For each ordinary Agoran Decision currently in existence, I intend,
with 2 support, to make it democratic. With the ability to create
players with arbitrary castes by announcement, I don't trust the
ordinary voting system to be at all fair at the moment, and I'll
continue making such intents until
I wrote:
> Yally wrote:
> > I intend, with support, to initiate an election for Clerk of the Courts.
>
> I support; even though the current political situation is such that Murphy
> will likely win no matter what the plausible circumstances (and I will
> likely vote for em), periodic elections feel
I call for judgement on the statement "Interpreting 'If ... then' in the
logical sense: If this statement is true, then it is possible for ais523 to win
the game by announcement."
--
ais523
Quazie wrote:
> I register IFF at least three players support.
Wow, welcome back Quazie! I support.
--
ais523
Wooble wrote:
(snip)
> As soon as possible
> after a first-class player becomes party to this agreement for the
> first time the SoA CAN and SHALL create a Digit Ranch and three Water Rights
> Vouchers in their possession.
(snip)
> 17. Unless otherwise specified, a player performs an action defined
Taral wrote:
> I award 20 points to Murphy as contestmaster of the FRC.
> The AAA is no longer a contest. The reading of the rule is a bit
> strange here, but I'm going to say Wooble doesn't care. No points.
> I'm going to exercise a bit of prerogative with the other two. I
> didn't see any substa
Goethe wrote:
> I intend to deputize for the Herald to award the title of Minister
> without Portfolio to ais523 (for eir recent coup).
Wrong patent title. I already have MWoP and cannot gain a second copy;
instead, I believe the Herald is (or will soon be) obligated to award
me a sixth copy of C
I NoV against Sgeo for violating rule 1750 by failing to read the
ruleset during Read the Ruleset week, and also failing to
understand or to carefully weigh the consequences of this failure.
Arguments: MMI describes SHOULD this way:
{{{
Before failing to perform
the described act
Yally wrote:
> Hey, what about me? I'm not listed as a player.
CoE against the recent Registrar's Report: Yally is a player.
--
ais523
Taral:
> On Sat, Feb 14, 2009 at 1:07 PM, comex wrote:
> > I intend to appeal this with two support. The judge did not address
> > the debate about a proposal's document-ness in any way, but assumed
> > that a proposal is immutable without addressing any of the arguments
> > about the matter.
>
comex wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 14, 2009 at 1:31 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
> > 2376: FALSE
> >
> > I accept Goethe's gratuitous arguments regarding Rule 754. comex's
> > scam legislation also fails to address the obvious and significant
> > ramifications of its claim (particularly the impact on an in-proc
The PNP wrote:
> NUM C I AI SUBMITTER TITLE
I vote as follows:
> 6086 D 0 2.0 Tiger Protectorate Anarchy
AGAINST
> 6087 D 1 3.0 Pavitra Strict Priority
AGAINST. As the current proposal mess shows, past judgements >
common sense is probably not what we want. I'd
I terminate 6069.
--
ais523
I terminate the Silly Hats pledge.
--
ais523
The PNP wrote:
> NUM C I AI SUBMITTER TITLE
I vote as follows:
> 6070 D 1 2.0 Murphy Limited liability
PRESENT; I suspect it won't matter either way, because partnerships are
probably due for an overhaul.
> 6071 O 1 1.5 ais523 Eagle-eyed
FORx8
> 6072 O 1 1.0 Go
comex wrote:
> Well, if you're going to treat me like a criminal-- ehird! we may as
> well make the best of the situation.
> I intend, with two support, to make the decision to adopt proposal
> 6062 democratic.
I support. (Who would have guessed that a simple milking rule would be
so controversia
The PNP wrote:
> NUM C I AI SUBMITTER TITLE
> 6060 D 1 2.0 Wooble rest creation 2.0
PRESENT
> 6061 D 1 2.0 ais523 Limited Point Transfer
FOR; if this fails, I'll try to submit a better-worded version
> 6062 O 1 1.0 ais523 Social experiment
PRESENT
On Mon, 2009-01-19 at 01:30 -0800, Ed Murphy wrote:
> === CFJ 2335 (Interest Index = 2)
> ehird has been sentenced in CFJ 2326 as a direct result of a
> message published by OscarMeyr.
> === CFJ 2336 (Interest Index = 2) =
I'd just written several pages worth of arguments and judgements
for CFJs 2276a to 2278a, then accidentally hit the back button
on the mouse here and my web browser deleted them.
I'll repeat the intents here, because the one for CFJ 227a is
still on my clipboard and I can more or less remeber the
Murphy wrote:
> Parties to this contract are Murphy, root, Zefram, Wooble, ais523,
> ehird, Pavitra, avpx, comex, Quazie, 0x44, Charles, and Warrigal;
> all of these are first-class players of Agora, so the maximum points
> this contest can award in a given week is 5*12 = 60. Per clause 5a,
> I aw
Let's get the uncontroversial one out of the way first.
CFJ 2288: "The Vote Market is a contract."
I judge TRUE on CFJ 2288, pending further evidence of
why it wouldn't be; feel free to appeal this or call a
new CFJ if further evidence of why it wouldn't be comes
to light. Regardless of what its
comex wrote:
> I nominate ais523 as Notary.
Set off a 3-week-long Holiday, and I may accept this.
For now, though, I'm too busy in RL to be able to produce
timely reports; therefore, I decline.
--
ais523
ehird wrote:
> I vote for myself because I am the Werewolf.
Well, either you're crazy, or you're correct.
I vote for ehird in the Werewolves contest.
--
ais523
BobTHJ wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 11:12, Warrigal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I see one way this panel can avoid breaking any rules. With the
> > support of two of BobTHJ, ais523, and H. CotC Murphy, I intend to send
> > the following message on behalf of judge of CFJ 2273a: "This panel
>
Warrigal wrote:
> I will not support this judgement, as I support AFFIRM only. CotC
> Murphy, assuming you also would only support AFFIRM, I suggest that
> you recuse this panel, as it clearly is not going to assign a
> judgement any time soon.
I intend, with 2 support, to a criminal case against W
Warrigal wrote:
> I see one way this panel can avoid breaking any rules. With the
> support of two of BobTHJ, ais523, and H. CotC Murphy, I intend to send
> the following message on behalf of judge of CFJ 2273a: "This panel
> recuses itself from CFJ 2273a." BobTHJ and ais523, please support; it
> w
Murphy wrote:
> 2282: FALSE
>
> Even if the scam clause converting annotations into amendments
> was added to the rules, any reasonable definition of "annotation"
> requires that the annotation was true, which this purported
> annotation was not.
I intend to appeal this judgement with 2 support,
ehird wrote:
> On 23/11/2008, Charles Reiss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I intend, with the support of the people, to amend the PBA by
> > replacing section 17 with:
> > {{
> > 17. Every midnight (UTC) that the PBA had zero of a given Eligible
> > Currency for the
> > prior 24 hours, that currenc
ais523 wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-11-20 at 10:27 -0500, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
> > This message serves to resolve the Agoran Decision to choose the
> > holder of the Clerk of the Courts office. The option selected by
> > Agora is .
> This is entirely incorrect. Surely it was a tie?
Actually...
I CoE on
Sgeo wrote:
> It seems to me that ais523 never awarded P1 and P3-P100 the Patent
> Title Left in a Huff, as e is required to do. I call an inquiry CFJ on
> the following statement:
> {"P2, at least you get the little lowercase w in the Registrar's
> Report, and a Patent Title, as compensation." co
I resign Registrar.
I resign Notary.
Sorry, I'll probably take them back up in a while if nobody
else seems to want them, but Agora mail's coming faster than
I can process it at the moment and I can't keep the reports
up to date. Given that I can't produce an up-to-date report
for either office t
Did I ever vote on 5946-5947?
I vote AGAINST on the Agoran Decision on whether to
adopt proposal 5946, and FOR the Agoran Decision on
whether to adopt proposal 5947. These will be invalid
if I've already voted on those decisions.
--
ais523
Murphy wrote:
> ais523 wrote:
> > I see no reason why a degree defined at power 1 can't be awarded
> > with an AI 1.5 proposal.
> True, but highly non-intuitive. Submit a proposal to append something
> like "Degrees are generally awarded by proposal (with adoption index
> high enough to satisfy t
Warrigal wrote:
> This is a proposal, and it will remain a proposal after I publish it,
> but it will not become a proposal, whether or not I say it will,
> because it can't become what it already is: "Repeal Rule 639, 107,
> 683, 208, 2196, 955, 106, or 1950."
> This is more of a proposal than th
Taral wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 3:59 AM, Alexander Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I submit the following Terrible Proposal, AI=3, II=1:
> > {{{
> > Remove all instances of "without objection" from rules with
> > Power at most 3.
> >
I submit the following Terrible Proposal, AI=3, II=1:
{{{
Remove all instances of "without objection" from rules with
Power at most 3.
Remove all instances of "without N objections", for each
integer N, from rules with Power at most 3.
}}}
--
ais523
Goethe wrote:
> I go on hold.
> I suggest a new election for Herald.
I intend to deputise for the Herald for the purposes of awarding me
two instances of Champion.
--
ais523
Goethe wrote:
> On Sat, 8 Nov 2008, Ed Murphy wrote:
> > Detail: http://zenith.homelinux.net/cotc/viewcase.php?cfj=2247
> >
> > == CFJ 2247 ==
> >
> >The Notary SHALL publish the fact that ais523 owns a Pain called
> >"xyzzy" as part
Pavitra wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 7:11 AM, Alex Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > For last week's Enigma puzzle "Elementary Arithmetic", I award points as
> > follows (btw, these are in order of submission, from the author's
> > original solution to the last submitted solution):
> > 4 to e
I spend C E G to increase 0x44's caste to Delta.
--
ais523
I submit the following Buy Ticket (8VP), targetted at comex
(i.e. it can only be filled by em): transfer a 6 Ranch to me.
--
ais523
Murphy wrote:
> I really don't want to have to load all the details of this situation
> back into short-term memory.
>
> The AFO and I agree to the following: { ais523 CAN act on behalf of the
> vote collector for Proposal 5707 to resolve that decision. Murphy CAN
> terminate this contract by annou
Goethe wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Oct 2008, Ed Murphy wrote:
> > Gratuitous Arguments by Pavitra:
> > An equitable resolution of the situation would be for ais523 to
> > destroy one 3 Crop and one 9 Crop.
>
> I hereby solicit comments from AAA parties (esp. ais523) on the equitability
> of Pavitra's propo
Taral wrote:
> I harvest 955, an amended power 3 rule, for 8 crops.
If I have at least two 9 crops and at least two 5 crops, I harvest
995, the number of a recently-amended power 3 rule, for 8 random
crops.
--
ais523
BobTHJ wrote:
> I intend with Agoran consent to set the Score Index to 2.
I support. I look forward to the next Scorekeepor's Report,
given how many points have been flying around lately.
--
ais523
Wooble wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 6:00 PM, Alex Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Date of this Report: Wed 15 Oct 2008
> > Date of last Report: Thu 9 Oct 2008
> CoE: those dates are both a week off.
Admitted. I thought I fixed that; I must have fixed it in the wrong place
though.
> Co
The PNP wrote:
> NUM C I AI SUBMITTER TITLE
I vote as follows:
> 5806 D 0 2.0 Wooble Stuck Offices
FOR
--
ais523
ais523 wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-10-21 at 09:56 -0700, The PerlNomic Partnership wrote:
>> NUM C I AI SUBMITTER TITLE
> I vote as follows (N.B. I can't remember if I've voted already, if I
> have these will be invalid):
>> 5803 D 1 3.0 ais523 Pragmatic Ratification
> FOR
>> 58
The PNP wrote:
> NUM C I AI SUBMITTER TITLE
> 5740 O 1 1.0 Pavitra More Reasonable Monster Deputy v.2
FORx2. I've had fun messing around with this, but all scams have to
end some time.
> 5741 D 1 3.0 Murphy Namespace conflicts (players)
Endorse Goethe
> 5742 O 1
comex wrote:
> The AFO votes TETRAHEDRON on Proposals 5732-3, as do I.
I transfer one Chit to the AFO, specifying PRESENT.
--
ais523
TTttPF
ais523 wrote:
> I vote TETRAHEDRON on the Agoran decision about whether to adopt proposal
> 5732. TETRAHEDRON is a conditional vote; I will reveal what it means later in
> the voting period.
Actually, I retract that vote and vote TETRAHEDRONx2 on proposal 5732.
--
ais523
The PNP wrote:
> NUM C I AI SUBMITTER TITLE
> 5732 O 0 1.0 tusho Good Proposal
> 5733 O 0 1.0 tusho Bad Proposal
I may as well turn this into a bit of an experiment.
I vote TETRAHEDRON on the Agoran decision about whether to adopt proposal 5732.
TETRAHEDRO
I submit the following arguments on the CFJs which Murphy's website shows will
be assigned the numbers 2203-2205:
An excerpt from Rule 2172:
{{{
The option selected shall be considered to be clearly identified
if and only if the truth or falsity of the specified
condition(s) can
I judge CFJ 2196 as follows:
Wooble's arguments are correct; I judge TRUE.
--
ais523
Murphy:
> In any case, I deny this CoE (to clear up my obligation to respond
> to it), and will let the relevant CFJ take care of it from here.
I publically state that Murphy's attempt to resolve proposal 5707 is subject to
a CFJ (whose number has not yet been assigned) and therefore cannot self-r
woggle:
> It's a CoE against the statement's self-ratifying claim as to who
> published it. Anyways, you can't deputise for that because the
> Assessor did not publish the original document, so e is not obliged to
> respond to CoEs against it. The assessor's deputy, the Monster,
> probably is, howe
Murphy wrote:
> ais523 wrote:
> > Voting results for Proposal 5707:
> > CoE: The decision was not Democratic; woggle's intent failed as e was
> > attempting to make a non-existent Agoran Decision democratic.
> Denied. A decision does not cease to exist when its voting period
> ends. Again, see C
Murphy:
> Especially with democratization in play, root's vote is
> unambiguous: SELL (5 VP - AGAINST) x 3, unbought, thus
> (due to democratization) a single AGAINST.
How can root's vote be unambiguous yet Wooble's vote be ambiguous? They were
both of the same nature. Or is whether a conditional
Murphy wrote:
> Claim of error: The proposal was democratized, so many of these
> votes were invalid, changing the overall outcome. (This also
> turns off self-ratification of the above.)
I act on behalf of the Monster to act on behalf of the Assessor to post the
following denial of that CoE:
{{
I join the Fantasy Rules Contest.
--
ais523
Voting results for Proposal 5707:
CoE: The decision was not Democratic; woggle's intent failed as e was
attempting to make a non-existent Agoran Decision democratic.
--
ais523
On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 12:19 PM, Alexander Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I CFJ on the following statement, barring root:
>
> "A vote that relies on terminology defined in a public contract
> satisfies R683(c)'s requirement to clearly identify the option
> sel
Wooble wrote:
> I CFJ on the following statements, barring ais523:
I CFJ on the following statement, barring root:
"A vote that relies on terminology defined in a public contract
satisfies R683(c)'s requirement to clearly identify the option
selected by the voter, even if the voter misunderstood
I submit the following proposal (AI=3, II=1, Title="A completely terrible
proposal"):
{{{
Modify all rules by removing every instance of the word "not" (or "NOT").
}}}
--
ais523
woggle wrote:
> Since proposal numbers are unique and AFAIK it is only possible to
> initiate a decision on whether to adopt a particular proposal once, I
> think my intent was unambiguous, the impossibility of it being
> resolved at the time it was made notwithstanding.
I intend, without objection
I intend, with 2 support, to initiate a criminal CFJ alleging that
ais523 violated Rule 2143 by failing to publish a Registrar's Report
last week (eir last report was published on 1 Sept.)
If this becomes a criminal case, I submit the following arguments:
I plead UNAWARE; I know that reports have
As root points out, it's possible that my second attempt failed due to an
incorrect tally, so here I'm making a third attempt to resolve the situation.
It now seems likely that root's and BobTHJ's votes failed altogether due to
being ambiguous, and thus the result is different. Either this attem
I act on behalf of the Monster to deputise for the Assessor to send the
following message:
{{{
This message hereby resolves the Agoran Decision on whether to adopt proposal
5707.
The decision chosen by Agora was ADOPTED.
The votes were as follows:
ais523 FORx2
BobTHJ FORx5
comex FORx1
Dvorak He
comex wrote:
> Rule 2193/12 (Power=1)
> The Monster
CoE: You accidentally duplicated part of this rule.
--
ais523
Mutphy wrote:
> OscarMeyr wrote:
>> I think the subsidy is now at 9. I request subsidization.
> Likewise.
If the subsidy is 9, I request subsidisation.
--
ais523
On Fri, 2008-08-15 at 01:17 -0400, Sgeo wrote:
> I make the following pledge:
>
> {
> This is a pledge, and a public contract. If I am on an appeals panel,
> any member of an appeals panel that I'm on may, by announcement, act
> on my behalf to cause me to support a decision in that appeals case.
Zefram wrote:
> I hereby vote:
I spend A, C, E to reduce Zefram's VVLOD by 1.
I flip my key to F#.
--
ais523
Zefram wrote:
> NUM FL AI SUBMITTER TITLE
I vote as follows:
> 5651 O1 1Quazie Left in a lull
AGAINSTx6
> 5652 D1 2comex Awful proposal
FOR if there are an even number of occurrences of the letter
'e' in public messages between now and the moment this decision
is resol
Goethe wrote:
> I vote 4xFOR (4 more votes FOR) proposal 5648. Note: it is possible
> this will fail.
I attempt to vote FORx5 on the Agoran Decision about whether
to adopt proposal 5648.
With 2 support, I intend to make that decision democratic.
--
ais523
Someone wrote:
> --Ivan "Nothing I say is true!" Hope CXXVII
I CoE on this signature, because at least one thing that Ivan Hope CXXVII has
said is true. (The signature is arguably self-ratifying; if it is, then we'd be
in for a world of pain if it did self-ratify.)
--
ais523
comex wrote:
> Without three objections, I intend to amend the Vote Market contract
> by adding the following section:
I object.
> Without three objections, I intend to amend the Vote Market contract
> by replacing "it's cost" with "its cost" in item 12.
I don't object to this one.
--
ais523
Zefram wrote:
> The +12:00 means that it occurs 12 hours earlier than that date occurs
> in UTC.
Well, in that case, I publically state that I did not have Internet access
during Agora's Birthday. This prevented me from participating in the fora
(which prevented me from fulfilling a pseudo-duty und
Happy Birthday, Agora!
Doesn't +1200 push it from midday on the 30th to midday on the 1st?
--
ais523
Acting on behalf of ehird, I cause ehird to transfer 19 VP to comex.
Acting on behalf of ehird, I cause ehird to transfer 28 VP to ais523.
--
ais523
BobTHJ wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 2:03 PM, Alexander Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> BobTHJ wrote:
>>> Buy Ticket
>>> Cost: A number of VP equal to 1/3 (rounded down) of the filler's
>>> current Voting Limit on Ordinary proposals.
>
I perform the following action on behalf of ehird:
{{{I file a CFJ on the statement "This CFJ was filed by ehird".}}}
--
ais523
I submit the following proposal (AI=2, II=1,
Title="It wasn't that interesting anyway):
Repeal rule 2153.
In rule 1607, amend "its interest index" to
{{{
whether it is disinterested or interested (it is disinterested if and
only if its proposer said it was in the message that submitted it, an
I propose the following (AI=1,II=1 (ugh),Title=Right to Vanish):
Append the following to rule 869:
{{{
A player can "vanish" by announcement. Upon doing so, all assets
e controls are transferred to the Lost and Found Department, e
ceases to be bound by any contracts e is currently bound by, e
I submit the following proposal (Title="another probably unsuccessful attempt
at registering ehird because e asked nicely", AI=1, II=0):
{{{
ehird is hereby registered.
The pledge that contains the text "Anything may act on
behalf of ehird by announcement." is terminated.
}}}
--
ais523
Evidence on CFJ 2046:
comex wrote:
> Actually, if I deregistered ehird before e attempted to change the
> Manroster, ehird was no longer a player in the Manroster, so e was not
> able to change it.
Ah, good catch. In that case, I may have been wrong about the current
contents of the Manroster, but
Just to help avoid another Annabel crisis: the person I know as Sgeo
from IRC, who is apparently not the same person as ehird, indeed
claims to have just registered on Agora; therefore I conclude that
the player Sgeo is highly unlikely to be the ex-player ehird in
disguise.
--
ais523
I act on behalf of ehird to cause ehird to submit a CFJ on the statement
{{This CFJ exists.}}.
I'm sufficiently confused now, what with all the name changes and everything,
that I'm not at all sure whether this works or not.
(Also, I secretly hope that the CotC will assign it to someone, who then
I join the Points Relay Service.
I request a cashout of 5 PV.
--
ais523
Goethe wrote:
> H. Notary, can you provide me with the ehrid contract and membership as
> it stood at the time of this CFJ (or confirm that the text and membership
> on the website you've provided was accurate to that time)? -Goethe
I submit the following evidence on CFJ 2046:
The contract menti
Without objection, I intend to terminate the pledge which allows
anything to act on behalf of ehird.
--
ais523
I initiate a criminal case against comex for violating rule 2185
by failing to assign a judgement to an open and applicable judicial
question of CFJ 1996 as soon as possible.
I initiate a criminal case against comex for violating rule 2185
by failing to assign a judgement to an open and applicable
Zefram almost wrote:
> NUM FL AI SUBMITTER TITLE
I vote as follows:
> 5569 D0 2ais523 At Most One Monster per Switch
FOR
> 5570 D1 3BobTHJ Chambers
AGAINST, and I pledge to vote AGAINST any similar proposal in the
near future unless its II is at least 2, changing the pr
Deputising for the Herald, I award ais523 the Patent Title of Champion.
Deputising for the Herald, I award ais523 the Patent Title of Minister without
Portfolio.
--
ais523
I flip my Hawkishness to Hanging.
--
ais523
ehird wrote:
> I act on behalf of ais523 to deregister.
One possibility I can think of for what happened there is that
you acted on behalf of me to deregister you. (And maybe I can
actually do that, given your recent pledge...)
If you did succeed in causing me to deregister (which strikes me
as be
ehird wrote:
> I agree to the following, which actually works:
> {
> This is a pledge.
> Anything may act on behalf of ehird by announcement.
> }
I act on behalf of ehird to act on behalf of Teh Cltohed Mna Ni
Teh Drak Woh Wtaches Adn Nevre Sasy A Wrod Execpt Wehn Psoessed
Yb Dmeons Mcuhly Precocup
BobTHJ wrote:
> Federal Subsidy: 7
I request subsidy.
Murphy wrote:
> == CFJ 2030 ==
>
> It is possible for ehird to cause woggle to vote by announcing
> 'On behalf of woggle: woggle retracts eir votes on proposal 5568
> and votes AGAINST x 6 on proposal 5568'.
>
> ===
woggle wrote:
> I intend, with the support of BobTHJ and ais523, to send the following
> message on behalf of the panel in 2026a:
> {
> This panel judges REMAND.
>
> H. Murphy's argument that clause 0 could be removed without changing
> anything else is irrelevant. It is there, and if it is possib
As there have not been three objections, then if Enigma is not
a contest I make it into a contest with me as contestmaster.
I would like to remind Enigma members that the contest depends
on your puzzle submissions to run! Submit interesting and
moderately difficult puzzles, and you may gain points
1 - 100 of 210 matches
Mail list logo
