On Sep 8, 2009, at 7:28 AM, ais523 callforjudgem...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
Because the banks are kind-of weird to understand right now, let's
settle for some old-fashioned haggling.
I'm willing to consider trading the following cards for something of
roughly equal value:
Distrib-u-matics
Kill
On Wed, 9 Sep 2009, Pavitra wrote:
The question then is: does the mathematical meaning (R754(3)) of
random imply that the random choice is made platonically and
invisibly, or does it leave that to other Agoran legal documents
(R754(4)), arguably including former Rules and probably including
On Wed, 2009-09-09 at 08:44 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
- If you take a legal/decision standpoint (where legally a decision
must be made based on uncertain data - see particularly natural
resource management for situations like this - a court CAN
determine a likely outcome and make it
Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 9, 2009, at 11:44 AM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
- If you take a Bayesian standpoint (with the process probabilities
as your priors) you come to the conclusion that 1/Nth of each
possible types of N cards were destroyed. Since this is
IMPOSSIBLE
On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 5:55 PM, Roger Hickspidge...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 16:43, Charles Reiss woggl...@gmail.com wrote:
On 9/5/09 8:09 AM, Ed Murphy wrote:
Detail: http://zenith.homelinux.net/cotc/viewcase.php?cfj=2674
== Criminal Case 2674 (Interest Index = 2)
Roger Hicks wrote:
On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 16:43, Charles Reiss woggl...@gmail.com wrote:
On 9/5/09 8:09 AM, Ed Murphy wrote:
Detail: http://zenith.homelinux.net/cotc/viewcase.php?cfj=2674
== �Criminal Case 2674 (Interest Index = 2) �===
� � BobTHJ violated Rule 2143,
Kerim Aydin wrote:
This favors the
spirit and some precedents but very much ignores the language.
Which of course would flagrantly violate R217s1, though as ais523 points
out IMPOSSIBLE and/or ILLEGAL things do occasionally ratify for the sake
of convenience.
It would be nice not to rely on
Roger Hicks wrote:
I appeal the sentence of this case. DISCHARGE would be more
appropriate based upon my previous comments.
BobTHJ
You now have two appeals going. Yay.
-coppro
On Wed, 9 Sep 2009, Pavitra wrote:
Kerim Aydin wrote:
- If you take a legal/decision standpoint (where legally a decision
must be made based on uncertain data - see particularly natural
resource management for situations like this - a court CAN
determine a likely outcome and make it
Sean Hunt wrote:
Roger Hicks wrote:
I appeal the sentence of this case. DISCHARGE would be more
appropriate based upon my previous comments.
BobTHJ
You now have two appeals going. Yay.
-coppro
No, the first one fizzled.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On Wed, 9 Sep 2009, Kerim Aydin wrote:
On Wed, 9 Sep 2009, Pavitra wrote:
Kerim Aydin wrote:
- If you take a legal/decision standpoint (where legally a decision
must be made based on uncertain data - see particularly natural
resource management for situations like this - a court CAN
On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 9:24 AM, Charles
Walkercharles.w.wal...@googlemail.com wrote:
I spend Distrib-u-matic to make the proposal No Vacancy v.2 Distributable.
Fails; was already made Distributable on 1 Sept.
Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 9, 2009, at 12:55 PM, Roger Hicks pidge...@gmail.com wrote:
I appeal this case. By custom Agora has permitted new officers a full
ASAP period to fulfill outstanding obligations.
You keep making that claim. I personally think that this custom
doesn't apply
On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 12:49, comex com...@gmail.com wrote:
You keep making that claim. I personally think that this custom doesn't
apply when the officer has most of a week (+ the election period) to
prepare a report, but neither of us has evidence. If you give some, I think
it would help
2009/9/9 comex com...@gmail.com:
FWIW, you can deposit these and withdraw other assets from the IBA (has lots
of cards at the moment). See iba.qoid.us for an up-to-date report. I'd
appreciate suggestions on reducing the weird/confusing aspect..
2009/9/8 ais523 callforjudgem...@yahoo.co.uk:
On Wed, 9 Sep 2009, Roger Hicks wrote:
On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 12:49, comex com...@gmail.com wrote:
You keep making that claim. I personally think that this custom doesn't
apply when the officer has most of a week (+ the election period) to
prepare a report, but neither of us has evidence. If
On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 3:35 PM, Kerim Aydinke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
Here, there's a consensus is no dinging at less than 4 days, dinging
after 7 days, but there's probably very few/no cases raised one way or
the other in the 5-7 day range. The question is, is this because we
don't
Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 9, 2009, at 3:31 PM, Elliott Hird penguinoftheg...@googlemail.com
wrote:
2009/9/9 comex com...@gmail.com:
I'd
appreciate suggestions on reducing the weird/confusing aspect..
On Wed, 9 Sep 2009, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 3:35 PM, Kerim Aydinke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
However, there were 2 cases (CFJ 2348, CFJ 2379) where the holder of a
low-priority office was accused of failing to report during eir first
month in the office; both resulted in
2009/9/9 comex comexcomexcomex
Sent from my bananaphone
On Sep 9, 2009, at 3:31 PM, Elliott Hird penguinoftheg...@googlemail.com
wrote:
fatal corruption error segfault
2012/12/21 comex com...@gmail.com:
I'd
appreciate suggestions on reducing the suggestions aspect..
(We are doing
On Wed, 9 Sep 2009, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
I could find no criminal CFJs against officers for late reports during
their first week in the archive.
By the way, with this low sample size, if there are NoVs that were closed
without going to criminal trial (either contested or mea culpas) those
On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 23:07, Pavitra celestialcognit...@gmail.com wrote:
Kerim Aydin wrote:
Rule 1079/4 (Power=1)
Definition of Random
I transfer a prop from myself to G. for digging up this very useful
precedent.
Fails. G. isn't registered.
BobTHJ
On Wed, 2009-09-09 at 20:50 -0600, Sean Hunt wrote:
Proposal 6481 (Democratic, AI=2.0, Interest=1) by Wooble
FOR if the PNP includes the text comex, AGAINST otherwise.
I'm not at all convinced that vote will resolve to anything but PRESENT.
--
ais523
On Wed, 2009-09-09 at 22:00 -0500, Pavitra wrote:
I submit the following proposal and make it Distributable:
AI=2 II=0 MWoP Assumption Fix
{{
Ratify the following document: {Proposal 6478 passed.}
At power 2?
--
ais523
Pavitra wrote:
Sean Hunt wrote:
Proposal 6478 (Democratic, AI=2.0, Interest=1) by Pavitra
AGAINST. This completely devalues MWoP and makes no effort to
destroy/replace it, and also doesn't deal with elections that cause a
candidate to be elected, but don't have an outcome because no Decision
Pavitra wrote:
Sean Hunt wrote:
Roger Hicks wrote:
I appeal the sentence of this case. DISCHARGE would be more
appropriate based upon my previous comments.
BobTHJ
You now have two appeals going. Yay.
-coppro
No, the first one fizzled.
R1504, last paragraph, second sentence Unless
26 matches
Mail list logo
