scshunt wrote:
On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 7:31 PM, omd wrote:
Criminal case: ais523 violated the rule "The Ambassador-At-Large"
(which I haven't numbered yet) by using a power granted to Agora's
ambassadors other than as allowed by the rules.
Arguments:
Regardless of whether e "attempt[ed] to us
On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 7:31 PM, omd wrote:
> Criminal case: ais523 violated the rule "The Ambassador-At-Large"
> (which I haven't numbered yet) by using a power granted to Agora's
> ambassadors other than as allowed by the rules.
>
> Arguments:
>
> Regardless of whether e "attempt[ed] to use" the
omd wrote:
On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 7:35 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
Second, in general, attempting to perform an Agoran action by
announcement is not explicitly prohibited or regulated, thus by R101(i)
persons have the right to so attempt. Specific forms are ILLEGAL (e.g.
Endorsing Forgery), but then
omd wrote:
On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 7:51 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
Counterarguments:
Those actions are intended to be disallowed for non-players.
Arguments:
I intend these actions to be disallowed for ais523.
Counterarguments:
More specifically, those actions are generally and (usually)
uncont
On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 7:35 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
> Second, in general, attempting to perform an Agoran action by
> announcement is not explicitly prohibited or regulated, thus by R101(i)
> persons have the right to so attempt. Specific forms are ILLEGAL (e.g.
> Endorsing Forgery), but then R101(v
omd wrote:
On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 4:06 PM, Alex Smith wrote:
I assume Ambassador-At-Large.
In other news, I hereby announce a new Nomic:
Nomic 1
1. This is the ruleset for Nomic 1. omd is the only player of Nomic
1, and can amend these rules arbitrarily by posting a message with the
new r
On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 5:31 PM, ais523 wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-07-09 at 17:13 -0700, omd wrote:
>> If that's true, then deregistering someone violates their right to
>> participate in the fora, since it disallows the vast majority of game
>> actions.
> Nonplayers don't have a right of participation
On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 7:51 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
> Counterarguments:
>
> Those actions are intended to be disallowed for non-players.
Arguments:
I intend these actions to be disallowed for ais523.
ais523 wrote:
On Mon, 2012-07-09 at 17:13 -0700, omd wrote:
If that's true, then deregistering someone violates their right to
participate in the fora, since it disallows the vast majority of game
actions.
Nonplayers don't have a right of participation in the fora.
Despite this not being exp
On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 5:41 PM, ais523 wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-07-09 at 17:13 -0700, omd wrote:
>> "an attempt to perform any Agoran action" is much more general than
>> "posting a message with the new ruleset". In any 'normal' nomic, you
>> would not interpret a rule that says "posting a message w
omd wrote:
On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 5:00 PM, ais523 wrote:
Arguments:
I have several defences to this.
First, even if this worked, both rule 478 and rule 101(v) give me the
right to participate in the fora. So there's a higher-power rule
allowing me to make posts to the fora. Prohibiting peopl
omd wrote:
On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 4:06 PM, Alex Smith wrote:
I assume Ambassador-At-Large.
In other news, I hereby announce a new Nomic:
Nomic 1
1. This is the ruleset for Nomic 1. omd is the only player of Nomic
1, and can amend these rules arbitrarily by posting a message with the
new r
On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 8:14 PM, omd wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 4:06 PM, Alex Smith wrote:
>> I assume Ambassador-At-Large.
>
> In other news, I hereby announce a new Nomic:
>
> Nomic 1
>
> 1. This is the ruleset for Nomic 1. omd is the only player of Nomic
> 1, and can amend these rules arb
13 matches
Mail list logo
