Actually, Arbitor willing, you could pass this problem to me if you'd like.
Because atm, I don't fear the SHOULDN'Ts and whatnot and I'll barge through
crimes in order to give a Judgement that I feel is right.
On Saturday, May 13, 2023, ais523 via agora-business <
agora-busin...@agoranomic.org>
On 5/12/23 18:15, juan via agora-discussion wrote:
> Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion [2023-05-12 09:32]:
>> On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 8:59 AM Yachay Wayllukuq via agora-discussion
>> wrote:
>> So a question to you: if an investigator, with good and honest intent
>> doesn't believe that a crime has
Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion [2023-05-12 09:32]:
> On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 8:59 AM Yachay Wayllukuq via agora-discussion
> wrote:
> So a question to you: if an investigator, with good and honest intent
> doesn't believe that a crime has been committed, and the 1-week
> Favoritism deadline for
Ah, alright
On Friday, May 12, 2023, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion <
agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> Oh sure - no worries if that’s the only thing - I was giving my logic so it
> didn’t come across as arbitrary, but didn’t mean to imply it was anything
> but my best (conjectural)
Oh sure - no worries if that’s the only thing - I was giving my logic so it
didn’t come across as arbitrary, but didn’t mean to imply it was anything
but my best (conjectural) guess at this time.
On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 9:51 AM Yachay Wayllukuq via agora-discussion <
Easy, you could state that you're basing yourself off mere conjecture and
that's the best you can do for now rather than using using language that
states your position as a matter of fact.
On Friday, May 12, 2023, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion <
agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> On
On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 8:59 AM Yachay Wayllukuq via agora-discussion
wrote:
>
> I'd like to mention that I don't feel like you're exercising the "highest
> reasonably possible standard of care" if your basis for if the crime has
> been committed or not is that it doesn't match the arcana, unless
On Fri, 2023-05-12 at 06:04 -0700, Kerim Aydin via agora-business
wrote:
>
> Further it is clear from the text itself that it was intended
> that this definition be "hidden" and continue to provide definitional
> guidance (that's unique afaik when thinking of other old gamestate):
It can't
I'd like to mention that I don't feel like you're exercising the "highest
reasonably possible standard of care" if your basis for if the crime has
been committed or not is that it doesn't match the arcana, unless you prove
first that the arcana has survived and still has legal effect to this day.
On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 8:03 AM Yachay Wayllukuq via agora-discussion
wrote:
> Having such an unwieldy amount of arcana puts a lot of power in being able
> to give out 'hedonistic' Judgements; ones that are heavily based on "well
> this is best for the game"/"this makes it playable"/etc,
Having such an unwieldy amount of arcana puts a lot of power in being able
to give out 'hedonistic' Judgements; ones that are heavily based on "well
this is best for the game"/"this makes it playable"/etc, especially ones
that have to be that way because of ambiguity. Because we don't know for
On 5/12/23 08:24, Yachay Wayllukuq via agora-business wrote:
Sure,
I note the infraction of Invisibilitating performed by 4st for jaywalking
without a license, compounded by having dangerous levels of swagger.
I CfJ: "There was an infraction noted in this message."
AFAICT Invisibilitating, if
On 5/12/23 06:59, Yachay Wayllukuq via agora-business wrote:
- Why would we make a special case just for Invisibilitating specifically?
What about other ancient things that may affect how other*current* things
of the game work too?
There might be. There's nothing that prevents us from looking
On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 5:00 AM Yachay Wayllukuq via agora-business
wrote:
>
> - It takes agency away from newer players and puts more into older ones
> which are more familiar with this obscure ancient arcana which has now
> supposedly been made relevant, which feels terrible.
>
Just on this
On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 1:31 AM Janet Cobb via agora-discussion <
agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> On 5/12/23 01:37, secretsnail9 via agora-discussion wrote:
> > And about "voting strength games", any player could reactivate voting
> > strength on the proposal if they would vote against
What is "Invisibilitating"?
I feel like I'm being left out of something here.
On Friday, May 12, 2023, Janet Cobb via agora-official <
agora-offic...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> RESOLUTION OF PROPOSALS 8960-8964
> =
>
> IDTitle Result
>
On 5/12/23 01:37, secretsnail9 via agora-discussion wrote:
> And about "voting strength games", any player could reactivate voting
> strength on the proposal if they would vote against it. Voting strength
> only matters when there's disagreement anyways, and if there is any, it'll
> get turned
17 matches
Mail list logo
