On Sun., Mar. 1, 2020, 17:05 Tanner Swett via agora-business, <
agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> I submit a proposal with AI = 1, titled "Somebody gets a coin":
> {
> Enact a power-1 rule titled "A Coin Award":
> {
> When this rule is enacted, a player other than the
>
I wrote:
> Ah ok, gotcha. (I wasn't particularly invested in this to be clear, just
> saw an opportunity and took it. Mostly in this for Cuddles' voting
> strength)
And also the opportunity to send a message with the subject line "OFF:
[Prime Minister] humble agoran farmer distributes proposal
G. wrote:
> It means that someone tried it (I wasn't the first I don't think) and
> there was some discussion and everyone involved agreed it worked and
> no-one offered any counterarguments worthy of a CFJ. And it was tried a
> time or two after that before CFJ 3688 with same results. I'll see
On 3/1/2020 11:16 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> On 3/1/2020 7:54 AM, Timon Walshe-Grey via agora-discussion wrote:
>> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
>>> I thought about that possibility, because R2160 includes this
>>> provision, which seems to prevent any deputisation where other rules
Although, hrm, I might be thinking too Blognomic when it comes to the word
"action" here, perhaps it means absolutely every action I do, even real
life ones, here? I don't know.
On Sun, Mar 1, 2020 at 8:31 PM Cuddle Beam wrote:
> I didn't perform an in-game action to grant consent, I just
I didn't perform an in-game action to grant consent, I just produced
external context via the which consent can be reasonably determined by.
On Sun, Mar 1, 2020 at 8:16 PM Gaelan Steele via agora-business <
agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> If it were IMPOSSIBLE for Cuddlebeam to consent
On 3/1/2020 7:54 AM, Timon Walshe-Grey via agora-discussion wrote:
> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
>> I thought about that possibility, because R2160 includes this
>> provision, which seems to prevent any deputisation where other rules
>> of any power prohibit the same action from the
On Wed, 26 Feb 2020 at 09:14, Kerim Aydin via agora-business
wrote:
> > 8344* Alexis 3.0 Unsubstantive interpretation
> PRESENT (for now). I'd like to get more understanding of what constitutes
> an interpretive principle?
Do you have any specific suggestions?
Alexis
On Sun, 1 Mar 2020 at 11:38, Alexis Hunt via agora-discussion
wrote:
>
> On Sun, 1 Mar 2020 at 09:05, Timon Walshe-Grey via agora-business
> wrote:
> > CuddleBeam wrote:
> > > So, yeah. Pretty much carte blanche, really.
> >
> > Sweet!
> >
> > I resign Tailor. I deputise for Tailor to grant
On Sun, 1 Mar 2020 at 09:05, Timon Walshe-Grey via agora-business
wrote:
> CuddleBeam wrote:
> > So, yeah. Pretty much carte blanche, really.
>
> Sweet!
>
> I resign Tailor. I deputise for Tailor to grant Alexis 19 coins for eir
> Emerald Glitter (awarded Feb 27, after the Notary election). I
On Sun, 1 Mar 2020 at 10:54, Timon Walshe-Grey via agora-discussion
wrote:
>
> Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
> > I thought about that possibility, because R2160 includes this
> > provision, which seems to prevent any deputisation where other rules
> > of any power prohibit the same
On Sun, 1 Mar 2020 at 00:51, Gaelan Steele via agora-discussion
wrote:
> > 8344* Alexis 3.0 Unsubstantive interpretation
> AGAINST due to ambiguity
Care to elaborate?
On Sat, 29 Feb 2020 at 23:27, Tanner Swett via agora-discussion
wrote:
>
> On Sat, Feb 29, 2020, 14:50 Alexis Hunt via agora-business <
> agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
>
> > [This first proposal is a reform to the core rules defining what rules
> > are, with an aim to better supporting
Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
> I thought about that possibility, because R2160 includes this
> provision, which seems to prevent any deputisation where other rules
> of any power prohibit the same action from the officeholder:
> 2. it would be POSSIBLE for the deputy to perform the
I thought about that possibility, because R2160 includes this
provision, which seems to prevent any deputisation where other rules
of any power prohibit the same action from the officeholder:
2. it would be POSSIBLE for the deputy to perform the action,
other than by deputisation,
Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
> twg deputised for the Prime Minister and it was not noted as a
> temporary deputisation, therefore e became Prime Minister. However, e
> also made emself Speaker. One of these was not possible, according to
> R2472, which states, "Rules to the contrary
Oh shit that was fast lmao. Yay! Victory!
I look forwards to what you do with the remaining ~89 days of rental of my
Agora body lol, have fun!
On Sun, Mar 1, 2020 at 3:05 PM Timon Walshe-Grey via agora-business <
agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> CuddleBeam wrote:
> > So, yeah. Pretty
>Just wondering what your boundaries are in terms of irreversible effect.
For a more general idea, I'm totally OK (and would be grateful for) gaining
anything with a positive connotation, permanent or not. I'm also fine with
gaining things with a negative connotation admittedly lol, because I
>In fact, where do you stand on also being made to receive benefits other
than winning?
I'm totally cool with getting ribbons and stuff! It's all good.
On Sun, Mar 1, 2020 at 2:20 PM Timon Walshe-Grey via agora-business <
agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> CuddleBeam wrote:
> > I'm fully
Hmmm, I guess No Fakery might be in play as well? I'm not sure.
I'm fully in twg's hands right now and aside from asking them to take
measures to fulfill the contract as intended (I should've probably added
that as a clause to the pledge, nw I understand why many contracts have
clauses like
20 matches
Mail list logo
