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
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
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
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
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
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).
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 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.
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
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 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
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, Aris Merchant wrote:
> I intend to destroy the universe with notice.
https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/?2150
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
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
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
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
That's an interesting idea. I feel like this could be scammable though.
Then again, what isn't scammable?
On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 6:34 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
>
> Why not just change it so a Welcome package Creates money rather than
> transferring it? (and to balance it, the secretary can dest
Why not just change it so a Welcome package Creates money rather than
transferring it? (and to balance it, the secretary can destroy money
if total is above some multiple of # of players).
On Sat, 21 Oct 2017, VJ Rada wrote:
> By the way, with this registration we have 20 players and 1000
> sh
By the way, with this registration we have 20 players and 1000
shinies. It's literally only possible for everyone to claim a welcome
package if nobody gained any more money than that. We need to print
money.
On Sat, Oct 21, 2017 at 9:22 AM, VJ Rada wrote:
> I pay Telnaior 5 shinies.
>
> On Sat, O
On 2017-10-21 09:22, Kerim Aydin wrote:
Telnaior - you should announce intent to win with 2 days notice, in
case proposal 7923 passes...
On Fri, 20 Oct 2017, ATMunn . wrote:
Speaking of...
If Telnaior's shiny balance is 0 as of the sending of this message, I transfer
10 shinies to Telnaior.
Telnaior - you should announce intent to win with 2 days notice, in
case proposal 7923 passes...
On Fri, 20 Oct 2017, ATMunn . wrote:
> Speaking of...
>
> If Telnaior's shiny balance is 0 as of the sending of this message, I
> transfer 10 shinies to Telnaior.
>
> I included the conditional i
Eh, you'll get money soon enough. Welcome! I'm Agora's second-newest player
before you registered (I think), so I'm still learning the ropes.
On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 4:52 PM, Madeline wrote:
> That's both the most disappointing (but perhaps the most sensible)
> interpretation and means I'm stuck
That's both the most disappointing (but perhaps the most sensible)
interpretation and means I'm stuck being broke D:
On 2017-10-21 07:47, Aris Merchant wrote:
The generally accepted interpretation is that the action entirely
fails. Welcome back!
-Aris
On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 1:46 PM, Madeli
The generally accepted interpretation is that the action entirely
fails. Welcome back!
-Aris
On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 1:46 PM, Madeline wrote:
> Alright, so what... does happen? It specifies you can't destroy a stamp if
> Agora can't pay the balance, but nothing else has a similar clause which
Alright, so what... does happen? It specifies you can't destroy a stamp
if Agora can't pay the balance, but nothing else has a similar clause
which suggests it's intended to still be possible.
On 2017-10-21 07:44, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
The shiny balance can not be negative bec
The shiny balance can not be negative because it is an asset, not a switch.
On 10/20/2017 04:42 PM, Telnaior wrote:
> I flip my Citizenship to Registered.
>
> For recordkeeping purposes, my username is Telnaior and I was
> previously deregistered in 2014.
>
> Anyways, I'm going to apologise, I fe
27 matches
Mail list logo
