On Thu, 23 Oct 2014, Kerim Aydin wrote:
On Thu, 23 Oct 2014, Eritivus wrote:
I guess the power of rules enacted by illicit fast track ratification
actually can't be more than 3, since the fast track rule has power 3?
So not as worrisome as I thought.
If you want to make higher-powered rules
On Thu, 23 Oct 2014, Eritivus wrote:
> I guess the power of rules enacted by illicit fast track ratification
> actually can't be more than 3, since the fast track rule has power 3?
>
> So not as worrisome as I thought.
If you want to make higher-powered rules but can get a power-3 proposal
thro
On Thu, 2014-10-23 at 19:51 +, Eritivus wrote:
> I guess the power of rules enacted by illicit fast track ratification
> actually can't be more than 3, since the fast track rule has power 3?
>
> So not as worrisome as I thought.
A Power-3 rule can do anything, though, because the Power restri
I guess the power of rules enacted by illicit fast track ratification
actually can't be more than 3, since the fast track rule has power 3?
So not as worrisome as I thought.
On Thu, 2014-10-23 at 18:33 +, omd wrote:
> That it ignores the AI=1 requirement is accidental, but probably not
> important. If someone makes an obviously deficient fast track
> attempt, that's what a Claim of Error is for.
Sure, I just don't have a feel for how likely it is that skilled
Rid
On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 1:56 PM, Eritivus wrote:
> The "self-ratifying" clause seems worrisome, because it is not obvious
> to me that it requires the conditions in the first paragraph (AI=1, 7
> days notice, etc) to be satisfied.
That ratification can occur regardless of any failures in the actu
Suppose I send the following message, having sent no previous relevant
messages (i.e. no previously published intent).
I hereby fast track the following proposal:
Proposal: Eritivus Regnat
AI: 4
Create a new Power-4 Rule titled "Eritivus Regnat":
Eritivus CAN cause this
On Tue, 21 Oct 2014, Jonatan Kilhamn wrote:
> On 21 October 2014 18:42, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> > On Tue, 21 Oct 2014, Jonatan Kilhamn wrote:
> >> On 21 October 2014 18:28, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Am I reading this wrong or does this allow any proposal to be adopted
> >> > with 2 support?
y ongoing decision on whether to
>adopt it is immediately cancelled (without being resolved).
--Message d'origine--
De: Kerim Aydin
À: Me
À: Agora Nomic discussions (DF)
Objet: Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Proposal: Fast Track
Envoyé: 21 oct. 2014 18:47
On Tue, 21 Oct 2014, khoyobeg...@gmai
On Tue, 21 Oct 2014, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Oct 2014, khoyobeg...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Is there a need for a vote count if there are no objections (AGAINST votes)
> > to a proposal ?
>
> SCAM:
> If there's a proposal you and 2 others don't like, fast-track it,
> then kill it with an ob
On 21 October 2014 18:42, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, 21 Oct 2014, Jonatan Kilhamn wrote:
>> On 21 October 2014 18:28, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > Am I reading this wrong or does this allow any proposal to be adopted
>> > with 2 support? Where's the actual vote count?
>> >
>>
>> With
On Tue, 21 Oct 2014, khoyobeg...@gmail.com wrote:
> Is there a need for a vote count if there are no objections (AGAINST votes)
> to a proposal ?
SCAM:
If there's a proposal you and 2 others don't like, fast-track it,
then kill it with an objection. Repeat indefinitely.
Is there a need for a vote count if there are no objections (AGAINST votes) to
a proposal ?
--Khoyo
-Original Message-
From: Kerim Aydin
Sender: "agora-discussion" Date: Tue,
21 Oct 2014 09:28:28
To: Agora Discussion
Reply-To: "Agora Nomic discussions \(DF\)"
S
On Tue, 21 Oct 2014, Jonatan Kilhamn wrote:
> On 21 October 2014 18:28, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> >
> >
> > Am I reading this wrong or does this allow any proposal to be adopted
> > with 2 support? Where's the actual vote count?
> >
>
> With 2 support and 0 objections, yes; that's how I read it too
On 21 October 2014 18:28, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
>
> Am I reading this wrong or does this allow any proposal to be adopted
> with 2 support? Where's the actual vote count?
>
With 2 support and 0 objections, yes; that's how I read it too.
--
Tiger
Am I reading this wrong or does this allow any proposal to be adopted
with 2 support? Where's the actual vote count?
On Tue, 21 Oct 2014, omd wrote:
> Proposal: Fast Track (AI=3)
>
> Create a new Power-3 Rule titled "Fast Tracking":
>
> A player CAN, without objection and with 2 suppor
16 matches
Mail list logo
