BobTHJ wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 17:23, comex wrote:
>> I deposit 2xDistrib-u-Matic, 1xDebate-o-Matic, 1xLocal Election in the
>> IBA for a total of 170zm.
>>
> Fails. The IBA is neither a player nor a contest and therefore can't own
> cards.
>
> Perhaps we should create a new class of co
Roger Hicks wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 17:18, comex wrote:
>> Proto (AI=2):
>> {
>> Amend Rule 2259 (Basic Hand Limits) by inserting, before the last
>> paragraph, the following paragraph:
>>
>> Special Deck Limit (SDL) is an entity switch, which is either
>> null (default) or an in
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 17:23, comex wrote:
> I deposit 2xDistrib-u-Matic, 1xDebate-o-Matic, 1xLocal Election in the
> IBA for a total of 170zm.
>
Fails. The IBA is neither a player nor a contest and therefore can't own cards.
Perhaps we should create a new class of contracts: AOE (Asset Owning
En
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 17:18, comex wrote:
> Proto (AI=2):
> {
> Amend Rule 2259 (Basic Hand Limits) by inserting, before the last
> paragraph, the following paragraph:
>
> Special Deck Limit (SDL) is an entity switch, which is either
> null (default) or an index. An entity with a non-n
Geoffrey Spear wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 4:26 PM, comex wrote:
>> Indeed, I think Agora might be irrevocably broken if email were to
>> cease to exist.
>
> email would platonically start to exist again within 4 weeks, due to AIAN.
While that is possibly one of the best answers to any questi
Geoffrey Spear wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 4:26 PM, comex wrote:
>> Indeed, I think Agora might be irrevocably broken if email were to
>> cease to exist.
>
> email would platonically start to exist again within 4 weeks, due to AIAN.
Only if we consider the existence of email part of the game
On Tue, 11 Aug 2009, comex wrote:
> The whole system would be simpler if
> either everything were a message, or, more practically, everything
> were an action.
Michael used to say (maybe first in a CFJ) "the only action we ever
actually take is sending messages, everything else is just a fanta
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 4:26 PM, comex wrote:
> Indeed, I think Agora might be irrevocably broken if email were to
> cease to exist.
email would platonically start to exist again within 4 weeks, due to AIAN.
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 9:45 PM, comex wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 9:22 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>> No offense taken, I'll be careful of the pattern. Though I'm not sure
>> may was an error in the original (when it was a pragmatic "MAY publish"
>> with no support issues - the pre-great-repeals
2009/8/12 comex :
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 9:22 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>> No offense taken, I'll be careful of the pattern. Though I'm not sure
>> may was an error in the original (when it was a pragmatic "MAY publish"
>> with no support issues - the pre-great-repeals legal system had a lot
>> of
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 9:22 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> No offense taken, I'll be careful of the pattern. Though I'm not sure
> may was an error in the original (when it was a pragmatic "MAY publish"
> with no support issues - the pre-great-repeals legal system had a lot
> of Kelly-influenced "if yo
On Tue, 11 Aug 2009, comex wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 6:04 PM, Pavitra wrote:
>> comex wrote:
>>> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 5:17 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
�1) We somehow forgot about the rising support requirement to publish
� � � multiple NoVs in the same week.
>>>
>>> Didn't forget. Th
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 7:29 PM, Sean Hunt wrote:
> comex wrote:
>> I deposit 2xDistrib-u-Matic, 1xDebate-o-Matic, 1xLocal Election in the
>> IBA for a total of 170zm.
>>
> INVALID; the IBA cannot own crops.
Ugh, what's the point of restricting it to players and contests?
Why contests?
--
-c.
comex wrote:
> Proto (AI=2):
> {
> Amend Rule 2259 (Basic Hand Limits) by inserting, before the last
> paragraph, the following paragraph:
>
> Special Deck Limit (SDL) is an entity switch, which is either
> null (default) or an index. An entity with a non-null SDL is
> known as
comex wrote:
> I deposit 2xDistrib-u-Matic, 1xDebate-o-Matic, 1xLocal Election in the
> IBA for a total of 170zm.
>
INVALID; the IBA cannot own crops.
-coppro
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 4:09 PM, Sean Hunt wrote:
> I harvest 2259 and 1 to turn a 2 ranch into a 1 ranch.
O.o
--
Taral
"Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you."
-- Unknown
The IBA's hand limit is currently zero. That means that all of its
cards will be destroyed next month, which is a pretty urgent problem,
but it's not clear to me how to fix it. There are a few options:
- Do nothing. Everyone will have to get their cards out at the end of
the month. Interesting
2009/8/11 comex :
> 2009/8/2 Edmond Dantes:
>> I register.
>>
>> I have no idea what's going on.
>
> CoE: You may or may not be Edmond Dantes.
>
> 2009/8/3 yuri_dragon_17 :
>> ฉันลงทะเบียน
>
> CoE: You may or may not be yuri_dragon_17.
>
> 2009/7/30 :
>> I register.
>
> CoE: You may or may not be J
Pavitra wrote:
> For an idea of how badly platonism isn't fail-safe, look up the Annabel
> Crisis, due to which ratification was invented.
The concept of ratification dates back to at least Rule 352:
http://agora.qoid.us/rule/352#521323
and a general mechanism was protoed as early as 1998:
ht
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 6:04 PM, Pavitra wrote:
> comex wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 5:17 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
>>> �1) We somehow forgot about the rising support requirement to publish
>>> � � � multiple NoVs in the same week.
>>
>> Didn't forget. The extra NoVs were, IIRC, ILLEGAL but VALID
On Tue, 2009-08-11 at 18:04 -0400, Pavitra wrote:
> comex wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 5:17 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
> >> �1) We somehow forgot about the rising support requirement to publish
> >> � � � multiple NoVs in the same week.
> >
> > Didn't forget. The extra NoVs were, IIRC, ILLEGAL bu
comex wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 5:17 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
>> �1) We somehow forgot about the rising support requirement to publish
>> � � � multiple NoVs in the same week.
>
> Didn't forget. The extra NoVs were, IIRC, ILLEGAL but VALID (because
> the Rule used MAY, which is nearly always a
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 5:17 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
> 1) We somehow forgot about the rising support requirement to publish
> multiple NoVs in the same week.
Didn't forget. The extra NoVs were, IIRC, ILLEGAL but VALID (because
the Rule used MAY, which is nearly always a mistake)
--
-c.
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 15:09, Sean Hunt wrote:
> Roger Hicks wrote:
>> Agoran Agricultural Association
>
> In the future, could you please post the report after the actions? Makes
> it easier on us.
>
Yes sorry. I forgot I had actions to process until after I had sent
the report. The current state
comex wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 3:46 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
>>> On Tue, 11 Aug 2009, Elliott Hird wrote:
2009/8/11 Sgeo :
> I haven't been paying much attention. What offices have you scammed?
CotC, majorly.
>>> Do you mean overriding random assignments to get favorable judges o
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 5:03 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
> Which one was that, again?
http://www.mail-archive.com/agora-busin...@agoranomic.org/msg13200.html
--
-c.
Ed Murphy wrote:
> comex wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 3:46 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
On Tue, 11 Aug 2009, Elliott Hird wrote:
> 2009/8/11 Sgeo :
>> I haven't been paying much attention. What offices have you scammed?
> CotC, majorly.
Do you mean overriding random assignment
Roger Hicks wrote:
> Agoran Agricultural Association
In the future, could you please post the report after the actions? Makes
it easier on us.
Also, you are the Scorekeepor. How come you can't ensure your
revocations of points succeed? This is an equitable contract; taking
reparative action if ne
comex wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 3:46 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
>>> On Tue, 11 Aug 2009, Elliott Hird wrote:
2009/8/11 Sgeo :
> I haven't been paying much attention. What offices have you scammed?
CotC, majorly.
>>> Do you mean overriding random assignments to get favorable judges o
By default the "Recent Events" section at the bottom of any report on
http://nomic.bob-space.com/agoralog.aspx will display all events that
have occurred in the past 30 days. However, you can add a time
variable to the URL set to an integer to display a variable length of
history. For example
http:
On Mon, 2009-08-10 at 16:17 -0400, Pavitra wrote:
> C-walker wrote:
> >> 6432 O 1 1.0 Wooble � � � � � � �Bill of Attainder
> > DENOUNCE COPPRO * the lesser of our voting limits, FOR * my voting
> > limit if e doesn't cast a FOR or an AGAINST vote
>
> I already did the denouncing thing. Overcounte
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 3:46 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
>> On Tue, 11 Aug 2009, Elliott Hird wrote:
>>> 2009/8/11 Sgeo :
I haven't been paying much attention. What offices have you scammed?
>>> CotC, majorly.
>>
>> Do you mean overriding random assignments to get favorable judges or
>> something mor
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 4:18 PM, ais523 wrote:
>> Of course. All of Agora depends on email to exist. Contracts depend
>> on language. I agree with you that it doesn't mean that R1728 clause is
>> wholly broken because nothing exists in a vacuum.
>
> The only places email is even mentioned in Ago
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 10:19 AM, Roger Hicks wrote:
> Origin IP is 64.17.129.3 or possibly 64.17.152.116. There were two
> messages within the past 15 minutes, both with the subject "BobTHJ's
> actions (automated)".
Your origin IP is smh*.opentransfer.com. Only one was received at my
end, the one
On Sun, 2009-08-09 at 16:16 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> On Sun, 9 Aug 2009, comex wrote:
> > It says "depends on", not "depends only on". If one or more factors
> > is necessary to preserve the existence of an entity, and one of them
> > is the contract, then its existence depends on the contract.
G. wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Aug 2009, Elliott Hird wrote:
>> 2009/8/11 Sgeo :
>>> I haven't been paying much attention. What offices have you scammed?
>> CotC, majorly.
>
> Do you mean overriding random assignments to get favorable judges or
> something more insidious? Because the former is just an o
On Tue, 11 Aug 2009, Elliott Hird wrote:
> 2009/8/11 Sgeo :
>> I haven't been paying much attention. What offices have you scammed?
>
> CotC, majorly.
Do you mean overriding random assignments to get favorable judges or
something more insidious? Because the former is just an office perk;
like th
2009/8/11 Sgeo :
> I haven't been paying much attention. What offices have you scammed?
CotC, majorly.
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 2:09 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
> ehird wrote:
>
>> 2009/8/11 Ed Murphy :
>>> When you try to scam an office, you should expect reprisals
>>
>> Pot, kettle.
>
> What I meant to add (but may have mistakenly left out when I went on to
> discuss hypotheticals) is that, yes, I have tr
ehird wrote:
> 2009/8/11 Ed Murphy :
>> When you try to scam an office, you should expect reprisals
>
> Pot, kettle.
What I meant to add (but may have mistakenly left out when I went on to
discuss hypotheticals) is that, yes, I have tried to scam offices myself
(sometimes successfully) and I exp
On Tue, 11 Aug 2009, comex wrote:
> vii. Every person has the right to be formally penalized only
> through well-defined and common judicial processes, and to
> consider invalid any bills of attainder passed against em.
Except, reading the text, the proposal in question just
The two deals to Warrigal failed, please disregard (sorry, I forgot to
remove this from the list of queued actions).
The deal to ? (as suggested by the reasoning) is a deal to schwa.
BobTHJ
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 1:19 PM, Roger Hicks wrote:
> Origin IP is 64.17.129.3 or possibly 64.17.152.116. There were two
> messages within the past 15 minutes, both with the subject "BobTHJ's
> actions (automated)".
>
> Thanks,
> BobTHJ
I received one such message.
--
-c.
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 11:21, Roger Hicks wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 11:19, Roger Hicks wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 11:15, Taral wrote:
>>> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 10:12 AM, Roger Hicks wrote:
H. Distributor: the automated e-mails from my site don't seem to be
reaching the li
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 11:15, Taral wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 10:12 AM, Roger Hicks wrote:
>> H. Distributor: the automated e-mails from my site don't seem to be
>> reaching the list. Do you have spam filtering of some sort active that
>> may be catching them?
>
> I can look if you give me
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 11:19, Roger Hicks wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 11:15, Taral wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 10:12 AM, Roger Hicks wrote:
>>> H. Distributor: the automated e-mails from my site don't seem to be
>>> reaching the list. Do you have spam filtering of some sort active that
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 10:12 AM, Roger Hicks wrote:
> H. Distributor: the automated e-mails from my site don't seem to be
> reaching the list. Do you have spam filtering of some sort active that
> may be catching them?
I can look if you give me a timestamp and origin IP or envelope return address
2009/8/11 Ed Murphy :
> When you try to scam an office, you should expect reprisals
Pot, kettle.
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 11:02, Pavitra wrote:
> Roger Hicks wrote:
>> I deputize for the Anarchist to publish the following:
>>
>> Deck of Change Report
>
> I'm surprised I don't have any Change cards, since my Salary has three
> Changes.
>
You are owed three draws presently from the Deck of Change
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 10:00 AM, comex wrote:
> Proto: A familiar right (AI=3)
Good idea, but I'm not a fan of that wording.
--
Taral
"Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you."
-- Unknown
Roger Hicks wrote:
> I deputize for the Anarchist to publish the following:
>
> Deck of Change Report
I'm surprised I don't have any Change cards, since my Salary has three
Changes.
Proto: A familiar right (AI=3)
{
Amend Rule 101 (The Rights of Agorans) by renumbering item vii. to
viii., and adding the following item before it:
vii. Every person has the right to be formally penalized only
through well-defined and common judicial processes, and to
cons
Geoffrey Spear wrote:
> Proposal: redundant election precence (II = 0, AI = 2)
> {
> In Rule 2154, remove:
>
> The set of candidates can change after the decision is
> initiated. If the number of candidates falls below two,
> PRESENT ceases to be a valid option.
>
>
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 2:29 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> Yeah, but that's how the Rest penalty is more or less balanced; to do
> a massive win manipulation that resets everyone's caste earns the rests
> to get you a ways (or without mitigating circumstances) all the way out
> the door. Maybe add to t
Kerim Aydin wrote:
> seems like it should be and (2) if this went through would it count as
> a r101 penalty and block rests? (or vice versa).
Quite likely; thanks for pointing that out.
-coppro
55 matches
Mail list logo
