On Fri, 2009-05-01 at 21:03 -0600, Sean Hunt wrote:
Yes, but an Ordinary proposal has sufficient power to exile anyone (the
more I think of it, the more I come to think that this hole should be
seriously considered a bug and fixed. I shouldn't have the ability to
exile every other player in
On Fri, 2009-05-01 at 20:19 -0400, Sgeo wrote:
On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 7:53 PM, Ian Kelly ian.g.ke...@gmail.com wrote:
Zing! Vext cwm fly jabs Kurd qoph
Will we all get to learn what the Clues were?
The Secret Answer no longer exists (now the Medal's been given away), so
the restriction on
On Sat, 2009-05-02 at 10:45 -0500, Benjamin Caplan wrote:
Alex Smith wrote:
Proto-proto, ai=3: The Speaker CAN act on behalf of any person with the
unanimous Support of all Ministers without Portfolio. The Speaker and
Ministers without Portfolio SHOULD and SHALL only use this power in good
On Thu, 2009-04-30 at 17:43 -0700, Ed Murphy wrote:
== CFJ 2477 ==
coppro has won the game at least once.
I judge this TRUE. It's a pretty clear bug in the
On Sat, 2009-05-02 at 09:39 -0700, Ed Murphy wrote:
[Summary: Each active non-scamster gets a bogus Rest, then the
scamsters take turns being the sole active Rest-free player for
Win by Solitude, then the bogus Rests are destroyed.]
Because scams involving the judicial system are often seen
On Sat, 2009-05-02 at 22:32 +0200, Jonatan Kilhamn wrote:
Can someone explain why e doesn't need a lot of support to do this? I
don't see how the first one is not a valid, un-closed NoV published
by the same player earlier that week as per R2230. Though there has
to be something as surely
On Sat, 2009-05-02 at 17:20 -0400, comex wrote:
On Sat, May 2, 2009 at 4:50 PM, Aaron Goldfein aarongoldf...@gmail.com
wrote:
It's possible to publish an NoV by sending it to a public forum, no
matter what lower-power rules think on the matter. Rules 101 and 478,
both power-3, give us the
On Sun, 2009-05-03 at 07:29 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
On Sun, 3 May 2009, Alex Smith wrote:
CFJ 1768 judged that rules 101 and 478 do not prevent Truthfulness
working, because lying isn't a method of participating in the fora.
Submitting an NoV, however, definitely is.
Publishing a text
On Sun, 2009-05-03 at 08:11 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
On Sun, 3 May 2009, Ed Murphy wrote:
A public message claiming to be a game-defined entity (e.g. a
distribution of proposals) is not generally that entity, but must
match the circumstances defined for that entity (e.g.
On Sun, 2009-05-03 at 11:01 -0700, Ed Murphy wrote:
Goethe wrote:
By the way ais523, what do you think of the other question, on whether
MAY with N Support in general invokes dependent actions thus turning
a MAY into a CAN?
Rule 1728 includes this:
A dependent action CAN be
On Sun, 2009-05-03 at 19:52 -0500, Benjamin Caplan wrote:
The condition has been satisfied. Does that discharge and destroy the
pledge? I don't think so, but I'm not sure. Semi-formally worded pledges
weird me out because I can't tell what's binding text, what's framing
context, and what's
On Mon, 2009-05-04 at 14:02 -0400, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 12:39 PM, Alex Smith ais...@bham.ac.uk wrote:
I judge this TRUE; rule 101 has higher Power, so by rule 1482 it does
indeed take precedence.
I intend, with 2 support, to appeal this ruling. R1482 only applies
On Mon, 2009-05-04 at 12:24 -0600, Ian Kelly wrote:
On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 12:13 PM, Ed Murphy emurph...@socal.rr.com wrote:
I performed duties related to Fantasy Rules Contest in a timely manner
during April.
I performed duties related to The Cookie Jar in a timely manner during
April.
On Mon, 2009-05-04 at 12:51 -0600, Ian Kelly wrote:
I just noticed I've been neglecting part of the Scorekeepor's report.
In the future, this will be published with the rest of the report.
Medals
--
3-Scroll Rodney 1
root1
I'm actually mildly curious as to why you
On Mon, 2009-05-04 at 14:26 -0500, Benjamin Caplan wrote:
=== CFJ 2488 (Interest Index = 2)
The prohibition on excessive Notices of Violation in rule 2230
is ineffective due to rule 101
On Mon, 2009-05-04 at 13:37 -0600, Ian Kelly wrote:
On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 1:15 PM, comex com...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/5/4 Ian Kelly ian.g.ke...@gmail.com:
I'm actually mildly curious as to why you haven't done the Win
Announcement yet.
I'm hoping to save it until a time when I don't
On Mon, 2009-05-04 at 13:45 -0600, Ian Kelly wrote:
On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 1:11 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu
wrote:
However, since that's defined under unique patent titles, there
may
be an error in that only the last Maniac should have the title.
Unless
Maniac was somehow
On Mon, 2009-05-04 at 16:14 -0500, Benjamin Caplan wrote:
comex wrote:
On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 4:48 PM, Ian Kelly ian.g.ke...@gmail.com wrote:
I spend G#G# to destroy root's Rest.
I create a rest.
In whose possession?
This is a Win Announcement. root has a Medal.
root
On Mon, 2009-05-04 at 15:43 -0600, Ian Kelly wrote:
I submit the following proposal, titled No forced championship wins:
{{{
Amend Rule 2242 by replacing this text:
Upon a win announcement that a specified non-contest player owns
a Medal, that player satisfies the Winning
On Mon, 2009-05-04 at 18:39 -0400, comex wrote:
On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 5:18 PM, Alex Smith ais...@bham.ac.uk wrote:
It would be a different issue if root were Insulator, I imagine; in that
case it might have been ambiguous whether root or the LFD got the
resulting Rest.
I don't believe
On Tue, 2009-05-05 at 00:30 +0100, Elliott Hird wrote:
2009/5/4 Sean Hunt ride...@gmail.com:
I submit the following proposal, entitled {I Fone}, II=0
{{{
Create a new power-1 rule with the following text:
If a public message claims to have been sent from a particular
On Mon, 2009-05-04 at 20:12 -0500, Aaron Goldfein wrote:
Hmm. For me (because I guess my email client uses a non-fixed width
font by default), my reports look good and the root's report looks
bad.
Different email clients use different fonts. A report that's lined up
only for you is not really
On Tue, 2009-05-05 at 03:40 +0100, Elliott Hird wrote:
On 2009-05-05, Quazie quazieno...@gmail.com wrote:
i am a separate person from quazie and i register at this e-mail
address with a nickname of 'gwen.'
Not possible. You need an email.
All the time oklopol was registered, e didn't
On Tue, 2009-05-05 at 00:52 -0600, Sean Hunt wrote:
I spend A C D to decrease Dvorak Herring's caste.
Fails, those don't form a triad. (A minor triad, which you would need,
is an interval of 3 semitones followed by an interval of 4 semitones.
What you have there is an interval of 3 semitones
On Tue, 2009-05-05 at 09:41 -0400, Sgeo wrote:
Suppose that, for some reason, a Terrible Proposal is on the ballot. A
large invasion force may join, say, a day before the Assessor is due
to asses the proposal, and vote FOR it. Unless 3 Senators are on
constant surveillance for such things, it
On Tue, 2009-05-05 at 11:34 -0500, comex wrote:
Each of the following requests subsidization. Disclaimer: Subsidization
requests fail if the Farmer has already requested subsidization this
week or if e owns at least as many lands as the Federal Subsidy.
* comex
* the AFO
Or if e is
On Tue, 2009-05-05 at 11:18 -0600, Sam Benner wrote:
I vote for this proposal.
It hasn't been distributed yet; wait until the Promotor publishes a
distribution of proposals, then you can vote on it. (It's more
convenient voting on a distribution than on proposals when they're
submitted, anyway.)
On Tue, 2009-05-05 at 14:00 -0400, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 1:56 PM, Alex Smith ais...@bham.ac.uk wrote:
All the time oklopol was registered, e didn't specify what eir email
address was (making my attempt to report on em as then-Registrar rather
special-cased). We
On Tue, 2009-05-05 at 20:18 +0200, Jonatan Kilhamn wrote:
2009/5/5 Alex Smith ais...@bham.ac.uk:
On Tue, 2009-05-05 at 00:52 -0600, Sean Hunt wrote:
I spend A C D to decrease Dvorak Herring's caste.
Fails, those don't form a triad. (A minor triad, which you would need,
is an interval
On Tue, 2009-05-05 at 12:20 -0600, Ian Kelly wrote:
19. If no surviving gnome has any minutes remaining, and the sub has
not been lost, then all surviving gnomes who have not abandoned
their comrades win the game.
20. A gnome who abandons eir comrades wins if all other gnomes lose;
On Tue, 2009-05-05 at 12:37 -0700, Ed Murphy wrote:
Pavitra wrote:
I disagree, and I not-support the intent. Judge comex assigned judgement
on time, thus making the judgement an on-time judgement; Murphy then
published that on-time judgement by (re)posting it to a public forum.
The
On Tue, 2009-05-05 at 14:01 -0600, Roger Hicks wrote:
I agree to the below referenced agreement (Nomic Wars III), which
becomes a public contract once someone else agrees to it.
I intend, without two objections, to create a medal in the possession
of Nomic Wars III.
Incidentally, you should
On Tue, 2009-05-05 at 14:34 -0600, Roger Hicks wrote:
On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 14:13, Jonatan Kilhamn jonatan.kilh...@gmail.com
wrote:
I agree to Nomic Wars III.
I flip the contestmaster of Nomic Wars III to BobTHJ.
Ugh, someone introduced a bug into R2136. (/me blames Murphy, I think it
On Tue, 2009-05-05 at 14:06 -0700, Ed Murphy wrote:
BobTHJ wrote:
On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 14:13, Jonatan Kilhamn jonatan.kilh...@gmail.com
wrote:
I agree to Nomic Wars III.
I flip the contestmaster of Nomic Wars III to BobTHJ.
I don't think this works; the condition was written
On Tue, 2009-05-05 at 15:27 -0700, Rodlen wrote:
Hmm...actually, because Comex was judged as not guilty, we probably
shouldn't punish him...but the PNP probably deserves something for
reputation damage...
Suggestions?
comex is currently not a PerlNomicite, and has stated e doesn't plan to
On Wed, 2009-05-06 at 11:45 -0700, Ed Murphy wrote:
The AFO buys a Digit Ranch.
Err, how, given that it isn't a player? It has nothing to pay with.
--
ais523
On Wed, 2009-05-06 at 15:19 -0400, comex wrote:
On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 2:03 PM, Rodlen rodlenj...@gmail.com wrote:
I CfJ on the following statement:
CFJ :p
Hey, I often write it with a lowercase f. I agree that the capital is
more common, though.
--
ais523
On Wed, 2009-05-06 at 21:31 +0200, Jonatan Kilhamn wrote:
Shouldn't that be Officor for homeland Security or something?
No, because an Officer isn't someone who offices.
--
ais523
On Wed, 2009-05-06 at 13:54 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
Actually what the heck, I support this intent, requesting REMAND.
If you all want a thesis on the subject (of which I'm not certain
of the outcome) I'm happy to write a thesis on the subject and
take all these myriad possibilities into
On Wed, 2009-05-06 at 17:55 -0400, Sgeo wrote:
Does that rule have a title, because it looks like the title you gave
is for the proposal.
Also, I think this is just a phase. I've been fantasizing about a war
between Agora and the Aerican Empire for some reason.
The title's indeed just for the
On Thu, 2009-05-07 at 00:10 +0200, Jonatan Kilhamn wrote:
2009/5/7 comex com...@gmail.com:
On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 5:55 PM, Sgeo sgeos...@gmail.com wrote:
Does that rule have a title, because it looks like the title you gave
is for the proposal.
Also, I think this is just a phase. I've
On Thu, 2009-05-07 at 06:11 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
In the past, when a low-powered rule has claimed precedence over a
certain matter (e.g. rests), we have reasoned that R1030 allows this
claim to work for rules of the same power, but R1482 overrules this
claim for rules of different power.
On Thu, 2009-05-07 at 06:11 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
Both views can't be right. Has the phrase this matter claims
precedence over matters of X been in an UNDECIDABLE conflict with
R1482 all along? Was Rule 2229's claim of precedence (allegedly
enacted 2008 or later) allegedly IMPOSSIBLE
On Thu, 2009-05-07 at 12:50 -0400, comex wrote:
On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 12:40 PM, Alex Smith ais...@bham.ac.uk wrote:
H. Rulekeepor comex, could you please publish to a-d, or link to a
website containing, the ruleset as of the adoption of R1482/2? If we're
going to have a Massive Gamestate
On Thu, 2009-05-07 at 15:04 -0500, Benjamin Caplan wrote:
Kerim Aydin wrote:
On Thu, 7 May 2009, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 2:59 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
Another problem. �The exact wording of 1482/2 says that rule changes
that cause the ruleset as a
On Thu, 2009-05-07 at 16:48 -0400, comex wrote:
On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 4:29 PM, Benjamin Caplan
celestialcognit...@gmail.com wrote:
There are two competing senses of stipulate to choose from: Wooble's,
by which no rule currently stipulates anything, and the crisis-causing
one, by which
On Thu, 2009-05-07 at 18:42 -0600, Ian Kelly wrote:
Nomic is supposed to be a legal simulation, so try another analogy.
Suppose the U.S. Congress enacted a bill stating that bills enacted by
Congress take precedence over the Constitution. What do you think
would happen?
As usual in such
On Thu, 2009-05-07 at 22:19 -0600, Sean Hunt wrote:
Sgeo wrote:
On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 12:15 AM, Sgeo sgeos...@gmail.com wrote:
Let i = number of invaders needed to prevent the Aericans from
impeaching our Senators
Let c = the number of active and aware members of a colony
i = 5c+1
On Fri, 2009-05-08 at 10:20 -0400, Quazie wrote:
On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 5:05 PM, Sean Hunt ride...@gmail.com wrote:
6273 Quick-and-dirty-fixD 3.0 3 coppro
I endorse murphy and goethe if ey agree.
they. Spivak doesn't change plurals, for the simple reason that
On Fri, 2009-05-08 at 10:20 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
2. If the power-system becomes paradoxically unclear, here's three
equally reasonable resolutions:
a. We should use the system that existed just before the rule
creating the paradox was created (e.g. maintain power).
b.
On Sat, 2009-05-09 at 13:35 +0100, Charles Walker wrote:
InterNomic II already knows ;)
Well, could they at least let me post to their forum? (/me grumbles at
Wikidot, /again/...)
--
ais523
Ambassador
On Sun, 2009-05-10 at 11:23 -0400, Benjamin Schultz wrote:
I was away longer than I expected.
I come Off Hold. I sit up. I vote PRESENCE on every Agoran Decision
currently in its voting period.
You have a voting limit of 0 on those, because they were initiated while
you were inactive.
On Sun, 2009-05-10 at 22:38 -0700, Rodlen wrote:
5 My?
I know nothing about 5 My...
Typo for May, almost certainly equivalent to it by the typo rule,
R754, unless it somehow made the statement of the CFJ ambiguous.
--
ais523
On Mon, 2009-05-11 at 14:19 +0200, Jonatan Kilhamn wrote:
2009/5/10 Alex Smith ais...@bham.ac.uk:
Points awards in this message are due to the Points Party.
I award 5 x-points and 5 y-points to each of: BobTHJ, Tiger, ehird,
Murphy, Taral, Rodlen, and Sgeo.
I flip the contestmaster
On Mon, 2009-05-11 at 07:48 -0700, Rodlen wrote:
I have found no record of any Quazie pledge on the fifth of May.
So far, that is.
Whoops, looks like I screwed up the statement of the CFJ.
http://agora-notary.wikidot.com/2009-05-05-quazie is a pledge Quazie
made on May 5; the one I meant to
On Mon, 2009-05-11 at 10:58 -0400, Quazie wrote:
Trivially false.
I CFJ on the following statement:
A pledge that Quazie made on 1 May this year regarding musicianship
still exists.
I bar ais523
Actually, trivially true, you made a different pledge on that day (the
I will not sign as
On Mon, 2009-05-11 at 20:17 +0100, Charles Walker wrote:
THIS MESSAGE IS CLEARLY INTENDED TO BE PUBLIC.
HEIL ERIS!
I submit the following proposal:
{{
(AI = 3), (II = 3)
Enact the entire ruleset found at http://txtb.in/2BB, and flip the ID
number, title, power and text of each such
On Tue, 2009-05-12 at 21:46 +0200, Jonatan Kilhamn wrote:
According to the rules, the Insulator SHALL announce whether an NoV is
valid or not. Does e do this? I don't think I've seen em do it.
The last time the issue came up, nobody else had seen em do it either,
but it turned out Murphy had
On Tue, 2009-05-12 at 13:18 -0700, Taral wrote:
On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 3:06 AM, Alex Smith ais...@bham.ac.uk wrote:
I appeal the question on culpability. At the time, I was aware of the
Libel rule, but nonetheless believed I was not breaking it. (Yes, it was
a deliberate attempt to scam
On Tue, 2009-05-12 at 18:27 -0400, Benjamin Schultz wrote:
On May 12, 2009, at 6:03 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
Detail: http://zenith.homelinux.net/cotc/viewcase.php?cfj=2485
== Equity Case 2485
==
The Lender has not been keeping
On Tue, 2009-05-12 at 15:56 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
On Tue, 12 May 2009, Alex Smith wrote:
On Tue, 2009-05-12 at 13:18 -0700, Taral wrote:
On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 3:06 AM, Alex Smith ais...@bham.ac.uk wrote:
I appeal the question on culpability. At the time, I was aware of the
Libel
On Tue, 2009-05-12 at 19:07 -0500, Aaron Goldfein wrote:
I see this proposal not as a way for me to be a jackass, but to reveal
a part of the game as flawed. Scamming is something that is very
intricate in the game, and as a result it should be expected that
someone would submit a proposal
On Wed, 2009-05-13 at 09:30 -0400, Quazie wrote:
a) Default Officehater. If the Default Officehater is the
holder of an office, then that office is considered vacant. The
Default Officehater can not perform the duties of any office.
Make sure this doesn't interrupt X Months Long
On Wed, 2009-05-13 at 20:14 +0200, Jonatan Kilhamn wrote:
Player Key Last change
---
ais523 D Feb 2009
I'm pretty sure I changed Key more recently than this...
--
ais523
On Wed, 2009-05-13 at 20:48 +0200, Jonatan Kilhamn wrote:
2009/5/13 Alex Smith ais...@bham.ac.uk:
On Tue, 2009-04-28 at 15:35 +0100, Alex Smith wrote (in agora-business):
I flip my Key to G.
I CoE against the latest Conductor's Report; my key is G, not D. My Note
holdings shown are also
On Wed, 2009-05-13 at 12:45 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
A player CAN flip a specified proposal to Distributable
with 2 Support, or by spending one Note.
A player CAN flip a specified proposal to Undistributable
with 4 Support, or by spending two Notes.
It
On Wed, 2009-05-13 at 13:00 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
On Wed, 13 May 2009, Alex Smith wrote:
On Wed, 2009-05-13 at 12:45 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
A player CAN flip a specified proposal to Distributable
with 2 Support, or by spending one Note.
A player CAN flip
On Wed, 2009-05-13 at 16:20 -0400, Quazie wrote:
On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 4:18 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
By the way, I really, really, really, really don't think that Cards
and Notes (in current complexity) should exist at the same time. -G.
I believe notes should die.
On Wed, 2009-05-13 at 18:56 -0600, Sean Hunt wrote:
Manuel Lanctot wrote:
I register.
~Manu
I award Manu a White Ribbon.
Fails, e's been a player before.
--
ais523
On Fri, 2009-05-15 at 09:38 -0400, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
Rather than try to take jobs away from officers, let's just require
better reports.
I submit the following proposal entitled Better Reports:
{{
In Rule 2143, add the following paragraph at the end:
Reports SHALL be
On Sat, 2009-05-16 at 23:55 -0700, Ed Murphy wrote:
6310 D 1 2.0 coppro Maple Leaf Dominance
PRESENT (I will inform Prime Minster Stephen Harper at p...@pm.gc.ca
if this passes; neither Queen Elizabeth II nor Governor General
Michaëlle Jean appears to be reachable by e-mail)
On Sun, 2009-05-17 at 12:42 -0600, Sean Hunt wrote:
If the above is a proposal, I retract it.
(now that's a new NttPF!)
It's written NttDF on occasion, to parallel with NttPF. It's
actually a case I don't know of; saying in the body of a message that
something's a proto prevents it being a
On Sun, 2009-05-17 at 20:06 +0100, Charles Walker wrote:
On Sun, May 17, 2009 at 8:03 PM, Ed Murphy emurph...@socal.rr.com
wrote:
coppro wrote:
Alex Smith wrote:
On Sat, 2009-05-16 at 23:55 -0700, Ed Murphy wrote:
6310 D 1 2.0 coppro
On Wed, 2009-05-13 at 18:51 -0400, Benjamin Schultz wrote:
I offer ais523 a trade of my 4s for eir 9s
I'm happy to trade up to half of the 9s I own to you in exchange for an
equal number of 4s.
I'll give you a pledge to this effect if you want, but I'm catching up
on the Notary's report atm and
On Sun, 2009-05-17 at 18:22 -0600, Sean Hunt wrote:
Ed Murphy wrote:
Detail: http://zenith.homelinux.net/cotc/viewcase.php?cfj=2528
== CFJ 2528 ==
On or about Sat, 16 May 2009 20:15:44 -0500, Yally resolved the
Agoran
On Mon, 2009-05-18 at 08:46 -0400, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 8:23 PM, Ed Murphy emurph...@socal.rr.com wrote:
Detail: http://zenith.homelinux.net/cotc/viewcase.php?cfj=2480a
Appeal 2480a
I opine AFFIRM. The
On Mon, 2009-05-18 at 16:04 +0100, Alex Smith wrote:
On Mon, 2009-05-18 at 08:46 -0400, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 8:23 PM, Ed Murphy emurph...@socal.rr.com wrote:
Detail: http://zenith.homelinux.net/cotc/viewcase.php?cfj=2480a
Appeal
On Mon, 2009-05-18 at 08:46 -0400, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 8:23 PM, Ed Murphy emurph...@socal.rr.com wrote:
Detail: http://zenith.homelinux.net/cotc/viewcase.php?cfj=2480a
Appeal 2480a
I opine AFFIRM. The
On Mon, 2009-05-18 at 08:46 -0400, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 8:23 PM, Ed Murphy emurph...@socal.rr.com wrote:
Detail: http://zenith.homelinux.net/cotc/viewcase.php?cfj=2480a
Appeal 2480a
I opine AFFIRM. The
On Mon, 2009-05-18 at 11:25 -0400, comex wrote:
On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 11:23 AM, Alex Smith ais...@bham.ac.uk wrote:
Also, the claimed action (sending false information to a Public
Forum) /is/ illegal; it just didn't happen. What you're affirming is not
what Taral judged; please at least
On Mon, 2009-05-18 at 12:05 -0400, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 12:01 PM, Ed Murphy emurph...@socal.rr.com wrote:
ais523 wrote:
On Sat, 2009-05-02 at 15:46 +0100, Alex Smith wrote:
1) For each active player not a party to this contract, ais523
publishes a Notice
On Mon, 2009-05-18 at 12:34 -0400, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 12:16 PM, Ed Murphy emurph...@socal.rr.com wrote:
The full text appears between {} below. The opening (which doesn't
allow me to fill in the missing parts later) plus 1) should lead to
a trivial FALSE.
{
On Mon, 2009-05-18 at 11:37 -0500, Benjamin Caplan wrote:
Alex Smith wrote:
Also, the text above was accusing; IMO, you can
accuse someone of doing something without stating that they've actually
done it. (False accusations have been rather common in history; and it's
well known
On Mon, 2009-05-18 at 13:08 -0400, Quazie wrote:
I judge FALSE ais523 did not submit the NOV's, based on both issues:
Pavitra and alleging.
I have no idea as to what actually happened as a result of the initial
message, but murphy did not perform any action on behalf of anyone.
I recommend
On Mon, 2009-05-18 at 11:17 -0600, Roger Hicks wrote:
On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 10:11, Ed Murphy emurph...@socal.rr.com wrote:
BobTHJ wrote:
Rests (* = Fugitive)
-
4 ais523
1 coppro
2 ehird
3 Sgeo
2 w1n5t0n
CoE: w1n5t0n was recently deregistered for inactivity,
On Mon, 2009-05-18 at 12:43 -0700, Ed Murphy wrote:
vii., the right to deregister, does not protect a
player from game obligations incurred after
ceasing to play;
[citation needed]
Arguably CFJ 2387, but that wasn't a very good
On Mon, 2009-05-18 at 15:00 -0600, Roger Hicks wrote:
On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 14:45, Sean Hunt ride...@gmail.com wrote:
I deputize for Herald to initiate an Agoran Decision to select the
degree to be awarded to ais523 for eir thesis summarizing the ruleset,
published on April 29 to
On Tue, 2009-05-19 at 10:19 -0400, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 10:02 AM, Quazie quazieno...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 9:52 AM, Geoffrey Spear geoffsp...@gmail.com
wrote:
The highest Proposal ID in use is 6323; no Proposal IDs are chaotic.
The pool
On Tue, 2009-05-19 at 14:18 -0700, Ed Murphy wrote:
*6285 D1 3.0 Goethe Precedence fix
*6287 D1 3.0 comex Emergency ratification
Wow, I'm glad these two were resolved this way round, not the other way
round!
--
ais523
On Tue, 2009-05-19 at 15:07 -0700, Ed Murphy wrote:
Proposal: Half-rests
(AI = 2, please)
Amend Rule 2166 (Assets) by appending this text to the paragraph
defining currencies:
If a currency's backing document defines a positive integral
piece count (N) for it, then each unit
On Wed, 2009-05-20 at 05:07 +0100, Elliott Hird wrote:
BOTH nicks?
On 2009-05-20, Ed Murphy emurph...@socal.rr.com wrote:
13 Arnold Bros (est. 1905)
15 ehird
Obviously people like your old nick more than your new one...
--
ais523
On Wed, 2009-05-20 at 15:00 +0200, Jonatan Kilhamn wrote:
2009/5/20 Alex Smith ais...@bham.ac.uk:
On Tue, 2009-05-19 at 17:05 -0600, Sean Hunt wrote:
Jonatan Kilhamn wrote:
coppro 3 3 6 3 7 0 2 2 1 1 4 2 34
18 May 2009 00:00:00 - coppro +D gained points
On Wed, 2009-05-20 at 18:53 +0100, Elliott Hird wrote:
2009/5/20 Quazie quazieno...@gmail.com:
On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 7:35 PM, Ed Murphy emurph...@socal.rr.com wrote:
Detail: http://zenith.homelinux.net/cotc/viewcase.php?cfj=2494
I judge TRUE by my own arguments.
I intend, with two
On Wed, 2009-05-20 at 11:37 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
On Wed, 20 May 2009, Alex Smith wrote:
On Wed, 2009-05-20 at 18:53 +0100, Elliott Hird wrote:
2009/5/20 Quazie quazieno...@gmail.com:
On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 7:35 PM, Ed Murphy emurph...@socal.rr.com wrote:
Detail: http
On Wed, 2009-05-20 at 11:52 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
On Wed, 20 May 2009, Elliott Hird wrote:
I intend, with two support, to appeal this judgment because remanding
here was an awful tiebreakre.
I submit the following proposal, Two tiered tiebreaker, AI 2.0:
On Wed, 2009-05-20 at 14:19 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
On Wed, 20 May 2009, Alex Smith wrote:
On Wed, 2009-05-20 at 11:52 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
[The Justiciar can just submit an opinion when e feels like it,
and it's used as the tiebreaker when needed].
Can you remove the hot-or-cold
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
On Thu, 2009-05-21 at 08:23 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
On Thu, 21 May 2009, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
OTOH, pledges have to be public now, so the pledge would have to be
published to take effect anyway. Agreeing in ##nomic to a non-pledge
private contract or to a public contract (with the fact
On Thu, 2009-05-21 at 14:53 -0500, Benjamin Caplan wrote:
Geoffrey Spear wrote:
##nomic is an Agoran discussion forum, and has no status at all in B.
It should work the same as a-d.
##nomic has a longer history and usage than its official status in
Agora. In practice, people discuss more
On Thu, 2009-05-21 at 16:01 -0400, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 3:57 PM, Alex Smith ais...@bham.ac.uk wrote:
It's also the equivalent of a PF for at least two other nomics, both of
which are now dead.
On behalf of One True Agora, I object to the Agoran Ambassador
claiming
501 - 600 of 1537 matches
Mail list logo
