On Sun, 5 Jun 2011, Elliott Hird wrote:
> On 5 June 2011 02:08, wrote:
> > Incidentally, apathy is the only thing turning the points+promises economy
> > from a combination of well-tested and innovative gameplay into degeneracy.
> > Do we really have to toss it out already?
>
> We are the g
On Sat, 4 Jun 2011, Pavitra wrote:
> On 06/04/2011 09:06 PM, ais523 wrote:
> > On Sat, 2011-06-04 at 21:03 -0500, Pavitra wrote:
> > > What was it about the AAA specifically that made it successful? Was it
> > > that it was run in the private sector and so mostly insulated from the
> > > rest of
On 06/05/2011 02:28 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
On Sun, 5 Jun 2011, Elliott Hird wrote:
On 5 June 2011 02:08, wrote:
Incidentally, apathy is the only thing turning the
points+promises economy from a combination of well-tested and
innovative gameplay into degeneracy. Do we really have to toss
it ou
On 06/05/2011 12:54 AM, Eric Stucky wrote:
R2162 (Switches) reads in part as follows:
"To become X" (where X is a possible value of
exactly one of the subject's switches) is to flip that switch to
X.
Thus, when Droowl attempted to register (that is, to cause ei
testing
Pavitra wrote:
> On 06/04/2011 03:40 PM, Benjamin Caplan wrote:
>> I CFJ: G.'s citizenship switch is a player.
>
> I retract this.
>
>
> I CFJ: Droowl is a player.
>
> Arguments:
>
> By R869 (How to Join and Leave Agora), citizenship is an entity switch;
> in particular, Droowl's citizenship
On 06/05/2011 01:59 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
> Gratuitous: Instances of switches are attributes of entities, not
> entities in their own right.
Doesn't "entity" just mean any noun?
On 06/05/2011 02:03 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
> Proposal: Effects are effective
> (AI = 3)
>
> Amend Rule 106 (Adopting Proposals) by replacing this text:
>
> a proposal that takes effect CAN, as
> part of its effect, apply the changes that it specifies.
>
> wi
Pavitra wrote:
> On 06/05/2011 02:03 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
>> Proposal: Effects are effective
>> (AI = 3)
>>
>> Amend Rule 106 (Adopting Proposals) by replacing this text:
>>
>> a proposal that takes effect CAN, as
>> part of its effect, apply the changes tha
Pavitra wrote:
> On 06/05/2011 01:59 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
>> Gratuitous: Instances of switches are attributes of entities, not
>> entities in their own right.
>
> Doesn't "entity" just mean any noun?
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/entity
1 a : being, existence; especially : independ
ehird wrote:
> On 2 June 2011 06:16, Ed Murphy wrote:
>> Does it really (asks the Assessor, expecting the unexpected)?
>
> I vote AGAINT proposal 7068.
As usual, this is deemed ineffective.
For Droowl's benefit, misspellings are generally covered by
Rule 754 (1), but "AGAINT" is a special case
On 5 June 2011 20:58, Ed Murphy wrote:
> As usual, this is deemed ineffective.
The ballots I submitted where I used AGAINT many times and then
defined it are still OK, though, yes?
ehird wrote:
> On 4 June 2011 05:07, omd wrote:
>> 7074 2  Walker   Spending Points v2
> AGAINT
>> 7075 3  scshunt  Proposals Are Atomic
> AGAINT
>> 7076 1  omd    No harm in knowing there's a betting market
> AGAINT
>
> means FOR
I'm interpreting this as "in this message, 'AGA
On 06/05/2011 10:08 AM, Benjamin Caplan wrote:
> testing
testing
[Crossing the AAA with some ideas from the board game Puerto
Rico. Thoughts?]
1) Administrivia:
a) The name of this contest is "The Banana Republic of Agora".
b) The Vice President of Agriculture (hereafter VPoA) is the
contestmaster of this contest, and performs all random
sel
Interesting. I think it would be more interesting to vary the AAA
component a little bit, but I like the concept. Notes inline.
On 11-06-05 04:14 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
[Crossing the AAA with some ideas from the board game Puerto
Rico. Thoughts?]
1) Administrivia:
a) The name of this contes
On 06/05/2011 06:14 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
>b) Each week, the top three Farmers CAN and SHALL (in order, without
> repetition among that week's selections) specify exactly one role
> that will be in play during the following week.
>[snip]
>A Farmer SHAL
scshunt wrote:
>> 4) Roles:
>>
>> a) The Order of Play is an ordered list of all Farmers. New Farmers
>>are added to the bottom. At the beginning of each week, the
>>Farmer at the top moves to the bottom.
> No way to alter this?
Not yet, but it /is/ effectively a charter nomic
Pavitra wrote:
> On 06/05/2011 06:14 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
>>b) Each week, the top three Farmers CAN and SHALL (in order, without
>> repetition among that week's selections) specify exactly one role
>> that will be in play during the following week.
>> [snip]
>>
On 11-06-05 05:47 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
b) If a Farmer has not specified a role within one day of it being
eir turn to do so, the VPoA CAN and SHALL cause em to specify a
random role from among the valid choices.
Oh. I see. A clause here to ensure three roles a week would be
On 6/5/11 4:14 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
> [Crossing the AAA with some ideas from the board game Puerto
> Rico. Thoughts?]
[snip]
>d) Producer is a role. While it is in play, each Ranch produces (and
> the privileged Farmer CAN once cause one of eir specifie Ranches
typo "specified".
>
21 matches
Mail list logo
