On Sat, 24 Oct 2009, comex wrote:
Historical trivia: When a mass repeal of rules was proposed in 2006,
there were 197 rules, quite a bit more than our current 153. However,
the figure is misleading: the SLR was approx. 4604 lines long then,
not much more than the current 4227. The current
FWIW, my R101 proto effectively had a weaker version of this: you have
the privilege (must be explicitly waived) to refuse to agree to an
amendment.
Sent from my iPhone
On Oct 26, 2009, at 12:33 AM, Sean Hunt ride...@gmail.com wrote:
Aaron Goldfein wrote:
Right, so what if we just said
--- On Sun, 25/10/09, comex com...@gmail.com wrote:
I suppose. One point is that it would be nice to
limit mousetraps to
impose unfair obligations, not I can act on behalf of
you to steal
all your assets and deregister. Your home is your
castle and
whatnot-- in this case, your person.
On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 12:51 AM, Pavitra celestialcognit...@gmail.com wrote:
Speaking of the stare decisis, we really should either get rid of that
or appoint a recordkeepor to track it.
Make the SHOULD into a SHALL in the Rulekeepor rule, since we have a
Rulekeepor who obviously hasn't
2009/10/25 Roger Hicks pidge...@gmail.com:
Were a proposal like this to go through, I would likely deregister.
I've spent countless hours working to model Agora as it stands
currently, I'd hate for it all to be a waste.
How very... conservative... um, never mind.
I nominate Wooble as Rulekeepor.
Sent from my iPhone
On Oct 25, 2009, at 9:48 AM, Geoffrey Spear geoffsp...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 12:51 AM, Pavitra celestialcognit...@gmail.com
wrote:
Speaking of the stare decisis, we really should either get rid of
that
or appoint a
Pavitra wrote:
Speaking of the stare decisis, we really should either get rid of that
or appoint a recordkeepor to track it.
Anyone can recommend adjustments to rule annotations. Some elements
also end up getting explicitly written into the rules.
2009/10/25 comex com...@gmail.com:
I nominate Wooble as Rulekeepor.
Didn't he say someone who wasn't a douche?
(ok, I had better stop elevating this)
Wooble wrote:
Make the SHOULD into a SHALL in the Rulekeepor rule, since we have a
Rulekeepor who obviously hasn't considered the implications of
ignoring the SHOULD.
IMO it's worth making conceptual and mechanical duties separable
when the latter is busy enough (same reason I gave up
On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 06:31, Alex Smith callforjudgem...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
--- On Sun, 25/10/09, comex com...@gmail.com wrote:
I suppose. One point is that it would be nice to
limit mousetraps to
impose unfair obligations, not I can act on behalf of
you to steal
all your assets and
Roger Hicks wrote:
Maybe all acting-on-behalf should be done equitably? I do tire of the
Mousetrap scams.
BobTHJ
I wouldn't have an issue with that except for the way that it affects
platonic gamestate - I don't want things held up while equitability is
discussed.
-coppro
On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 10:24 PM, Roger Hicks pidge...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 06:31, Alex Smith callforjudgem...@yahoo.co.uk
wrote:
--- On Sun, 25/10/09, comex com...@gmail.com wrote:
I suppose. One point is that it would be nice to
limit mousetraps to
impose unfair
On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 12:09 AM, Aaron Goldfein
aarongoldf...@gmail.com wrote:
What if the rules simply said that players must always be allowed to
leave a contract? I'm sure that would break something, but what?
Any attempt to use contracts to get people to commit to binding
obligations -
On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 11:11 PM, Craig Daniel teu...@pobox.com wrote:
On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 12:09 AM, Aaron Goldfein
aarongoldf...@gmail.com wrote:
What if the rules simply said that players must always be allowed to
leave a contract? I'm sure that would break something, but what?
Any
Aaron Goldfein wrote:
Right, so what if we just said that players must always be allowed to
leave a contract unless the text of that contract is immutable. I
don't think there are more than a small number of mutable contracts
that impose ongoing obligations on parties, and most of those don't
On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 12:33 AM, Sean Hunt ride...@gmail.com wrote:
Aaron Goldfein wrote:
Right, so what if we just said that players must always be allowed to
leave a contract unless the text of that contract is immutable. I
don't think there are more than a small number of mutable
Craig Daniel wrote:
That would lead to contracts containing the phrase SHALL consent, I suspect.
Mutability would be a contract switch that could only be set with
explicit consent from all parties.
Proto:
{{
Mutability is a contract switch, tracked by the Notary, with values
Mutable and
On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 12:46 AM, Sean Hunt ride...@gmail.com wrote:
Craig Daniel wrote:
That would lead to contracts containing the phrase SHALL consent, I
suspect.
Mutability would be a contract switch that could only be set with explicit
consent from all parties.
Question: how do you
Craig Daniel wrote:
Do you really want some random foreign game that is using Agora for
arbitration purposes to spam S-B with a hundred explicit consents
every time it wants to tweak its rules? For that matter, do you really
want to try to make such people register for a different mailing list
On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 1:03 AM, Sean Hunt ride...@gmail.com wrote:
Craig Daniel wrote:
Do you really want some random foreign game that is using Agora for
arbitration purposes to spam S-B with a hundred explicit consents
every time it wants to tweak its rules? For that matter, do you really
Craig Daniel wrote:
On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 1:03 AM, Sean Hunt ride...@gmail.com wrote:
Craig Daniel wrote:
Do you really want some random foreign game that is using Agora for
arbitration purposes to spam S-B with a hundred explicit consents
every time it wants to tweak its rules? For that
Proto: The Citrine Repeals
[We've had too many deregistrations lately (some my fault, I guess)
and general inactivity in Agora, which worries me... and leads me to
suspect that it may be time for another mass repeals: because Agora
needs a reset once in a while; because the ruleset is bloated;
2009/10/24 comex com...@gmail.com:
Proto: The Citrine Repeals
FOR
--
-Tiger
On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 12:35 PM, comex com...@gmail.com wrote:
Proto: The Citrine Repeals
I agree; the game has gotten too complex and especially focused on
minor issues with the rules, etc. But I would support even more severe
simplification. I would suggest also repealing in the areas of
On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 17:09, Aaron Goldfein aarongoldf...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 12:35 PM, comex com...@gmail.com wrote:
Proto: The Citrine Repeals
I agree; the game has gotten too complex and especially focused on
minor issues with the rules, etc. But I would support even
On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 7:51 PM, Roger Hicks pidge...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 17:09, Aaron Goldfein aarongoldf...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 12:35 PM, comex com...@gmail.com wrote:
Proto: The Citrine Repeals
I agree; the game has gotten too complex and
On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 11:35, comex com...@gmail.com wrote:
Proto: The Citrine Repeals
[We've had too many deregistrations lately (some my fault, I guess)
Were a proposal like this to go through, I would likely deregister.
I've spent countless hours working to model Agora as it stands
A lot of Agora's ruleset deals with special situations and fringe
cases. Perhaps we would be good to separate the ruleset into two
bodies of law. A supreme constitution including R101, and the basis
of the legislative, judicial, and executive systems, and then all the
details and specifics in
On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 10:31 PM, Roger Hicks pidge...@gmail.com wrote:
Were a proposal like this to go through, I would likely deregister.
I've spent countless hours working to model Agora as it stands
currently, I'd hate for it all to be a waste. More importantly however
I don't know if
comex wrote:
Agora is much more complex
than any nomic I've ever heard of*-- the ruleset is long with many
cross-references, and that's before you read the stare decisis--
Speaking of the stare decisis, we really should either get rid of that
or appoint a recordkeepor to track it.
Pavitra wrote:
Someday, the charters of non-nomic-related Internet communities will be
drawn up as Agoran contracts, and judged in the jurisdiction of Agora.
That is what I want Agora to be.
Hear, hear!
-coppro
Pavitra wrote:
comex wrote:
Agora is much more complex
than any nomic I've ever heard of*-- the ruleset is long with many
cross-references, and that's before you read the stare decisis--
Speaking of the stare decisis, we really should either get rid of that
or appoint a recordkeepor to track
32 matches
Mail list logo
