Re: DIS: Re: BUS: How to win by bribery
On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 9:07 AM, Alexander Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > That isn't a miswording, I sent the message but I had to send it from a > different address, and it seems not to have arrived. H. Distributor Taral, > can you check a-o to see if something got stuck there? Note that it's worth > 8VP to you, quite possibly, as arguably if my deputisation doesn't arrive > some time the proposal didn't technically pass. Your message never made it to the list then. The list is protected against non-subscriber posting, otherwise I deal with spam messages per day. -- Taral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: How to win by bribery
On Wednesday 01 October 2008 12:53:00 pm Geoffrey Spear wrote: > On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 1:36 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > Hold on here. Now we get to the point where a legitimate > > communication is held up. Does this violate R101 participation > > rights? -Goethe > > On the other hand, in a case where the sender of the message didn't > take the reasonable step of sending email from an address that was > subscribed to the mailing lists, I don't think eir rights are being > violated by bouncing the message. It's trivial to subscribe the > new address to the list and of course e retains the right, if not > the ability, to send from eir previously-subscribed address. ... Maybe. I believe the precedent is that the message counts iff it was made in a good faith attempt to communicate with the other list subscribers. Pavitra
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: How to win by bribery
On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 1:36 PM, Kerim Aydin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I'm sorry, but _actions only happen when a majority of the list sees it_. >> >> See: comex's ratification scam from a while back. >> >> You're too late. > > Hold on here. Now we get to the point where a legitimate communication > is held up. Does this violate R101 participation rights? -Goethe First of all, "a majority of the list sees it" isn't the standard; if a message is sent via a public forum and it reaches one player but not all of the rest because their email servers happen to be down, the other players should have heeded Rule 478 and ensured they could receive messages. To consider such messages to not be published would probably violate R101. On the other hand, in a case where the sender of the message didn't take the reasonable step of sending email from an address that was subscribed to the mailing lists, I don't think eir rights are being violated by bouncing the message. It's trivial to subscribe the new address to the list and of course e retains the right, if not the ability, to send from eir previously-subscribed address. The PerlNomic case is probably a bit more questionable; PNP was sending messages from its registered and previously-subscribed address which stopped being delivered because the previously-valid address had become bogus. Arguably that's an R101 violation, however unreasonable it would be to demand that the Distributor accept email from a bogus address.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: How to win by bribery
On Wed, 1 Oct 2008, Elliott Hird wrote: > On 1 Oct 2008, at 17:07, Alexander Smith wrote: > >> That isn't a miswording, I sent the message but I had to send it from a >> different address, and it seems not to have arrived. H. Distributor Taral, >> can you check a-o to see if something got stuck there? Note that it's worth >> 8VP to you, quite possibly, as arguably if my deputisation doesn't arrive >> some time the proposal didn't technically pass. >> -- >> ais523 > > I'm sorry, but _actions only happen when a majority of the list sees it_. > > See: comex's ratification scam from a while back. > > You're too late. Hold on here. Now we get to the point where a legitimate communication is held up. Does this violate R101 participation rights? -Goethe
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: How to win by bribery
On 1 Oct 2008, at 17:07, Alexander Smith wrote: That isn't a miswording, I sent the message but I had to send it from a different address, and it seems not to have arrived. H. Distributor Taral, can you check a-o to see if something got stuck there? Note that it's worth 8VP to you, quite possibly, as arguably if my deputisation doesn't arrive some time the proposal didn't technically pass. -- ais523 I'm sorry, but _actions only happen when a majority of the list sees it_. See: comex's ratification scam from a while back. You're too late.
RE: DIS: Re: BUS: How to win by bribery
That isn't a miswording, I sent the message but I had to send it from a different address, and it seems not to have arrived. H. Distributor Taral, can you check a-o to see if something got stuck there? Note that it's worth 8VP to you, quite possibly, as arguably if my deputisation doesn't arrive some time the proposal didn't technically pass. -- ais523 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of comex Sent: Wed 01/10/2008 03:30 To: agora-discussion@agoranomic.org Subject: Re: DIS: Re: BUS: How to win by bribery On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 8:35 PM, Ian Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 5:39 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Proposal 5707 has been adopted > Not until the Assessor determines the option selected by Agora. Uh... how silly, to miss a monthly win because you misworded a message. <>
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: How to win by bribery
On 1 Oct 2008, at 04:16, Ed Murphy wrote: I need to check the exact details of Goethe's and BobTHJ's sell tickets. I have the votes as 15F / 16A without those. Will take care of it later tonight. Haha. It is all for naught. ais523 was trying to continue eir long-running streak of winning once a month. Since e failed to remember to actually Monster-deputize for the Assessor, that streak is now over. Way to be careful in the final moments, ais...
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: How to win by bribery
On Tue, 30 Sep 2008, Ed Murphy wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> Proposal 5707 has been adopted, awarding a win to ais523. Therefore, >> by rule 2188, ais523 satisfies the Winning Condition of Legislation. >> Therefore, by rule 2186, as ais523 satisfies a Winning Condition but >> no Losing Conditions, ais523 wins. > > I need to check the exact details of Goethe's and BobTHJ's sell > tickets. I have the votes as 15F / 16A without those. Will take > care of it later tonight. I think I voted 2xFOR directly in satisfying the ticket... -G.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: How to win by bribery
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 8:35 PM, Ian Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 5:39 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Proposal 5707 has been adopted > Not until the Assessor determines the option selected by Agora. Uh... how silly, to miss a monthly win because you misworded a message.
