Goethe wrote:
root wrote:
This seems to indicate that a partnership's obligations are only
enforceable to the extent that the partnership's members desire them
to be enforced. Any thoughts?
There are two distinct sets of obligations here.
The first are the set of obligations that the
Zefram wrote:
Ed Murphy wrote:
The only difference was the spurious line break in Rule 2139,
right?
Line break in the middle of a word, yes.
I just went back and checked my local message store;
neither the submission nor the purported distribution
contained the spurious line break,
Ian Kelly wrote:
Thus, it is clear to me that the phrase by announcement must be
interpreted according to its Rule 478 definition, regardless of any
qualification or decoration.
I think this is in error. Even if it is forbidden to locally redefine
by announcement (which I will accept is
proposal: enforce agreements
AI: 1
{{{
Amend rule 1742 by deleting the sentence
If a Civil CFJ is called by anyone who is not party to that
agreement, then it lacks standing and shall be dismissed.
}}}
-zefram
Does this mean that Agora can judge agreements that aren't made
Roger Hicks wrote:
Does this mean that Agora can judge agreements that aren't made under Agoran
law? ie. my Bob's Quality Cards agreement?
That depends entirely on the interpretation of the first paragraph
of R1742.
-zefram
proto-proposal: define registration
AI: 1
{{{
Amend rule 869 by replacing the text:
A person who is not currently registered as a player and is not
prohibited from registering is permitted to register.
A person registers or deregisters by announcement.
Whenever a
Zefram wrote:
Amend rule 1742 by deleting the sentence
If a Civil CFJ is called by anyone who is not party to that
agreement, then it lacks standing and shall be dismissed.
Yet another terrible idea. What right does Agora have to stick
its nose in an agreement when all its
On 6/9/07, Zefram [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ian Kelly wrote:
Thus, it is clear to me that the phrase by announcement must be
interpreted according to its Rule 478 definition, regardless of any
qualification or decoration.
I think this is in error. Even if it is forbidden to locally redefine
by
On 6/8/07, Kerim Aydin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
An example of the two tiers: Zefram and root form a partnership,
it registers as a player, and the partnership fails to perform
some required action. Anyone may bring suit against the partnership,
and the partnership as a whole is dinged.
But
Thought I ought to take a look at slimming the judicial system.
Here's the first snip of the pruning shears; there's more to come.
proto-proposal: no compulsion
AI: 1
{{{
Repeal rules 1509 and 1830.
[Orders to Compel don't actually achieve anything: they impose an
obligation that the target
proto-proposal: simplify Judicial Orders
AI: 1
{{{
Repeal rule 1803.
Amend rule 1794 by appending to item (c) the sentence A Judicial
Oredr is executed by announcement..
[We don't need the complex execution mechanism: announcement will do
fine. The second paragraph of rule 1803 is vacuous, as
proto-proposal: execution of timing orders
AI: 1
{{{
Amend rule 1794 by replacing executed by any person with executed by
any person by announcement.
[The mechanism to execute timing orders was not specified.]
}}}
-zefram
proto-proposal: report Agoran Contracts
AI: 2
{{{
Amend rule 2109 by replacing the paragraph:
The CotC is required to keep track of all Agoran Contracts.
with:
The CotC's monthly report includes all Agoran Contracts.
[Our lone Agoran Contract is presently invisible.]
}}}
proto-proposal: simplify legislative orders
AI: 1
{{{
Repeal rule 1891.
[Sections (a) and (b) are implicit in the definition of legislative
orders in R1794. Section (c) just seems pointless.]
}}}
-zefram
On 6/9/07, Zefram [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I hereby cause the Hanging Judge to be deregistered, provided that
this does not cause me to cease to be a player.
What grants you the power to deregister the Hanging Judge?
--
C. Maud Image (Michael Slone)
Agora: a self-supporting cycle of evil.
quazie wrote:
Zefram wrote:
proto-proposal: CFJ by announcement
AI: 2
{{{
Amend rule 991 by replacing by submitting a Call for Judgement (CFJ)
to the Clerk of the Courts with by publishing a Call for Judgement
(CFJ).
Amend rule 897 by deleting the paragraph that begins The Clerk of the
Ed Murphy wrote:
quazie wrote:
Zefram wrote:
proto-proposal: CFJ by announcement
AI: 2
{{{
Amend rule 991 by replacing by submitting a Call for Judgement (CFJ)
to the Clerk of the Courts with by publishing a Call for Judgement
(CFJ).
Amend rule 897 by deleting the paragraph that begins The
On 6/9/07, Zefram [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The final paragraph of rule 869. The Hanging Judge is clearly no longer
a person, according to recent jurisprudence and rule 2145.
My copy of the ruleset only has effects of proposals up to 4975.
Would you mind quoting the text you have in mind?
--
On 6/9/07, Michael Slone [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 6/9/07, Ed Murphy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That would carry a little more weight if the CotC were actually
performing that duty. Anyway, surely the easiest way to locate
CFJs is the database?
The database is a pain to use. In particular,
19 matches
Mail list logo
