Thanks, that's a really good idea. I changed the wording slightly to
remove some ambiguity; that leaves this text:
{
[Comment: This clarifies the wording to explicitly use both the time
window and penalty specified in the Oath. This also specifies that
pledges can only be violated once.]
Am
It happens :). We at least get some interesting precedent out of it. And
you might have stopped G. and ais523 from doing crazy stuff.
Jason Cobb
On 6/25/19 1:23 AM, James Cook wrote:
CFJ: "There exists a proposal with the title 'It's caused enough
trouble already' and with a valid adoption ind
On Mon, 24 Jun 2019 at 05:08, Jason Cobb wrote:
> for 60 days. If the Cold Hand of Justice is imposed on a Player for
> violating a certain pledge, then that pledge ceases to be a pledge.
A pledge can still be violated multiple times, even with this text,
during the window of time between
> > CFJ: "There exists a proposal with the title 'It's caused enough
> > trouble already' and with a valid adoption index."
> >
> > CFJ: "There exists an Agoran Decision to adopt a proposal with the
> > title 'It's caused enough trouble already' and with a valid adoption
> > index."
Sorry! I reall
I think the main issue with contracts is that there are fairly complex
desires for what we want them to do. The changes to R1742 ensure that
they can prohibit/require anything that the Rules define, which I think
is desirable. If that's all we wanted contracts to be able to do, then
that would
In large part, it’s the whole thing together. It feels like a complex set
of changes across multiple rules. The fact that such a change is necessary
suggests that the entire approach is inelegant. In general, the best
approaches to solving problems require relatively few rule changes, and it
feels
Is it any parts specifically, or is it just the entire thing when looked
at together?
If it's any part specifically, I imagine it's either the Rule 1742 or
the Rule 2125 changes.
The Rule 2125 changes were intended to mirror the old Rule 2125 as
closely as possible. The big changes (outside
Thanks! Responses inline again.
Jason Cobb
On Sun, Jun 23, 2019 at 3:57 PM Jason Cobb wrote:
A contract CAN define and regulate the following actions, except
that the performance of them must include at least clearly and
unambiguously announcing the performance of t
It’s getting to the point where this is feeling inelegant again, which is
usually a very bad sign.
-Aris
On Sun, Jun 23, 2019 at 3:57 PM Jason Cobb wrote:
> Here's v2 for further comment. Since we've got a while before the next
> distribution, I'll leave it up for much longer.
>
> omd: any of y
i favour this
On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 6:13 PM omd wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 23, 2019 at 3:40 PM Kerim Aydin wrote:
> >
> >
> > CFJ: An Agoran decision to select the winner of the election has
> > a voting method of AI-Majority.
> >
> > Rule 1950 (Decisions with Adoption Indices, Power=3):
> >
On Sun, Jun 23, 2019 at 3:40 PM Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
>
> CFJ: An Agoran decision to select the winner of the election has
> a voting method of AI-Majority.
>
> Rule 1950 (Decisions with Adoption Indices, Power=3):
> Adoption index is an untracked switch possessed by Agoran
> decis
On Sun, Jun 23, 2019 at 3:57 PM Jason Cobb wrote:
> A contract CAN define and regulate the following actions, except
> that the performance of them must include at least clearly and
> unambiguously announcing the performance of the action:
What does it mean to "define" an
12 matches
Mail list logo
