On Thu, 21 Feb 2008, Ed Murphy wrote:
> Rule 2019 does say "SHALL do X by announcement", where X = "randomly
> assign each Minister Without Portfolio a different Prerogative for the
> upcoming month".
But I don't think it did "at the time of the CFJ", did it? I'm pretty
sure that bugfix was min
On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 7:36 PM, Iammars <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> http://jmcteague.com/mediawikiold/index.php?title=Agora_Nomic_Tailor%27s_Report
> Put it up on my wiki because I decided it was easier than trying to create a
> SVN or other stuff like that.
Is that an invitation to edit it? I
On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 7:35 PM, Iammars <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The key part of Rule 2149/8 is that a message doesn't have to be true, but
> that the person who writes it believes that it is true. comes tries to
> exploit a loophole that he thought would work, so Rule 2149/8 doesn't take
> af
On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 7:36 PM, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Rule 2019 does say "SHALL do X by announcement", where X = "randomly
> assign each Minister Without Portfolio a different Prerogative for the
> upcoming month".
It does now, because we adopted a proposal of Goethe's that fi
root wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 6:37 PM, Benjamin Schultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Much thanks to zefram for eir help and comments on these rulings.
>>
>> CFJ 1890:
>> The Speaker CAN assign prerogatives for the upcoming month in
>> the seven days before the beginning of a mo
http://jmcteague.com/mediawikiold/index.php?title=Agora_Nomic_Tailor%27s_Report
Put it up on my wiki because I decided it was easier than trying to create a
SVN or other stuff like that.
--
-Iammars
www.jmcteague.com
The key part of Rule 2149/8 is that a message doesn't have to be true, but
that the person who writes it believes that it is true. comes tries to
exploit a loophole that he thought would work, so Rule 2149/8 doesn't take
affect here. I proto-judge INNOCENT.
--
-Iammars
www.jmcteague.com
On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 6:37 PM, Benjamin Schultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Much thanks to zefram for eir help and comments on these rulings.
>
> CFJ 1890:
> The Speaker CAN assign prerogatives for the upcoming month in
> the seven days before the beginning of a month.
>
> CFJ 1765 e
On Thu, 21 Feb 2008, Ben Caplan wrote:
> We have here a moral, not a factual, decision. Either choice makes sense;
> which one is _right_?
The general practice is that if two decisions are equally, or close to
similarly "reasonable", then we defer to the judge's call. That is, a
hypothetical App
On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 3:52 PM, Ben Caplan
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > If the agent of Registrar (through Cantus Cygneus) doesn't
> > >satisfy, neither would the agent of a deputy.
> >
> > Nice point. Its validity comes down to the question of how much
> > BobTHJness is e
> > If the agent of Registrar (through Cantus Cygneus) doesn't
> >satisfy, neither would the agent of a deputy.
>
> Nice point. Its validity comes down to the question of how much
> BobTHJness is entailed in the position that I was deputising for.
> As noted above, I think there wa
Kerim Aydin wrote:
>> == CFJ 1895 ==
>>BobTHJ is an R2160 'position'
...
>This Court finds FALSE.
Good analysis.
>> == CFJ 1899 ==
>>BobTHJ CAN register.
...
>First, I offer
On 2/21/08, Zefram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Any case (as the wording seems to say), or just inquiry cases (the
> subject of R591)?
Any case. Without 2 objections is a high bar.
--
Taral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you."
-- Unknown
Taral wrote:
>Amend Rule 591 by adding this paragraph at the end:
>
> The Clerk of the Courts CAN disqualify a player from a case
> without 2 objections.
Any case (as the wording seems to say), or just inquiry cases (the
subject of R591)?
-zefram
On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 3:39 PM, Kerim Aydin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> A set of proto-judgements...
I suggest you resubmit the first as a thesis for a D.N.Phil.
[I have substantially changed my opinion as a result of the recent
conversations]
A set of proto-judgements...
On Mon, 18 Feb 2008, Ed Murphy wrote:
> == CFJ 1895 ==
>BobTHJ is an R2160 'position'
Agora, by long tradition, is fundam
root wrote:
> Then what, may I ask, was the point in issuing the claim of error?
Because it gives em an excuse to continue presenting eir interpretation
as if it were judicially established fact. :)
On Thu, 21 Feb 2008, Ben Caplan wrote:
> I never realized before just how much *gratuitous* information is in
> the report. Apparently Agorans enjoy paperwork. Technically, that
> report could be shortened to:
>
> -
> IADoP's Organization Chart
It used to be (not that long ago? I didn't noti
On Thursday 21 February 2008 10:57 Geoffrey Spear wrote:
> When the elections in question were resolved, it was noted that the
> first attempt to resolve the votes on those proposals has
> self-ratified so in every case the earlier date was correct.
Ok.
> I think I've actually got an up-to-date IA
On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 2:45 AM, Zefram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ian Kelly wrote:
> > 5441 5442 5443 5444 5445
> >
> >BobTHJ A4A A
>
> Claim of error: BobTHJ cannot have cast votes on these proposals,
> because e was not an eligible voter due to no
On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 11:47 AM, Ben Caplan
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thursday 21 February 2008 14:11 Geoffrey Spear wrote:
> > I nominate Goethe, OscarMeyr, Pavitra, and Wooble for IADoP.
>
> Hmm...
>
> What happened with pikhq's nominations on (16 or 19) January? I've
> spent the last
On Thursday 21 February 2008 14:11 Geoffrey Spear wrote:
> I nominate Goethe, OscarMeyr, Pavitra, and Wooble for IADoP.
Hmm...
What happened with pikhq's nominations on (16 or 19) January? I've
spent the last half-hour trying to sort it out. Was it just left
ambiguous?
On Thursday 21 February 2008 4:17 Ed Murphy wrote:
> (e) Any additional information defined by the rules as
> essential parameters.
(e) Any essential parameters for that decision.
> If an Agoran decision has an adoption index, then the following
> are essential
Benjamin Schultz wrote:
>My search-fu through my saved messages is failing me. Would you
>please throw me a bone, er, precedent?
CFJ 1765.
-zefram
24 matches
Mail list logo
