | 0
> G. | 2010-01-26 08:34:57-08 | 1
> coppro | 2010-01-26 09:27:46-08 | 6
> coppro | 2010-01-26 11:47:10-08 | 1
> coppro | 2010-01-30 20:48:08-08 | 0
> Murphy | 2010-01-31 21:33:55-08 | 1
> G. | 2010-01-31 21:59:46-08 | 0
Okay, I went through this, and (if it's accurate) Rest holdings
as of 1/31/2010 were
2 BobTHJ
1 Murphy
1 all 22 fugitives converted on 13 Nov 09
0 ehird, Quazie, Sgeo, Warrigal
0 everyone else who was listed (0x44, Elysion, and root were not,
so they're OK)
I recommend that the Herald's report include a history of Rest
changes, to simplify future error-checking.
