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