On Mon, 2022-06-13 at 02:07 +0200, nethack4.org dicebot via agora-
business wrote:
> Assignment of dice rolls to rules:
> 139:R2658;
Based on CFJ outcomes, this might not be a valid roll. I'll try another
one later this week if this one failed.
--
ais523
Mad Engineer
On 6/12/22 18:16, nix via agora-business wrote:
> I transfer the Bowerbird to myself.
>
> I play with the Bowerbird and transfer the protection stone from G. to
> myself.
>
> I wield the protection stone, specifying the protection stone.
I've been reminded I don't have the license to wield that
On 6/12/2022 3:26 PM, Edward Murphy via agora-business wrote:
> [Some or all of this may have already occurred, see CFJs 3965
> through 3967. Possibly only rules numbered higher than 2658
> still contain ~> <~ delimited text.]
There aren't any rules like that. One key fortunate fact is
4st wrote:
I create a new promise with the text, "If possible, the author votes FOR on
the proposal of the bearer's choice. The author will not rescind this vote
of their own will.", hereby referred to as my promise to support.
Probably should reissue this promise with the second sentence
G. wrote:
On 6/12/2022 9:35 AM, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote:
CFJ: "The entity at one point known as Rule 2658 is a Rule."
CFJ: "The entity at one point known as Rule 2658 has performed at least
one amendment of a Rule."
CFJ: "The entity at one point known as Rule 2658 has been
On 6/12/2022 12:43 PM, ais523 via agora-discussion wrote:
> On Sun, 2022-06-12 at 12:22 -0700, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion
> wrote:
>> The Winds Died Down recently, beginning the procedure described in
>> R2658.
>>
>> It's pretty clear to me that all of the repeals of (1) went through,
>>
On Sun, 2022-06-12 at 12:22 -0700, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion
wrote:
> The Winds Died Down recently, beginning the procedure described in
> R2658.
>
> It's pretty clear to me that all of the repeals of (1) went through,
> and I can't think of an argument that those repeals failed.
The rule
On 6/12/2022 9:35 AM, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote:
> CFJ: "The entity at one point known as Rule 2658 is a Rule."
>
> CFJ: "The entity at one point known as Rule 2658 has performed at least
> one amendment of a Rule."
>
> CFJ: "The entity at one point known as Rule 2658 has been
On Sun, 2022-06-12 at 11:31 -0700, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion
wrote:
> The first one depends on whether the recent CFJs means repeals didn't
> happen - Haven't seen any other arguments for BBGs still existing
> (let me know if I missed one).
I was planning to conditionalise it on whether
On Sat, Jun 11, 2022, 8:39 PM Forest Sweeney wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 11, 2022, 9:19 AM ais523 via agora-discussion <
> agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 2022-06-11 at 07:02 -0700, Forest Sweeney via agora-business
>> wrote:
>> > I sponsor a new duel. The entry fee is 2 boatloads
On Sat, Jun 11, 2022, 8:39 PM Forest Sweeney wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 11, 2022, 9:19 AM ais523 via agora-discussion <
> agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 2022-06-11 at 07:02 -0700, Forest Sweeney via agora-business
>> wrote:
>> > I sponsor a new duel. The entry fee is 2 boatloads
On 6/12/2022 11:26 AM, ais523 via agora-business wrote:
> On Sun, 2022-06-12 at 19:24 +0100, ais523 via agora-business wrote:
>> On Sun, 2022-06-12 at 11:20 -0700, Kerim Aydin via agora-business wrote:
>>> I issue a cabinet order of Dive on ais523, levying a fine of 2 blots on
>>> em, because e
On Sat, 2022-06-11 at 20:39 -0700, Forest Sweeney wrote:
> I cancel all duels I've sponsored thus far, as needed.
>
> I create a promise with the text "the author transfers one of eir stamps to
> the bearer.", referred to as my stamp promise.
>
> I sponsor a new duel, with the reward as my stamp
13 matches
Mail list logo
