On 2/1/22 16:38, Rose Strong via agora-discussion wrote:
> Unless I am completely misunderstanding the CFJ 3938 ruling a quorum can
> never be 1.
>
That's under the current rules, due to the clause that would be changed
here. There's nothing inherently saying quorum can't be 1, that's just
what
On 1/24/22 22:28, Ørjan Johansen via agora-discussion wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Jan 2022, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote:
>
>> I create the following proposal, then pay a fee of one pendant to cause
>> it to become pending.
>>
>> Title: Auction Self-Ratification
>> Adoption index: 3.0
>> Author:
On 1/19/2022 11:09 AM, ais523 via agora-discussion wrote:
> On Wed, 2022-01-19 at 07:30 -0800, Kerim Aydin via agora-business wrote:
>> I submit the following proposal, AI=2, called "Points":
>>
>>
>>
>> Create the following power=2 rule,
On 8/22/2021 11:39 AM, Edward Murphy via agora-discussion wrote:
> G. wrote:
>
>> I submit the following proposal, "fix win lockouts", AI-2 please.
>
> Note: this doesn't cause winning conditions to override "impure players
> can't win", it just prevents post-win cleanups from occurring unless
On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 11:03 AM Jason Cobb via agora-discussion <
agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> On 8/15/21 9:00 PM, Sarah S. via agora-discussion wrote:
> > why not just spend a pendant
> >
> > --
> > R. Lee
>
>
> This is a bugfix. I don't mind forgoing the rewards.
>
> --
> Jason
On 8/15/21 9:00 PM, Sarah S. via agora-discussion wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 10:58 AM Jason Cobb via agora-business <
> agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
>
>> On 8/15/21 6:03 PM, Aspen via agora-business wrote:
>>> On Thu, Aug 5, 2021 at 2:07 PM Jason Cobb via agora-business
>>> wrote:
>From https://faculty.washington.edu/kerim/nomic/cases/?3784, Judge Aspen
presiding:
"If a proposal fails to state that who is performing an action, Agorans
are sufficiently respectful to make the inference that the proposal is.
Thus, the proposal takes the place that a player would take for a
Nah I don't think the proposal would do anything if enacted. The pronoun
can only have one referent and the referent is G, in the action of sejdinf
an email
On Mon, Aug 9, 2021, 11:11 AM ais523 via agora-discussion <
agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> On Sun, 2021-08-08 at 17:59 -0700,
Trigon wrote:
On 06/08/2021 03:44, Ned Strange via agora-business wrote:
There are too many coins. let's delete some. This will do nothing but u
know aesthetics.
I create and pend the following proposal by using a pendant
Title: decimation times 9
Ai 1
Text
Create a power 1 rule called
On 8/7/2021 11:29 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> On 8/7/2021 11:19 AM, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion wrote:
>> On 8/7/21 2:13 PM, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote:
>>> On 8/7/2021 8:43 AM, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote:
Amend Rule 2653 by replacing "A player's Voting Strength on
On 8/7/2021 11:19 AM, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion wrote:
> On 8/7/21 2:13 PM, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote:
>> On 8/7/2021 8:43 AM, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote:
>>> Amend Rule 2653 by replacing "A player's Voting Strength on referendum"
>>> with "A person's Voting Strength
On 8/7/21 2:13 PM, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote:
> On 8/7/2021 8:43 AM, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote:
>> Amend Rule 2653 by replacing "A player's Voting Strength on referendum"
>> with "A person's Voting Strength on a referendum".
> Why are we catering to non-players like this
How about
"Rules and Regulations to the contrary notwithstanding, all auctions that
are ongoing in the last week of September 2021 SHALL and CAN be resolved by
announcement during that week, using the bids currently in place and
disregarding any other time period. Any ongoing auctions as of 1
It is timed at the end of the month (as it says) as it says which avoids
the bouyancy problem, and likely the auction problem.
On Fri, Aug 6, 2021, 2:13 PM Trigon via agora-discussion <
agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> On 06/08/2021 03:44, Ned Strange via agora-business wrote:
> > There
On 7/2/21 10:51 PM, Trigon via agora-discussion wrote:
> Imagine, for instance, a proposal which reads as follows:
>
> "Enact a rule with parameters [...]. Repeal that rule. Enact another
> rule. Repeal that rule."
>
> What we have here is an infinite pendant generator scheme. There needs
> to be
On Fri, Jul 02, 2021 at 09:04:57PM -0700, Aris via agora-discussion wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 2, 2021 at 8:53 PM Trigon via agora-discussion
> wrote:
> >
> > On 03/07/2021 03:45, Rebecca Lee via agora-discussion wrote:
> > > On Sat, Jul 3, 2021 at 1:30 PM OatmealSurprise via agora-business <
> > >
On Fri, Jul 2, 2021 at 8:53 PM Trigon via agora-discussion
wrote:
>
> On 03/07/2021 03:45, Rebecca Lee via agora-discussion wrote:
> > On Sat, Jul 3, 2021 at 1:30 PM OatmealSurprise via agora-business <
> > agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> >
> >> I (Mask) hereby propose the following:
> >>
On 7/2/21 11:55 PM, Aris via agora-discussion wrote:
> I don't know if I'd vote FOR it with that change, but it could be
> interesting as a way of incentivising ruleset simplification. I'd have
> to reflect on whether I think ruleset simplification is a good thing.
> I certainly wouldn't like us
On Fri, Jul 2, 2021 at 8:46 PM Rebecca Lee via agora-discussion
wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jul 3, 2021 at 1:30 PM OatmealSurprise via agora-business <
> agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
>
> > I (Mask) hereby propose the following:
> > """
> > Reduce, Reuse, Recycle
> > On successful repeal of a
On 03/07/2021 03:45, Rebecca Lee via agora-discussion wrote:
On Sat, Jul 3, 2021 at 1:30 PM OatmealSurprise via agora-business <
agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
I (Mask) hereby propose the following:
"""
Reduce, Reuse, Recycle
On successful repeal of a rule, the player who proposed the
Falsifian wrote:
I like the changes, though I don't know if I get "winsome".
Win some, lose some.
On 6/11/2021 8:02 AM, Falsifian via agora-discussion wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 06, 2021 at 03:27:54PM -0400, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote:
>> I submit (but do not pend) the following proposal (stolen from Trigon
>> with permission):
>>
>> Title: The Name of the Win Cards
>>
>> Adoption index:
On 6/8/2021 8:56 AM, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion wrote:
> On 6/8/21 11:53 AM, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote:
>> Oh crap well that's completely broken. I was madly trying to sculpt
>> Murphy's text and missed those differences.
>
>
> It seems to just break the repeal case? It
On 6/8/21 11:53 AM, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote:
> Oh crap well that's completely broken. I was madly trying to sculpt
> Murphy's text and missed those differences.
It seems to just break the repeal case? It seems like something that can
be fixed after enactment.
--
Jason Cobb
On Sun, Jun 6, 2021 at 3:21 AM Gaelan Steele via agora-discussion <
agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
>
>
> > On Jun 5, 2021, at 7:15 PM, Aris Merchant via agora-business <
> agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> >
> > the Promotor
>
> aren't you…
Well, yes, but if I make extra work for
On 6/6/21 5:46 AM, Gaelan Steele via agora-discussion wrote:
>
>> On Jun 4, 2021, at 2:58 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-business
>> wrote:
>>
>> I submit (but do not pend) the following proposal:
>>
>> Title: Gauntlet announcement patch
>>
>> Adoption index: 2.0
>>
>> Author: Jason
>>
>> Coauthors:
On 6/6/21 5:36 AM, Gaelan Steele via agora-discussion wrote:
>
>> On Jun 4, 2021, at 9:17 AM, Jason Cobb via agora-business
>> wrote:
>>
>> Amend rule 1950 by appending the following to the first paragraph: " If
>> a referendum has an adoption index less than the adoption index of its
>>
> On Jun 5, 2021, at 7:15 PM, Aris Merchant via agora-business
> wrote:
>
> the Promotor
aren't you…
On 6/5/2021 6:23 PM, Aris Merchant via agora-discussion wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 5, 2021 at 6:13 PM Kerim Aydin wrote:
>> On 6/5/2021 4:55 PM, Aris Merchant via agora-business wrote:
>>> Title: Determinacy is a Good Thing
>>> Adoption index: 1.7
>>> Author: Aris
>>
>> Want to lodge a bit of a
On Sat, Jun 5, 2021 at 6:13 PM Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion
wrote:
>
>
> On 6/5/2021 4:55 PM, Aris Merchant via agora-business wrote:
> > Title: Determinacy is a Good Thing
> > Adoption index: 1.7
> > Author: Aris
>
> Want to lodge a bit of a protest here - paradox to me is inherent to
>
On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 10:01 AM Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion
wrote:
>
>
>
> On 5/23/2021 2:21 PM, Aris Merchant via agora-discussion wrote:
> > On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 4:12 PM Kerim Aydin via agora-business
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> After the nomination period ends, the ADoP (or, if the
On 5/23/2021 2:21 PM, Aris Merchant via agora-discussion wrote:
> On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 4:12 PM Kerim Aydin via agora-business
> wrote:
>>
>> After the nomination period ends, the ADoP (or, if the office is
>> the ADoP, the Assessor) CAN and, in a timely fashion, SHALL:
>>
>>
On Fri, Mar 19, 2021 at 01:21:10PM -0700, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion
wrote:
>
> On 3/19/2021 12:51 PM, Gaelan Steele via agora-discussion wrote:
> >> On Mar 19, 2021, at 12:17 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-business
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> {
> >>
> >> Amend Rule 2465, "Victory by Apathy", by
On 3/19/2021 12:51 PM, Gaelan Steele via agora-discussion wrote:
>> On Mar 19, 2021, at 12:17 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-business
>> wrote:
>>
>> {
>>
>> Amend Rule 2465, "Victory by Apathy", by replacing the final "."
>> character with the following: ", except for those who have won the game
>>
> Statement from Aris:
>
> This wasn't brought up on list at the time of the proto, and I'm sorry
> about that. That said... this is really hard to read. Like, I don't
> generally mind doing mental diffs for rules that are a paragraph long
> or something. But expecting people to do mental diffs
On Sun, Feb 21, 2021 at 3:45 PM Gaelan Steele via agora-discussion
wrote:
>
>
> > On Feb 20, 2021, at 11:13 PM, Aris Merchant via agora-business
> > wrote:
> >
> > I submit the following proposal.
> >
> > -Aris
> > ---
> > Title: You CAN, CAN'T You?
> > Adoption index: 3.0
> > Author: Aris
> >
On Thu, Feb 4, 2021 at 11:03 AM Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion <
agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
>
> On 2/4/2021 10:57 AM, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote:
> > Amend Rule 478 by replacing "Actions in messages (including
> > sub-messages) are performed in the order they appear in the
On 1/22/21 5:15 AM, Cuddle Beam via agora-discussion wrote:
> "Also the Buying Strength cap is gone."
>
> This feels pretty dangerous. Couldn't one single player (or a very small
> group of them) could force any proposal through?
There's still a limit on overall Voting Strength (15). But yes,
On 1/21/21 8:01 PM, Aris Merchant via agora-discussion wrote:
>> Amend R2422, "Voting Strength" by replacing:
>>
>> A player CAN Buy Strength by paying 1 Extra Vote and specifying a
>> current Agoran decision on which e is a voter. For each time a
>> player has Bought Strength
On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 09:22:14AM -0800, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion
wrote:
>
> On 1/20/2021 9:13 AM, Falsifian via agora-discussion wrote:
> >> If an inactice player has been inactive continuously for the past
> >
> > typo: "inactice" twice
> >
> >> 60 days, then any player
On 1/20/2021 9:13 AM, Falsifian via agora-discussion wrote:
>> If an inactice player has been inactive continuously for the past
>
> typo: "inactice" twice
>
>> 60 days, then any player CAN deregister em with notice; for such
>> a deregistration to be successful, the
On 1/16/2021 2:25 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion wrote:
> On 1/16/21 5:24 PM, Falsifian via agora-discussion wrote:
>>> Award all Patent Titles to eir former holders that were lost solely due
>>> to the entity not being a person (under any current or former definition
>>> of "person"),
> > "Every intelligence is a person."
> >
> > Is a chatbot an intelligence? I worry that "intelligence" may be more
> > broad than we want.
>
> The OED entry I was going for "An intelligent or rational being, esp.
> a spiritual one, or one alien to mankind". But, like, obviously not
> the
On 1/16/21 5:24 PM, Falsifian via agora-discussion wrote:
>> Award all Patent Titles to eir former holders that were lost solely due
>> to the entity not being a person (under any current or former definition
>> of "person"), other than Hero of Agora Nomic or Grand Hero of Agora Nomic.
> Is the
On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 10:01 PM Falsifian via agora-discussion
wrote:
>
> > {
> > Title: Personhood
> > Adoption index: 3.0
> > Author: Aris
> > Co-authors: Trigon, nix, G., Jason, ATMunn
> >
> >
> > Amend Rule 869, "How to Join and Leave Agora", by replacing:
> >
> > Any entity that is or
> {
> Title: Personhood
> Adoption index: 3.0
> Author: Aris
> Co-authors: Trigon, nix, G., Jason, ATMunn
>
>
> Amend Rule 869, "How to Join and Leave Agora", by replacing:
>
> Any entity that is or ever was an organism generally capable of
> freely originating and communicating independent
On 1/13/21 4:57 AM, Cuddle Beam via agora-discussion wrote:
This is going to become a scam shitshow. And it will be glorious.
Only insofar as creating one new unregistered person per number of
friends you have is a scam. We discussed this on discord and it seems
that the two areas where this
This is going to become a scam shitshow. And it will be glorious.
On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 2:44 AM Aris Merchant via agora-discussion <
agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 5:33 PM nix via agora-discussion
> wrote:
> >
> > On 1/12/21 7:18 PM, nix via agora-business
On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 5:33 PM nix via agora-discussion
wrote:
>
> On 1/12/21 7:18 PM, nix via agora-business wrote:
> >
> > I submit, but do not pend, the following proposal:
> >
> > {
> > Title: Personhood Revisited
> > Power: 3.0
> > Author: nix
> > Co-Authors: Gaelan, Aris
> >
> > Amend R869
On 12/7/20 2:23 PM, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote:
> Is the intent that "fungible" must be defined by the rules explicitly
> (e.g. "potatoes are fungible" being rules text) or that it's a sort of
> judicial analysis (such that a judge would say "nothing in the rules
> distinguishes one
On 10/31/20 4:56 PM, Aris Merchant via agora-discussion wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 31, 2020 at 1:56 PM Falsifian via agora-business
> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 08:51:14PM -0400, ATMunn via agora-business wrote:
>>> I submit (but do not pend) the following proposal:
>>>
>>> Title: I
> > Okay, that makes more sense, but I'm still skeptical. Can you say more
> > about that precedent? Normally the only way I can tell for sure where
> > one paragraph ends and the next starts is formatting (a blank line).
>
> The precedent was established in CFJ 3452 and reaffirmed in CFJs
On 10/31/20 5:02 PM, Falsifian via agora-discussion wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 31, 2020 at 04:57:31PM -0400, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion
> wrote:
>> On 10/31/20 4:55 PM, Falsifian via agora-business wrote:
>>> On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 08:51:14PM -0400, ATMunn via agora-business wrote:
I submit
On Sat, Oct 31, 2020 at 04:57:31PM -0400, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion wrote:
> On 10/31/20 4:55 PM, Falsifian via agora-business wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 08:51:14PM -0400, ATMunn via agora-business wrote:
> >> I submit (but do not pend) the following proposal:
> >>
> >> Title: I
On Sat, Oct 31, 2020 at 1:57 PM Aris Merchant via agora-discussion
wrote:
>
> On Sat, Oct 31, 2020 at 1:56 PM Falsifian via agora-business
> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 08:51:14PM -0400, ATMunn via agora-business wrote:
> > > I submit (but do not pend) the following proposal:
> > >
>
On Sun, Oct 18, 2020 at 07:53:08PM +, nix via agora-discussion wrote:
>
> On 10/18/20 2:09 PM, Falsifian via agora-discussion wrote:
> > This means a new player can't take advantage of this for a while. Two
> > suggested solutions:
>
> New players get a Welcome Package with the benefits of
On 10/18/20 2:09 PM, Falsifian via agora-discussion wrote:
> This means a new player can't take advantage of this for a while. Two
> suggested solutions:
New players get a Welcome Package with the benefits of every focus, so I
don't see this as a problem.
--
nix
Webmastor
On 9/24/2020 11:44 AM, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote:
On 9/24/2020 6:45 AM, ATMunn via agora-business wrote:
My Agoran birthday was September 21, but I forgot to announce it. This
is very sad. Please feel bad for me.
I submit the following proposal:
Title: Happy Belated Birthday
NttPF
On 8/14/2020 2:42 AM, Gaelan Steele via agora-discussion wrote:
I support.
Gaelan
On Aug 9, 2020, at 2:58 PM, Aris Merchant via agora-business
wrote:
On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 11:02 AM Jason Cobb via agora-business
wrote:
On 8/3/20 10:19 AM, Jason Cobb via agora-business wrote:
I
On 7/30/2020 2:21 PM, Gaelan Steele via agora-discussion wrote:
On Jul 30, 2020, at 10:08 AM, Kerim Aydin via agora-business
wrote:
I submit the following proposal with:
Title: a minor adjustment
Chamber: Legislation
Adoption index: 1.0
Author: G.
text:
On 7/6/20 1:01 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion
wrote:
> On 7/6/20 2:00 PM, nch via agora-discussion wrote:
>> On 7/6/20 12:54 PM, ATMunn via agora-business wrote:
>>> [This came from a discussion on Discord in which nch mentioned that the
>>> current 10 coin welcome
On 7/6/2020 11:00 AM, nch via agora-discussion wrote:
> On 7/6/20 12:54 PM, ATMunn via agora-business wrote:
>> [This came from a discussion on Discord in which nch mentioned that the
>> current 10 coin welcome packages really don't help that much. 25 may
>> still be on the low side, but I think
On 7/6/20 2:00 PM, nch via agora-discussion wrote:
> On 7/6/20 12:54 PM, ATMunn via agora-business wrote:
>> [This came from a discussion on Discord in which nch mentioned that the
>> current 10 coin welcome packages really don't help that much. 25 may
>> still be on the low side, but I think it's
On 2020-06-28 11:21 p.m., Reuben Staley via agora-discussion wrote:
On 2020-06-28 13:54, Edward Murphy via agora-business wrote:
Proposal: Decriminalization
(AI = 1.7)
Unless I'm missing something, this is purely a ruleset-wide change in
semantics from 'crime' to 'infraction', correct? Not
On 7/3/2020 5:48 PM, omd via agora-discussion wrote:
> at 5:19 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion
> wrote:
>>> An asset generally CAN be transferred (syn. given) by announcement
>>> by its owner to another entity, subject to modification by its
>>> backing document. A fixed
at 5:21 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion
wrote:
I'm not sure whether this is enough to have R1586 automatically transfer
switch karma to asset karma.
Fair point. I’ll change it to be more explicit before pending this (if I
ever get enough cards to pend anything, anyway :).
at 5:19 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion
wrote:
An asset generally CAN be transferred (syn. given) by announcement
by its owner to another entity, subject to modification by its
backing document. A fixed asset is one defined as such by its
backing document, and CANNOT
On 7/3/20 8:17 PM, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote:
>>Up to once per week, each player CAN grant a specified other
>>player 1 Karma by announcement. A player CAN also transfer any
>>amount of eir own Karma to another player by announcement. In
>>both cases,
On 7/1/2020 9:08 AM, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion wrote:
> On 7/1/20 11:05 AM, ATMunn via agora-discussion wrote:
>> FWIW I will probably vote AGAINST both of these as I have a black ribbon
>> already, and the way this is worded, I'm not sure I could even get black
>> glitter from it.
On 7/1/20 11:05 AM, ATMunn via agora-discussion wrote:
> FWIW I will probably vote AGAINST both of these as I have a black ribbon
> already, and the way this is worded, I'm not sure I could even get black
> glitter from it. Correct me if I'm wrong, however.
I believe you would get black
On 6/28/2020 8:35 PM, Aris Merchant via agora-discussion wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 8:29 PM Jason Cobb via agora-discussion <
> agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
>
>> On 6/28/20 11:06 PM, Ed Strange via agora-business wrote:
>>> So, as it currently stands, the Referee can impose 6
On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 8:29 PM Jason Cobb via agora-discussion <
agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> On 6/28/20 11:06 PM, Ed Strange via agora-business wrote:
> > So, as it currently stands, the Referee can impose 6 blots around
> anywhere
> > e wants for no reason whatsoever, just because
On Sun, 28 Jun 2020 at 23:07, nch via agora-discussion
wrote:
> On 6/23/20 7:33 PM, nch via agora-business wrote:
> > On 6/23/20 7:32 PM, nch via agora-discussion wrote:
> >> On 6/23/20 7:29 PM, nch via agora-business wrote:
> >>> I ditched the idea of Ready Proposals for something more similar
On Sun, Jun 28, 2020, 5:19 PM omd via agora-discussion <
agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
>
> > On Jun 28, 2020, at 4:11 PM, Reuben Staley via agora-business <
> agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> >
> > Don't know how everyone else is feeling about it but there is "Sponsored
>
On 6/28/20 7:21 PM, James Cook via agora-discussion wrote:
> On Sat, 27 Jun 2020 at 00:53, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via
> agora-discussion wrote:
>> On 6/26/20 8:45 PM, James Cook via agora-business wrote:
>>>This SHOULD only be done if the
>>>contract's provisions ensure
On Sat, 27 Jun 2020 at 00:53, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via
agora-discussion wrote:
> On 6/26/20 8:45 PM, James Cook via agora-business wrote:
> > This SHOULD only be done if the
> > contract's provisions ensure that its funds will be used solely
> > for the betterment of
On 2020-06-28 17:07, nch via agora-discussion wrote:
On 6/23/20 7:33 PM, nch via agora-business wrote:
On 6/23/20 7:32 PM, nch via agora-discussion wrote:
On 6/23/20 7:29 PM, nch via agora-business wrote:
I ditched the idea of Ready Proposals for something more similar to the
old
On 6/23/20 7:33 PM, nch via agora-business wrote:
> On 6/23/20 7:32 PM, nch via agora-discussion wrote:
>> On 6/23/20 7:29 PM, nch via agora-business wrote:
>>> I ditched the idea of Ready Proposals for something more similar to the
>>> old disinterested proposals system. The way this works is by
nch wrote:
On 6/28/20 2:54 PM, Edward Murphy via agora-business wrote:
Amend Rule 2626 (Certifiable Patches) by replacing "unless its sole
function is" with "unless e reasonably believes its sole function is".
[In addition to quibbles about "sole function", this also covers cases
like "I
Jason wrote:
On 6/28/20 3:11 PM, Edward Murphy via agora-business wrote:
[Pending fees are fine and all, but only three new Legislative Cards
per month seems a bit low. This would at least raise that to four.]
Officers can actually only give two legislative cards right now (since
I'm both
On 6/28/2020 12:22 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:> On 6/28/2020 12:14 PM, Jason
Cobb via agora-discussion wrote:>> On 6/28/20 3:11 PM, Edward Murphy via
agora-business wrote:>>> [Pending fees are fine and all, but only three
new Legislative Cards>>> per month seems a bit low. This would at least
raise
On 6/28/2020 12:14 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion wrote:
> On 6/28/20 3:11 PM, Edward Murphy via agora-business wrote:
>> [Pending fees are fine and all, but only three new Legislative Cards
>> per month seems a bit low. This would at least raise that to four.]
>
>
> Officers can actually
On 6/27/20 9:26 PM, Ed Strange via agora-discussion wrote:
> Something must be valid in order to have binding legal effect, surely thats
> what valid means (and my judgement on notices doesnt conflict with that).
Well, this is proof that there's disagreement. I think I'm being
relatively
Something must be valid in order to have binding legal effect, surely thats
what valid means (and my judgement on notices doesnt conflict with that).
On Sun., 28 Jun. 2020, 11:23 am Jason Cobb via agora-discussion, <
agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> On 6/27/20 9:16 PM, Ed Strange via
On 6/27/20 9:16 PM, Ed Strange via agora-discussion wrote:
> No, i said they may not disagree. Any contention that valid and effective
> are not synonyms is, with respect, unreasonable
The argument is that "the announcement" (i.e. the message) being not
"valid" is different from the attempt not
No, i said they may not disagree. Any contention that valid and effective
are not synonyms is, with respect, unreasonable
On Sun., 28 Jun. 2020, 11:12 am Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion, <
agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
>
> On 6/27/2020 6:06 PM, Ed Strange via agora-discussion wrote:
>
On 6/27/2020 6:06 PM, Ed Strange via agora-discussion wrote:
> I point a finger at jason for uncertain certification. Reasonable players
> may not disagree about the operation of the current wording.
Which means it's an ambiguity which is covered by CP?
-G.
On 6/25/20 11:39 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via
agora-discussion wrote:
> For simplicity, would it be possible for the Registrar to adopt
> regulations defering to the Treasuror's regulations?
I think so. I don't see any reason a Regulation couldn't simply say
"Auctions are run as
On 6/25/2020 11:16 AM, Reuben Staley via agora-discussion wrote:
> On 2020-06-25 10:41, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion wrote:
>> On 6/25/20 12:39 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via
>> agora-discussion wrote:
>>> On 6/25/20 12:37 PM, James Cook via agora-discussion wrote:
This also
On 2020-06-25 10:41, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion wrote:
On 6/25/20 12:39 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via
agora-discussion wrote:
On 6/25/20 12:37 PM, James Cook via agora-discussion wrote:
This also means the Registrar rather than the Treasuror is in charge
of figuring out how
On 6/25/20 12:47 PM, James Cook via agora-discussion wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Jun 2020 at 16:39, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via
> agora-discussion wrote:
>> On 6/25/20 12:37 PM, James Cook via agora-discussion wrote:
>>> On Thu, 25 Jun 2020 at 14:05, Jason Cobb via agora-business
>>> wrote:
On 6/25/2020 9:41 AM, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion wrote:
> The Registrar wouldn't need to write any regulations, e would just need
> to pick a method that the Treasuror has defined in the auction regulations.
>
I think the auctioneer is free to point to any method that follows the
On Thu, 25 Jun 2020 at 16:39, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via
agora-discussion wrote:
> On 6/25/20 12:37 PM, James Cook via agora-discussion wrote:
> > On Thu, 25 Jun 2020 at 14:05, Jason Cobb via agora-business
> > wrote:
> >> I submit the following proposal:
> >>
> >> Title: Talismans
On 6/25/20 12:39 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via
agora-discussion wrote:
> On 6/25/20 12:37 PM, James Cook via agora-discussion wrote:
>> On Thu, 25 Jun 2020 at 14:05, Jason Cobb via agora-business
>> wrote:
>>> I submit the following proposal:
>>>
>>> Title: Talismans auction patch
>>>
On 6/25/20 12:37 PM, James Cook via agora-discussion wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Jun 2020 at 14:05, Jason Cobb via agora-business
> wrote:
>> I submit the following proposal:
>>
>> Title: Talismans auction patch
>>
>> Author: Jason
>>
>> Coauthors: Trigon
>>
>> Adoption index: 2.0
>>
>> {
>>
>> Amend
On 6/22/20 8:57 PM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion
wrote:
> On 6/22/20 9:55 PM, Ed Strange via agora-business wrote:
>> I create this following proposal (I also certify it, why not)
>>
>> Title: Fist of Law
>> AI: 3
>> Create a power 3 rule with the text "Unless e has
Treasuror checking in. I feel like I should comment early on this thread as
this change would affect my office a lot.
--
Trigon
currently on a phone
On Sun, Jun 21, 2020, 12:16 Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion <
agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> > Should we do it with other reports
On 6/21/2020 10:11 AM, James Cook via agora-discussion wrote:
> On Sun, 21 Jun 2020 at 15:52, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>> [This confuses everyone regularly, except Aris. Let's just make it clear]
>>
>> I submit the following proposal "no backdating needed", AI-3:
>>
>>
+1
On 6/20/2020 2:02 AM, Reuben Staley via agora-discussion wrote:
On 2020-06-19 23:37, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote:
Rule 1623/11
Disinterested Proposals
A Proposal may be Interested or Disinterested. Each Proposal is
Interested when made. The Proposer of a Proposal
On 6/20/20 5:01 PM, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion wrote:
> On 6/20/2020 1:49 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion wrote:
>> On 6/20/20 8:50 AM, nch via agora-discussion wrote:
>>> On 6/20/20 7:20 AM, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion wrote:
This may be the programmer in me speaking, but I
101 - 200 of 1906 matches
Mail list logo
