In the ruleset code and in the annotations it generates, I use
"reenact". If it is changed, I'll just add a dash to the reenactment
template.
On 7/20/19 11:00 PM, Aris Merchant wrote:
I’m strongly considering objecting, as I’d prefer to go the other way. What
do others think?
-Aris
On Sat, J
I’m strongly considering objecting, as I’d prefer to go the other way. What
do others think?
-Aris
On Sat, Jul 20, 2019 at 9:54 PM Jason Cobb wrote:
> I intend, without Objection, to clean Rule 105 by replacing all
> instances of the string "reenact" with the string "re-enact".
>
> Jason Cobb
>
I like this reasoning, so I'll probably go with this unless I see any
strong objections.
Jason Cobb
On 7/20/19 2:13 PM, Aris Merchant wrote:
Personally, I’d just make them all lower case (apart from the “Agoran”) and
have done with it. My reasoning is that people can be consistent about
using
On 7/20/2019 12:00 PM, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote:
One thing is Agorans have a weird tendency to Overcapitalize things to
somehow emphasize their Importance.
I always thought the point of this was to indicate that something was a
term of art. Though I'll grant you it's not at all used consistent
Ah, thank you. I guess that settles that.
Jason Cobb
On 7/20/19 4:52 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
On 7/20/2019 12:38 PM, Jason Cobb wrote:
Rule 1586 ("Definition and Continuity of Entities") reads:
If the entity that defines another entity is amended such
that it
no longer defines
On 7/20/2019 12:38 PM, Jason Cobb wrote:
Rule 1586 ("Definition and Continuity of Entities") reads:
If the entity that defines another entity is amended such that it
no longer defines the second entity, then the second entity and
its attributes cease to exist.
What is "
Rule 1586 ("Definition and Continuity of Entities") reads:
If the entity that defines another entity is amended such that it
no longer defines the second entity, then the second entity and
its attributes cease to exist.
What is "the entity that defines" a Rule, if any? Is
On Sat, Jul 20, 2019, 12:55 PM Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> > "Blot" vs "blot": I think this should be "Blot" because it's being used
> as
> > a proper noun to refer to the single currency, but current consensus
> seems
> > to be "blot".
>
> This is incorrect by all style guides (checked three, America
Oh, found another one: "reenact" vs "re-enact". All usages occur in Rule
105, with 4 usages of the former and 5 usages of the latter.
Jason Cobb
On 7/20/19 12:50 AM, Jason Cobb wrote:
I've already brought up a few common editorial inconsistencies in the
Rules - those being "Judgement"/"Judgmen
> One thing is Agorans have a weird tendency to Overcapitalize things to
> somehow emphasize their Importance.
I always thought the point of this was to indicate that something was a term of
art. Though I'll grant you it's not at all used consistently.
-twg
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On
Alright, I guess I'll fix that when I submit a proposal to fix the usage
of "levy"ing a fine (the offending rules use "levy a fine of N Blots",
where the official definition uses "levy a fine of N").
Jason Cobb
On 7/20/19 1:53 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
This is incorrect by all style guides (check
Personally, I’d just make them all lower case (apart from the “Agoran”) and
have done with it. My reasoning is that people can be consistent about
using lower case, but I doubt we could get them to consistently use upper
case.
-Aris
On Sat, Jul 20, 2019 at 10:55 AM Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> A clea
A clean-up is always nice!
One thing is Agorans have a weird tendency to Overcapitalize things to
somehow emphasize their Importance. It's sometimes like reading Winnie-the-
Pooh and not really supported by standard style guides (though maybe it is
in legal style guides, I'm not familiar with
13 matches
Mail list logo
