Another option could be to go all the way with this and remove the
supply limit altogether, making shinies destructible and having costs
based on how many are possessed by players, then rewards either fully
constant or based on some kind of logarithmic function? (Having them
tied linearly to ho
On Sat, 21 Oct 2017, Madeline wrote:
> I intend to win the game with two days' notice, in accordance with Rule 7923.
> (Does this really work before it's even a rule?)
Yes, but it's not Rule 7923 (that's the proposal), saying it was "Rule 7923"
instead of "as described in Proposal 7923" might m
I already have a proposal which ties the Supply Value to the number of
players every month. Called (if I recall) "slightly more responsible
Zimbabwean-style economics".
On Sat, Oct 21, 2017 at 9:37 AM, ATMunn . wrote:
> That's an interesting idea. I feel like this could be scammable though. The
If supporting this message is allowable, I do so.
On 10/20/2017 08:24 PM, Aris Merchant wrote:
> I intend to destroy the universe with notice.
>
> -Aris
>
> On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 5:22 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
> wrote:
>> I intend t win the game with two days' notice, as described in
On Fri, 20 Oct 2017, Aris Merchant wrote:
> I intend to destroy the universe with notice.
https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/?2150
Okay, how did this go from "The shiny balance can not be negative because
it is an asset, not a switch." to "Any Player CAN destroy the universe With
Notice."
On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 9:28 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
>
> I submit the following Proposal, "Don't vote for this", AI-3, and
> AP-pend it:
On Fri, 20 Oct 2017 at 21:53 Aris Merchant <
thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Actually, given that this makes things more interesting... I SH-CFJ (or
> AP-CFJ if the action would otherwise fail due to lack of shinies) "If there
> were currently a power 3.9 rule purpoting to allow any p
I would judge IRRELEVANT: situation appears to be too hypothetical
and attenuated to be a useful clarification of the game state.
On Sat, Oct 21, 2017 at 12:59 PM, Alexis Hunt wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, 20 Oct 2017 at 21:53 Aris Merchant
> wrote:
>>
>> Actually, given that this makes things more inte
On Sat, 2017-10-21 at 09:32 +1100, Madeline wrote:
> I intend to win the game with two days' notice, in accordance with
> Rule 7923. (Does this really work before it's even a rule?)
Dependent action intents work "backwards". The intent itself doesn't do
anything, but the resolution of the dependen
On Fri, 2017-10-20 at 18:28 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> I submit the following Proposal, "Don't vote for this", AI-3, and
> AP-pend it:
The created rule wouldn't actually work (for interesting reasons which
are almost along the line of a scam). That said, that's not something
I'd like to rely on.
I've requested that the judge consider what would happen in that rule's
absence.
-Aris
On Oct 20, 2017 6:59 PM, "Alexis Hunt" wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, 20 Oct 2017 at 21:53 Aris Merchant gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Actually, given that this makes things more interesting... I SH-CFJ (or
>> AP-CFJ if the a
On Sat, 21 Oct 2017, Alex Smith wrote:
> On Fri, 2017-10-20 at 18:28 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> > I submit the following Proposal, "Don't vote for this", AI-3, and
> > AP-pend it:
>
> The created rule wouldn't actually work (for interesting reasons which
> are almost along the line of a scam).
On Fri, 2017-10-20 at 19:24 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> On Sat, 21 Oct 2017, Alex Smith wrote:
> > On Fri, 2017-10-20 at 18:28 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> > > I submit the following Proposal, "Don't vote for this", AI-3, and
> > > AP-pend it:
> >
> > The created rule wouldn't actually work (for i
Is the safety-valve super-secret propitietery technology?
On Sat, Oct 21, 2017 at 1:32 PM, Alex Smith wrote:
> On Fri, 2017-10-20 at 19:24 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>> On Sat, 21 Oct 2017, Alex Smith wrote:
>> > On Fri, 2017-10-20 at 18:28 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>> > > I submit the following P
Three reasons that would be a bad judgment, which I would likely moot:
1. I'm paying for the CFJ, which means the judge will get paid for it.
It wouldn't be very nice to take money and then assign an effectively
null judgment.
2. The CFJ concerns a subject of deep game signifcance. If the rules
d
On Fri, 20 Oct 2017, Aris Merchant wrote:
> Three reasons that would be a bad judgment, which I would likely moot:
>
> 1. I'm paying for the CFJ, which means the judge will get paid for it.
> It wouldn't be very nice to take money and then assign an effectively
> null judgment.
This is an inap
On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 8:14 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
>
>
> On Fri, 20 Oct 2017, Aris Merchant wrote:
>> Three reasons that would be a bad judgment, which I would likely moot:
>>
>> 1. I'm paying for the CFJ, which means the judge will get paid for it.
>> It wouldn't be very nice to take money and
Welcome, Falsifian! Good test of new rule - nice beginning!
In general, when a rule says "a Player CAN [verb] with Agoran Consent", it
means that e does whatever [verb] is using the Agoran Consent method; that
is, the "actual" actions the player takes are following the R1728 procedure.
Similar
Thanks, G.
When I was initially planning this, I thought I remembered Rule 478
being power=4 and having some strong wording to the effect that
players can participate in the fora, and thought I could make a case
that a lower-powered rule like 2125 can't limit a player's ability to
do anything syno
In terms of the common definition for "declare", it makes perfect sense.
In fact I called a CFJ on a similar issue (substituting "state" for
"declare") a couple weeks back, but I'm realizing it's not in the Gazette.
D. Margaux, did the following CFJ get missed or am I just not finding the
assi
El 13/02/2020 a las 17:56, Timon Walshe-Grey via agora-discussion escribió:
sukil wrote:
Me too!
Hi sukil, welcome to Agora! You sent this to the main Discussion Forum
(agora-discussion@agoranomic.org), whereas you probably meant to send it
to the main Public Forum (agora-busin...@agoranomic.
On Sat, 2017-07-29 at 10:12 -0700, Ajay Kumar Raja wrote:
> I would like to register as a player.
Welcome!
Just as a note, you normally have to be quite precise with your
language when taking actions in Agora (registration is an exception,
which is why this (probably) works). Saying that you'd li
On 21/08/2023 17:47, 4st nomic via agora-discussion wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 21, 2023 at 7:31 AM Katherina Walshe-Grey via agora-business <
> agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
>
>> (Also: Is the convention here not still to use Spivak e/em/eir pronouns
>> for everyone? If not, mine are she/her. Th
On Mon, Aug 21, 2023 at 10:05 AM Katherina Walshe-Grey via agora-discussion
wrote:
> On 21/08/2023 17:47, 4st nomic via agora-discussion wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 21, 2023 at 7:31 AM Katherina Walshe-Grey via agora-business
> <
> > agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> >
> >> (Also: Is the convent
> No bother :) Even if this isn't one of them, I'm sure culture has
> changed in some ways since I was last here - I fully expect there to be
> a bit of adjustment needed from me.
Spivak is still very much the default. I (speaking for myself) am happy to use
other pronouns if you (or anyone) wo
On 23/08/2023 03:22, Gaelan Steele via agora-discussion wrote:
>
>> No bother :) Even if this isn't one of them, I'm sure culture has
>> changed in some ways since I was last here - I fully expect there to be
>> a bit of adjustment needed from me.
>
> Spivak is still very much the default. I (spe
AWW!
On 1/10/07, Michael Slone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 1/10/07, Taral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I register again. :D
You deregistered on 13 December, so rule 869 prohibits you from
registering today.
--
Michael Slone
--
Taral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"You can't prove anything."
-- G
Ian Kelly wrote:
>other than to annoy the CotC.
If e got annoyed by this, wouldn't e be violating 698/15(b)(3) "don't
panic"?
>By the way, no need to bar me: I deregistered in December.
Oops, missed that. It's been a rapid catch-up for me. Now to find out
why no one's sure whether Goethe is a
I wrote:
>why no one's sure whether Goethe is a Player...
Ah, found it. It's trivial: game custom is that where part of a Rule
makes no sense then the remainder of it is applied as far as possible.
The CotC's posting of the Writ deregisters the Player, and the
"instructing the Registrar" bit is n
Kerim Aydin wrote:
>But what about the utility of calling a CFJ with only one eligible
>judge (of the caller's choosing)? I agree, nice one, Zefram!
Heh. What I like is that there's a procedure to unlink the CFJs,
which would resolve the problem, but you can't do it until a Judge has
been assign
Kerim Aydin wrote:
> The paradox arose because
...
>our judgments so they deferred to each other, thereby invalidating
>themselves as judgments (circularly). That works regardless of the
>validity of the original argument
In a Platonist system this wouldn't be a problem. In the Plat
On 1/10/07, Zefram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
What started the Great Repeals anyway? They've been monstrously more
successful than any of the Chromatic Repeals ever were.
We got bored.
--
Taral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"You can't prove anything."
-- Gödel's Incompetence Theorem
Zefram wrote:
What I like is that there's a procedure to unlink the CFJs,
which would resolve the problem, but you can't do it until a Judge has
been assigned.
YAFI, YGI.
Proto-Proposal: Pre-emptive Unlinking
Amend Rule 2024 (Linked Statements) by appending, after this text:
Linked C
Goethe wrote:
ps. if you like the new rule 101, want to try to gut the judicial
system... I ran out of steam on that one and we still need judicial
reform (reform the mechanics to match R101 and the rest).
Something along the lines of this outline?
i. Every person has the right to CFJ
On 1/11/07, Zefram wrote:
Ooh, yes please. Looks like the judicial system makes up a good half or
so of the current ruleset. I came to the tentative conclusion that you'd
decided to centre the whole game on legal process for the time being.
Let's repeal the whole legal system and replace it
Ed Murphy wrote:
>YAFI, YGI.
What does that expand to?
> The Clerk of the Courts may, without objection, unlink one or
> more of the linked CFJs from the others by announcement. If e
> unlinks more than one as a set, then those CFJs remain linked
> to each other.
There are i
Zefram wrote:
Ed Murphy wrote:
YAFI, YGI.
What does that expand to?
"You asked for it, you got it".
The Clerk of the Courts may, without objection, unlink one or
more of the linked CFJs from the others by announcement. If e
unlinks more than one as a set, then those CFJs
On 1/11/07, Benjamin Schultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Welcome to the game, Zefram! Heck of a way to jump right in. Make yourself
at home.
Technically, this ought to be s#Welcome#Welcome back# ... After all,
Zefram was a Fugitive from Justice for over nine years.
--
Michael Slone
On Jan 11, 2007, at 9:01 PM, Michael Slone wrote:
On 1/11/07, Benjamin Schultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Welcome to the game, Zefram! Heck of a way to jump right in.
Make yourself
at home.
Technically, this ought to be s#Welcome#Welcome back# ... After all,
Zefram was a Fugitive from J
Michael Slone wrote:
>Zefram was a Fugitive from Justice for over nine years.
That's funny, I don't recall having any Blots when I deregistered.
Now that Blots and Stain are no longer defined by the Rules, do the
references to them in Rule 1437 mean that they still exist with their
previous seman
On Jan 10, 2007, at 2:10 PM, Michael Slone wrote:
On 1/10/07, Taral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I register again. :D
You deregistered on 13 December, so rule 869 prohibits you from
registering today.
--
Michael Slone
But you can try again now.
-
Benjamin Schultz KE3OM
On Sat, 2017-07-29 at 10:12 -0700, Ajay Kumar Raja wrote:
> I would like to register as a player.
Welcome to Agora!
On Jul 29, 2017, at 1:17 PM, Alex Smith wrote:
> Welcome!
>
> Just as a note, you normally have to be quite precise with your
> language when taking actions in Agora (registrati
On Mar 7, 2007, at 1:33 PM, Michael Slone wrote:
I register.
I issue a Timing Order to H. Rulekeepor Michael to publish
the Short Logical Ruleset within a fortnight.
Unfortunately, I haven't been keeping up with proposals too
well, so I don't know if this mechanism is still in the
rules.
--
On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 8:52 AM, Charles Walker
wrote:
> I register, with nickname 'Bede'.
>
> I award myself a White Ribbon.
>
> - Bede
>
Welcome, Bede! I dance the dance of welcome.
OscarMeyr
301 - 344 of 344 matches
Mail list logo
