On Mon, 16 Oct 2017, ATMunn . wrote:
> The reason why they're called Medals of Honour is because in order to declare
> yourself eligible for one, you have to have not received any cards in the
> last
> month, and you can't have negative Karma.
Since karma is 0-sum, for there to be any positiv
Overall I like the idea; however, my only concern is with my new Medals of
Honour proposal I'm working on (and planning on publishing tonight).
If you haven't read the proto, basically it says that in the first week of
every month, anyone can declare emself to be eligible for a Medal of
Honour. Af
Does this look right to everyone?
-Aris
---
Revised proposal pool (effective at the time of my last report):
IDAuthor(s) AI Title
---
pp1 o 2.0 Faster Auctions
pp2* G.1.7 Appeals improv
On Mon, 16 Oct 2017, Kerim Aydin wrote:
On Mon, 16 Oct 2017, Josh T wrote:
About Silly proposals I am vexed:Of the rule's intention I am perplexed;
Ought the proposal's mood be most merry,
Or it's meaning and tone be contrary?
The Rule's a blank slate
With no preconceived notions
Whatever you
Alas, wordplay in Japanese does not
invoke quite the same type of afterthought.
天火狐
On 16 October 2017 at 12:30, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 16 Oct 2017, Josh T wrote:
> > About Silly proposals I am vexed:Of the rule's intention I am perplexed;
> > Ought the proposal's mood be most merry,
On Mon, 16 Oct 2017, Josh T wrote:
> About Silly proposals I am vexed:Of the rule's intention I am perplexed;
> Ought the proposal's mood be most merry,
> Or it's meaning and tone be contrary?
The Rule's a blank slate
With no preconceived notions
Whatever you like
On Mon, 2017-10-16 at 10:49 -0400, Josh T wrote:
> About Silly proposals I am vexed:
> Of the rule's intention I am perplexed;
> Ought the proposal's mood be most merry,
> Or it's meaning and tone be contrary?
>
> 天火狐
I suspect that Rule 1789 was created by a Silly Proposal (on the "truly
hideous
About Silly proposals I am vexed:
Of the rule's intention I am perplexed;
Ought the proposal's mood be most merry,
Or it's meaning and tone be contrary?
天火狐
On Sun, 15 Oct 2017, Aris Merchant wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 10:21 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Sun, 15 Oct 2017, Aris Merchant wrote:
> >>
> >> 7922* Alexis 3.0 Clarity Act Alexis 1 AP
> >>
> >
> > H. Assessor, H. Promotor:
> >
> > Proposal 7922 t
On Mon, 16 Oct 2017, Alex Smith wrote:
> On Sun, 2017-10-15 at 20:20 -0700, Aris Merchant wrote:
> > I hereby distribute each listed proposal, initiating the Agoran
> > Decision of whether to adopt it, and removing it from the proposal
> > pool.
>
> not-technically-a-CoE: The ID numbers listed i
I'm confused at what's going on here.
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 2:05 AM, Alexis Hunt wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Oct 2017 at 02:04 Aris Merchant gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I recommend a green card. Given the preceding a-d discussion, this was
>> clearly an accidental omission and not an attempt at fraud.
>>
On Mon, 2017-10-16 at 09:37 -0400, ATMunn . wrote:
> Wait, you're not a player, right? Just a watcher?
>
> Do the rules just say that persons can initiate CFJs instead of just
> players?
Nonplayers don't have to spend AP or shinies for a CFJ (they don't have
any), so they actually have more abili
Wait, you're not a player, right? Just a watcher?
Do the rules just say that persons can initiate CFJs instead of just
players?
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 12:20 AM, Ørjan Johansen wrote:
> I make two CFJ, and request that they be linked:
>
> There exists a Rule entitled "Campaign Proposals,
It's an interesting idea, but as other players have said, it could be quite
scammable.
On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 8:45 PM, Gaelan Steele wrote:
> There are many places where Agora essentially calls eval(T), where T is
> some text from a player. This includes:
>
> The rules, of course
> Proposals
>
Ratification takes effect relative to the publication of the document,
however. The context doesn't matter; if this document were ratified, then
it would be treated as true and correct; that is, it would be treated as if
it was a complete list of the proposal pool at the time of its publication.
O
Oh, did I forget to capitalize that somewhere? Oops.
On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 10:18 PM, VJ Rada wrote:
> By the way, Hon. Rulekeepor: in the new emotions rule, "Registrar"
> should be capitalized.
>
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 12:43 PM, VJ Rada wrote:
> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qV5lzRHrGe
Alright, thanks. I guess I should have more confidence in myself.
As for the victory elections thing, I might actually go ahead and repeal
that when I actually post the proposal.
As for when I'll post it, I'll probably post it later today, if nobody else
says anything.
On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 9:
I checked it doesn't. Appears 17 times all correctly capitalized. At
least in the last ruleset.
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 7:04 PM, Alex Smith wrote:
> On Sun, 2017-10-15 at 20:40 -0700, Gaelan Steele wrote:
>> Ah, forgot that cleanup time could do that. I intend without
>> objection to cause Cleanu
On Sun, 2017-10-15 at 20:20 -0700, Aris Merchant wrote:
> I hereby distribute each listed proposal, initiating the Agoran
> Decision of whether to adopt it, and removing it from the proposal
> pool.
not-technically-a-CoE: The ID numbers listed in the summary at the
start and in the proposal descri
On Sun, 2017-10-15 at 20:40 -0700, Gaelan Steele wrote:
> Ah, forgot that cleanup time could do that. I intend without
> objection to cause Cleanup Time to amend the ruleset by replacing
> “registrar” in any places it appears with “Registrar”.
If it appears more than once, you'll need to explicitl
20 matches
Mail list logo
