Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: zeckalpha is to be registered.
Michael wrote: > PS: would people be interested in a Zendo contest/sub-game? (See > http://www.koryheath.com/games/zendo/design-history, for example.) Yes.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: zeckalpha is to be registered.
On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 4:09 AM, Alexander Smith wrote: > It could have been interesting, but it collapsed when Iammars became > inactive, and I don't think there have been any attempts to resurrect it > since. I made an attempt to resurrect it and got no interest at all.
RE: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: zeckalpha is to be registered.
G. wrote: > On Mon, 1 Jun 2009, Michael Norrish wrote: > > PS: would people be interested in a Zendo contest/sub-game? (See > > http://www.koryheath.com/games/zendo/design-history, for example.) > > That sounds a contest we played a little while ago. The contestmaster > came up with a secret rule for assigning values (or at least an ordering) > for arbitrary sentences. > > Two contestants would "fight" by challenging each other to a duel > consisting of one sentence each; the gamemaster would announce who won > (whose sentence was greater), object being of course to figure out the > rule to become the master duelist. It could have been interesting, but it collapsed when Iammars became inactive, and I don't think there have been any attempts to resurrect it since. (It never really got started; IIRC, this was about the time of the original Bank of Agora, because I think pens featured heavily in at least one of the common guesses.) -- ais523 <>
RE: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: zeckalpha is to be registered.
Michael wrote: > Kyle Marek-Spartz wrote: > > I assumed... Hazing of sorts. Makes sense to weed out those unwilling > > to put up with criticism and informs initiates about some of the > > subtleties of the Agoran way. Clever. > > I'm kinda glad I never had to bother with it :-) I just love the way that the more we try to loosen up registration to not alienate new players, the more interesting ways turn up for it to go wrong. (zeckalpha: you may want to look at the use/mention distinction, at R478, and possibly also at R754. I suspect you are a player, but it's something I'd like a judge to look at.) -- ais523 <>
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: zeckalpha is to be registered.
On Mon, 1 Jun 2009, Michael Norrish wrote: > PS: would people be interested in a Zendo contest/sub-game? (See > http://www.koryheath.com/games/zendo/design-history, for example.) That sounds a contest we played a little while ago. The contestmaster came up with a secret rule for assigning values (or at least an ordering) for arbitrary sentences. Two contestants would "fight" by challenging each other to a duel consisting of one sentence each; the gamemaster would announce who won (whose sentence was greater), object being of course to figure out the rule to become the master duelist. -G.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: zeckalpha is to be registered.
Michael Norrish wrote: > PS: would people be interested in a Zendo contest/sub-game? (See > http://www.koryheath.com/games/zendo/design-history, for example.) Sounds neat. Turn-based games (e.g., nomic) tend to be made less so when played by email. Does anyone see any outstanding gameplay issues that would need to be addressed for realtime Zendo?
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: zeckalpha is to be registered.
Kerim Aydin wrote: On Mon, 1 Jun 2009, Michael Norrish wrote: Kyle Marek-Spartz wrote: I assumed... Hazing of sorts. Makes sense to weed out those unwilling to put up with criticism and informs initiates about some of the subtleties of the Agoran way. Clever. I'm kinda glad I never had to bother with it :-) Yeah, but you have to deal with it vicariously every time R104 comes up again. -G. It's an ongoing honour that it's still there at all. Michael. PS: would people be interested in a Zendo contest/sub-game? (See http://www.koryheath.com/games/zendo/design-history, for example.)
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: zeckalpha is to be registered.
He has bouts of existance, it's not too rare :-) On 2009-06-01, Sean Hunt wrote: > Michael Norrish wrote: >> Kyle Marek-Spartz wrote: >>> I assumed... Hazing of sorts. Makes sense to weed out those unwilling >>> to put up with criticism and informs initiates about some of the >>> subtleties of the Agoran way. Clever. >> >> I'm kinda glad I never had to bother with it :-) >> >> Michael. >> > Woah, dude. >
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: zeckalpha is to be registered.
On Mon, 1 Jun 2009, Michael Norrish wrote: > Kyle Marek-Spartz wrote: >> I assumed... Hazing of sorts. Makes sense to weed out those unwilling >> to put up with criticism and informs initiates about some of the >> subtleties of the Agoran way. Clever. > > I'm kinda glad I never had to bother with it :-) Yeah, but you have to deal with it vicariously every time R104 comes up again. -G.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: zeckalpha is to be registered.
Michael Norrish wrote: > Kyle Marek-Spartz wrote: >> I assumed... Hazing of sorts. Makes sense to weed out those unwilling >> to put up with criticism and informs initiates about some of the >> subtleties of the Agoran way. Clever. > > I'm kinda glad I never had to bother with it :-) > > Michael. > Woah, dude.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: zeckalpha is to be registered.
Kyle Marek-Spartz wrote: I assumed... Hazing of sorts. Makes sense to weed out those unwilling to put up with criticism and informs initiates about some of the subtleties of the Agoran way. Clever. I'm kinda glad I never had to bother with it :-) Michael.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: zeckalpha is to be registered.
On Sun, 31 May 2009, Kyle Marek-Spartz wrote: > I assumed... Hazing of sorts. Makes sense to weed out those unwilling > to put up with criticism and informs initiates about some of the > subtleties of the Agoran way. Clever. Maybe this should be in the FAQ? The ironic thing is, the reason R869 is written to allow several different grammatical constructions that express an intent to register is found in CFJ 1263. As Judge Steve wrote: ...It may be true as Blob says (although I doubt it), that forcing new Players to phrase their registration messages explicitly as requests might inculcate some humility into them. But I think it's just as likely that being so severe on New Players will humiliate rather than humble them and make their first official experience with Agora the negative one of being nit-picked on for trivial reasons. First impressions last. In the spirit, if not precisely in the letter, of Rule 754, differences in phraseology should be regarded as inconsequential as long as the meaning is clear. Any message expressing a clear desire or intent to register as a Player should count as a request for registration, whether or not it is explicitly phrased as a request. When I saw your registration I thought: "looks like it fits that standard to me but I bet some nitpicky dunderhead will question it." -G.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: zeckalpha is to be registered.
I assumed... Hazing of sorts. Makes sense to weed out those unwilling to put up with criticism and informs initiates about some of the subtleties of the Agoran way. Clever. Kyle Marek-Spartz On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 1:10 AM, Sean Hunt wrote: > Kyle Marek-Spartz wrote: >> Unnecessary... According to 869 this is the phrasing necessary for >> registration. >> >> The verb "to be registered" means to become a player (i.e., to >> have one's citizenship changed from Unregistered to Registered), >> and the verb "to be deregistered" means to cease to be a player >> (i.e., to have one's citizenship changed from Registered to >> Unregistered). Where the verb "to register" or "to deregister" >> is used without an explicit direct object, the action is >> implicitly reflexive. >> The home page says "To register as a player, just post a message to >> the "business" mailing list saying that you register" which is un >> specific. I could have posted a message consisting solely of "that you >> register" and according to the home page I should be. >> >> You're giving me a hard time though, so I am as well. ;) >> >> Kyle Marek-Spartz > > Debating whether X counts as a registration is an Agoran pastime. My > registration statement was "I, coppro, am registering", and that was > plenty controversial! >
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: zeckalpha is to be registered.
Kyle Marek-Spartz wrote: > Unnecessary... According to 869 this is the phrasing necessary for > registration. > > The verb "to be registered" means to become a player (i.e., to > have one's citizenship changed from Unregistered to Registered), > and the verb "to be deregistered" means to cease to be a player > (i.e., to have one's citizenship changed from Registered to > Unregistered). Where the verb "to register" or "to deregister" > is used without an explicit direct object, the action is > implicitly reflexive. > The home page says "To register as a player, just post a message to > the "business" mailing list saying that you register" which is un > specific. I could have posted a message consisting solely of "that you > register" and according to the home page I should be. > > You're giving me a hard time though, so I am as well. ;) > > Kyle Marek-Spartz Debating whether X counts as a registration is an Agoran pastime. My registration statement was "I, coppro, am registering", and that was plenty controversial!
DIS: Re: BUS: Re: zeckalpha is to be registered.
Unnecessary... According to 869 this is the phrasing necessary for registration.
The verb "to be registered" means to become a player (i.e., to
have one's citizenship changed from Unregistered to Registered),
and the verb "to be deregistered" means to cease to be a player
(i.e., to have one's citizenship changed from Registered to
Unregistered). Where the verb "to register" or "to deregister"
is used without an explicit direct object, the action is
implicitly reflexive.
The home page says "To register as a player, just post a message to
the "business" mailing list saying that you register" which is un
specific. I could have posted a message consisting solely of "that you
register" and according to the home page I should be.
You're giving me a hard time though, so I am as well. ;)
Kyle Marek-Spartz
On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 7:55 AM, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
> On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 2:31 AM, Kyle Marek-Spartz
> wrote:
>> zeckalpha is to be registered.
>
> Welcome, maybe.
>
> I CFJ on: {{zeckalpha is a Player.}}
>
> Evidence: above-quoted grammatically-problematic message.
>
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: zeckalpha is to be registered.
2009/5/30 Alex Smith : > I take it that Kyle Marek-Spartz /is/ zeckalpha? That attempted > registration would almost certainly fail if zeckalpha was someone else. > (Unless there was a submarine act-on-behalf contract, which would get us > into even more confusing realms of rule weirdness...) "zeckal...@gmail.com" yes
DIS: Re: BUS: Re: zeckalpha is to be registered.
On Sat, 2009-05-30 at 08:55 -0400, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
> On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 2:31 AM, Kyle Marek-Spartz
> wrote:
> > zeckalpha is to be registered.
>
> Welcome, maybe.
>
> I CFJ on: {{zeckalpha is a Player.}}
>
> Evidence: above-quoted grammatically-problematic message.
I take it that Kyle Marek-Spartz /is/ zeckalpha? That attempted
registration would almost certainly fail if zeckalpha was someone else.
(Unless there was a submarine act-on-behalf contract, which would get us
into even more confusing realms of rule weirdness...)
--
ais523
DIS: Re: BUS: Re: zeckalpha is to be registered.
On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 7:31 AM, Kyle Marek-Spartz wrote:
> zeckalpha is to be registered.
>
Welcome. You may find the following useful if you've never played before:
[ With thanks to Murphy ]
Agora Nomic FAQ
last updated 4/22/09
Q. What's with the funny pronouns?
A. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spivak_pronoun (Agora traditionally
uses "e" as subject and "emself" as reflexive).
Q. What is Power?
A. Power is a number that restricts how rules, proposals, and other
entities can affect the gamestate. Rules with higher Power have
higher precedence (Rule 1482) and are harder to amend (Rule 2140).
Q. What is Adoption Index? Which one should I use?
A. When submitting a proposal, you should specify an Adoption Index
at least as high as the highest-Power rule you plan to amend,
otherwise some amendments will fail even if the proposal is
adopted (Rules 106, 2140). A higher Adoption Index requires a
higher ratio of votes in favor (Rule 955); basically, AI=1 requires
50% + 1, AI=2 requires a 2/3 majority, AI=3 requires a 3/4 majority.
Q. Do the rules get reset when someone wins?
A. No, but each method of winning is generally accompanied by a
cleanup procedure (Rule 2186) that resets the relevant part of the
gamestate, e.g. winning by High Score resets scores.
Q. Why does Rule 104 (First Speaker) still exist?
A. It's the only initial rule that's never been amended. Some of us
want to keep it that way.
Q. What's the best way to get up to speed on the rules?
A. The Full Logical Ruleset (Rule 1681) includes cross-references
and notes on interpretation.
Q. What's with lots of titles ending in "-or" instead of "-er"?
A. Historical precedent, dating back to at least "Rulekeepor" in
Rule 399/1 (now 1051/18; amended rules used to be renumbered).
Q. What does "Cantus Cygneus" mean?
A. Latin for "swan song". Probably grammatically incorrect.
Q. What's the Senate for?
A. A line of defense in case some large group of trolls ever decides
"hur hur, we can ruin this game because we outnumber the existing
players". If the trolls appear patient enough to wait two months,
then we have time to erect stronger defenses.
Q. Why is the recordkeepor of Rests called the Insulator?
A. Mixed metaphor. The recordkeepor of Notes is called the Conductor.
Q. What's with the words in all caps?
A. See Rule 2152, which was explicitly based on RFC 2119.
Q. How long is "as soon as possible" / "in a timely fashion"?
A. One week (Rule 1023).
Q. How are weeks defined?
A. Absolute weeks (e.g. "at least once a week", "during the same week")
begin at midnight UTC on Monday (Rule 1023). Relative durations
(e.g. "within one week after") are measured relatively.
Q. How should trivial corrections be made?
A. Without objection (Rule 2221) or via disinterested proposal (Rules
2153, 2224).
Q. What's an index?
A. A real number or +inf ("unanimity") or -inf (Rule 2146).
Q. What's a switch?
A. A single-value attribute relevant to a specified type of entity,
with a default setting (Rule 2162).
Q. Why do replies go to the discussion list?
A. Because most replies are discussionary in nature. If you send an
attempted action to the discussion list by mistake, just forward
it to the business list and add "TTttPF" ("this time to the Public
Forum").
Q. Why are lots of things performed "by announcement"?
A. Agora has long rejected the interpretation that any action can
implicitly be performed by saying so ("I say I do, therefore I
do"). Defining and using "by announcement" (Rule 478) makes it
explicit.
Q. What are the time limits for actions with support or without
objections?
A. The action must be performed within fourteen days of announcing
intent. If the action depends on objections, then there's a
minimum four-day wait. (Rule 1728)
Q. What is Agoran Consent?
A. Basically "with more support than objections". Specifying a number
may increase the difficulty. (Rule 1728)
Q. What are fungible assets?
A. Interchangeable, indistinguishable. One typically says "you owe me
a dollar", not "you owe me the dollar with a particular serial
number". (Rule 2166)
Q. What happens if a player leaves the game while holding an office?
A. Only players can hold office (Rule 1006), so the office becomes
vacant.
Q. What is deputisation?
A. A method for any player to perform a duty of an office because the
officer is slacking off but hasn't been replaced yet, or the office
is vacant (Rule 2160).
Q. What's the schedule for elections to office?
A. Elections occur whenever someone initiates one (Rule 2154); this is
only required of the IADoP when the office is vacant or its holder
is inactive (Rule 2217). Nominations last for four days, then the
IADoP initiates voting if needed (Rule 2154) which lasts for seven
days (Rule 107).
Q. Do I have to accept or decline if I'm nominated? Can I change my
