DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to Register

Hello, > Under what name do you wish to be known? Any names listed in set [1] are acceptable. Please note that the listed names are _not_ case-insensitive — they are all fully lower-cased, even when they appear in contexts which would typically require upper-casing or title-casing, such as at

DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to register

On 1/28/24 17:24, Maria Carmela Del Gaudio via agora-business wrote: > Hello, > I would like to register, my preferred name is mcdg. > Many thanks. Welcome! By the way, for all new players (or anyone that wants a refresher?), I've been working on a new beginner's guide. You can see the rough

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to register to Agora

On Thu, 2023-05-18 at 18:49 -0500, blob via agora-discussion wrote: > I, being the new player, totally agree with this. I would be more than > willing to put some sort of marker in front of my name, as others in the > past have done. How should I go about changing my name--or how have others > in

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to register to Agora

On Thu, May 18, 2023 at 10:36 AM Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > On Thu, May 18, 2023 at 4:44 AM juan via agora-discussion > wrote: > > Note that the "free choice" is qualified by the need to "pick em out > in the full range of Agoran contexts". The

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to register to Agora

On Thu, May 18, 2023 at 4:44 AM juan via agora-discussion wrote: > > Janet Cobb via agora-discussion [2023-05-17 23:21]: > > On 5/17/23 20:13, nix via agora-business wrote: > > > On 5/17/23 19:10, Christian Arguinzoni via agora-business wrote: > > >> I would like to register for the nomic game

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to register to Agora

On 5/18/23 06:44, juan via agora-discussion wrote: I think this is kind of rude… People are free to choose their own names, at least in Agora, and I believe its an important principle. The problem seems to stem from the way the rules define persons regardless of their interactions with game

DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to register to Agora

On Wed, 2023-05-17 at 19:13 -0500, nix via agora-business wrote: > On 5/17/23 19:10, Christian Arguinzoni via agora-business wrote: > > I would like to register for the nomic game Agora. My preferred name is > > blob. Thank you! > > Welcome! I grant blob a Welcome Package. This is interesting

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to register to Agora

Janet Cobb via agora-discussion [2023-05-17 23:21]: > On 5/17/23 20:13, nix via agora-business wrote: > > On 5/17/23 19:10, Christian Arguinzoni via agora-business wrote: > >> I would like to register for the nomic game Agora. My preferred name is > >> blob. Thank you! > > Welcome! I grant blob a

DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to register to Agora

On 5/17/23 20:13, nix via agora-business wrote: > On 5/17/23 19:10, Christian Arguinzoni via agora-business wrote: >> I would like to register for the nomic game Agora. My preferred name is >> blob. Thank you! > Welcome! I grant blob a Welcome Package. This is interesting because > this might be

DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to initiate Registrar election

ziproot wrote: FALSE: One section of "Performing Tabled Actions" says "A rule purporting to allow a person to perform a tabled action allows em to do so by announcement, if, considering only intents for that action/method combination." Purporting is not defined anywhere, so a common sense

DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to register

On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 04:43:10PM +, unication Smith via agora-business wrote: > I wish to register under the alias “Ubercrow”. Welcome to Agora! -- Falsifian

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to Begin Nomaoic

Cuddlebeam wrote: (once you have a totally reliable majority cabal, the game is under your total control anyways, you just monopolize what proposals pass and what not) Provided that it remains totally reliable, because backstabbing never ever happens. Maybe it would lead to less degenerate

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to Begin Nomaoic

(once you have a totally reliable majority cabal, the game is under your total control anyways, you just monopolize what proposals pass and what not) On Wed, Sep 2, 2020 at 6:18 PM Cuddle Beam wrote: > It's not guaranteed if another group does the random roll instead and the > bonds of a

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to Begin Nomaoic

It's not guaranteed if another group does the random roll instead and the bonds of a majority cabal aren't strong enough. Although once you have a totally reliable cabal that is majority-sized, then yes, it's better to go for your option. On Wed, Sep 2, 2020 at 6:14 PM nix via agora-discussion <

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to Begin Nomaoic

On 9/2/20 11:10 AM, Cuddle Beam wrote: > Having a sole winner doesn't solve the problem imo, you could just > make that one of the team players selected at random achieve a win > (which is quicker than the 2-proposal one and if done, it's too fast > for anything slower to work). Quicker in

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to Begin Nomaoic

Having a sole winner doesn't solve the problem imo, you could just make that one of the team players selected at random achieve a win (which is quicker than the 2-proposal one and if done, it's too fast for anything slower to work). On Wed, Sep 2, 2020 at 5:07 PM nix via agora-discussion <

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to Begin Nomaoic

On 9/2/20 9:51 AM, Gaelan Steele via agora-discussion wrote: > > OK, so here's what's going on: I received a proposal along the lines of > "these players get 100 points. They all win." I won't reveal the names or > number of these players for obvious reasons, but, at the point when it >

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to Begin Nomaoic

> On Sep 2, 2020, at 3:51 PM, Gaelan Steele via agora-discussion > wrote: > > OK, so here's what's going on: I received a proposal along the lines of > "these players get 100 points. They all win." I won't reveal the names or > number of these players for obvious reasons, but, at the point

DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to Begin Nomaoic

OK, so here's what's going on: I received a proposal along the lines of "these players get 100 points. They all win." I won't reveal the names or number of these players for obvious reasons, but, at the point when it happened, it was exactly enough players to pass a proposal… as long as

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to Begin Nomaoic

On 9/1/20 2:51 PM, Cuddle Beam via agora-discussion wrote: > I become a player in Nomaoic. Noting that I'm very open to cabals, feel > free to email me. This was NttPF btw. -- Jason Cobb

DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to Begin Nomaoic

On Tue, Sep 1, 2020, 7:33 PM nix via agora-business < agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > On 9/1/20 7:26 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote: > > > > On 9/1/20 2:17 PM, Gaelan Steele via agora-business wrote: > >> I do so. > >> > >> Players may register by a public message; after that,

DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to Begin Nomaoic

I become a player in Nomaoic. Noting that I'm very open to cabals, feel free to email me. On Tue, Sep 1, 2020 at 8:25 PM ATMunn via agora-business < agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > On 9/1/2020 2:17 PM, Gaelan Steele via agora-business wrote: > > > > > >> On Aug 28, 2020, at 6:22 PM,

DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to Begin Nomaoic

On 8/28/2020 10:22 AM, Gaelan Steele via agora-business wrote: I intend, with 2 Consent, to initiate a free tournament with the following regulations. 1. Gaelan can not win the Tournament, nor become a player within the tournament. Gaelan is the Gamemaster and Judge of this Tournament. 2.

DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to Become a Player

On 6/2/20 7:19 PM, Aris Merchant via agora-business wrote: > Happy birthday, Jason! You've contributed greatly to Agora and it's been > wonderful to have you. There's a reason you're the current Shogun. :) I > hope you'll be one of our players long into the future. I grant Jason 3 > coins. > >

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Intent

Well, we have some test cases right now, so someone could CFJ (if nobody else does, I will later). Jason Cobb On 7/11/19 10:18 AM, James Cook wrote: On Wed, 10 Jul 2019 at 00:56, Rebecca wrote: Does the CHoJ work now btw? It's unclear, since R2557 may not give a method for levying fines.

DIS: Re: BUS: Intent

On Wed, 10 Jul 2019 at 00:56, Rebecca wrote: > Does the CHoJ work now btw? It's unclear, since R2557 may not give a method for levying fines. See my proposal "Police Power" with Jason Cobb.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to Become a Player

Thanks :) Jason Cobb On Sun, Jun 2, 2019 at 10:30 AM ATMunn wrote: > Welcome to Agora, Jason Cobb! > > On 6/1/2019 10:02 PM, Jason Cobb wrote: > > I declare my intent to become a Player. > > > > Jason Cobb > > >

DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to Become a Player

Welcome to Agora, Jason Cobb! On 6/1/2019 10:02 PM, Jason Cobb wrote: I declare my intent to become a Player. Jason Cobb

DIS: Re: BUS: Intent Proposal

Maybe try “does not appear to have known”? Otherwise, the gamestate depends on someone’s actual mental state, which is impossible to determine given the limits of current technology. -Aris On Sun, May 26, 2019 at 4:24 PM D. Margaux wrote: > Crap. > > I withdraw that proposal. I resubmit it

DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to clean rules

This needs to be done after the intent fixing proposal passes, anyway, since rule changes are explicitly _not_ fixed and this won't be in the ruleset that is being ratified. Greetings, Ørjan. On Tue, 5 Mar 2019, James Cook wrote: On Wed, 13 Feb 2019 at 00:59, James Cook wrote: I intend to

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Intent (+SPOOKY)

I slightly mind, but I probably would have done the same thing so meh. Also, come to think of it, I also abused that contract to your detriment, so maybe this is just karma. Gaelan > On Feb 18, 2019, at 3:36 PM, D. Margaux wrote: > > Good point! Based on his recent hashes, he probably is.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Intent (+SPOOKY)

I think you need to retract the previous ballots first (though "changing" a vote is accepted shorthand) -twg ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On Monday, February 18, 2019 11:36 PM, D. Margaux wrote: > Good point! Based on his recent hashes, he probably is. Therefore: > > If Aris’s message

DIS: Re: BUS: Intent (+SPOOKY)

Hold on, are we sure G. isn't in on it? -twg ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On Monday, February 18, 2019 11:31 PM, D. Margaux wrote: > Like Gaelan, I do the following, and I cause ATMunn to do the following: > > - object to any intents announced in the quoted message. > - if quoted

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Intent

What if we approach this from the other direction—i.e., what kind of a thing could this “Protocol” action possibly be? If this Protocol action isn’t somehow authorized (directly or indirectly) by the Rules, then it cannot be used to perform regulated actions and so there’s no reason for us to

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Intent

> On Feb 18, 2019, at 4:18 AM, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: > > ais523 mentioned something about the original definition being NttPF - we've > already checked the a-d archives, but maybe there was once something in the > IRC channel? Or does anyone know of any other discussion forums that have

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Intent

The closest thing I could find is this: which relates to UNDEAD, but to the best of my knowledge Aris registered well after UNDEAD was a major thing. My default assumption whenever something like this happens is that

DIS: Re: BUS: Intent

The Protocol seems like something that could be interacted with but it’s too obscure for uninformed people to properly react to (“if you remember” and whatnot, implying it requires some kind of past knowledge, and there’s nothing on the archives so I have no idea), I did the same lol. On Mon, 18

DIS: Re: BUS: Intent

On Monday, February 18, 2019 8:24 AM, Cuddle Beam wrote: > I hngah 50 coins for Aris Merchant // Title: 50 coins Adoption index: 1.0 Author: CuddleBeam Aris Merchant

DIS: Re: BUS: Intent

On Sun, 2019-02-17 at 22:36 -0800, Aris Merchant wrote: > To be honest, I can’t think of a way to block an activation of The > Protocol after an intent has been announced. That said, the fact that > I can’t think of a way to do something doesn’t mean it’s impossible. Assuming that this is a

DIS: Re: BUS: Intent

I promise, I won’t preferentially delay any proposals. If they’re late, they’ll be late for the sole reason that the entire report is late. That shouldn’t happpen though, as I have some free time over the next few days. -Aris On Tue, Feb 5, 2019 at 9:41 AM D. Margaux wrote: > I intend to

DIS: Re: BUS: Intent

I think you technically cannot force it until just after the Week, because you need to wait until the Promotor is late (rule 2160 §3). Greetings, Ørjan. On Tue, 5 Feb 2019, D. Margaux wrote: I intend to deputise for Promotor to distribute the proposals in the proposal pool. I intend to

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Intent

Huh. YMMV, but I personally wouldn't consider it rude, especially if you explained why it was time-sensitive for you (unless you were doing it every time they were a day late or something). The whole purpose of requiring Notice is to give a fair warning. A specific purpose of deputisation,

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Intent

In that case I won’t do the deputising then. I guess I’m just overly excited to see how the scam plays out. :-) > On Feb 5, 2019, at 4:16 PM, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote: > > Yikes. > > I've been told in the past that forcibly ousting (non-corrupt) officers > without their consent is considered

DIS: Re: BUS: Intent

Yikes. I've been told in the past that forcibly ousting (non-corrupt) officers without their consent is considered rude, but if you're willing to wait until the weekend I can distribute it for you as a one-off, if Aris hasn't already by then. -twg ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On

DIS: Re: BUS: Intent

Attn ATMunn: Here's o initiating a Surveyor election, nobody has stood against em. On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 5:48 PM, Owen Jacobson wrote: > > > On Oct 22, 2017, at 12:46 AM, VJ Rada wrote: > > > > I intend, in between 2 and 14 days, to deputize for the

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Intent

Oh sorry you just thought you needed to pend it. Yeah, Alexis is right, they're free. On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 1:40 PM, VJ Rada wrote: > Uh...players can unilaterally initiate elections for offices they hold. > That election is initiated. > > On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 1:38 PM,

DIS: Re: BUS: Intent

Uh...players can unilaterally initiate elections for offices they hold. That election is initiated. On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 1:38 PM, Owen Jacobson wrote: > > > On Oct 24, 2017, at 2:48 AM, Owen Jacobson wrote: > > > > > >> On Oct 22, 2017, at 12:46 AM, VJ

DIS: Re: BUS: Intent

I won't stand for this. (this office! Not "I won't stand for this" as in "this is unacceptable") On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 5:48 PM, Owen Jacobson wrote: > >> On Oct 22, 2017, at 12:46 AM, VJ Rada wrote: >> >> I intend, in between 2 and 14 days, to deputize

DIS: Re: BUS: Intent

I would be willing to do secretary. On 10/22/2017 12:46 AM, VJ Rada wrote: > I intend, in between 2 and 14 days, to deputize for the positions of > Referee and Surveyor, for the purposes of publishing the weekly > reports of each of those positions. > > I encourage someone with a stronger heart

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Intent

Yeah, I just put out an intent to kill the agency. :) > On Oct 4, 2017, at 7:14 AM, Alexis Hunt wrote: > >> On Wed, 4 Oct 2017 at 01:13 Gaelan Steele wrote: >> Get shinies for proposing (and passing) rules that are valid markdown so >> that the HLR works

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Intent

On Wed, 4 Oct 2017 at 01:13 Gaelan Steele wrote: > Get shinies for proposing (and passing) rules that are valid markdown so > that the HLR works better. > Opposed to this.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Intent

"Any protest from anyone about proposing 1 weekly report that contains full agency texts? It's not all that long..." As the superintendant, nope. Go for it. On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 3:12 PM, Gaelan Steele wrote: > Get shinies for proposing (and passing) rules that are valid

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Intent

Get shinies for proposing (and passing) rules that are valid markdown so that the HLR works better. > On Oct 3, 2017, at 10:05 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > > On Tue, 3 Oct 2017, Gaelan Steele wrote: >> I intend with 24 Hours notice to destroy the agency MKD. Nobody's

DIS: Re: BUS: Intent

On Tue, 3 Oct 2017, Gaelan Steele wrote: > I intend with 24 Hours notice to destroy the agency MKD. Nobody's ever > used it, and it doesn't seem worth keeping around. I think the Agency reports are out of whack. A weekly list of names carries very little useful information, and there's so long

DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to deputise

On Nov 4, 2016, at 1:47 PM, Owen Jacobson wrote: > * It’ll take me about that long to get the reports together anyways, and I’d > rather not duplicate the effort if someone else is already doing it; Apparently not. I have DRAFTS of the two rules-required reports, as well as

DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to Deputise for Promotor

I didn't think to actually echo your intent. However, I am ready to distribute the proposals after ribbons; if you'd like me to do so, resign.

DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to Deputise for Promotor

I had been planning to send a similar message. Happy to give the office a shot if neither you nor aranea want it.

DIS: Re: BUS: Intent

On Sun, Aug 25, 2013 at 11:45 AM, Charles Walker charles.w.wal...@gmail.com wrote: I announce that it is my intent, assuming the absence of a trio (or greater) of objectors within the defined time period, to cause the Mutability Index to have a value of 10. I will object for something

DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to deputise

On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 7:17 PM, Jonathan Rouillard jonathan.rouill...@gmail.com wrote: If I haven't already voted on these, I vote PRESENT on all of them. (I sent a message to the list, but it was down so it told me that it would retry automatically. I have no idea if it actually did, so eh.

DIS: Re: BUS: Intent

On 31 July 2011 02:18, Elliott Hird penguinoftheg...@googlemail.com wrote: On 30 July 2011 23:21, woggle woggl...@gmail.com wrote: I intend, with Agoran Consent, to cause the President to deregister. I intend, with Agoran Consent, to cause the President to withdraw all previous support or

DIS: Re: BUS: Intent

On 31 July 2011 01:18, Elliott Hird penguinoftheg...@googlemail.com wrote: On 30 July 2011 23:21, woggle woggl...@gmail.com wrote: I intend, with Agoran Consent, to cause the President to deregister. I intend, with Agoran Consent, to cause the President to withdraw all previous support or

DIS: Re: BUS: intent to deputize

On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 5:43 PM, Geoffrey Spear geoffsp...@gmail.com wrote: I intend to deputize for the Registrar to publish eir weekly report. Pseudo-CoE: This is too vague. There are multiple documents that would satisfy the Registrar's requirement to publish a weekly report.

DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to deregister

On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 5:10 PM, Schrodinger's Cat schrodingers.kat...@gmail.com wrote: I object. On 12/16/09, Schrodinger's Cat schrodingers.kat...@gmail.com wrote: I intend, without objection, to deregister Schrodinger's Cat. -- Sent from my mobile device -- Schrodinger's Cat --

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to deregister

On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 7:59 PM, Sgeo sgeos...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 5:10 PM, Schrodinger's Cat schrodingers.kat...@gmail.com wrote: I object. On 12/16/09, Schrodinger's Cat schrodingers.kat...@gmail.com wrote: I intend, without objection, to deregister Schrodinger's Cat.

DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to amend FRContest

On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 6:45 PM, Ed Murphy emurph...@socal.rr.com wrote: 7) If this contract is a Champion's Contest, the contestmaster CAN and    SHALL transfer a medal from the contract to any contestant who has    won 3 rounds of the Committee since the contract came to possess that    

DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to ditch the Points Party

--- On Wed, 23/9/09, Elliott Hird penguinoftheg...@googlemail.com wrote: You're a damn immoral liar, claiming that your mousetrap would only be used for that proposal to me. Shame. I didn't; I also claimed that I would try to punish players who attempted to object by stealing/destroying

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to ditch the Points Party

2009/9/23 Alex Smith callforjudgem...@yahoo.co.uk: I didn't; I also claimed that I would try to punish players who attempted to object by stealing/destroying assets, which is what I'm doing here. I think your misquote of me is bordering on illegal. ais523 I said I'd only use the mousetrap

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to ditch the Points Party

On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 10:30 AM, Elliott Hird penguinoftheg...@googlemail.com wrote: 2009/9/23 Alex Smith callforjudgem...@yahoo.co.uk: I didn't; I also claimed that I would try to punish players who attempted to object by stealing/destroying assets, which is what I'm doing here. I think

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to ditch the Points Party

On Wed, 23 Sep 2009, comex wrote: On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 10:30 AM, Elliott Hird penguinoftheg...@googlemail.com wrote: 2009/9/23 Alex Smith callforjudgem...@yahoo.co.uk: I didn't; I also claimed that I would try to punish players who attempted to object by stealing/destroying assets...

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to ditch the Points Party

Sent from my iPhone On Sep 23, 2009, at 1:54 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote: (and as an aside, maybe such a far-reaching win should close off the era of complex contracts in Agora). Only if it works!

DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to ditch the Points Party

On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 16:57, ais523 callforjudgem...@yahoo.co.uk wrote: On Tue, 2009-09-15 at 07:04 -0700, Ed Murphy wrote: I retract my proposal Kill it with fire. I submit the following proposal, and intend (without objection) to make it distributable: Proposal:  Kill it with fire (AI

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to ditch the Points Party

Roger Hicks wrote: Proto: Criminalize Ambiguity { Create a new rule with the text: {{ Knowingly compounding an ambiguous gamestate is the class 4 crime of Muddying the Waters. }} } Criminality dependent on intent is almost, but not quite, as bad as gamestate ambiguity, and for not

DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to ditch the Points Party

ais523 wrote: On Tue, 2009-09-15 at 07:04 -0700, Ed Murphy wrote: I retract my proposal Kill it with fire. I submit the following proposal, and intend (without objection) to make it distributable: Proposal: Kill it with fire (AI = 2, II = 0, please) Terminate the contract that was

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: intent, NoV

coppro wrote: I spend an Absolve-o-matic (sp) to destroy a Rest in my own possession. TTttPF As a few of us have recently found out, Absolv-o-Matic is ineffective because its rule has too low Power to satisfy securing of Rest changes.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: intent, NoV

Ed Murphy wrote: coppro wrote: I spend an Absolve-o-matic (sp) to destroy a Rest in my own possession. TTttPF As a few of us have recently found out, Absolv-o-Matic is ineffective because its rule has too low Power to satisfy securing of Rest changes. Oh, wonderful :/

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: intent, NoV

On Thu, 2009-07-30 at 23:55 -0600, Sean Hunt wrote: Geoffrey Spear wrote: I intend to deputize for the IADoP to initiate an election for Rulekeepor. I publish an NoV alleging that coppro violated R2217, a Power 1 rule, by failing to initiate an election for Rulekeepor within 1 week of

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: intent, NoV

On Fri, 31 Jul 2009, ais523 wrote: Fails, Absolve-o-matics are broken atm. -- ais523 I think quorum is such that you could fix it personally by voting FOR 6409 right now (and if you feel like it, 6407-6408 are also straightforward fixes). -G.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: intent, NoV

On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 10:04 AM, Kerim Aydinke...@u.washington.edu wrote: On Fri, 31 Jul 2009, ais523 wrote: Fails, Absolve-o-matics are broken atm. -- ais523 I think quorum is such that you could fix it personally by voting FOR 6409 right now (and if you feel like it, 6407-6408 are also

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: intent, NoV

Wooble wrote: On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 10:04 AM, Kerim Aydinke...@u.washington.edu wrote: On Fri, 31 Jul 2009, ais523 wrote: Fails, Absolve-o-matics are broken atm. -- ais523 I think quorum is such that you could fix it personally by voting FOR 6409 right now (and if you feel like it,

DIS: Re: BUS: intent, NoV

Geoffrey Spear wrote: I intend to deputize for the IADoP to initiate an election for Rulekeepor. I publish an NoV alleging that coppro violated R2217, a Power 1 rule, by failing to initiate an election for Rulekeepor within 1 week of the office ceasing to have an active holder. I cause this

DIS: Re: BUS: intent

On Sun, Jul 12, 2009 at 09:02, Geoffrey Speargeoffsp...@gmail.com wrote: I intend to deputise for the Insulator to make initial deals from the Deck of Justice. That's what I get for not re-reading the adopted proposal. I forgot this was my job. Deals coming up. BobTHJ

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: intent to deputise

On May 30, 2009, at 1:48 PM, Sean Hunt wrote: Geoffrey Spear wrote: I intend to deputise for the Herald to announce that OscarMeyr became Speaker on 20 May 2009. Oscar, or anyone deputizing if Oscar fails to do so: I believe the Respectfully, my nickname is OscarMeyr, not Oscar. Take a

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: intent to deputise

Benjamin Schultz wrote: On May 30, 2009, at 1:48 PM, Sean Hunt wrote: Geoffrey Spear wrote: I intend to deputise for the Herald to announce that OscarMeyr became Speaker on 20 May 2009. Oscar, or anyone deputizing if Oscar fails to do so: I believe the Respectfully, my nickname is

DIS: Re: BUS: intent to deputise

Geoffrey Spear wrote: I intend to deputise for the Herald to announce that OscarMeyr became Speaker on 20 May 2009. Oscar, or anyone deputizing if Oscar fails to do so: I believe the current MWoPs are myself, ais523, root, yourself, and Wooble. Note that Canada being awarded MWoP will not change

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: intent to deputise

Sean Hunt wrote: Geoffrey Spear wrote: I intend to deputise for the Herald to announce that OscarMeyr became Speaker on 20 May 2009. Oscar, or anyone deputizing if Oscar fails to do so: I believe the current MWoPs are myself, ais523, root, yourself, and Wooble. Note that Canada being awarded

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: intent to deputise

On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 12:48 PM, Sean Hunt ride...@gmail.com wrote: at OscarMeyr became Speaker on 20 May 2009. Canada is a player, and an active one at that.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: intent to deputise

On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 2:40 PM, Aaron Goldfein aarongoldf...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 12:48 PM, Sean Hunt ride...@gmail.com wrote: at OscarMeyr became Speaker on 20 May 2009. Canada is a player, and an active one at that. It is a person; I'm not aware of it ever becoming

DIS: Re: BUS: intent to deputise

On Sat, 30 May 2009, Geoffrey Spear wrote: I intend to deputise for the Herald to announce that OscarMeyr became Speaker on 20 May 2009. Oh sorry is that a duty now? Missed that. I'll announce it tomorrow when I catch up with records. -G.

DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to award patent titles

Wooble wrote: I award myself the patent title Champion for my win by Championship. I award myself the patent title Champion for my win by High Score. In the interest of maintaining the Hall of Fame's historical records (and my not having to hunt through the archives again), what was the nature

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to award patent titles

On Fri, 2009-05-22 at 12:25 -0700, Ed Murphy wrote: Wooble wrote: I award myself the patent title Champion for my win by Championship. I award myself the patent title Champion for my win by High Score. In the interest of maintaining the Hall of Fame's historical records (and my not

DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to award patent titles

On Wed, 2009-05-20 at 21:52 -0400, Geoffrey Spear wrote: On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 9:50 PM, Geoffrey Spear geoffsp...@gmail.com wrote: I award myself the patent title Champion for my win by Championship. I award myself the patent title Champion for my win by High Score. I award myself the

DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to clean up contracts from November and early December

Sgeo wrote: On Sun, Dec 7, 2008 at 9:12 PM, Ed Murphy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I wrote: Wed 5 Nov 00:58:13 P1 and P2 amended; P3 through P100 come and go In case the previous message was ineffective: [snip the murders of partnerships P1-P100] I CFJ on the statement: P17 has the Patent

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to clean up contracts from November and early December

On Tue, Dec 9, 2008 at 1:42 PM, Ed Murphy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sgeo wrote: On Sun, Dec 7, 2008 at 9:12 PM, Ed Murphy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I wrote: Wed 5 Nov 00:58:13 P1 and P2 amended; P3 through P100 come and go In case the previous message was ineffective: [snip the murders of

DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to clean up contracts from November and early December

On 8 Dec 2008, at 02:09, Ed Murphy wrote: Sun 16 Nov 00:52:20 Unnamed pledge created by ehird I pledge not to redeem USD Vouchers specifying warrigal. Having received no objection, I terminate this contract. This pledge did not exist. It did not identify itself as public.

DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to clean up contracts from November and early December

Tue 2 Dec 23:27:07 Unnamed pledge created by Warrigal I publicly pledge that if I get elected, I'll sort this out so that harblcat, Siege and Charles get an equal chance. Having received no objection, I terminate this contract. This is also a Grand Poobah pledge, isn't it? --Warrigal

DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to register

On Nov 28, 2008, at 4:50 AM, Chris Blair wrote: I, harblcat, hereby announce my registration. --- I hope to have fun. Welcome to the game, harblcat! - Benjamin Schultz KE3OM OscarMeyr {{welcome-tiny}}

DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to appeal

On 28 Nov 2008, at 19:31, comex wrote: On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 2:24 PM, Geoffrey Spear [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I intend, with 2 support, to appeal the judgement on sentencing in CFJ 2273. CHOKEY is far too lenient. Support. I support and appeal it. If comex gets EXILED, cantus

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to deputise

On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 11:35 AM, Ed Murphy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I accept this nomination. I also predict that Taral will decline (or at least not accept) eirs, as IIRC e ran away screaming the last time e was so nominated. Eh, if Murphy wants it, e can have it. Murphy? -- Taral [EMAIL

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to deputise

Taral wrote: On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 11:35 AM, Ed Murphy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I accept this nomination. I also predict that Taral will decline (or at least not accept) eirs, as IIRC e ran away screaming the last time e was so nominated. Eh, if Murphy wants it, e can have it. Murphy?

DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to deputise

On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 8:09 AM, Alex Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I intend to deputise for the CotC to: * Recuse the appeals panel on CFJ 2213a * Recuse the appeals panel on CFJ 2203a * Recuse the appeals panel on CFJ 2172a I note that the CotC is very nearly overdue on one

  1   2   >