From Sxejmaso@a... Sun Nov 26 18:08:56 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Sxejmaso@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 27 Nov 2000 02:08:56 -0000 Received: (qmail 20025 invoked from network); 27 Nov 2000 02:08:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 27 Nov 2000 02:08:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ci.egroups.com) (10.1.2.81) by mta1 with SMTP; 27 Nov 2000 02:08:55 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Sxejmaso@a... Received: from [10.1.2.55] by ci.egroups.com with NNFMP; 27 Nov 2000 02:08:55 -0000 Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 02:08:53 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Welcome Message-ID: <8vsfnl+f23i@e...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 30 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 152.163.197.204 From: Sxejmaso@a... Hope you enjoy:) Jon A Grimm From Sxejmaso@a... Mon Nov 27 17:15:32 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Sxejmaso@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 28 Nov 2000 01:15:32 -0000 Received: (qmail 6104 invoked from network); 28 Nov 2000 01:15:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 28 Nov 2000 01:15:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ef.egroups.com) (10.1.2.111) by mta3 with SMTP; 28 Nov 2000 02:16:37 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Sxejmaso@a... Received: from [10.1.2.25] by ef.egroups.com with NNFMP; 28 Nov 2000 01:15:31 -0000 Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 01:15:19 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Howdy! Message-ID: <8vv0v7+3dg6@e...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 493 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 172.160.140.237 From: "Jon A Grimm" Welcome aboard folks:) I guess we could go ahead and begin if you want to. I know a couple of other folks who will be joining us in a day or two, that will make five of us which I think is a good number to start with, What do yall think? Is there anything we need to change about the ruleset before we begin play? Something that you have found that makes computer play easier or something? BTW I am a little green at this, but once things get rolling I will fall right into it. JAG From rsholmes@m... Tue Nov 28 12:15:14 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@m... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 28 Nov 2000 20:15:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 66609 invoked from network); 28 Nov 2000 20:15:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 28 Nov 2000 20:15:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO fl.egroups.com) (10.1.10.48) by mta1 with SMTP; 28 Nov 2000 20:15:11 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: rsholmes@m... Received: from [10.1.2.117] by fl.egroups.com with NNFMP; 28 Nov 2000 20:15:11 -0000 Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 20:15:10 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: Howdy! Message-ID: <9013oe+6tml@e...> In-Reply-To: <8vv0v7+3dg6@e...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 411 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 128.230.72.24 From: "Doctroid " --- In n_omic@egroups.com, "Jon A Grimm" wrote: > Welcome aboard folks:) > > I guess we could go ahead and begin if you want to. I know a couple > of other folks who will be joining us in a day or two, that will make > five of us which I think is a good number to start with, What do yall > think? I think it'd be best to wait. Be sure there really are five or so of us before starting. From Sxejmaso@a... Tue Nov 28 17:35:36 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Sxejmaso@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 29 Nov 2000 01:35:36 -0000 Received: (qmail 9031 invoked from network); 29 Nov 2000 01:35:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 29 Nov 2000 01:35:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO jj.egroups.com) (10.1.10.91) by mta2 with SMTP; 29 Nov 2000 01:35:24 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Sxejmaso@a... Received: from [10.1.10.123] by jj.egroups.com with NNFMP; 29 Nov 2000 01:35:24 -0000 Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 01:35:19 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Welcome Message-ID: <901mgn+qvdl@e...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 52 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 172.142.130.74 From: "Jon A Grimm" Jeff Weston is now amongst us... Welcome Jeff. JAG From Sxejmaso@a... Tue Nov 28 17:37:26 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Sxejmaso@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 29 Nov 2000 01:37:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 16498 invoked from network); 29 Nov 2000 01:37:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 29 Nov 2000 01:37:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hl.egroups.com) (10.1.10.44) by mta1 with SMTP; 29 Nov 2000 01:37:25 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Sxejmaso@a... Received: from [10.1.10.123] by hl.egroups.com with NNFMP; 29 Nov 2000 01:37:25 -0000 Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 01:37:18 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: Howdy! Message-ID: <901mke+4hpq@e...> In-Reply-To: <9013oe+6tml@e...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 151 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 172.142.130.74 From: "Jon A Grimm" > > I think it'd be best to wait. Be sure there really are five or so of > us before starting. I concur. I will remin them that we are here. JAG From jjweston@p... Tue Nov 28 20:00:25 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@p... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 29 Nov 2000 04:00:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 74422 invoked from network); 29 Nov 2000 04:00:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 29 Nov 2000 04:00:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net) (192.48.96.19) by mta1 with SMTP; 29 Nov 2000 04:00:24 -0000 Received: from picard by wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net with SMTP (peer crosschecked as: [63.84.211.245]) id QQjriu24169 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 04:00:23 GMT Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20001128200014.01116318@m...> X-Sender: mail198193@m... X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 20:00:14 -0800 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Welcome In-Reply-To: <901mgn+qvdl@e...> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" From: Jeff Weston At 01:35 AM 11/29/2000 -0000, you wrote: >Jeff Weston is now amongst us... Welcome Jeff. Thank you for the welcome. I am glad I found this game when I did. I've always wanted to play in a fresh game of Nomic with the original ruleset, but was hesistant to start a game myself. Now I don't need to start one. ;-) - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@p... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/personal-key.asc - - - From Sxejmaso@a... Tue Nov 28 20:42:18 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Sxejmaso@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 29 Nov 2000 04:42:17 -0000 Received: (qmail 51036 invoked from network); 29 Nov 2000 04:42:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 29 Nov 2000 04:42:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO c9.egroups.com) (10.1.2.66) by mta1 with SMTP; 29 Nov 2000 04:42:17 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Sxejmaso@a... Received: from [10.1.10.117] by c9.egroups.com with NNFMP; 29 Nov 2000 04:42:16 -0000 Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 04:42:01 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: Welcome Message-ID: <9021ep+kq27@e...> In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20001128200014.01116318@m...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 743 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 172.142.130.74 From: "Jon A Grimm" > Thank you for the welcome. I am glad I found this game when I did. I've > always wanted to play in a fresh game of Nomic with the original ruleset, > but was hesistant to start a game myself. Now I don't need to start one. ;-) > > - - - > Jeffrey J. Weston I have played in two 'real-life' games but have never played on the internet before. I was (and still am a little) a little leery of setting one up, but the idea of joining a game that had two years worth of rules to peruse didn't appeal to me too much so here we are. Hopefully we will have a couple of other folks joining our little party in the next day or two and we can start the fun and games... now that the ball seems to be rolling I am itching to start. :) JAG From kevan@s... Wed Nov 29 03:38:28 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: kevan@s... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 29 Nov 2000 11:38:28 -0000 Received: (qmail 70204 invoked from network); 29 Nov 2000 11:38:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 29 Nov 2000 11:38:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO cj.egroups.com) (10.1.2.82) by mta3 with SMTP; 29 Nov 2000 12:39:33 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: kevan@s... Received: from [10.1.10.111] by cj.egroups.com with NNFMP; 29 Nov 2000 11:38:27 -0000 Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 11:38:24 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: Welcome Message-ID: <902prg+unso@e...> In-Reply-To: <9021ep+kq27@e...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 1138 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 212.42.164.32 From: "Kevan " > I have played in two 'real-life' games but have never played on the > internet before. I was (and still am a little) a little leery of > setting one up, but the idea of joining a game that had two years > worth of rules to peruse didn't appeal to me too much so here we are. Two years seems a bit of an exaggeration - BB Nomic (http://nomic.net/~g2) has only been going a month, is still running slowly and simply enough for new people to jump aboard, and could really use some new blood. Once the Administrator wakes up, anyway. Running an Internet Nomic before you've played one seems a particularly brave thing to do, anyway - appropriate kudos to you. It'll be interesting to see a Nomic involve without overwhelming input from veterans, really. > Hopefully we will have a couple of other folks joining our little > party in the next day or two and we can start the fun and games... > now that the ball seems to be rolling I am itching to start. :) Mm, count me in, anyway. Kevan -- http://uncertain.org/~kevan "I came back to my old city with fierce determination, and I couldn't find my way out of the station." From kevan@s... Wed Nov 29 03:58:58 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: kevan@s... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 29 Nov 2000 11:58:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 52400 invoked from network); 29 Nov 2000 11:58:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 29 Nov 2000 11:58:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO fj.egroups.com) (10.1.10.46) by mta1 with SMTP; 29 Nov 2000 11:58:58 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: kevan@s... Received: from [10.1.10.108] by fj.egroups.com with NNFMP; 29 Nov 2000 11:58:58 -0000 Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 11:58:50 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: Howdy! Message-ID: <902r1q+86bm@e...> In-Reply-To: <8vv0v7+3dg6@e...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 816 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 212.42.164.32 From: "Kevan " > Is there anything we need to change about the ruleset before we begin > play? Something that you have found that makes computer play easier > or something? Bits and pieces, but nothing that can't be fixed during the course of the game, really. It'll be refreshing to play a Nomic from the initial Suber ruleset for a change. One thing about the Nomic itself, though - does it have a name? As you've doubtless noticed, online Nomics tend to give themselves names (typically "[Something] Nomic"), if only to distinguish them from one another. It'd make conversation and linking and bookmarking and whatnot rather easier if we gave this one a moniker. (Although I suppose we could establish one by Proposal, really.) Kevan -- http://uncertain.org/~kevan "The son and the heir of nothing in particular." From jjweston@p... Wed Nov 29 08:32:46 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@p... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 29 Nov 2000 16:32:46 -0000 Received: (qmail 11872 invoked from network); 29 Nov 2000 16:32:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 29 Nov 2000 16:32:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mk.egroups.com) (10.1.1.30) by mta3 with SMTP; 29 Nov 2000 17:33:50 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: jjweston@p... Received: from [10.1.10.114] by mk.egroups.com with NNFMP; 29 Nov 2000 16:32:44 -0000 Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 16:32:38 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: Howdy! Message-ID: <903b36+ga77@e...> In-Reply-To: <8vv0v7+3dg6@e...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 718 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 63.84.211.245 From: "Jeff Weston" Five sounds like a decent number to start with. I would wait until they are actually around first though... I would recommend setting a date for when you want to start and let everyone know about it. Perhaps this weekend? Also, I have let a few of my friends know about this game. If we wait until the weekend to start, it will give them a few days to get aboard if they desire. --- In n_omic@egroups.com, "Jon A Grimm" wrote: > Welcome aboard folks:) > > I guess we could go ahead and begin if you want to. I know a couple > of other folks who will be joining us in a day or two, that will make > five of us which I think is a good number to start with, What do yall > think? From rsholmes@m... Wed Nov 29 14:29:35 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 29 Nov 2000 22:29:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 52921 invoked from network); 29 Nov 2000 22:29:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 29 Nov 2000 22:29:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta1 with SMTP; 29 Nov 2000 22:29:35 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.007C6D61@m...>; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 17:29:34 -0500 Received: (from rsholmes@l...) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id RAA08060; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 17:29:33 -0500 (EST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Re: Howdy! References: <902r1q+86bm@e...> Date: 29 Nov 2000 17:29:32 -0500 In-Reply-To: "Kevan "'s message of "Wed, 29 Nov 2000 11:58:50 -0000" Message-ID: Lines: 15 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... "Kevan " writes: > One thing about the Nomic itself, though - does it have a name? As > you've doubtless noticed, online Nomics tend to give themselves names > (typically "[Something] Nomic"), if only to distinguish them from one > another. It'd make conversation and linking and bookmarking and > whatnot rather easier if we gave this one a moniker. Well, the eGroups name is n_omic, which is no stupider than a lot of Nomic names. Pronounced, I would assume, "enn-omic" (long or short o according to taste!). -- - Rich Holmes Syracuse, NY From rsholmes@m... Wed Nov 29 14:35:20 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 29 Nov 2000 22:35:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 36143 invoked from network); 29 Nov 2000 22:34:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 29 Nov 2000 22:34:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta1 with SMTP; 29 Nov 2000 22:34:13 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.007C6DBD@m...>; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 17:34:13 -0500 Received: (from rsholmes@l...) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id RAA09197; Wed, 29 Nov 2000 17:34:12 -0500 (EST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Re: Welcome References: <902prg+unso@e...> Date: 29 Nov 2000 17:34:12 -0500 In-Reply-To: "Kevan "'s message of "Wed, 29 Nov 2000 11:38:24 -0000" Message-ID: Lines: 18 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... "Kevan " writes: > Two years seems a bit of an exaggeration - BB Nomic > (http://nomic.net/~g2) has only been going a month, is still running > slowly and simply enough for new people to jump aboard, and could > really use some new blood. Once the Administrator wakes up, anyway. Hmm, it's been a while since lilith was heard from and considerably longer for Doug, so even if the Admin admins it's not obvious to me BB Nomic has a future... still, doesn't hurt to try, eh? In fact, a "hey, what's up, can I join?" message from a newcomer might be what the game needs. And if not, we could always kidnap the ruleset for a new Nomic... I'd hate to see all the time I spent on that Adjudication proposal go to waste... -- - Rich Holmes Syracuse, NY From Sxejmaso@a... Wed Nov 29 17:09:37 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Sxejmaso@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 30 Nov 2000 01:09:37 -0000 Received: (qmail 60738 invoked from network); 30 Nov 2000 01:09:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 30 Nov 2000 01:09:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO cj.egroups.com) (10.1.2.82) by mta1 with SMTP; 30 Nov 2000 01:09:32 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Sxejmaso@a... Received: from [10.1.2.30] by cj.egroups.com with NNFMP; 30 Nov 2000 01:09:31 -0000 Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 01:09:25 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: Welcome Message-ID: <9049c5+u3tb@e...> In-Reply-To: <902prg+unso@e...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 843 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 172.162.101.20 From: "Jon A Grimm" > > Two years seems a bit of an exaggeration - BB Nomic > (http://nomic.net/~g2) has only been going a month, is still running > slowly and simply enough for new people to jump aboard, and could > really use some new blood. Once the Administrator wakes up, anyway. > Maybe I will go take a looksie. The other one I thought of joining eems to be stagnating at the gate. > Running an Internet Nomic before you've played one seems a > particularly brave thing to do, anyway - appropriate kudos to you. > It'll be interesting to see a Nomic involve without overwhelming > input from veterans, really. I used to play in the micronationalist movement a little, I even led acouple of governments so I am thinking and hoping that Nomic will not be any worse than that. :) > > Mm, count me in, anyway. > > Kevan > > -- Cool:) JAG From Sxejmaso@a... Wed Nov 29 17:13:02 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Sxejmaso@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 30 Nov 2000 01:13:02 -0000 Received: (qmail 72417 invoked from network); 30 Nov 2000 01:13:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 30 Nov 2000 01:13:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ho.egroups.com) (10.1.2.219) by mta3 with SMTP; 30 Nov 2000 02:14:07 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Sxejmaso@a... Received: from [10.1.4.67] by ho.egroups.com with NNFMP; 30 Nov 2000 01:13:02 -0000 Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 01:12:59 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: Howdy! Message-ID: <9049ir+huqb@e...> In-Reply-To: <902r1q+86bm@e...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 647 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 172.162.101.20 From: "Jon A Grimm" > > One thing about the Nomic itself, though - does it have a name? As > you've doubtless noticed, online Nomics tend to give themselves names > (typically "[Something] Nomic"), if only to distinguish them from one > another. It'd make conversation and linking and bookmarking and > whatnot rather easier if we gave this one a moniker. > > (Although I suppose we could establish one by Proposal, really.) > > Kevan > I thought of Penguinomic... but then I rethought it...yall might not have liked that so I just chose a simple name like nomic but it was already taken in Egroups so n_omic was born. I am all for a name change. JAG From Sxejmaso@a... Wed Nov 29 17:16:13 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Sxejmaso@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 30 Nov 2000 01:16:13 -0000 Received: (qmail 81960 invoked from network); 30 Nov 2000 01:16:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 30 Nov 2000 01:16:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO jj.egroups.com) (10.1.10.91) by mta2 with SMTP; 30 Nov 2000 01:16:13 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Sxejmaso@a... Received: from [10.1.4.67] by jj.egroups.com with NNFMP; 30 Nov 2000 01:16:13 -0000 Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 01:16:08 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: Howdy! Message-ID: <9049oo+8u3q@e...> In-Reply-To: <903b36+ga77@e...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 619 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 172.162.101.20 From: "Jon A Grimm" --- In n_omic@egroups.com, "Jeff Weston" wrote: > Five sounds like a decent number to start with. I would wait > until they are actually around first though... I would recommend > setting a date for when you want to start and let everyone know about > it. Perhaps this weekend? > > Also, I have let a few of my friends know about this game. If we > wait until the weekend to start, it will give them a few days to get > aboard if they desire. > That is good. I might be hard to reach till about Sunday afternoon or so but I will do my best at keeping up here in the begining. JAG From Sxejmaso@a... Wed Nov 29 19:17:48 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Sxejmaso@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 30 Nov 2000 03:17:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 54520 invoked from network); 30 Nov 2000 03:17:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 30 Nov 2000 03:17:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO fk.egroups.com) (10.1.10.47) by mta3 with SMTP; 30 Nov 2000 04:18:53 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Sxejmaso@a... Received: from [10.1.10.69] by fk.egroups.com with NNFMP; 30 Nov 2000 03:17:48 -0000 Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 03:17:44 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Administrative Stuff Message-ID: <904gso+klhd@e...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 270 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 172.162.101.20 From: "Jon A Grimm" Welcome to Benjamin Gimpert. I will be updating the player roster at our site at http://eud.sphosting.com/nomic.html. Is anybody here not a player? And Kevan, do you have a last name? I dont guess it really matters except for rule 201, which might be changed. JAG From kevan@s... Thu Nov 30 01:48:50 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: kevan@s... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 30 Nov 2000 09:48:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 46970 invoked from network); 30 Nov 2000 09:48:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 30 Nov 2000 09:48:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO c9.egroups.com) (10.1.2.66) by mta3 with SMTP; 30 Nov 2000 10:49:52 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: kevan@s... Received: from [10.1.10.104] by c9.egroups.com with NNFMP; 30 Nov 2000 09:48:47 -0000 Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 09:48:40 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: Nomic Name Message-ID: <9057po+895h@e...> In-Reply-To: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 377 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 212.42.164.32 From: "Kevan " > Well, the eGroups name is n_omic, which is no stupider than a lot of > Nomic names. Pronounced, I would assume, "enn-omic" (long or short o > according to taste!). Or "Nunderscorenomic", I suppose... (Or maybe we could have the second letter of the Nomic's name randomised every week.) K. -- http://uncertain.org/~kevan "And you curse my soul if I don't want petrol." From rsholmes@m... Thu Nov 30 07:55:51 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@m... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 30 Nov 2000 15:55:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 53166 invoked from network); 30 Nov 2000 15:55:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 30 Nov 2000 15:55:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mk.egroups.com) (10.1.1.30) by mta3 with SMTP; 30 Nov 2000 16:56:56 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: rsholmes@m... Received: from [10.1.10.64] by mk.egroups.com with NNFMP; 30 Nov 2000 15:55:50 -0000 Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 15:55:43 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: DocNomic Message-ID: <905t9v+r5pq@e...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 152 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 128.230.72.24 From: "Doctroid " I'm soliciting interest in an Imperial Nomic variant I call DocNomic: Have a look... From Sxejmaso@a... Thu Nov 30 16:55:12 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Sxejmaso@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 1 Dec 2000 00:55:12 -0000 Received: (qmail 14012 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2000 00:55:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 1 Dec 2000 00:55:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO fk.egroups.com) (10.1.10.47) by mta1 with SMTP; 1 Dec 2000 00:55:11 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Sxejmaso@a... Received: from [10.1.2.116] by fk.egroups.com with NNFMP; 01 Dec 2000 00:55:09 -0000 Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2000 00:55:07 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: Nomic Name Message-ID: <906stb+p159@e...> In-Reply-To: <9057po+895h@e...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 199 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 172.139.28.86 From: "Jon A Grimm" > > Or "Nunderscorenomic", I suppose... > > (Or maybe we could have the second letter of the Nomic's name > randomised every week.) > > K. > Both cool ideas...but I LOVE the second one:) JAGH From n_omic@egroups.com Thu Nov 30 18:48:30 2000 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 95079 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2000 02:48:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 1 Dec 2000 02:48:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hm.egroups.com) (10.1.10.45) by mta1 with SMTP; 1 Dec 2000 02:48:30 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: notify@egroups.com Received: from [10.1.10.99] by hm.egroups.com with NNFMP; 01 Dec 2000 02:48:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 38402 invoked by uid 65534); 1 Dec 2000 02:48:22 -0000 Date: 1 Dec 2000 02:48:22 -0000 Message-ID: <975638902.38399@egroups.com> X-eGroups-Notify: From: To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: New file uploaded to n_omic MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello, This email message is a notification to let you know that a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the n_omic group. File : /players.html Uploaded by : Sxejmaso@a... Description : You can access this file at the URL http://www.egroups.com/files/n_omic/players%2Ehtml To learn more about eGroups file sharing, please visit http://www.egroups.com/help/files.html Regards, Sxejmaso@a... From Sxejmaso@a... Thu Nov 30 18:53:06 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Sxejmaso@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 1 Dec 2000 02:53:06 -0000 Received: (qmail 53489 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2000 02:53:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 1 Dec 2000 02:53:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO fl.egroups.com) (10.1.10.48) by mta1 with SMTP; 1 Dec 2000 02:53:06 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Sxejmaso@a... Received: from [10.1.2.43] by fl.egroups.com with NNFMP; 01 Dec 2000 02:53:06 -0000 Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2000 02:53:02 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: More Admin Stuff.... Message-ID: <9073qe+s5gv@e...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 369 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 172.139.28.86 From: "Jon A Grimm" Aint I busy little beaver? Players Roster has been uploaded to the egroups site and the eud.sphosting.com/players.html site. Kevan has the honour of being the first player due to rule 201. i would ask that he wait till the weekend before he proposes anything so we can see ifn anybody else wants in at the begining... but after that it is your call Kevan:) JAG From jjweston@p... Thu Nov 30 23:45:57 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@p... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 1 Dec 2000 07:45:56 -0000 Received: (qmail 10913 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2000 07:45:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 1 Dec 2000 07:45:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net) (192.48.96.19) by mta1 with SMTP; 1 Dec 2000 07:45:56 -0000 Received: from picard by wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net with SMTP (peer crosschecked as: [63.84.211.245]) id QQjrqt05428 for ; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 07:45:55 GMT Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20001130234544.01169b08@m...> X-Sender: mail198193@m... X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 23:45:44 -0800 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] More Admin Stuff.... In-Reply-To: <9073qe+s5gv@e...> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" From: Jeff Weston At 02:53 AM 12/1/2000 -0000, you wrote: >Aint I busy little beaver? > >Players Roster has been uploaded to the egroups site and the >eud.sphosting.com/players.html site. > >Kevan has the honour of being the first player due to rule 201. i >would ask that he wait till the weekend before he proposes anything >so we can see ifn anybody else wants in at the begining... but after >that it is your call Kevan:) Sweet... Busting at the seems with anticipation! ;-) Seems my friends aren't too interested in playing at this time. Ah well... Sorry to get your hopes up. Looking forward to the first proposal this weekend though... - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@p... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/personal-key.asc - - - From kevan@s... Fri Dec 01 08:53:22 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: kevan@s... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 1 Dec 2000 16:53:22 -0000 Received: (qmail 4650 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2000 16:52:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 1 Dec 2000 16:52:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hn.egroups.com) (10.1.2.221) by mta1 with SMTP; 1 Dec 2000 16:52:40 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: kevan@s... Received: from [10.1.10.104] by hn.egroups.com with NNFMP; 01 Dec 2000 16:52:40 -0000 Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2000 16:52:37 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Proposal 301 : Naming Ceremony Message-ID: <908l0l+9h4t@e...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 1448 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 212.42.164.32 From: "Kevan " Enact a new Mutable Rule with the following indented text:- This Nomic shall have two official names. The first official name shall be "N_omic" (pronounced "Nunderscorenomic"). The second official name shall be either Naomic, Neomic, Nhomic, Niomic, Nnomic, Noomic, Nuomic or Nyomic. This name may only be altered through means specified by the ruleset. Any Player may post a message to the mailing list with the subject line "Age of [name]", where "[name]" is one of the possible second official names of N_omic. Upon posting such a message, N_omic's second official name shall become that stated in the subject line, and the Player who posted the message shall lose five points in payment for the ceremony. Upon this Rule's enactment, N_omic's second official name shall be set to "Nuomic" and this paragraph shall automatically remove itself from the ruleset. { Sorry for not waiting 'til the weekend, but I'm probably not going to be around much during it. This is a Proposal to establish an official name for the Nomic, anyway, and to play a bit with the "changing name" joke. It might be interesting if the Nomic acted differently depending on its second name; Nhomic only permitting repeal proposals, Neomic only allowing new enactments, Noomic seeing double-points for everyone, Nyomic requiring all proposals to be submitted in limerick form, or whatever. Just a starting point. } From kevan@s... Fri Dec 01 08:57:27 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: kevan@s... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 1 Dec 2000 16:57:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 62594 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2000 16:57:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 1 Dec 2000 16:57:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO c9.egroups.com) (10.1.2.66) by mta1 with SMTP; 1 Dec 2000 16:57:25 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: kevan@s... Received: from [10.1.10.104] by c9.egroups.com with NNFMP; 01 Dec 2000 16:57:25 -0000 Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2000 16:57:23 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Vote FOR 301 Message-ID: <908l9j+jsgc@e...> In-Reply-To: <908l0l+9h4t@e...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 172 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 212.42.164.32 From: "Kevan " Oh, and I vote in favour of this proposal, unsurprisingly. Kevan -- http://uncertain.org/~kevan "This is the last song I will ever sing. No, I've changed my mind again." From jjweston@p... Fri Dec 01 09:16:08 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@p... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 1 Dec 2000 17:16:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 88090 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2000 17:15:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 1 Dec 2000 17:15:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net) (192.48.96.19) by mta1 with SMTP; 1 Dec 2000 17:15:20 -0000 Received: from picard by wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net with SMTP (peer crosschecked as: [63.84.211.245]) id QQjrsf07001 for ; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 17:15:19 GMT Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20001201091510.01116f20@m...> X-Sender: mail198193@m... X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2000 09:15:10 -0800 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: vote FOR 301 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" From: Jeff Weston I vote YES for proposal 301. - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@p... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/personal-key.asc - - - From JJWeston@T... Fri Dec 01 11:01:49 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: JJWeston@T... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 1 Dec 2000 19:01:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 8840 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2000 19:00:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 1 Dec 2000 19:00:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dfw7-1.relay.mail.uu.net) (199.171.54.106) by mta3 with SMTP; 1 Dec 2000 20:02:04 -0000 Received: from mother.thoughtworks.com by dfw7sosrv11.alter.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mother.thoughtworks.com [204.178.39.204]) id QQjrsm09188 for ; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 19:00:58 GMT Subject: Re: [n_omic] Proposal 301 : Naming Ceremony To: n_omic@egroups.com X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.4a July 24, 2000 Message-ID: Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2000 10:50:46 -0800 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on Mother/ThoughtWorks.COM/US(Release 5.0.5 |September 22, 2000) at 12/01/2000 01:06:20 PM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: JJWeston@T... Just thought of one small improvement to the proposal. The third paragraph states that "Any player may post a message to the mailing list..." Yet we have not defined any sort of mail list for the game. I would suggest that the new rule state something along the lines of "Any player may send a message to all the other players..." That way we can enact another rule that specifies exactly how messages should be passed to all the players. The reason I suggest this approach is because of a proposal I am considering that would specify the official mailing list for this Nomic. Since I have experienced problems with eGroups, I am going to put an emergency backup clause in the proposal, to allow gameplay to continue even if eGroups drops off of the face of the earth. Referencing a mailing list elsewhere in the rules will make it difficult to use the emergency backup method. - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@t... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/pgp-key.asc - - - From rsholmes@m... Fri Dec 01 11:29:44 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 1 Dec 2000 19:29:43 -0000 Received: (qmail 48723 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2000 19:29:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 1 Dec 2000 19:29:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta1 with SMTP; 1 Dec 2000 19:29:35 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.007D56A8@m...>; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 14:29:35 -0500 Received: (from rsholmes@l...) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id OAA01829; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 14:29:34 -0500 (EST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Vote FOR 301 [explained] References: <908l0l+9h4t@e...> Date: 01 Dec 2000 14:29:34 -0500 In-Reply-To: "Kevan "'s message of "Fri, 01 Dec 2000 16:52:37 -0000" Message-ID: Lines: 19 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... ... but I would like to see early proposals addressing some less frivolous issues. I've never played by the Suber initial ruleset before. Now that I am I'm starting to see lots of things I'd like to see change. One of the first will be making Rule 105 mutable and amending it. Requiring all players to participate in all votes is a recipe for early Nomic-death -- as I read it, if I never submitted this vote, the game would be over. Specification of the forum(s) in which the Nomic takes place is important. There are others but those are the first that come to mind. -- Doctroid From JJWeston@T... Fri Dec 01 11:42:13 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: JJWeston@T... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 1 Dec 2000 19:42:13 -0000 Received: (qmail 64906 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2000 19:41:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 1 Dec 2000 19:41:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO sjc3-1.relay.mail.uu.net) (199.171.54.122) by mta2 with SMTP; 1 Dec 2000 19:41:42 -0000 Received: from mother.thoughtworks.com by sjc3sosrv11.alter.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mother.thoughtworks.com [204.178.39.204]) id QQjrso24361 for ; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 19:41:42 GMT Subject: Re: [n_omic] Vote FOR 301 [explained] To: n_omic@egroups.com X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.4a July 24, 2000 Message-ID: Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2000 11:37:38 -0800 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on Mother/ThoughtWorks.COM/US(Release 5.0.5 |September 22, 2000) at 12/01/2000 01:47:04 PM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: JJWeston@T... I wouldn't ammend rule 105. I would create a new rule that specifies that if a player doesn't send a required message, such as a rule proposal or a vote, after a specified length of time they are dropped from the game. - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@t... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/pgp-key.asc - - - rsholmes@m... wrote: One of the first will be making Rule 105 mutable and amending it. Requiring all players to participate in all votes is a recipe for early Nomic-death -- as I read it, if I never submitted this vote, the game would be over. From rsholmes@m... Fri Dec 01 13:02:40 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 1 Dec 2000 21:02:40 -0000 Received: (qmail 13449 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2000 21:02:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 1 Dec 2000 21:02:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta1 with SMTP; 1 Dec 2000 21:02:28 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.007D6366@m...>; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 16:02:28 -0500 Received: (from rsholmes@l...) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id QAA22429; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 16:02:27 -0500 (EST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Vote FOR 301 [explained] References: Date: 01 Dec 2000 16:02:27 -0500 In-Reply-To: JJWeston@T...'s message of "Fri, 1 Dec 2000 11:37:38 -0800" Message-ID: Lines: 15 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... JJWeston@T... writes: > I wouldn't ammend rule 105. I would create a new rule that specifies > that if a player doesn't send a required message, such as a rule proposal > or a vote, after a specified length of time they are dropped from the game. That would address permanent dropouts, I guess, but wouldn't allow for temporary absences. As it is, anytime someone goes on a two-week vacation, the game's frozen for two weeks. Not good. For that matter, the ruleset does not define the term "player". It should. -- Doctroid From Sxejmaso@a... Fri Dec 01 18:31:48 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Sxejmaso@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 2 Dec 2000 02:31:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 56010 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2000 02:31:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 2 Dec 2000 02:31:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hp.egroups.com) (10.1.2.220) by mta1 with SMTP; 2 Dec 2000 02:31:48 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Sxejmaso@a... Received: from [10.1.10.103] by hp.egroups.com with NNFMP; 02 Dec 2000 02:31:48 -0000 Date: Sat, 02 Dec 2000 02:31:44 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: ADMIN: Welcome Message-ID: <909mug+6jh7@e...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 107 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 172.142.201.193 From: "Jon A Grimm" to Eric Strathmeyer. Are you wanting to play or just observe? I'll be happy to add you to the list:) JAG From Sxejmaso@a... Fri Dec 01 18:35:03 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Sxejmaso@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 2 Dec 2000 02:35:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 43267 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2000 02:35:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 2 Dec 2000 02:35:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO c9.egroups.com) (10.1.2.66) by mta1 with SMTP; 2 Dec 2000 02:35:03 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Sxejmaso@a... Received: from [10.1.10.117] by c9.egroups.com with NNFMP; 02 Dec 2000 02:35:03 -0000 Date: Sat, 02 Dec 2000 02:34:59 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: Vote FOR : Proposal 301 : Naming Ceremony Message-ID: <909n4j+rejo@e...> In-Reply-To: <908l0l+9h4t@e...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 1574 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 172.142.201.193 From: "Jon A Grimm" --- In n_omic@egroups.com, "Kevan " wrote: > Enact a new Mutable Rule with the following indented text:- > > This Nomic shall have two official names. The first official > name shall be "N_omic" (pronounced "Nunderscorenomic"). > > The second official name shall be either Naomic, Neomic, > Nhomic, Niomic, Nnomic, Noomic, Nuomic or Nyomic. This name > may only be altered through means specified by the ruleset. > > Any Player may post a message to the mailing list with the > subject line "Age of [name]", where "[name]" is one of the > possible second official names of N_omic. > > Upon posting such a message, N_omic's second official name > shall become that stated in the subject line, and the Player > who posted the message shall lose five points in payment for > the ceremony. > > Upon this Rule's enactment, N_omic's second official name > shall be set to "Nuomic" and this paragraph shall > automatically remove itself from the ruleset. > > { Sorry for not waiting 'til the weekend, but I'm probably not > going to be around much during it. > > This is a Proposal to establish an official name for the > Nomic, anyway, and to play a bit with the "changing name" > joke. > > It might be interesting if the Nomic acted differently > depending on its second name; Nhomic only permitting repeal > proposals, Neomic only allowing new enactments, Noomic seeing > double-points for everyone, Nyomic requiring all proposals > to be submitted in limerick form, or whatever. Just a starting > point. } From frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... Fri Dec 01 18:37:00 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 2 Dec 2000 02:37:00 -0000 Received: (qmail 47184 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2000 02:36:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 2 Dec 2000 02:36:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailhub.Dartmouth.EDU) (129.170.16.6) by mta3 with SMTP; 2 Dec 2000 03:37:19 -0000 Received: from dasher.Dartmouth.EDU (dasher.dartmouth.edu [129.170.208.6]) by mailhub.Dartmouth.EDU (8.9.3+DND/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA22178 for ; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 21:36:13 -0500 (EST) Message-id: <37779507@d...> Date: 01 Dec 2000 21:36:13 EST Reply-To: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... (Willard) Subject: Re: [n_omic] ADMIN: Welcome To: n_omic@egroups.com X-eGroups-From: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... (Frederick C. Strathmeyer) From: frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... i'll play... From Sxejmaso@a... Fri Dec 01 18:42:37 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Sxejmaso@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 2 Dec 2000 02:42:37 -0000 Received: (qmail 66847 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2000 02:42:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 2 Dec 2000 02:42:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO f19.egroups.com) (10.1.2.136) by mta3 with SMTP; 2 Dec 2000 03:43:32 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Sxejmaso@a... Received: from [10.1.2.55] by f19.egroups.com with NNFMP; 02 Dec 2000 02:42:26 -0000 Date: Sat, 02 Dec 2000 02:42:25 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: ADMIN: Welcome Message-ID: <909nih+shh2@e...> In-Reply-To: <37779507@d...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 221 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 172.142.201.193 From: "Jon A Grimm" --- In n_omic@egroups.com, frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... wrote: > i'll play... Great:) We are still in the informal parts of the game so you can (and probably by the letter of the ruleset need to) vote on Prop 301. JAG From frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... Fri Dec 01 18:53:03 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 2 Dec 2000 02:53:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 90782 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2000 02:53:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 2 Dec 2000 02:53:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO fg.egroups.com) (10.1.2.134) by mta1 with SMTP; 2 Dec 2000 02:53:02 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... Received: from [10.1.10.68] by fg.egroups.com with NNFMP; 02 Dec 2000 02:53:02 -0000 Date: Sat, 02 Dec 2000 02:52:55 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: VOTE AGAINST Proposal 301` Message-ID: <909o67+d9mb@e...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 13 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 129.170.168.33 From: "Eric Strathmeyer" I say "nay". From jjweston@p... Fri Dec 01 22:26:53 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@p... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 2 Dec 2000 06:26:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 33311 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2000 06:26:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 2 Dec 2000 06:26:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net) (192.48.96.19) by mta1 with SMTP; 2 Dec 2000 06:26:52 -0000 Received: from picard by wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net with SMTP (peer crosschecked as: [63.84.211.245]) id QQjruf17805 for ; Sat, 2 Dec 2000 06:26:51 GMT Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20001201222642.01169568@m...> X-Sender: mail198193@m... X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2000 22:26:42 -0800 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Prop 301 tally. One more vote needed... Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" From: Jeff Weston Here are the votes I've seen for 301. Just need Benjamin Gimpert to cast the final vote... Kev YES Ben - Jon YES Doc YES Eric NO Jeff YES - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@p... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/personal-key.asc - - - From Sxejmaso@a... Fri Dec 01 22:35:19 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Sxejmaso@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 2 Dec 2000 06:35:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 29444 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2000 06:35:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 2 Dec 2000 06:35:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-d10.mx.aol.com) (205.188.157.42) by mta3 with SMTP; 2 Dec 2000 07:36:24 -0000 Received: from Sxejmaso@a... by imo-d10.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v28.34.) id a.64.8e927e3 (4463) for ; Sat, 2 Dec 2000 01:35:15 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <64.8e927e3.2759f222@a...> Date: Sat, 2 Dec 2000 01:35:14 EST Subject: Re: [n_omic] Prop 301 tally. One more vote needed... To: n_omic@egroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Windows AOL sub 110 From: Sxejmaso@a... Yep... I have posted just such a tally at http://eud.sphosting.com/current.html From jjweston@p... Fri Dec 01 22:37:33 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@p... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 2 Dec 2000 06:37:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 32723 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2000 06:37:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 2 Dec 2000 06:37:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net) (192.48.96.19) by mta2 with SMTP; 2 Dec 2000 06:37:33 -0000 Received: from picard by wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net with SMTP (peer crosschecked as: [63.84.211.245]) id QQjrug27388 for ; Sat, 2 Dec 2000 06:37:29 GMT Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20001201223716.01169568@m...> X-Sender: mail198193@m... X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2000 22:37:16 -0800 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Prop 301 tally. One more vote needed... In-Reply-To: <64.8e927e3.2759f222@a...> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" From: Jeff Weston At 01:35 AM 12/2/2000 EST, you wrote: >Yep... I have posted just such a tally at >http://eud.sphosting.com/current.html Heh... I've also entertained myself by created two database tables for N_omic at eGroups... :-) - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@p... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/personal-key.asc - - - From Sxejmaso@a... Fri Dec 01 22:41:28 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Sxejmaso@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 2 Dec 2000 06:41:28 -0000 Received: (qmail 66279 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2000 06:41:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 2 Dec 2000 06:41:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-d03.mx.aol.com) (205.188.157.35) by mta2 with SMTP; 2 Dec 2000 06:41:28 -0000 Received: from Sxejmaso@a... by imo-d03.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v28.34.) id a.8.ceb5774 (4463) for ; Sat, 2 Dec 2000 01:41:23 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <8.ceb5774.2759f392@a...> Date: Sat, 2 Dec 2000 01:41:22 EST Subject: Re: [n_omic] Prop 301 tally. One more vote needed... To: n_omic@egroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Windows AOL sub 110 From: Sxejmaso@a... Help yourself. I tried doing that yesterday but it kept making everything alpahbetical and while we are running alphabetially it doesn't look that way due to keeping identities secret and what not... If you can do it help yourself. I will maintain the eud.sphosting pages. JAG From Sxejmaso@a... Fri Dec 01 22:57:05 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Sxejmaso@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 2 Dec 2000 06:57:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 40199 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2000 06:57:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 2 Dec 2000 06:57:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-r10.mx.aol.com) (152.163.225.10) by mta2 with SMTP; 2 Dec 2000 06:57:04 -0000 Received: from Sxejmaso@a... by imo-r10.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v28.34.) id a.a1.dd99f0c (4463) for ; Sat, 2 Dec 2000 01:56:56 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: Date: Sat, 2 Dec 2000 01:56:55 EST Subject: ADMIN To: n_omic@egroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Windows AOL sub 110 From: Sxejmaso@a... BTW- I have updated the site at http://eud.sphosting.com/nomic.html to include Eric in the roster and a current proposals page. JAG From jjweston@p... Sat Dec 02 01:34:00 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@p... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 2 Dec 2000 09:34:00 -0000 Received: (qmail 99884 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2000 09:34:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 2 Dec 2000 09:34:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net) (192.48.96.19) by mta1 with SMTP; 2 Dec 2000 09:33:59 -0000 Received: from picard by wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net with SMTP (peer crosschecked as: [63.84.211.245]) id QQjrus21509 for ; Sat, 2 Dec 2000 09:33:55 GMT Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20001202013345.010f3870@m...> X-Sender: mail198193@m... X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Sat, 02 Dec 2000 01:33:45 -0800 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: To keep this Nomic moving, I invoke judgement. Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" From: Jeff Weston In accordance with rule 212, I invoke judgement. I have a disagreement regarding rule 105 regarding the definition of "player". With respect to the vote on proposal 301, this Nomic appears to be stuck while waiting for Benjamin Gimpert to cast his vote. I have examined the eGroups message archive and have not found even one message from Benjamin Gimpert. I feel that his status as player in this Nomic is questionable at best. To ensure this Nomic doesn't fall apart even before it gets off the ground, I suggest we consider that Benjamin Gimpert is not a player at this time. If we ever hear from him, we can reinstate him as a player at that time. Now correct me if I'm wrong, I feel that according to rule 212 I am the judge for settling this particular question, since I would preceed Kevan in the order of play. If that is the case, I feel compelled to agree with myself. If no one has disagreements over this matter, I would say lets continue the game with Jon Grimm's turn. - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@p... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/personal-key.asc - - - From Sxejmaso@a... Sat Dec 02 12:05:16 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Sxejmaso@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 2 Dec 2000 20:05:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 54158 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2000 20:05:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 2 Dec 2000 20:05:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ci.egroups.com) (10.1.2.81) by mta2 with SMTP; 2 Dec 2000 20:05:15 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Sxejmaso@a... Received: from [10.1.10.34] by ci.egroups.com with NNFMP; 02 Dec 2000 20:05:15 -0000 Date: Sat, 02 Dec 2000 20:05:08 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: CONSENT: Re: To keep this Nomic moving, I invoke judgement. Message-ID: <90bklk+tkei@e...> In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20001202013345.010f3870@m...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 288 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 172.162.75.243 From: "Jon A Grimm" As per rule 212 the judgement needs the consent of the majority of the players before play can continue, so I grant my consent. Gimpert never stated to me or this board whether he wanted to play or just observe. He was placed on the Roster on the chance that he wanted to play. JAG From frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... Sat Dec 02 12:33:05 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 2 Dec 2000 20:33:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 54026 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2000 20:32:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 2 Dec 2000 20:32:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailhub.Dartmouth.EDU) (129.170.16.6) by mta1 with SMTP; 2 Dec 2000 20:32:34 -0000 Received: from dasher.Dartmouth.EDU (dasher.dartmouth.edu [129.170.208.6]) by mailhub.Dartmouth.EDU (8.9.3+DND/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA26263 for ; Sat, 2 Dec 2000 15:32:33 -0500 (EST) Message-id: <37799951@d...> Date: 02 Dec 2000 15:32:33 EST Reply-To: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... (Willard) Subject: Re: [n_omic] CONSENT: Re: To keep this Nomic moving, I invoke judgement. To: n_omic@egroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Disposition: inline X-eGroups-From: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... (Frederick C. Strathmeyer) From: frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... I consent. From Sxejmaso@a... Sat Dec 02 16:13:18 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Sxejmaso@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 3 Dec 2000 00:13:17 -0000 Received: (qmail 51140 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2000 00:12:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 3 Dec 2000 00:12:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-r08.mx.aol.com) (152.163.225.8) by mta1 with SMTP; 3 Dec 2000 00:12:38 -0000 Received: from Sxejmaso@a... by imo-r08.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v28.34.) id a.5f.da6d626 (3864) for ; Sat, 2 Dec 2000 19:12:30 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <5f.da6d626.275ae9ee@a...> Date: Sat, 2 Dec 2000 19:12:30 EST Subject: Just awonderin--- To: n_omic@egroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Windows AOL sub 110 From: Sxejmaso@a... Has everyone here read 1984 by Orwell? JAG From frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... Sat Dec 02 16:24:54 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 3 Dec 2000 00:24:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 35883 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2000 00:24:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 3 Dec 2000 00:24:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailhub.Dartmouth.EDU) (129.170.16.6) by mta3 with SMTP; 3 Dec 2000 01:25:30 -0000 Received: from dasher.Dartmouth.EDU (dasher.dartmouth.edu [129.170.208.6]) by mailhub.Dartmouth.EDU (8.9.3+DND/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA32610 for ; Sat, 2 Dec 2000 19:24:24 -0500 (EST) Message-id: <37807908@d...> Date: 02 Dec 2000 19:24:24 EST Reply-To: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... (Willard) Subject: Re: [n_omic] Just awonderin--- To: n_omic@egroups.com X-eGroups-From: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... (Frederick C. Strathmeyer) From: frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... yup From Sxejmaso@a... Sat Dec 02 16:28:58 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Sxejmaso@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 3 Dec 2000 00:28:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 47786 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2000 00:28:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 3 Dec 2000 00:28:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-d05.mx.aol.com) (205.188.157.37) by mta2 with SMTP; 3 Dec 2000 00:28:58 -0000 Received: from Sxejmaso@a... by imo-d05.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v28.34.) id a.af.3f65867 (3864) for ; Sat, 2 Dec 2000 19:28:53 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: Date: Sat, 2 Dec 2000 19:28:53 EST Subject: Re: [n_omic] Just awonderin--- To: n_omic@egroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Windows AOL sub 110 From: Sxejmaso@a... Maybe I am detecting a possible theme here for n_omic... I'll wait to see if the others have read it. JAG From jjweston@p... Sat Dec 02 19:25:33 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@p... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 3 Dec 2000 03:25:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 76158 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2000 03:25:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 3 Dec 2000 03:25:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net) (192.48.96.19) by mta3 with SMTP; 3 Dec 2000 04:26:32 -0000 Received: from picard by wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net with SMTP (peer crosschecked as: [63.84.211.245]) id QQjrxl22401 for ; Sun, 3 Dec 2000 03:25:25 GMT Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20001202192519.010f5408@m...> X-Sender: mail198193@m... X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Sat, 02 Dec 2000 19:25:19 -0800 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Just awonderin--- In-Reply-To: <5f.da6d626.275ae9ee@a...> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" From: Jeff Weston nope At 07:12 PM 12/2/2000 EST, you wrote: >Has everyone here read 1984 by Orwell? > >JAG > > >To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: >n_omic-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@p... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/personal-key.asc - - - From jjweston@p... Sat Dec 02 20:31:50 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@p... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 3 Dec 2000 04:31:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 49958 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2000 04:31:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 3 Dec 2000 04:31:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net) (192.48.96.19) by mta1 with SMTP; 3 Dec 2000 04:31:47 -0000 Received: from picard by wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net with SMTP (peer crosschecked as: [63.84.211.245]) id QQjrxq22168 for ; Sun, 3 Dec 2000 04:31:46 GMT Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20001202203140.010c99a0@m...> X-Sender: mail198193@m... X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Sat, 02 Dec 2000 20:31:40 -0800 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Just need one more to consent... Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" From: Jeff Weston All we need is one more player to consent to my judgement to continue this game... Doctroid? Kevan? - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@p... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/personal-key.asc - - - From Sxejmaso@a... Sun Dec 03 15:03:34 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Sxejmaso@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 3 Dec 2000 23:03:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 98854 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2000 23:02:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 3 Dec 2000 23:02:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-r17.mail.aol.com) (152.163.225.71) by mta1 with SMTP; 3 Dec 2000 23:02:40 -0000 Received: from Sxejmaso@a... by imo-r17.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v28.34.) id a.59.3b11a3e (26121) for ; Sun, 3 Dec 2000 18:02:32 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <59.3b11a3e.275c2b07@a...> Date: Sun, 3 Dec 2000 18:02:31 EST Subject: ADMIN To: n_omic@egroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Windows AOL sub 110 From: Sxejmaso@a... Page at eud.sphosting.com/nomic.html updated and I believe current up to 03 December @ 5:10 PM CST. JAG From kevan@s... Mon Dec 04 02:10:43 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: kevan@s... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 4 Dec 2000 10:10:43 -0000 Received: (qmail 30125 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2000 10:10:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 4 Dec 2000 10:10:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO cj.egroups.com) (10.1.2.82) by mta2 with SMTP; 4 Dec 2000 10:10:43 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: kevan@s... Received: from [10.1.10.106] by cj.egroups.com with NNFMP; 04 Dec 2000 10:10:42 -0000 Date: Mon, 04 Dec 2000 10:10:37 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: Just awonderin--- Message-ID: <90fqit+gqhe@e...> In-Reply-To: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 606 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 212.42.164.32 From: "Kevan " > Maybe I am detecting a possible theme here for n_omic... I'll wait to see if > the others have read it. "Detecting"? Where? Anyway, I've read the book and have, indeed, gone so far as to push a Nomic in its direction already, a couple of years back; http://members.tripod.com/pelmet Stealing Nomic theme ideas from quality literature seems a good idea, but I think I'd rather try something that hadn't been done before. Hm. Although it depends what exactly gets proposed, I suppose. K. -- http://uncertain.org/~kevan "It was a bright cold day in April, and the clocks were striking thirteen." From kevan@s... Mon Dec 04 02:13:34 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: kevan@s... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 4 Dec 2000 10:13:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 35855 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2000 10:13:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 4 Dec 2000 10:13:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hh.egroups.com) (10.1.10.40) by mta3 with SMTP; 4 Dec 2000 11:14:39 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: kevan@s... Received: from [10.1.10.106] by hh.egroups.com with NNFMP; 04 Dec 2000 10:13:33 -0000 Date: Mon, 04 Dec 2000 10:13:31 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: Just need one more to consent... Message-ID: <90fqob+ts6g@e...> In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20001202203140.010c99a0@m...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 205 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 212.42.164.32 From: "Kevan " > All we need is one more player to consent to my judgement to continue this > game... Doctroid? Kevan? I agree with the judgment. K. -- http://uncertain.org/~kevan "No U-turns, no emergency debates." From jjweston@p... Mon Dec 04 07:56:11 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@p... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_2); 4 Dec 2000 15:56:11 -0000 Received: (qmail 53845 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2000 15:55:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 4 Dec 2000 15:55:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net) (192.48.96.19) by mta2 with SMTP; 4 Dec 2000 15:55:16 -0000 Received: from picard by wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net with SMTP (peer crosschecked as: [63.84.211.245]) id QQjsdb00879 for ; Mon, 4 Dec 2000 15:55:15 GMT Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20001204075507.0116c840@m...> X-Sender: mail198193@m... X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Mon, 04 Dec 2000 07:55:07 -0800 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Re: Just need one more to consent... In-Reply-To: <90fqob+ts6g@e...> References: <3.0.6.32.20001202203140.010c99a0@m...> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" From: Jeff Weston At 10:13 AM 12/4/2000 -0000, you wrote: >> All we need is one more player to consent to my judgement to >continue this >> game... Doctroid? Kevan? > >I agree with the judgment. Alright... With Kevan's consent, Benjamin Gimpert is dropped. Prop 301 fails. Kevan loses 10 points for it failing. Kevan receives 8 points for receiving 80% favorable votes for his proposal. Play can now continue with Jon Grimm. Whew! - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@p... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/personal-key.asc - - - From Sxejmaso@a... Mon Dec 04 17:44:31 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Sxejmaso@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 5 Dec 2000 01:44:31 -0000 Received: (qmail 26102 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2000 01:44:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Dec 2000 01:44:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO c9.egroups.com) (10.1.2.66) by mta3 with SMTP; 5 Dec 2000 02:45:36 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Sxejmaso@a... Received: from [10.1.2.52] by c9.egroups.com with NNFMP; 05 Dec 2000 01:44:30 -0000 Date: Tue, 05 Dec 2000 01:44:25 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: PROPOSAL302: Defining Players Message-ID: <90hh9p+7hp6@e...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 448 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 172.160.171.7 From: "Jon A Grimm" Proposal 302: Defining Players 1. Rule 105 is hereby transmuted to a mutable rule. 2. Rule 105 is amended to read: A player is any person who posts eir desire to play on the mailing list for N_omic located at http://www.egroups.com/group/n_omic. Every player is an eligible voter. Every eligible voter must participate in every vote on rule- changes, unless the eligible voter has announced eir absence to the other players in advance. From Sxejmaso@a... Mon Dec 04 17:53:27 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Sxejmaso@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 5 Dec 2000 01:53:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 53532 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2000 01:53:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Dec 2000 01:53:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO fk.egroups.com) (10.1.10.47) by mta3 with SMTP; 5 Dec 2000 02:54:32 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Sxejmaso@a... Received: from [10.1.2.59] by fk.egroups.com with NNFMP; 05 Dec 2000 01:53:08 -0000 Date: Tue, 05 Dec 2000 01:53:06 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: Just need one more to consent... Message-ID: <90hhq2+672a@e...> In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20001204075507.0116c840@m...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 712 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 172.160.171.7 From: "Jon A Grimm" --- In n_omic@egroups.com, Jeff Weston wrote: > At 10:13 AM 12/4/2000 -0000, you wrote: > >> All we need is one more player to consent to my judgement to > >continue this > >> game... Doctroid? Kevan? > > > >I agree with the judgment. > > Alright... With Kevan's consent, Benjamin Gimpert is dropped. Prop 301 > fails. Kevan loses 10 points for it failing. Kevan receives 8 points for > receiving 80% favorable votes for his proposal. Play can now continue with > Jon Grimm. Cool! i have already proposed proposal 302. SpHosting got spammed last night so for the time being I am unable to update my N_omic pages and Dune is about to come on...so I will update it tommorrow I hope. JAG From jjweston@p... Mon Dec 04 22:31:33 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@p... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 5 Dec 2000 06:31:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 11478 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2000 06:31:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 5 Dec 2000 06:31:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net) (192.48.96.19) by mta2 with SMTP; 5 Dec 2000 06:31:33 -0000 Received: from picard by wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net with SMTP (peer crosschecked as: [63.84.211.245]) id QQjsfi00854 for ; Tue, 5 Dec 2000 06:31:32 GMT Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20001204223121.0116ae28@m...> X-Sender: mail198193@m... X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Mon, 04 Dec 2000 22:31:21 -0800 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] PROPOSAL302: Defining Players In-Reply-To: <90hh9p+7hp6@e...> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" From: Jeff Weston Hmm... If this proposal even legal? I was under the impression that proposals can make only one adjustment to the rules. Is this not the case? At 01:44 AM 12/5/2000 -0000, Jon Grimm wrote: >Proposal 302: Defining Players > >1. Rule 105 is hereby transmuted to a mutable rule. > >2. Rule 105 is amended to read: A player is any person who posts eir >desire to play on the mailing list for N_omic located at >http://www.egroups.com/group/n_omic. Every player is an eligible >voter. Every eligible voter must participate in every vote on rule- >changes, unless the eligible voter has announced eir absence to the >other players in advance. - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@p... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/personal-key.asc - - - From kevan@s... Tue Dec 05 01:57:33 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: kevan@s... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 5 Dec 2000 09:57:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 57105 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2000 09:57:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Dec 2000 09:57:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mv.egroups.com) (10.1.1.41) by mta3 with SMTP; 5 Dec 2000 10:58:38 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: kevan@s... Received: from [10.1.2.117] by mv.egroups.com with NNFMP; 05 Dec 2000 09:57:32 -0000 Date: Tue, 05 Dec 2000 09:57:29 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: Legality of Proposal 302 Message-ID: <90ie69+opl7@e...> In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20001204223121.0116ae28@m...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 736 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 212.42.164.32 From: "Kevan " > Hmm... If this proposal even legal? I was under the impression that > proposals can make only one adjustment to the rules. Is this not the case? Indeed:- 103. A rule-change is any of the following: (1) the enactment, repeal, or amendment of a mutable rule; (2) the enactment, repeal, or amendment of an amendment of a mutable rule; or (3) the transmutation of an immutable rule into a mutable rule or vice versa. Since Jon's Proposal isn't a legal Rule Change, I guess that means we're still waiting for him to propose a Rule Change (ignoring his Proposal just as we'd ignore any other message that wasn't a legal Rule Change). Kevan -- http://uncertain.org/~kevan "I play postal chess with a man who doesn't know me." From Sxejmaso@a... Tue Dec 05 18:01:26 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Sxejmaso@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 6 Dec 2000 02:01:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 20162 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2000 02:01:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 6 Dec 2000 02:01:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-r17.mail.aol.com) (152.163.225.71) by mta2 with SMTP; 6 Dec 2000 02:01:24 -0000 Received: from Sxejmaso@a... by imo-r17.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v28.34.) id a.d9.d376f3d (4184) for ; Tue, 5 Dec 2000 21:01:21 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2000 21:01:20 EST Subject: Re: [n_omic] PROPOSAL302: Transmutation of rule 105 To: n_omic@egroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Windows AOL sub 110 From: Sxejmaso@a... In a message dated 12/5/00 12:32:39 AM Central Standard Time, jjweston@p... writes: Prop 302 redeaux: << 1. Rule 105 is hereby transmuted to a mutable rule. >> JAG From jjweston@p... Tue Dec 05 22:54:25 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@p... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 6 Dec 2000 06:54:24 -0000 Received: (qmail 40534 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2000 06:54:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 6 Dec 2000 06:54:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net) (192.48.96.19) by mta3 with SMTP; 6 Dec 2000 07:55:29 -0000 Received: from picard by wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net with SMTP (peer crosschecked as: [63.84.211.245]) id QQjsjb28988 for ; Wed, 6 Dec 2000 06:54:22 GMT Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20001205225415.010f3af8@m...> X-Sender: mail198193@m... X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Tue, 05 Dec 2000 22:54:15 -0800 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: vote AGAINST prop 302 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" From: Jeff Weston I would rather solve our "players" problem by enacting new rules, instead of messing with rule 105. - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@p... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/personal-key.asc - - - From frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... Wed Dec 06 00:56:45 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 6 Dec 2000 08:56:45 -0000 Received: (qmail 36683 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2000 08:56:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 6 Dec 2000 08:56:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailhub.Dartmouth.EDU) (129.170.16.6) by mta3 with SMTP; 6 Dec 2000 09:57:50 -0000 Received: from dasher.Dartmouth.EDU (dasher.dartmouth.edu [129.170.208.6]) by mailhub.Dartmouth.EDU (8.9.3+DND/8.9.3) with ESMTP id DAA30769 for ; Wed, 6 Dec 2000 03:56:44 -0500 (EST) Message-id: <37953767@d...> Date: 06 Dec 2000 03:56:43 EST Reply-To: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... (Willard) Subject: Re: [n_omic] PROPOSAL302: Transmutation of rule 105 To: n_omic@egroups.com X-eGroups-From: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... (Frederick C. Strathmeyer) From: frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... I vote against proposal 302. From kevan@s... Wed Dec 06 03:15:22 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: kevan@s... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 6 Dec 2000 11:15:22 -0000 Received: (qmail 85429 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2000 11:15:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 6 Dec 2000 11:15:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ho.egroups.com) (10.1.2.219) by mta1 with SMTP; 6 Dec 2000 11:15:22 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: kevan@s... Received: from [10.1.10.113] by ho.egroups.com with NNFMP; 06 Dec 2000 11:15:22 -0000 Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2000 11:15:20 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Vote FOR Proposal 302 Message-ID: <90l748+v1ra@e...> In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20001205225415.010f3af8@m...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 618 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 212.42.164.32 From: "Kevan " --- In n_omic@egroups.com, Jeff Weston wrote: > I would rather solve our "players" problem by enacting new rules, instead > of messing with rule 105. Hm, curious; what Enactment did you have in mind that would work alongside an intact "Every eligible voter must participate in every vote on rule-changes." in Rule 105? I vote FOR Proposal 302 because it seemed like a good idea, anyway, even if it's now unable to pass with one person against it. Kevan -- http://uncertain.org/~kevan "When I had my loft converted back into a loft, the neighbours came around and scoffed and called me retro." From rsholmes@m... Wed Dec 06 07:13:39 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 6 Dec 2000 15:13:39 -0000 Received: (qmail 39871 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2000 15:13:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 6 Dec 2000 15:13:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta2 with SMTP; 6 Dec 2000 15:13:38 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.007F3941@m...>; Wed, 6 Dec 2000 10:13:38 -0500 Received: (from rsholmes@l...) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id KAA13733; Wed, 6 Dec 2000 10:13:37 -0500 (EST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Vote FOR Proposal 302 References: <90l748+v1ra@e...> Date: 06 Dec 2000 10:13:37 -0500 In-Reply-To: "Kevan "'s message of "Wed, 06 Dec 2000 11:15:20 -0000" Message-ID: Lines: 9 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... "Kevan " writes: > I vote FOR Proposal 302 because it seemed like a good idea, anyway, > even if it's now unable to pass with one person against it. I too vote FOR, for similar reasons. -- Doctroid From jjweston@p... Wed Dec 06 08:15:30 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@p... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 6 Dec 2000 16:15:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 49820 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2000 16:15:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 6 Dec 2000 16:15:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net) (192.48.96.19) by mta2 with SMTP; 6 Dec 2000 16:15:26 -0000 Received: from picard by wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net with SMTP (peer crosschecked as: [63.84.211.245]) id QQjskn21855 for ; Wed, 6 Dec 2000 16:15:25 GMT Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20001206081517.01125790@m...> X-Sender: mail198193@m... X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2000 08:15:17 -0800 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Vote FOR Proposal 302 In-Reply-To: <90l748+v1ra@e...> References: <3.0.6.32.20001205225415.010f3af8@m...> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" From: Jeff Weston At 11:15 AM 12/6/2000 -0000, Kevan wrote: >Hm, curious; what Enactment did you have in mind that would work >alongside an intact "Every eligible voter must participate in every >vote on rule-changes." in Rule 105? Short answer... Make a new rule to drop inactive players, as I have suggested before. Please read below for a more verbose explanation. The potential ammendment to 105 that Jon Grimm had posted would not solve our current problem. It would not deal with players that mysteriously disappear without a trace. If players have a long absence, say two weeks, while announcing their absence will solve voting issues, the game will still grind to a halt when it is their turn, or if someone invokes judgement while they are the judge, or for any number of issues that may come up due to future rule changes. Instead of going through and ammending every single rule that requires a player response to ignore absent players, I would rather enact a new rule that removes inactive or absent players. That way every contigency is handled. I would make a new rule that defines how new players are added. I would also add a clause somewhere that says if a player is dropped, and then later added, they have the same status as when they left the game. I strongly feel that playing around with immutable rules for this purpose is dangerous, since it then opens them up for further modification. I don't see how making 105 immutable is required for solving this problem. If you can show me that we have a problem that can only be solved by transmuting 105, then I'll consider it. A second problem with the proposed ammendment is that it mentions a mailing list. Instead of mentioning a mailing list in the proposal, I would much rather see it require new players to communicate their desire to play to all the rest of the players. Then I'd create just one rule that would define how to communicate to all players by mentioning the mailing list. If the mailing list ever needs to change, it would be a real pain to have to ammend a dozen rules that mention it. - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@p... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/personal-key.asc - - - From kevan@s... Wed Dec 06 09:00:44 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: kevan@s... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 6 Dec 2000 17:00:43 -0000 Received: (qmail 3915 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2000 17:00:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 6 Dec 2000 17:00:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hn.egroups.com) (10.1.2.221) by mta3 with SMTP; 6 Dec 2000 18:01:48 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: kevan@s... Received: from [10.1.10.101] by hn.egroups.com with NNFMP; 06 Dec 2000 17:00:42 -0000 Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2000 17:00:37 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: Mutating Rule 105 Message-ID: <90lrbl+24ud@e...> In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20001206081517.01125790@m...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 1572 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 212.42.164.32 From: "Kevan " > Instead of going through and ammending every single rule that requires a > player response to ignore absent players, I would rather enact a new rule > that removes inactive or absent players. That way every contigency is > handled. I would make a new rule that defines how new players are added. I > would also add a clause somewhere that says if a player is dropped, and > then later added, they have the same status as when they left the game. That seems reasonable. Maybe a bit misleading in its terminology (I'd be more comfortable with "active players" and "absent players" than "players" and "non-players"), but a good plan. > I strongly feel that playing around with immutable rules for this purpose > is dangerous, since it then opens them up for further modification. I don't > see how making 105 immutable is required for solving this problem. If you > can show me that we have a problem that can only be solved by transmuting > 105, then I'll consider it. Well, the desperately immediate problem with this Nomic is that - under Rule 105 - all players are required to cast a Vote before a Turn can proceed; if a single player wanders away, the Nomic dies. I guess we can get around this with a new Rule that says "If a Proposal's been up for more than 48 hours, anyone who's not voted on it automatically votes FOR. This is considered 'participation' for the purposes of Rule 105.", or something, though, leaving 105's mutability untouched. Fair enough. Kevan -- http://uncertain.org/~kevan "I'm just a clean-living all-Earth youth." From rsholmes@m... Wed Dec 06 10:30:49 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 6 Dec 2000 18:30:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 72614 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2000 18:30:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 6 Dec 2000 18:30:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta2 with SMTP; 6 Dec 2000 18:30:48 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.007F51CD@m...>; Wed, 6 Dec 2000 13:30:48 -0500 Received: (from rsholmes@l...) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id NAA05711; Wed, 6 Dec 2000 13:30:47 -0500 (EST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Re: Mutating Rule 105 References: <90lrbl+24ud@e...> Date: 06 Dec 2000 13:30:47 -0500 In-Reply-To: "Kevan "'s message of "Wed, 06 Dec 2000 17:00:37 -0000" Message-ID: Lines: 11 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... "Kevan " writes: > That seems reasonable. Maybe a bit misleading in its terminology (I'd > be more comfortable with "active players" and "absent players" than > "players" and "non-players"), but a good plan. But then 105 would still have to be modified, since "absent player" presumably is a subclass of "player". -- Doctroid From rsholmes@m... Wed Dec 06 10:41:25 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 6 Dec 2000 18:41:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 11897 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2000 18:41:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 6 Dec 2000 18:41:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta1 with SMTP; 6 Dec 2000 18:41:24 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.007F529D@m...>; Wed, 6 Dec 2000 13:41:24 -0500 Received: (from rsholmes@l...) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id NAA08118; Wed, 6 Dec 2000 13:41:23 -0500 (EST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Re: Mutating Rule 105 References: <90lrbl+24ud@e...> Date: 06 Dec 2000 13:41:23 -0500 In-Reply-To: "Kevan "'s message of "Wed, 06 Dec 2000 17:00:37 -0000" Message-ID: Lines: 28 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... "Kevan " writes: > I guess we can get around this with a new Rule that says "If a > Proposal's been up for more than 48 hours, anyone who's not voted on > it automatically votes FOR. This is considered 'participation' for > the purposes of Rule 105.", or something, though, leaving 105's > mutability untouched. Fair enough. I see nothing in the ruleset that restrict votes to "for" or "against"; in particular, no reason the "default" vote in Kevan's proposed rule couldn't be "abstain". But whether the default is "for", "against", or "abstain", it seems to me Kevan's proposed rule amounts to defining 48 hours of non-participation as participation, thereby rendering Rule 105 more or less meaningless. If that's the only fix that'll get support, I'll go along. But fundamentally I regard 105 as a bad rule in an email Nomic, and the best way to deal with it is to transmute it and fix it. By the way, I just noticed Rule 203 says A rule-change is adopted if and only if the vote is unanimous among the eligible voters. Does this mean if everyone votes AGAINST a proposal, it passes? ;-) -- Doctroid From frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... Wed Dec 06 11:09:15 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 6 Dec 2000 19:09:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 52610 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2000 19:09:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 6 Dec 2000 19:09:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailhub.Dartmouth.EDU) (129.170.16.6) by mta2 with SMTP; 6 Dec 2000 19:09:15 -0000 Received: from dasher.Dartmouth.EDU (dasher.dartmouth.edu [129.170.208.6]) by mailhub.Dartmouth.EDU (8.9.3+DND/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA06652 for ; Wed, 6 Dec 2000 14:09:14 -0500 (EST) Message-id: <37972008@d...> Date: 06 Dec 2000 14:09:14 EST Reply-To: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... (Willard) Subject: Re: [n_omic] Re: Mutating Rule 105 To: n_omic@egroups.com X-eGroups-From: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... (Frederick C. Strathmeyer) From: frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... --- You wrote: Does this mean if everyone votes AGAINST a proposal, it passes? ;-) --- end of quote --- ooo... constitutional intent! From kevan@s... Thu Dec 07 07:49:20 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: kevan@s... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 7 Dec 2000 15:49:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 59634 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2000 15:49:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Dec 2000 15:49:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hi.egroups.com) (10.1.10.41) by mta2 with SMTP; 7 Dec 2000 15:49:20 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: kevan@s... Received: from [10.1.2.207] by hi.egroups.com with NNFMP; 07 Dec 2000 15:49:20 -0000 Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2000 15:49:10 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: Mutating Rule 105 Message-ID: <90obhm+l22u@e...> In-Reply-To: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 1820 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 212.42.164.32 From: "Kevan " > > I guess we can get around this with a new Rule that says "If a > > Proposal's been up for more than 48 hours, anyone who's not voted on > > it automatically votes FOR. This is considered 'participation' for > > the purposes of Rule 105.", or something, though, leaving 105's > > mutability untouched. Fair enough. > > I see nothing in the ruleset that restrict votes to "for" or > "against"; in particular, no reason the "default" vote in Kevan's > proposed rule couldn't be "abstain". Well, except that - at least until unanimity expires or gets replaced - any Proposal with idle Voters would fail, when they defaulted to "abstain" (or "pass" or "maybe" or "I'm too lazy to vote"). > But whether the default is "for", "against", or "abstain", it seems to > me Kevan's proposed rule amounts to defining 48 hours of > non-participation as participation, thereby rendering Rule 105 more or > less meaningless. If that's the only fix that'll get support, I'll go > along. Well, it only takes one person to be against a Proposal for it to fail, so that seemed the only way that'd get support. > But fundamentally I regard 105 as a bad rule in an email > Nomic, and the best way to deal with it is to transmute it and fix it. Mm. Actually I don't think there's any reason why we can't propose to enact a new Rule which says; "When this Rule enacts, transmute 105. Amend it in such-and-such a way. Transmute it back. Then repeal this rule." Rather than all that tedious mucking around with separate Proposals. > By the way, I just noticed Rule 203 says > > A rule-change is adopted if and only if the vote is unanimous among > the eligible voters. > > Does this mean if everyone votes AGAINST a proposal, it passes? ;-) Heh. K. -- http://uncertain.org/~kevan "I gazed a gazely stare." From jjweston@p... Thu Dec 07 07:55:19 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@p... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 7 Dec 2000 15:55:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 59432 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2000 15:55:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 7 Dec 2000 15:55:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net) (192.48.96.19) by mta3 with SMTP; 7 Dec 2000 16:56:24 -0000 Received: from picard by wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net with SMTP (peer crosschecked as: [63.84.211.245]) id QQjsod17240 for ; Thu, 7 Dec 2000 15:55:18 GMT Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20001207075510.011238b0@m...> X-Sender: mail198193@m... X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2000 07:55:10 -0800 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Prop 302 fails. Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" From: Jeff Weston With 3 votes for, and 2 votes against, proposal 302 fails. Jon Grimm loses 10 points for it failing, and gains 7 points for receiving 60% favorable votes. Play now continues with Doctroid... - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@p... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/personal-key.asc - - - From rsholmes@m... Thu Dec 07 08:49:16 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 7 Dec 2000 16:49:16 -0000 Received: (qmail 42476 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2000 16:49:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 7 Dec 2000 16:49:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta1 with SMTP; 7 Dec 2000 16:49:11 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.007FB6A8@m...>; Thu, 7 Dec 2000 11:49:11 -0500 Received: (from rsholmes@l...) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id LAA00243; Thu, 7 Dec 2000 11:49:10 -0500 (EST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Re: Mutating Rule 105 References: <90obhm+l22u@e...> Date: 07 Dec 2000 11:49:09 -0500 In-Reply-To: "Kevan "'s message of "Thu, 07 Dec 2000 15:49:10 -0000" Message-ID: Lines: 22 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... "Kevan " writes: > Mm. Actually I don't think there's any reason why we can't propose to > enact a new Rule which says; "When this Rule enacts, transmute 105. > Amend it in such-and-such a way. Transmute it back. Then repeal this > rule." Rather than all that tedious mucking around with separate > Proposals. I'd argue that, first, if that's legal it renders nonsensical Rule 103's limitation of one action for a rule-change; second, that it "arguably consists of two or more rule-changes compounded" under Rule 111, even if disguised as a single rule-change; and third, that Rule 109's "Transmutation... must be stated explicitly in a proposal to take effect" means that a rule cannot transmute another rule -- only a transmute proposal can. I'd grant that reasonable people could argue otherwise, of course. I also am not fond of Rule 103's limitation of one action for a rule-change, but it's not at the top of my to-undo list. -- Doctroid From rsholmes@m... Thu Dec 07 09:39:27 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 7 Dec 2000 17:39:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 84163 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2000 17:39:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Dec 2000 17:39:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta1 with SMTP; 7 Dec 2000 17:39:25 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.007FBDEB@m...>; Thu, 7 Dec 2000 12:39:25 -0500 Received: (from rsholmes@l...) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id MAA10381; Thu, 7 Dec 2000 12:39:25 -0500 (EST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Proposal 303: Player status Date: 07 Dec 2000 12:39:24 -0500 Message-ID: Lines: 34 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... Add a rule: ===== Any person may become a Player at any time by informing the current Players of their desire to do so, subject to restrictions by other rules or portions of this rule. A Player shall lose 10 points and become a Reyalp upon (1) announcing their desire to do so to the other Players (and optionally stating a maximum time duration for their Reyalp status) or (2) failing to cast a vote on a Proposal within 72 hours of its posting. Reyalps are not Players, but they continue to hold points, which may be increased or decreased only as consequences of actions they took or failed to take while they were Players. (Comment: The foregoing means e.g. that a Player who proposes a Rule that gets defeated loses 10 points even if he becomes a Reyalp before the defeat. However, if the rules were to specify e.g. a 10 point penalty for failing to post the word "green" on St Patrick's Day, a Player who was a Reyalp for the duration of St Patrick's Day would not incur the penalty. This parenthesized text is not part of the proposed Rule.) Reyalps may become Players again by informing the current Players of their desire to do so. If they do not do so within the time limit they announced, or within 21 days if no such announcement was made, then they cease to be Reyalps and their points are lost. ===== -- Doctroid From JJWeston@T... Thu Dec 07 11:54:38 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: JJWeston@T... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 7 Dec 2000 19:54:37 -0000 Received: (qmail 71885 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2000 19:54:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Dec 2000 19:54:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dfw7-1.relay.mail.uu.net) (199.171.54.106) by mta3 with SMTP; 7 Dec 2000 20:55:42 -0000 Received: from mother.thoughtworks.com by dfw7sosrv11.alter.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mother.thoughtworks.com [204.178.39.204]) id QQjsot19329 for ; Thu, 7 Dec 2000 19:54:36 GMT Subject: Re: [n_omic] Proposal 303: Player status To: n_omic@egroups.com X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.5 September 22, 2000 Message-ID: Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2000 11:39:25 -0800 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on Mother/ThoughtWorks.COM/US(Release 5.0.5 |September 22, 2000) at 12/07/2000 02:00:07 PM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: JJWeston@T... Under rule 111 I would like to propose an ammendment to your proposal. For your second case of a player becoming a reyalp, you only handle cases where a player has not voted. What about cases where its a player's turn, and they haven't made a proposal for a long time? What about when judgement is invoked and the player who is the judge doesn't give judgement for a long time? There are additional conditions that may arise as the rules are adjusted. I would recomend that the second case of a player becoming a reyalp read as such: (2) failing to send a required communication within 72 hours after such communication can initially occur. (This would initially include, but is not limited to: making a proposal when it is their turn, voting on a proposal, making a judgement when somone invokes judgement, if they are the judge.) Perhaps the proponent can find a better wording, but you get the picture. There are a number of situations that can stop this game cold. It would be nice to handle as many as we can with one swipe... ;-) - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@t... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/pgp-key.asc - - - From rsholmes@m... Thu Dec 07 13:34:14 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 7 Dec 2000 21:34:13 -0000 Received: (qmail 46689 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2000 21:34:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 7 Dec 2000 21:34:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta1 with SMTP; 7 Dec 2000 21:34:12 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.007FD6A1@m...>; Thu, 7 Dec 2000 16:33:24 -0500 Received: (from rsholmes@l...) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id QAA06392; Thu, 7 Dec 2000 16:33:23 -0500 (EST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Proposal 303: Player status References: Date: 07 Dec 2000 16:33:23 -0500 In-Reply-To: JJWeston@T...'s message of "Thu, 7 Dec 2000 11:39:25 -0800" Message-ID: Lines: 53 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... JJWeston@T... writes: > I would recomend that the second case of a player becoming a reyalp > read as such: (2) failing to send a required communication within 72 hours > after such communication can initially occur. (This would initially > include, but is not limited to: making a proposal when it is their turn, > voting on a proposal, making a judgement when somone invokes judgement, if > they are the judge.) An outstanding suggestion. I believe Rule 111 does indeed allow this sort of amendment process (though it appears to have been intended for amendment of proposals that are useless or worse, not merely suboptimal, but I think it can be argued a suboptimal proposal is of questionable value). If so, I request Prop 303 be considered amended as stated. That is: ======= Add a rule: ===== Any person may become a Player at any time by informing the current Players of their desire to do so, subject to restrictions by other rules or portions of this rule. A Player shall lose 10 points and become a Reyalp upon (1) announcing their desire to do so to the other Players (and optionally stating a maximum time duration for their Reyalp status) or (2) failing to send a required communication within 72 hours after such communication can initially occur. Reyalps are not Players, but they continue to hold points, which may be increased or decreased only as consequences of actions they took or failed to take while they were Players. (Comment: The foregoing means e.g. that a Player who proposes a Rule that gets defeated loses 10 points even if he becomes a Reyalp before the defeat. However, if the rules were to specify e.g. a 10 point penalty for failing to post the word "green" on St Patrick's Day, a Player who was a Reyalp for the duration of St Patrick's Day would not incur the penalty. This parenthesized text is not part of the proposed Rule.) Reyalps may become Players again by informing the current Players of their desire to do so. If they do not do so within the time limit they announced, or within 21 days if no such announcement was made, then they cease to be Reyalps and their points are lost. ===== ======= -- Doctroid From JJWeston@T... Thu Dec 07 13:41:56 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: JJWeston@T... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 7 Dec 2000 21:41:56 -0000 Received: (qmail 71107 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2000 21:41:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 7 Dec 2000 21:41:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net) (198.5.241.86) by mta1 with SMTP; 7 Dec 2000 21:41:55 -0000 Received: from mother.thoughtworks.com by mr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mother.thoughtworks.com [204.178.39.204]) id QQjspa13378 for ; Thu, 7 Dec 2000 21:41:46 GMT Subject: vote FOR prop 303 To: n_omic@egroups.com X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.5 September 22, 2000 Message-ID: Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2000 13:41:51 -0800 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on Mother/ThoughtWorks.COM/US(Release 5.0.5 |September 22, 2000) at 12/07/2000 03:47:25 PM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: JJWeston@T... Sounds fantastic to me! ;-) - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@t... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/pgp-key.asc - - - From frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... Fri Dec 08 01:20:22 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 8 Dec 2000 09:20:22 -0000 Received: (qmail 59174 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2000 08:40:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 8 Dec 2000 08:40:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailhub.Dartmouth.EDU) (129.170.16.6) by mta3 with SMTP; 8 Dec 2000 09:41:56 -0000 Received: from dasher.Dartmouth.EDU (dasher.dartmouth.edu [129.170.208.6]) by mailhub.Dartmouth.EDU (8.9.3+DND/8.9.3) with ESMTP id DAA20920 for ; Fri, 8 Dec 2000 03:40:50 -0500 (EST) Message-id: <38023577@d...> Date: 08 Dec 2000 03:40:50 EST Reply-To: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... (Willard) Subject: Vote FOR amended version of 303 To: n_omic@egroups.com X-eGroups-From: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... (Frederick C. Strathmeyer) From: frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... I'll vote FOR the new amended version of proposal 303. This is the version (copied directly from Doctroid's message) that I am voting for: ======= Add a rule: ===== Any person may become a Player at any time by informing the current Players of their desire to do so, subject to restrictions by other rules or portions of this rule. A Player shall lose 10 points and become a Reyalp upon (1) announcing their desire to do so to the other Players (and optionally stating a maximum time duration for their Reyalp status) or (2) failing to send a required communication within 72 hours after such communication can initially occur. Reyalps are not Players, but they continue to hold points, which may be increased or decreased only as consequences of actions they took or failed to take while they were Players. (Comment: The foregoing means e.g. that a Player who proposes a Rule that gets defeated loses 10 points even if he becomes a Reyalp before the defeat. However, if the rules were to specify e.g. a 10 point penalty for failing to post the word "green" on St Patrick's Day, a Player who was a Reyalp for the duration of St Patrick's Day would not incur the penalty. This parenthesized text is not part of the proposed Rule.) Reyalps may become Players again by informing the current Players of their desire to do so. If they do not do so within the time limit they announced, or within 21 days if no such announcement was made, then they cease to be Reyalps and their points are lost. From rsholmes@m... Fri Dec 08 06:48:21 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 8 Dec 2000 14:48:21 -0000 Received: (qmail 67415 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2000 14:48:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 8 Dec 2000 14:48:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta3 with SMTP; 8 Dec 2000 15:49:26 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.00800821@m...>; Fri, 8 Dec 2000 9:48:21 -0500 Received: (from rsholmes@l...) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id JAA14721; Fri, 8 Dec 2000 09:48:20 -0500 (EST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Vote FOR amended version of 303 References: <38023577@d...> Date: 08 Dec 2000 09:48:19 -0500 In-Reply-To: frederick.c.strathmeyer@d...'s message of "08 Dec 2000 03:40:50 EST" Message-ID: Lines: 4 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... I also vote FOR P303 as amended. -- Doctroid From kevan@s... Fri Dec 08 07:18:31 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: kevan@s... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 8 Dec 2000 15:18:30 -0000 Received: (qmail 79634 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2000 15:18:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 8 Dec 2000 15:18:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ck.egroups.com) (10.1.2.83) by mta2 with SMTP; 8 Dec 2000 15:18:30 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: kevan@s... Received: from [10.1.10.108] by ck.egroups.com with NNFMP; 08 Dec 2000 15:18:22 -0000 Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2000 15:17:16 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: Vote FOR amended version of 303 Message-ID: <90qu1s+rkis@e...> In-Reply-To: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 116 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 212.42.164.32 From: "Kevan " > I also vote FOR P303 as amended. Likewise. K. -- http://uncertain.org/~kevan "Emotional baggage accessorised." From Sxejmaso@a... Fri Dec 08 18:30:50 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Sxejmaso@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 9 Dec 2000 02:30:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 81363 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2000 02:30:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 9 Dec 2000 02:30:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-r17.mail.aol.com) (152.163.225.71) by mta1 with SMTP; 9 Dec 2000 02:30:49 -0000 Received: from Sxejmaso@a... by imo-r17.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v28.34.) id a.58.46e1a4d (4257) for ; Fri, 8 Dec 2000 21:30:42 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <58.46e1a4d.2762f352@a...> Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2000 21:30:42 EST Subject: Re: [n_omic] Re: Vote FOR amended version of 303 To: n_omic@egroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Windows AOL sub 110 From: Sxejmaso@a... Ditto. JAG From jjweston@p... Mon Dec 11 19:45:44 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@p... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 12 Dec 2000 03:45:41 -0000 Received: (qmail 75266 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2000 03:45:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 12 Dec 2000 03:45:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net) (192.48.96.19) by mta1 with SMTP; 12 Dec 2000 03:45:41 -0000 Received: from picard by wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net with SMTP (peer crosschecked as: [63.84.211.245]) id QQjtet14318 for ; Tue, 12 Dec 2000 03:45:40 GMT Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20001211194532.011239b0@m...> X-Sender: mail198193@m... X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2000 19:45:32 -0800 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Prop 303 passes! Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" From: Jeff Weston With Jon Grimm's affirmative vote for 303 on Friday, prop 303 passes. Yay! Our first successfull proposal! :-) Doctroid gets 12 points for receiving 100% favorable votes. Play now continues with Eric Strathmeyer. - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@p... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/personal-key.asc - - - From frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... Tue Dec 12 04:46:48 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 12 Dec 2000 12:46:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 35998 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2000 12:46:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 12 Dec 2000 12:46:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailhub.Dartmouth.EDU) (129.170.16.6) by mta2 with SMTP; 12 Dec 2000 12:46:47 -0000 Received: from dasher.Dartmouth.EDU (dasher.dartmouth.edu [129.170.208.6]) by mailhub.Dartmouth.EDU (8.9.3+DND/8.9.3) with ESMTP id HAA08285 for ; Tue, 12 Dec 2000 07:46:47 -0500 (EST) Message-id: <38089810@d...> Date: 12 Dec 2000 07:46:47 EST Reply-To: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... (Willard) Subject: Proposal 304 -- Amend Rule 203 To: n_omic@egroups.com X-eGroups-From: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... (Frederick C. Strathmeyer) From: frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... Rule 203 is hereby ammended to read: A rule-change is NOT adopted if there is more than one (1) vote AGAINST that proposal. If all eligible voters have voted on a proposal, and it is not rejected on the basis of the preceding sentence, then and only then will that proposal be adopted. (Clarification: Under this rule, a proposal can suffer one 'against' vote without failing. It will take two or more votes against in order to reject the rule. Any suggestions on rewording the rule to eliminate [or add] loopholes will be happily considered. This parenthesized text is not part of the proposal.) From Sxejmaso@a... Tue Dec 12 17:06:03 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Sxejmaso@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 13 Dec 2000 01:06:02 -0000 Received: (qmail 46730 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2000 01:06:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Dec 2000 01:06:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-r04.mx.aol.com) (152.163.225.4) by mta2 with SMTP; 13 Dec 2000 01:06:01 -0000 Received: from Sxejmaso@a... by imo-r04.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v28.34.) id a.c6.e785ec9 (4250) for ; Tue, 12 Dec 2000 20:05:38 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2000 20:05:38 EST Subject: Re: [n_omic]VOTE FOR: Proposal 304 -- Amend Rule 203 (NIM) To: n_omic@egroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Windows AOL sub 110 From: Sxejmaso@a... N I M = no internal message From Sxejmaso@a... Tue Dec 12 17:11:52 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Sxejmaso@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 13 Dec 2000 01:11:52 -0000 Received: (qmail 15205 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2000 01:11:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Dec 2000 01:11:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-d08.mx.aol.com) (205.188.157.40) by mta2 with SMTP; 13 Dec 2000 01:11:51 -0000 Received: from Sxejmaso@a... by imo-d08.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v28.34.) id a.a0.d538493 (4250) for ; Tue, 12 Dec 2000 20:11:45 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2000 20:11:45 EST Subject: Mr Weston... To: n_omic@egroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Windows AOL sub 110 From: Sxejmaso@a... For the next few weeks my time is severly limited. I will only have about enough time each night to read my mail and vote. Could you possibly build a table at the n_omic egroup site showing the game state for me for the duration? I will try to update the website, but it will be in a catch as catch can type manner. JAG From Nomic1@a... Tue Dec 12 17:52:51 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 13 Dec 2000 01:52:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 34372 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2000 01:52:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Dec 2000 01:52:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ei.egroups.com) (10.1.2.114) by mta3 with SMTP; 13 Dec 2000 02:53:55 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.4.69] by ei.egroups.com with NNFMP; 13 Dec 2000 01:52:50 -0000 Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 01:52:46 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: [N_omic]. New member. DISCUSSION TOPIC: egroups.com Message-ID: <916kpe+k83p@e...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 1421 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 24.4.252.248 From: "Feyd " Hello, I'm the newest player to N_omic. I'm glad to be in on the first floor (e-floor?). Anyway, after reading all of the messages and reading the complete ruleset, I would like to open the following topic for discussion (in preparation to making a proposal, eh?). How much should we count on using http://www.egroups.com to run N_omic? For example, votes could be tabulated using the "POLL" feature. egroup Polls have the following properties: Visible: Results are visible to all members during polling Results are hidden until polling is over Anonymity: Voting is anonymous (only a vote count is displayed) Voting is enumerated (identity of the voter is displayed with each vote) Conclude poll: Manually On Distribution: Send results to the entire group via email Send results to the person who created the poll via email This would make things a log easier, and would allow transition to non-turn-based proposals if such were to be proposed ;-). Possible downsides: How would ammendments be added to the poll? What would stop a Player from extending the time of a poll illegally? The above is meant as a way to practically use the environment to shape the Nomic. One turn/person/month is going to drag any PBeM down I think. Oh, and a question::: Am I now a "Player"? May I vote on Prop 304? Feyd From frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... Tue Dec 12 19:37:11 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 13 Dec 2000 03:37:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 48715 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2000 03:37:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Dec 2000 03:37:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailhub.Dartmouth.EDU) (129.170.16.6) by mta1 with SMTP; 13 Dec 2000 03:37:10 -0000 Received: from dasher.Dartmouth.EDU (dasher.dartmouth.edu [129.170.208.6]) by mailhub.Dartmouth.EDU (8.9.3+DND/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA06875 for ; Tue, 12 Dec 2000 22:37:09 -0500 (EST) Message-id: <38111288@d...> Date: 12 Dec 2000 22:37:09 EST Reply-To: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... (Willard) Subject: Re: [n_omic]VOTE FOR: Proposal 304 -- Amend Rule 203 (NIM) To: n_omic@egroups.com X-eGroups-From: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... (Frederick C. Strathmeyer) From: frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... --- You wrote: N I M = no internal message --- end of quote --- ? From jjweston@p... Tue Dec 12 22:06:19 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@p... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 13 Dec 2000 06:06:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 78691 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2000 06:06:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Dec 2000 06:06:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net) (192.48.96.19) by mta1 with SMTP; 13 Dec 2000 06:06:17 -0000 Received: from picard by wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net with SMTP (peer crosschecked as: [63.84.211.245]) id QQjtiu07510 for ; Wed, 13 Dec 2000 06:06:15 GMT Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20001212220607.0111ffb8@m...> X-Sender: mail198193@m... X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2000 22:06:07 -0800 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Mr Weston... In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" From: Jeff Weston At 08:11 PM 12/12/2000 EST, you wrote: >For the next few weeks my time is severly limited. I will only have about >enough time each night to read my mail and vote. Could you possibly build a >table at the n_omic egroup site showing the game state for me for the >duration? I will try to update the website, but it will be in a catch as >catch can type manner. Jon, I don't think the database feature of eGroups can adequately handle the game state for a N_omic game. It can help with tracking votes, and proposal summaries (which I'm already doing), but tracking the ruleset and the full text of proposals and judgements really needs a web site. I took the liberty of quickly slapping together a replica of the N_omic web site on my own server. I can mantain this site until you get a chance to get back up to speed. If you are unable to continue maintenance of your site, I would be willing to continue maintaining the one I've developed. The site can be found here: http://kenny.sir-toby.com/n_omic/ Its current as of today. Let me know if you find any inaccuracies in it. - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@p... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/personal-key.asc - - - From jjweston@p... Tue Dec 12 22:09:04 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@p... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 13 Dec 2000 06:09:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 87754 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2000 06:09:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Dec 2000 06:09:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net) (192.48.96.19) by mta1 with SMTP; 13 Dec 2000 06:09:03 -0000 Received: from picard by wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net with SMTP (peer crosschecked as: [63.84.211.245]) id QQjtiu11193 for ; Wed, 13 Dec 2000 06:09:02 GMT Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20001212220854.0111ffb8@m...> X-Sender: mail198193@m... X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2000 22:08:54 -0800 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [N_omic]. New member. DISCUSSION TOPIC: egroups.com In-Reply-To: <916kpe+k83p@e...> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" From: Jeff Weston At 01:52 AM 12/13/2000 -0000, you wrote: >Hello, >I'm the newest player to N_omic. I'm glad to be in on the first [snip] >Oh, and a question::: Am I now a "Player"? May I vote on Prop 304? Well, with your first line it looks like you are declaring your intent to play. With rule 303, which was enacted Friday the 8th, you are now officially a player. Not only "may" you vote on prop 304, but according to rule 105 you *must* vote on prop 304. ;-) Welcome aboard! You've been added to the player list maintained at: http://kenny.sir-toby.com/n_omic/ - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@p... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/personal-key.asc - - - From jjweston@p... Tue Dec 12 22:11:17 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@p... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 13 Dec 2000 06:11:17 -0000 Received: (qmail 46253 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2000 06:11:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Dec 2000 06:11:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net) (192.48.96.19) by mta1 with SMTP; 13 Dec 2000 06:11:16 -0000 Received: from picard by wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net with SMTP (peer crosschecked as: [63.84.211.245]) id QQjtiu13900 for ; Wed, 13 Dec 2000 06:11:15 GMT Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20001212221108.0111ffb8@m...> X-Sender: mail198193@m... X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2000 22:11:08 -0800 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: vote FOR prop 304. Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" From: Jeff Weston - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@p... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/personal-key.asc - - - From jjweston@p... Tue Dec 12 22:40:17 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@p... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 13 Dec 2000 06:40:17 -0000 Received: (qmail 9775 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2000 06:40:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Dec 2000 06:40:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net) (192.48.96.19) by mta3 with SMTP; 13 Dec 2000 07:41:22 -0000 Received: from picard by wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net with SMTP (peer crosschecked as: [63.84.211.245]) id QQjtiw19371 for ; Wed, 13 Dec 2000 06:40:16 GMT Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20001212224005.01673fe0@m...> X-Sender: mail198193@m... X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2000 22:40:05 -0800 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Need player's surnames... Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" From: Jeff Weston Kevan and Feyd, Would you kindly provide your surname so I can properly place you in the players list? Rule 202 requires that players take turns by alternating in alphabetical order by surname. - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@p... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/personal-key.asc - - - From Nomic1@a... Wed Dec 13 06:17:09 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 13 Dec 2000 14:17:09 -0000 Received: (qmail 28799 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2000 14:17:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Dec 2000 14:17:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hl.egroups.com) (10.1.10.44) by mta3 with SMTP; 13 Dec 2000 15:18:14 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.2.240] by hl.egroups.com with NNFMP; 13 Dec 2000 14:17:09 -0000 Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 14:17:01 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: Need player's surnames... Message-ID: <9180ct+ot3o@e...> In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20001212224005.01673fe0@m...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 631 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 208.249.92.139 From: "Feyd " --- In n_omic@egroups.com, Jeff Weston wrote: > Kevan and Feyd, > > Would you kindly provide your surname so I can properly place you in the > players list? Rule 202 requires that players take turns by alternating in > alphabetical order by surname. POO..hm, wait, not a POO, but a question: In looking at 202, what happens if I refuse to give a surname (or do not have one)? Would this imply that I am not allowed to take turns (i.e. suggest proposals) or vote? Technically, I think that looking at the definion of my registered Name (according to egroups), my surname is "". Is this sufficient? Feyd From Nomic1@a... Wed Dec 13 06:22:41 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 13 Dec 2000 14:22:41 -0000 Received: (qmail 53854 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2000 14:22:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 13 Dec 2000 14:22:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ml.egroups.com) (10.1.1.31) by mta2 with SMTP; 13 Dec 2000 14:22:30 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.2.240] by ml.egroups.com with NNFMP; 13 Dec 2000 14:22:30 -0000 Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 14:22:27 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: VOTE FOR :: Proposal 304 -- Amend Rule 203 Message-ID: <9180n3+ot3s@e...> In-Reply-To: <38089810@d...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 757 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 208.249.92.139 From: "Feyd " To be clear, the proposal I am voting for is listed below: --- In n_omic@egroups.com, frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... wrote: > Rule 203 is hereby ammended to read: > > A rule-change is NOT adopted if there is more than one (1) vote AGAINST that > proposal. If all eligible voters have voted on a proposal, and it is not > rejected on the basis of the preceding sentence, then and only then will that > proposal be adopted. > > (Clarification: Under this rule, a proposal can suffer one 'against' vote > without failing. It will take two or more votes against in order to reject the > rule. Any suggestions on rewording the rule to eliminate [or add] loopholes > will be happily considered. This parenthesized text is not part of the > proposal.) From rsholmes@m... Wed Dec 13 06:34:06 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 13 Dec 2000 14:34:05 -0000 Received: (qmail 38554 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2000 14:34:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Dec 2000 14:34:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta2 with SMTP; 13 Dec 2000 14:34:04 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.0081B113@m...>; Wed, 13 Dec 2000 9:34:04 -0500 Received: (from rsholmes@l...) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id JAA10205; Wed, 13 Dec 2000 09:34:03 -0500 (EST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: VOTE AGAINST: Proposal 304 -- Amend Rule 203 References: <38089810@d...> Date: 13 Dec 2000 09:34:03 -0500 In-Reply-To: frederick.c.strathmeyer@d...'s message of "12 Dec 2000 07:46:47 EST" Message-ID: Lines: 25 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... writes: > Rule 203 is hereby ammended to read: > > A rule-change is NOT adopted if there is more than one (1) vote AGAINST that > proposal. If all eligible voters have voted on a proposal, and it is not > rejected on the basis of the preceding sentence, then and only then will that > proposal be adopted. No no no! I remind you of the text of Rule 203: > 203. A rule-change is adopted if and only if the vote is unanimous > among the eligible voters. If this rule is not amended by the end of > the second complete circuit of turns, it automatically changes to > require only a simple majority. Unanimity is required ONLY in the first two circuits. After that it reverts to majority. P304 wants to impose near-unanimity forever. I vote AGAINST. -- Doctroid From kevan@s... Wed Dec 13 07:50:18 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: kevan@s... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 13 Dec 2000 15:50:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 11250 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2000 15:50:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Dec 2000 15:50:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO cj.egroups.com) (10.1.2.82) by mta1 with SMTP; 13 Dec 2000 15:50:17 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: kevan@s... Received: from [10.1.10.107] by cj.egroups.com with NNFMP; 13 Dec 2000 15:50:17 -0000 Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 15:50:12 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: VOTE AGAINST: Proposal 304 -- Amend Rule 203 Message-ID: <9185rk+go61@e...> In-Reply-To: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 440 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 212.42.164.32 From: "Kevan " > No no no! Quite right. It still requires all eligible voters to vote, as well, which we should really be sorting out. I too vote AGAINST. And I half-wonder if it'd be quicker to start again with a sharper Ruleset; this game's proving to be rather sluggish and unexciting, thus far, to be honest. Too much basic stuff to sort out, too lengthy a business to get it sorted. Hm. Kevan -- http://uncertain.org/~kevan "You see; ennui." From kevan@s... Wed Dec 13 08:01:43 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: kevan@s... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 13 Dec 2000 16:01:43 -0000 Received: (qmail 19987 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2000 16:01:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Dec 2000 16:01:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mo.egroups.com) (10.1.1.34) by mta1 with SMTP; 13 Dec 2000 16:01:27 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: kevan@s... Received: from [10.1.10.127] by mo.egroups.com with NNFMP; 13 Dec 2000 16:01:26 -0000 Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 16:01:19 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: Need player's surnames... Message-ID: <9186gf+59nh@e...> In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20001212224005.01673fe0@m...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 210 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 212.42.164.32 From: "Kevan " > Would you kindly provide your surname so I can properly place you in the > players list? It's still "Davis". Kevan -- http://uncertain.org/~kevan "Stop me if you think that you've heard this one before." From jjweston@p... Wed Dec 13 08:04:33 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@p... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 13 Dec 2000 16:04:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 45142 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2000 16:04:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Dec 2000 16:04:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net) (192.48.96.19) by mta1 with SMTP; 13 Dec 2000 16:04:32 -0000 Received: from picard by wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net with SMTP (peer crosschecked as: [63.84.211.245]) id QQjtki20090 for ; Wed, 13 Dec 2000 16:04:31 GMT Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20001213080255.0117a128@m...> X-Sender: mail198193@m... X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 08:02:55 -0800 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Prop 304 fails. Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" From: Jeff Weston With 4 votes FOR it and 2 votes AGAINST it, prop 304 fails. Eric loses 10 points for it failing. Eric gains 9 points for receiving 66.66% percent favorable votes. Play now continues with myself. - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@p... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/personal-key.asc - - - From jjweston@p... Wed Dec 13 08:04:34 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@p... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 13 Dec 2000 16:04:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 45179 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2000 16:04:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Dec 2000 16:04:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net) (192.48.96.19) by mta1 with SMTP; 13 Dec 2000 16:04:32 -0000 Received: from picard by wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net with SMTP (peer crosschecked as: [63.84.211.245]) id QQjtki20096 for ; Wed, 13 Dec 2000 16:04:31 GMT Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20001213080421.01178718@m...> X-Sender: mail198193@m... X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 08:04:21 -0800 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Re: Need player's surnames... In-Reply-To: <9180ct+ot3o@e...> References: <3.0.6.32.20001212224005.01673fe0@m...> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" From: Jeff Weston At 02:17 PM 12/13/2000 -0000, you wrote: >Technically, I think that looking at the definion of my registered >Name (according to egroups), my surname is "". Is this sufficient? I suppose... I'll place you next to Kevan, since he too has not given us a surname. I'll rank you two by first names then. Your turn will come after mine. - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@p... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/personal-key.asc - - - From jjweston@p... Wed Dec 13 08:06:25 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@p... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 13 Dec 2000 16:06:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 93278 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2000 16:06:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Dec 2000 16:06:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net) (192.48.96.19) by mta3 with SMTP; 13 Dec 2000 17:07:29 -0000 Received: from picard by wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net with SMTP (peer crosschecked as: [63.84.211.245]) id QQjtki23504 for ; Wed, 13 Dec 2000 16:06:23 GMT Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20001213080615.01178718@m...> X-Sender: mail198193@m... X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 08:06:15 -0800 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Re: Need player's surnames... In-Reply-To: <9186gf+59nh@e...> References: <3.0.6.32.20001212224005.01673fe0@m...> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" From: Jeff Weston At 04:01 PM 12/13/2000 -0000, you wrote: >> Would you kindly provide your surname so I can properly place you >in the >> players list? > >It's still "Davis". Cool, thanks. I guess I didn't see it when you posted it earlier. I'll still place Feyd in front of Kevan. If anyone has a problem with this ordering of players, invoke judgement on it. - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@p... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/personal-key.asc - - - From jjweston@p... Wed Dec 13 08:16:49 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@p... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 13 Dec 2000 16:16:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 85614 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2000 16:16:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Dec 2000 16:16:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net) (192.48.96.19) by mta2 with SMTP; 13 Dec 2000 16:16:45 -0000 Received: from picard by wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net with SMTP (peer crosschecked as: [63.84.211.245]) id QQjtkj11882 for ; Wed, 13 Dec 2000 16:16:40 GMT Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20001213081632.01178718@m...> X-Sender: mail198193@m... X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 08:16:32 -0800 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Proposal 305. Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" From: Jeff Weston Create a new rule: The official mailing list of N_omic is n_omic@egroups.com, available through this web site: http://www.egroups.com/group/n_omic Any game related communication that must go to all players must be sent through this mailing list. If the official mailing list is unable to function in this capacity for any reason, players may directly email all other players as an emergency backup until a new mailing list is available. - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@p... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/personal-key.asc - - - From frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... Wed Dec 13 08:21:50 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 13 Dec 2000 16:21:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 45283 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2000 16:21:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Dec 2000 16:21:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailhub.Dartmouth.EDU) (129.170.16.6) by mta1 with SMTP; 13 Dec 2000 16:21:49 -0000 Received: from dasher.Dartmouth.EDU (dasher.dartmouth.edu [129.170.208.6]) by mailhub.Dartmouth.EDU (8.9.3+DND/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA11732 for ; Wed, 13 Dec 2000 11:21:48 -0500 (EST) Message-id: <38121664@d...> Date: 13 Dec 2000 11:21:48 EST Reply-To: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... (Willard) Subject: suggestion.... To: n_omic@egroups.com X-eGroups-From: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... (Frederick C. Strathmeyer) From: frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... perhaps the next person could propose a rule such as: "Once this rule is enacted, the game shall enter Limbo. Definition of Limbo: 1. While in Limbo no points shall be awarded. 2. In Limbo, rules may be adopted by a simple majority, and will be adopted when a majority of voters vote FOR a rule (except where noted below). 3. Any player who voted AGAINST a rule that failed is able to suggest alterations to the rule that would cause them to vote FOR it. If the player who proposed the failed rule wishes so, he may propose an altered version if he believes it will succeed. A rule may only be re-proposed once. 4. Rules enacted in Limbo may NOT alter the way players accumulate points, or the way players win. [add more stuff here] 5. Any rule proposed in Limbo which violates point 4 (above) or wishes to ammend this rule (i.e., the entire definition of Limbo) can only be passed by a unanimous FOR vote. 6. Limbo will be ended by a majority vote [or a unaimous one if that's what we want]. 7. When Limbo ends, this rule shall remove itself from the ruleset. " This way we could hammer down some basic rules quickly and easily... From frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... Wed Dec 13 08:23:11 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 13 Dec 2000 16:23:11 -0000 Received: (qmail 25516 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2000 16:23:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Dec 2000 16:23:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailhub.Dartmouth.EDU) (129.170.16.6) by mta3 with SMTP; 13 Dec 2000 17:24:16 -0000 Received: from dasher.Dartmouth.EDU (dasher.dartmouth.edu [129.170.208.6]) by mailhub.Dartmouth.EDU (8.9.3+DND/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA12994 for ; Wed, 13 Dec 2000 11:23:10 -0500 (EST) Message-id: <38121706@d...> Date: 13 Dec 2000 11:23:10 EST Reply-To: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... (Willard) Subject: VOTE FOR Proposal 305. To: n_omic@egroups.com X-eGroups-From: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... (Frederick C. Strathmeyer) From: frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... From Nomic1@a... Wed Dec 13 08:28:48 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 13 Dec 2000 16:28:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 69824 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2000 16:28:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Dec 2000 16:28:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mk.egroups.com) (10.1.1.30) by mta3 with SMTP; 13 Dec 2000 17:29:53 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.10.111] by mk.egroups.com with NNFMP; 13 Dec 2000 16:28:47 -0000 Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 16:28:40 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: VOTE FOR Proposal 305. Message-ID: <91883p+7ghb@e...> In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20001213081632.01178718@m...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 686 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 208.249.92.137 From: "Feyd " The proposal I am voting for is as follows --- In n_omic@egroups.com, Jeff Weston wrote: > Create a new rule: > > The official mailing list of N_omic is n_omic@egroups.com, available > through this web site: > > http://www.egroups.com/group/n_omic > > Any game related communication that must go to all players must be sent > through this mailing list. If the official mailing list is unable to > function in this capacity for any reason, players may directly email all > other players as an emergency backup until a new mailing list is available. > > - - - > Jeffrey J. Weston > jjweston@p... > PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/personal-key.asc > - - - From Nomic1@a... Wed Dec 13 08:45:52 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 13 Dec 2000 16:45:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 83620 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2000 16:45:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Dec 2000 16:45:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO fl.egroups.com) (10.1.10.48) by mta1 with SMTP; 13 Dec 2000 16:45:50 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.10.125] by fl.egroups.com with NNFMP; 13 Dec 2000 16:45:50 -0000 Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 16:45:49 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Counter Re: suggestion.... Message-ID: <91893t+vl92@e...> In-Reply-To: <38121664@d...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 1937 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 208.249.92.138 From: "Feyd " Instead of this "limbo", I would much prefer to keep the current system and focus on the problem rules in question. The only rules inhibiting the game are rules 201 and 202. Both are mutable, and can be updated as needed. What you are proposing below is a suspension of both 201 and 202, possibly 204, in the same piece of legislation. This is clearly illegal within rule 103. We're going to have to tough it out for a few days until we get a faster, more flexible system in place. As a side note, what we are doing in game is modifying rules. If we suspend the game rules to allow us to modify rules, I don't think we have really achieved anything anyway. Feyd --- In n_omic@egroups.com, frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... wrote: > perhaps the next person could propose a rule such as: > > "Once this rule is enacted, the game shall enter Limbo. > > Definition of Limbo: > 1. While in Limbo no points shall be awarded. > 2. In Limbo, rules may be adopted by a simple majority, and will be adopted > when a majority of voters vote FOR a rule (except where noted below). > 3. Any player who voted AGAINST a rule that failed is able to suggest > alterations to the rule that would cause them to vote FOR it. If the player > who proposed the failed rule wishes so, he may propose an altered version if he > believes it will succeed. A rule may only be re-proposed once. > 4. Rules enacted in Limbo may NOT alter the way players accumulate points, or > the way players win. [add more stuff here] > 5. Any rule proposed in Limbo which violates point 4 (above) or wishes to > ammend this rule (i.e., the entire definition of Limbo) can only be passed by a > unanimous FOR vote. > 6. Limbo will be ended by a majority vote [or a unaimous one if that's what we > want]. > 7. When Limbo ends, this rule shall remove itself from the ruleset. " > > This way we could hammer down some basic rules quickly and easily... From Nomic1@a... Wed Dec 13 08:52:02 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 13 Dec 2000 16:52:01 -0000 Received: (qmail 25365 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2000 16:52:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Dec 2000 16:52:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hn.egroups.com) (10.1.2.221) by mta1 with SMTP; 13 Dec 2000 16:52:01 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.2.51] by hn.egroups.com with NNFMP; 13 Dec 2000 16:51:59 -0000 Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 16:51:57 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: Need player's surnames... Message-ID: <9189fd+nsd0@e...> In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20001213080421.01178718@m...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 778 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 208.249.92.139 From: "Feyd " --- In n_omic@egroups.com, Jeff Weston wrote: > At 02:17 PM 12/13/2000 -0000, you wrote: > >Technically, I think that looking at the definion of my registered > >Name (according to egroups), my surname is "". Is this sufficient? > > I suppose... I'll place you next to Kevan, since he too has not given us a > surname. I'll rank you two by first names then. Your turn will come after > mine. You cannot just "suppose" to change (or is this just a technical interpretation of) rule 201. However, as Kevan has submitted a surname other than "", this point is moot. Also, to more fully comply with your request, I hereby state that my surname is the empty string, denoted by "". Thus my full name is "Feyd", 'Feyd', or Feyd. I love this game Feyd From frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... Wed Dec 13 09:01:50 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 13 Dec 2000 17:01:50 -0000 Received: (qmail 92149 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2000 17:01:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 13 Dec 2000 17:01:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailhub.Dartmouth.EDU) (129.170.16.6) by mta1 with SMTP; 13 Dec 2000 17:01:48 -0000 Received: from dasher.Dartmouth.EDU (dasher.dartmouth.edu [129.170.208.6]) by mailhub.Dartmouth.EDU (8.9.3+DND/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA01779 for ; Wed, 13 Dec 2000 12:01:48 -0500 (EST) Message-id: <38123214@d...> Date: 13 Dec 2000 12:01:48 EST Reply-To: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... (Willard) Subject: Re: [n_omic] Re: Need player's surnames... To: n_omic@egroups.com X-eGroups-From: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... (Frederick C. Strathmeyer) From: frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... --- Feyd wrote: You cannot just "suppose" to change (or is this just a technical interpretation of) rule 201. However, as Kevan has submitted a surname other than "", this point is moot. --- end of quote --- Well basically he was invoking judgement... I don't think he was the official judge, but I do believe that a majority would have upheld his decision... and he didn't receive any compensation for judging, so it's all good... don't get too technical or the game gets tedious From Nomic1@a... Wed Dec 13 09:22:37 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 13 Dec 2000 17:22:37 -0000 Received: (qmail 95523 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2000 17:22:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Dec 2000 17:22:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ci.egroups.com) (10.1.2.81) by mta1 with SMTP; 13 Dec 2000 17:22:36 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.10.99] by ci.egroups.com with NNFMP; 13 Dec 2000 17:22:36 -0000 Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 17:22:32 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Tedious Rule Mongering Re: Need player's surnames... Message-ID: <918b8o+qg70@e...> In-Reply-To: <38123214@d...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 1828 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 208.249.92.139 From: "Feyd " --- In n_omic@egroups.com, frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... wrote: > --- Feyd wrote: > You cannot just "suppose" to change (or is this just a technical > interpretation of) rule 201. However, as Kevan has submitted a > surname other than "", this point is moot. > --- end of quote --- > > Well basically he was invoking judgement... I don't think he was the official > judge, but I do believe that a majority would have upheld his decision... and > he didn't receive any compensation for judging, so it's all good... > don't get too technical or the game gets tedious Actually, I wasn't trying to be tedious, I was trying to get people to think critically about what they are doing early in the game. And to provoke conversation about...well, anything. Currently we are moving rather slowly because of the ruleset, I figure anything to generate interest and conversation is good . Even if it is to correct me ;-). It is definitely NOT my goal to rulemonger the game to death! However, if someone wishes to propose the title "Tedious Rule Monger" and assign me a point every time I pose annoying questions, I'll take it ROTFL. Back to the point, if he was invoking judgement (which, by the way, I think would rule that under "legislative intent" would be sorted by surname then firstname) then he should actually invoke it. To make a judgment based on the fact that you believe that the majority "would have upheld [your] opinion" is a poor precedent. The idea I am pursuing here is to pick small, obvious arguments where the winner is obvious, to set clear precedent for future cases. I guess since I'm the one raising the stink over this I had better submit a proposal on my turn to deal with it in the future. Anyone have anything they feel needs to be attached? Feyd "Tedious Rule Monger" From frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... Wed Dec 13 10:21:00 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 13 Dec 2000 18:21:00 -0000 Received: (qmail 87311 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2000 18:21:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Dec 2000 18:21:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailhub.Dartmouth.EDU) (129.170.16.6) by mta3 with SMTP; 13 Dec 2000 19:22:05 -0000 Received: from dasher.Dartmouth.EDU (dasher.dartmouth.edu [129.170.208.6]) by mailhub.Dartmouth.EDU (8.9.3+DND/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA07589 for ; Wed, 13 Dec 2000 13:20:58 -0500 (EST) Message-id: <38125433@d...> Date: 13 Dec 2000 13:20:58 EST Reply-To: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... (Willard) Subject: Re: [n_omic] Tedious Rule Mongering Re: Need player's surnames... To: n_omic@egroups.com X-eGroups-From: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... (Frederick C. Strathmeyer) From: frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... --- Feyd wrote: To make a judgment based on the fact that you believe that the majority "would have upheld [your] opinion" is a poor precedent. --- end of quote --- Hmm... You see, I think that that's a good precedent, as long as anyone can voice their opposition to a ruling and request that someone invoke (captial-J) Judgment. From frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... Wed Dec 13 10:22:09 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 13 Dec 2000 18:22:09 -0000 Received: (qmail 54113 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2000 18:22:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 13 Dec 2000 18:22:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailhub.Dartmouth.EDU) (129.170.16.6) by mta2 with SMTP; 13 Dec 2000 18:22:08 -0000 Received: from dasher.Dartmouth.EDU (dasher.dartmouth.edu [129.170.208.6]) by mailhub.Dartmouth.EDU (8.9.3+DND/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA29402 for ; Wed, 13 Dec 2000 13:22:07 -0500 (EST) Message-id: <38125476@d...> Date: 13 Dec 2000 13:22:07 EST Reply-To: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... (Willard) Subject: Request to become a Reyalp To: n_omic@egroups.com X-eGroups-From: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... (Frederick C. Strathmeyer) From: frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... As I will be able to check my email sporadically at best for the next two and a half weeks, I would like to become a Reyalp. I'll be back (fer sher) on Jan 2nd. Have fun =) From rsholmes@m... Wed Dec 13 10:39:29 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 13 Dec 2000 18:39:28 -0000 Received: (qmail 53229 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2000 18:39:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Dec 2000 18:39:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta2 with SMTP; 13 Dec 2000 18:39:28 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.0081C6FE@m...>; Wed, 13 Dec 2000 13:39:12 -0500 Received: (from rsholmes@l...) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id NAA02841; Wed, 13 Dec 2000 13:39:10 -0500 (EST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: VOTE FOR [n_omic] Proposal 305. References: <3.0.6.32.20001213081632.01178718@m...> Date: 13 Dec 2000 13:39:10 -0500 In-Reply-To: Jeff Weston's message of "Wed, 13 Dec 2000 08:16:32 -0800" Message-ID: Lines: 3 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... -- Doctroid From n_omic@egroups.com Wed Dec 13 10:54:21 2000 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 47564 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2000 18:54:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Dec 2000 18:54:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hh.egroups.com) (10.1.10.40) by mta2 with SMTP; 13 Dec 2000 18:54:15 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: notify@egroups.com Received: from [10.1.2.33] by hh.egroups.com with NNFMP; 13 Dec 2000 18:54:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 16211 invoked by uid 65534); 13 Dec 2000 18:54:04 -0000 Date: 13 Dec 2000 18:54:04 -0000 Message-ID: <976733644.16208@egroups.com> X-eGroups-Application: poll From: n_omic@egroups.com To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: New poll for n_omic MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Enter your vote today! Check out the new poll for the n_omic group: Would you support a proposal written as follows? I. A Player makes a Proposal by posting that proposal to this space. Once posted, a proposal may NOT be ammended. Settings on polls are as follows: Choice 1 "Yes" Choice 2 "No" Choice 3 "Abstain" Visible: Results are hidden until polling is over. Anonymity: Voting is Enumerated Conclude poll: Polling Date + 2 days. [[Note that anyone who does NOT vote becomes a Reyalp per 303]] II. Once the poll is complete, the results of the poll plus any other valid votes created or imposed by later rules will be counted and the proposal status will be determined. II. A proposal may not be edited in any way once it has been posted. o Yes o No o Abstain To vote, please visit the following web page: http://www.egroups.com/polls/n_omic Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the eGroups web site listed above. Thanks! From Nomic1@a... Wed Dec 13 11:04:34 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 13 Dec 2000 19:04:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 80086 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2000 19:04:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Dec 2000 19:04:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mw.egroups.com) (10.1.2.2) by mta3 with SMTP; 13 Dec 2000 20:05:39 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.10.93] by mw.egroups.com with NNFMP; 13 Dec 2000 19:04:33 -0000 Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 19:04:31 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: New poll for n_omic Message-ID: <918h7v+hk7h@e...> In-Reply-To: <976733644.16208@egroups.com> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 315 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 208.249.92.138 From: "Feyd " Yikes, everything looks cool about this method except the POLL page, which looks absolutely awful. Oh well, that's why I played with it rather than Proposed it. Maybe a poll like the above where the subject line is "Proposal 307a" would be better... Any other discussion on why this is a good/bad idea? Feyd From rsholmes@m... Wed Dec 13 11:12:55 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 13 Dec 2000 19:12:55 -0000 Received: (qmail 54276 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2000 19:12:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Dec 2000 19:12:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta1 with SMTP; 13 Dec 2000 19:12:54 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.0081C9EF@m...>; Wed, 13 Dec 2000 14:12:55 -0500 Received: (from rsholmes@l...) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id OAA11249; Wed, 13 Dec 2000 14:12:54 -0500 (EST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] New poll for n_omic References: <976733644.16208@egroups.com> Date: 13 Dec 2000 14:12:53 -0500 In-Reply-To: n_omic@egroups.com's message of "13 Dec 2000 18:54:04 -0000" Message-ID: Lines: 56 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... n_omic@egroups.com writes: > Would you support a proposal written as > follows? Lord, no... > I. A Player makes a Proposal by > posting that proposal to this space. > Once posted, a proposal may NOT be > ammended. Hey guys... "amended" has ONE "m"... > Settings on polls are as > follows: > Choice 1 "Yes" > Choice 2 "No" > Choice 3 "Abstain" I note that the eGroups polling mechanism allows you to change your vote at any time. That'd be a significant change, and not one I'd like. > Visible: Results are hidden until > polling is over. And so would that. > II. A proposal may not be edited in > any way once it has been posted. And so would that. And another change is that you would not be able to make a proposal by email. I'd like to avoid having to bring up the eGroups site as much as possible, because I've found it tends to be slow and the user interface somewhat frustrating -- cutting a proposal and pasting into an email discussing the proposal, for example, is a pain; on my system if I tried to do that with this poll it'd look like this: Would you support a proposal written as follows? I. A Player makes a Proposal by posting that proposal to this space. Once posted, a proposal may NOT be ammended. Settings on polls are as follows: Choice 1 "Yes" Choice 2 "No" Choice 3 "Abstain" (et cetera). Note also that the formatting of your poll question has gotten munged, not only above but on the eGroups poll page -- your line breaks have been ignored. Bleacccch. > Note: Please do not reply to this message. Bugger that! -- Doctroid From JJWeston@T... Wed Dec 13 12:05:19 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: JJWeston@T... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 13 Dec 2000 20:05:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 28613 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2000 20:05:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Dec 2000 20:05:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net) (198.5.241.86) by mta3 with SMTP; 13 Dec 2000 21:06:23 -0000 Received: from mother.thoughtworks.com by mr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mother.thoughtworks.com [204.178.39.204]) id QQjtky09453 for ; Wed, 13 Dec 2000 20:05:05 GMT Subject: Re: [n_omic] Re: Need player's surnames... To: n_omic@egroups.com X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.5 September 22, 2000 Message-ID: Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 10:29:14 -0800 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on Mother/ThoughtWorks.COM/US(Release 5.0.5 |September 22, 2000) at 12/13/2000 02:10:57 PM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: JJWeston@T... Sorry for my long winded message here. I've found myself with a little bit of time to ponder the situation... ;-) Actually, I was trying to solve the problem without invoking judgement. I proposed an unofficial sollution to the problem and suggested that if someone didn't like it, they could invoke judgement to get an official decision. Since Feyd has submitted a surname of "", then his placement in the players list is either last, or first depening on if you think "" comes before A, or after Z. The only real difference between the two is that if he is placed first, his second proposal will come after rule 203 has been ammended to require only a simple majority. If he is placed last, his second proposal will still require unaminity to pass. As support for placing Feyd first, the Unix 'sort' command places a blank line first when sorting a file. As support for placing Feyd last, it would make it more for fair for him to play with the same conditions as everyone else. I have simply chosen to place Feyd first. If someone wants an official decision, they should invoke judgement. This message, along with my earlier message, are not invoking judgement. I am simply trying to solve the problem using the simplest method that could possibly work. - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@t... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/pgp-key.asc - - - Eric wrote: >Well basically he was invoking judgement... I don't think he was the official >judge, but I do believe that a majority would have upheld his decision... and >he didn't receive any compensation for judging, so it's all good... > >don't get too technical or the game gets tedious From JJWeston@T... Wed Dec 13 12:05:19 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: JJWeston@T... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 13 Dec 2000 20:05:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 28664 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2000 20:05:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Dec 2000 20:05:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net) (198.5.241.86) by mta2 with SMTP; 13 Dec 2000 20:05:19 -0000 Received: from mother.thoughtworks.com by mr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mother.thoughtworks.com [204.178.39.204]) id QQjtky09480 for ; Wed, 13 Dec 2000 20:05:06 GMT Subject: Re: [n_omic] suggestion.... To: n_omic@egroups.com X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.5 September 22, 2000 Message-ID: Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 10:56:28 -0800 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on Mother/ThoughtWorks.COM/US(Release 5.0.5 |September 22, 2000) at 12/13/2000 02:10:58 PM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: JJWeston@T... Interesting idea... However with 110 intact, you wouldn't be able to overrule any immutable rules. Point 2 is in conflict with rule 105. I'm kinda curious what basic rule changes need to be made in this fashion... With 303 in place, we've handled the large issue of players disapearing. If 305 passes, we'll have secured an official mailing list. If game speed is an issue, we can always ammend rule 303 to allow less time for communications to occur. On another note... I would consider transmuting 105 if we first eliminate the condition in the second paragraph of 202 that implies that all players are voting on a proposal. Ammending 105 to allow proposals to pass immediately when they have sufficient FOR votes may help speed things up. When 203 is automatically ammended to require only a simple majority, it will make it easier to pass proposals. While it won't speed up the game, it will give the illusion of a faster game by allowing rule changes to happen more often. It should also make it more fun... In any case, things seem to be speeding up a little bit more now. I'll try to be a little more aggressive about moving the game along by posting when proposals pass or fail, who's turn it is, etc... I totally spaced out this weekend when I didn't realize that 303 actually passed on Friday. Of course, this isn't my official capacity. I originaly started posting such messages to help move the game along. It looks like it helps, so I'll keep on doing it. ;-) - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@t... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/pgp-key.asc - - - Eric wrote: >perhaps the next person could propose a rule such as: > >"Once this rule is enacted, the game shall enter Limbo. From JJWeston@T... Wed Dec 13 12:05:24 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: JJWeston@T... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 13 Dec 2000 20:05:24 -0000 Received: (qmail 72360 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2000 20:05:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Dec 2000 20:05:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net) (198.5.241.86) by mta2 with SMTP; 13 Dec 2000 20:05:23 -0000 Received: from mother.thoughtworks.com by mr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mother.thoughtworks.com [204.178.39.204]) id QQjtky09572 for ; Wed, 13 Dec 2000 20:05:10 GMT Subject: Test message. To: n_omic@egroups.com X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.5 September 22, 2000 Message-ID: Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 11:53:56 -0800 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on Mother/ThoughtWorks.COM/US(Release 5.0.5 |September 22, 2000) at 12/13/2000 02:11:02 PM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: JJWeston@T... eGroups seems to be ignoring me, since it ignored my last couple messages. Just trying to figure out whats wrong... - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@t... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/pgp-key.asc - - - From rsholmes@m... Wed Dec 13 12:59:43 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 13 Dec 2000 20:59:43 -0000 Received: (qmail 52804 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2000 20:59:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 13 Dec 2000 20:59:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta2 with SMTP; 13 Dec 2000 20:59:42 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.0081D6C8@m...>; Wed, 13 Dec 2000 15:59:43 -0500 Received: (from rsholmes@l...) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id PAA06038; Wed, 13 Dec 2000 15:59:42 -0500 (EST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] suggestion.... References: Date: 13 Dec 2000 15:59:41 -0500 In-Reply-To: JJWeston@T...'s message of "Wed, 13 Dec 2000 10:56:28 -0800" Message-ID: Lines: 21 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... JJWeston@T... writes: > On another note... I would consider transmuting 105 if we first > eliminate the condition in the second paragraph of 202 that implies that > all players are voting on a proposal. Ammending 105 to allow proposals to > pass immediately when they have sufficient FOR votes may help speed things > up. I don't think things need to be speeded up, actually. This Nomic is moving considerably more slowly than, say, DocNomic... but so what? An online game of Rock, Paper, Scissors would move even faster, presumably, but that's because it's a different game -- as are n_omic and DocNomic. And there are, so I understand, online Nomics that move more deliberately than this one. If this game were dragging out because people weren't fulfilling their responsibilities that'd be one thing. But this one moves slowly by the nature of its rules, and I think that's fine. -- Doctroid From Nomic1@a... Wed Dec 13 13:58:54 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 13 Dec 2000 21:58:54 -0000 Received: (qmail 83048 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2000 21:58:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Dec 2000 21:58:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hk.egroups.com) (10.1.10.43) by mta3 with SMTP; 13 Dec 2000 22:59:59 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.10.107] by hk.egroups.com with NNFMP; 13 Dec 2000 21:58:53 -0000 Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 21:58:45 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Tradition of Judgement RE: Tedious Rule Mongering Message-ID: <918rel+6n0h@e...> In-Reply-To: <38125433@d...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 1066 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 208.249.92.137 From: "Feyd " --- In n_omic@egroups.com, frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... wrote: > --- Feyd wrote: > To make a judgment based on the fact that you believe that the majority "would > have upheld [your] opinion" is a poor precedent. > --- end of quote --- > > Hmm... You see, I think that that's a good precedent, as long as anyone can > voice their opposition to a ruling and request that someone invoke (captial-J) > Judgment. > --- End of Quote --- Would it not be preferable to base precedent solely on Rule of Law, rather than (mutable) player opinion? Ah, but your point is that nothing has been invoked, and if anyone feels it is unfair they can invoke RoL via Judgement. I do not want to dip this discussion to deeply into "what if" scenarios; I would rather stay grounded in the Rules and established precedent. Precedent shows that common-sense rulings have helped pull the game back from potential deadlock (Judgement #1 was a pretty clear step to remove dead-weight). I accept the argument you put forth. Feyd Can I still be "Tedious Rule Monger"? From Sxejmaso@a... Wed Dec 13 19:00:44 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Sxejmaso@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 14 Dec 2000 03:00:43 -0000 Received: (qmail 82016 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2000 03:00:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 14 Dec 2000 03:00:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-d02.mx.aol.com) (205.188.157.34) by mta3 with SMTP; 14 Dec 2000 04:01:48 -0000 Received: from Sxejmaso@a... by imo-d02.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v28.34.) id a.b9.991d925 (4003) for ; Wed, 13 Dec 2000 22:00:38 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 22:00:37 EST Subject: Re: [n_omic] Mr Weston... To: n_omic@egroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Windows AOL sub 110 From: Sxejmaso@a... Thank you very very much. JAG From jjweston@p... Wed Dec 13 23:29:41 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@p... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 14 Dec 2000 07:29:40 -0000 Received: (qmail 86345 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2000 07:29:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 14 Dec 2000 07:29:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net) (192.48.96.19) by mta1 with SMTP; 14 Dec 2000 07:29:39 -0000 Received: from picard by wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net with SMTP (peer crosschecked as: [63.84.211.245]) id QQjtmr26228 for ; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 07:29:37 GMT Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20001213232917.0117e360@m...> X-Sender: mail198193@m... X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 23:29:17 -0800 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Tedious Rule Mongering Re: Need player's surnames... In-Reply-To: <918b8o+qg70@e...> References: <38123214@d...> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" From: Jeff Weston At 05:22 PM 12/13/2000 -0000, you wrote: >Back to the point, if he was invoking judgement (which, by the way, I >think would rule that under "legislative intent" would be sorted by >surname then firstname) then he should actually invoke it. To make a >judgment based on the fact that you believe that the majority "would >have upheld [your] opinion" is a poor precedent. The idea I am [snip] Actually, I think its a great precedent. Think about how many things in this game have been decided by consent, rather than by invoking judgement... Rule 106 requires rule changes to be written down. We have decided that typing out rule changes and emailing them to all players is an acceptable substitute. Rule 111 was strected to allow an amendment to be made to a proposal that wasn't neccessarily destructive of play. Rule 201 doesn't specify which player starts the game. We decided to start with the surname that would occur earliest alphabetically. There are probably others, but you can see my point. This game would be forever bogged down in Inoking Judgement if we had to get an official ruling on every single point. By simply making a decision that everyone will agree with, the game can proceed without any difficulty. Invoking judgement is always an option if an official decision is desired. This was used in the case of Judgement 1 where Jon had decided to include a player and there was a disagreement about that decision. Judgement was invoked. A decision was made. The game continued, after some time... - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@p... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/personal-key.asc - - - From jjweston@p... Wed Dec 13 23:36:20 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@p... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 14 Dec 2000 07:36:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 62965 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2000 07:36:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 14 Dec 2000 07:36:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net) (192.48.96.19) by mta2 with SMTP; 14 Dec 2000 07:36:19 -0000 Received: from picard by wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net with SMTP (peer crosschecked as: [63.84.211.245]) id QQjtms04081 for ; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 07:36:18 GMT Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20001213233008.0117e360@m...> X-Sender: mail198193@m... X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 23:30:08 -0800 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Request to become a Reyalp In-Reply-To: <38125476@d...> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" From: Jeff Weston At 01:22 PM 12/13/2000 EST, you wrote: >As I will be able to check my email sporadically at best for the next two and a >half weeks, I would like to become a Reyalp. > >I'll be back (fer sher) on Jan 2nd. Okay... Eric loses 10 points and becomes a Reyalp. The site has been updated. - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@p... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/personal-key.asc - - - From jjweston@p... Wed Dec 13 23:36:20 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@p... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 14 Dec 2000 07:36:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 98624 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2000 07:36:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 14 Dec 2000 07:36:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net) (192.48.96.19) by mta3 with SMTP; 14 Dec 2000 08:37:25 -0000 Received: from picard by wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net with SMTP (peer crosschecked as: [63.84.211.245]) id QQjtms04094 for ; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 07:36:19 GMT Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20001213233525.01685a88@m...> X-Sender: mail198193@m... X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 23:35:25 -0800 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] New poll for n_omic In-Reply-To: <976733644.16208@egroups.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" From: Jeff Weston At 06:54 PM 12/13/2000 -0000, you wrote: >Would you support a proposal written as >follows? No! No! No! Sorry.... Just wanted to be clear on the point. First of all, the polling mechanism isn't really suited to our current needs. Secondly, the method of voting can change at any time via the ruleset. The polls would be unable to cope with all the changes. Third, its just another thing to tie us to eGroups that would haunt us if they ever went away, or if they finished merging with Yahoo and their name, site, and/or url changes. I see nothing wrong with sending votes to the mailing list. It allows us great flexibility for working with the voting mechanism. This is important because I feel impending change coming that way... ;-) - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@p... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/personal-key.asc - - - From jjweston@p... Wed Dec 13 23:43:59 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@p... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 14 Dec 2000 07:43:59 -0000 Received: (qmail 78304 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2000 07:43:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 14 Dec 2000 07:43:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net) (192.48.96.19) by mta2 with SMTP; 14 Dec 2000 07:43:58 -0000 Received: from picard by wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net with SMTP (peer crosschecked as: [63.84.211.245]) id QQjtms12068 for ; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 07:43:57 GMT Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20001213234349.01685a88@m...> X-Sender: mail198193@m... X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 23:43:49 -0800 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Partial voting results for proposal 305. Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" From: Jeff Weston ?, Feyd : for Davis, Kevan : no vote yet Grimm, Jon : no vote yet Holmes, Rich : for Weston, Jeffrey : for Kevan? Jon? - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@p... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/personal-key.asc - - - From jjweston@p... Wed Dec 13 23:47:43 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@p... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 14 Dec 2000 07:47:43 -0000 Received: (qmail 77254 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2000 07:47:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 14 Dec 2000 07:47:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net) (192.48.96.19) by mta2 with SMTP; 14 Dec 2000 07:47:42 -0000 Received: from picard by wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net with SMTP (peer crosschecked as: [63.84.211.245]) id QQjtmt15851 for ; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 07:47:40 GMT Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20001213234721.01685a88@m...> X-Sender: mail198193@m... X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 23:47:21 -0800 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Suggestion for the mailing list. Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" From: Jeff Weston Can the mailing list be set so that new subscribers don't have to be approved by the owner? Jon, if you get too busy to approve new list subscriptions, it may hamper those who wish to join the game, or just spectate. - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@p... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/personal-key.asc - - - From kevan@s... Thu Dec 14 02:40:48 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: kevan@s... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 14 Dec 2000 10:40:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 55315 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2000 10:40:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 14 Dec 2000 10:40:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO fg.egroups.com) (10.1.2.134) by mta2 with SMTP; 14 Dec 2000 10:40:47 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: kevan@s... Received: from [10.1.10.66] by fg.egroups.com with NNFMP; 14 Dec 2000 10:40:47 -0000 Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 10:40:41 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: Vote FOR 305 Message-ID: <91a839+83fu@e...> In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20001213234349.01685a88@m...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 299 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 212.42.164.32 From: "Kevan " > ?, Feyd : for > Davis, Kevan : no vote yet > Grimm, Jon : no vote yet > Holmes, Rich : for > Weston, Jeffrey : for > > Kevan? Forgive my being in an inconsiderate timezone. I vote FOR. Kevan -- http://uncertain.org/~kevan "Half a world away, it's the middle of the night." From kevan@s... Thu Dec 14 02:43:47 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: kevan@s... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 14 Dec 2000 10:43:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 11978 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2000 10:43:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 14 Dec 2000 10:43:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hm.egroups.com) (10.1.10.45) by mta1 with SMTP; 14 Dec 2000 10:43:46 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: kevan@s... Received: from [10.1.2.207] by hm.egroups.com with NNFMP; 14 Dec 2000 10:43:46 -0000 Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 10:43:43 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: Suggestion for the mailing list. Message-ID: <91a88v+ev95@e...> In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20001213234721.01685a88@m...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 631 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 212.42.164.32 From: "Kevan " > Can the mailing list be set so that new subscribers don't have to be > approved by the owner? Jon, if you get too busy to approve new list > subscriptions, it may hamper those who wish to join the game, or just > spectate. Mm, actually making the archives publicly readable would stop any curious potential players storming off in apathy. I do tend to cancel subscriptions and wander off, if a mailing list tells me I need to wait for approval before I can even read the archives to see if it's an interesting enough list to be worth joining. Tch. Kevan -- http://uncertain.org/~kevan "This is boredom you can afford." From Nomic1@a... Thu Dec 14 07:00:53 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 14 Dec 2000 15:00:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 62522 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2000 15:00:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 14 Dec 2000 15:00:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO fg.egroups.com) (10.1.2.134) by mta3 with SMTP; 14 Dec 2000 16:01:58 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.2.230] by fg.egroups.com with NNFMP; 14 Dec 2000 15:00:49 -0000 Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 15:00:44 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Mutual Consent verses Judgement WAS: Tedious Rule Mongering Message-ID: <91anas+k1l2@e...> In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20001213232917.0117e360@m...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 1527 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 208.249.92.74 From: "Feyd " --- In n_omic@egroups.com, Jeff Weston wrote: > At 05:22 PM 12/13/2000 -0000, you wrote: >>To make a > >judgment based on the fact that you believe that the majority "would > >have upheld [your] opinion" is a poor precedent. The idea I am > [snip] > > Actually, I think its a great precedent. Think about how many things in > this game have been decided by consent, rather than by invoking judgement... > > --- examples --------- > There are probably others, but you can see my point. This game would be > forever bogged down in Inoking Judgement if we had to get an official > ruling on every single point. > Invoking judgement is always an option if an official decision is desired. > This was used in the case of Judgement 1 where Jon had decided to include a > player and there was a disagreement about that decision. Judgement was > invoked. A decision was made. The game continued, after some time... Good points. I yield. Interesting discussion all around. In retrospect, I think that my initial argument is flawed based on rule 116, which states: "Whatever is not prohibited or regulated by a rule is permitted and unregulated, with the sole exception of changing the rules, which is permitted only when a rule or set of rules explicitly or implicitly permits it." Order of play is based upon surname, but that rule does not further refine what to do in case of ties, in which case any solution is probably acceptable under 116. Oh well, enough meandering. Feyd From Nomic1@a... Thu Dec 14 13:41:17 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 14 Dec 2000 21:41:17 -0000 Received: (qmail 31902 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2000 21:41:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 14 Dec 2000 21:41:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mk.egroups.com) (10.1.1.30) by mta2 with SMTP; 14 Dec 2000 21:41:16 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.2.230] by mk.egroups.com with NNFMP; 14 Dec 2000 21:41:14 -0000 Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 21:41:00 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Call for Comments: Potential Proposal Message-ID: <91bepc+rah2@e...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 2880 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 208.249.92.139 From: "Feyd " As soon as the current vote ends (we are missing one player), I believe it will be my turn. I am published the following text for comment. If anyone sees a problem with it, please say something and I'll change it before actually submitting it for vote. I don't know if the definitions below should be so tight (i.e. "tedious" ;-), or if that is a good thing. If y'all think this is too ambitions for now, say so and I'll come up with something else. Feyd ------------------------------------------------------- Creation of Game State & Administration Officer Article 1: In all rules following this, and in all Articles following this Article, the symbol "[[" will be used to start comments and the symbol "]]" will be used to end comments. Text with comments has no affect on a rule, and is used purely for example and clarification. Article 2: A. The "Game State" is defined as all information necessary and pertinent to administration of this game as it exists at that moment. A Game State always exists. This information is as follows: i. The current Ruleset ii. A list of current Players, Reyalps, and their point totals iii. The current Player iv. All Current Officers v. Current and Pending Proposals vi. Completed and Pending Judgments B. The Game State may be altered by a new rule without explicating amending this Article [[Article 2. This is so that if a "Widget" is added to the game state it can be added without having to amend here.]]. Article 3: A. A position named "Honorable Administrator to the Masses" (also referred to as the "HAM") is hereby created. The HAM has the following duties: i. Maintain the Game State in a timely fashion. The Game State must be updated no less than once a week. B. In payment for his services, the HAM is awarded 5 + (total number of Players / 2) points, rounded down, each Monday at 5:00 PM. C. The HAM may designate a new HAM by posting to the official list that he is passing the title to a new Player, and that player posts a reply to the official list stating that he accepts the position of HAM. D. If the HAM resigns or becomes a Reyalp without designating a new HAM (or if he designates a new HAM but that person does not accept the title before the HAM resigns or becomes a Reyalp), an immediate vote will be held to Name a new HAM using the existing voting standard. Players may nominate themselves for the Office, and only players so Nominated may be voted for. E. Upon approval of this Proposal, the Honorable Administrator to the Masses will become "Jeff Weston". This paragraph will then self- edit to become a comment surrounded by the comment symbols. [[Jeff is currently acting like our administrator, we might as well make it official and pay him for it.]] ---------------------------------------------------------------- From Sxejmaso@a... Thu Dec 14 16:02:17 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Sxejmaso@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 15 Dec 2000 00:02:17 -0000 Received: (qmail 58065 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2000 00:02:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 15 Dec 2000 00:02:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-r02.mx.aol.com) (152.163.225.2) by mta1 with SMTP; 15 Dec 2000 00:02:15 -0000 Received: from Sxejmaso@a... by imo-r02.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v28.34.) id a.73.971791c (4260) for ; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 19:02:08 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <73.971791c.276ab97a@a...> Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 19:02:02 EST Subject: Re: [n_omic] Suggestion for the mailing list. To: n_omic@egroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Windows AOL sub 110 From: Sxejmaso@a... Yeah I need to check on that... it is irritating... From Sxejmaso@a... Thu Dec 14 16:10:58 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Sxejmaso@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 15 Dec 2000 00:10:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 44456 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2000 00:10:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 15 Dec 2000 00:10:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO fg.egroups.com) (10.1.2.134) by mta2 with SMTP; 15 Dec 2000 00:10:57 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Sxejmaso@a... Received: from [10.1.10.126] by fg.egroups.com with NNFMP; 15 Dec 2000 00:10:52 -0000 Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2000 00:10:04 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: VOTE FOR: Proposal 305. Message-ID: <91bngs+m5hb@e...> In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20001213081632.01178718@m...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 642 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 172.143.94.223 From: "Jon A Grimm" --- In n_omic@egroups.com, Jeff Weston wrote: > Create a new rule: > > The official mailing list of N_omic is n_omic@egroups.com, available > through this web site: > > http://www.egroups.com/group/n_omic > > Any game related communication that must go to all players must be sent > through this mailing list. If the official mailing list is unable to > function in this capacity for any reason, players may directly email all > other players as an emergency backup until a new mailing list is available. > > - - - > Jeffrey J. Weston > jjweston@p... > PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/personal-key.asc > - - - From Sxejmaso@a... Thu Dec 14 16:11:05 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Sxejmaso@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 15 Dec 2000 00:11:05 -0000 Received: (qmail 83633 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2000 00:11:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 15 Dec 2000 00:11:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ei.egroups.com) (10.1.2.114) by mta1 with SMTP; 15 Dec 2000 00:11:04 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Sxejmaso@a... Received: from [10.1.10.126] by ei.egroups.com with NNFMP; 15 Dec 2000 00:10:57 -0000 Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2000 00:10:23 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: VOTE FOR: Proposal 305. Message-ID: <91bnhf+hct1@e...> In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20001213081632.01178718@m...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 642 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 172.143.94.223 From: "Jon A Grimm" --- In n_omic@egroups.com, Jeff Weston wrote: > Create a new rule: > > The official mailing list of N_omic is n_omic@egroups.com, available > through this web site: > > http://www.egroups.com/group/n_omic > > Any game related communication that must go to all players must be sent > through this mailing list. If the official mailing list is unable to > function in this capacity for any reason, players may directly email all > other players as an emergency backup until a new mailing list is available. > > - - - > Jeffrey J. Weston > jjweston@p... > PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/personal-key.asc > - - - From Sxejmaso@a... Thu Dec 14 16:26:37 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Sxejmaso@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 15 Dec 2000 00:26:37 -0000 Received: (qmail 89532 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2000 00:26:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 15 Dec 2000 00:26:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ck.egroups.com) (10.1.2.83) by mta1 with SMTP; 15 Dec 2000 00:26:36 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Sxejmaso@a... Received: from [10.1.4.74] by ck.egroups.com with NNFMP; 15 Dec 2000 00:26:28 -0000 Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2000 00:26:20 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: Call for Comments: Potential Proposal Message-ID: <91bofc+e6c7@e...> In-Reply-To: <91bepc+rah2@e...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 448 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 172.143.94.223 From: "Jon A Grimm" The only thing I am a little wary of is 200 points wins the game so the HAM will have a definite advantage... but other than that i think it is a good idea. Oh, and if Jeff Weston will take the job I am more than happy to let him. This job I am working so much overtime on will not be completed till 1 February or so, so my time is very strapped and I will not be able to fullfill any HAM duties... and his pages look pretty cool too:) JAG From Sxejmaso@a... Thu Dec 14 16:32:49 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Sxejmaso@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 15 Dec 2000 00:32:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 6225 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2000 00:32:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 15 Dec 2000 00:32:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ci.egroups.com) (10.1.2.81) by mta2 with SMTP; 15 Dec 2000 00:32:24 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Sxejmaso@a... Received: from [10.1.4.74] by ci.egroups.com with NNFMP; 15 Dec 2000 00:32:24 -0000 Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2000 00:32:18 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: Suggestion for the mailing list. Message-ID: <91boqi+23jf@e...> In-Reply-To: <73.971791c.276ab97a@a...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 306 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 172.143.94.223 From: "Jon A Grimm" --- In n_omic@egroups.com, Sxejmaso@a... wrote: > Yeah I need to check on that... it is irritating... OK I think I have opened up the whole e-group except for issues where I think privacy may be a concern. Any questions comments or concerns please tell me and I will try to fix them expeditiously. JAG From JJWeston@T... Thu Dec 14 17:17:00 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: JJWeston@T... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 15 Dec 2000 01:16:59 -0000 Received: (qmail 58570 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2000 01:16:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 15 Dec 2000 01:16:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO sjc3-1.relay.mail.uu.net) (199.171.54.122) by mta1 with SMTP; 15 Dec 2000 01:16:35 -0000 Received: from mother.thoughtworks.com by sjc3sosrv11.alter.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mother.thoughtworks.com [204.178.39.204]) id QQjtpl13064 for ; Fri, 15 Dec 2000 01:16:35 GMT Subject: Proposal 305 passes! To: n_omic@egroups.com X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.5 September 22, 2000 Message-ID: Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 17:16:32 -0800 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on Mother/ThoughtWorks.COM/US(Release 5.0.5 |September 22, 2000) at 12/14/2000 07:22:16 PM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: JJWeston@T... With 5 votes for, and 0 votes against, proposal 305 passes! Jeff Weston receives 14 points for receiving 100% favorable votes. This completes the first circuit of turns. We now start the second circuit of turns with Feyd. The web site has been updated to reflect this new rule. - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@t... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/pgp-key.asc - - - From JJWeston@T... Thu Dec 14 17:45:59 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: JJWeston@T... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 15 Dec 2000 01:45:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 38047 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2000 01:45:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 15 Dec 2000 01:45:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ashd1-1.relay.mail.uu.net) (199.171.54.245) by mta1 with SMTP; 15 Dec 2000 01:45:46 -0000 Received: from mother.thoughtworks.com by mr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mother.thoughtworks.com [204.178.39.204]) id QQjtpn29894 for ; Fri, 15 Dec 2000 01:45:58 GMT Subject: Re: [n_omic] Call for Comments: Potential Proposal To: n_omic@egroups.com X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.5 September 22, 2000 Message-ID: Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 17:45:42 -0800 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on Mother/ThoughtWorks.COM/US(Release 5.0.5 |September 22, 2000) at 12/14/2000 07:51:26 PM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: JJWeston@T... Interesting proposal. The main technical problem with the proposal is that it clearly consists of several rule changes compounded. It looks like you were aware of this yourself since you split it into three articles... I would suggest that each article is a proposal in and of itself, and as such I would recommend proposing each article seperately. I will comment on the articles as if they are seperate proposals. -- Feyd wrote: Article 1: In all rules following this, and in all Articles following this Article, the symbol "[[" will be used to start comments and the symbol "]]" will be used to end comments. Text with comments has no affect on a rule, and is used purely for example and clarification. -- I respond: Why limit it to just rules following this one? Seems a little wordy. Why are you using double square brackets to start and end comments? I might recommend something along these lines: Rules can contain comments. Comments start with the '[' character, and end with the ']' character. Comments have no effect on a rule and are used purely for example and clarification. -- Feyd wrote: Article 2: A. The "Game State" is defined as all information necessary and pertinent to administration of this game as it exists at that moment. A Game State always exists. This information is as follows: [SNIP] B. The Game State may be altered by a new rule without explicating amending this Article [[Article 2. This is so that if a "Widget" is added to the game state it can be added without having to amend here.]]. -- I respond: Not sure what to think about this one... The rules already imply that this information is already kept. I feel its dangerous to make the ruleset part of the gamestate, since whoever maintains the gamestate could be given some control over the rules. It would be nice to have a method to officially track current players and their respective stats however. I'm curious what others think. -- Feyd wrote: Article 3: A. A position named "Honorable Administrator to the Masses" (also referred to as the "HAM") is hereby created. The HAM has the following duties: [SNIP] -- I respond: You put a lot of effort into defining how HAMs get elected, pass on their post, etc... Its possible that future offices may be created (article 2 implies it), and it would be nice to have a general rule describing how offices in general can be handled. Then more specific rules can be enacted to create specific offices and the roles involved with them. The HAM sure gets a lot of points... ;-) I have a small problem with the time the points get earned. You didn't specify a timezone. Since not every player lives in the same timezone, you'll need to specify a timezone with any time you give, so that everyone can know "exactly" what time you are talking about. I would encourage everyone to use the same timezone (perhaps GMT?) when placing times into the ruleset to avoid timezone confusion... Some interesting ideas you have there. I look forward to seeing how they work out. - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@t... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/pgp-key.asc - - - From Nomic1@a... Thu Dec 14 20:36:06 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 15 Dec 2000 04:36:06 -0000 Received: (qmail 47591 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2000 04:36:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 15 Dec 2000 04:36:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO fk.egroups.com) (10.1.10.47) by mta2 with SMTP; 15 Dec 2000 04:36:05 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.10.98] by fk.egroups.com with NNFMP; 15 Dec 2000 04:36:05 -0000 Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2000 04:35:11 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: Call for Comments: Potential Proposal Message-ID: <91c71v+2a29@e...> In-Reply-To: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 4296 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 24.4.252.248 From: "Feyd " --- In n_omic@egroups.com, JJWeston@T... wrote: >Interesting proposal. The main technical problem with the proposal is >that it clearly consists of several rule changes compounded. Nope. It is several *NEW* rules combined. Nothing in the proposal amends any rules. If you look through the rule set there are several example of rules with multiple clauses. The only difference is that the clauses below are more disjointed, and longer . I don't think that is forbidden by 103, which only denotes how rule-CHANGES work, not how NEW rules are composed. > you were aware of this yourself since you split it into three >articles... I would suggest that each article is a proposal in and >of itself, and as such If I haven't convinced you, then I will do that. Uninamity is a tough nut to crack, which is why I'm asking for Comments first. ;-) > -- Feyd wrote: > Article 1: > In all rules following this, and in all Articles following this > Article, the symbol "[[" will be used to start comments and the > symbol "]]" will be used to end comments. Text with comments has no > affect on a rule, and is used purely for example and clarification. > -- I respond: > >Why limit it to just rules following this one? Seems a little wordy. >Why are you using double square brackets to start and end comments? ------------ Feyd responds... If it affects THIS Article then the text between the [[ and ]] become comments and the rule becomes ..."following this Article, the symbol "" will be used to end comements." once the rule goes into effect. I can tighten it to say, "in all rules following this", but then I can't use comments in Articles II. or III. The reason I used [[ and ]] is that is seems to be a standard in the Nomics I have looked at, much like using e, em, eir is. > > -- Feyd wrote: > Article 2: > A. The "Game State" is defined as all information necessary and > pertinent to administration of this game as it exists at that > moment. A Game State always exists. This information is as follows: > [SNIP] > > B. The Game State may be altered by a new rule without explicating > amending this Article [[Article 2. This is so that if a "Widget" is > added to the game state it can be added without having to amend > here.]]. > -- I respond: > >Not sure what to think about this one... The rules already imply that >this information is already kept. I feel its dangerous to make the >ruleset part of the gamestate, since whoever maintains the gamestate >could be given some control over the rules. Oof. Good point. I will remove ruleset from the gamestate. Was the rest of the gamestate ok? > -- Feyd wrote: > Article 3: > A. A position named "Honorable Administrator to the Masses" (also > referred to as the "HAM") is hereby created. The HAM has the > following duties: > [SNIP] > -- I respond: > >You put a lot of effort into defining how HAMs get elected, pass on >their post, etc... Its possible that future offices may be created >(article 2 implies it), and it would be nice to have a general rule >describing how offices in general can be handled. Then more specific >rules can be enactedto create specific offices and the roles >involved with them. ---------- I reply ------------------ Future rules creating officers can invoke this Rule in terms of how players are elected (i.e. "The Foo-Officer is electes as per Rule 306."). I didn't want to limit how different officers were elected (for example, the "Tedious Rule Monger" Officer might automatically pass to the person who last mentions a rule by number. If I set rules on how officers are elected, then a new rule would have to first ammend 306 before proposing a new officer. >The HAM sure gets a lot of points... ;-) I have a small problem with > the time the points get earned. You didn't specify a timezone. I will specify a timezone. I purposefully gave too many points in order to force discussion and an amendment. It worked LOL. Besides, as the author pointed out, "I made the point system boring so it would be quickly changed." If someone will suggest an amendment I will incorporate it. Thanks to those who have commented! I plan to leave the comment period open until around 5:00 CST tomorrow, and then make a proposal. Feyd From jjweston@p... Fri Dec 15 00:25:22 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@p... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 15 Dec 2000 08:25:22 -0000 Received: (qmail 60807 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2000 08:25:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 15 Dec 2000 08:25:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net) (192.48.96.19) by mta2 with SMTP; 15 Dec 2000 08:25:21 -0000 Received: from picard by wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net with SMTP (peer crosschecked as: [63.84.211.245]) id QQjtqn11242 for ; Fri, 15 Dec 2000 08:25:20 GMT Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20001215002508.01672a38@m...> X-Sender: mail198193@m... X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2000 00:25:08 -0800 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Re: Call for Comments: Potential Proposal In-Reply-To: <91c71v+2a29@e...> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" From: Jeff Weston At 04:35 AM 12/15/2000 -0000, Feyd wrote: >--- In n_omic@egroups.com, JJWeston@T... wrote: >>Interesting proposal. The main technical problem with the proposal is >>that it clearly consists of several rule changes compounded. > >Nope. It is several *NEW* rules combined. Nothing in the proposal >amends any rules. If you look through the rule set >there are several example of rules with multiple clauses. The only >difference is that the clauses below are more disjointed, and longer >. I don't think that is forbidden by 103, which only denotes how >rule-CHANGES work, not how NEW rules are composed. Take a look at the definition of a rule change in rule 103. You said yourself that your proposed proposal is "several *NEW* rules combined." >From 103, one possible rule change is the enactment of a mutable rule. I would argue that this is indeed several rule changes rolled into one. However, having said that, there is nothing in the rules that says this is *illegal*. Rule 111 only mentions two or more rule changes compounded as a basis for suggesting amendments or arguing against the proposal before voting starts. You are more than welcome to make your proposal, and have us vote on it, as is. I have an even better argument against making such a compounded new rule. Once those three totally unrelated things are combined into one rule, it becomes fairly difficult to split them apart and deal with them seperately. An example: Assume your proposal passes as posted. Lets say we really like the "comments" clause and we want to make it immutable. However, we don't want the "gamestate" and "HAM" clauses to be immutable as well. In order to seperate out the "comments" clause, we'd have to make a new rule that contains *just* the comments clause. We'd also have to ammend the old rule to remove the comments clause. The order of those two changes is problematic either way. If we make the new rule first, we have two rules covering the same topic and conflicting with each other. If we remove the "comments" clause from the old rule first, we lose an integral part of the ruleset while waiting for it to be added back. Possibly a third rule change could be used to smooth the transition, but I'm not certain how. And don't forget the "transmute" rule change, which is what we wanted to do in the first place. You have 3, possibly 4 rule changes required for this one simple change. I truly believe that rules should focus on just one thing. I feel it will make things easier in the long run. My voting will reflect that opinion. - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@p... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/personal-key.asc - - - From jjweston@p... Fri Dec 15 00:29:57 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@p... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 15 Dec 2000 08:29:56 -0000 Received: (qmail 69369 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2000 08:29:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 15 Dec 2000 08:29:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net) (192.48.96.19) by mta1 with SMTP; 15 Dec 2000 08:29:56 -0000 Received: from picard by wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net with SMTP (peer crosschecked as: [63.84.211.245]) id QQjtqn15980 for ; Fri, 15 Dec 2000 08:29:55 GMT Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20001215002947.01672a38@m...> X-Sender: mail198193@m... X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2000 00:29:47 -0800 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Re: Call for Comments: Potential Proposal In-Reply-To: <91c71v+2a29@e...> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" From: Jeff Weston At 04:35 AM 12/15/2000 -0000, Feyd wrote: >>Why limit it to just rules following this one? Seems a little wordy. >>Why are you using double square brackets to start and end comments? > >------------ Feyd responds... >If it affects THIS Article then the text between the [[ and ]] become >comments and the rule becomes ..."following this Article, the >symbol "" will be used to end comements." once the rule goes into >effect. I can tighten it to say, "in all rules following this", but >then I can't use comments in Articles II. or III. I sense the tedious rule mongering aspect coming up again... I do see your point. To be truly technically correct, I would spell out the comment characters as such: A comment starts with a left square bracket and ends with a right square bracket. However, one could argue that by surrounding the [ or ] in quotes would indicate you are referring to the actual character, and not trying to start a comment. But I digress. Do what you feel is best and we will vote appropriately. - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@p... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/personal-key.asc - - - From Nomic1@a... Fri Dec 15 06:23:32 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 15 Dec 2000 14:23:31 -0000 Received: (qmail 79678 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2000 14:23:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 15 Dec 2000 14:23:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mw.egroups.com) (10.1.2.2) by mta2 with SMTP; 15 Dec 2000 14:23:31 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.2.211] by mw.egroups.com with NNFMP; 15 Dec 2000 14:23:31 -0000 Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2000 14:23:25 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Back to TRM -- Brief comment Message-ID: <91d9gt+nvvc@e...> In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20001215002947.01672a38@m...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 684 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 208.249.92.139 From: "Feyd " >I sense the tedious rule mongering aspect coming up again... I do >see your point. To be truly technically correct, I would spell out >the comment characters as such. One quick comment on "Tedious Rule Mongering" -- which I freely admit is a term that I coined. I'm not sure that's a bad thing (obviously not, or I wouldn't have called myself that even in jest). Rules are important. In a game of making rules, it because even more important that these rules are clear and accurate, and given to only a single interpretation by reasonable persons in both letter and intent. Just look at the recent US election to see what happens when rules are not crystal clear. ;-). From rsholmes@m... Fri Dec 15 08:24:50 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 15 Dec 2000 16:24:50 -0000 Received: (qmail 47779 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2000 16:24:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 15 Dec 2000 16:24:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta2 with SMTP; 15 Dec 2000 16:24:49 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.008280F0@m...>; Fri, 15 Dec 2000 11:24:49 -0500 Received: (from rsholmes@l...) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id LAA20660; Fri, 15 Dec 2000 11:24:48 -0500 (EST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Back to TRM -- Brief comment References: <91d9gt+nvvc@e...> Date: 15 Dec 2000 11:24:48 -0500 In-Reply-To: "Feyd "'s message of "Fri, 15 Dec 2000 14:23:25 -0000" Message-ID: Lines: 8 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... "Feyd " writes: > Just look at the recent US election Must we? ;-) -- Doctroid From rsholmes@m... Fri Dec 15 08:32:14 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 15 Dec 2000 16:32:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 70612 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2000 16:32:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 15 Dec 2000 16:32:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta1 with SMTP; 15 Dec 2000 16:32:13 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.00828193@m...>; Fri, 15 Dec 2000 11:32:13 -0500 Received: (from rsholmes@l...) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id LAA22148; Fri, 15 Dec 2000 11:32:12 -0500 (EST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Call for Comments: Potential Proposal References: Date: 15 Dec 2000 11:32:12 -0500 In-Reply-To: JJWeston@T...'s message of "Thu, 14 Dec 2000 17:45:42 -0800" Message-ID: Lines: 29 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... JJWeston@T... writes: > Why limit it to just rules following this one? Seems a little wordy. > Why are you using double square brackets to start and end comments? I might > recommend something along these lines: Some TRM here: the phrase "all rules following this" is ambiguous; it could mean "all rules enacted after this one" or "all rules with a higher rule number than this one". I *think* the current ruleset makes these two concepts synonymous, but that could in theory change. Anyway, as Mr Weston says, it could be more neatly applied to all rules (if, as someone else pointed out, you spell out the delimiter characters instead of using them). > The HAM sure gets a lot of points... It seems to me the point system is another place where the Suber rules reflect a bias toward in-person play. With the time involved in setting up and running an online Nomic, and no artificial deadlines like "we have to finish playing by midnight", even the 200 points for email play seems to threaten cutting the game short just as it gets interesting. Personally I think a typical online Nomic is better if it's open-ended, with no termination condition other than, perhaps, unanimous consent to shut down. In this game as in so many others but more so, winning isn't the point; playing is. -- Doctroid From Nomic1@a... Fri Dec 15 09:15:40 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 15 Dec 2000 17:15:40 -0000 Received: (qmail 74294 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2000 17:15:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 15 Dec 2000 17:15:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hi.egroups.com) (10.1.10.41) by mta1 with SMTP; 15 Dec 2000 17:15:39 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.10.124] by hi.egroups.com with NNFMP; 15 Dec 2000 17:15:39 -0000 Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2000 17:15:35 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Points.. Message-ID: <91djjn+u8ip@e...> In-Reply-To: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 1018 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 208.249.92.138 From: "Feyd " >> The HAM sure gets a lot of points... >It seems to me the point system is another place where the Suber rules >reflect a bias toward in-person play. With the time involved in >setting up and running an online Nomic, and no artificial deadlines >like "we have to finish playing by midnight", even the 200 points for >email play seems to threaten cutting the game short just as it gets >interesting. Personally I think a typical online Nomic is better if >it's open-ended, with no termination condition other than, perhaps, >unanimous consent to shut down. In this game as in so many others but >more so, winning isn't the point; playing is. Personally, I don't see the point system staying around much longer. There are too many ways to change it by amending mutable rules, or simply proposing new ones. This includes: The concept of a RESET, that says if someone wins you just reset points, make the last winner then HAM, and keep going. Making the points needed to win 2**32 or such. etc. etc. From rsholmes@m... Fri Dec 15 09:20:18 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 15 Dec 2000 17:20:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 21461 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2000 17:20:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 15 Dec 2000 17:20:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta3 with SMTP; 15 Dec 2000 18:21:23 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.008287A0@m...>; Fri, 15 Dec 2000 12:20:18 -0500 Received: (from rsholmes@l...) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id MAA05232; Fri, 15 Dec 2000 12:20:16 -0500 (EST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Re: Call for Comments: Potential Proposal References: <3.0.6.32.20001215002508.01672a38@m...> Date: 15 Dec 2000 12:20:16 -0500 In-Reply-To: Jeff Weston's message of "Fri, 15 Dec 2000 00:25:08 -0800" Message-ID: Lines: 36 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... Jeff Weston writes: > Take a look at the definition of a rule change in rule 103. You said > yourself that your proposed proposal is "several *NEW* rules combined." > From 103, one possible rule change is the enactment of a mutable rule. I > would argue that this is indeed several rule changes rolled into one. I'm not a big fan of Rule 103's absolute prohibition on combining rule changes into one proposal. One finds e.g. cases in which similar language is used in several rules, and if that language ends up needing to be changed, I see no reason not to allow a proposal to change it whereever it occurs. But Jeff's point: > I have an even better argument against making such a compounded new rule. > Once those three totally unrelated things are combined into one rule, it > becomes fairly difficult to split them apart and deal with them seperately. [...] > I truly believe that rules should focus on just one thing. I feel it will > make things easier in the long run. My voting will reflect that opinion. is well taken. The "Potential Proposal" tries to do too many disparate things. Hmm, if this were an in-person game, all this "potential proposal" discussion would be illegal under Suber's ruleset. Presumably it's legal in email games only because there's no way to enforce such a provision. The intent seems to be that you don't get a non-binding vote before deciding whether to ask for a binding (and point-scoring) vote. Not that I actually have a problem with such discussion -- just pointing out it appears to be contrary to the intent of Suber's ruleset, while not actually being illegal. -- Doctroid From Nomic1@a... Fri Dec 15 09:27:34 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 15 Dec 2000 17:27:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 47272 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2000 17:26:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 15 Dec 2000 17:26:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO c9.egroups.com) (10.1.2.66) by mta1 with SMTP; 15 Dec 2000 17:26:59 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.10.99] by c9.egroups.com with NNFMP; 15 Dec 2000 17:26:56 -0000 Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2000 17:25:41 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Proposal 306: Definition of Comments Message-ID: <91dk6l+8aa2@e...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 616 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 208.249.92.139 From: "Feyd " Hey guys, I decided that I was being way to ambitions with my previous suggestions. This is my first rule, I thought I had better simplify. I'll try to be more grandious next time ;-) ---------------------Begin Proposal Text------------------------- Proposal 306: Comment The symbol "[[" will be used to start comments and the symbol "]]" will be used to end comments. Text within comments has no affect on a rule, and is used purely for example and clarification of intent. In this proposal the comment symbols do NOT denote comments. -------------------- End Proposal Text ------------------------- From rsholmes@m... Fri Dec 15 09:38:10 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 15 Dec 2000 17:38:09 -0000 Received: (qmail 79272 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2000 17:38:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 15 Dec 2000 17:38:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta3 with SMTP; 15 Dec 2000 18:39:14 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.00828919@m...>; Fri, 15 Dec 2000 12:38:08 -0500 Received: (from rsholmes@l...) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id MAA09379; Fri, 15 Dec 2000 12:38:08 -0500 (EST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: VOTE FOR [n_omic] Proposal 306: Definition of Comments References: <91dk6l+8aa2@e...> Date: 15 Dec 2000 12:38:07 -0500 In-Reply-To: "Feyd "'s message of "Fri, 15 Dec 2000 17:25:41 -0000" Message-ID: Lines: 5 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... ... provided, of course, one corrects it by replacing "affect" with "effect"! -- Doctroid From JJWeston@T... Fri Dec 15 09:55:48 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: JJWeston@T... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 15 Dec 2000 17:55:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 33120 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2000 17:55:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 15 Dec 2000 17:55:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO sjc3-1.relay.mail.uu.net) (199.171.54.122) by mta3 with SMTP; 15 Dec 2000 18:56:53 -0000 Received: from mother.thoughtworks.com by sjc3sosrv11.alter.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mother.thoughtworks.com [204.178.39.204]) id QQjtrz10075 for ; Fri, 15 Dec 2000 17:55:47 GMT Subject: Re: [n_omic] Call for Comments: Potential Proposal To: n_omic@egroups.com X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.5 September 22, 2000 Message-ID: Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2000 09:55:44 -0800 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on Mother/ThoughtWorks.COM/US(Release 5.0.5 |September 22, 2000) at 12/15/2000 12:01:30 PM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: JJWeston@T... I agree! Anyone for transmuting rule 112? - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@t... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/pgp-key.asc - - - Doctroid wrote: It seems to me the point system is another place where the Suber rules reflect a bias toward in-person play. With the time involved in setting up and running an online Nomic, and no artificial deadlines like "we have to finish playing by midnight", even the 200 points for email play seems to threaten cutting the game short just as it gets interesting. Personally I think a typical online Nomic is better if it's open-ended, with no termination condition other than, perhaps, unanimous consent to shut down. In this game as in so many others but more so, winning isn't the point; playing is. From JJWeston@T... Fri Dec 15 10:01:41 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: JJWeston@T... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 15 Dec 2000 18:01:40 -0000 Received: (qmail 28515 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2000 18:01:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 15 Dec 2000 18:01:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net) (198.5.241.86) by mta3 with SMTP; 15 Dec 2000 19:02:44 -0000 Received: from mother.thoughtworks.com by mr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mother.thoughtworks.com [204.178.39.204]) id QQjtsa17548 for ; Fri, 15 Dec 2000 18:01:24 GMT Subject: Re: [n_omic] Proposal 306: Definition of Comments To: n_omic@egroups.com X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.5 September 22, 2000 Message-ID: Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2000 10:01:35 -0800 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on Mother/ThoughtWorks.COM/US(Release 5.0.5 |September 22, 2000) at 12/15/2000 12:07:21 PM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: JJWeston@T... Arguing that the misused word "affect" could make the rule unclear, under rule 111 I suggest ammending the proposal to replace "affect" with "effect". - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@t... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/pgp-key.asc - - - Feyd wrote: Proposal 306: Comment The symbol "[[" will be used to start comments and the symbol "]]" will be used to end comments. Text within comments has no affect on a rule, and is used purely for example and clarification of intent. In this proposal the comment symbols do NOT denote comments. From JJWeston@T... Fri Dec 15 10:09:30 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: JJWeston@T... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 15 Dec 2000 18:09:30 -0000 Received: (qmail 52608 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2000 18:09:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 15 Dec 2000 18:09:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dfw7-1.relay.mail.uu.net) (199.171.54.106) by mta3 with SMTP; 15 Dec 2000 19:10:35 -0000 Received: from mother.thoughtworks.com by dfw7sosrv11.alter.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mother.thoughtworks.com [204.178.39.204]) id QQjtsa06009 for ; Fri, 15 Dec 2000 18:09:29 GMT Subject: Re: [n_omic] Proposal 306: Definition of Comments To: n_omic@egroups.com X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.5 September 22, 2000 Message-ID: Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2000 10:09:26 -0800 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on Mother/ThoughtWorks.COM/US(Release 5.0.5 |September 22, 2000) at 12/15/2000 12:15:12 PM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: JJWeston@T... Another suggested ammendment... Take the word "proposal" from the second paragraph and replace it with "rule". If the proposal passes, it becomes a rule and the second paragraph would make no sense. - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@t... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/pgp-key.asc - - - Feyd wrote: [SNIP] In this proposal the comment symbols do NOT denote comments. From Nomic1@a... Fri Dec 15 11:04:07 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 15 Dec 2000 19:04:06 -0000 Received: (qmail 40350 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2000 19:04:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 15 Dec 2000 19:04:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ch.egroups.com) (10.1.10.51) by mta1 with SMTP; 15 Dec 2000 19:04:06 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.10.33] by ch.egroups.com with NNFMP; 15 Dec 2000 19:04:04 -0000 Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2000 19:03:59 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: Proposal 306: Definition of Comments Message-ID: <91dpuv+mhgi@e...> In-Reply-To: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 643 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 208.249.92.137 From: "Feyd " > Another suggested ammendment... Take the word "proposal" from the > second paragraph and replace it with "rule". If the proposal passes, it > becomes a rule and the second paragraph would make no sense. I agree to both these ammendments. I do not understand procedure under current ruleset. Amendment: Change "affect" to "effect" Amendment: Chage "Proposal" in second paragraph to "Rule". Are these added to the proposal, or is the proposal just changed now and vote begins anew? Obviously Doctroid's vote on the original proposal is void. If there is no established procedure, do we wing it until a rule is proposed? Feyd From rsholmes@m... Fri Dec 15 11:21:34 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 15 Dec 2000 19:21:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 68002 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2000 19:21:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 15 Dec 2000 19:21:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta1 with SMTP; 15 Dec 2000 19:21:33 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.008292C7@m...>; Fri, 15 Dec 2000 14:21:33 -0500 Received: (from rsholmes@l...) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id OAA28949; Fri, 15 Dec 2000 14:21:32 -0500 (EST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: VOTE FOR amended [n_omic] Re: Proposal 306: Definition of Comments References: <91dpuv+mhgi@e...> Date: 15 Dec 2000 14:21:32 -0500 In-Reply-To: "Feyd "'s message of "Fri, 15 Dec 2000 19:03:59 -0000" Message-ID: Lines: 23 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... "Feyd " writes: > > Another suggested ammendment... Take the word "proposal" from > the > > second paragraph and replace it with "rule". If the proposal > passes, it > > becomes a rule and the second paragraph would make no sense. > > I agree to both these ammendments. I do not understand procedure > under current ruleset. > Amendment: Change "affect" to "effect" > Amendment: Chage "Proposal" in second paragraph to "Rule". > > Are these added to the proposal, or is the proposal just changed now > and vote begins anew? > > Obviously Doctroid's vote on the original proposal is void. If there > is no established procedure, do we wing it until a rule is proposed? I vote FOR the proposal as amended. -- Doctroid From JJWeston@T... Fri Dec 15 11:23:26 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: JJWeston@T... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 15 Dec 2000 19:23:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 91428 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2000 19:23:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 15 Dec 2000 19:23:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net) (198.5.241.86) by mta1 with SMTP; 15 Dec 2000 19:23:25 -0000 Received: from mother.thoughtworks.com by mr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mother.thoughtworks.com [204.178.39.204]) id QQjtsf04773 for ; Fri, 15 Dec 2000 19:23:10 GMT Subject: Re: [n_omic] Re: Proposal 306: Definition of Comments To: n_omic@egroups.com X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.5 September 22, 2000 Message-ID: Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2000 11:23:22 -0800 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on Mother/ThoughtWorks.COM/US(Release 5.0.5 |September 22, 2000) at 12/15/2000 01:29:07 PM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: JJWeston@T... Good questions... For guidance, I'll bring up the pertinent portion of rule 111: "The proponent decides the final form in which the proposal is to be voted on and, unless the Judge has been asked to do so, also decides the time to end debate and vote." You decide the final form for the proposal we are to vote on. This can easily be handled by posting a new proposal 306 that contains the amendments you accept. You also decide when to end debate and vote. Perhaps when you post the new proposal, you can also declare the debate has ended. Since the proposal will show up in a new form, I would argue that the votes start off with a clean slate and everyone would have to cast a vote for the amended proposal. If you still feel there is ambiguity for how to handle this situation, you can examine the message archive for how the same procedure was used for proposal 303. If this still doesn't make it clear to you, invoke judgement. I see no reason for us to "wing it until a rule is proposed." - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@t... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/pgp-key.asc - - - Feyd wrote: I agree to both these ammendments. I do not understand procedure under current ruleset. Amendment: Change "affect" to "effect" Amendment: Chage "Proposal" in second paragraph to "Rule". Are these added to the proposal, or is the proposal just changed now and vote begins anew? Obviously Doctroid's vote on the original proposal is void. If there is no established procedure, do we wing it until a rule is proposed? From Nomic1@a... Fri Dec 15 12:31:45 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 15 Dec 2000 20:31:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 52978 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2000 20:31:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 15 Dec 2000 20:31:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hm.egroups.com) (10.1.10.45) by mta2 with SMTP; 15 Dec 2000 20:31:41 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.2.133] by hm.egroups.com with NNFMP; 15 Dec 2000 20:31:40 -0000 Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2000 20:31:34 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Proposal: Amended 306a Message-ID: <91dv36+jm97@e...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 691 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 208.249.92.139 From: "Feyd " To help differentiate between Proposal 306 and the amended proposal, I am calling this 306a. This will still become rule 306 as one would expect, it is just for easy of reference. I also hereby end all discussion on this rule. The official voting period starts now. --------------------Begin Proposal Text------------------------- Proposal 306a: Comment The symbol "[[" will be used to start comments and the symbol "]]" will be used to end comments. Text within comments has no effect on a rule, and is used purely for example and clarification of intent. In this rule the comment symbols do NOT denote comments. -------------------- End Proposal Text ------------------------- From JJWeston@T... Fri Dec 15 13:09:15 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: JJWeston@T... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 15 Dec 2000 21:09:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 1478 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2000 21:09:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 15 Dec 2000 21:09:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO chi6-1.relay.mail.uu.net) (199.171.54.98) by mta3 with SMTP; 15 Dec 2000 22:10:19 -0000 Received: from mother.thoughtworks.com by chi6sosrv11.alter.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mother.thoughtworks.com [204.178.39.204]) id QQjtsm04285 for ; Fri, 15 Dec 2000 21:09:13 GMT Subject: vote FOR ammended proposal 306a To: n_omic@egroups.com X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.5 September 22, 2000 Message-ID: Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2000 13:09:09 -0800 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on Mother/ThoughtWorks.COM/US(Release 5.0.5 |September 22, 2000) at 12/15/2000 03:14:56 PM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: JJWeston@T... - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@t... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/pgp-key.asc - - - From Sxejmaso@a... Sat Dec 16 13:49:28 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Sxejmaso@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 16 Dec 2000 21:49:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 87377 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2000 21:49:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 16 Dec 2000 21:49:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO jk.egroups.com) (10.1.10.92) by mta2 with SMTP; 16 Dec 2000 21:49:26 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Sxejmaso@a... Received: from [10.1.2.209] by jk.egroups.com with NNFMP; 16 Dec 2000 21:49:26 -0000 Date: Sat, 16 Dec 2000 21:49:25 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Vote FOR---Proposal: Amended 306a Message-ID: <91go15+niq2@e...> In-Reply-To: <91dv36+jm97@e...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 439 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 152.163.207.49 From: "Jon A Grimm" > > --------------------Begin Proposal Text------------------------- > Proposal 306a: Comment > The symbol "[[" will be used to start comments and the symbol "]]" > will be used to end comments. Text within comments has no effect on > a rule, and is used purely for example and clarification of intent. > > In this rule the comment symbols do NOT denote comments. > > -------------------- End Proposal Text ------------------------- From jjweston@p... Sun Dec 17 12:24:33 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@p... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 17 Dec 2000 20:24:32 -0000 Received: (qmail 30535 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2000 20:24:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 17 Dec 2000 20:24:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net) (192.48.96.19) by mta3 with SMTP; 17 Dec 2000 21:25:37 -0000 Received: from picard by wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net with SMTP (peer crosschecked as: [63.84.211.245]) id QQjtzt24578 for ; Sun, 17 Dec 2000 20:24:31 GMT Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20001217122422.010f6bc0@m...> X-Sender: mail198193@m... X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Sun, 17 Dec 2000 12:24:22 -0800 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Kevan: You have 24 hours to vote on proposal 306. Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" From: Jeff Weston Kevan, Still waiting for your vote on the amended proposal 306. You have 24 hours to vote before you become a Reyalp. - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@p... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/personal-key.asc - - - From kevan@s... Sun Dec 17 12:39:06 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: kevan@s... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 17 Dec 2000 20:39:06 -0000 Received: (qmail 72445 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2000 20:39:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 17 Dec 2000 20:39:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mv.egroups.com) (10.1.1.41) by mta2 with SMTP; 17 Dec 2000 20:39:05 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: kevan@s... Received: from [10.1.2.110] by mv.egroups.com with NNFMP; 17 Dec 2000 20:38:39 -0000 Date: Sun, 17 Dec 2000 20:34:58 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: Vote FOR 306, and Yalpery Message-ID: <91j81i+ukj0@e...> In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20001217122422.010f6bc0@m...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 438 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 212.188.135.49 From: "Kevan " > Still waiting for your vote on the amended proposal 306. You have 24 hours > to vote before you become a Reyalp. I vote FOR Proposal 306 and declare my intention to become a Reyalp. Too much traffic when I'm asleep or elsewhere, and too little time to keep myself up to the Nomic's rather drawn-out speed, I'm afraid. All the best with the rest of it. Kevan -- http://uncertain.org/~kevan "Don't try to wake me in the morning." From jjweston@p... Sun Dec 17 12:45:01 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@p... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 17 Dec 2000 20:45:01 -0000 Received: (qmail 81934 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2000 20:45:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 17 Dec 2000 20:45:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net) (192.48.96.19) by mta2 with SMTP; 17 Dec 2000 20:45:01 -0000 Received: from picard by wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net with SMTP (peer crosschecked as: [63.84.211.245]) id QQjtzu15545 for ; Sun, 17 Dec 2000 20:44:59 GMT Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20001217124451.010f6bc0@m...> X-Sender: mail198193@m... X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Sun, 17 Dec 2000 12:44:51 -0800 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Proposal 306 passes! Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" From: Jeff Weston With 5 votes for and 0 votes against, proposal 306 passes! Feyd gets 15 points for receiving 100% favorable votes. Per his request, Kevan is now a Reyalp. He loses 10 points for doing so. He will remain in that status until January 7th, 2001, since no date was specified for him leaving Reyalp status. Play now continues with Jon Grimm. The web site will be updated with the latest rule change soon. - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@p... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/personal-key.asc - - - From joejava@d... Sun Dec 17 14:45:59 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: joejava@d... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 17 Dec 2000 22:45:59 -0000 Received: (qmail 83662 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2000 22:45:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 17 Dec 2000 22:45:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail2.bna.bellsouth.net) (205.152.150.14) by mta1 with SMTP; 17 Dec 2000 22:45:58 -0000 Received: from ceo (host-216-76-128-95.rdu.bellsouth.net [216.76.128.95]) by mail2.bna.bellsouth.net (3.3.5alt/0.75.2) with ESMTP id RAA00238 for ; Sun, 17 Dec 2000 17:45:55 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <007901c06c67$fe245880$5f804cd8@c...> To: Subject: New Player Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2000 17:39:05 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 From: "Joel Ricker" Greetings fellow n_omicans, I'm looking to get started. Where are the rules? I can find the initial state and the current rules on eGroups. Hopefully it's also mirrored somehwere other than eGroups as that sites has been slower than death lately. ready to roll Joel From jjweston@p... Sun Dec 17 16:12:53 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@p... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 18 Dec 2000 00:12:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 44870 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2000 00:12:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 18 Dec 2000 00:12:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net) (192.48.96.19) by mta1 with SMTP; 18 Dec 2000 00:12:51 -0000 Received: from picard by wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net with SMTP (peer crosschecked as: [63.84.211.245]) id QQjuai22807 for ; Mon, 18 Dec 2000 00:12:50 GMT Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20001217161241.01683ab0@m...> X-Sender: mail198193@m... X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Sun, 17 Dec 2000 16:12:41 -0800 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] New Player In-Reply-To: <007901c06c67$fe245880$5f804cd8@c...> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" From: Jeff Weston At 05:39 PM 12/22/2000 -0500, you wrote: >Greetings fellow n_omicans, > >I'm looking to get started. Where are the rules? I can find the initial >state and the current rules on eGroups. Hopefully it's also mirrored >somehwere other than eGroups as that sites has been slower than death >lately. > >ready to roll >Joel Hello Joel, Welcome to N_omic. I have a web-site with the up to date rules. Take a look: http://kenny.sir-toby.com/n_omic I'll go ahead and add you to the player roster right now. - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@p... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/personal-key.asc - - - From joejava@d... Sun Dec 17 16:28:39 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: joejava@d... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 18 Dec 2000 00:28:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 10076 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2000 00:28:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 18 Dec 2000 00:28:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail0.bna.bellsouth.net) (205.152.150.12) by mta1 with SMTP; 18 Dec 2000 00:28:38 -0000 Received: from ceo (host-216-76-128-172.rdu.bellsouth.net [216.76.128.172]) by mail0.bna.bellsouth.net (3.3.5alt/0.75.2) with ESMTP id TAA25349 for ; Sun, 17 Dec 2000 19:28:36 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <00b301c06c76$56ddefa0$ac804cd8@c...> To: Subject: Re: [n_omic] New Player Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2000 19:21:47 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 From: "Joel Ricker" > Welcome to N_omic. I have a web-site with the up to date rules. Take a look: > >http://kenny.sir-toby.com/n_omic > > I'll go ahead and add you to the player roster right now. Thanks. Guess I just have to relax and wait for my turn to come up. -J From Nomic1@a... Sun Dec 17 18:44:05 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 18 Dec 2000 02:44:05 -0000 Received: (qmail 10818 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2000 02:44:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 18 Dec 2000 02:44:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ei.egroups.com) (10.1.2.114) by mta3 with SMTP; 18 Dec 2000 03:45:10 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.2.240] by ei.egroups.com with NNFMP; 18 Dec 2000 02:44:05 -0000 Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2000 02:44:03 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: New Player Message-ID: <91jtlj+ph0g@e...> In-Reply-To: <00b301c06c76$56ddefa0$ac804cd8@c...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 172 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 24.4.252.249 From: "Feyd " > > Guess I just have to relax and wait for my turn to come up. Nah, I'm sure you can cause trouble in other ways besides taking your turn to propose rules Feyd From JJWeston@T... Mon Dec 18 10:48:31 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: JJWeston@T... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 18 Dec 2000 18:48:30 -0000 Received: (qmail 34428 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2000 18:48:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 18 Dec 2000 18:48:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ashd1-1.relay.mail.uu.net) (199.171.54.245) by mta2 with SMTP; 18 Dec 2000 18:48:30 -0000 Received: from mother.thoughtworks.com by mr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mother.thoughtworks.com [204.178.39.204]) id QQjudf05527 for ; Mon, 18 Dec 2000 18:48:43 GMT Subject: Jon Grimm, its your turn. To: n_omic@egroups.com X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.5 September 22, 2000 Message-ID: Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2000 10:48:27 -0800 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on Mother/ThoughtWorks.COM/US(Release 5.0.5 |September 22, 2000) at 12/18/2000 12:54:16 PM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: JJWeston@T... You have 50 hours left to make a proposal... Gee... Can anyone tell I'm anxious to keep this game moving? ;-) - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@t... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/pgp-key.asc - - - From Sxejmaso@a... Mon Dec 18 16:38:09 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Sxejmaso@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 19 Dec 2000 00:38:08 -0000 Received: (qmail 46592 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2000 00:38:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 19 Dec 2000 00:38:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-r18.mail.aol.com) (152.163.225.72) by mta1 with SMTP; 19 Dec 2000 00:38:08 -0000 Received: from Sxejmaso@a... by imo-r18.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v28.34.) id a.c6.ed2a90a (4003) for ; Mon, 18 Dec 2000 19:38:03 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2000 19:38:03 EST Subject: Re: [n_omic] Jon Grimm, its your turn. To: n_omic@egroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Windows AOL sub 110 From: Sxejmaso@a... Already?! OK- Proposal 30? ---begin--- All proposals must end with the phrase 'All Hail the mighty Jon!' ---end--- From JJWeston@T... Mon Dec 18 17:32:24 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: JJWeston@T... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 19 Dec 2000 01:32:24 -0000 Received: (qmail 46923 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2000 01:32:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 19 Dec 2000 01:32:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net) (198.5.241.86) by mta1 with SMTP; 19 Dec 2000 01:32:24 -0000 Received: from mother.thoughtworks.com by mr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mother.thoughtworks.com [204.178.39.204]) id QQjueg01270 for ; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 01:32:07 GMT Subject: Re: [n_omic] Jon Grimm, its your turn. To: n_omic@egroups.com X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.5 September 22, 2000 Message-ID: Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2000 17:20:52 -0800 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on Mother/ThoughtWorks.COM/US(Release 5.0.5 |September 22, 2000) at 12/18/2000 07:38:10 PM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: JJWeston@T... Yeah, Kevan asked to become a Reyalp, so your turn came up faster than normal. Your proposal number is 307. - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@t... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/pgp-key.asc - - - Jon Grimm wrote: Already?! OK- Proposal 30? ---begin--- All proposals must end with the phrase 'All Hail the mighty Jon!' ---end--- From Sxejmaso@a... Mon Dec 18 17:36:23 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Sxejmaso@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 19 Dec 2000 01:36:23 -0000 Received: (qmail 59488 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2000 01:36:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 19 Dec 2000 01:36:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-r12.mail.aol.com) (152.163.225.66) by mta1 with SMTP; 19 Dec 2000 01:36:22 -0000 Received: from Sxejmaso@a... by imo-r12.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v28.34.) id a.41.5120d25 (4003) for ; Mon, 18 Dec 2000 20:36:12 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <41.5120d25.2770158b@a...> Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2000 20:36:11 EST Subject: Re: [n_omic] Proposal 307 To: n_omic@egroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Windows AOL sub 110 From: Sxejmaso@a... I am majorly sick so I will keep this proposal short and sweet.... << ---begin--- All proposals must end with the phrase 'All Hail the mighty Jon!' ---end--- >> From Sxejmaso@a... Mon Dec 18 17:39:08 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Sxejmaso@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 19 Dec 2000 01:39:08 -0000 Received: (qmail 76682 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2000 01:39:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 19 Dec 2000 01:39:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-r02.mx.aol.com) (152.163.225.2) by mta3 with SMTP; 19 Dec 2000 02:40:13 -0000 Received: from Sxejmaso@a... by imo-r02.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v28.34.) id a.84.ee14ef8 (4003) for ; Mon, 18 Dec 2000 20:38:54 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <84.ee14ef8.2770162d@a...> Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2000 20:38:53 EST Subject: Re: [n_omic] Vote FOR: Proposal 307 To: n_omic@egroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Windows AOL sub 110 From: Sxejmaso@a... WORSHIP ME YE MORTALS! From rsholmes@m... Mon Dec 18 17:55:58 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 19 Dec 2000 01:55:57 -0000 Received: (qmail 21231 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2000 01:55:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 19 Dec 2000 01:55:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta1 with SMTP; 19 Dec 2000 01:55:27 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.0083799F@m...>; Mon, 18 Dec 2000 20:55:27 -0500 Received: (from rsholmes@l...) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id UAA16479; Mon, 18 Dec 2000 20:55:26 -0500 (EST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Proposal 307 References: <41.5120d25.2770158b@a...> Date: 18 Dec 2000 20:55:26 -0500 In-Reply-To: Sxejmaso@a...'s message of "Mon, 18 Dec 2000 20:36:11 EST" Message-ID: Lines: 17 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... Sxejmaso@a... writes: > I am majorly sick so I will keep this proposal short and sweet.... > > << ---begin--- > All proposals must end with the phrase 'All Hail the mighty Jon!' > > ---end--- >> I take it this is a proposed new rule, and not, say, a proposed amendment to an existing rule? I note that no mention is made of what happens if a proposal not ending with the prescribed phrase is submitted... -- Doctroid From joejava@d... Mon Dec 18 18:10:38 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: joejava@d... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 19 Dec 2000 02:10:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 57233 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2000 02:10:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 19 Dec 2000 02:10:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail0.bna.bellsouth.net) (205.152.150.12) by mta2 with SMTP; 19 Dec 2000 02:10:36 -0000 Received: from ceo (host-209-214-163-217.rdu.bellsouth.net [209.214.163.217]) by mail0.bna.bellsouth.net (3.3.5alt/0.75.2) with ESMTP id VAA09466 for ; Mon, 18 Dec 2000 21:10:35 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <00f201c06d4d$be719cc0$d9a3d6d1@c...> To: Subject: Re: [n_omic] Proposal 307 Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2000 21:03:41 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 From: "Joel Ricker" >I note that no mention is made of what happens if a proposal not >ending with the prescribed phrase is submitted... Typical nomic proposal, you can leave that up to further proposals. -J From joejava@d... Mon Dec 18 18:14:13 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: joejava@d... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 19 Dec 2000 02:14:13 -0000 Received: (qmail 52572 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2000 02:14:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 19 Dec 2000 02:14:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail1.bna.bellsouth.net) (205.152.150.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 19 Dec 2000 02:14:12 -0000 Received: from ceo (host-209-214-163-217.rdu.bellsouth.net [209.214.163.217]) by mail1.bna.bellsouth.net (3.3.5alt/0.75.2) with ESMTP id VAA14522 for ; Mon, 18 Dec 2000 21:14:11 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <00f901c06d4e$3f3ccdc0$d9a3d6d1@c...> To: Subject: Vote AGAINST: Proposal 307 Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2000 21:07:13 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 From: "Joel Ricker" That's my story and I'm sticking to it. -J From JJWeston@T... Mon Dec 18 18:22:40 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: JJWeston@T... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 19 Dec 2000 02:22:40 -0000 Received: (qmail 52850 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2000 02:22:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 19 Dec 2000 02:22:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net) (198.5.241.86) by mta2 with SMTP; 19 Dec 2000 02:22:39 -0000 Received: from mother.thoughtworks.com by mr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mother.thoughtworks.com [204.178.39.204]) id QQjuej00357 for ; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 02:22:23 GMT Subject: Vote AGAINST proposal 307 To: n_omic@egroups.com X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.5 September 22, 2000 Message-ID: Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2000 18:16:03 -0800 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on Mother/ThoughtWorks.COM/US(Release 5.0.5 |September 22, 2000) at 12/18/2000 08:28:26 PM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: JJWeston@T... - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@t... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/pgp-key.asc - - - From Nomic1@a... Tue Dec 19 06:57:31 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 19 Dec 2000 14:57:31 -0000 Received: (qmail 36616 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2000 14:57:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 19 Dec 2000 14:57:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO f19.egroups.com) (10.1.2.136) by mta2 with SMTP; 19 Dec 2000 14:57:31 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.10.66] by f19.egroups.com with NNFMP; 19 Dec 2000 14:57:31 -0000 Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2000 14:57:25 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: VOTE FOR: Proposal 307 (more inside) Message-ID: <91nt0l+2e22@e...> In-Reply-To: <41.5120d25.2770158b@a...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 363 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 208.249.92.139 From: "Feyd " --- In n_omic@egroups.com, Sxejmaso@a... wrote: > << ---begin--- > All proposals must end with the phrase 'All Hail the mighty Jon!' > ---end--- >> Note: I would not vote for this proposal if there were a chance of it passing. I like the approach very much, but feel it is just a tad to "JON" oriented. If you had suggested "FEYD", then maybe.... Feyd From Nomic1@a... Tue Dec 19 07:02:35 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 19 Dec 2000 15:02:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 31929 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2000 15:02:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 19 Dec 2000 15:02:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mw.egroups.com) (10.1.2.2) by mta1 with SMTP; 19 Dec 2000 15:02:32 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.2.99] by mw.egroups.com with NNFMP; 19 Dec 2000 15:02:32 -0000 Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2000 15:02:23 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Online Voting and Rule 204 Message-ID: <91nt9v+8en8@e...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 494 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 208.249.92.139 From: "Feyd " This rule states that: "If and when rule-changes can be adopted without unanimity, the players who vote against winning proposals shall receive 10 points each. " This really favors the last voter(s), as they can see that a rule will pass even if they vote NO. Doing so will give them an easy 10 point. This is ok for tabletop when you can write down your votes and then show them all at once. We don't have that available here. Any suggestions on a rule to fix this problem? Feyd From joejava@d... Tue Dec 19 08:06:07 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: joejava@d... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 19 Dec 2000 16:06:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 64513 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2000 16:06:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 19 Dec 2000 16:06:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail2.bna.bellsouth.net) (205.152.150.14) by mta2 with SMTP; 19 Dec 2000 16:06:06 -0000 Received: from ceo (host-209-214-162-204.rdu.bellsouth.net [209.214.162.204]) by mail2.bna.bellsouth.net (3.3.5alt/0.75.2) with ESMTP id LAA06320 for ; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 11:06:04 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <000c01c06dc2$75ab0880$cca2d6d1@c...> To: Subject: Re: [n_omic] Online Voting and Rule 204 Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2000 10:59:10 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 From: "Joel Ricker" >This really favors the last voter(s), as they can see that a rule >will pass even if they vote NO. Doing so will give them an easy 10 >point. This is ok for tabletop when you can write down your votes >and then show them all at once. We don't have that available here. > >Any suggestions on a rule to fix this problem? There are alot of rules that favor or assume tabletop play that should be struck from the rules. I have my next few proposals that will fix these things and bring it more into a more online version of nomic. Just out of curiosity, what's everyones experience with nomics? I've been a semi-active member of Ackanomic for a couple of years and ran and played in imperial nomics. What about everyone else? -J From joejava@d... Tue Dec 19 08:16:48 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: joejava@d... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 19 Dec 2000 16:16:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 70794 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2000 16:16:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 19 Dec 2000 16:16:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail0.bna.bellsouth.net) (205.152.150.12) by mta1 with SMTP; 19 Dec 2000 16:16:47 -0000 Received: from ceo (host-209-214-162-204.rdu.bellsouth.net [209.214.162.204]) by mail0.bna.bellsouth.net (3.3.5alt/0.75.2) with ESMTP id LAA20817 for ; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 11:16:46 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <001101c06dc3$f3c1f980$cca2d6d1@c...> To: Subject: Re: [n_omic] Online Voting and Rule 204 Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2000 11:09:52 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 From: "Joel Ricker" >>Any suggestions on a rule to fix this problem? One way that I just thought of would be to build a voting bot for receiving proposals, alerting the list of proposals and collecting the votes and tabulating them once the voting period has passed. I'll be hapy to provide resources for accomplishing this. -J From Nomic1@a... Tue Dec 19 09:49:20 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 19 Dec 2000 17:49:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 58213 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2000 17:49:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 19 Dec 2000 17:49:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO c9.egroups.com) (10.1.2.66) by mta1 with SMTP; 19 Dec 2000 17:49:19 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.1.38] by c9.egroups.com with NNFMP; 19 Dec 2000 17:49:19 -0000 Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2000 17:49:17 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: Online Voting and Rule 204 Message-ID: <91o72t+ak9u@e...> In-Reply-To: <001101c06dc3$f3c1f980$cca2d6d1@c...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 585 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 208.249.92.137 From: "Feyd " --- In n_omic@egroups.com, "Joel Ricker" wrote: > > >>Any suggestions on a rule to fix this problem? >One way that I just thought of would be to build a voting bot for receiving >proposals, alerting the list of proposals and collecting the votes and >tabulating them once the voting period has passed. I'll be hapy to provide >resources for accomplishing this. We could just as easily use the POLL mechanism, which is already in place. you can't put the TEXT of the rule there, but you can set then Proposal # to vote on, and can easily tabulate votes... Feyd From JJWeston@T... Tue Dec 19 10:21:04 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: JJWeston@T... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 19 Dec 2000 18:21:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 1570 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2000 18:21:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 19 Dec 2000 18:21:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO chi6-1.relay.mail.uu.net) (199.171.54.98) by mta3 with SMTP; 19 Dec 2000 19:22:09 -0000 Received: from mother.thoughtworks.com by chi6sosrv11.alter.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mother.thoughtworks.com [204.178.39.204]) id QQjugv00337 for ; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 18:21:03 GMT Subject: Re: [n_omic] Online Voting and Rule 204 To: n_omic@egroups.com X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.5 September 22, 2000 Message-ID: Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2000 10:21:00 -0800 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on Mother/ThoughtWorks.COM/US(Release 5.0.5 |September 22, 2000) at 12/19/2000 12:26:51 PM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: JJWeston@T... I suppose that's *one* way to solve the problem... I had thought about something along those lines, but abandoned that thinking in favor of a much simpler solution...just repealing rule 204. Of course, I really don't see anything wrong with 204. I kinda like the aspect of working the system to get points. ;-) But others may disagree... In reality, it looks like the whole point aspect of this game will go away pretty soon anyways. - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@t... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/pgp-key.asc - - - Joel Ricker wrote: >>Any suggestions on a rule to fix this problem? One way that I just thought of would be to build a voting bot for receiving proposals, alerting the list of proposals and collecting the votes and tabulating them once the voting period has passed. I'll be hapy to provide resources for accomplishing this. From JJWeston@T... Tue Dec 19 10:26:58 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: JJWeston@T... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 19 Dec 2000 18:26:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 83140 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2000 18:26:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 19 Dec 2000 18:26:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO sjc3-1.relay.mail.uu.net) (199.171.54.122) by mta1 with SMTP; 19 Dec 2000 18:26:52 -0000 Received: from mother.thoughtworks.com by sjc3sosrv11.alter.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mother.thoughtworks.com [204.178.39.204]) id QQjugv18926 for ; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 18:26:51 GMT Subject: Re: [n_omic] Re: Online Voting and Rule 204 To: n_omic@egroups.com X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.5 September 22, 2000 Message-ID: Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2000 10:26:47 -0800 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on Mother/ThoughtWorks.COM/US(Release 5.0.5 |September 22, 2000) at 12/19/2000 12:32:39 PM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: JJWeston@T... We had already discussed the polling mechanism... First of all, all moderators and whoever created the poll get to see the votes. Gives them an unfair advantage. Secondly, players can change their votes before voting is concluded - a change from our current setup. Third, voting may be delayed while waiting for the poll to close. Fourth, some people have expressed a dislike for the eGroups polling mechanism. If it came down to a choice between using eGroups polling and repealing 204, I would repeal 204. - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@t... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/pgp-key.asc - - - Feyd wrote: We could just as easily use the POLL mechanism, which is already in place. you can't put the TEXT of the rule there, but you can set then Proposal # to vote on, and can easily tabulate votes... From rsholmes@m... Tue Dec 19 12:32:42 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 19 Dec 2000 20:32:39 -0000 Received: (qmail 72571 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2000 20:32:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 19 Dec 2000 20:32:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta2 with SMTP; 19 Dec 2000 20:32:39 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.0083BE81@m...>; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 15:32:39 -0500 Received: (from rsholmes@l...) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id PAA13332; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 15:32:37 -0500 (EST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Online Voting and Rule 204 References: <91nt9v+8en8@e...> Date: 19 Dec 2000 15:32:34 -0500 In-Reply-To: "Feyd "'s message of "Tue, 19 Dec 2000 15:02:23 -0000" Message-ID: Lines: 24 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... "Feyd " writes: > This rule states that: > "If and when rule-changes can be adopted without unanimity, the > players who vote against winning proposals shall receive 10 points > each. " > > > This really favors the last voter(s), as they can see that a rule > will pass even if they vote NO. Doing so will give them an easy 10 > point. This is ok for tabletop when you can write down your votes > and then show them all at once. We don't have that available here. > > Any suggestions on a rule to fix this problem? What problem? That's no problem, it's a feature. Another way of stating it is that it discourages players from voting in haste. I have no qualms whatsoever about that rule. -- Doctroid From rsholmes@m... Tue Dec 19 12:35:07 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 19 Dec 2000 20:35:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 94127 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2000 20:35:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 19 Dec 2000 20:35:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta3 with SMTP; 19 Dec 2000 21:36:12 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.0083BEA4@m...>; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 15:35:06 -0500 Received: (from rsholmes@l...) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id PAA13731; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 15:35:05 -0500 (EST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Re: Online Voting and Rule 204 References: <91o72t+ak9u@e...> Date: 19 Dec 2000 15:35:05 -0500 In-Reply-To: "Feyd "'s message of "Tue, 19 Dec 2000 17:49:17 -0000" Message-ID: Lines: 29 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... "Feyd " writes: > --- In n_omic@egroups.com, "Joel Ricker" wrote: > > > > >>Any suggestions on a rule to fix this problem? > >One way that I just thought of would be to build a voting bot for > receiving > >proposals, alerting the list of proposals and collecting the votes > and > >tabulating them once the voting period has passed. I'll be hapy to > provide > >resources for accomplishing this. > > We could just as easily use the POLL mechanism, which is already in > place. you can't put the TEXT of the rule there, but you can set > then Proposal # to vote on, and can easily tabulate votes... We've been through that. There are a number of reasons why the poll mechanism is lousy for vote-taking, and as far as I'm concerned one of them is precisely what you're favoring it for: that it doesn't allow votes to be seen until the voting period is over. I prefer votes to be public immediately -- I just like having that information available. Not a very persuasive reason, I know, but as I said, there are lots of other reasons. -- Doctroid From rsholmes@m... Tue Dec 19 12:35:40 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 19 Dec 2000 20:35:40 -0000 Received: (qmail 81892 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2000 20:35:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 19 Dec 2000 20:35:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta2 with SMTP; 19 Dec 2000 20:35:40 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.0083BEB2@m...>; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 15:35:40 -0500 Received: (from rsholmes@l...) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id PAA13931; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 15:35:39 -0500 (EST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: VOTE AGAINST: [n_omic] Proposal 307 References: <41.5120d25.2770158b@a...> Date: 19 Dec 2000 15:35:39 -0500 In-Reply-To: Sxejmaso@a...'s message of "Mon, 18 Dec 2000 20:36:11 EST" Message-ID: Lines: 3 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... -- Doctroid From JJWeston@T... Tue Dec 19 14:43:00 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: JJWeston@T... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 19 Dec 2000 22:43:00 -0000 Received: (qmail 90498 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2000 22:43:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 19 Dec 2000 22:43:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ashd1-1.relay.mail.uu.net) (199.171.54.245) by mta3 with SMTP; 19 Dec 2000 23:44:05 -0000 Received: from mother.thoughtworks.com by mr0.ash.ops.us.uu.net with ESMTP (peer crosschecked as: mother.thoughtworks.com [204.178.39.204]) id QQjuhm14780 for ; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 22:43:13 GMT Subject: Proposal 307 fails. To: n_omic@egroups.com X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.5 September 22, 2000 Message-ID: Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2000 14:42:54 -0800 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on Mother/ThoughtWorks.COM/US(Release 5.0.5 |September 22, 2000) at 12/19/2000 04:48:47 PM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: JJWeston@T... With 2 votes for and 3 votes against, proposal 307 fails. Jon Grimm loses 10 points for it failing, but gets 6 points for receiving 40% favorable votes. Play now continues with Rich Holmes. - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@t... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/pgp-key.asc - - - From rsholmes@m... Tue Dec 19 17:31:04 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 20 Dec 2000 01:31:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 53105 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2000 01:31:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 20 Dec 2000 01:31:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta2 with SMTP; 20 Dec 2000 01:31:03 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.0083D26B@m...>; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 20:31:02 -0500 Received: (from rsholmes@l...) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id UAA20709; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 20:31:02 -0500 (EST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Proposal 308 Date: 19 Dec 2000 20:31:02 -0500 In-Reply-To: JJWeston@T...'s message of "Tue, 19 Dec 2000 14:42:54 -0800" Message-ID: Lines: 43 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... Add a rule: -- BEGIN -- There are two types of Players, Labelled and Unlabelled. When it is an Unlabelled Player's turn, it is the job of the Judge to select one label and stick it to the Unlabelled Player's forehead, making em a Labelled Player. Each label has a single word on it, chosen from a list of valid words. The Judge then must inform the other Players, except the one whose turn it is, what the word is, using a private channel such as direct email. A Player of course cannot see eir own label, and can determine its word only indirectly, e.g. by logical deduction or by getting another Player to tell em. When a new Player joins the game, the Judge must inform the new Player of the labels of all the Labelled Players except the Judge emself, using a private channel such as direct email. The Judge must also add one word to the list of valid label words, and announce it to all Players. The Player whose turn it is must inform the new Player of the Judge's label, if e has one, using a private channel such as direct email. When a Player or Reyalp leaves the game, the Judge must remove one word from the list of valid label words, and announce it to all Players. Any Players having that word on their labels are informed of that fact, and become Unlabelled Players. Labels may not be removed or altered except as specifically provided by the rules. The list of valid label words may not be modified except as specifically provided by the rules. When this Rule takes effect, the list of valid label words shall be Rock, Scissors, and Paper. This paragraph will then repeal itself. -- END -- This rule of course does nothing substantive, in the sense that it causes Players to be labelled but defines no purpose or consequences for the labels. That's left to future rules. -- Doctroid From Sxejmaso@a... Tue Dec 19 19:22:15 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Sxejmaso@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 20 Dec 2000 03:22:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 4103 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2000 03:22:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 20 Dec 2000 03:22:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-r03.mx.aol.com) (152.163.225.3) by mta2 with SMTP; 20 Dec 2000 03:22:14 -0000 Received: from Sxejmaso@a... by imo-r03.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v28.35.) id a.3b.e072e9d (4466) for ; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 22:21:59 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3b.e072e9d.27717fd6@a...> Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2000 22:21:58 EST Subject: Re: [n_omic] Proposal 308 To: n_omic@egroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 110 From: Sxejmaso@a... This interests me tremendously... I am inclined to vote in favour but give me some time to ponder on it... JAG From joejava@d... Tue Dec 19 19:27:50 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: joejava@d... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 20 Dec 2000 03:27:50 -0000 Received: (qmail 18799 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2000 03:27:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 20 Dec 2000 03:27:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail0.bna.bellsouth.net) (205.152.150.12) by mta1 with SMTP; 20 Dec 2000 03:27:50 -0000 Received: from ceo (host-216-76-128-32.rdu.bellsouth.net [216.76.128.32]) by mail0.bna.bellsouth.net (3.3.5alt/0.75.2) with ESMTP id WAA24816 for ; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 22:27:48 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <001201c06e21$b19238a0$20804cd8@c...> To: Subject: Re: [n_omic] Proposal 308 Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2000 22:20:52 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1 X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 From: "Joel Ricker" >This interests me tremendously... I am inclined to vote in favour but give me >some time to ponder on it... Waiting to see if you are the last to vote? ;) Sounds like fun. I vote FOR proposal 308. -J From rsholmes@m... Tue Dec 19 21:22:46 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 20 Dec 2000 05:22:45 -0000 Received: (qmail 8540 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2000 05:22:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 20 Dec 2000 05:22:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta3 with SMTP; 20 Dec 2000 06:23:50 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.0083E171@m...>; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 0:22:44 -0500 Received: (from rsholmes@l...) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id AAA12755; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 00:22:44 -0500 (EST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Proposal 308 References: <001201c06e21$b19238a0$20804cd8@c...> Date: 20 Dec 2000 00:22:44 -0500 In-Reply-To: "Joel Ricker"'s message of "Sun, 24 Dec 2000 22:20:52 -0500" Message-ID: Lines: 9 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... "Joel Ricker" writes: > Waiting to see if you are the last to vote? ;) Can't use that scam^H^H^H^Hfeature yet, we're still in the unanimity phase! -- Doctroid From jjweston@p... Wed Dec 20 01:22:51 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@p... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 20 Dec 2000 09:22:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 62137 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2000 09:22:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 20 Dec 2000 09:22:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net) (192.48.96.19) by mta1 with SMTP; 20 Dec 2000 09:22:51 -0000 Received: from picard by wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net with SMTP (peer crosschecked as: [63.84.211.245]) id QQjuiq29139 for ; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 06:06:10 GMT Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20001219220436.01124308@m...> X-Sender: mail198193@m... X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2000 22:04:36 -0800 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Vote FOR proposal 308. Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" From: Jeff Weston Sounds interesting. I'd like to see where this takes us... - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@p... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/personal-key.asc - - - From Nomic1@a... Wed Dec 20 06:31:10 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 20 Dec 2000 14:31:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 37517 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2000 14:31:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 20 Dec 2000 14:31:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO fj.egroups.com) (10.1.10.46) by mta3 with SMTP; 20 Dec 2000 15:32:15 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.2.25] by fj.egroups.com with NNFMP; 20 Dec 2000 14:31:09 -0000 Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2000 14:31:06 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Vote FOR proposal 308. Message-ID: <91qfra+f8s3@e...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 76 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 208.249.92.139 From: "Feyd " I have no idea where this is going, but I see no reason to oppose it. Feyd From jjweston@p... Wed Dec 20 08:11:59 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@p... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 20 Dec 2000 16:11:59 -0000 Received: (qmail 89552 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2000 16:11:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 20 Dec 2000 16:11:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net) (192.48.96.19) by mta1 with SMTP; 20 Dec 2000 16:11:58 -0000 Received: from picard by wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net with SMTP (peer crosschecked as: [63.84.211.245]) id QQjuke20444 for ; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 16:11:56 GMT Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20001220081140.010fb9a0@m...> X-Sender: mail198193@m... X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2000 08:11:40 -0800 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Okay Jon Grimm, we wait with anticipation for your vote... ;-) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" From: Jeff Weston Proposal 308 rests on your shoulders now. - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@p... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/personal-key.asc - - - From Sxejmaso@a... Wed Dec 20 18:23:19 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Sxejmaso@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 21 Dec 2000 02:23:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 47162 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2000 02:23:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 21 Dec 2000 02:23:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-d10.mx.aol.com) (205.188.157.42) by mta1 with SMTP; 21 Dec 2000 02:23:18 -0000 Received: from Sxejmaso@a... by imo-d10.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v28.35.) id a.92.e0384e6 (4461) for ; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 21:23:14 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <92.e0384e6.2772c391@a...> Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2000 21:23:13 EST Subject: Re: [n_omic] Okay Jon Grimm, we wait with anticipation for your vote... ;-) To: n_omic@egroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 110 From: Sxejmaso@a... Well well well all the POWER is mine.... BWAHAHAHA!... Ok I vote FOR as well JAG From jjweston@p... Wed Dec 20 22:56:37 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@p... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 21 Dec 2000 06:56:37 -0000 Received: (qmail 31378 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2000 06:56:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 21 Dec 2000 06:56:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net) (192.48.96.19) by mta3 with SMTP; 21 Dec 2000 07:57:41 -0000 Received: from picard by wodc7mr3.ffx.ops.us.uu.net with SMTP (peer crosschecked as: [63.84.211.245]) id QQjuml27844 for ; Thu, 21 Dec 2000 06:56:35 GMT Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20001220225624.016795d0@m...> X-Sender: mail198193@m... X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2000 22:56:24 -0800 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Proposal 308 passes! Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" From: Jeff Weston With 5 votes for and 0 votes against, proposal 308 passes! Rich Holmes gets 17 points for receiving 100% favorable votes. The valid list of label words is now set to: Rock, Scissors, and Paper. The last paragraph of rule 308 repeals itself. The rule does not specify what state the current players are in. My assumption is that all current players and reyalps are Unlabelled. Play now continues with Joel Ricker. Joel Ricker is an Unlabelled player. As the judge, Rich Holmes has the responsibility of placing a label on Joel Ricker's forehead and informing the rest of us of the label via private email. The web site has been updated to accomodate this rule change. - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@p... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/personal-key.asc - - - From joejava@d... Thu Dec 21 16:52:24 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: joejava@d... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 22 Dec 2000 00:52:23 -0000 Received: (qmail 16468 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2000 00:52:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 22 Dec 2000 00:52:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail2.bna.bellsouth.net) (205.152.150.14) by mta3 with SMTP; 22 Dec 2000 01:53:28 -0000 Received: from ceo (host-209-214-160-57.rdu.bellsouth.net [209.214.160.57]) by mail2.bna.bellsouth.net (3.3.5alt/0.75.2) with ESMTP id TAA12637 for ; Thu, 21 Dec 2000 19:52:21 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <001d01c06bb1$24a5c140$39a0d6d1@c...> To: Subject: Proposal 309 Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2000 19:50:10 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 From: "Joel Ricker" Add a rule based on the followed --BEGIN-- & --END-- delimited text: --BEGIN-- [[ Money, get away. Get a good job with good pay and you're okay. Money, it's a gas. Grab that cash with both hands and make a stash. New car, caviar, four star daydream, Think I'll buy me a football team. ]] The currency of N_omic is the Grok. When a player joins N_omic, that player receives 50 Groks. Groks can be transferred between players by way of the giving player stating the transfer and listing the person receiving the Groks. If this proposal passes, each player is awarded 50 Groks and this sentence is deleted. --END-- [[ I had some better ideas but I still need to flesh them out. This will get things going. ]] From rsholmes@m... Thu Dec 21 18:58:41 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 22 Dec 2000 02:58:40 -0000 Received: (qmail 93622 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2000 02:58:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 22 Dec 2000 02:58:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta1 with SMTP; 22 Dec 2000 02:58:25 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.00846537@m...>; Thu, 21 Dec 2000 21:58:24 -0500 Received: (from rsholmes@l...) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id VAA17487; Thu, 21 Dec 2000 21:58:23 -0500 (EST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Proposal 308 passes! References: <3.0.6.32.20001220225624.016795d0@m...> Date: 21 Dec 2000 21:58:23 -0500 In-Reply-To: Jeff Weston's message of "Wed, 20 Dec 2000 22:56:24 -0800" Message-ID: Lines: 26 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... Jeff Weston writes: > As the judge, Rich Holmes has the responsibility of placing a label on Joel > Ricker's forehead and informing the rest of us of the label via private email. I have done so. For the convenience of future Judges, here's the email addresses of all present players, in order: "Feyd " ,Sxejmaso@a...,rsholmes@m...,"Joel Ricker" ,Jeff Weston Now that the proposal has passed I can point out a flaw therein: it doesn't fully deal with how to treat Reyalps. Probably they should be treated exactly the same way as Players as far as their own label is concerned -- they keep their label when/if they come back, unless their label word gets stricken from the list in which case they become unlabelled, etc. And should Reyalps get notified when a player gets labelled? Probably better to send them updates when they come back. I did not send notification of Joel's label to our two Reyalps. And yes, it should have specified that new players are Unlabelled, as were all of us until now... -- Doctroid From jjweston@k... Fri Dec 22 08:52:30 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 22 Dec 2000 16:52:28 -0000 Received: (qmail 89232 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2000 16:52:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 22 Dec 2000 16:52:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta2 with SMTP; 22 Dec 2000 16:52:27 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBMHldS27840 for ; Fri, 22 Dec 2000 09:47:46 -0800 Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2000 09:47:39 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Heading out of town for a few weeks... Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" Greetings everyone! Today I leave on vacation for a couple of weeks. I will still have spotty internet access and will continue to play the game. I will also attempt to keep the web-site updated, but that may occur more slowly than it has been in the last week or so. For email that must be directly sent to me, please use this address: jjweston@k... I will not have access to my other email addresses during the next couple of weeks. From jjweston@k... Fri Dec 22 09:08:47 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 22 Dec 2000 17:08:46 -0000 Received: (qmail 35953 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2000 17:08:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 22 Dec 2000 17:08:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta2 with SMTP; 22 Dec 2000 17:08:42 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBMI39Y27867 for ; Fri, 22 Dec 2000 10:03:15 -0800 Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2000 10:03:09 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Vote FOR proposal 309 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" Don't see any reason to vote against it... From rsholmes@m... Fri Dec 22 11:19:31 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 22 Dec 2000 19:19:31 -0000 Received: (qmail 95706 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2000 19:19:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 22 Dec 2000 19:19:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta3 with SMTP; 22 Dec 2000 20:20:36 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.00848E3F@m...>; Fri, 22 Dec 2000 14:19:31 -0500 Received: (from rsholmes@l...) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id OAA25401; Fri, 22 Dec 2000 14:19:30 -0500 (EST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: VOTE FOR [n_omic] Proposal 309 References: <001d01c06bb1$24a5c140$39a0d6d1@c...> Date: 22 Dec 2000 14:19:30 -0500 In-Reply-To: "Joel Ricker"'s message of "Thu, 21 Dec 2000 19:50:10 -0500" Message-ID: Lines: 23 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... "Joel Ricker" writes: > Add a rule based on the followed --BEGIN-- & --END-- delimited text: > > --BEGIN-- > > The currency of N_omic is the Grok. When a player joins N_omic, that player > receives 50 Groks. Groks can be transferred between players by way of the > giving player stating the transfer and listing the person receiving the > Groks. > > If this proposal passes, each player is awarded 50 Groks and this sentence > is deleted. > > --END-- Hmm, I'd kind of prefer that the recipient have some say in whether the transaction takes place, given that there almost undoubtedly will turn out to be some downsides to having lots of Groks, but that can be fixed later if necessary... -- Doctroid From Sxejmaso@a... Fri Dec 22 14:16:20 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Sxejmaso@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 22 Dec 2000 22:16:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 53466 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2000 22:16:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 22 Dec 2000 22:16:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-d01.mx.aol.com) (205.188.157.33) by mta2 with SMTP; 22 Dec 2000 22:16:19 -0000 Received: from Sxejmaso@a... by imo-d01.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v28.35.) id a.f8.5eed230 (4597) for ; Fri, 22 Dec 2000 17:16:14 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2000 17:16:14 EST Subject: Vote FOR... [n_omic] Proposal 309 To: n_omic@egroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 110 From: Sxejmaso@a... I have no problems with this at all. From Sxejmaso@a... Fri Dec 22 14:18:33 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Sxejmaso@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 22 Dec 2000 22:18:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 58356 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2000 22:18:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 22 Dec 2000 22:18:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-d09.mx.aol.com) (205.188.157.41) by mta1 with SMTP; 22 Dec 2000 22:18:33 -0000 Received: from Sxejmaso@a... by imo-d09.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v28.35.) id a.22.f9b53b6 (4597) for ; Fri, 22 Dec 2000 17:18:30 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <22.f9b53b6.27752d36@a...> Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2000 17:18:30 EST Subject: Winter Holidays To: n_omic@egroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 110 From: Sxejmaso@a... I will be around for Friday and Saturday and part of Sunday but I will be somewhat distracted. Sunday and Monday I will have limited access but will still be around. JAG ---maybe I can get to work on the eud.sphosting.com pages From Nomic1@a... Fri Dec 22 14:32:50 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 22 Dec 2000 22:32:50 -0000 Received: (qmail 92560 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2000 22:32:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 22 Dec 2000 22:32:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO c3.egroups.com) (10.1.10.50) by mta3 with SMTP; 22 Dec 2000 23:33:55 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.10.129] by c3.egroups.com with NNFMP; 22 Dec 2000 22:32:49 -0000 Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2000 22:32:46 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Vote FOR... [n_omic] Proposal 309 Message-ID: <920kqe+5a6a@e...> In-Reply-To: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 60 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 204.116.99.173 From: "Feyd " I see no explicit reason to vote against this... sure Feyd From joejava@d... Fri Dec 22 15:39:56 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: joejava@d... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 22 Dec 2000 23:39:56 -0000 Received: (qmail 8751 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2000 23:39:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 22 Dec 2000 23:39:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail2.bna.bellsouth.net) (205.152.150.14) by mta2 with SMTP; 22 Dec 2000 23:39:55 -0000 Received: from ceo (host-209-214-160-34.rdu.bellsouth.net [209.214.160.34]) by mail2.bna.bellsouth.net (3.3.5alt/0.75.2) with ESMTP id SAA10907 for ; Fri, 22 Dec 2000 18:39:53 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <001401c06c70$2f1de840$22a0d6d1@c...> To: Subject: Re: VOTE FOR [n_omic] Proposal 309 Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2000 18:37:42 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 From: "Joel Ricker" Doctroid said: >Hmm, I'd kind of prefer that the recipient have some say in whether >the transaction takes place, given that there almost undoubtedly will >turn out to be some downsides to having lots of Groks, but that can be >fixed later if necessary... I just mainly wanted to be clear on the fact that you give not take so someone couldn't say I take 30 Groks from Doctroid, for example. -J From rsholmes@m... Sat Dec 23 12:02:25 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 23 Dec 2000 20:02:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 88880 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2000 20:02:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 23 Dec 2000 20:02:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta2 with SMTP; 23 Dec 2000 20:02:24 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.0084B4A4@m...>; Sat, 23 Dec 2000 15:02:24 -0500 Received: (from rsholmes@l...) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id PAA22522; Sat, 23 Dec 2000 15:02:23 -0500 (EST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: VOTE FOR [n_omic] Proposal 309 References: <001401c06c70$2f1de840$22a0d6d1@c...> Date: 23 Dec 2000 15:02:23 -0500 In-Reply-To: "Joel Ricker"'s message of "Fri, 22 Dec 2000 18:37:42 -0500" Message-ID: Lines: 15 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... "Joel Ricker" writes: > I just mainly wanted to be clear on the fact that you give not take so > someone couldn't say > > I take 30 Groks from Doctroid, for example. Of course, understood -- I wouldn't have voted in favor if that sort of transaction were permitted! "I give 30 Groks to Doctroid" with no requirement that I accept isn't problematic yet, but could be someday... -- Doctroid From jjweston@k... Sat Dec 23 23:47:08 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 24 Dec 2000 07:47:08 -0000 Received: (qmail 51113 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2000 07:47:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 24 Dec 2000 07:47:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta2 with SMTP; 24 Dec 2000 07:47:07 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBO8g8P28834 for ; Sun, 24 Dec 2000 00:42:09 -0800 Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2000 00:42:08 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Proposal 309 passes! Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" With 5 votes for and 0 votes against, proposal 309 passes! Joel receives 19 points for receiving 100% favorable votes. Per rule 309, everyone is awarded 50 groks. The last paragraph of rule 309 deletes itself. Play now continues with Jeff Weston. Jeff Weston is an unlabelled player. As the judge, Joel Ricker must place a label on Jeff Weston's forehead and inform everyone else of the label. The web site has been updated with the latest rule change. I will make my proposal shortly. On another note, Rich Holmes, could you please mail me Joel Ricker's label to this email address? I forget his label and don't have access to the email you sent earlier. From jjweston@k... Sat Dec 23 23:48:14 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 24 Dec 2000 07:48:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 77580 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2000 07:48:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 24 Dec 2000 07:48:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta3 with SMTP; 24 Dec 2000 08:49:19 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBO8hFP28842 for ; Sun, 24 Dec 2000 00:43:15 -0800 Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2000 00:43:15 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Proposal 310 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" Rule 112 is hereby transmuted to a mutable rule. From jjweston@k... Sat Dec 23 23:50:19 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 24 Dec 2000 07:50:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 80523 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2000 07:50:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 24 Dec 2000 07:50:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta2 with SMTP; 24 Dec 2000 07:50:19 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBO8jK228850 for ; Sun, 24 Dec 2000 00:45:20 -0800 Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2000 00:45:20 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Proposal 309 - correction Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" Joel only receives 18 points for proposal 309, not 19 as I had previously stated. From rsholmes@m... Tue Dec 26 11:46:44 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 26 Dec 2000 19:46:39 -0000 Received: (qmail 27336 invoked from network); 26 Dec 2000 19:46:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 26 Dec 2000 19:46:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta1 with SMTP; 26 Dec 2000 19:46:39 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.008517E1@m...>; Tue, 26 Dec 2000 14:46:38 -0500 Received: (from rsholmes@l...) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id OAA23038; Tue, 26 Dec 2000 14:46:38 -0500 (EST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: VOTE FOR: [n_omic] Proposal 310 References: Date: 26 Dec 2000 14:46:38 -0500 In-Reply-To: "Jeffrey J. Weston"'s message of "Sun, 24 Dec 2000 00:43:15 -0800 (PST)" Message-ID: Lines: 6 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... "Jeffrey J. Weston" writes: > Rule 112 is hereby transmuted to a mutable rule. -- Doctroid From jjweston@k... Tue Dec 26 12:05:31 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 26 Dec 2000 20:05:30 -0000 Received: (qmail 97820 invoked from network); 26 Dec 2000 20:05:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 26 Dec 2000 20:05:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta1 with SMTP; 26 Dec 2000 20:05:28 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBQKxgS01711 for ; Tue, 26 Dec 2000 12:59:49 -0800 Date: Tue, 26 Dec 2000 12:59:42 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: 12 hours left to vote for proposal 310 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" In accordance with rule 303, there are about 12 hours left to vote on proposal 310 before you become a Reyalp... From joejava@d... Tue Dec 26 15:25:05 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: joejava@d... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 26 Dec 2000 23:25:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 3900 invoked from network); 26 Dec 2000 23:25:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 26 Dec 2000 23:25:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail0.bna.bellsouth.net) (205.152.150.12) by mta3 with SMTP; 27 Dec 2000 00:26:09 -0000 Received: from ceo (host-209-214-160-188.rdu.bellsouth.net [209.214.160.188]) by mail0.bna.bellsouth.net (3.3.5alt/0.75.2) with ESMTP id SAA14143 for ; Tue, 26 Dec 2000 18:25:02 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <001a01c06f92$c25a9ac0$bca0d6d1@c...> To: Subject: Re: [n_omic] Vote FOR Proposal 310 Date: Tue, 26 Dec 2000 18:22:46 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 From: "Joel Ricker" > Rule 112 is hereby transmuted to a mutable rule. Joel From Sxejmaso@a... Tue Dec 26 16:14:16 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Sxejmaso@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 27 Dec 2000 00:14:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 69673 invoked from network); 27 Dec 2000 00:14:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 27 Dec 2000 00:14:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-r12.mail.aol.com) (152.163.225.66) by mta3 with SMTP; 27 Dec 2000 01:15:19 -0000 Received: from Sxejmaso@a... by imo-r12.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v28.35.) id a.26.f140156 (3997) for ; Tue, 26 Dec 2000 19:14:09 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <26.f140156.277a8e50@a...> Date: Tue, 26 Dec 2000 19:14:08 EST Subject: Re: [n_omic] Vote FOR Proposal 310 To: n_omic@egroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 110 From: Sxejmaso@a... Yes I consent as well JAG From Nomic1@a... Thu Dec 28 15:03:57 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 28 Dec 2000 23:03:57 -0000 Received: (qmail 76937 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2000 23:03:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 28 Dec 2000 23:03:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hk.egroups.com) (10.1.10.43) by mta2 with SMTP; 28 Dec 2000 23:03:56 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.10.64] by hk.egroups.com with NNFMP; 28 Dec 2000 23:03:56 -0000 Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2000 23:03:55 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Vote FOR 310 Message-ID: <92ggsr+b3o0@e...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 136 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 24.4.252.249 From: "Feyd " although I think I missed the deadline and and a reyalp. If so I state my intention to become a player again. Feyd MERRY CHRISTMAS! From Sxejmaso@a... Thu Dec 28 18:57:11 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Sxejmaso@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 29 Dec 2000 02:57:11 -0000 Received: (qmail 67899 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2000 02:57:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 29 Dec 2000 02:57:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-r05.mx.aol.com) (152.163.225.5) by mta1 with SMTP; 29 Dec 2000 02:57:10 -0000 Received: from Sxejmaso@a... by imo-r05.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v28.35.) id a.9f.f286d75 (7094) for ; Thu, 28 Dec 2000 21:57:04 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <9f.f286d75.277d577f@a...> Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2000 21:57:03 EST Subject: Re: [n_omic] Vote FOR 310 To: n_omic@egroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 110 From: Sxejmaso@a... I voted for 310 but am not sure it ever got through the egroups thingy... I dont remember it being sent back to me.... JAG From jjweston@k... Fri Dec 29 17:15:39 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 30 Dec 2000 01:15:37 -0000 Received: (qmail 78388 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2000 01:15:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 30 Dec 2000 01:15:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta1 with SMTP; 30 Dec 2000 01:15:36 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id eBU298803654 for ; Fri, 29 Dec 2000 18:09:08 -0800 Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2000 18:09:08 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Proposal 310 passes! Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" Sorry for the delay on this message... Been busy over here. With 4 votes for and 0 votes against, proposal 310 passes. (Feyd's vote wasn't included since he was a reyalp at the time.) Jeff receives 19 points for receiving 100% favorable votes. Feyd missed the deadline for voting and became a reyalp, losing 10 points in the process. He has since stated his intention to rejoin the game. This completes the second complete circuit of turns. Since rule 203 has not been amended, it is automatically changed to require only a simple majority to pass proposals, per rule 203. The word "unanimous" is stricken from the rule and replaced with the phrase, "a simple majority". The game now continues with the third circuit of turns, starting with Feyd. Feyd is an unlabelled player. As the judge, Jeff Weston must place a label on Feyd's forehead and inform everyone else of the label. The web site has been updated with the latest rule changes. I have created a new page called the Rule Graveyard where I will store the original versions of rules we amend, repeal, or otherwise mutilate. From Nomic1@a... Sat Dec 30 20:12:50 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 31 Dec 2000 04:12:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 58657 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2000 04:12:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 31 Dec 2000 04:12:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hl.egroups.com) (10.1.10.44) by mta3 with SMTP; 31 Dec 2000 05:13:54 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.2.110] by hl.egroups.com with NNFMP; 31 Dec 2000 04:12:49 -0000 Date: Sun, 31 Dec 2000 04:12:41 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Proposal 211: More money Message-ID: <92mbnp+tbnn@e...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 421 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 24.4.252.248 From: "Feyd " Ammend rule 207 as follows: Article 1: For any vote, a player may spent 100 groks for ONE additional vote. This vote must be placed at the same time that the player's normal vote is cast. The last person to vote on an issue must spent 150 groks for the extra vote instead of 100. A player may gain no more than one additional vote in this manner. All such votes are counted toward point total calculations. Feyd From Sxejmaso@a... Sun Dec 31 14:59:24 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: Sxejmaso@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 31 Dec 2000 22:59:24 -0000 Received: (qmail 54638 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2000 22:59:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 31 Dec 2000 22:59:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-r02.mx.aol.com) (152.163.225.2) by mta2 with SMTP; 31 Dec 2000 22:59:21 -0000 Received: from Sxejmaso@a... by imo-r02.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v28.35.) id a.da.60c2d5 (16934) for ; Sun, 31 Dec 2000 17:59:14 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: Date: Sun, 31 Dec 2000 17:59:13 EST Subject: Re: [n_omic] Proposal 211: More money To: n_omic@egroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 110 From: Sxejmaso@a... OK I can do this. I was going to bribe folks to support me but this makes it easier. JAG From jjweston@k... Sun Dec 31 20:53:25 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 1 Jan 2001 04:53:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 85625 invoked from network); 1 Jan 2001 04:53:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 1 Jan 2001 04:53:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta3 with SMTP; 1 Jan 2001 05:54:30 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f015kN408795 for ; Sun, 31 Dec 2000 21:46:24 -0800 Date: Sun, 31 Dec 2000 21:46:23 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Proposal 211: More money In-Reply-To: <92mbnp+tbnn@e...> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" A few suggestions... This should actually be proposal 311, but I think that's what you meant. You don't specify *how* to amend rule 207. Does your text replace the existing text? Are you adding new paragraphs to the rule? It looks like you are replacing the rule. The big problem here is that you don't mention the one vote that players have in the first place. Under rule 111, I propose the following amendments to your proposal: - Insert this sentence at the front of the first paragraph, "Each player has one vote." - The word "spent" in the first paragraph should be "spend". On Sun, 31 Dec 2000, Feyd wrote: > Ammend rule 207 as follows: > > Article 1: > For any vote, a player may spent 100 groks for ONE additional vote. > This vote must be placed at the same time that the player's normal > vote is cast. The last person to vote on an issue must spent 150 > groks for the extra vote instead of 100. > > A player may gain no more than one additional vote in this manner. > > All such votes are counted toward point total calculations. From engels@w... Tue Jan 02 08:05:04 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: engels@w... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 2 Jan 2001 16:05:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 25795 invoked from network); 2 Jan 2001 16:05:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 2 Jan 2001 16:05:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailhost.tue.nl) (131.155.2.5) by mta2 with SMTP; 2 Jan 2001 16:05:02 -0000 Received: from wsinfm15.win.tue.nl (wsinfm15.win.tue.nl [131.155.69.168]) by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f02G4xS05925 for ; Tue, 2 Jan 2001 17:04:59 +0100 (MET) Received: (from engels@l...) by wsinfm15.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) id f02G4xX01274 for n_omic@egroups.com; Tue, 2 Jan 2001 17:04:59 +0100 (MET) Message-Id: <200101021604.f02G4xX01274@w...> Subject: New player To: n_omic@egroups.com Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2001 17:04:59 +0100 (MET) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL43 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Andre Engels I want to become a player. -- Andre Engels, engels@w... telephone: +31-40-2474628 (work) +31-6-17774490 (mobile) http://www.win.tue.nl/~engels/index_en.html If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all -- Noam Chomsky From Nomic1@a... Tue Jan 02 09:19:08 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 2 Jan 2001 17:19:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 61200 invoked from network); 2 Jan 2001 17:19:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 2 Jan 2001 17:19:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ej.egroups.com) (10.1.10.49) by mta2 with SMTP; 2 Jan 2001 17:19:06 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.10.127] by ej.egroups.com with NNFMP; 02 Jan 2001 17:19:06 -0000 Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2001 17:19:05 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: Proposal 311: More money (ammended as suggested by Jeffrey) Message-ID: <92t2i9+j9v0@e...> In-Reply-To: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 1030 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 208.249.92.139 From: "Feyd " Thanks for the suggestions.. the amended proposal is below. We should think about making firmer rules for how proposals are "in discussion" versus when they are in "voting". --- In n_omic@egroups.com, "Jeffrey J. Weston" wrote: > A few suggestions... This should actually be proposal 311, >but I think that's what you meant. Right.. I would never try to scam! honest! ========= Text of proposal 311 ============= Amend rule 207 to read as follows: Article I: Each player has one vote per proposal. This is also known as the player's "normal" or "standard" vote. Article II: For each proposal, a player may spent 100 groks for ONE additional vote. This vote must be placed at the same time that the player's normal vote is cast. The last person to vote on an issue must spent 150 groks for the extra vote instead of 100 groks. A player may gain no more than one additional vote in this manner. All such votes are counted toward point total calculations. =============== END amendment ========= Feyd From engels@w... Tue Jan 02 12:08:05 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: engels@w... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 2 Jan 2001 20:08:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 81571 invoked from network); 2 Jan 2001 20:06:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 2 Jan 2001 20:06:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailhost.tue.nl) (131.155.2.5) by mta2 with SMTP; 2 Jan 2001 20:06:17 -0000 Received: from wsinfm15.win.tue.nl (wsinfm15.win.tue.nl [131.155.69.168]) by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f02K6BS18107 for ; Tue, 2 Jan 2001 21:06:12 +0100 (MET) Received: (from engels@l...) by wsinfm15.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) id f02K6BC02467 for n_omic@egroups.com; Tue, 2 Jan 2001 21:06:11 +0100 (MET) Message-Id: <200101022006.f02K6BC02467@w...> Subject: Player To: n_omic@egroups.com Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2001 21:06:11 +0100 (MET) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL43 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Andre Engels I would like to become a player (seems my original message did not get through). -- Andre Engels, engels@w... telephone: +31-40-2474628 (work) +31-6-17774490 (mobile) http://www.win.tue.nl/~engels/index_en.html If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all -- Noam Chomsky From jjweston@k... Tue Jan 02 17:15:29 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 3 Jan 2001 01:15:29 -0000 Received: (qmail 6927 invoked from network); 3 Jan 2001 01:15:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 3 Jan 2001 01:15:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta3 with SMTP; 3 Jan 2001 02:16:34 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0327nG10027 for ; Tue, 2 Jan 2001 18:07:55 -0800 Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2001 18:07:49 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Player In-Reply-To: <200101022006.f02K6BC02467@w...> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" Welcome to N_omic Andre. I will add you to the player list. You receive 50 groks for joining the game, per rule 309. Per rule 308 I must add a new label to the list of valid labels. I add "pistol". I must also privately email Andre the labels of all labelled players. As the current player, Feyd must privately email Andre what my label is. On Tue, 2 Jan 2001, Andre Engels wrote: > I would like to become a player (seems my original message did not get > through). From frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... Tue Jan 02 18:42:58 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 3 Jan 2001 02:42:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 99354 invoked from network); 3 Jan 2001 02:42:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 3 Jan 2001 02:42:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailhub.Dartmouth.EDU) (129.170.16.6) by mta2 with SMTP; 3 Jan 2001 02:42:56 -0000 Received: from dasher.Dartmouth.EDU (dasher.dartmouth.edu [129.170.208.6]) by mailhub.Dartmouth.EDU (8.9.3+DND/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA30021 for ; Tue, 2 Jan 2001 21:42:55 -0500 (EST) Message-id: <38383717@d...> Date: 02 Jan 2001 21:42:55 EST Reply-To: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... (Willard) Subject: I'm back... To: n_omic@egroups.com X-eGroups-From: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... (Frederick C. Strathmeyer) From: frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... and swamped with proposals and votes.... If anyone would be kind enough to summarize some of the activity from the past couple of weeks, I'd reeeeally appreciate it... otherwise I guess I'll start digging through archives... From jjweston@k... Tue Jan 02 22:34:08 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 3 Jan 2001 06:34:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 83910 invoked from network); 3 Jan 2001 06:34:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 3 Jan 2001 06:34:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta2 with SMTP; 3 Jan 2001 06:34:07 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f037QUF10209 for ; Tue, 2 Jan 2001 23:26:30 -0800 Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2001 23:26:30 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] I'm back... In-Reply-To: <38383717@d...> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" Welcome back! I've updated your status on the player roster. I have a web site with a list of all proposals if you want to look at that instead of the archives. It's located here: http://kenny.sir-toby.com/n_omic/proposals.html On 2 Jan 2001 frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... wrote: > and swamped with proposals and votes.... > > If anyone would be kind enough to summarize some of the activity from the past > couple of weeks, I'd reeeeally appreciate it... > > otherwise I guess I'll start digging through archives... From jjweston@k... Tue Jan 02 22:36:05 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 3 Jan 2001 06:36:05 -0000 Received: (qmail 87892 invoked from network); 3 Jan 2001 06:36:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 3 Jan 2001 06:36:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta1 with SMTP; 3 Jan 2001 06:36:05 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f037SWx10221 for ; Tue, 2 Jan 2001 23:28:32 -0800 Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2001 23:28:32 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Vote FOR Proposal 311 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" From frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... Tue Jan 02 23:21:21 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 3 Jan 2001 07:21:21 -0000 Received: (qmail 48334 invoked from network); 3 Jan 2001 07:21:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 3 Jan 2001 07:21:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailhub.Dartmouth.EDU) (129.170.16.6) by mta1 with SMTP; 3 Jan 2001 07:21:20 -0000 Received: from dasher.Dartmouth.EDU (dasher.dartmouth.edu [129.170.208.6]) by mailhub.Dartmouth.EDU (8.9.3+DND/8.9.3) with ESMTP id CAA09535 for ; Wed, 3 Jan 2001 02:21:19 -0500 (EST) Message-id: <38387651@d...> Date: 03 Jan 2001 02:21:19 EST Reply-To: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... (Willard) Subject: ok... To: n_omic@egroups.com X-eGroups-From: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... (Frederick C. Strathmeyer) From: frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... I vote FOR proposal 311 and I request that someone sends me a list of everyone's labels except for my own. and also that someone (rich, maybe?) explain to me what the hell is the big deal with the labels! =P (also, are we in "majority mode" yet? or are we still in unimous mode?) From Nomic1@a... Wed Jan 03 08:10:26 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 3 Jan 2001 16:10:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 96191 invoked from network); 3 Jan 2001 16:10:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 3 Jan 2001 16:10:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO fj.egroups.com) (10.1.10.46) by mta2 with SMTP; 3 Jan 2001 16:10:25 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.10.103] by fj.egroups.com with NNFMP; 03 Jan 2001 16:10:24 -0000 Date: Wed, 03 Jan 2001 16:07:40 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Vote FOR 311 Message-ID: <92vioc+cb2g@e...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 1 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 208.249.92.138 From: "Feyd " From rsholmes@m... Wed Jan 03 12:03:53 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 3 Jan 2001 20:03:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 96592 invoked from network); 3 Jan 2001 20:03:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 3 Jan 2001 20:03:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta1 with SMTP; 3 Jan 2001 20:03:52 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.0086881B@m...>; Wed, 3 Jan 2001 15:03:52 -0500 Received: (from rsholmes@l...) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id PAA25239; Wed, 3 Jan 2001 15:03:51 -0500 (EST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: VOTE AGAINST [n_omic] Re: Proposal 311: More money (ammended as suggested by Jeffrey) References: <92t2i9+j9v0@e...> Date: 03 Jan 2001 15:03:51 -0500 In-Reply-To: "Feyd "'s message of "Tue, 02 Jan 2001 17:19:05 -0000" Message-ID: Lines: 21 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... "Feyd " writes: > ========= Text of proposal 311 ============= > Amend rule 207 to read as follows: > > Article I: > Each player has one vote per proposal. This is also known as the > player's "normal" or "standard" vote. > > Article II: > For each proposal, a player may spent 100 groks for ONE additional > vote. This vote must be placed at the same time that the player's > normal vote is cast. The last person to vote on an issue must spent > 150 groks for the extra vote instead of 100 groks. > > A player may gain no more than one additional vote in this manner. > All such votes are counted toward point total calculations. > =============== END amendment ========= -- Doctroid From rsholmes@m... Wed Jan 03 12:06:51 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 3 Jan 2001 20:06:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 8069 invoked from network); 3 Jan 2001 20:06:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 3 Jan 2001 20:06:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta3 with SMTP; 3 Jan 2001 21:07:49 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.00868864@m...>; Wed, 3 Jan 2001 15:06:44 -0500 Received: (from rsholmes@l...) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id PAA25558; Wed, 3 Jan 2001 15:06:43 -0500 (EST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] ok... References: <38387651@d...> Date: 03 Jan 2001 15:06:43 -0500 In-Reply-To: frederick.c.strathmeyer@d...'s message of "03 Jan 2001 02:21:19 EST" Message-ID: Lines: 23 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... writes: > and I request that someone sends me a list of everyone's labels except for my > own. The current Judge is supposed to do that, and the current Player is supposed to tell you the Judge's label. Not that others can't confirm what they tell you, but those are the ones who are *required* to tell you. > and also that someone (rich, maybe?) explain to me what the hell is the > big deal with the labels! =P The labels are a setup waiting for a punch line. Frankly, I have no idea what -- if any -- use will be made of the labels! Just seemed like something that could evolve into an interesting theme. > (also, are we in "majority mode" yet? or are we still in unimous mode?) As of Feyd's proposal, we're in majority mode. -- Doctroid From Nomic1@a... Wed Jan 03 13:31:16 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 3 Jan 2001 21:31:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 89455 invoked from network); 3 Jan 2001 21:31:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 3 Jan 2001 21:31:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hl.egroups.com) (10.1.10.44) by mta2 with SMTP; 3 Jan 2001 21:31:15 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.10.120] by hl.egroups.com with NNFMP; 03 Jan 2001 21:31:14 -0000 Date: Wed, 03 Jan 2001 21:30:31 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Hey Doctroid, do you not like the prop or just scamming point? Message-ID: <9305ln+o1lf@e...> In-Reply-To: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 2 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 208.249.92.139 From: "Feyd " x From Nomic1@a... Wed Jan 03 13:31:56 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 3 Jan 2001 21:31:56 -0000 Received: (qmail 91871 invoked from network); 3 Jan 2001 21:31:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 3 Jan 2001 21:31:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO f19.egroups.com) (10.1.2.136) by mta3 with SMTP; 3 Jan 2001 22:33:00 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.10.120] by f19.egroups.com with NNFMP; 03 Jan 2001 21:31:55 -0000 Date: Wed, 03 Jan 2001 21:31:49 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: Player Message-ID: <9305o5+v3u3@e...> In-Reply-To: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 230 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 208.249.92.139 From: "Feyd " I must also privately email Andre the labels of all labelled > players. As the current player, Feyd must privately email Andre what my > label is. Done. I just sent him my current list, it had better match yours . Feyd From frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... Wed Jan 03 13:39:44 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 3 Jan 2001 21:39:44 -0000 Received: (qmail 22057 invoked from network); 3 Jan 2001 21:39:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 3 Jan 2001 21:39:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailhub.Dartmouth.EDU) (129.170.16.6) by mta3 with SMTP; 3 Jan 2001 22:40:48 -0000 Received: from dasher.Dartmouth.EDU (dasher.dartmouth.edu [129.170.208.6]) by mailhub.Dartmouth.EDU (8.9.3+DND/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA21784 for ; Wed, 3 Jan 2001 16:39:41 -0500 (EST) Message-id: <38412714@d...> Date: 03 Jan 2001 16:39:41 EST Reply-To: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... (Willard) Subject: Re: [n_omic] Re: Player To: n_omic@egroups.com X-eGroups-From: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... (Frederick C. Strathmeyer) From: frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... alright.... someone needs to email me labels.... From rsholmes@m... Wed Jan 03 14:44:08 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 3 Jan 2001 22:44:05 -0000 Received: (qmail 35046 invoked from network); 3 Jan 2001 22:44:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 3 Jan 2001 22:44:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta2 with SMTP; 3 Jan 2001 22:44:04 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.0086957A@m...>; Wed, 3 Jan 2001 17:44:03 -0500 Received: (from rsholmes@l...) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id RAA12656; Wed, 3 Jan 2001 17:44:03 -0500 (EST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Re: Player References: <38412714@d...> Date: 03 Jan 2001 17:44:03 -0500 In-Reply-To: frederick.c.strathmeyer@d...'s message of "03 Jan 2001 16:39:41 EST" Message-ID: Lines: 16 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... writes: > alright.... someone needs to email me labels.... And already the defects in my own rule, which I so kindly pointed out after it passed ;-) , rear their ugly head... The rules don't mandate that Reyalps get informed about who has what label. But I recommend treating a re-entering Reyalp the same as a newcomer in that regard, e.g. the Judge sends em all the labels except the Judge's (and the ex-Reyalp's!! Not that Frederick has one yet.), and the player whose turn it is (is there an easier term than "player whose turn it is"?) sends em the Judge's label. -- Doctroid From frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... Wed Jan 03 14:45:27 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 3 Jan 2001 22:45:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 75852 invoked from network); 3 Jan 2001 22:45:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 3 Jan 2001 22:45:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailhub.Dartmouth.EDU) (129.170.16.6) by mta1 with SMTP; 3 Jan 2001 22:45:26 -0000 Received: from dasher.Dartmouth.EDU (dasher.dartmouth.edu [129.170.208.6]) by mailhub.Dartmouth.EDU (8.9.3+DND/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA24813 for ; Wed, 3 Jan 2001 17:45:24 -0500 (EST) Message-id: <38415740@d...> Date: 03 Jan 2001 17:45:24 EST Reply-To: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... (Willard) Subject: Re: [n_omic] Re: Player To: n_omic@egroups.com X-eGroups-From: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... (Frederick C. Strathmeyer) From: frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... --- You wrote: (is there an easier term than "player whose turn it is"?) --- end of quote --- "current player"? From rsholmes@m... Wed Jan 03 14:46:03 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 3 Jan 2001 22:46:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 40849 invoked from network); 3 Jan 2001 22:46:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 3 Jan 2001 22:46:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta2 with SMTP; 3 Jan 2001 22:46:02 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.0086959B@m...>; Wed, 3 Jan 2001 17:46:01 -0500 Received: (from rsholmes@l...) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id RAA12982; Wed, 3 Jan 2001 17:46:01 -0500 (EST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Hey Doctroid, do you not like the prop or just scamming point? References: <9305ln+o1lf@e...> Date: 03 Jan 2001 17:46:00 -0500 In-Reply-To: "Feyd "'s message of "Wed, 03 Jan 2001 21:30:31 -0000" Message-ID: Lines: 12 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... "Feyd " writes: > x Not that I feel the need to justify myself... but I dislike the proposal. Not for any particular defects, it just doesn't appeal to me. I'll be happy to take the points, of course, but the points aren't the point... -- Doctroid From jjweston@p... Wed Jan 03 23:59:18 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@p... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 4 Jan 2001 07:59:17 -0000 Received: (qmail 79520 invoked from network); 4 Jan 2001 07:59:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 4 Jan 2001 07:59:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net) (198.5.241.87) by mta1 with SMTP; 4 Jan 2001 07:59:16 -0000 Received: from picard by mr2.ash.ops.us.uu.net with SMTP (peer crosschecked as: [63.84.211.245]) id QQjwmg21613 for ; Thu, 4 Jan 2001 07:43:06 GMT Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20010103234252.016b4e88@m...> X-Sender: mail198193@m... X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Wed, 03 Jan 2001 23:42:52 -0800 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Re: Player In-Reply-To: References: <38412714@d...> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" From: Jeff Weston Okay... As the current judge, I feel I have taken all the actions required of my by the rules regarding Eric. I have not created a new label for having him rejoin the game. I have sent him a list of the labels of all the players, but only because he requested it, not because I felt it was required by the rules. If anyone feels I have not followed the rules in this regard, now is a good time to invoke judgement. At 05:44 PM 1/3/2001 -0500, Doctroid wrote: >frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... writes: > >> alright.... someone needs to email me labels.... > >And already the defects in my own rule, which I so kindly pointed out >after it passed ;-) , rear their ugly head... > >The rules don't mandate that Reyalps get informed about who has what >label. But I recommend treating a re-entering Reyalp the same as a >newcomer in that regard, e.g. the Judge sends em all the labels except >the Judge's (and the ex-Reyalp's!! Not that Frederick has one yet.), >and the player whose turn it is (is there an easier term than "player >whose turn it is"?) sends em the Judge's label. - - - Jeffrey J. Weston jjweston@p... PGP Public Key : http://www.sir-toby.com/personal-key.asc - - - From engels@w... Thu Jan 04 06:59:11 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: engels@w... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 4 Jan 2001 14:59:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 10550 invoked from network); 4 Jan 2001 14:59:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 4 Jan 2001 14:59:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kweetal.tue.nl) (131.155.2.7) by mta1 with SMTP; 4 Jan 2001 14:59:09 -0000 Received: from wsinfm15.win.tue.nl (wsinfm15.win.tue.nl [131.155.69.168]) by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f04Ex8A26838 for ; Thu, 4 Jan 2001 15:59:08 +0100 (MET) Received: (from engels@l...) by wsinfm15.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) id f04Ex7N00798 for n_omic@egroups.com; Thu, 4 Jan 2001 15:59:07 +0100 (MET) Message-Id: <200101041459.f04Ex7N00798@w...> Subject: 311 vote AGAINST To: n_omic@egroups.com Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2001 15:59:07 +0100 (MET) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL43 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Andre Engels I vote AGAINST Proposal 311. One man, one vote, me says. -- Andre Engels, engels@w... telephone: +31-40-2474628 (work) +31-6-17774490 (mobile) http://www.win.tue.nl/~engels/index_en.html If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all -- Noam Chomsky From jjweston@k... Thu Jan 04 13:32:43 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 4 Jan 2001 21:32:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 65671 invoked from network); 4 Jan 2001 21:31:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 4 Jan 2001 21:31:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta3 with SMTP; 4 Jan 2001 22:32:35 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f04MMxe11516 for ; Thu, 4 Jan 2001 14:23:25 -0800 Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2001 14:22:59 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: 20 hours left to vote on proposal 311 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" Jon Grimm and Joel Ricker, Still waiting for your vote on proposal 311. You have about 20 hours left to cast your vote before you become Reyalps. Now both of you can't scam 10 points out of the deal... If both of you vote "against" it fails... ;-) For determining time left to vote on proposals, I'm using the eGroups time stamp in the archives. You will become a reyalp if your vote is received after the 72 hour mark... From Sxejmaso@a... Thu Jan 04 16:38:29 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Sxejmaso@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 5 Jan 2001 00:38:29 -0000 Received: (qmail 29778 invoked from network); 5 Jan 2001 00:38:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Jan 2001 00:38:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-d03.mx.aol.com) (205.188.157.35) by mta1 with SMTP; 5 Jan 2001 00:38:28 -0000 Received: from Sxejmaso@a... by imo-d03.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v28.35.) id a.34.f180b8d (9623) for ; Thu, 4 Jan 2001 19:38:22 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <34.f180b8d.2786717e@a...> Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2001 19:38:22 EST Subject: Re: [n_omic] 20 hours left to vote on proposal 311 To: n_omic@egroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 114 From: Sxejmaso@a... Nah I vote for it. JAG From rsholmes@m... Thu Jan 04 16:50:04 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 5 Jan 2001 00:50:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 33923 invoked from network); 5 Jan 2001 00:50:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Jan 2001 00:50:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta1 with SMTP; 5 Jan 2001 00:50:03 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.0086EDDF@m...>; Thu, 4 Jan 2001 19:50:02 -0500 Received: (from rsholmes@l...) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id TAA03526; Thu, 4 Jan 2001 19:50:02 -0500 (EST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Outage Date: 04 Jan 2001 19:50:02 -0500 Message-ID: Lines: 13 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... To: DocNomic@egroups.com Subject: Outage Gcc: nnml+private:mail.archive-mail --text follows this line-- Our computer system will be down for upgrading from 10:30 pm GMT on Friday, January 5, 2001, through 1:00 pm GMT Monday, January 8, 2001 I *probably* won't be forced into Reyalp status by that, but keep it in mind, please... -- Doctroid From Nomic1@a... Thu Jan 04 19:13:19 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 5 Jan 2001 03:13:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 13583 invoked from network); 5 Jan 2001 03:13:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Jan 2001 03:13:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mw.egroups.com) (10.1.2.2) by mta1 with SMTP; 5 Jan 2001 03:13:14 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.10.34] by mw.egroups.com with NNFMP; 05 Jan 2001 03:13:12 -0000 Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2001 03:13:11 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Once more, really sorry Kevan Message-ID: <933e47+6mh8@e...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 212 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 24.4.252.248 From: "Feyd " Kevan, I just keep losing the email with the password you send me -- I'm on a bastard email system that eats read mail. Can you give it to me one more time and I'll write it down I promise. Feyd the Flighty From jjweston@k... Fri Jan 05 00:39:18 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 5 Jan 2001 08:39:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 69755 invoked from network); 5 Jan 2001 08:38:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Jan 2001 08:38:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta1 with SMTP; 5 Jan 2001 08:38:51 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f059UhY11904 for ; Fri, 5 Jan 2001 01:30:44 -0800 Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2001 01:30:43 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Once more, really sorry Kevan In-Reply-To: <933e47+6mh8@e...> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" Uh... Isn't this a DocNomic issue? I don't think Kevan is subscribed to this mailing list anymore. On Fri, 5 Jan 2001, Feyd wrote: > Kevan, > > I just keep losing the email with the password you send me -- I'm on > a bastard email system that eats read mail. Can you give it to me > one more time and I'll write it down I promise. > > Feyd the Flighty From Nomic1@a... Fri Jan 05 06:17:16 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 5 Jan 2001 14:17:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 72111 invoked from network); 5 Jan 2001 14:17:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Jan 2001 14:17:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hh.egroups.com) (10.1.10.40) by mta1 with SMTP; 5 Jan 2001 14:17:14 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.10.123] by hh.egroups.com with NNFMP; 05 Jan 2001 14:17:14 -0000 Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2001 14:17:07 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: Once more, really sorry Kevan Message-ID: <934l13+btj5@e...> In-Reply-To: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 337 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 208.249.92.137 From: "Feyd " --- In n_omic@egroups.com, "Jeffrey J. Weston" wrote: > Uh... Isn't this a DocNomic issue? I don't think Kevan is > subscribed to this mailing list anymore. Uh... yes it is. And no he isn't. I thought I was sending him private email. Sigh. I guess I'll try again > > Feyd the Flighty ^ apparently very From jjweston@k... Fri Jan 05 10:41:33 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 5 Jan 2001 18:41:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 66826 invoked from network); 5 Jan 2001 18:27:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Jan 2001 18:27:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta3 with SMTP; 5 Jan 2001 19:28:33 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f05JJ5J12373 for ; Fri, 5 Jan 2001 11:19:06 -0800 Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2001 11:19:04 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Proposal 311 Passes Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" With 4 votes for and 2 votes against, proposal 311 passes. Joel Ricker loses 10 points and becomes a Reyalp for not voting within 72 hours after the amended proposal was posted. Feyd receives 13 points for receiving 66.7% favorable votes. Andre Engels and Rich Holmes receive 10 points each for voting against a winning proposal. Play now continues with Andre Engels. Andre Engels is an unlabelled player. As the judge, Feyd must place a label on Andre Engels' forehead and inform everyone else of the label. From engels@w... Fri Jan 05 11:12:32 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: engels@w... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 5 Jan 2001 19:12:31 -0000 Received: (qmail 24947 invoked from network); 5 Jan 2001 18:55:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Jan 2001 18:55:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailhost.tue.nl) (131.155.2.5) by mta3 with SMTP; 5 Jan 2001 19:56:29 -0000 Received: from wsinfm15.win.tue.nl (wsinfm15.win.tue.nl [131.155.69.168]) by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f05ItMS27089 for ; Fri, 5 Jan 2001 19:55:23 +0100 (MET) Received: (from engels@l...) by wsinfm15.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) id f05ItM801661 for n_omic@egroups.com; Fri, 5 Jan 2001 19:55:22 +0100 (MET) Message-Id: <200101051855.f05ItM801661@w...> Subject: Proposal 312 To: n_omic@egroups.com Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2001 19:55:22 +0100 (MET) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL43 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Andre Engels Let a Rule be created with the following text: If a player wins the game, the game does not end. Instead, all players have their number of points reset to zero, and their number of Groks to 50 plus 20 times the number of times they have won the game. From rsholmes@m... Fri Jan 05 12:18:51 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 5 Jan 2001 20:18:50 -0000 Received: (qmail 21068 invoked from network); 5 Jan 2001 20:04:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Jan 2001 20:04:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta1 with SMTP; 5 Jan 2001 20:04:32 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.0087261E@m...>; Fri, 5 Jan 2001 15:04:31 -0500 Received: (from rsholmes@l...) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id PAA14333; Fri, 5 Jan 2001 15:04:30 -0500 (EST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: VOTE FOR [n_omic] Proposal 312 References: <200101051855.f05ItM801661@w...> Date: 05 Jan 2001 15:04:30 -0500 In-Reply-To: Andre Engels's message of "Fri, 5 Jan 2001 19:55:22 +0100 (MET)" Message-ID: Lines: 10 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... Andre Engels writes: > Let a Rule be created with the following text: > > If a player wins the game, the game does not end. Instead, all players have > their number of points reset to zero, and their number of Groks to 50 plus > 20 times the number of times they have won the game. -- Doctroid From jjweston@k... Fri Jan 05 12:22:38 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 5 Jan 2001 20:22:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 37837 invoked from network); 5 Jan 2001 20:09:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Jan 2001 20:09:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta2 with SMTP; 5 Jan 2001 20:09:12 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f05L05512465 for ; Fri, 5 Jan 2001 13:00:48 -0800 Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2001 13:00:05 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Administrative Note Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" Up until proposal 310, I've been assuming that players vote for their own proposals, due to unaminity requirements. Since now only a simple majority is required, and there is a potential benefit to voting against your own proposals, I'm no longer assuming that you vote for your own proposals. You must now state what your vote is on your own proposals. From frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... Fri Jan 05 12:24:19 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 5 Jan 2001 20:24:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 25351 invoked from network); 5 Jan 2001 20:10:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Jan 2001 20:10:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailhub.Dartmouth.EDU) (129.170.16.6) by mta2 with SMTP; 5 Jan 2001 20:10:24 -0000 Received: from dasher.Dartmouth.EDU (dasher.dartmouth.edu [129.170.208.6]) by mailhub.Dartmouth.EDU (8.9.3+DND/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA25764 for ; Fri, 5 Jan 2001 15:10:21 -0500 (EST) Message-id: <38493913@d...> Date: 05 Jan 2001 15:10:21 EST Reply-To: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... (Willard) Subject: Re: [n_omic] Proposal 312 To: n_omic@egroups.com X-eGroups-From: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... (Frederick C. Strathmeyer) From: frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... I vote AGAINST. (i'd like the game to end.. =P) From jjweston@k... Fri Jan 05 12:31:21 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 5 Jan 2001 20:31:21 -0000 Received: (qmail 60530 invoked from network); 5 Jan 2001 20:15:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Jan 2001 20:15:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta3 with SMTP; 5 Jan 2001 21:16:47 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f05L6ea12474 for ; Fri, 5 Jan 2001 13:06:52 -0800 Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2001 13:06:40 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Vote FOR Proposal 312 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" From Nomic1@a... Fri Jan 05 13:32:08 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 5 Jan 2001 21:32:08 -0000 Received: (qmail 63223 invoked from network); 5 Jan 2001 21:30:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Jan 2001 21:30:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO fk.egroups.com) (10.1.10.47) by mta3 with SMTP; 5 Jan 2001 22:31:32 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.10.132] by fk.egroups.com with NNFMP; 05 Jan 2001 21:30:27 -0000 Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2001 21:30:17 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Vote AGAINST Proposal 312 Message-ID: <935ed9+2o8k@e...> In-Reply-To: <200101051855.f05ItM801661@w...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 325 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 208.249.92.138 From: Nomic1@a... --- In n_omic@egroups.com, Andre Engels wrote: > Let a Rule be created with the following text: > > If a player wins the game, the game does not end. Instead, all players have > their number of points reset to zero, and their number of Groks to 50 plus > 20 times the number of times they have won the game. From Nomic1@a... Fri Jan 05 14:06:40 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 5 Jan 2001 22:06:39 -0000 Received: (qmail 33891 invoked from network); 5 Jan 2001 22:06:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Jan 2001 22:06:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hi.egroups.com) (10.1.10.41) by mta2 with SMTP; 5 Jan 2001 22:06:23 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.2.211] by hi.egroups.com with NNFMP; 05 Jan 2001 22:06:23 -0000 Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2001 22:06:17 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: Vote AGAINST Proposal 312 Message-ID: <935ggp+h8cv@e...> In-Reply-To: <935ed9+2o8k@e...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 275 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 208.249.92.138 From: Nomic1@a... Sorry, should have given my reasons... I vote against the proposal because I would prefer to start tabula rosa between games, rather than back up a step and keep going. Also, a restart should be even, without giving weight to previous winners. All IMHO, of course. Feyd From jjweston@k... Sat Jan 06 11:52:02 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 6 Jan 2001 19:52:01 -0000 Received: (qmail 36943 invoked from network); 6 Jan 2001 19:52:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 6 Jan 2001 19:52:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta1 with SMTP; 6 Jan 2001 19:52:00 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f06KhV013074 for ; Sat, 6 Jan 2001 12:43:32 -0800 Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2001 12:43:31 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Feyd, what is Andre's label? Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" Still haven't received notification of Andre's label... From Nomic1@a... Sat Jan 06 13:27:04 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 6 Jan 2001 21:27:02 -0000 Received: (qmail 71340 invoked from network); 6 Jan 2001 21:27:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 6 Jan 2001 21:27:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mw.egroups.com) (10.1.2.2) by mta2 with SMTP; 6 Jan 2001 21:27:01 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.10.122] by mw.egroups.com with NNFMP; 06 Jan 2001 21:27:01 -0000 Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2001 21:26:56 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: *Sent. If you didn't receive please ping me. Feyd Message-ID: <9382j0+82ea@e...> In-Reply-To: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 1 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 24.4.252.248 From: Nomic1@a... From jjweston@k... Sat Jan 06 23:58:53 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 7 Jan 2001 07:58:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 99629 invoked from network); 7 Jan 2001 07:58:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Jan 2001 07:58:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta2 with SMTP; 7 Jan 2001 07:58:52 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f078oGA13300 for ; Sun, 7 Jan 2001 00:50:16 -0800 Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2001 00:50:16 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] *Sent. If you didn't receive please ping me. Feyd In-Reply-To: <9382j0+82ea@e...> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" Got it. Although, in the future, please use jjweston@k... to send private email to me. My access to my other email address will be limited for a couple of weeks. From engels@w... Mon Jan 08 00:40:26 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: engels@w... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 8 Jan 2001 08:40:24 -0000 Received: (qmail 25276 invoked from network); 8 Jan 2001 08:40:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 8 Jan 2001 08:40:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kweetal.tue.nl) (131.155.2.7) by mta3 with SMTP; 8 Jan 2001 09:41:28 -0000 Received: from wsinfm15.win.tue.nl (wsinfm15.win.tue.nl [131.155.69.168]) by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f088eLA13909 for ; Mon, 8 Jan 2001 09:40:21 +0100 (MET) Received: (from engels@l...) by wsinfm15.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) id f088b4D06289 for n_omic@egroups.com; Mon, 8 Jan 2001 09:37:04 +0100 (MET) Message-Id: <200101080837.f088b4D06289@w...> Subject: Vote To: n_omic@egroups.com Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2001 09:37:03 +0100 (MET) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL43 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Andre Engels I vote FOR Proposal 312. -- Andre Engels, engels@w... telephone: +31-40-2474628 (work) +31-6-17774490 (mobile) http://www.win.tue.nl/~engels/index_en.html If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all -- Noam Chomsky From jjweston@k... Mon Jan 08 07:55:35 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 8 Jan 2001 15:55:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 79560 invoked from network); 8 Jan 2001 15:54:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 8 Jan 2001 15:54:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta3 with SMTP; 8 Jan 2001 16:55:48 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f08GjN318015 for ; Mon, 8 Jan 2001 08:45:35 -0800 Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2001 08:45:23 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Jon Grimm: 3 hours left to vote on 312... Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" Still waiting for Jon Grimm's vote. You have three hours left. From jjweston@k... Mon Jan 08 08:14:10 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 8 Jan 2001 16:14:06 -0000 Received: (qmail 76239 invoked from network); 8 Jan 2001 16:13:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 8 Jan 2001 16:13:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta2 with SMTP; 8 Jan 2001 16:13:09 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f08H44818051 for ; Mon, 8 Jan 2001 09:04:06 -0800 Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2001 09:04:04 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Kevan is dropped from the game. Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" Kevan has not rejoined the game within the given time frame. He is dropped from the game. As the current judge, Feyd must remove one label from the list of valid labels. From jjweston@k... Mon Jan 08 16:05:22 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 9 Jan 2001 00:05:21 -0000 Received: (qmail 25009 invoked from network); 9 Jan 2001 00:03:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 9 Jan 2001 00:03:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta1 with SMTP; 9 Jan 2001 00:03:06 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f090rla18495 for ; Mon, 8 Jan 2001 16:53:53 -0800 Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2001 16:53:47 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Proposal 312 Passes Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" With 3 votes for and 2 votes against, proposal 312 passes. Jon Grimm did not vote within the 72 hour time frame, so he loses 10 points and becomes a reyalp. Andre Engels gains 13 points for receiving 60% favorable votes. Feyd and Eric receive 10 points each for voting against a winning proposal. Play now continues with Rich Holmes. Rich Holmes is an unlabelled player. As the judge, Andre Engels must place a label on Rich's forehead and inform everyone else of the label. However, Andre probably should wait until Feyd announces which label he has removed from the list of valid labels. The web site has been updated with this rule change. From rsholmes@m... Mon Jan 08 19:04:02 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 9 Jan 2001 03:04:01 -0000 Received: (qmail 78441 invoked from network); 9 Jan 2001 03:03:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 9 Jan 2001 03:03:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta2 with SMTP; 9 Jan 2001 03:03:30 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.0087F0E3@m...>; Mon, 8 Jan 2001 22:03:30 -0500 Received: (from rsholmes@l...) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id WAA13042; Mon, 8 Jan 2001 22:03:29 -0500 (EST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Proposal 313 References: Date: 08 Jan 2001 22:03:29 -0500 In-Reply-To: "Jeffrey J. Weston"'s message of "Mon, 8 Jan 2001 16:53:47 -0800 (PST)" Message-ID: Lines: 29 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... Add a rule: Each Player or Reyalp occupies a square on an infinite 2-dimensional grid. Squares have integer coordinates (x,y). Players and Reyalps may be moved from one square to another only as specified by the Rules. The first Player to reach Row Zero (i.e., any square whose y coordinate is zero) without crossing it gains 100 points, and must immediately move all Players and Reyalps to squares (0, 20), (5, 20), (10, 20), ... ((n-1, 20)*5) (where n is the number of Players and Reyalps) in any order e chooses. A new Player entering the game is placed on square ((n-1)*5, j) where n is the new number of Players and Reyalps and j is the mean value of the y coordinate of all the other Players and Reyalps, rounded to the nearest integer. At the moment this rule is enacted, Feyd is on square (0, 20); Andre is on square (5, 20); Jon is on square (10, 20); Rich is on square (15, 20); Joel is on square (20, 20); Eric is on square (25, 20); and Jeff is on square (30, 20) [[order determined by player number]]. This paragraph will then self-repeal. -- Doctroid From jjweston@k... Tue Jan 09 08:18:47 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 9 Jan 2001 16:18:46 -0000 Received: (qmail 62791 invoked from network); 9 Jan 2001 16:14:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 9 Jan 2001 16:14:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta2 with SMTP; 9 Jan 2001 16:14:11 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f09G3ML18994 for ; Tue, 9 Jan 2001 08:04:04 -0800 Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2001 08:03:22 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Proposal 313 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" Looks like there is a typo in the fourth paragraph: On 8 Jan 2001 rsholmes@m... wrote: > The first Player to reach Row Zero (i.e., any square whose y > coordinate is zero) without crossing it gains 100 points, and must > immediately move all Players and Reyalps to squares (0, 20), (5, 20), > (10, 20), ... ((n-1, 20)*5) (where n is the number of Players and > Reyalps) in any order e chooses. The phrase "((n-1, 20)*5)" looks like it should read as: ((n-1)*5, 20) From Nomic1@a... Tue Jan 09 08:40:28 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 9 Jan 2001 16:40:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 88121 invoked from network); 9 Jan 2001 16:37:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 9 Jan 2001 16:37:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO fk.egroups.com) (10.1.10.47) by mta2 with SMTP; 9 Jan 2001 16:37:57 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.10.120] by fk.egroups.com with NNFMP; 09 Jan 2001 16:37:56 -0000 Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2001 16:37:52 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Removing Lable: I hereby remove lable "Scissors" Message-ID: <93fep0+37rq@e...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 63 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 208.249.92.138 From: Nomic1@a... Is the list of current lables currently listed anywhere? Feyd From Nomic1@a... Tue Jan 09 08:43:34 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 9 Jan 2001 16:43:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 86721 invoked from network); 9 Jan 2001 16:41:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 9 Jan 2001 16:41:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mq.egroups.com) (10.1.1.36) by mta2 with SMTP; 9 Jan 2001 16:41:15 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.10.120] by mq.egroups.com with NNFMP; 09 Jan 2001 16:41:14 -0000 Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2001 16:41:09 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Can we call the amended proposal "313a" or such so they don't get confused? Message-ID: <93fev5+jfen@e...> In-Reply-To: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 569 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 208.249.92.138 From: Nomic1@a... --- In n_omic@egroups.com, "Jeffrey J. Weston" wrote: > Looks like there is a typo in the fourth paragraph: > > On 8 Jan 2001 rsholmes@m... wrote: > > > The first Player to reach Row Zero (i.e., any square whose y > > coordinate is zero) without crossing it gains 100 points, and must > > immediately move all Players and Reyalps to squares (0, 20), (5, 20), > > (10, 20), ... ((n-1, 20)*5) (where n is the number of Players and > > Reyalps) in any order e chooses. > > The phrase "((n-1, 20)*5)" looks like it should read as: > > ((n-1)*5, 20) From engels@w... Tue Jan 09 10:06:38 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: engels@w... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 9 Jan 2001 18:06:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 91456 invoked from network); 9 Jan 2001 18:00:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 9 Jan 2001 18:00:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kweetal.tue.nl) (131.155.2.7) by mta1 with SMTP; 9 Jan 2001 18:00:39 -0000 Received: from wsinfm15.win.tue.nl (wsinfm15.win.tue.nl [131.155.69.168]) by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f09I0bh18880 for ; Tue, 9 Jan 2001 19:00:38 +0100 (MET) Received: (from engels@l...) by wsinfm15.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) id f09I0b801273 for n_omic@egroups.com; Tue, 9 Jan 2001 19:00:37 +0100 (MET) Message-Id: <200101091800.f09I0b801273@w...> Subject: Re: [n_omic] Can we call the amended proposal "313a" or such so they don't get confused? In-Reply-To: <93fev5+jfen@e...> from "Nomic1@a..." at "Jan 9, 2001 4:41: 9 pm" To: n_omic@egroups.com Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2001 19:00:37 +0100 (MET) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL43 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Andre Engels It's okay with me to call the amended proposal 313a. However, please do note that it's not a proposal (yet). If Rich (or I) ends the discussion and decides to adopt the amendment, 313a becomes proposal 313. If not, it will not be voted upon. -- Andre Engels, engels@w... telephone: +31-40-2474628 (work) +31-6-17774490 (mobile) http://www.win.tue.nl/~engels/index_en.html If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all -- Noam Chomsky From jjweston@k... Tue Jan 09 10:45:24 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 9 Jan 2001 18:45:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 15829 invoked from network); 9 Jan 2001 18:40:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 9 Jan 2001 18:40:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta2 with SMTP; 9 Jan 2001 18:40:02 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f09JUO919135 for ; Tue, 9 Jan 2001 11:30:27 -0800 Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2001 11:30:23 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Removing Lable: I hereby remove lable "Scissors" In-Reply-To: <93fep0+37rq@e...> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" On Tue, 9 Jan 2001 Nomic1@a... wrote: > Is the list of current lables currently listed anywhere? I keep the current list of valid labels at this url: http://kenny.sir-toby.com/n_omic/players.html I will go ahead and remove scissors from the list. From jjweston@k... Tue Jan 09 10:49:50 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 9 Jan 2001 18:49:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 40033 invoked from network); 9 Jan 2001 18:44:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 9 Jan 2001 18:44:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta3 with SMTP; 9 Jan 2001 19:45:37 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f09JZ6B19143 for ; Tue, 9 Jan 2001 11:35:12 -0800 Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2001 11:35:05 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Removing Lable: I hereby remove lable "Scissors" In-Reply-To: <93fep0+37rq@e...> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" I know of no one with this label. Will someone please let me know if my label is "Scissors"? From rsholmes@m... Tue Jan 09 11:56:04 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 9 Jan 2001 19:56:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 13230 invoked from network); 9 Jan 2001 19:55:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 9 Jan 2001 19:55:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta2 with SMTP; 9 Jan 2001 19:55:19 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.00882964@m...>; Tue, 9 Jan 2001 14:55:10 -0500 Received: (from rsholmes@l...) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id OAA15826; Tue, 9 Jan 2001 14:55:09 -0500 (EST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Proposal 313 References: Date: 09 Jan 2001 14:55:09 -0500 Message-ID: Lines: 31 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... [[Sorry, tried to get clever with a macro and it bit me.]] Add a rule: Each Player or Reyalp occupies a square on an infinite 2-dimensional grid. Squares have integer coordinates (x,y). Players and Reyalps may be moved from one square to another only as specified by the Rules. The first Player to reach Row Zero (i.e., any square whose y coordinate is zero) without crossing it gains 100 points, and must immediately move all Players and Reyalps to squares (0, 20), (5, 20), (10, 20), ... ((n-1)*5, 20) (where n is the number of Players and Reyalps) in any order e chooses. A new Player entering the game is placed on square ((n-1)*5, j) where n is the new number of Players and Reyalps and j is the mean value of the y coordinate of all the other Players and Reyalps, rounded to the nearest integer. At the moment this rule is enacted, Feyd is on square (0, 20); Andre is on square (5, 20); Jon is on square (10, 20); Rich is on square (15, 20); Joel is on square (20, 20); Eric is on square (25, 20); and Jeff is on square (30, 20) [[order determined by player number]]. This paragraph will then self-repeal. -- Doctroid From jjweston@k... Wed Jan 10 07:08:13 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 10 Jan 2001 15:08:13 -0000 Received: (qmail 90897 invoked from network); 10 Jan 2001 15:04:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 10 Jan 2001 15:04:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta1 with SMTP; 10 Jan 2001 15:04:52 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0AFsfT19756 for ; Wed, 10 Jan 2001 07:55:08 -0800 Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 07:54:41 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Vote FOR Proposal 313 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" From Nomic1@a... Wed Jan 10 07:16:59 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 10 Jan 2001 15:16:59 -0000 Received: (qmail 74509 invoked from network); 10 Jan 2001 15:13:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 10 Jan 2001 15:13:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hp.egroups.com) (10.1.2.220) by mta2 with SMTP; 10 Jan 2001 15:12:59 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.10.120] by hp.egroups.com with NNFMP; 10 Jan 2001 15:12:59 -0000 Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 15:12:54 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: VOTE FOR AMENDED Proposal 313 (as stated below) Message-ID: <93hu5m+u4iv@e...> In-Reply-To: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 1296 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 208.249.92.138 From: Nomic1@a... This looks kinda similar to another nomic I read through, but I'm sure we'll change things soon enough. Feyd --- In n_omic@egroups.com, rsholmes@m... wrote: > Add a rule: > > Each Player or Reyalp occupies a square on an infinite 2-dimensional > grid. > > Squares have integer coordinates (x,y). > > Players and Reyalps may be moved from one square to another only as > specified by the Rules. > > The first Player to reach Row Zero (i.e., any square whose y > coordinate is zero) without crossing it gains 100 points, and must > immediately move all Players and Reyalps to squares (0, 20), (5, 20), > (10, 20), ... ((n-1)*5, 20) (where n is the number of Players and > Reyalps) in any order e chooses. > > A new Player entering the game is placed on square ((n-1)*5, j) where > n is the new number of Players and Reyalps and j is the mean value of > the y coordinate of all the other Players and Reyalps, rounded to the > nearest integer. > > At the moment this rule is enacted, Feyd is on square (0, 20); Andre > is on square (5, 20); Jon is on square (10, 20); Rich is on square > (15, 20); Joel is on square (20, 20); Eric is on square (25, 20); and > Jeff is on square (30, 20) [[order determined by player number]]. > This paragraph will then self-repeal. > > -- > Doctroid From rsholmes@m... Wed Jan 10 09:47:53 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 10 Jan 2001 17:47:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 54879 invoked from network); 10 Jan 2001 17:36:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 10 Jan 2001 17:36:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta2 with SMTP; 10 Jan 2001 17:36:02 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.00887902@m...>; Wed, 10 Jan 2001 12:36:02 -0500 Received: (from rsholmes@l...) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id MAA09231; Wed, 10 Jan 2001 12:36:01 -0500 (EST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] VOTE FOR AMENDED Proposal 313 (as stated below) References: <93hu5m+u4iv@e...> Date: 10 Jan 2001 12:36:01 -0500 In-Reply-To: Nomic1@a...'s message of "Wed, 10 Jan 2001 15:12:54 -0000" Message-ID: Lines: 9 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... Nomic1@a... writes: > This looks kinda similar to another nomic I read through, but I'm > sure we'll change things soon enough. We'd better... given that there's no way to move yet! -- Doctroid From frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... Wed Jan 10 10:15:45 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 10 Jan 2001 18:15:44 -0000 Received: (qmail 43927 invoked from network); 10 Jan 2001 18:01:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 10 Jan 2001 18:01:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailhub.Dartmouth.EDU) (129.170.16.6) by mta1 with SMTP; 10 Jan 2001 18:01:21 -0000 Received: from dasher.Dartmouth.EDU (dasher.dartmouth.edu [129.170.208.6]) by mailhub.Dartmouth.EDU (8.9.3+DND/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA08833 for ; Wed, 10 Jan 2001 13:01:19 -0500 (EST) Message-id: <38680574@d...> Date: 10 Jan 2001 13:01:19 EST Reply-To: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... (Willard) Subject: vote FOR 313 To: n_omic@egroups.com X-eGroups-From: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... (Frederick C. Strathmeyer) From: frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... what the hell... i'll vote FOR it... From jjweston@k... Thu Jan 11 16:15:18 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 12 Jan 2001 00:15:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 23135 invoked from network); 12 Jan 2001 00:05:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 12 Jan 2001 00:05:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta3 with SMTP; 12 Jan 2001 01:06:41 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0C0tQr20798 for ; Thu, 11 Jan 2001 16:55:32 -0800 Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 16:55:26 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: 20 hours left to vote on proposal 313 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" Andre and Rich, you have about 20 hours left to cast your vote for proposal 313. From rsholmes@m... Fri Jan 12 07:34:05 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 12 Jan 2001 15:34:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 30120 invoked from network); 12 Jan 2001 15:32:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 12 Jan 2001 15:32:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta2 with SMTP; 12 Jan 2001 15:32:20 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.00893F56@m...>; Fri, 12 Jan 2001 10:32:20 -0500 Received: (from rsholmes@l...) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id KAA29964; Fri, 12 Jan 2001 10:32:19 -0500 (EST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: VOTE FOR [n_omic] Proposal 313 as amended References: Date: 12 Jan 2001 10:32:19 -0500 In-Reply-To: rsholmes@m...'s message of "09 Jan 2001 14:55:09 -0500" Message-ID: Lines: 3 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... -- Doctroid From engels@w... Fri Jan 12 12:07:39 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: engels@w... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 12 Jan 2001 20:07:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 76237 invoked from network); 12 Jan 2001 20:07:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 12 Jan 2001 20:07:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kweetal.tue.nl) (131.155.2.7) by mta1 with SMTP; 12 Jan 2001 20:07:25 -0000 Received: from wsinfm15.win.tue.nl (wsinfm15.win.tue.nl [131.155.69.168]) by kweetal.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0CK7NT01592 for ; Fri, 12 Jan 2001 21:07:23 +0100 (MET) Received: (from engels@l...) by wsinfm15.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) id f0CK7Mk00433 for n_omic@egroups.com; Fri, 12 Jan 2001 21:07:23 +0100 (MET) Message-Id: <200101122007.f0CK7Mk00433@w...> Subject: Vote To: n_omic@egroups.com Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 21:07:22 +0100 (MET) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL43 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Andre Engels What the heck, I'll vote FOR Proposal 313. -- Andre Engels, engels@w... telephone: +31-40-2474628 (work) +31-6-17774490 (mobile) http://www.win.tue.nl/~engels/index_en.html If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all -- Noam Chomsky From jjweston@k... Fri Jan 12 14:46:03 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 12 Jan 2001 22:46:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 83930 invoked from network); 12 Jan 2001 22:45:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 12 Jan 2001 22:45:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta1 with SMTP; 12 Jan 2001 22:45:13 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0CNYnk21641 for ; Fri, 12 Jan 2001 15:34:59 -0800 Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 15:34:49 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Proposal 313 Passes Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" With 5 votes for and 0 votes against, proposal 313 passes. Rich Holmes gains 22 points for receiving 100% favorable votes. Feyd is placed on square (0, 20). Andre is placed on square (5, 20). Jon is placed on square (10, 20). Rich is placed on square (15, 20). Joel is placed on square (20, 20). Eric is placed on square (25, 20). Jeff is placed on square (30, 20). The last paragraph of rule 313 repeals itself. Play now coninues with Eric Strathmeyer. Eric is an unlabelled player. As the judge, Rich Holmes must place a label on Eric's forehead and inform everyone else what it is. The web site has been updated with the latest rule changes. From jjweston@k... Mon Jan 15 07:16:13 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 15 Jan 2001 15:16:09 -0000 Received: (qmail 60152 invoked from network); 15 Jan 2001 15:14:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 15 Jan 2001 15:14:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta2 with SMTP; 15 Jan 2001 15:14:02 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0FG1tG26973 for ; Mon, 15 Jan 2001 08:02:31 -0800 Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 08:01:55 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Eric - Its Your Turn Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" Eric, you have about 8 and a half hours left to make a proposal before becoming a Reyalp. From frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... Mon Jan 15 12:10:12 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 15 Jan 2001 20:10:11 -0000 Received: (qmail 86913 invoked from network); 15 Jan 2001 19:50:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 15 Jan 2001 19:50:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailhub.Dartmouth.EDU) (129.170.16.6) by mta2 with SMTP; 15 Jan 2001 19:50:48 -0000 Received: from dasher.Dartmouth.EDU (dasher.dartmouth.edu [129.170.208.6]) by mailhub.Dartmouth.EDU (8.9.3+DND/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA30361 for ; Mon, 15 Jan 2001 14:50:46 -0500 (EST) Message-id: <38869464@d...> Date: 15 Jan 2001 14:50:46 EST Reply-To: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... (Willard) Subject: Proposal 314 To: n_omic@egroups.com X-eGroups-From: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... (Frederick C. Strathmeyer) From: frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... Feyd's name is hereby changed to Feyd Unaway. If this proposal passes, everyone but Feyd will get 50 groks, and this paragraph will remove itself from the ruleset. [[ Evil.... ]] From rsholmes@m... Mon Jan 15 12:49:38 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 15 Jan 2001 20:49:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 24854 invoked from network); 15 Jan 2001 20:31:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 15 Jan 2001 20:31:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta2 with SMTP; 15 Jan 2001 20:31:08 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.008A1742@m...>; Mon, 15 Jan 2001 15:31:08 -0500 Received: (from rsholmes@l...) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id PAA04612; Mon, 15 Jan 2001 15:31:07 -0500 (EST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Proposal 314 References: <38869464@d...> Date: 15 Jan 2001 15:31:06 -0500 In-Reply-To: frederick.c.strathmeyer@d...'s message of "15 Jan 2001 14:50:46 EST" Message-ID: Lines: 15 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... writes: > Feyd's name is hereby changed to Feyd Unaway. > > If this proposal passes, everyone but Feyd will get 50 groks, and this > paragraph will remove itself from the ruleset. > > [[ Evil.... ]] What is this, National Gang Up On Feyd month? ;-) (Anyone not playing DocNomic probably won't understand...) -- Doctroid From jjweston@k... Mon Jan 15 12:49:58 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 15 Jan 2001 20:49:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 13838 invoked from network); 15 Jan 2001 20:32:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 15 Jan 2001 20:32:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta1 with SMTP; 15 Jan 2001 20:32:34 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0FLLRv27149 for ; Mon, 15 Jan 2001 13:21:35 -0800 Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 13:21:27 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Vote AGAINST Proposal 314 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" From frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... Mon Jan 15 13:11:01 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 15 Jan 2001 21:11:01 -0000 Received: (qmail 85516 invoked from network); 15 Jan 2001 20:52:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 15 Jan 2001 20:52:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailhub.Dartmouth.EDU) (129.170.16.6) by mta3 with SMTP; 15 Jan 2001 21:53:18 -0000 Received: from dasher.Dartmouth.EDU (dasher.dartmouth.edu [129.170.208.6]) by mailhub.Dartmouth.EDU (8.9.3+DND/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA17794 for ; Mon, 15 Jan 2001 15:52:10 -0500 (EST) Message-id: <38872668@d...> Date: 15 Jan 2001 15:52:09 EST Reply-To: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... (Willard) Subject: Re: [n_omic] Proposal 314 To: n_omic@egroups.com X-eGroups-From: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... (Frederick C. Strathmeyer) From: frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... --- You wrote: What is this, National Gang Up On Feyd month? ;-) --- end of quote --- No... It was simply me rolling out of bed this afternoon, seeing that I only had a few hours left to make up a proposal and simply typing the first thing that came to the my mind... I hope Feyd realizes it's all in good fun.... From rsholmes@m... Mon Jan 15 13:21:08 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 15 Jan 2001 21:21:08 -0000 Received: (qmail 28589 invoked from network); 15 Jan 2001 21:01:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 15 Jan 2001 21:01:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta2 with SMTP; 15 Jan 2001 21:01:06 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.008A198A@m...>; Mon, 15 Jan 2001 16:01:06 -0500 Received: (from rsholmes@l...) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id QAA09093; Mon, 15 Jan 2001 16:01:05 -0500 (EST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: VOTE AGAINST: [n_omic] Proposal 314 References: <38869464@d...> Date: 15 Jan 2001 16:01:05 -0500 In-Reply-To: frederick.c.strathmeyer@d...'s message of "15 Jan 2001 14:50:46 EST" Message-ID: Lines: 11 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... writes: > Feyd's name is hereby changed to Feyd Unaway. > > If this proposal passes, everyone but Feyd will get 50 groks, and this > paragraph will remove itself from the ruleset. > > [[ Evil.... ]] -- Doctroid From Nomic1@a... Mon Jan 15 14:19:31 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 15 Jan 2001 22:19:30 -0000 Received: (qmail 47876 invoked from network); 15 Jan 2001 21:54:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 15 Jan 2001 21:54:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mu.egroups.com) (10.1.1.40) by mta3 with SMTP; 15 Jan 2001 22:55:59 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.2.240] by mu.egroups.com with NNFMP; 15 Jan 2001 21:54:41 -0000 Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 21:54:30 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: Proposal 314 Message-ID: <93vrim+a1s8@e...> In-Reply-To: <38872668@d...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 556 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 208.249.92.137 From: Nomic1@a... --- In n_omic@egroups.com, frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... wrote: > I hope Feyd realizes it's all in good fun.... Of course I do. Mommy says that sticks and stones may break my bones, but worms will never hurt me. Unless enacted into a Rule. Even if those words are said by wicked, evil, unrightous shell of a man who can only make his light shine brighter by putting someone elses out! Because I'm a brave little soldier. Besides, I'm not afraid of worms either. Feyd Hmmm. How many groks will you pay me to vote for this proposal? From jjweston@k... Wed Jan 17 07:10:51 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 17 Jan 2001 15:10:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 22530 invoked from network); 17 Jan 2001 15:06:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 17 Jan 2001 15:06:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta2 with SMTP; 17 Jan 2001 15:06:11 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0HFsWu28408 for ; Wed, 17 Jan 2001 07:54:34 -0800 Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2001 07:54:32 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Waiting for votes on proposal 314... Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" Feyd, Andre, and Eric... Still waiting for your vote. You have about 29 hours left to cast your vote. From Nomic1@a... Wed Jan 17 07:22:58 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 17 Jan 2001 15:22:57 -0000 Received: (qmail 31063 invoked from network); 17 Jan 2001 15:18:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 17 Jan 2001 15:18:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO fg.egroups.com) (10.1.2.134) by mta2 with SMTP; 17 Jan 2001 15:18:18 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.2.116] by fg.egroups.com with NNFMP; 17 Jan 2001 15:18:17 -0000 Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2001 15:18:13 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Vote AGAINST Proposal 314 Message-ID: <944d3l+ok3p@e...> In-Reply-To: <38869464@d...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 141 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 208.249.92.138 From: Nomic1@a... I could perhaps have stomached "Feyd Away", but this is just too much. And to add insult to injury you cut me out of the cash LOL. Feyd From frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... Wed Jan 17 07:44:52 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 17 Jan 2001 15:44:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 55172 invoked from network); 17 Jan 2001 15:34:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 17 Jan 2001 15:34:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailhub.Dartmouth.EDU) (129.170.16.6) by mta3 with SMTP; 17 Jan 2001 16:35:41 -0000 Received: from dasher.Dartmouth.EDU (dasher.dartmouth.edu [129.170.208.6]) by mailhub.Dartmouth.EDU (8.9.3+DND/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA07023 for ; Wed, 17 Jan 2001 10:34:28 -0500 (EST) Message-id: <38955377@d...> Date: 17 Jan 2001 10:34:28 EST Reply-To: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... (Willard) Subject: Re: [n_omic] Waiting for votes on proposal 314... To: n_omic@egroups.com X-eGroups-From: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... (Frederick C. Strathmeyer) From: frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... sorry... forgot we had to vote for our own. I vote FOR proposal 314 From jjweston@k... Thu Jan 18 07:09:54 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 18 Jan 2001 15:09:54 -0000 Received: (qmail 77502 invoked from network); 18 Jan 2001 15:05:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 18 Jan 2001 15:05:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta3 with SMTP; 18 Jan 2001 16:06:26 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0IFqxI29161 for ; Thu, 18 Jan 2001 07:53:03 -0800 Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 07:52:59 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Waiting for Andre's vote... Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" Andre, you have about 5 hours left to vote on proposal 314... From jjweston@k... Thu Jan 18 14:52:33 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 18 Jan 2001 22:52:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 77148 invoked from network); 18 Jan 2001 22:27:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 18 Jan 2001 22:27:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta1 with SMTP; 18 Jan 2001 22:27:49 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0INFte29464 for ; Thu, 18 Jan 2001 15:15:57 -0800 Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 15:15:55 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Proposal 314 fails Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" With 1 vote for and 3 votes against, proposal 314 fails. Eric loses 10 points for it failing. Eric gains 6 points for receiving 25% favorable votes. Andre did not vote within the time limit, so he loses 10 points and becomes a Reyalp. Play now continues with myself. I will be making a proposal shortly. From jjweston@k... Thu Jan 18 15:49:01 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 18 Jan 2001 23:49:01 -0000 Received: (qmail 66064 invoked from network); 18 Jan 2001 23:28:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 18 Jan 2001 23:28:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta3 with SMTP; 19 Jan 2001 00:29:32 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0J0GRN29530 for ; Thu, 18 Jan 2001 16:16:40 -0800 Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 16:16:27 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Proposal 315 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" Amend rule 202 to read in full: A player's turn consists of three phases. The first phase is the "Purchase" phase. Players automatically get to propose one rule change per turn, but additional rule change proposals may be purchased during this phase for 50 Groks a piece. The player announces such a purchase by sending a message to the other players indicating how many additional rule change proposals that they wish to purchase. The player must have an adequate supply of Groks in their possesion to make this purchase. Even if the player does not wish to purchase any additional rule change proposals, the player must still announce this to the other players. The second phase is the "Proposal" phase. Players propose as many rule changes as they have arranged for in phase one. Each proposed rule change is a seperate entity, each with their own number. The combined proposed rule changes form one proposal. The individual proposed rule changes do not have to relate to each other in any way. If only one rule change is proposed the label of the proposal is "Propsal x" where x is the number of the proposed rule change, otherwise it is "Proposal x - y" where x is the lowest number assigned in the set of proposed rule changes, and y is the highest number. The third phase is the "Voting" phase. The proposal from phase two is now voted on. If it is adopted, the proposed rule changes are enacted one at a time starting with the lowest numbered rule change, and ending with the highest numbered rule change. If any single rule change is found to be illegal according to the rules, that rule change, along with all higher numbered rule changes in that proposal, are discarded and not enacted. The player loses five points for each rule change discarded in this fashion. The player is awarded the number of points computed by subtracting 291 from the ordinal number of the highest numbered rule change and multiplying that result by the fraction of favorable votes the player's proposal received. From jjweston@k... Thu Jan 18 16:13:25 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 19 Jan 2001 00:13:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 35895 invoked from network); 18 Jan 2001 23:54:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 18 Jan 2001 23:54:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta3 with SMTP; 19 Jan 2001 00:55:44 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0J0gos29545 for ; Thu, 18 Jan 2001 16:42:57 -0800 Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 16:42:50 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Vote FOR Proposal 315 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" From frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... Thu Jan 18 16:16:27 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 19 Jan 2001 00:16:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 57147 invoked from network); 18 Jan 2001 23:56:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 18 Jan 2001 23:56:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailhub.Dartmouth.EDU) (129.170.16.6) by mta1 with SMTP; 18 Jan 2001 23:56:48 -0000 Received: from dasher.Dartmouth.EDU (dasher.dartmouth.edu [129.170.208.6]) by mailhub.Dartmouth.EDU (8.9.3+DND/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA01464 for ; Thu, 18 Jan 2001 18:56:47 -0500 (EST) Message-id: <39029299@d...> Date: 18 Jan 2001 18:56:46 EST Reply-To: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... (Willard) Subject: Re: [n_omic] Proposal 315 To: n_omic@egroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 X-eGroups-From: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... (Frederick C. Strathmeyer) From: frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... i vote for From Nomic1@a... Fri Jan 19 10:47:07 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 19 Jan 2001 18:47:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 1455 invoked from network); 19 Jan 2001 18:36:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 19 Jan 2001 18:36:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hh.egroups.com) (10.1.10.40) by mta3 with SMTP; 19 Jan 2001 19:37:50 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.2.155] by hh.egroups.com with NNFMP; 19 Jan 2001 18:36:43 -0000 Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 18:35:49 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Vote FOR proposal 315 Message-ID: <94a1e5+ehpv@e...> In-Reply-To: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 311 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 208.249.92.138 From: Nomic1@a... --- In n_omic@egroups.com, "Jeffrey J. Weston" wrote: > Amend rule 202 to read in full: I'm not really sure I like the "multiple Proposal" thing, but since everything is voted on one thumbs up/down, it seems fair. And it will allow faster building of particular rule directions. Feyd From rsholmes@m... Fri Jan 19 11:12:27 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 19 Jan 2001 19:12:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 92907 invoked from network); 19 Jan 2001 19:00:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 19 Jan 2001 19:00:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta2 with SMTP; 19 Jan 2001 19:00:58 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.008C1C16@m...>; Fri, 19 Jan 2001 14:00:58 -0500 Received: (from rsholmes@l...) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id OAA08866; Fri, 19 Jan 2001 14:00:57 -0500 (EST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: VOTE AGAINST [n_omic] Proposal 315 References: Date: 19 Jan 2001 14:00:57 -0500 In-Reply-To: "Jeffrey J. Weston"'s message of "Thu, 18 Jan 2001 16:16:27 -0800 (PST)" Message-ID: Lines: 4 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... OK, *now* I'm scamming points! ;-) -- Doctroid From Nomic1@a... Fri Jan 19 11:55:56 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 19 Jan 2001 19:55:56 -0000 Received: (qmail 55861 invoked from network); 19 Jan 2001 19:47:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 19 Jan 2001 19:47:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hh.egroups.com) (10.1.10.40) by mta2 with SMTP; 19 Jan 2001 19:47:27 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.2.110] by hh.egroups.com with NNFMP; 19 Jan 2001 19:47:27 -0000 Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 19:47:21 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: VOTE AGAINST [n_omic] Proposal 315 Message-ID: <94a5k9+s517@e...> In-Reply-To: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 95 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 208.249.92.139 From: Nomic1@a... --- In n_omic@egroups.com, rsholmes@m... wrote: > OK, *now* I'm scamming points! ;-) ROTFL. From jjweston@k... Fri Jan 19 11:55:59 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 19 Jan 2001 19:55:59 -0000 Received: (qmail 55482 invoked from network); 19 Jan 2001 19:47:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 19 Jan 2001 19:47:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta3 with SMTP; 19 Jan 2001 20:48:24 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0JKYbW30300 for ; Fri, 19 Jan 2001 12:35:24 -0800 Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 12:34:37 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Proposal 315 Passes Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" With 3 votes for and 1 vote against, proposal 315 passes. Jeff gains 18 points for receiving 75% favorable votes. Rich Holmes scams^H^H^H^H^Hgains 10 points for voting against a successful proposal. This completes the third complete circuit of turns. Play now continues with Feyd, starting off the fourth circuit of turns. The web site has been updated with this rule change. From jjweston@k... Sat Jan 20 15:27:20 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 20 Jan 2001 23:27:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 6346 invoked from network); 20 Jan 2001 23:27:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 20 Jan 2001 23:27:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta1 with SMTP; 20 Jan 2001 23:27:20 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0L0FDS31019 for ; Sat, 20 Jan 2001 16:15:13 -0800 Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2001 16:15:13 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Feyd: It's your turn. Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" From ross@b... Sun Jan 21 09:20:03 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: ross@b... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 21 Jan 2001 17:20:02 -0000 Received: (qmail 12404 invoked from network); 21 Jan 2001 17:20:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 21 Jan 2001 17:20:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO cliff.unet.brandeis.edu) (129.64.99.34) by mta2 with SMTP; 21 Jan 2001 17:20:02 -0000 Received: from sam.unet.brandeis.edu (IDENT:0@s... [129.64.99.130]) by cliff.unet.brandeis.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3/UNet1.7) with ESMTP id MAA28267 for ; Sun, 21 Jan 2001 12:20:01 -0500 Received: from localhost (ross@l...) by sam.unet.brandeis.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA03460 for ; Sun, 21 Jan 2001 12:20:00 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: sam.unet.brandeis.edu: ross owned process doing -bs Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 12:20:00 -0500 (EST) X-Sender: ross@s... To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: New player? Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Ross B. Schulman" I would like to become a player. Ross Schulman ross@b... From jjweston@k... Sun Jan 21 12:00:02 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 21 Jan 2001 20:00:01 -0000 Received: (qmail 5387 invoked from network); 21 Jan 2001 20:00:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 21 Jan 2001 20:00:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta2 with SMTP; 21 Jan 2001 20:00:00 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0LKleN03083 for ; Sun, 21 Jan 2001 12:47:40 -0800 Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 12:47:39 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] New player? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" On Sun, 21 Jan 2001, Ross B. Schulman wrote: > I would like to become a player. > > Ross Schulman > ross@b... Welcome to N_omic Ross! I have added you to the player list I maintain at: http://kenny.sir-toby.com/n_omic You receive 50 Groks for joining the game, per rule 309. You are placed on square (35, 20), per rule 313. As the current judge, I will privately email you a list of the labels of all the players. As the current player, Feyd will privately email you what my label is. I also have to add one word to the list of valid label words. I will make that announcement soon. Let me know if you have any questions. From jjweston@k... Sun Jan 21 12:01:27 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 21 Jan 2001 20:01:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 64016 invoked from network); 21 Jan 2001 20:01:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 21 Jan 2001 20:01:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta3 with SMTP; 21 Jan 2001 21:02:30 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0LKn3Z03091 for ; Sun, 21 Jan 2001 12:49:04 -0800 Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 12:49:03 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Added Label: Stapler Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" Ross Schulman has joined the game. Per rule 308, I add "Stapler" to the list of valid labels. From htowsner@s... Sun Jan 21 17:19:47 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: htowsner@s... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 22 Jan 2001 01:19:46 -0000 Received: (qmail 85194 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2001 01:19:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 22 Jan 2001 01:19:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO smtp.Stanford.EDU) (171.64.14.23) by mta3 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2001 02:20:50 -0000 Received: from [128.12.55.129] (toyon-00-119.Stanford.EDU [128.12.55.129]) by smtp.Stanford.EDU (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f0M1Jid25685 for ; Sun, 21 Jan 2001 17:19:45 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: htowsner@h... Message-Id: Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 17:19:38 -0800 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: New player Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" From: Henry Towsner I would like to join n_omic...the rules don't seem to actually say how one does this, but just announcing my intent to do so seems to be traditional. -- Henry Towsner Majority, n.: That quality that distinguishes a crime from a law From jjweston@k... Sun Jan 21 18:07:36 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 22 Jan 2001 02:07:36 -0000 Received: (qmail 48098 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2001 02:07:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 22 Jan 2001 02:07:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta1 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2001 02:07:35 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0M2tAk03255 for ; Sun, 21 Jan 2001 18:55:10 -0800 Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 18:55:10 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] New player In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" On Sun, 21 Jan 2001, Henry Towsner wrote: > I would like to join n_omic...the rules don't seem to > actually say how one does this, but just announcing my intent to do > so seems to be traditional. Welcome to N_omic Henry! You may be looking at an older version of our ruleset. Rule 303 of the current rules explains how to join. As luck would have it, you did the right thing anyways. The up to date web site can be found here: http://kenny.sir-toby.com/n_omic/ I have added you to the player list maintained at the above site. You receive 50 Groks for joining the game, per rule 309. You are placed on square (40, 20), per rule 313. As the current judge, I will privately email you a list of the labels of all the players. As the current player, Feyd will privately email you what my label is. I also have to add one word to the list of valid label words. I will make that announcement soon. Let me know if you have any questions. From jjweston@k... Sun Jan 21 18:08:32 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 22 Jan 2001 02:08:31 -0000 Received: (qmail 48835 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2001 02:08:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 22 Jan 2001 02:08:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta2 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2001 02:08:31 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0M2u6T03263 for ; Sun, 21 Jan 2001 18:56:06 -0800 Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 18:56:06 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Added Label: Rag Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" From jjweston@k... Sun Jan 21 18:13:21 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 22 Jan 2001 02:13:21 -0000 Received: (qmail 60507 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2001 02:13:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 22 Jan 2001 02:13:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta1 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2001 02:13:21 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0M30uu03279 for ; Sun, 21 Jan 2001 19:00:56 -0800 Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 19:00:56 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Feyd: 18 hours left to start your turn... Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" Feyd, You have about 18 hours left to start your turn before becoming a Reyalp. From Nomic1@a... Sun Jan 21 18:44:02 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 22 Jan 2001 02:44:02 -0000 Received: (qmail 37261 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2001 02:44:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 22 Jan 2001 02:44:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mw.egroups.com) (10.1.2.2) by mta2 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2001 02:44:02 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.2.113] by mw.egroups.com with NNFMP; 22 Jan 2001 02:44:02 -0000 Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 02:43:53 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Proposal: Rule 316: Movement Message-ID: <94g6p9+8aro@e...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 689 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 24.4.252.248 From: Nomic1@a... Create a new rule as follows: Movement: A player may move along the y axis for a cost of abs[(10 - y1) * (10 - y2)] grocks. Where: y1 is the starting Y coordinate and y2 is the ending Y coordinate. (y1 - y2) < max (2, total number of players) (y2 - y1) > min (-2, total number of players) 10 - y1 <> 0 10 - y2 <> 0 Cost: The grocks paid are given to the current player at the highest Y coordinate. If more than one player is at the highest Y coordinate, the grocks are evenly split between all such players. =============end rule============= [[was thinking odd things about movement and geometry...has great potential for abuse - I kinda like that ]] Feyd From jjweston@k... Sun Jan 21 19:18:05 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 22 Jan 2001 03:18:05 -0000 Received: (qmail 22786 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2001 03:18:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 22 Jan 2001 03:18:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta2 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2001 03:18:04 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0M45dp03336 for ; Sun, 21 Jan 2001 20:05:39 -0800 Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 20:05:39 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Proposal: Rule 316: Movement In-Reply-To: <94g6p9+8aro@e...> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" On Mon, 22 Jan 2001 Nomic1@a... wrote: > Create a new rule as follows: > > > Movement: > A player may move along the y axis for a cost of abs[(10 - y1) * (10 - > y2)] grocks. Where: > y1 is the starting Y coordinate and y2 is the ending Y coordinate. > (y1 - y2) < max (2, total number of players) > (y2 - y1) > min (-2, total number of players) > 10 - y1 <> 0 > 10 - y2 <> 0 > > > Cost: > The grocks paid are given to the current player at the highest Y > coordinate. If more than one player is at the highest Y coordinate, > the grocks are evenly split between all such players. A few questions When can such movement occur? How does a player announce such movement? What do we do about fractional amounts of Groks left over when splitting them amongst multiple players? A couple notes... You don't provide a method to travel UP the Y axis. That may have been your intent, but I'm not sure. Also, you misspelled Grok. On another note, you skipped phase one of your turn. A minor detail, but rule 201 does state that "parts of turns may not be skipped." Under rule 111 I would suggest the following amendments to the proposal: Specify when players may make moves of this sort. Specify how players announce their movements. Specify how fractional amounts of Groks are dealt with when splitting them amongst multiple players. If you intend players to be able to move both directions on the Y axis, make the appropriate adjustments. You may want to specify that a player must have sufficient Groks in their possesion to make the move. We don't want players spending Groks that they don't have... Also, please spell Grok correctly. From Nomic1@a... Mon Jan 22 06:45:08 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 22 Jan 2001 14:45:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 12232 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2001 14:44:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 22 Jan 2001 14:44:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hk.egroups.com) (10.1.10.43) by mta1 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2001 14:44:17 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.1.35] by hk.egroups.com with NNFMP; 22 Jan 2001 14:44:13 -0000 Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 14:43:49 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Feyd: Phase 1 of turn Message-ID: <94hgv5+eb3h@e...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 252 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 208.249.92.137 From: Nomic1@a... Good point. From my re-read of #315 I don't think that the above proposal is valid, since I made it out of order. I'll take phase 1 now and rewrite 316. I will not spend any additional Groks on my turn; I will only make a single proposal. Feyd From rsholmes@m... Mon Jan 22 08:05:39 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 22 Jan 2001 16:05:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 22401 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2001 15:56:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 22 Jan 2001 15:56:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta2 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2001 15:56:57 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.008CF2F8@m...>; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 10:56:57 -0500 Received: (from rsholmes@l...) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id KAA01761; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 10:56:56 -0500 (EST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Proposal: Rule 316: Movement References: <94g6p9+8aro@e...> Date: 22 Jan 2001 10:56:56 -0500 In-Reply-To: Nomic1@a...'s message of "Mon, 22 Jan 2001 02:43:53 -0000" Message-ID: Lines: 59 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... Nomic1@a... writes: > Movement: > A player may move along the y axis But you're the only Player *on* the y axis! Are you the only one allowed to move? I wouldn't put it past you, but I think it's more likely you meant "may move parallel to the y axis". > for a cost of abs[(10 - y1) * (10 - > y2)] grocks. Where: > y1 is the starting Y coordinate and y2 is the ending Y coordinate. Implying, then that any move off or onto the 10th row is free? Very odd... oh, but you ruled that out... > (y1 - y2) < max (2, total number of players) > (y2 - y1) > min (-2, total number of players) > 10 - y1 <> 0 > 10 - y2 <> 0 I'm not sure I understand. Let's see. There now are 6 Players (and 3 Reyalps), and we're all at y1=20. That means 20 - y2 < 6 or y2 > 14 y2 - 20 > -2 or y2 > 18 so the first condition is weaker than the second, and we all can move to any row above row 18 we can afford. No, I don't think that's what you meant. Should that second line be (y1 - y2) > min (-2, -(total number of players)) ? If so, that means 20 - y2 < 6 or y2 > 14 20 - y2 > -6 or y2 < 26 Or in other words, one can move up to 5 squares. Right? >From row 20 to row 15 costs 50 Groks, from 15 to 10 would be free, but that's not allowed. (The third and fourth conditions could be more clearly stated as y1 <> 10, y2 <> 10.) But you could go 15 to 11 for 5 Groks, then 11 to 9 for 1 Grok, 9 to 5 for 5 Groks, and 5 to 0 for 50 Groks. And those Groks go to the other players... and currently we all have 50 Groks... hmmm. Interesting. I do think it's a shame movement in the x direction isn't exploited, but hey, this is Nomic... Oh, and I think you could replace "max (2, number of players)" with "number of players". The only time those two quantities differ is when the number of players is 1 or 0, and in that case I don't think there's a heckuva lot of point in playing... -- Doctroid From Nomic1@a... Mon Jan 22 08:08:13 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 22 Jan 2001 16:08:12 -0000 Received: (qmail 59543 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2001 15:59:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 22 Jan 2001 15:59:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO b05.egroups.com) (10.1.2.184) by mta3 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2001 17:00:30 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.10.110] by b05.egroups.com with NNFMP; 22 Jan 2001 15:58:42 -0000 Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 15:57:21 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Feyd Phase 2: Proposal 316 "Movement" Message-ID: <94hl91+jcql@e...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 1499 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 208.249.92.139 From: Nomic1@a... Proposal 316: Movement Amend rule 315 as follows: I. Change the first sentence to read: "A player's turn consists of four phases. " II. Add the following text to the end of the rule: The fourth phase is the "Movement" phase. A player may move along the Y axis for a cost of |(10 - y1) * (10 - y2) * 2 | + 10 groks, where the following is true: i. y1 is the starting Y coordinate and y2 is the ending Y coordinate. ii. (y1 - y2) < max (2, total number of players) iii.(y2 - y1) > min (-2, total number of players) iv. 10 - y1 <> 0 v. 10 - y2 <> 0 vi. The player has the groks in eir possession to pay for the move. The groks paid are given to the current player at the greatest Y coordinate. If more than one player is at the highest Y coordinate, the groks are evenly split between all such players (fractions are dropped). The player announces the move by stating the move from (X1,Y1) to (X2,Y2), and the total grok cost. If any of the above conditions are false then the player does not move and loses no groks. If all conditions hold then the gamestate is updated to show the move and the groks subtracted from the player's total and distributed. [[ Note that movement may be made in either direction along the Y axis as long as the movement conditions are met. The function "|x|" denotes the absolute value of X. Example: A player at (10,5) could move to (10,3) for 80 groks. Example: A player at (-1,5) could move to (-1,7) for 40 groks. ]] From rsholmes@m... Mon Jan 22 08:16:53 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 22 Jan 2001 16:16:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 50893 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2001 16:06:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 22 Jan 2001 16:06:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta1 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2001 16:06:19 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.008CF4A2@m...>; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 11:06:19 -0500 Received: (from rsholmes@l...) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id LAA03204; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 11:06:17 -0500 (EST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] New player References: Date: 22 Jan 2001 11:06:17 -0500 In-Reply-To: "Jeffrey J. Weston"'s message of "Sun, 21 Jan 2001 18:55:10 -0800 (PST)" Message-ID: Lines: 13 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... "Jeffrey J. Weston" writes: > Welcome to N_omic Henry! You may be looking at an older version of > our ruleset. I see you posted the URL for the "other" site to the NBB. It's unfortunate that your site says "This is not the 'official' web site" or whatever. Actually, nothing in the rules mandates any web site so I think yours is as official as anyone's. It might reduce confusion to remove that disclaimer. -- Doctroid From Nomic1@a... Mon Jan 22 08:51:49 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 22 Jan 2001 16:51:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 85009 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2001 16:41:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 22 Jan 2001 16:41:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO jj.egroups.com) (10.1.10.91) by mta2 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2001 16:41:16 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.2.238] by jj.egroups.com with NNFMP; 22 Jan 2001 16:41:14 -0000 Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 16:41:10 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: "Official Page" -- link updated... Message-ID: <94hnr6+96iv@e...> In-Reply-To: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 367 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 208.249.92.137 From: Nomic1@a... --- In n_omic@egroups.com, rsholmes@m... wrote: > "Jeffrey J. Weston" writes: > I think yours is as official as anyone's. It might reduce confusion > to remove that disclaimer. I posted the link there. Updated. Do we want to keep everyone's X/Y coordinates in an egroups database here, or just keep everything's on Jeff's website? anyone? Feyd From jjweston@k... Mon Jan 22 09:06:00 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 22 Jan 2001 17:05:59 -0000 Received: (qmail 28600 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2001 16:55:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 22 Jan 2001 16:55:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta2 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2001 16:55:34 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0MHgHw03774 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 09:42:39 -0800 Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 09:42:17 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] New player In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" On 22 Jan 2001 rsholmes@m... wrote: > "Jeffrey J. Weston" writes: > > > Welcome to N_omic Henry! You may be looking at an older version of > > our ruleset. > > I see you posted the URL for the "other" site to the NBB. It's > unfortunate that your site says "This is not the 'official' web site" > or whatever. Actually, nothing in the rules mandates any web site so > I think yours is as official as anyone's. It might reduce confusion > to remove that disclaimer. Good point... I put that disclaimer up because the rules don't specify an "official" site. The site is up purely for reference, not because the rules mandate it. I'll take it down off of the front page, but I ought to leave it up on the rules page. If I make a mistake when adjusting the rule set, the web site is not the authoritative version. From jjweston@k... Mon Jan 22 09:12:19 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 22 Jan 2001 17:12:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 61357 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2001 17:02:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 22 Jan 2001 17:02:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta1 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2001 17:02:31 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0MHnYx03788 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 09:49:51 -0800 Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 09:49:34 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] "Official Page" -- link updated... In-Reply-To: <94hnr6+96iv@e...> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" On Mon, 22 Jan 2001 Nomic1@a... wrote: > --- In n_omic@egroups.com, rsholmes@m... wrote: > > "Jeffrey J. Weston" writes: > > I think yours is as official as anyone's. It might reduce confusion > > to remove that disclaimer. > > I posted the link there. Updated. What official page are you talking about? The rules don't specify one... > Do we want to keep everyone's X/Y coordinates in an egroups database > here, or just keep everything's on Jeff's website? That information can be stored anywhere until a proposal specifies otherwise. I will continue updating my site regardless. If a proposal comes up requiring that game data be stored in eGroups, I will oppose it. We'd be in very bad shape if eGroups could no longer support that functionality at some point. From jjweston@k... Mon Jan 22 09:20:17 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 22 Jan 2001 17:20:17 -0000 Received: (qmail 18988 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2001 17:09:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 22 Jan 2001 17:09:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta1 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2001 17:09:24 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0MHtUX03798 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 09:56:17 -0800 Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 09:55:30 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Feyd Phase 2: Proposal 316 "Movement" In-Reply-To: <94hl91+jcql@e...> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" On Mon, 22 Jan 2001 Nomic1@a... wrote: > iii.(y2 - y1) > min (-2, total number of players) I think you need a negative sign in front of "total number of players". From rsholmes@m... Mon Jan 22 10:22:49 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 22 Jan 2001 18:22:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 68957 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2001 18:09:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 22 Jan 2001 18:09:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta3 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2001 19:10:06 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.008D074C@m...>; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 13:09:01 -0500 Received: (from rsholmes@l...) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id NAA04568; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 13:09:00 -0500 (EST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Feyd Phase 2: Proposal 316 "Movement" References: Date: 22 Jan 2001 13:08:59 -0500 In-Reply-To: "Jeffrey J. Weston"'s message of "Mon, 22 Jan 2001 09:55:30 -0800 (PST)" Message-ID: Lines: 14 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... "Jeffrey J. Weston" writes: > On Mon, 22 Jan 2001 Nomic1@a... wrote: > > > iii.(y2 - y1) > min (-2, total number of players) > > I think you need a negative sign in front of "total number of > players". And, at the risk of repeating myself, I think the left hand side should have been (y1 - y2). -- Doctroid From ross@b... Mon Jan 22 12:06:56 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: ross@b... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 22 Jan 2001 20:06:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 3884 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2001 19:52:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 22 Jan 2001 19:52:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO clavin2.unet.brandeis.edu) (129.64.99.33) by mta2 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2001 19:52:01 -0000 Received: from sam.unet.brandeis.edu (IDENT:0@s... [129.64.99.130]) by clavin2.unet.brandeis.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3/UNet1.6) with ESMTP id OAA20619 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 14:52:00 -0500 Received: from localhost (ross@l...) by sam.unet.brandeis.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA12766 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 14:52:00 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: sam.unet.brandeis.edu: ross owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 14:51:59 -0500 (EST) X-Sender: ross@s... To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Feyd Phase 2: Proposal 316 "Movement" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Ross B. Schulman" On 22 Jan 2001 rsholmes@m... wrote: > "Jeffrey J. Weston" writes: > > > On Mon, 22 Jan 2001 Nomic1@a... wrote: > > > > > iii.(y2 - y1) > min (-2, total number of players) > > > > I think you need a negative sign in front of "total number of > > players". > > And, at the risk of repeating myself, I think the left hand side > should have been (y1 - y2). > > Actually, I think one or the other, but not both... either keep it (y2 - y1) and put in a negative sign in front of total num... or no negative sign and make it (y1 - y2). I think that makes the most mathematical sense (although I'll be damned if I understand what Feyd is trying to do here.) : ) -Ross From Nomic1@a... Mon Jan 22 12:08:02 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 22 Jan 2001 20:08:02 -0000 Received: (qmail 37797 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2001 19:51:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 22 Jan 2001 19:51:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO fg.egroups.com) (10.1.2.134) by mta1 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2001 19:51:07 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.10.116] by fg.egroups.com with NNFMP; 22 Jan 2001 19:51:02 -0000 Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 19:50:43 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: Feyd Phase 2: Proposal 316 "Movement" -- amendment to item iii. Message-ID: <94i2uj+bktj@e...> In-Reply-To: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 927 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 208.249.92.139 From: Nomic1@a... Doc, I see what you are saying now. Please amend Proposal 316 item iii. as follows: iii.(y2 - y1) < max (2, total number of players) [[I think this clearer than iii.(y1 - y2) > min (-2, -total number of players) although the effect is the same. Apparently I was thinking of one method of doing the math and switched methods mid-stream. The intended purpose of item iii is to govern movment away from the y axis in the same way that item ii allows movement towards. ...perhaps I should seek the services of a pschiatreist. ]] Feyd --- In n_omic@egroups.com, rsholmes@m... wrote: > "Jeffrey J. Weston" writes: > > On Mon, 22 Jan 2001 Nomic1@a... wrote: > > > iii.(y2 - y1) > min (-2, total number of players) > > I think you need a negative sign in front of "total number of > > players". > And, at the risk of repeating myself, I think the left hand side > should have been (y1 - y2). > Doctroid From ross@b... Mon Jan 22 12:23:35 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: ross@b... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 22 Jan 2001 20:23:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 48856 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2001 20:07:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 22 Jan 2001 20:07:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO cliff.unet.brandeis.edu) (129.64.99.34) by mta3 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2001 21:08:10 -0000 Received: from sam.unet.brandeis.edu (IDENT:0@s... [129.64.99.130]) by cliff.unet.brandeis.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3/UNet1.7) with ESMTP id PAA07090 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 15:07:04 -0500 Received: from localhost (ross@l...) by sam.unet.brandeis.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA14505 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 15:07:04 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: sam.unet.brandeis.edu: ross owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 15:07:03 -0500 (EST) X-Sender: ross@s... To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Feyd Phase 2: Proposal 316 "Movement" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Ross B. Schulman" On 22 Jan 2001 rsholmes@m... wrote: > "Jeffrey J. Weston" writes: > > > On Mon, 22 Jan 2001 Nomic1@a... wrote: > > > > > iii.(y2 - y1) > min (-2, total number of players) > > > > I think you need a negative sign in front of "total number of > > players". > > And, at the risk of repeating myself, I think the left hand side > should have been (y1 - y2). > > Okay, I'll try this again... last one didn't go through, I apologize for a possible repeat. Actually, I think one or the other, but not both... either keep it (y2 - y1) and put in a negative sign in front of total num... or no negative sign and make it (y1 - y2). I think that makes the most mathematical sense (although I'll be damned if I understand what Feyd is trying to do here.) : ) -Ross From frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... Mon Jan 22 12:28:41 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 22 Jan 2001 20:28:41 -0000 Received: (qmail 34183 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2001 20:12:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 22 Jan 2001 20:12:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailhub.Dartmouth.EDU) (129.170.16.6) by mta3 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2001 21:13:04 -0000 Received: from dasher.Dartmouth.EDU (dasher.dartmouth.edu [129.170.208.6]) by mailhub.Dartmouth.EDU (8.9.3+DND/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA28962 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 15:11:58 -0500 (EST) Message-id: <39169992@d...> Date: 22 Jan 2001 15:11:57 EST Reply-To: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... (Willard) Subject: Re: [n_omic] Re: Feyd Phase 2: Proposal 316 "Movement" -- amendment to item iii. To: n_omic@egroups.com X-eGroups-From: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... (Frederick C. Strathmeyer) From: frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... --- You wrote: Please amend Proposal 316 item iii. as follows: --- end of quote --- could we have a restating of the entire proposal so we can vote on it? (pwease?) From rsholmes@m... Mon Jan 22 12:32:29 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 22 Jan 2001 20:32:29 -0000 Received: (qmail 73359 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2001 20:15:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 22 Jan 2001 20:15:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta1 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2001 20:15:27 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.008D1795@m...>; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 15:14:51 -0500 Received: (from rsholmes@l...) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id PAA09888; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 15:14:49 -0500 (EST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: VOTE FOR [n_omic] Re: Feyd Phase 2: Proposal 316 "Movement" -- amendment to item iii. References: <94i2uj+bktj@e...> Date: 22 Jan 2001 15:14:49 -0500 In-Reply-To: Nomic1@a...'s message of "Mon, 22 Jan 2001 19:50:43 -0000" Message-ID: Lines: 11 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... Nomic1@a... writes: > Doc, I see what you are saying now. Please amend Proposal 316 item > iii. as follows: > > iii.(y2 - y1) < max (2, total number of players) With this amendment, I vote FOR. -- Doctroid From jjweston@k... Mon Jan 22 12:35:03 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 22 Jan 2001 20:35:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 50821 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2001 20:17:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 22 Jan 2001 20:17:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta1 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2001 20:17:53 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0MKqhP03905 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 12:53:17 -0800 Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 12:52:43 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Feyd Phase 2: Proposal 316 "Movement" In-Reply-To: <94hl91+jcql@e...> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" On Mon, 22 Jan 2001 Nomic1@a... wrote: > The fourth phase is the "Movement" phase. A player may move along > the Y axis for a cost of |(10 - y1) * (10 - y2) * 2 | + 10 groks, > where the following is true: > i. y1 is the starting Y coordinate and y2 is the ending Y > coordinate. > ii. (y1 - y2) < max (2, total number of players) > iii.(y2 - y1) > min (-2, total number of players) > iv. 10 - y1 <> 0 > v. 10 - y2 <> 0 > vi. The player has the groks in eir possession to pay for the move. I just saw another problem... Rich Holmes is correct. With iii written as (y2 - y1) > ... you place no limit on you far someone may move in the positive Y direction. An example: Moving from Y = 20 to Y = 100. y1 = 20 y2 = 100 y1 - y2 = -80 (satisfies condition ii) y2 - y1 = 80 (satisfies condition iii) Is this what you intended? As it is now, condition iii is already covered by condition ii. To limit moving in the positive Y direction, you could remove condition iii and rewrite condition ii as follows: | ( y1 - y2 ) | < num_players On another note, conditions iv and v could be made simpler as follows: iv. y1 <> 10 v. y2 <> 10 From Nomic1@a... Mon Jan 22 13:07:10 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 22 Jan 2001 21:07:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 54686 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2001 20:46:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 22 Jan 2001 20:46:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mk.egroups.com) (10.1.1.30) by mta2 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2001 20:46:33 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.2.116] by mk.egroups.com with NNFMP; 22 Jan 2001 20:46:11 -0000 Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 20:45:30 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: Feyd Phase 2: Proposal 316 "Movement" (with amendment ) Message-ID: <94i65a+oush@e...> In-Reply-To: <94hl91+jcql@e...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 1692 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 208.249.92.138 From: Nomic1@a... Since you said "pwease". This is the same text that Doctroid voted on. Feyd --- In n_omic@egroups.com, Nomic1@a... wrote: > Proposal 316: Movement > Amend rule 315 as follows: > > I. Change the first sentence to read: > "A player's turn consists of four phases. " > > II. Add the following text to the end of the rule: > > The fourth phase is the "Movement" phase. A player may move along > the Y axis for a cost of |(10 - y1) * (10 - y2) * 2 | + 10 groks, > where the following is true: > i. y1 is the starting Y coordinate and y2 is the ending Y > coordinate. > ii. (y1 - y2) < max (2, total number of players) > iii.(y2 - y1) < max (2, total number of players) > iv. 10 - y1 <> 0 > v. 10 - y2 <> 0 > vi. The player has the groks in eir possession to pay for the move. > > The groks paid are given to the current player at the greatest Y > coordinate. If more than one player is at the highest Y coordinate, > the groks are evenly split between all such players (fractions are > dropped). > > The player announces the move by stating the move from (X1,Y1) to > (X2,Y2), and the total grok cost. If any of the above conditions are > false then the player does not move and loses no groks. If all > conditions hold then the gamestate is updated to show the move and > the groks subtracted from the player's total and distributed. > > [[ > Note that movement may be made in either direction along the Y axis > as long as the movement conditions are met. > The function "|x|" denotes the absolute value of X. > Example: A player at (10,5) could move to (10,3) for 80 groks. > Example: A player at (-1,5) could move to (-1,7) for 40 groks. > ]] From Nomic1@a... Mon Jan 22 13:23:00 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 22 Jan 2001 21:23:00 -0000 Received: (qmail 95048 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2001 21:00:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 22 Jan 2001 21:00:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO fk.egroups.com) (10.1.10.47) by mta2 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2001 21:00:50 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.10.102] by fk.egroups.com with NNFMP; 22 Jan 2001 21:00:50 -0000 Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 21:00:44 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Jeff has better math skills than Feyd Message-ID: <94i71s+ijtb@e...> In-Reply-To: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 979 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 208.249.92.138 From: Nomic1@a... --- In n_omic@egroups.com, "Jeffrey J. Weston" wrote: > On Mon, 22 Jan 2001 Nomic1@a... wrote: > I just saw another problem... Rich Holmes is correct. With iii > written as (y2 - y1) > ... you place no limit on you far someone may move > in the positive Y direction. An example: > Moving from Y = 20 to Y = 100. > > y1 = 20 > y2 = 100 > > y1 - y2 = -80 (satisfies condition ii) > y2 - y1 = 80 (satisfies condition iii) This has been updated in the amendment. egroups must be lagging post order again. Currently this example would cost 1410 groks. That in itself might be considered a deterent... > suggest ii. | ( y1 - y2 ) | < num_players > iv. y1 <> 10 > v. y2 <> 10 Better mathematical implementation than mine. However, I don't think it's worth an amendment to update, as the results are the same. It's been a while since I got my degree, and I've never used the math part of it . Feyd "Maybe I can't add, but I KNOW WHAT I LIKE!" From ross@b... Mon Jan 22 13:29:26 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: ross@b... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 22 Jan 2001 21:29:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 64055 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2001 21:06:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 22 Jan 2001 21:06:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO cliff.unet.brandeis.edu) (129.64.99.34) by mta3 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2001 22:07:47 -0000 Received: from sam.unet.brandeis.edu (IDENT:0@s... [129.64.99.130]) by cliff.unet.brandeis.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3/UNet1.7) with ESMTP id QAA20552 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 16:06:39 -0500 Received: from localhost (ross@l...) by sam.unet.brandeis.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA18459 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 16:06:39 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: sam.unet.brandeis.edu: ross owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 16:06:38 -0500 (EST) X-Sender: ross@s... To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: VOTE FOR 316 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Ross B. Schulman" On 22 Jan 2001 rsholmes@m... wrote: > Nomic1@a... writes: > > > Doc, I see what you are saying now. Please amend Proposal 316 item > > iii. as follows: > > > > iii.(y2 - y1) < max (2, total number of players) > > With this amendment, I vote FOR. > > With this amendment, I too vote FOR. Ross From frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... Mon Jan 22 13:36:29 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 22 Jan 2001 21:36:29 -0000 Received: (qmail 45241 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2001 21:14:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 22 Jan 2001 21:14:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailhub.Dartmouth.EDU) (129.170.16.6) by mta3 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2001 22:15:23 -0000 Received: from dasher.Dartmouth.EDU (dasher.dartmouth.edu [129.170.208.6]) by mailhub.Dartmouth.EDU (8.9.3+DND/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA14520 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 16:14:16 -0500 (EST) Message-id: <39173626@d...> Date: 22 Jan 2001 16:14:16 EST Reply-To: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... (Willard) Subject: vote AGAINST proposal 316 To: n_omic@egroups.com X-eGroups-From: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... (Frederick C. Strathmeyer) From: frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... From ross@b... Mon Jan 22 13:53:10 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: ross@b... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 22 Jan 2001 21:53:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 85161 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2001 21:30:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 22 Jan 2001 21:30:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO cliff.unet.brandeis.edu) (129.64.99.34) by mta2 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2001 21:30:35 -0000 Received: from sam.unet.brandeis.edu (IDENT:0@s... [129.64.99.130]) by cliff.unet.brandeis.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3/UNet1.7) with ESMTP id QAA25583 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 16:30:33 -0500 Received: from localhost (ross@l...) by sam.unet.brandeis.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA20060 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 16:30:33 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: sam.unet.brandeis.edu: ross owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 16:30:33 -0500 (EST) X-Sender: ross@s... To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] VOTE FOR 316 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Ross B. Schulman" Oh bloody hell, just ignore me. : ) From ross@b... Mon Jan 22 14:01:13 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: ross@b... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 22 Jan 2001 22:01:13 -0000 Received: (qmail 25887 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2001 21:29:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 22 Jan 2001 21:29:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO clavin2.unet.brandeis.edu) (129.64.99.33) by mta3 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2001 22:30:31 -0000 Received: from sam.unet.brandeis.edu (IDENT:0@s... [129.64.99.130]) by clavin2.unet.brandeis.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3/UNet1.6) with ESMTP id QAA15908 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 16:29:24 -0500 Received: from localhost (ross@l...) by sam.unet.brandeis.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA20035 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 16:29:24 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: sam.unet.brandeis.edu: ross owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 16:29:24 -0500 (EST) X-Sender: ross@s... To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: vote YES on proposal 316 In-Reply-To: <94i71s+ijtb@e...> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Ross B. Schulman" On Mon, 22 Jan 2001 Nomic1@a... wrote: > --- In n_omic@egroups.com, "Jeffrey J. Weston" wrote: > > On Mon, 22 Jan 2001 Nomic1@a... wrote: > > > I just saw another problem... Rich Holmes is correct. With iii > > written as (y2 - y1) > ... you place no limit on you far someone > may move > > in the positive Y direction. An example: > > Moving from Y = 20 to Y = 100. > > > > y1 = 20 > > y2 = 100 > > > > y1 - y2 = -80 (satisfies condition ii) > > y2 - y1 = 80 (satisfies condition iii) > > This has been updated in the amendment. egroups must be lagging post > order again. Currently this example would cost 1410 groks. That in > itself might be considered a deterent... > > > suggest ii. | ( y1 - y2 ) | < num_players > > iv. y1 <> 10 > > v. y2 <> 10 > Better mathematical implementation than mine. However, I don't think > it's worth an amendment to update, as the results are the same. It's > been a while since I got my degree, and I've never used the math part > of it . > > Feyd "Maybe I can't add, but I KNOW WHAT I LIKE!" Okay, so its not just me... although egroups appears to be just dropping any attempt at messages I send. In anycase, I would like to vote YES on this amendment of the proposal. -Ross From htowsner@s... Mon Jan 22 14:56:26 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: htowsner@s... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 22 Jan 2001 22:56:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 79687 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2001 22:32:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 22 Jan 2001 22:32:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO smtp.Stanford.EDU) (171.64.14.23) by mta1 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2001 22:31:55 -0000 Received: from [128.12.55.129] (toyon-00-119.Stanford.EDU [128.12.55.129]) by smtp.Stanford.EDU (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f0MMVod17847 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 14:31:50 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: htowsner@h... Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <94i65a+oush@e...> References: <94i65a+oush@e...> Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 14:31:47 -0800 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Vote YES on Proposal 316 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" From: Henry Towsner I also vote YES on the amended proposal. -- Henry Towsner Majority, n.: That quality that distinguishes a crime from a law From jjweston@k... Mon Jan 22 15:31:08 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 22 Jan 2001 23:31:08 -0000 Received: (qmail 58661 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2001 23:06:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 22 Jan 2001 23:06:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta2 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2001 23:06:51 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0MNrEj04063 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 15:53:36 -0800 Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 15:53:14 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Vote AGAINST Proposal 316 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" From jjweston@k... Mon Jan 22 15:44:36 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 22 Jan 2001 23:44:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 23665 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2001 23:18:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 22 Jan 2001 23:18:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta2 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2001 23:18:02 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0N04Ua04072 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 16:05:17 -0800 Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 16:04:30 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Re: Feyd Phase 2: Proposal 316 "Movement" (with amendment ) In-Reply-To: <94i65a+oush@e...> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" On Mon, 22 Jan 2001 Nomic1@a... wrote: > Since you said "pwease". This is the same text that Doctroid voted > on. > Feyd > > --- In n_omic@egroups.com, Nomic1@a... wrote: > > Proposal 316: Movement > > Amend rule 315 as follows: I just realized this will be a very boring rule. No one can currently afford any available moves... Right now, the cheapest move would be the one getting us as close as possible to y=10. With 6 players, the biggest move we can make is five. | ( 10 - 20 ) * ( 10 - 15 ) * 2 | + 10 = 110 Smaller hops would just cost more. The real question is... Since you can't skip parts of your turn, will Rich Holmes win by paradox since he won't be able to make a move? From htowsner@s... Mon Jan 22 16:13:26 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: htowsner@s... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 23 Jan 2001 00:13:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 12889 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2001 23:47:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 22 Jan 2001 23:47:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO smtp.Stanford.EDU) (171.64.14.23) by mta3 with SMTP; 23 Jan 2001 00:48:35 -0000 Received: from [128.12.55.129] (toyon-00-119.Stanford.EDU [128.12.55.129]) by smtp.Stanford.EDU (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f0MNlTd23300 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 15:47:29 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: htowsner@h... Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 15:47:24 -0800 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Re: Feyd Phase 2: Proposal 316 "Movement" (with amendment ) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" From: Henry Towsner > Smaller hops would just cost more. The real question is... Since >you can't skip parts of your turn, will Rich Holmes win by paradox since >he won't be able to make a move? I don't think so. It says "a player *may* move" and also "If any of the above conditions are false then the player does not move and loses no groks" which implies that making a meaningless, invalid move will suffice. -- Henry Towsner Majority, n.: That quality that distinguishes a crime from a law From ross@b... Mon Jan 22 16:18:58 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: ross@b... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 23 Jan 2001 00:18:57 -0000 Received: (qmail 15452 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2001 23:52:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 22 Jan 2001 23:52:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO cliff.unet.brandeis.edu) (129.64.99.34) by mta3 with SMTP; 23 Jan 2001 00:53:21 -0000 Received: from sam.unet.brandeis.edu (IDENT:0@s... [129.64.99.130]) by cliff.unet.brandeis.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3/UNet1.7) with ESMTP id SAA15526 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 18:52:15 -0500 Received: from localhost (ross@l...) by sam.unet.brandeis.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA29404 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 18:52:15 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: sam.unet.brandeis.edu: ross owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 18:52:14 -0500 (EST) X-Sender: ross@s... To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Re: Feyd Phase 2: Proposal 316 "Movement" (with amendment ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Ross B. Schulman" On Mon, 22 Jan 2001, Jeffrey J. Weston wrote: > Smaller hops would just cost more. The real question is... Since > you can't skip parts of your turn, will Rich Holmes win by paradox since > he won't be able to make a move? > I don't think so... the relevant part of the rule reads > The fourth phase is the "Movement" phase. A player may move along ^^^ > the Y axis for a cost of |(10 - y1) * (10 - y2) * 2 | + 10 groks, So a player doesn't have to move at all, e can simply elect to not move during eis fourth phase. -Ross From rsholmes@m... Mon Jan 22 17:07:39 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 23 Jan 2001 01:07:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 60360 invoked from network); 23 Jan 2001 00:33:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 23 Jan 2001 00:33:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta3 with SMTP; 23 Jan 2001 01:34:25 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.008D3981@m...>; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 19:33:21 -0500 Received: (from rsholmes@l...) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id TAA06276; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 19:33:19 -0500 (EST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Re: Feyd Phase 2: Proposal 316 "Movement" (with amendment ) References: Date: 22 Jan 2001 19:33:19 -0500 In-Reply-To: "Jeffrey J. Weston"'s message of "Mon, 22 Jan 2001 16:04:30 -0800 (PST)" Message-ID: Lines: 20 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... "Jeffrey J. Weston" writes: > I just realized this will be a very boring rule. No one can > currently afford any available moves... Right now, the cheapest move would > be the one getting us as close as possible to y=10. With 6 players, the > biggest move we can make is five. > > | ( 10 - 20 ) * ( 10 - 15 ) * 2 | + 10 = 110 Hmm, Feyd slipped that factor of 2 in without my noticing. I noticed the + 10 but not the * 2. Had I noticed, I'd've voted against... For that matter, even without the * 2, nobody can afford to move right now -- and there's no way to get more Groks unless someone gives 'em to you. But, hey, this is Nomic, right? -- Doctroid From jjweston@k... Mon Jan 22 18:40:32 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 23 Jan 2001 02:40:32 -0000 Received: (qmail 33966 invoked from network); 23 Jan 2001 02:12:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 23 Jan 2001 02:12:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta2 with SMTP; 23 Jan 2001 02:12:43 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0N2xxV04160 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 19:00:01 -0800 Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 18:59:59 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Re: Feyd Phase 2: Proposal 316 "Movement" (with amendment ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" On Mon, 22 Jan 2001, Ross B. Schulman wrote: > On Mon, 22 Jan 2001, Jeffrey J. Weston wrote: > > Smaller hops would just cost more. The real question is... Since > > you can't skip parts of your turn, will Rich Holmes win by paradox since > > he won't be able to make a move? > > > > I don't think so... the relevant part of the rule reads > > The fourth phase is the "Movement" phase. A player may move along > ^^^ > > the Y axis for a cost of |(10 - y1) * (10 - y2) * 2 | + 10 groks, > > So a player doesn't have to move at all, e can simply elect to not move > during eis fourth phase. Fair enough... I did see the "may" as well. I was just wondering out loud if the higher precedence rule 201 would prevent you from skipping that phase even with the "may" there. But on second looking, you engage in phase 4 regardless, and may choose to do nothing during that phase. Also, the ability to make nonsense moves and have them ignored also solves the problem. I did *not* see that originally... Ah well. Now if only Feyd would submit a vote, we could move on... From Nomic1@a... Tue Jan 23 06:01:15 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 23 Jan 2001 14:01:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 21996 invoked from network); 23 Jan 2001 14:01:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 23 Jan 2001 14:01:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO cj.egroups.com) (10.1.2.82) by mta1 with SMTP; 23 Jan 2001 14:01:02 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.10.103] by cj.egroups.com with NNFMP; 23 Jan 2001 14:01:02 -0000 Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 14:00:58 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: I vote FOR 316 (plus comments) Message-ID: <94k2qq+94d6@e...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 252 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 208.249.92.139 From: Nomic1@a... I intentially made the cost greater than the current number of groks. I assume that will change over time and I wanted a way for people to spend large amounts of currency . Of course, an easy alternative is to recruit another 5 players... Feyd From ross@b... Tue Jan 23 06:16:22 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: ross@b... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 23 Jan 2001 14:16:22 -0000 Received: (qmail 20345 invoked from network); 23 Jan 2001 14:14:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 23 Jan 2001 14:14:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO clavin2.unet.brandeis.edu) (129.64.99.33) by mta2 with SMTP; 23 Jan 2001 14:14:55 -0000 Received: from sam.unet.brandeis.edu (IDENT:0@s... [129.64.99.130]) by clavin2.unet.brandeis.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3/UNet1.6) with ESMTP id JAA23060 for ; Tue, 23 Jan 2001 09:14:54 -0500 Received: from localhost (ross@l...) by sam.unet.brandeis.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA23972 for ; Tue, 23 Jan 2001 09:14:54 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: sam.unet.brandeis.edu: ross owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 09:14:54 -0500 (EST) X-Sender: ross@s... To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] I vote FOR 316 (plus comments) In-Reply-To: <94k2qq+94d6@e...> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Ross B. Schulman" Well, since Feyd brought it up... I DO know of a mailing list I could send to about this Nomic, if people want more players... I don't know how many it would bring in (if, indeed, any), but I can try. -Ross On Tue, 23 Jan 2001 Nomic1@a... wrote: > I intentially made the cost greater than the current number of > groks. I assume that will change over time and I wanted a way for > people to spend large amounts of currency . > > Of course, an easy alternative is to recruit another 5 players... > > Feyd > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > n_omic-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > From jjweston@k... Tue Jan 23 09:03:34 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 23 Jan 2001 17:03:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 99056 invoked from network); 23 Jan 2001 16:55:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 23 Jan 2001 16:55:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta1 with SMTP; 23 Jan 2001 16:55:21 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0NHgO804707 for ; Tue, 23 Jan 2001 09:42:25 -0800 Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 09:42:23 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] I vote FOR 316 (plus comments) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" On Tue, 23 Jan 2001, Ross B. Schulman wrote: > Well, since Feyd brought it up... > I DO know of a mailing list I could send to about this Nomic, if people > want more players... I don't know how many it would bring in (if, indeed, > any), but I can try. Well, I for one do not mind bringing in more players. However, with more players comes longer waits between each individual players' turns... From frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... Tue Jan 23 09:15:52 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 23 Jan 2001 17:15:52 -0000 Received: (qmail 32400 invoked from network); 23 Jan 2001 17:04:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 23 Jan 2001 17:04:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailhub.Dartmouth.EDU) (129.170.16.6) by mta3 with SMTP; 23 Jan 2001 18:05:54 -0000 Received: from dasher.Dartmouth.EDU (dasher.dartmouth.edu [129.170.208.6]) by mailhub.Dartmouth.EDU (8.9.3+DND/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA15940 for ; Tue, 23 Jan 2001 12:04:48 -0500 (EST) Message-id: <39211840@d...> Date: 23 Jan 2001 12:04:47 EST Reply-To: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... (Willard) Subject: Re: new players To: n_omic@egroups.com X-eGroups-From: Frederick.C.Strathmeyer@D... (Frederick C. Strathmeyer) From: frederick.c.strathmeyer@d... --- Jeffrey J. Weston wrote: Well, I for one do not mind bringing in more players. However, with more players comes longer waits between each individual players' turns... --- end of quote --- Yeah.... and it's nice that there aren't any bad apples in the barrel yet... From jjweston@k... Tue Jan 23 09:35:49 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 23 Jan 2001 17:35:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 78528 invoked from network); 23 Jan 2001 17:23:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 23 Jan 2001 17:23:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta3 with SMTP; 23 Jan 2001 18:24:34 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0NIACc04799 for ; Tue, 23 Jan 2001 10:10:24 -0800 Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 10:10:12 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Proposal 316 Passes Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" With 4 votes for and 2 votes against, proposal 316 passes. Feyd gains 17 points for receiving 66.7% favorable votes. Eric Strathmeyer and Jeff Weston gain 10 points each for voting against a winning proposal. Play now continues with Rich Holmes. The web site has been updated with the latest rule change. From engels@w... Tue Jan 23 09:48:55 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: engels@w... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 23 Jan 2001 17:48:55 -0000 Received: (qmail 44359 invoked from network); 23 Jan 2001 17:38:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 23 Jan 2001 17:38:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailhost.tue.nl) (131.155.2.5) by mta1 with SMTP; 23 Jan 2001 17:38:39 -0000 Received: from wsinfm15.win.tue.nl (wsinfm15.win.tue.nl [131.155.69.168]) by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0NHccq05190 for ; Tue, 23 Jan 2001 18:38:38 +0100 (MET) Received: (from engels@l...) by wsinfm15.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) id f0NHcR601897 for n_omic@egroups.com; Tue, 23 Jan 2001 18:38:27 +0100 (MET) Message-Id: <200101231738.f0NHcR601897@w...> Subject: Back & Vote To: n_omic@egroups.com Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 18:38:27 +0100 (MET) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL43 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Andre Engels Sorry for not announcing my vacation, I have been away for a week. I vote AGAINST Proposal 316. -- Andre Engels, engels@w... telephone: +31-40-2474628 (work) +31-6-17774490 (mobile) http://www.win.tue.nl/~engels/index_en.html If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all -- Noam Chomsky From Nomic1@a... Tue Jan 23 13:05:58 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 23 Jan 2001 21:05:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 67658 invoked from network); 23 Jan 2001 20:46:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 23 Jan 2001 20:46:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ef.egroups.com) (10.1.2.111) by mta2 with SMTP; 23 Jan 2001 20:46:55 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.10.133] by ef.egroups.com with NNFMP; 23 Jan 2001 20:46:55 -0000 Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 20:46:46 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: new players Message-ID: <94kqjm+10ds0@e...> In-Reply-To: <39211840@d...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 128 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 208.249.92.138 From: Nomic1@a... > > Yeah.... and it's nice that there aren't any bad apples in the barrel yet... HEY, I thought *I* was the bad apple! Feyd From Nomic1@a... Tue Jan 23 13:07:34 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 23 Jan 2001 21:07:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 87079 invoked from network); 23 Jan 2001 20:47:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 23 Jan 2001 20:47:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO fh.egroups.com) (10.1.2.135) by mta3 with SMTP; 23 Jan 2001 21:48:50 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.10.133] by fh.egroups.com with NNFMP; 23 Jan 2001 20:47:45 -0000 Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 20:47:41 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Feyd: Phase 4 (movement) Message-ID: <94kqld+gbmg@e...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 79 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 208.249.92.138 From: Nomic1@a... Since 316 passes I must now take phase 4. I choose not to make a move. Feyd From jjweston@k... Tue Jan 23 14:32:58 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 23 Jan 2001 22:32:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 24980 invoked from network); 23 Jan 2001 22:09:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 23 Jan 2001 22:09:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta3 with SMTP; 23 Jan 2001 23:11:03 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0NMucb04928 for ; Tue, 23 Jan 2001 14:56:50 -0800 Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 14:56:38 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Back & Vote In-Reply-To: <200101231738.f0NHcR601897@w...> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" On Tue, 23 Jan 2001, Andre Engels wrote: > Sorry for not announcing my vacation, I have been away for a week. Welcome back Andre. I have updated your status on the web site. I have not adjusted whose turn it is. If you think you should go now instead of Rich, go ahead and make your case. > I vote AGAINST Proposal 316. Proposal 316 passed before you made your vote, so unfortunately I don't think it counts. From Nomic1@a... Wed Jan 24 06:57:14 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 24 Jan 2001 14:57:13 -0000 Received: (qmail 2220 invoked from network); 24 Jan 2001 14:54:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 24 Jan 2001 14:54:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO cj.egroups.com) (10.1.2.82) by mta2 with SMTP; 24 Jan 2001 14:54:04 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.10.125] by cj.egroups.com with NNFMP; 24 Jan 2001 14:53:57 -0000 Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 14:53:49 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Interesting delimma: whose turn is it/who is Judge? [NOT A POINT OF ORDER YET] Message-ID: <94mq9t+tnin@e...> In-Reply-To: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 1868 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 208.249.92.137 From: Nomic1@a... --- In n_omic@egroups.com, "Jeffrey J. Weston" wrote: > On Tue, 23 Jan 2001, Andre Engels wrote: > > Sorry for not announcing my vacation, I have been away for a week. > Welcome back Andre. I have updated your status on the web site. I have not adjusted whose turn it is. If you think you should go now instead > of Rich, go ahead and make your case. By #303, if Andre was a reyalp when 316 passed then can't vote. If he was a reyalp when Feyd ended phase 4 of his turn (phase 4 was created by 316, then play would roll TO Rich (#201). Let's take these one at a time: 1. Does Andre's vote count? The amended Proposal #316 was made in message 304 on Date: Mon Jan 22, 2001 1:50pm. A player has 72 hours to act on a proposal. Andre was not a player at that time, he was a reyalp (for failing to vote on 315 or 314). All player votes were complete at Date: Tue Jan 23, 2001 8:00am (message 322). Andre did not post (and thus become a player) until message 327 (Date: Tue Jan 23, 2001 11:38am). His vote doesn't count. 2. Whose turn is it? Andre stated his reentry into the game (and thus return to player status) in message 327 (Date: Tue Jan 23, 2001 11:38am). Feyd did not end phase 4 of is turn until message 329 (Date: Tue Jan 23, 2001 2:47pm). Thus Andre was a player when Feyd's turn ended. It is Andre's turn. If anyone disagrees with this please raise a point of Order. Note that when you raise the point of order you should also state whom you think the judge should be, based on whose turn you think it is currently. If a point of order is raise then I will either use the above as a basis for judgement if I am judge, or submit it to the judge for consideration. Feyd > > I vote AGAINST Proposal 316. > > Proposal 316 passed before you made your vote, so unfortunately I > don't think it counts. From ross@b... Wed Jan 24 07:25:05 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: ross@b... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 24 Jan 2001 15:25:05 -0000 Received: (qmail 88914 invoked from network); 24 Jan 2001 15:19:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 24 Jan 2001 15:19:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO clavin2.unet.brandeis.edu) (129.64.99.33) by mta1 with SMTP; 24 Jan 2001 15:19:11 -0000 Received: from sam.unet.brandeis.edu (IDENT:0@s... [129.64.99.130]) by clavin2.unet.brandeis.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3/UNet1.6) with ESMTP id KAA08401 for ; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 10:19:09 -0500 Received: from localhost (ross@l...) by sam.unet.brandeis.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA23466 for ; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 10:19:09 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: sam.unet.brandeis.edu: ross owned process doing -bs Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 10:19:08 -0500 (EST) X-Sender: ross@s... To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Interesting delimma: whose turn is it/who is Judge? [NOT A POINT OF ORDER YET] In-Reply-To: <94mq9t+tnin@e...> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Ross B. Schulman" On Wed, 24 Jan 2001 Nomic1@a... wrote: > 2. Whose turn is it? > Andre stated his reentry into the game (and thus return to player > status) in message 327 (Date: Tue Jan 23, 2001 11:38am). Feyd did > not end phase 4 of is turn until message 329 (Date: Tue Jan 23, 2001 > 2:47pm). Thus Andre was a player when Feyd's turn ended. It is > Andre's turn. > I'm inclined to disagree. As I see it, on your last turn, Feyd, you don't get a fourth phase because the ruleset we were operating under when the last vote was cast was that voting was the final phase of a player's turn. Once all of the votes of the active players were cast (which happened at Tue, 23 Jan 2001 14:00:58 -0000 (at least, that's when I received it)), Feyd's turn was over, then the changes were commited to the ruleset, then play passed to Rich and only then did Andre convey his interest in becoming a player again. What the question really is: which happens first, the end of Feyd's turn or the implementation of the new rule? In addition, if it is Rich's turn right now, as I believe it is, Andre would certainly be Judge if someone invoked judgment. I don't see any clauses having to do with a conflict of interest situation in Judging so is this a problem? -Ross From Nomic1@a... Wed Jan 24 07:50:13 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 24 Jan 2001 15:50:12 -0000 Received: (qmail 81286 invoked from network); 24 Jan 2001 15:41:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 24 Jan 2001 15:41:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hp.egroups.com) (10.1.2.220) by mta1 with SMTP; 24 Jan 2001 15:41:17 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.10.114] by hp.egroups.com with NNFMP; 24 Jan 2001 15:41:16 -0000 Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 15:41:13 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: Interesting delimma: whose turn is it/who is Judge? [NOT A POINT OF ORDER YET] Message-ID: <94mt2p+72vr@e...> In-Reply-To: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 1572 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 208.249.92.139 From: Nomic1@a... --- In n_omic@egroups.com, "Ross B. Schulman" wrote: > On Wed, 24 Jan 2001 Nomic1@a... wrote: > > > 2. Whose turn is it? > I'm inclined to disagree. As I see it, on your last turn, Feyd, you don't > get a fourth phase because the ruleset we were operating under when the > last vote was cast was that voting was the final phase of a player's > turn. Once all of the votes of the active players were cast (which > happened at Tue, 23 Jan 2001 14:00:58 -0000 (at least, that's when I > received it)), Feyd's turn was over, then the changes were commited to the > ruleset, then play passed to Rich and only then did Andre convey his > interest in becoming a player again. > What the question really is: which happens first, the end of Feyd's turn > or the implementation of the new rule? Very good point. I do not know the answer to this question. Both are instantenious events happening simultaniously. This is a good candidate for a Point Of Order. Again, since this is addressing whose turn it is, who is the judge? > In addition, if it is Rich's turn right now, as I believe it is, Andre > would certainly be Judge if someone invoked judgment. I don't see any > clauses having to do with a conflict of interest situation in Judging so > is this a problem? The last judgement we has was a Point of Order made by Jeff Weston, also judged by Jeff Weston. Precedent would point to conflict of interest not being sufficient reason for a judge not to perform is duties. However there is procedure in place to reverse a judgement. Feyd From rsholmes@m... Wed Jan 24 08:45:21 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 24 Jan 2001 16:45:21 -0000 Received: (qmail 1182 invoked from network); 24 Jan 2001 16:34:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 24 Jan 2001 16:34:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta3 with SMTP; 24 Jan 2001 17:35:43 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.008E033E@m...>; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 11:34:38 -0500 Received: (from rsholmes@l...) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id LAA23174; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 11:34:37 -0500 (EST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Re: Interesting delimma: whose turn is it/who is Judge? [NOT A POINT OF ORDER YET] References: <94mt2p+72vr@e...> Date: 24 Jan 2001 11:34:37 -0500 In-Reply-To: Nomic1@a...'s message of "Wed, 24 Jan 2001 15:41:13 -0000" Message-ID: Lines: 32 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... Seems to me what it boils down to is whether Feyd's turn ended at the end of Phase Three or if there was a legitimate Phase Four to go through first. And that depends on when his rule-change took effect. Rule 107 states: No rule-change may take effect earlier than the moment of the completion of the vote that adopted it, even if its wording explicitly states otherwise. No rule-change may have retroactive application. So the *earliest* the rule-change could have taken effect was at the completion of the vote, which also was the moment Phase Three ended. If the rule-change and the end of vote were simultaneous than there's no way to answer the question of whether Feyd gets a Phase Four or not. If they were not simultaneous, then there's a clear answer. So in order not to have an unresolvable situation, we have to designate one event as occurring (infinitesimally) before the other. And since the rule-change cannot take place any earlier than the completion of the vote, the only option is to designate it as occurring (infinitesimally) later. Si Feyd's turn ended with Phase Three and it became my turn, and *then* Feyd's rule-change took effect. That's my take, anyway. On the other hand, if it'd help any, I'd be more than happy to yield my turn to Andre. -- Doctroid From jjweston@k... Wed Jan 24 09:25:54 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 24 Jan 2001 17:25:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 81038 invoked from network); 24 Jan 2001 17:12:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 24 Jan 2001 17:12:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta3 with SMTP; 24 Jan 2001 18:13:50 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0OHxA605484 for ; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 09:59:18 -0800 Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 09:59:10 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] Re: Interesting delimma: whose turn is it/who is Judge? [NOT A POINT OF ORDER YET] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" My take on the whole situation... I direct you to rule 315, that was in effect immediately before proposoal 316 passed. The third paragraph reads as such: The third phase is the "Voting" phase. The proposal from phase two is now voted on. If it is adopted, the proposed rule changes are enacted one at a time starting with the lowest numbered rule change, and ending with the highest numbered rule change. If any single rule change is found to be illegal according to the rules, that rule change, along with all higher numbered rule changes in that proposal, are discarded and not enacted. The player loses five points for each rule change discarded in this fashion. The player is awarded the number of points computed by subtracting 291 from the ordinal number of the highest numbered rule change and multiplying that result by the fraction of favorable votes the player's proposal received. There seem to be several mini-phases in phase three. 1) Everyone votes. 2) If proposal is adopted, the rule changes are enacted one at a time. 3) Points are distributed. The key phrase is in mini-phase two: "one at a time". This seems to imply that events in phase three occur in a certain order and not simultaneously. I would argue that Feyd did indeed have a phase four to his turn, and it is now Andre's turn. As for conflict of interest in judges... I direct you to rule 212 paragraph 4: Unless a Judge is overruled, one Judge settles all questions arising from the game until the next turn is begun, including questions as to his or her own legitimacy and jurisdiction as Judge. Settling issues of judge legitamacy and jurisdiction sure seems like a conflict of interest, yet the rules explicitly state that it is allowed. Another note... Suppose judgement is invoked? We still don't know who the current judge would be... Rule 212 provides clear direction. Our discussion boils down to how does Feyd's turn end. Essentially questioning the exact events of passing proposal 316. The last paragraph of rule 212 states: "New Judges may, however, settle only those questions on which the players currently disagree and that affect the completion of the turn in which Judgment was invoked." Since the argument is about the completion of Feyd's turn, I would argue it still is Feyd's turn and the judge would be myself. I love this game. ;-) From Nomic1@a... Wed Jan 24 10:39:59 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nomic1@a... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 24 Jan 2001 18:39:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 58194 invoked from network); 24 Jan 2001 18:24:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 24 Jan 2001 18:24:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ml.egroups.com) (10.1.1.31) by mta1 with SMTP; 24 Jan 2001 18:24:01 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Nomic1@a... Received: from [10.1.4.66] by ml.egroups.com with NNFMP; 24 Jan 2001 18:24:01 -0000 Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 18:23:54 -0000 To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: My take on Jeff's Take...(very good analysis, BTW) Message-ID: <94n6jq+qdh9@e...> In-Reply-To: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 838 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 208.249.92.137 From: Nomic1@a... --- In n_omic@egroups.com, "Jeffrey J. Weston" wrote: > My take on the whole situation... I direct you to rule 315, > was in effect immediately before proposoal 316 passed. The third >There seem to be several mini-phases in phase three. 1) Everyone > votes. 2) If proposal is adopted, the rule changes are enacted one at a > time. 3) Points are distributed. If this is true then phase 3 ends when "points are distributed". This would be after the rule goes into effect, so there is an implied "4) phase ends" here. Thus there is time between when the rule goes into effect and the end of the turn. > which Judgment was invoked." Since the argument is about the completion of > Feyd's turn, I would argue it still is Feyd's turn and the judge would be myself. > I love this game. ;-) I do too!! Feyd From rsholmes@m... Wed Jan 24 11:13:27 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 24 Jan 2001 19:13:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 58763 invoked from network); 24 Jan 2001 19:01:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 24 Jan 2001 19:01:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta3 with SMTP; 24 Jan 2001 20:02:17 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.008E1CFF@m...>; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 14:01:12 -0500 Received: (from rsholmes@l...) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id OAA01034; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 14:01:11 -0500 (EST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] My take on Jeff's Take...(very good analysis, BTW) References: <94n6jq+qdh9@e...> Date: 24 Jan 2001 14:01:11 -0500 In-Reply-To: Nomic1@a...'s message of "Wed, 24 Jan 2001 18:23:54 -0000" Message-ID: Lines: 20 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... Nomic1@a... writes: > --- In n_omic@egroups.com, "Jeffrey J. Weston" wrote: > > My take on the whole situation... I direct you to rule 315, > > was in effect immediately before proposoal 316 passed. The third > > >There seem to be several mini-phases in phase three. 1) Everyone > > votes. 2) If proposal is adopted, the rule changes are enacted one > at a > > time. 3) Points are distributed. > > If this is true then phase 3 ends when "points are distributed". > This would be after the rule goes into effect, so there is an > implied "4) phase ends" here. Thus there is time between when the > rule goes into effect and the end of the turn. I'll buy that... -- Doctroid From ross@b... Wed Jan 24 11:15:59 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: ross@b... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 24 Jan 2001 19:15:59 -0000 Received: (qmail 5827 invoked from network); 24 Jan 2001 19:04:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 24 Jan 2001 19:04:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO cliff.unet.brandeis.edu) (129.64.99.34) by mta2 with SMTP; 24 Jan 2001 19:04:05 -0000 Received: from sam.unet.brandeis.edu (IDENT:0@s... [129.64.99.130]) by cliff.unet.brandeis.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3/UNet1.7) with ESMTP id OAA04469 for ; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 14:04:04 -0500 Received: from localhost (ross@l...) by sam.unet.brandeis.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA06628 for ; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 14:04:03 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: sam.unet.brandeis.edu: ross owned process doing -bs Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 14:04:03 -0500 (EST) X-Sender: ross@s... To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Re: [n_omic] My take on Jeff's Take...(very good analysis, BTW) In-Reply-To: <94n6jq+qdh9@e...> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Ross B. Schulman" On Wed, 24 Jan 2001 Nomic1@a... wrote: > --- In n_omic@egroups.com, "Jeffrey J. Weston" wrote: > > My take on the whole situation... I direct you to rule 315, > > was in effect immediately before proposoal 316 passed. The third > > >There seem to be several mini-phases in phase three. 1) Everyone > > votes. 2) If proposal is adopted, the rule changes are enacted one > at a > > time. 3) Points are distributed. > > If this is true then phase 3 ends when "points are distributed". > This would be after the rule goes into effect, so there is an > implied "4) phase ends" here. Thus there is time between when the > rule goes into effect and the end of the turn. Okay, yes, I see what you're saying and I agre with you now that its put that way. > > which Judgment was invoked." Since the argument is about the > completion of > > Feyd's turn, I would argue it still is Feyd's turn and the judge > would be myself. > I for one can concur at this point that it's now Andre's turn and don't see a need to call for judgment. Since Rich seems okay with that too, should we just continue then? > > I love this game. ;-) > > I do too!! I've never played before this but I'm having a great time so far. : ) -Ross From jjweston@k... Wed Jan 24 11:38:17 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 24 Jan 2001 19:38:11 -0000 Received: (qmail 38987 invoked from network); 24 Jan 2001 19:26:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 24 Jan 2001 19:26:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta2 with SMTP; 24 Jan 2001 19:26:19 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0OKCtj05718 for ; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 12:13:01 -0800 Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 12:12:55 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Looks like we continue with Andre... Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" Looks like the general consensus is to continue the game with Andre's turn. I have updated the player list to reflect this. If anyone still disagrees, invoke judgement. From engels@w... Wed Jan 24 12:15:15 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: engels@w... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 24 Jan 2001 20:15:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 1429 invoked from network); 24 Jan 2001 20:00:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 24 Jan 2001 20:00:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailhost.tue.nl) (131.155.2.5) by mta1 with SMTP; 24 Jan 2001 20:00:34 -0000 Received: from wsinfm15.win.tue.nl (wsinfm15.win.tue.nl [131.155.69.168]) by mailhost.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0OK0WK20856 for ; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 21:00:33 +0100 (MET) Received: (from engels@l...) by wsinfm15.win.tue.nl (8.11.0/8.11.1) id f0OK0Wq01809 for n_omic@egroups.com; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 21:00:32 +0100 (MET) Message-Id: <200101242000.f0OK0Wq01809@w...> Subject: Proposal 317 To: n_omic@egroups.com Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 21:00:32 +0100 (MET) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL43 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Andre Engels Purchase phase: I do not buy an extra Proposal. Proposal phase: I make the following Proposal: Let rule 210 be repealed. (comment: has no effect on this game anyway). Andre From jjweston@k... Wed Jan 24 12:35:36 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjweston@k... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 24 Jan 2001 20:35:36 -0000 Received: (qmail 53674 invoked from network); 24 Jan 2001 20:21:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 24 Jan 2001 20:21:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kenny.sir-toby.com) (63.84.211.242) by mta1 with SMTP; 24 Jan 2001 20:21:12 -0000 Received: from localhost (jjweston@l...) by kenny.sir-toby.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0OL7Jm05775 for ; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 13:07:45 -0800 Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 13:07:18 -0800 (PST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: Vote FOR Proposal 317 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: "Jeffrey J. Weston" From rsholmes@m... Wed Jan 24 13:03:02 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: rsholmes@M... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 24 Jan 2001 21:03:02 -0000 Received: (qmail 35563 invoked from network); 24 Jan 2001 20:50:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 24 Jan 2001 20:50:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailer.syr.edu) (128.230.18.29) by mta2 with SMTP; 24 Jan 2001 20:50:26 -0000 Received: from rodan.syr.edu by mailer.syr.edu (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.008E2BEF@m...>; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 15:50:25 -0500 Received: (from rsholmes@l...) by rodan.syr.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id PAA28136; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 15:50:24 -0500 (EST) To: n_omic@egroups.com Subject: VOTE FOR Re: [n_omic] Proposal 317 References: <200101242000.f0OK0Wq01809@w...> Date: 24 Jan 2001 15:50:24 -0500 In-Reply-To: Andre Engels's message of "Wed, 24 Jan 2001 21:00:32 +0100 (MET)" Message-ID: Lines: 6 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-eGroups-From: rsholmes@M... (Richard S. Holmes) From: rsholmes@m... Andre Engels writes: > Let rule 210 be repealed. -- Doctroid From htowsner@s... Wed Jan 24 13:12:16 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: htowsner@s... X-Apparently-To: n_omic@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 24 Jan 2001 21:12:16 -0000 Received: (qmail 41035 invoked from network); 24 Jan 2001 20:55:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 24 Jan 2001 20:55:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO smtp.Stanford.EDU) (