From comexk at gmail.com Mon Jun 9 12:14:27 2008 From: comexk at gmail.com (comex) Date: Sun, 08 Jun 2008 22:14:27 -0400 Subject: BAK: List down? Message-ID: <6bf32280806081914n62a1f481g473e877dacebd15a@mail.gmail.com> I cannot connect to agoranomic.org, and I have not received a copy of the message I attempted to send to agora-business earlier, so I'm assuming the main lists are down. hmm. So, what's up? I intend, without objection, to make ehird inactive. From taralx at gmail.com Mon Jun 9 12:19:33 2008 From: taralx at gmail.com (Taral) Date: Sun, 08 Jun 2008 19:19:33 -0700 Subject: BAK: Primary mailing list outage Message-ID: Unfortunately, a system failure has taken down the box handing the primary mailing lists. Apologies for the inconvenience. -- Distributor Eris "AAAAAAAGH!" -- Everyone From emurphy42 at socal.rr.com Mon Jun 9 17:21:41 2008 From: emurphy42 at socal.rr.com (Ed Murphy) Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2008 00:21:41 -0700 Subject: BAK: [Fwd: Judgements] Message-ID: <484CDA05.80508@socal.rr.com> -------- Original Message -------- Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2008 00:18:36 -0700 From: Ed Murphy To: Agora Business Subject: Judgements 1983: TRUE Arguments: There is reasonable support for interpreting "statement" broadly; some definitions supporting this interpretation are provided as evidence. I also believe that the task of parsing and interpreting statements should generally (Rule 2204 is an exception) be assigned to the judge, rather than the Clerk of the Courts; interpreting "statement" broadly is consistent with this belief; see also CFJs 1266 and 1883-84. Evidence: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/statement [Random House] 1. something stated. [American Heritage] 1. The act of stating or declaring. 2. Something stated; a declaration. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/state [Random House] ?verb (used with object) 19. to declare definitely or specifically: She stated her position on the case. 20. to set forth formally in speech or writing: to state a hypothesis. 21. to set forth in proper or definite form: to state a problem. 22. to say. 23. to fix or settle, as by authority. [American Heritage] tr.v. To set forth in words; declare. ----- 1988: UNDETERMINED The dangling pronoun "it" is sufficiently vague to make this judgement appropriate. From AIS523 at bham.ac.uk Mon Jun 9 20:31:03 2008 From: AIS523 at bham.ac.uk (Alexander Smith) Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2008 11:31:03 +0100 Subject: BAK: Objecting to comex's attempt to make ehird inactive Message-ID: I object to comex's attempt to make ehird inactive. -- ais523 From ihope127 at gmail.com Mon Jun 9 22:32:26 2008 From: ihope127 at gmail.com (ihope) Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2008 08:32:26 -0400 Subject: BAK: List down? In-Reply-To: <6bf32280806081914n62a1f481g473e877dacebd15a@mail.gmail.com> References: <6bf32280806081914n62a1f481g473e877dacebd15a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7db5cba20806090532v57ad8c44rabd58f7800d4dfcb@mail.gmail.com> On Sun, Jun 8, 2008 at 10:14 PM, comex wrote: > I intend, without objection, to make ehird inactive. I object. --Ivan Hope CXXVII From geoffspear at gmail.com Mon Jun 9 22:40:10 2008 From: geoffspear at gmail.com (Geoffrey Spear) Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2008 08:40:10 -0400 Subject: BAK: List down? In-Reply-To: <7db5cba20806090532v57ad8c44rabd58f7800d4dfcb@mail.gmail.com> References: <6bf32280806081914n62a1f481g473e877dacebd15a@mail.gmail.com> <7db5cba20806090532v57ad8c44rabd58f7800d4dfcb@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 8:32 AM, ihope wrote: > On Sun, Jun 8, 2008 at 10:14 PM, comex wrote: >> I intend, without objection, to make ehird inactive. > > I object. I find this objection objectionable. Rule 478 warned H. ehird that e should ensure e can receive messages via each public forum; we should assume in good faith that e fully understood the implications of not subscribing to at least one of the public fora and accepts the consequences. From AIS523 at bham.ac.uk Mon Jun 9 22:51:40 2008 From: AIS523 at bham.ac.uk (Alexander Smith) Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2008 13:51:40 +0100 Subject: BAK: DIS: RE: List down? References: <6bf32280806081914n62a1f481g473e877dacebd15a@mail.gmail.com> <7db5cba20806090532v57ad8c44rabd58f7800d4dfcb@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: I do not in this message assert anything in the following {{{}}} block to be true or false, nor take any actions in it, even if the block appears to make assertions or statements, or take actions: {{{ Geoffrey Spear wrote: > On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 8:32 AM, ihope wrote: >> On Sun, Jun 8, 2008 at 10:14 PM, comex wrote: >>> I intend, without objection, to make ehird inactive. >> >> I object. > > I find this objection objectionable. Rule 478 warned H. ehird that e > should ensure e can receive messages via each public forum; we should > assume in good faith that e fully understood the implications of not > subscribing to at least one of the public fora and accepts the > consequences. Well, I objected because surely you can come up with far more amusing and appropriate consequences than mere inactivation (which ehird can undo pretty easily)? Anyway, receiving via all public fora is a "should" (not a SHALL or even a SHOULD); it's entirely possible that ehird can read the archives, or figure out what happened for emself when the main mailing lists appear to be down. (ehird communicates with me often for non-nomic-related reasons; I could tell em that the main lists were down myself, for instance, as I would likely have an opportunity.) Incidentally, before the current outage, I was subscribed to precisely three public fora on Agora. (I subscribed to the fourth when the third let me know the first and second were down). I'm adding DIS: BAK: and OFF: myself at the moment to help clarify things. Unfortunately, when making an intended-for-discussion-forum post, I have to come up with silly quoting like this to prevent it being under the rules for public fora. (Not that I think it would be a problem to post this message in particular to a public forum, but I think the principle is important in some sense. There should be a rule 101 right to a discussion forum IMO, the game hurts without one.) }}} -- ais523 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/ms-tnef Size: 3789 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://yoyo.its.monash.edu.au/pipermail/nomic/attachments/20080609/3953668b/attachment.bin From geoffspear at gmail.com Mon Jun 9 23:13:21 2008 From: geoffspear at gmail.com (Geoffrey Spear) Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2008 09:13:21 -0400 Subject: BAK: Judgment in CFJs Message-ID: Rule 2166 says that the owner of an asset generally CAN transfer it to another entity, so ehird CAN transfer a crumpet in eir possession to a pen. The court rejects H. Ivan Hope CXXVII's assertion that a pen, being a fungible entity, cannot own different assets than another pen with the same owner; ownership in this case is a property of the crumpet, not of the pen, so the fungibility of any given entity's pens is immaterial. There's no general right to cause an asset in one's possession to transfer assets it owns to oneself, and thus 2 pens are of equal value regardless of whether one of them happens to own crumpets as well. (It is, of course, impossible for the recordkeepor of crumpets to say for sure which pen owns a particular crumpet, since pens don't have individuality, but that's rather the recordkeepor's problem, not the court's.) However, I hold that the statement "I create a crumpet, eat it, and transfer it to a pen, randomly selected from all pens." is meaningless, since the original crumpet ceases to exist upon being eaten, as it is replaced with 5 crumpets, leaving the second "it" without a referent. The attempted transfer therefore failed, so at the time these CFJs were called, both were FALSE. (Were they to be called again now, after the clarified action of attempting to transfer all of the crumpets created by the eating of 1, I'd argue for a ruling of UNDETERMINED, since at least one pen has been destroyed in the interim and the information about whether the crumpets were owned by a destroyed pen is unavailable to the court, and, for that matter, to the recordkeepor of crumpets. Again, it's the responsibility of the parties to the contract defining crumpets to ensure that they can only be owned by entities that can be distinguished; they cannot shift that responsibility to the courts.) --Wooble From geoffspear at gmail.com Mon Jun 9 23:16:11 2008 From: geoffspear at gmail.com (Geoffrey Spear) Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2008 09:16:11 -0400 Subject: BAK: Fwd: Judgment in CFJs 1956-57 Message-ID: Uh, ttwtcnsykwIttra (this time with the CFJ numbers so you know what I'm trying to rule about). I rule as follows in CFJs 1956 and 1957: Rule 2166 says that the owner of an asset generally CAN transfer it to another entity, so ehird CAN transfer a crumpet in eir possession to a pen. The court rejects H. Ivan Hope CXXVII's assertion that a pen, being a fungible entity, cannot own different assets than another pen with the same owner; ownership in this case is a property of the crumpet, not of the pen, so the fungibility of any given entity's pens is immaterial. There's no general right to cause an asset in one's possession to transfer assets it owns to oneself, and thus 2 pens are of equal value regardless of whether one of them happens to own crumpets as well. (It is, of course, impossible for the recordkeepor of crumpets to say for sure which pen owns a particular crumpet, since pens don't have individuality, but that's rather the recordkeepor's problem, not the court's.) However, I hold that the statement "I create a crumpet, eat it, and transfer it to a pen, randomly selected from all pens." is meaningless, since the original crumpet ceases to exist upon being eaten, as it is replaced with 5 crumpets, leaving the second "it" without a referent. The attempted transfer therefore failed, so at the time these CFJs were called, both were FALSE. (Were they to be called again now, after the clarified action of attempting to transfer all of the crumpets created by the eating of 1, I'd argue for a ruling of UNDETERMINED, since at least one pen has been destroyed in the interim and the information about whether the crumpets were owned by a destroyed pen is unavailable to the court, and, for that matter, to the recordkeepor of crumpets. Again, it's the responsibility of the parties to the contract defining crumpets to ensure that they can only be owned by entities that can be distinguished; they cannot shift that responsibility to the courts.) --Wooble From comexk at gmail.com Tue Jun 10 00:30:44 2008 From: comexk at gmail.com (comex) Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2008 10:30:44 -0400 Subject: BAK: Fwd: lateJudgement of CFJ 1964 In-Reply-To: <6bf32280806080923y6f9f1716m3dfef52c49ce1b65@mail.gmail.com> References: <6bf32280806080923y6f9f1716m3dfef52c49ce1b65@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6bf32280806090730j317930deq2c71bf47af5c940@mail.gmail.com> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: comex Date: Jun 8, 2008 12:23 PM Subject: lateJudgement of CFJ 1964 To: agora-business at agoranomic.org (I forgot about this one.) By the precedent of CFJ 1738, if ihope had had the RIGHT to do what e wilt, then Rule 2149 would conflict with this right and would be invalid. However, e only had the PRIVILEGE to do so. R101's treatment of rights is a lot stronger than of privileges. Nevertheless, R101 claims to take precedence over any rule "which would allow restrictions of a person's rights or privileges." This, combined with the fact that ihope's privilege to do what e wilt would be severely restricted if e was in violation of any rule for doing things, leads to the conclusion that Rule 101 did indeed conflict with Rule 2149, and ihope did not violate the Rules by publishing a false statement. I judge CFJ 1964 UNIMPUGNED. Evidence: Rule 101/7 (Power=3) Agoran Rights and Privileges The rules may define persons as possessing specific rights or privileges. Be it hereby proclaimed that no binding agreement or interpretation of Agoran law may abridge, reduce, limit, or remove a person's defined rights. A person's defined privileges are assumed to exist in the absence of an explicit, binding agreement to the contrary. This rule takes precedence over any rule which would allow restrictions of a person's rights or privileges. Rule 2149/8 (Power=1) Truthfulness A person SHALL NOT make a public statement unless e believes that in doing so e is telling the truth. From: ihope To: agora-business at agoranomic.org Subject: Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Re: Hay guyz Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 16:22:16 -0400 By the way, two plus two is five. I initiate a criminal CFJ against myself for violating rule 2149 by making a public statement that two plus two is five. My arguments: R101(i) gives me the privilege of doing what I will, which includes stating that two plus two is five. R101 also states that "A person's defined privileges are assumed to exist in the absence of an explicit, binding agreement to the contrary", but this doesn't mean that if there is an explicit, binding agreement to the contrary, my defined privileges do not exist; R101(i) not only makes that privilege "defined" but also states that I do, in fact, have it, meaning rule 2149 cannot restrict it. In case this is not sufficient evidence, I don't believe I've explicitly and bindingly agreed to the rules--I have become a player, but the rules don't state that they apply only to players, so I don't think this should be taken as an agreement, much less an explicit, binding one. --Ivan Hope CXXVII From ihope127 at gmail.com Tue Jun 10 03:11:46 2008 From: ihope127 at gmail.com (ihope) Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2008 13:11:46 -0400 Subject: BAK: Fwd: lateJudgement of CFJ 1964 In-Reply-To: <6bf32280806090730j317930deq2c71bf47af5c940@mail.gmail.com> References: <6bf32280806080923y6f9f1716m3dfef52c49ce1b65@mail.gmail.com> <6bf32280806090730j317930deq2c71bf47af5c940@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7db5cba20806091011j129944aek61003106933a5785@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 10:30 AM, comex wrote: > I judge CFJ 1964 UNIMPUGNED. I give comex 50 pens as an obvious bribe. --Ivan Hope CXXVII From penguinofthegods at googlemail.com Tue Jun 10 03:18:17 2008 From: penguinofthegods at googlemail.com (Elliott Hird) Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2008 18:18:17 +0100 Subject: BAK: BUS: Re: OFF: distribution of proposals 5541-5545 In-Reply-To: <56732cfd0806071842j504afa10ya4315fa3ce256429@mail.gmail.com> References: <56732cfd0806071842j504afa10ya4315fa3ce256429@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <784a579e0806091018u6ff45ee7x6e82bb3732c116af@mail.gmail.com> I join the Vote Market. 2008/6/8 Roger Hicks : >> 5545 O1 1 ehird AGORA > > I post the following: > > Sell Ticket > Cost: 1VP > Action: Vote in the manner specified by the filler of this ticket on > Proposal 5545. > > BobTHJ > I fill this ticket. BobTHJ, vote FORx7 on proposal 55445. ehird From ian.g.kelly at gmail.com Tue Jun 10 04:39:31 2008 From: ian.g.kelly at gmail.com (Ian Kelly) Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2008 12:39:31 -0600 Subject: BAK: Fwd: lateJudgement of CFJ 1964 In-Reply-To: <6bf32280806090730j317930deq2c71bf47af5c940@mail.gmail.com> References: <6bf32280806080923y6f9f1716m3dfef52c49ce1b65@mail.gmail.com> <6bf32280806090730j317930deq2c71bf47af5c940@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <3fc761710806091139t4e9a52dar3204341934056297@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 8:30 AM, comex wrote: > (I forgot about this one.) > > By the precedent of CFJ 1738, if ihope had had the RIGHT to do what e > wilt, then Rule 2149 would conflict with this right and would be > invalid. However, e only had the PRIVILEGE to do so. R101's > treatment of rights is a lot stronger than of privileges. > Nevertheless, R101 claims to take precedence over any rule "which > would allow restrictions of a person's rights or privileges." > > This, combined with the fact that ihope's privilege to do what e wilt > would be severely restricted if e was in violation of any rule for > doing things, leads to the conclusion that Rule 101 did indeed > conflict with Rule 2149, and ihope did not violate the Rules by > publishing a false statement. > > I judge CFJ 1964 UNIMPUGNED. I intend to appeal this judgement with 2 support. -root From pidgepot at gmail.com Tue Jun 10 04:40:04 2008 From: pidgepot at gmail.com (Roger Hicks) Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2008 12:40:04 -0600 Subject: BAK: BUS: Re: OFF: distribution of proposals 5541-5545 In-Reply-To: <784a579e0806091018u6ff45ee7x6e82bb3732c116af@mail.gmail.com> References: <56732cfd0806071842j504afa10ya4315fa3ce256429@mail.gmail.com> <784a579e0806091018u6ff45ee7x6e82bb3732c116af@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <56732cfd0806091140w260e877ere1f4dd1008f2ba38@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 11:18 AM, Elliott Hird wrote: > I fill this ticket. BobTHJ, vote FORx7 on proposal 55445. > As obligated, I vote FOR x 7 on proposal 5545. BobTHJ From penguinofthegods at googlemail.com Tue Jun 10 04:42:16 2008 From: penguinofthegods at googlemail.com (Elliott Hird) Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2008 19:42:16 +0100 Subject: BAK: Teh Cltohed Mna Ni Teh Drak Woh Wtaches Adn Nevre Sasy A Wrod Execpt Wehn Psoessed Yb Dmeons Mcuhly Precocupied Message-ID: <784a579e0806091142x56b400e9wf7547c0a494e0098@mail.gmail.com> I intend to create the following contract with ais523, named "Teh Cltohed Mna Ni Teh Drak Woh Wtaches Adn Nevre Sasy A Wrod Execpt Wehn Psoessed Yb Dmeons Mcuhly Precocupied": {There is a list of players called the Manroster. The Manroster is initially ehird and ais523. Any player in the Manroster can perform actions on behalf of this contract. All parties to this contract SHALL act to ensure it fulfills any obligations it may incur. This is a public contract.} ehird From AIS523 at bham.ac.uk Tue Jun 10 04:43:23 2008 From: AIS523 at bham.ac.uk (Alexander Smith) Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2008 19:43:23 +0100 Subject: BAK: BUS: Teh Cltohed Mna Ni Teh Drak Woh Wtaches Adn Nevre Sasy A Wrod Execpt Wehn Psoessed Yb Dmeons Mcuhly Precocupied References: <784a579e0806091142x56b400e9wf7547c0a494e0098@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: ehird wrote: > I intend to create the following contract with ais523, named "Teh > Cltohed Mna Ni Teh Drak Woh Wtaches Adn Nevre Sasy A Wrod Execpt Wehn > Psoessed Yb Dmeons Mcuhly Precocupied": {There is a list of players > called the Manroster. The Manroster is initially ehird and ais523. Any > player in the Manroster can perform actions on behalf of this > contract. All parties to this contract SHALL act to ensure it fulfills > any obligations it may incur. This is a public contract.} I do not agree to this, because the name is misspelt. -- ais523 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/ms-tnef Size: 3322 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://yoyo.its.monash.edu.au/pipermail/nomic/attachments/20080610/028123d7/attachment-0001.bin From penguinofthegods at googlemail.com Tue Jun 10 04:46:42 2008 From: penguinofthegods at googlemail.com (Elliott Hird) Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2008 19:46:42 +0100 Subject: BAK: BUS: Teh Cltohed Mna Ni Teh Drak Woh Wtaches Adn Nevre Sasy A Wrod Execpt Wehn Psoessed Yb Dmeons Mcuhly Precocupied In-Reply-To: References: <784a579e0806091142x56b400e9wf7547c0a494e0098@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <784a579e0806091146j21121996k887a989761bbed0f@mail.gmail.com> 2008/6/9 Alexander Smith : > I do not agree to this, because the name is misspelt. > -- > ais523 > It's actually valid in Egnlish, a little-known variation on Pig Latin from 786 BC. It means "Turtle". ehird From comexk at gmail.com Tue Jun 10 05:03:27 2008 From: comexk at gmail.com (comex) Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2008 15:03:27 -0400 Subject: BAK: Fwd: lateJudgement of CFJ 1964 In-Reply-To: <7db5cba20806091011j129944aek61003106933a5785@mail.gmail.com> References: <6bf32280806080923y6f9f1716m3dfef52c49ce1b65@mail.gmail.com> <6bf32280806090730j317930deq2c71bf47af5c940@mail.gmail.com> <7db5cba20806091011j129944aek61003106933a5785@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6bf32280806091203u5d35f3e2r951094f334c9382b@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 1:11 PM, ihope wrote: > On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 10:30 AM, comex wrote: >> I judge CFJ 1964 UNIMPUGNED. > > I give comex 50 pens as an obvious bribe. I did not expect this bribe nor did I base my judgement on it. I give ihope his 50 pens back. From ihope127 at gmail.com Tue Jun 10 05:15:30 2008 From: ihope127 at gmail.com (ihope) Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2008 15:15:30 -0400 Subject: BAK: Fwd: lateJudgement of CFJ 1964 In-Reply-To: <6bf32280806091203u5d35f3e2r951094f334c9382b@mail.gmail.com> References: <6bf32280806080923y6f9f1716m3dfef52c49ce1b65@mail.gmail.com> <6bf32280806090730j317930deq2c71bf47af5c940@mail.gmail.com> <7db5cba20806091011j129944aek61003106933a5785@mail.gmail.com> <6bf32280806091203u5d35f3e2r951094f334c9382b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7db5cba20806091215g3bae1d80vb7caa95af28d9343@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 3:03 PM, comex wrote: > I did not expect this bribe nor did I base my judgement on it. I give > ihope his 50 pens back. Oh, thank you. By the way, did I mention I didn't have 50 pens in the first place, so you just gave me free stuff? (Which is a question, not a statement, which hopefully means I can't be prosecuted for it.) --Ivan Hope CXXVII From ihope127 at gmail.com Tue Jun 10 09:32:26 2008 From: ihope127 at gmail.com (ihope) Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2008 19:32:26 -0400 Subject: BAK: Teh Cltohed Mna Ni Teh Drak Woh Wtaches Adn Nevre Sasy A Wrod Execpt Wehn Psoessed Yb Dmeons Mcuhly Precocupied In-Reply-To: <784a579e0806091142x56b400e9wf7547c0a494e0098@mail.gmail.com> References: <784a579e0806091142x56b400e9wf7547c0a494e0098@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7db5cba20806091632h3ce4a4edo21cae0eef8ac684e@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 2:42 PM, Elliott Hird wrote: > I intend to create the following contract with ais523, named "Teh > Cltohed Mna Ni Teh Drak Woh Wtaches Adn Nevre Sasy A Wrod Execpt Wehn > Psoessed Yb Dmeons Mcuhly Precocupied": {There is a list of players > called the Manroster. The Manroster is initially ehird and ais523. Any > player in the Manroster can perform actions on behalf of this > contract. All parties to this contract SHALL act to ensure it fulfills > any obligations it may incur. This is a public contract.} I agree. --Ivan Hope CXXVII From penguinofthegods at googlemail.com Tue Jun 10 09:35:51 2008 From: penguinofthegods at googlemail.com (Elliott Hird) Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 00:35:51 +0100 Subject: BAK: Teh Cltohed Mna Ni Teh Drak Woh Wtaches Adn Nevre Sasy A Wrod Execpt Wehn Psoessed Yb Dmeons Mcuhly Precocupied In-Reply-To: <7db5cba20806091632h3ce4a4edo21cae0eef8ac684e@mail.gmail.com> References: <784a579e0806091142x56b400e9wf7547c0a494e0098@mail.gmail.com> <7db5cba20806091632h3ce4a4edo21cae0eef8ac684e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <784a579e0806091635l5356a5dfp2e735bd94a956484@mail.gmail.com> On 10/06/2008, ihope wrote: > On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 2:42 PM, Elliott Hird > wrote: >> I intend to create the following contract with ais523, named "Teh >> Cltohed Mna Ni Teh Drak Woh Wtaches Adn Nevre Sasy A Wrod Execpt Wehn >> Psoessed Yb Dmeons Mcuhly Precocupied": {There is a list of players >> called the Manroster. The Manroster is initially ehird and ais523. Any >> player in the Manroster can perform actions on behalf of this >> contract. All parties to this contract SHALL act to ensure it fulfills >> any obligations it may incur. This is a public contract.} > > I agree. > > --Ivan Hope CXXVII > > _______________________________________________ > Nomic mailing list > Nomic at yoyo.its.monash.edu.au > http://yoyo.its.monash.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/nomic > I intend, without objection, to change this contract to read: {There is a list of players called the Manroster. The Manroster is initially ehird and ais523. Any player in the Manroster can perform actions on behalf of this contract. Any player in the Manroster can change the Manroster. All parties to this contract SHALL act to ensure it fulfills any obligations it may incur. This is a public contract.} From penguinofthegods at googlemail.com Tue Jun 10 09:39:39 2008 From: penguinofthegods at googlemail.com (Elliott Hird) Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 00:39:39 +0100 Subject: BAK: Teh Cltohed Mna Ni Teh Drak Woh Wtaches Adn Nevre Sasy A Wrod Execpt Wehn Psoessed Yb Dmeons Mcuhly Precocupied In-Reply-To: <784a579e0806091635l5356a5dfp2e735bd94a956484@mail.gmail.com> References: <784a579e0806091142x56b400e9wf7547c0a494e0098@mail.gmail.com> <7db5cba20806091632h3ce4a4edo21cae0eef8ac684e@mail.gmail.com> <784a579e0806091635l5356a5dfp2e735bd94a956484@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <784a579e0806091639s60833f1arb49863987ec0d530@mail.gmail.com> Wait no. I intend to make the following contract with ihope, named Teh Cltohed Mna Ni Teh Drak Woh Wtaches Adn Nevre Sasy A Wrod Execpt Wehn Psoessed Yb Dmeons Mcuhly Precocupied: {There is a list of players called the Manroster. The Manroster is initially ehird and ihope. Any player in the Manroster can perform actions on behalf of this contract. Any player in the Manroster can change the Manroster. All parties to this contract SHALL act to ensure it fulfills any obligations it may incur. This is a public contract.} ehird From ihope127 at gmail.com Tue Jun 10 09:41:32 2008 From: ihope127 at gmail.com (ihope) Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2008 19:41:32 -0400 Subject: BAK: Teh Cltohed Mna Ni Teh Drak Woh Wtaches Adn Nevre Sasy A Wrod Execpt Wehn Psoessed Yb Dmeons Mcuhly Precocupied In-Reply-To: <784a579e0806091639s60833f1arb49863987ec0d530@mail.gmail.com> References: <784a579e0806091142x56b400e9wf7547c0a494e0098@mail.gmail.com> <7db5cba20806091632h3ce4a4edo21cae0eef8ac684e@mail.gmail.com> <784a579e0806091635l5356a5dfp2e735bd94a956484@mail.gmail.com> <784a579e0806091639s60833f1arb49863987ec0d530@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7db5cba20806091641j794ed0c2w6992fa018834e7ca@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 7:39 PM, Elliott Hird wrote: > {There is a list of players called the Manroster. The Manroster is > initially ehird and ihope. Any player in the Manroster can perform > actions on behalf of this contract. Any player in the Manroster can > change the Manroster. All parties to this contract SHALL act to ensure > it fulfills any obligations it may incur. This is a public contract.} I agree to this contract and cause it to register. --Ivan Hope CXXVII From celestialcognition at gmail.com Tue Jun 10 09:44:08 2008 From: celestialcognition at gmail.com (Ben Caplan) Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2008 18:44:08 -0500 Subject: BAK: Teh Cltohed Mna Ni Teh Drak Woh Wtaches Adn Nevre Sasy A Wrod Execpt Wehn Psoessed Yb Dmeons Mcuhly Precocupied In-Reply-To: <7db5cba20806091632h3ce4a4edo21cae0eef8ac684e@mail.gmail.com> References: <784a579e0806091142x56b400e9wf7547c0a494e0098@mail.gmail.com> <7db5cba20806091632h3ce4a4edo21cae0eef8ac684e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200806091844.13311.celestialcognition@gmail.com> On Monday 9 June 2008 6:32:26 ihope wrote: > On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 2:42 PM, Elliott Hird > wrote: > > I intend to create the following contract with ais523 [...] > > I agree. > > --Ivan Hope CXXVII Does this work? From ihope127 at gmail.com Tue Jun 10 09:52:48 2008 From: ihope127 at gmail.com (ihope) Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2008 19:52:48 -0400 Subject: BAK: Teh Cltohed Mna Ni Teh Drak Woh Wtaches Adn Nevre Sasy A Wrod Execpt Wehn Psoessed Yb Dmeons Mcuhly Precocupied In-Reply-To: <200806091844.13311.celestialcognition@gmail.com> References: <784a579e0806091142x56b400e9wf7547c0a494e0098@mail.gmail.com> <7db5cba20806091632h3ce4a4edo21cae0eef8ac684e@mail.gmail.com> <200806091844.13311.celestialcognition@gmail.com> Message-ID: <7db5cba20806091652k3164d571oded6635f2fb34e84@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 7:44 PM, Ben Caplan wrote: > Does this work? No. Unrelatedly, Teh Cltohed Mna Ni Teh Drak Woh Wtaches Adn Nevre Sasy A Wrod Execpt Wehn Psoessed Yb Dmeons Mcuhly Precocupied joins the AAA and requests subsidization. --Ivan Hope CXXVII From celestialcognition at gmail.com Tue Jun 10 10:04:31 2008 From: celestialcognition at gmail.com (Ben Caplan) Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2008 19:04:31 -0500 Subject: BAK: CFJ: Raaargh Message-ID: <200806091904.33151.celestialcognition@gmail.com> I call for judgement on the following statement, disqualifying the Mad Scientist: Rule 2193 is at least one of: (1) a Monster; (2) the Monster. Arguments: The title of the rule is "The Monster". Although email subject lines (temptingly analogous) are held to be ineffective, rule titles are specified in public messages. Therefore the title should be considered more than just "flavor text". In addition, each step of the progressive creation of Rule 2193 followed the Monster-making process specified for the creation of an Agoran Monster: ? ? ? (a) Initiation of the Monster. [Submission of the Mad Scientist's proposal.] ? ? ? (b) Voting of the people. [Voting on said proposal.] ? ? ? (c) Resolution of the Monster. [Amendment of Rule 2193. Carrying out effects of the new rule text.] For these reasons, I recommend a ruling of TRUE. Pavitra From ihope127 at gmail.com Tue Jun 10 10:37:15 2008 From: ihope127 at gmail.com (ihope) Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2008 20:37:15 -0400 Subject: BAK: Teh Cltohed Mna Ni Teh Drak Woh Wtaches Adn Nevre Sasy A Wrod Execpt Wehn Psoessed Yb Dmeons Mcuhly Precocupied In-Reply-To: <7db5cba20806091652k3164d571oded6635f2fb34e84@mail.gmail.com> References: <784a579e0806091142x56b400e9wf7547c0a494e0098@mail.gmail.com> <7db5cba20806091632h3ce4a4edo21cae0eef8ac684e@mail.gmail.com> <200806091844.13311.celestialcognition@gmail.com> <7db5cba20806091652k3164d571oded6635f2fb34e84@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7db5cba20806091737x4fc33acg7eb7598ce7e0ddbd@mail.gmail.com> And now, I transfer all my pens to Teh Cltohed Mna Ni Teh Drak Woh Wtaches Adn Nevre Sasy A Wrod Execpt Wehn Psoessed Yb Dmeons Mcuhly Precocupied, it becomes a banker, and it transfers all its pens back to me. --Ivan Hope CXXVII From emurphy42 at socal.rr.com Tue Jun 10 15:14:10 2008 From: emurphy42 at socal.rr.com (Ed Murphy) Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2008 22:14:10 -0700 Subject: BAK: [Fwd: Re: Fwd: lateJudgement of CFJ 1964] Message-ID: <484E0DA2.3020409@socal.rr.com> -------- Original Message -------- Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2008 13:25:39 -0700 From: Ed Murphy To: Agora Business Subject: Re: BAK: Fwd: lateJudgement of CFJ 1964 Ivan Hope wrote: > On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 3:03 PM, comex wrote: >> I did not expect this bribe nor did I base my judgement on it. I give >> ihope his 50 pens back. > > Oh, thank you. By the way, did I mention I didn't have 50 pens in the > first place, so you just gave me free stuff? > > (Which is a question, not a statement, which hopefully means I can't > be prosecuted for it.) I initiate a criminal case, alleging that Ivan Hope breached Rule 2149 (Truthfulness) by claiming (on or about Mon, 09 Jun 2008 13:11:46 -0400) to give comex 50 pens. Evidence: the above-quoted material. I initiate an inquiry case on the statement "On or about Mon, 09 Jun 2008 15:03:27 -0400, comex gave Ivan Hope 50 pens". Argument for TRUE: Instances of a currency are fungible. Argument for FALSE: comex's statement can reasonably be interpreted as "I give Ivan Hope 50 pens iff e gave me 50 pens as quoted". Evidence: the above-quoted material, plus this message from comex: >> I give comex 50 pens as an obvious bribe. > I did not expect this bribe nor did I base my judgement on it. I give > ihope his 50 pens back. From emurphy42 at socal.rr.com Tue Jun 10 15:22:16 2008 From: emurphy42 at socal.rr.com (Ed Murphy) Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2008 22:22:16 -0700 Subject: BAK: Proposal: Chronological order Message-ID: <484E0F88.1080108@socal.rr.com> Proposal: Chronological order (AI = 3, please) Amend Rule 2161 (ID Numbers) by appending this text to item (a): The player SHOULD assign ID numbers in the order the entities were created. Amend Rule 2141 (Role and Attributes of Rules) by replacing this text: Rules have ID numbers, to be assigned by the Rulekeepor. with this text: Rules have ID numbers, to be assigned by the Rulekeepor. The Rulekeepor SHALL assign ID numbers to rules in the order they were created. From emurphy42 at socal.rr.com Tue Jun 10 15:26:27 2008 From: emurphy42 at socal.rr.com (Ed Murphy) Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2008 22:26:27 -0700 Subject: BAK: Moderation Message-ID: <484E1083.9090905@socal.rr.com> I'm about to start processing the last ~24 hours worth of judicial cases. If I miss one that was sent to a-b and not yet forwarded to backup, then I'll process it when Eris clears it. If I miss one that was sent to backup, then please give me a URL for the appropriate backup list's archive. From emurphy42 at socal.rr.com Tue Jun 10 15:38:40 2008 From: emurphy42 at socal.rr.com (Ed Murphy) Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2008 22:38:40 -0700 Subject: BAK: Judgment in CFJs In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <484E1360.8010800@socal.rr.com> Wooble wrote: > The attempted transfer > therefore failed, so at the time these CFJs were called, both were > FALSE. I'm treating this first message as sufficiently clear to be effective, as Wooble was only assigned to two cases with an open judicial question at the time. From emurphy42 at socal.rr.com Tue Jun 10 16:14:49 2008 From: emurphy42 at socal.rr.com (Ed Murphy) Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2008 23:14:49 -0700 Subject: BAK: Judicial summary Message-ID: <484E1BD9.4060603@socal.rr.com> To avoid further spamming the backup lists, here are recent events as they will appear in the next CotC's report. I'll post details to a-o as usual once a-o is back to normal; meanwhile, you can look things up ahead of time at http://zenith.homelinux.net/cotc/ if you like. Mon 9 Jun 07:18:36 1983 judged TRUE by Murphy Mon 9 Jun 07:18:36 1988 judged UNDETERMINED by Murphy Mon 9 Jun 07:50:20 1992 initiated by Quazie Mon 9 Jun 10:47:30 1993 initiated by ais523 Mon 9 Jun 13:13:21 1956-57 judged FALSE by Wooble Mon 9 Jun 14:30:44 1964 judged UNIMPUGNED by comex Mon 9 Jun 14:34:01 1994 initiated by ais523 Mon 9 Jun 14:43:21 1991 judged TRUE by BobTHJ Mon 9 Jun 18:20:48 Inquiry case initiated by ais523 Mon 9 Jun 18:52:54 Above case retracted by ais523 Mon 9 Jun 20:25:39 1995-96 initiated by Murphy Mon 9 Jun 20:41:32 1997-98 initiated by Quazie Mon 9 Jun 22:04:40 Quazie? ehird? deregisters (disputed, see CFJs 1997-2000) Mon 9 Jun 22:23:57 1999-2000 initiated by Quazie Mon 9 Jun 23:29:07 Quazie deregisters (disputed, see CFJs 1997-98) Tue 10 Jun 00:02:25 2001 initiated by Ivan Hope Tue 10 Jun 00:04:31 2002 initiated by Pavitra Also, for those tracking the CotC web admin project (hail Eris): * Disqualification during initiation initiated * Assignment implemented * Recording of decision should auto-identify judge From ihope127 at gmail.com Tue Jun 10 23:59:24 2008 From: ihope127 at gmail.com (ihope) Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 09:59:24 -0400 Subject: BAK: [Fwd: Re: Fwd: lateJudgement of CFJ 1964] In-Reply-To: <484E0DA2.3020409@socal.rr.com> References: <484E0DA2.3020409@socal.rr.com> Message-ID: <7db5cba20806100659w561090f9nad3f2bebace9cb4a@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 1:14 AM, Ed Murphy wrote: > I initiate a criminal case, alleging that Ivan Hope breached Rule 2149 > (Truthfulness) by claiming (on or about Mon, 09 Jun 2008 13:11:46 -0400) > to give comex 50 pens. Definitely UNIMPUGNED, as I did in fact have more than 50 pens at the time. > I initiate an inquiry case on the statement "On or about > Mon, 09 Jun 2008 15:03:27 -0400, comex gave Ivan Hope 50 pens". Likewise, definitely TRUE. If you're going to initiate a criminal case against me, do it for saying "By the way, did I mention I didn't have 50 pens in the first place, so you just gave me free stuff?" while believing I did in fact have 50 pens in the first place. --Ivan Hope CXXVII From pidgepot at gmail.com Wed Jun 11 00:49:28 2008 From: pidgepot at gmail.com (Roger Hicks) Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 08:49:28 -0600 Subject: BAK: Teh Cltohed Mna Ni Teh Drak Woh Wtaches Adn Nevre Sasy A Wrod Execpt Wehn Psoessed Yb Dmeons Mcuhly Precocupied In-Reply-To: <7db5cba20806091652k3164d571oded6635f2fb34e84@mail.gmail.com> References: <784a579e0806091142x56b400e9wf7547c0a494e0098@mail.gmail.com> <7db5cba20806091632h3ce4a4edo21cae0eef8ac684e@mail.gmail.com> <200806091844.13311.celestialcognition@gmail.com> <7db5cba20806091652k3164d571oded6635f2fb34e84@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <56732cfd0806100749x42b57827ycbf1b473a174789b@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 5:52 PM, ihope wrote: > Unrelatedly, Teh Cltohed Mna Ni Teh Drak Woh Wtaches Adn Nevre Sasy A > Wrod Execpt Wehn Psoessed Yb Dmeons Mcuhly Precocupied joins the AAA > and requests subsidization. > I create a Mill (land #86) with an Operator of / (Division) and a WRV in the possession of Teh Cltohed Mna. BobTHJ From emurphy42 at socal.rr.com Wed Jun 11 06:25:57 2008 From: emurphy42 at socal.rr.com (Ed Murphy) Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 13:25:57 -0700 Subject: BAK: [Fwd: Re: Fwd: lateJudgement of CFJ 1964] In-Reply-To: <7db5cba20806100659w561090f9nad3f2bebace9cb4a@mail.gmail.com> References: <484E0DA2.3020409@socal.rr.com> <7db5cba20806100659w561090f9nad3f2bebace9cb4a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <484EE355.20804@socal.rr.com> Ivan Hope wrote: > On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 1:14 AM, Ed Murphy wrote: >> I initiate a criminal case, alleging that Ivan Hope breached Rule 2149 >> (Truthfulness) by claiming (on or about Mon, 09 Jun 2008 13:11:46 -0400) >> to give comex 50 pens. > > Definitely UNIMPUGNED, as I did in fact have more than 50 pens at the time. > >> I initiate an inquiry case on the statement "On or about >> Mon, 09 Jun 2008 15:03:27 -0400, comex gave Ivan Hope 50 pens". > > Likewise, definitely TRUE. > > If you're going to initiate a criminal case against me, do it for > saying "By the way, did I mention I didn't have 50 pens in the first > place, so you just gave me free stuff?" while believing I did in fact > have 50 pens in the first place. YAFI, YGI. I initiate a criminal case alleging that Ivan Hope breached Rule 2149 (Truthfulness) by saying "By the way, did I mention I didn't have 50 pens in the first place, so you just gave me free stuff?" while believing e did have at least 50 pens at the time (on or about Mon, 09 Jun 2008 13:11:46 -0400) e claimed to transfer 50 pens to comex. From taralx at gmail.com Wed Jun 11 08:46:42 2008 From: taralx at gmail.com (Taral) Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 15:46:42 -0700 Subject: BAK: List usage Message-ID: Please stop sending stuff to both backup lists. It is driving me insane. -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown From penguinofthegods at googlemail.com Wed Jun 11 09:16:56 2008 From: penguinofthegods at googlemail.com (Elliott Hird) Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2008 00:16:56 +0100 Subject: BAK: List usage In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <784a579e0806101616k1dedd492m55a4f202c642abfe@mail.gmail.com> 2008/6/10 Taral : > Please stop sending stuff to both backup lists. It is driving me insane. > > -- > Taral > "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." > -- Unknown > > _______________________________________________ > Nomic mailing list > Nomic at yoyo.its.monash.edu.au > http://yoyo.its.monash.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/nomic > See, this is why the PNP shouldn't have to send to both lists at once. ehird From ihope127 at gmail.com Wed Jun 11 09:40:50 2008 From: ihope127 at gmail.com (ihope) Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 19:40:50 -0400 Subject: BAK: Here, have a cotton ball Message-ID: <7db5cba20806101640k3831c6e7g5f6184859f32bb84@mail.gmail.com> I submit a proposal, with a title of "Tongue-tied" and an adoption index of 1: In Rule 2173, remove the sentence "The Notary SHALL NOT disclose it otherwise, except as explicitly allowed by the contract, or with the explicit consent of all parties." --Ivan Hope CXXVII From ihope127 at gmail.com Wed Jun 11 09:50:36 2008 From: ihope127 at gmail.com (ihope) Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 19:50:36 -0400 Subject: BAK: Hello, B Message-ID: <7db5cba20806101650i7923a7aav79247b9795c89f93@mail.gmail.com> I agree to the rules of B Nomic. ehird intends to do the same. --Ivan Hope CXXVII From penguinofthegods at googlemail.com Wed Jun 11 09:52:21 2008 From: penguinofthegods at googlemail.com (Elliott Hird) Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2008 00:52:21 +0100 Subject: BAK: Hello, B In-Reply-To: <7db5cba20806101650i7923a7aav79247b9795c89f93@mail.gmail.com> References: <7db5cba20806101650i7923a7aav79247b9795c89f93@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <784a579e0806101652v697bad45if8da479976fbd7c9@mail.gmail.com> 2008/6/11 ihope : > I agree to the rules of B Nomic. ehird intends to do the same. > > --Ivan Hope CXXVII > > _______________________________________________ > Nomic mailing list > Nomic at yoyo.its.monash.edu.au > http://yoyo.its.monash.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/nomic > I agree to all the rules of B Nomic. ehird From ian.g.kelly at gmail.com Wed Jun 11 09:56:38 2008 From: ian.g.kelly at gmail.com (Ian Kelly) Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 17:56:38 -0600 Subject: BAK: Hello, B In-Reply-To: <784a579e0806101652v697bad45if8da479976fbd7c9@mail.gmail.com> References: <7db5cba20806101650i7923a7aav79247b9795c89f93@mail.gmail.com> <784a579e0806101652v697bad45if8da479976fbd7c9@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <3fc761710806101656r554ce151sdad1ce891740321c@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 5:52 PM, Elliott Hird wrote: > 2008/6/11 ihope : >> I agree to the rules of B Nomic. ehird intends to do the same. >> >> --Ivan Hope CXXVII >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Nomic mailing list >> Nomic at yoyo.its.monash.edu.au >> http://yoyo.its.monash.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/nomic >> > > I agree to all the rules of B Nomic. My guess is that this has the effect of creating a contract which matches the current rules of B Nomic in text, but which is not B Nomic and lacks its current gamestate. -root From ian.g.kelly at gmail.com Wed Jun 11 10:05:08 2008 From: ian.g.kelly at gmail.com (Ian Kelly) Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 18:05:08 -0600 Subject: BAK: Hello, B In-Reply-To: <3fc761710806101656r554ce151sdad1ce891740321c@mail.gmail.com> References: <7db5cba20806101650i7923a7aav79247b9795c89f93@mail.gmail.com> <784a579e0806101652v697bad45if8da479976fbd7c9@mail.gmail.com> <3fc761710806101656r554ce151sdad1ce891740321c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <3fc761710806101705u3a21a6bgdce3360618db2a7b@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 5:56 PM, Ian Kelly wrote: > My guess is that this has the effect of creating a contract which > matches the current rules of B Nomic in text, but which is not B Nomic > and lacks its current gamestate. Which incidentally makes it impossible to do anything with it, I think. By Rule 4E6, all Fora are initially Private, and I see no way to make one Public except by proposal, which requires a Public Forum. You can't even enter a State of Emergency. -root From ihope127 at gmail.com Wed Jun 11 11:14:28 2008 From: ihope127 at gmail.com (ihope) Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 21:14:28 -0400 Subject: BAK: Hello, B In-Reply-To: <3fc761710806101656r554ce151sdad1ce891740321c@mail.gmail.com> References: <7db5cba20806101650i7923a7aav79247b9795c89f93@mail.gmail.com> <784a579e0806101652v697bad45if8da479976fbd7c9@mail.gmail.com> <3fc761710806101656r554ce151sdad1ce891740321c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7db5cba20806101814n12d122calf05a0eacd505140b@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 7:56 PM, Ian Kelly wrote: > My guess is that this has the effect of creating a contract which > matches the current rules of B Nomic in text, but which is not B Nomic > and lacks its current gamestate. With ehird's consent, I intend to modify our B Nomic contract so that the rest of its gamestate matches B Nomic's. --Ivan Hope CXXVII From taralx at gmail.com Wed Jun 11 11:51:29 2008 From: taralx at gmail.com (Taral) Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 18:51:29 -0700 Subject: BAK: List usage In-Reply-To: <784a579e0806101616k1dedd492m55a4f202c642abfe@mail.gmail.com> References: <784a579e0806101616k1dedd492m55a4f202c642abfe@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On 6/10/08, Elliott Hird wrote: > See, this is why the PNP shouldn't have to send to both lists at once. It doesn't. -- Taral "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown From ian.g.kelly at gmail.com Wed Jun 11 11:57:37 2008 From: ian.g.kelly at gmail.com (Ian Kelly) Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 19:57:37 -0600 Subject: BAK: Hello, B In-Reply-To: <7db5cba20806101814n12d122calf05a0eacd505140b@mail.gmail.com> References: <7db5cba20806101650i7923a7aav79247b9795c89f93@mail.gmail.com> <784a579e0806101652v697bad45if8da479976fbd7c9@mail.gmail.com> <3fc761710806101656r554ce151sdad1ce891740321c@mail.gmail.com> <7db5cba20806101814n12d122calf05a0eacd505140b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <3fc761710806101857qa814897v450470823fd4862b@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 7:14 PM, ihope wrote: > On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 7:56 PM, Ian Kelly wrote: >> My guess is that this has the effect of creating a contract which >> matches the current rules of B Nomic in text, but which is not B Nomic >> and lacks its current gamestate. > > With ehird's consent, I intend to modify our B Nomic contract so that > the rest of its gamestate matches B Nomic's. That's not a defined contract change. -root From ian.g.kelly at gmail.com Wed Jun 11 11:58:59 2008 From: ian.g.kelly at gmail.com (Ian Kelly) Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 19:58:59 -0600 Subject: BAK: Hello, B In-Reply-To: <3fc761710806101857qa814897v450470823fd4862b@mail.gmail.com> References: <7db5cba20806101650i7923a7aav79247b9795c89f93@mail.gmail.com> <784a579e0806101652v697bad45if8da479976fbd7c9@mail.gmail.com> <3fc761710806101656r554ce151sdad1ce891740321c@mail.gmail.com> <7db5cba20806101814n12d122calf05a0eacd505140b@mail.gmail.com> <3fc761710806101857qa814897v450470823fd4862b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <3fc761710806101858h70c6a67dr70a52595b90fd56a@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 7:57 PM, Ian Kelly wrote: > On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 7:14 PM, ihope wrote: >> On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 7:56 PM, Ian Kelly wrote: >>> My guess is that this has the effect of creating a contract which >>> matches the current rules of B Nomic in text, but which is not B Nomic >>> and lacks its current gamestate. >> >> With ehird's consent, I intend to modify our B Nomic contract so that >> the rest of its gamestate matches B Nomic's. > > That's not a defined contract change. Though I suppose that "amending a contract" is a bit ambiguous in that regard, so maybe it can work. -root From ian.g.kelly at gmail.com Wed Jun 11 12:02:04 2008 From: ian.g.kelly at gmail.com (Ian Kelly) Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 20:02:04 -0600 Subject: BAK: List usage In-Reply-To: <784a579e0806101616k1dedd492m55a4f202c642abfe@mail.gmail.com> References: <784a579e0806101616k1dedd492m55a4f202c642abfe@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <3fc761710806101902j783a7b23w25f4db4134dc03e4@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 5:16 PM, Elliott Hird wrote: > See, this is why the PNP shouldn't have to send to both lists at once. I don't think anyone has suggested that it should, only that it needs to take some sort of responsibility for its own inability to cope with the lists being down. Sending the same message to all public fora is certainly not the only solution. -root From penguinofthegods at googlemail.com Wed Jun 11 13:36:57 2008 From: penguinofthegods at googlemail.com (Elliott Hird) Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2008 04:36:57 +0100 Subject: BAK: Hello, B In-Reply-To: <7db5cba20806101814n12d122calf05a0eacd505140b@mail.gmail.com> References: <7db5cba20806101650i7923a7aav79247b9795c89f93@mail.gmail.com> <784a579e0806101652v697bad45if8da479976fbd7c9@mail.gmail.com> <3fc761710806101656r554ce151sdad1ce891740321c@mail.gmail.com> <7db5cba20806101814n12d122calf05a0eacd505140b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <784a579e0806102036p59b5ca01l6233c1e1e3307b6a@mail.gmail.com> On 11/06/2008, ihope wrote: > With ehird's consent, I intend to modify our B Nomic contract so that > the rest of its gamestate matches B Nomic's. > > --Ivan Hope CXXVII I consent. From quazienomic at gmail.com Tue Jun 24 09:33:04 2008 From: quazienomic at gmail.com (Quazie) Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2008 16:33:04 -0700 Subject: BAK: Teh Cltohed Mna Ni Teh Drak Woh Wtaches Adn Nevre Sasy A Wrod Execpt Wehn Psoessed Yb Dmeons Mcuhly Precocupied In-Reply-To: <7db5cba20806091641j794ed0c2w6992fa018834e7ca@mail.gmail.com> References: <784a579e0806091142x56b400e9wf7547c0a494e0098@mail.gmail.com> <7db5cba20806091632h3ce4a4edo21cae0eef8ac684e@mail.gmail.com> <784a579e0806091635l5356a5dfp2e735bd94a956484@mail.gmail.com> <784a579e0806091639s60833f1arb49863987ec0d530@mail.gmail.com> <7db5cba20806091641j794ed0c2w6992fa018834e7ca@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 4:41 PM, ihope wrote: > On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 7:39 PM, Elliott Hird > wrote: >> {There is a list of players called the Manroster. The Manroster is >> initially ehird and ihope. Any player in the Manroster can perform >> actions on behalf of this contract. Any player in the Manroster can >> change the Manroster. All parties to this contract SHALL act to ensure >> it fulfills any obligations it may incur. This is a public contract.} > > I agree to this contract and cause it to register. > > --Ivan Hope CXXVII > > _______________________________________________ > Nomic mailing list > Nomic at yoyo.its.monash.edu.au > http://yoyo.its.monash.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/nomic > It registered here.