DIS: Re: BUS: Nothing to See Here
Good attempt at a scam. I had already anticipated it, however, and I think you will find you'd rather have submitted to the currency revaluation. If anyone spots the booby-trap, please don't point it out. I want the delicious satisfaction of seeing their reactions when it activates. c: -twg ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On Sunday, September 30, 2018 11:05 PM, D Margaux wrote: > The text of the contract between me and G. is provided at bottom of this > email. > > I transfer 30 coins to nichdel. > > I transfer all of my coins to the contract below between me and G. > > I cause nichdel to transfer 30 coins to me. > > I CFJ (barring Aris) this statement: “D. Margaux’s attempt in this message > to transfer coins to the contract between em and G. is EFFECTIVE.” (I note > for the Arbitor’s benefit that G. is an interested party. Also twg might be > considered an interested party because this transfer circumvents the > “according to eir means” proposals that e authored.) > > If my attempt to transfer coins to the contract between me and G. was > INEFFECTIVE, then I change my vote and cause nichdel to change eir vote on > 8081B* to FOR. > > / Contract between D. Margaux and G. / > > 1. This is a contract between D. Margaux and G. (the “parties”). Other > players CANNOT join this contract without consent of both parties. This > contract CAN be terminated by consent of both parties. > > 2. The name of this contract is the “First Bank of Agora.” > 3. A party to this contract has “on deposit in the contract” an amount of > coins equal to the total number of coins e has deposited in this contract, > minus the total number of coins e has withdrawn from the contract. > > 4. Any party to this contract CAN transfer coins to this contract. Making > such a transfer is called “depositing” those coins in the contract. > > 5. Any party to this contract CAN cause the contract to transfer to em any > amount of coins less than or equal to the number of coins e has on deposit > in the contract. Making such a transfer is called “withdrawing” the coins > from the contract. > > / end of contract / > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 7:12 PM Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote: > > > > I agree to the exchanged Contract with this hash. -G. > > On Sat, 29 Sep 2018, D Margaux wrote: > > > > > G. and I have exchanged a document that has text with the following > > SHA256 > > > > hash: > > > 58629980096A5E997EC5CF62C04B59EBFBEEAF81DD4785B50CCF190E1F24CE2D > > > I agree to be bound by that text and I agree and consent for that text > > to > > > > be a contract between me and G., if G. likewise agrees.
DIS: Re: BUS: nothing to see here
On 05/02/2010 06:43 PM, Geoffrey Spear wrote: If I'm not a player, I register and sit up. This will fail in any case; there is currently an Emergency Session so your posture must be supine. -coppro
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Nothing to See Here
If you’re referring to the Point Installation Act, I think that will be voted down. If something else, I’m excited to find out! :-) On Sun, Sep 30, 2018 at 7:44 PM Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: > Good attempt at a scam. I had already anticipated it, however, and I think > you will find you'd rather have submitted to the currency revaluation. > > If anyone spots the booby-trap, please don't point it out. I want the > delicious satisfaction of seeing their reactions when it activates. c: > > -twg > > > ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ > On Sunday, September 30, 2018 11:05 PM, D Margaux > wrote: > > > The text of the contract between me and G. is provided at bottom of this > > email. > > > > I transfer 30 coins to nichdel. > > > > I transfer all of my coins to the contract below between me and G. > > > > I cause nichdel to transfer 30 coins to me. > > > > I CFJ (barring Aris) this statement: “D. Margaux’s attempt in this > message > > to transfer coins to the contract between em and G. is EFFECTIVE.” (I > note > > for the Arbitor’s benefit that G. is an interested party. Also twg might > be > > considered an interested party because this transfer circumvents the > > “according to eir means” proposals that e authored.) > > > > If my attempt to transfer coins to the contract between me and G. was > > INEFFECTIVE, then I change my vote and cause nichdel to change eir vote > on > > 8081B* to FOR. > > > > / Contract between D. Margaux and G. / > > > > 1. This is a contract between D. Margaux and G. (the “parties”). Other > > players CANNOT join this contract without consent of both parties. > This > > contract CAN be terminated by consent of both parties. > > > > 2. The name of this contract is the “First Bank of Agora.” > > 3. A party to this contract has “on deposit in the contract” an amount > of > > coins equal to the total number of coins e has deposited in this > contract, > > minus the total number of coins e has withdrawn from the contract. > > > > 4. Any party to this contract CAN transfer coins to this contract. > Making > > such a transfer is called “depositing” those coins in the contract. > > > > 5. Any party to this contract CAN cause the contract to transfer to em > any > > amount of coins less than or equal to the number of coins e has on > deposit > > in the contract. Making such a transfer is called “withdrawing” the > coins > > from the contract. > > > > / end of contract / > > > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 7:12 PM Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu > wrote: > > > > > > > I agree to the exchanged Contract with this hash. -G. > > > On Sat, 29 Sep 2018, D Margaux wrote: > > > > > > > G. and I have exchanged a document that has text with the following > > > > SHA256 > > > > > > hash: > > > > 58629980096A5E997EC5CF62C04B59EBFBEEAF81DD4785B50CCF190E1F24CE2D > > > > I agree to be bound by that text and I agree and consent for that > text > > > > to > > > > > > be a contract between me and G., if G. likewise agrees. > > >
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Nothing to See Here
On Sun, 30 Sep 2018, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: > Good attempt at a scam. I had already anticipated it, however, and I think > you > will find you'd rather have submitted to the currency revaluation. Do you thing the transferring-to-contract actually worked? It takes non-obvious (and frankly a bit iffy) logic to conclude that. I'm curious on your logic on that, if it matches ours, that's some confirmation that it's a reasonable reading.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Nothing to See Here
On Sun, 2018-09-30 at 17:36 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote: > On Sun, 30 Sep 2018, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: > > Good attempt at a scam. I had already anticipated it, however, and > I think you > > will find you'd rather have submitted to the currency revaluation. > > Do you thing the transferring-to-contract actually worked? It takes > non-obvious (and frankly a bit iffy) logic to conclude that. I'm > curious on your logic on that, if it matches ours, that's some > confirmation that it's a reasonable reading. There was a moderately recent past ruleset under which you could transfer assets to contracts but the contracts couldn't transfer them back. (I was considering this trick myself as a method of dodging a tax, but realised that it wouldn't work.) I can't remember what the current ruleset is like, but I suspect it's changed since. -- ais523
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Nothing to See Here
On Mon, 1 Oct 2018, ais...@alumni.bham.ac.uk wrote: > On Sun, 2018-09-30 at 17:36 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > On Sun, 30 Sep 2018, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: > > > Good attempt at a scam. I had already anticipated it, however, and > > I think you > > > will find you'd rather have submitted to the currency revaluation. > > > > Do you thing the transferring-to-contract actually worked? It takes > > non-obvious (and frankly a bit iffy) logic to conclude that. I'm > > curious on your logic on that, if it matches ours, that's some > > confirmation that it's a reasonable reading. > > There was a moderately recent past ruleset under which you could > transfer assets to contracts but the contracts couldn't transfer them > back. (I was considering this trick myself as a method of dodging a > tax, but realised that it wouldn't work.) > > I can't remember what the current ruleset is like, but I suspect it's > changed since. A key change that Aris made recently was changing R2483 from this (referring to Coins and the other currencies): They can be owned by Agora, players, contracts, and facilities. to this: They can be owned by Agora, players, and facilities. Now, Rule 2576 says: If an asset's backing document restricts its ownership to a class of entities, then that asset CANNOT be gained by or transferred to an entity outside that class [...] By default, ownership of an asset is restricted to Agora, players, and contracts. So, the question is, when R2483 says that Agora, players, and facilities can own these currencies, is that an exceptio probat regulam restricting all others (so that contracts can't get the currencies) or does it add to the default list so that contracts still can?
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: nothing to see here
coppro wrote: > On 05/02/2010 06:43 PM, Geoffrey Spear wrote: >> If I'm not a player, I register and sit up. > > This will fail in any case; there is currently an Emergency Session Since when? > so your posture must be supine.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: nothing to see here
On 05/03/2010 07:53 AM, Ed Murphy wrote: coppro wrote: On 05/02/2010 06:43 PM, Geoffrey Spear wrote: If I'm not a player, I register and sit up. This will fail in any case; there is currently an Emergency Session Since when? so your posture must be supine. Since I started a coup last week. -coppro
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: nothing to see here
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 10:17 AM, Sean Hunt wrote: > Since I started a coup last week. Care to provide a message-ID?
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: nothing to see here
On 05/03/2010 08:44 AM, Geoffrey Spear wrote: On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 10:17 AM, Sean Hunt wrote: Since I started a coup last week. Care to provide a message-ID? http://www.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-business/2010-April/025537.html -coppro
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: nothing to see here
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 5:18 PM, Sean Hunt wrote: >> Care to provide a message-ID? > > http://www.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-business/2010-April/025537.html I'm still curious: what were you announcing about the Palace's official coin?
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: nothing to see here
On 05/03/2010 04:30 PM, comex wrote: On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 5:18 PM, Sean Hunt wrote: Care to provide a message-ID? http://www.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-business/2010-April/025537.html I'm still curious: what were you announcing about the Palace's official coin? Oops, typo. Not fatal. -coppro
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: nothing to see here
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 6:45 PM, Sean Hunt wrote: >> I'm still curious: what were you announcing about the Palace's official >> coin? > > Oops, typo. Not fatal. Wait, really? I thought you were being intentionally ambiguous.
