On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 9:45 PM, omd wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 9:43 PM, Sean Hunt
> wrote:
>>> It was TtDF.
>>
>> There is nothing saying you can't withdraw an intent to a DF.
>
> There is very little reason to believe you can. Or in any other
> forum, as your arguments mention, but espe
Proposal: Inclusive proposal competitions (AI=3)
Change the power of Rule 2431 (Proposal Competitions) to 1, and amend
it to read:
Any player CAN, with Agoran Consent, initiate a Proposal
Competition with a specified Objective. Only one Competition may
be in progress at a time.
On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 9:33 PM, omd wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 9:32 PM, omd wrote:
>> I think we need more gameplay. Although the points won through a
>> Proposal Competition are rather useless at the moment, still -
>>
>> I intend, with Agoran Consent, to initiate a Proposal Competition.
I think we need more gameplay. Although the points won through a
Proposal Competition are rather useless at the moment, still -
I intend, with Agoran Consent, to initiate a Proposal Competition.
The objective shall be to create at least one new rule.
On 2014-10-20 00:31, Alex Smith wrote:
> As such, I'm instead going to make a political/tactical move. This is my
> Brief on the ongoing Moot:
> {{{
> FALSE. G.'s and Eritivus' reasonings are both incorrect.
> }}}
>
I submit the following brief for the ongoing Moot:
{{{
I recommend FALSE for the r
On 20 October 2014 08:31, Alex Smith wrote:
> On Mon, 2014-10-20 at 02:13 -0400, omd wrote:
> > So, my first nontrivial Brief for the first nontrivial Moot. Compared
> > to past judicial arguments, this one really is pretty unique in two
> > respects.
> >
> > The first is the futility of the arg
