Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Auction related proposals
I mean, all someone has to do to run an unofficial auction is say that they'll give a number of assets to someone who gives them the most of some currency and then maybe back it by a pledge. On Thu, Oct 18, 2018, 16:28 Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > On Thu, 18 Oct 2018, Reuben Staley wrote: > > Create a new power-1 rule entitled 'Free Auctions' with the text: > > > > A player who is not the auctioneer of an existing Auction > > specified by this rule CAN, by announcement, initiate an auction > > with emself as the auctioneer The lots, minimum bid, and currency > > of the Auction shall be set by said player. > > This actually is more restrictive than what can be done now with the > following > proto-contract: > > 1. The auction described in this contract is run as if the auction rules > were > generally part of this contract, with [name] as the auctioneer and [lots] > as the > lots. > > 2. Anyone who bids joins the contract. The winner CAN act on behalf of > [name] > to transfer the lots to em. > > (Basically, an auction can be run "wholly unofficially", with the only > legal > construct needed being the act-on-behalf for the winner to make the > transfer > The rule adds the restriction of "not an auctioneer of an existing auction" > so is more restrictive). > > >
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Auction related proposals
All of these are valid except the last. If a player is the auctioneer, e
becomes the announcer as well.
On Thu, Oct 18, 2018, 16:00 Timon Walshe-Grey wrote:
> Good idea! Minor comments on the second one:
>
> > A player who is not the auctioneer of an existing Auction
> > specified by this rule CAN, by announcement, initiate an auction
> > with emself as the auctioneer The lots, minimum bid, and currency
> > of the Auction shall be set by said player.
>
> - This says "auctioneer" instead of "Auctioneer" like the first one does -
> I would make them consistent to prevent potential confusion (for example,
> see R2549 where "announcer" and "Announcer" mean different things).
> - Missing a full stop before "The lots".
> - I don't think the last sentence ("The lots" onwards) is actually
> necessary. R2549 already requires the announcer to specify the lots,
> minimum bid and (optionally) currency of the Auction, and there are no
> other rules that would prevent em from specifying anything e liked.
> - Relatedly, unless you replace "emself as the auctioneer" with "emself as
> the Auctioneer and Announcer", it's possible to make _any other player_ the
> Announcer without eir consent.
>
> -twg
>
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Auction
On Fri, 2008-11-28 at 09:19 +1100, Michael Norrish wrote: Nonetheless, I don't actually have a problem with your example involving ais523. Perhaps this is because it's not much of a name. If you put Bill in for ais523, my sensibilities might be more offended. As a data point, ais523 refers to emself as they in non-nomic-related channels (and either e or he in ##nomic, depending on whether we're talking about Agora or B). -- ais523
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Auction
On Nov 27, 2008, at 2:15 AM, Pavitra wrote: of geeksquee(*), on my part at least, would be lost by its removal. (*) I just invented this word because I couldn't think of one to mean what I meant: the feeling of inordinate glee you get from an obscure reference, like that one time on Family Guy with the MC Escher rap video. (Extra special points if you get the rather subtle Hofstadter reference in that last comma-delimited clause.) I'm going to have to find occasions to use the neologism geeksquee, especially among people who intuitively understand the term. - Benjamin Schultz KE3OM OscarMeyr
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Auction
comex wrote: On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 11:19 PM, Roger Hicks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Now can we get rid of Spivak? I second this motion. It worked for B. they is fine for unknown referents, but I'm not going to say I transfer a prop to ais523 because they did a fine job in their judgement. We could of course revert to standard English and use pronouns appropriate for players' actual genders. Yes. The discussion on Language Log makes it clear that they is best used for situations where the referent is unknown, or where the singular person is being drawn from a vague set. E.g., Each Agoran should ensure that their affairs are in order... Nonetheless, I don't actually have a problem with your example involving ais523. Perhaps this is because it's not much of a name. If you put Bill in for ais523, my sensibilities might be more offended. Michael.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Auction
On 27 Nov 2008, at 22:19, Michael Norrish wrote: Perhaps this is because it's not much of a name. It was apparently assigned by a computer from their initials, so that's not very surprising. [[I change my nick to a9*D(987([EMAIL PROTECTED](~``bz. My gender is !%~F vZ.]]
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Auction
On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 5:26 PM, Elliott Hird [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 27 Nov 2008, at 22:19, Michael Norrish wrote: Perhaps this is because it's not much of a name. It was apparently assigned by a computer from their initials, Whose initials? ...oh.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Auction
On 26 Nov 2008, at 04:46, Pavitra wrote: On Tuesday 25 November 2008 01:27:59 pm Elliott Hird wrote: time, unless the winner has transferred the VP to him. Y'know, you B players really need to get used to the way we use pronouns around here. I started playing B much after Agora. I do not like Spivak.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Auction
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 7:38 AM, Elliott Hird [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I started playing B much after Agora. I do not like Spivak. Funny, I started playing B much before Agora. When it used Spivak.
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Auction
Elliott Hird wrote: On 26 Nov 2008, at 04:46, Pavitra wrote: On Tuesday 25 November 2008 01:27:59 pm Elliott Hird wrote: time, unless the winner has transferred the VP to him. Y'know, you B players really need to get used to the way we use pronouns around here. I started playing B much after Agora. I do not like Spivak. I've never used Spivak by choice. English has perfectly good gender-neutral third person singular pronouns: they, them etc. (Nor are these some kind of PC invention of the 20th century; they occur used in this way in Shakespeare, the King James bible and Jane Austen. I recommend the discussion on Language Log (online), or the Merriam-Webster Usage Dictionary.) Michael
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Auction
On 26 Nov 2008, at 22:41, Michael Norrish wrote: I've never used Spivak by choice. English has perfectly good gender-neutral third person singular pronouns: they, them etc. (Nor are these some kind of PC invention of the 20th century; they occur used in this way in Shakespeare, the King James bible and Jane Austen. I recommend the discussion on Language Log (online), or the Merriam-Webster Usage Dictionary.) The First Speaker... speaks! Now can we get rid of Spivak?
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Auction
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 16:04, Elliott Hird [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 26 Nov 2008, at 22:41, Michael Norrish wrote: I've never used Spivak by choice. English has perfectly good gender-neutral third person singular pronouns: they, them etc. (Nor are these some kind of PC invention of the 20th century; they occur used in this way in Shakespeare, the King James bible and Jane Austen. I recommend the discussion on Language Log (online), or the Merriam-Webster Usage Dictionary.) The First Speaker... speaks! Now can we get rid of Spivak? I second this motion. It worked for B. BobTHJ
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Auction
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 11:19 PM, Roger Hicks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Now can we get rid of Spivak? I second this motion. It worked for B. they is fine for unknown referents, but I'm not going to say I transfer a prop to ais523 because they did a fine job in their judgement. We could of course revert to standard English and use pronouns appropriate for players' actual genders. But, why?
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Auction
On Wednesday 26 November 2008 10:19:56 pm Roger Hicks wrote: On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 16:04, Elliott Hird [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 26 Nov 2008, at 22:41, Michael Norrish wrote: I've never used Spivak by choice. English has perfectly good gender-neutral third person singular pronouns: they, them etc. (Nor are these some kind of PC invention of the 20th century; they occur used in this way in Shakespeare, the King James bible and Jane Austen. I recommend the discussion on Language Log (online), or the Merriam-Webster Usage Dictionary.) The First Speaker... speaks! Now can we get rid of Spivak? I second this motion. It worked for B. Strongly tempting, but I still disagree. All politics and grammar aside, Spivak has become a distinctive part of Agoran culture. A lot of geeksquee(*), on my part at least, would be lost by its removal. (*) I just invented this word because I couldn't think of one to mean what I meant: the feeling of inordinate glee you get from an obscure reference, like that one time on Family Guy with the MC Escher rap video. (Extra special points if you get the rather subtle Hofstadter reference in that last comma-delimited clause.) Pavitra
Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Auction
On Tuesday 25 November 2008 01:27:59 pm Elliott Hird wrote: time, unless the winner has transferred the VP to him. Y'know, you B players really need to get used to the way we use pronouns around here.
