From eventi@h... Tue Dec 12 21:09:37 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 13 Dec 2000 05:09:37 -0000 Received: (qmail 72680 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2000 05:09:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Dec 2000 05:09:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mv.egroups.com) (10.1.1.41) by mta3 with SMTP; 13 Dec 2000 06:10:42 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: eventi@h... Received: from [10.1.10.127] by mv.egroups.com with NNFMP; 13 Dec 2000 05:09:36 -0000 Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 05:09:33 -0000 To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: Proposal 301 Message-ID: <9170ad+68q1@eGroups.com> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 127 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 64.29.109.19 From: "eventi " Each proposal shall be posted to the group with the subject consisting of the word "Proposal" followed by the proposal number. From eventi@h... Tue Dec 12 21:10:57 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 13 Dec 2000 05:10:57 -0000 Received: (qmail 53217 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2000 05:10:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 13 Dec 2000 05:10:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ho.egroups.com) (10.1.2.219) by mta3 with SMTP; 13 Dec 2000 06:12:02 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: eventi@h... Received: from [10.1.10.127] by ho.egroups.com with NNFMP; 13 Dec 2000 05:10:57 -0000 Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 05:10:54 -0000 To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: Proposal 302 Message-ID: <9170cu+6t0t@eGroups.com> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 108 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 64.29.109.19 From: "eventi " A poll shall be created by the author of a new proposal, in order to facilitate the vote tabulating process From eventi@h... Tue Dec 12 21:12:33 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 13 Dec 2000 05:12:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 3833 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2000 05:12:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Dec 2000 05:12:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hm.egroups.com) (10.1.10.45) by mta1 with SMTP; 13 Dec 2000 05:12:32 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: eventi@h... Received: from [10.1.10.127] by hm.egroups.com with NNFMP; 13 Dec 2000 05:12:31 -0000 Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 05:12:24 -0000 To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: Proposal 303 Message-ID: <9170fo+6t9d@eGroups.com> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 127 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 64.29.109.19 From: "eventi " Enacted rules shall be posted to the list, with the subject consisting of the word "Rule", followed by the number of the rule. From eventi@h... Tue Dec 12 21:13:42 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 13 Dec 2000 05:13:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 55143 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2000 05:13:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Dec 2000 05:13:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO c3.egroups.com) (10.1.10.50) by mta2 with SMTP; 13 Dec 2000 05:13:41 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: eventi@h... Received: from [10.1.10.127] by c3.egroups.com with NNFMP; 13 Dec 2000 05:13:41 -0000 Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 05:13:34 -0000 To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: Re: Proposal 301 Message-ID: <9170hu+6anb@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: <9170ad+68q1@eGroups.com> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 60 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 64.29.109.19 From: "eventi " This is an outrage!!! What kind of Crack are you smoking?? From eventi@h... Tue Dec 12 21:17:43 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 13 Dec 2000 05:17:43 -0000 Received: (qmail 92796 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2000 05:17:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Dec 2000 05:17:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ho.egroups.com) (10.1.2.219) by mta3 with SMTP; 13 Dec 2000 06:18:48 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: eventi@h... Received: from [10.1.2.56] by ho.egroups.com with NNFMP; 13 Dec 2000 05:17:42 -0000 Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 05:16:45 -0000 To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: Re: Proposal 302 Message-ID: <9170nt+nai0@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: <9170cu+6t0t@eGroups.com> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 278 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 64.29.109.19 From: "eventi " --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, "eventi " wrote: > A poll shall be created by the author of a new proposal, in order to facilitate the vote tabulating process This definately needs clarification... Is this now the only way to vote? As written, I vote against. From eventi@h... Tue Dec 12 21:24:35 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 13 Dec 2000 05:24:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 82572 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2000 05:24:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Dec 2000 05:24:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO b05.egroups.com) (10.1.2.184) by mta2 with SMTP; 13 Dec 2000 05:24:35 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: eventi@h... Received: from [10.1.2.56] by b05.egroups.com with NNFMP; 13 Dec 2000 05:24:35 -0000 Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 05:24:30 -0000 To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: Re: Proposal 303 Message-ID: <91716e+k82l@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: <9170fo+6t9d@eGroups.com> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 254 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 64.29.109.19 From: "eventi " --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, "eventi " wrote: > Enacted rules shall be posted to the list, with the subject consisting of the word "Rule", followed by the number of the rule. someone should write a rule for how to Call For Judgement. From bernardo@c... Sat Dec 16 07:29:31 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 16 Dec 2000 15:29:31 -0000 Received: (qmail 17726 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2000 15:29:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 16 Dec 2000 15:29:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ef.egroups.com) (10.1.2.111) by mta3 with SMTP; 16 Dec 2000 16:30:36 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: bernardo@c... Received: from [10.1.2.28] by ef.egroups.com with NNFMP; 16 Dec 2000 15:29:31 -0000 Date: Sat, 16 Dec 2000 15:29:28 -0000 To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: Re: Proposal 301 Message-ID: <91g1op+plve@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: <9170ad+68q1@eGroups.com> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 208 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 208.17.168.70 From: bernardo@c... --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, "eventi " wrote: > Each proposal shall be posted to the group with the subject consisting of the word "Proposal" followed by the proposal number. I vote yea. From bernardo@c... Sat Dec 16 07:41:53 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 16 Dec 2000 15:41:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 38578 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2000 15:41:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 16 Dec 2000 15:41:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO jj.egroups.com) (10.1.10.91) by mta2 with SMTP; 16 Dec 2000 15:41:52 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: bernardo@c... Received: from [10.1.2.109] by jj.egroups.com with NNFMP; 16 Dec 2000 15:41:52 -0000 Date: Sat, 16 Dec 2000 15:41:48 -0000 To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: Re: Proposal 303 Message-ID: <91g2fs+js9t@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: <9170fo+6t9d@eGroups.com> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 220 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 208.17.168.70 From: bernardo@c... --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, "eventi " wrote: > Enacted rules shall be posted to the list, with the subject consisting of the word "Rule", followed by the number of the rule. I like this one too. p. From bernardo@c... Sat Dec 16 07:53:18 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 16 Dec 2000 15:53:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 11356 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2000 15:53:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 16 Dec 2000 15:53:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO jk.egroups.com) (10.1.10.92) by mta3 with SMTP; 16 Dec 2000 16:54:23 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: bernardo@c... Received: from [10.1.2.52] by jk.egroups.com with NNFMP; 16 Dec 2000 15:53:17 -0000 Date: Sat, 16 Dec 2000 15:53:12 -0000 To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: Re: Proposal 302 Message-ID: <91g358+p1ue@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: <9170cu+6t0t@eGroups.com> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 624 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 208.17.168.70 From: bernardo@c... --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, "eventi " wrote: > A poll shall be created by the author of a new proposal, in order to facilitate the vote tabulating process. This one may or may not be problematic. It depends on whether these rules are intended to stand alone, or they are to be appended to a prior set - which set would specify voting procedure and the threshold for passage. For example, it's quite possible to require a super-majority rather than a mere majority, etc. So I'd say I vote to retable this one for further discussion. You see - nobody specified whether that was possible or not! From eventi@h... Sat Dec 16 09:40:08 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 16 Dec 2000 17:40:08 -0000 Received: (qmail 39276 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2000 17:40:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 16 Dec 2000 17:40:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mv.egroups.com) (10.1.1.41) by mta2 with SMTP; 16 Dec 2000 17:40:08 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: eventi@h... Received: from [10.1.10.64] by mv.egroups.com with NNFMP; 16 Dec 2000 17:40:07 -0000 Date: Sat, 16 Dec 2000 17:40:07 -0000 To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: Re: Proposal 302 Message-ID: <91g9dn+cgd3@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: <91g358+p1ue@eGroups.com> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 1023 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 64.29.109.18 From: "eventi " --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, bernardo@c... wrote: > --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, "eventi " wrote: > > A poll shall be created by the author of a new proposal, in order > to facilitate the vote tabulating process. > > This one may or may not be problematic. It depends on whether these > rules are intended to stand alone, or they are to be appended to a > prior set - which set would specify voting procedure and the > threshold for passage. For example, it's quite possible to require a > super-majority rather than a mere majority, etc. > > So I'd say I vote to retable this one for further discussion. You > see - nobody specified whether that was possible or not! I did intend this to go along with the previous rules... I posted them in the database section(link's on the right of the webpage). So it's unanimous for 2 rounds, then simple majority. Also, the poll is a feature from eGroups, not a generic term. Since this proposal was so botched, lemme re-propose it later. From eventi@h... Sat Dec 16 09:41:28 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 16 Dec 2000 17:41:28 -0000 Received: (qmail 47406 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2000 17:41:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 16 Dec 2000 17:41:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hi.egroups.com) (10.1.10.41) by mta1 with SMTP; 16 Dec 2000 17:41:28 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: eventi@h... Received: from [10.1.10.64] by hi.egroups.com with NNFMP; 16 Dec 2000 17:41:27 -0000 Date: Sat, 16 Dec 2000 17:41:20 -0000 To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: Rule 301 Message-ID: <91g9g0+nila@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: <91g1op+plve@eGroups.com> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 129 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 64.29.109.18 From: "eventi " Each proposal shall be posted to the group with the subject consisting of the word "Proposal" followed by the proposal number. From eventi@h... Sat Dec 16 09:42:40 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 16 Dec 2000 17:42:40 -0000 Received: (qmail 70174 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2000 17:42:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 16 Dec 2000 17:42:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO fk.egroups.com) (10.1.10.47) by mta2 with SMTP; 16 Dec 2000 17:42:39 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: eventi@h... Received: from [10.1.10.64] by fk.egroups.com with NNFMP; 16 Dec 2000 17:42:32 -0000 Date: Sat, 16 Dec 2000 17:42:23 -0000 To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: Rule 303 Message-ID: <91g9hv+4nmk@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: <91g2fs+js9t@eGroups.com> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 130 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 64.29.109.18 From: "eventi " Enacted rules shall be posted to the list, with the subject consisting of the word "Rule", followed by the number of the rule. From eventi@h... Mon Dec 18 08:36:32 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 18 Dec 2000 16:36:32 -0000 Received: (qmail 37173 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2000 16:36:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 18 Dec 2000 16:36:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hh.egroups.com) (10.1.10.40) by mta3 with SMTP; 18 Dec 2000 17:37:31 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: eventi@h... Received: from [10.1.2.59] by hh.egroups.com with NNFMP; 18 Dec 2000 16:36:26 -0000 Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2000 16:36:24 -0000 To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: Test Message Message-ID: <91lee8+104jq@eGroups.com> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 12 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 209.73.237.163 From: "eventi " Hello There From bernardo@c... Mon Dec 18 10:48:42 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 18 Dec 2000 18:48:36 -0000 Received: (qmail 34683 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2000 18:48:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 18 Dec 2000 18:48:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 18 Dec 2000 18:48:35 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp03-05.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.65]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id eBIImUv19887 for ; Mon, 18 Dec 2000 13:48:30 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <00b901c06923$0c3bee80$41a811d0@computer> To: References: <91lee8+104jq@eGroups.com> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Test Message Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2000 13:47:58 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" Hi. ----- Original Message ----- From: eventi To: Sent: Monday, December 18, 2000 11:36 AM Subject: [scatterbrains] Test Message > Hello There > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Mon Dec 18 10:51:57 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 18 Dec 2000 18:51:57 -0000 Received: (qmail 33242 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2000 18:51:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 18 Dec 2000 18:51:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 18 Dec 2000 18:51:56 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id NAA15351 for ; Mon, 18 Dec 2000 13:51:50 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Test Message Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2000 13:52:28 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.3018.1300 In-Reply-To: <00b901c06923$0c3bee80$41a811d0@computer> From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" Yeah- I added my work account, then found out that we were blocking egroups.com from delivering email... And me with no one to bitch to. All's good now. --e > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Monday, December 18, 2000 1:48 PM > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Test Message > > > Hi. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: eventi > To: > Sent: Monday, December 18, 2000 11:36 AM > Subject: [scatterbrains] Test Message > > > > Hello There > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Mon Dec 18 13:57:42 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 18 Dec 2000 21:57:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 2541 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2000 21:57:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 18 Dec 2000 21:57:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hp.egroups.com) (10.1.2.220) by mta3 with SMTP; 18 Dec 2000 22:58:47 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: bernardo@c... Received: from [10.1.2.116] by hp.egroups.com with NNFMP; 18 Dec 2000 21:57:41 -0000 Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2000 21:57:38 -0000 To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: Proposal 304 Message-ID: <91m18i+toct@eGroups.com> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 648 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 208.17.168.69 From: "Al Farabi" A) Each player shall receive Points for the Introduction of a new player into the game. B) Points shall be determined in the same manner as the passage of a new rule. C)Introduction shall be determined by an affidavit posted to the group, by the new player, within 1 (one) day of joining, with the subject header "Introduction" and text consisting of the following declaration: "[Player name] has introduced me to Scatterbrains." D)This rule shall remain in effect until the game consists of 10 (ten) or more members. E) For the purposes of further discussion, this rule may also be referred to as the "Be Fruitful and Multiply" Bill. From bernardo@c... Mon Dec 18 14:05:58 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 18 Dec 2000 22:05:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 48663 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2000 22:05:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 18 Dec 2000 22:05:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta3 with SMTP; 18 Dec 2000 23:06:59 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp03-09.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.69]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id eBIM5nv39635 for ; Mon, 18 Dec 2000 17:05:50 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <002301c0693e$9d235080$45a811d0@computer> To: References: <91m18i+toct@eGroups.com> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Proposal 304 Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2000 17:05:18 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" Revision to 304: Render Part B to read, "The introducing Player shall receive 5 (five) points for an official Introduction." p.bernardo. I was reading the part about dice, and only realized later - "duh!" - that that couldn't apply to this rule! ----- Original Message ----- From: Al Farabi To: Sent: Monday, December 18, 2000 4:57 PM Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 304 > A) Each player shall receive Points for the Introduction of a new > player into the game. > > B) Points shall be determined in the same manner as the passage of a > new rule. > > C)Introduction shall be determined by an affidavit posted to the > group, by the new player, within 1 (one) day of joining, with the > subject header "Introduction" and text consisting of the following > declaration: "[Player name] has introduced me to Scatterbrains." > > D)This rule shall remain in effect until the game consists of 10 > (ten) or more members. > > E) For the purposes of further discussion, this rule may also be > referred to as the "Be Fruitful and Multiply" Bill. > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Mon Dec 18 14:06:55 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 18 Dec 2000 22:06:55 -0000 Received: (qmail 67266 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2000 22:06:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 18 Dec 2000 22:06:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 18 Dec 2000 23:07:59 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id RAA05069 for ; Mon, 18 Dec 2000 17:06:50 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 304 Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2000 17:07:40 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-reply-to: <91m18i+toct@eGroups.com> Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" Sounds good- Since Proposals 302 and 303 were technically illegal, you have no obligation to post this to the list as a rule, but I would think you are swell for doing so. 10 points for you --e > -----Original Message----- > From: Al Farabi [mailto:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Monday, December 18, 2000 4:58 PM > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 304 > > > A) Each player shall receive Points for the Introduction of a new > player into the game. > > B) Points shall be determined in the same manner as the passage of a > new rule. > > C)Introduction shall be determined by an affidavit posted to the > group, by the new player, within 1 (one) day of joining, with the > subject header "Introduction" and text consisting of the following > declaration: "[Player name] has introduced me to Scatterbrains." > > D)This rule shall remain in effect until the game consists of 10 > (ten) or more members. > > E) For the purposes of further discussion, this rule may also be > referred to as the "Be Fruitful and Multiply" Bill. > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Mon Dec 18 14:26:45 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 18 Dec 2000 22:26:44 -0000 Received: (qmail 34033 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2000 22:26:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 18 Dec 2000 22:26:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta3 with SMTP; 18 Dec 2000 23:26:49 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp03-09.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.69]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id eBIMPcv41613 for ; Mon, 18 Dec 2000 17:25:38 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <003401c06941$618e99a0$45a811d0@computer> To: References: Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Proposal 304 Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2000 17:25:07 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" Actually, that'd be 13 points for me : (304-291)*1 I didn't see the rule about the rules being posted only singly, but it seems to me to be common parliamentary procedure to introduce a package of rules at one time. Since these all had, more or less, the same subject, I don't see why this couldn't be the case. Sort of like Nafta, which was a bundle of rule-changes guided by one purpose. But I guess that this is a bit of extra-legal reasoning. There oughta' be a law! ----- Original Message ----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia To: Sent: Monday, December 18, 2000 5:07 PM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 304 > Sounds good- > Since Proposals 302 and 303 were technically illegal, you have no > obligation to post this to the list as a rule, but I would think you are > swell for doing so. 10 points for you > --e > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Al Farabi [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > Sent: Monday, December 18, 2000 4:58 PM > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 304 > > > > > > A) Each player shall receive Points for the Introduction of a new > > player into the game. > > > > B) Points shall be determined in the same manner as the passage of a > > new rule. > > > > C)Introduction shall be determined by an affidavit posted to the > > group, by the new player, within 1 (one) day of joining, with the > > subject header "Introduction" and text consisting of the following > > declaration: "[Player name] has introduced me to Scatterbrains." > > > > D)This rule shall remain in effect until the game consists of 10 > > (ten) or more members. > > > > E) For the purposes of further discussion, this rule may also be > > referred to as the "Be Fruitful and Multiply" Bill. > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Mon Dec 18 14:38:23 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 18 Dec 2000 22:38:23 -0000 Received: (qmail 22782 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2000 22:38:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 18 Dec 2000 22:38:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 18 Dec 2000 22:38:22 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id RAA07912 for ; Mon, 18 Dec 2000 17:38:17 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 304 Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2000 17:39:07 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-reply-to: <003401c06941$618e99a0$45a811d0@computer> Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" If you were referring to my 3 proposals, I think it violates the turn order (201) and 202 (a turn consists of...) If you were referring to yours... I didn't see a problem with that proposal, but I think it could have been challenged under 111. Since we don't have a 3rd Player, I would have been the judge, too. But when seperated, it would have been too ambiguous. I'm not so sure I'm convinced that packages are Good Things(tm)... They expedite things now, but later, they'll be shot down more easily on the basis of one of the parts... 13 Points it is. > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Monday, December 18, 2000 5:25 PM > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Proposal 304 > > > Actually, that'd be 13 points for me : (304-291)*1 > > I didn't see the rule about the rules being posted only singly, > but it seems > to me to be common parliamentary procedure to introduce a package of rules > at one time. Since these all had, more or less, the same subject, I don't > see why this couldn't be the case. Sort of like Nafta, which was a bundle > of rule-changes guided by one purpose. > > But I guess that this is a bit of extra-legal reasoning. > > There oughta' be a law! > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Eugene Ventimiglia > To: > Sent: Monday, December 18, 2000 5:07 PM > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 304 > > > > Sounds good- > > Since Proposals 302 and 303 were technically illegal, you have no > > obligation to post this to the list as a rule, but I would think you are > > swell for doing so. 10 points for you > > --e > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Al Farabi [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > > Sent: Monday, December 18, 2000 4:58 PM > > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 304 > > > > > > > > > A) Each player shall receive Points for the Introduction of a new > > > player into the game. > > > > > > B) Points shall be determined in the same manner as the passage of a > > > new rule. > > > > > > C)Introduction shall be determined by an affidavit posted to the > > > group, by the new player, within 1 (one) day of joining, with the > > > subject header "Introduction" and text consisting of the following > > > declaration: "[Player name] has introduced me to Scatterbrains." > > > > > > D)This rule shall remain in effect until the game consists of 10 > > > (ten) or more members. > > > > > > E) For the purposes of further discussion, this rule may also be > > > referred to as the "Be Fruitful and Multiply" Bill. > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Mon Dec 18 14:40:57 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 18 Dec 2000 22:40:57 -0000 Received: (qmail 7689 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2000 22:40:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 18 Dec 2000 22:40:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 18 Dec 2000 22:40:55 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id RAA08164 for ; Mon, 18 Dec 2000 17:40:54 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 304 Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2000 17:41:44 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-reply-to: <002301c0693e$9d235080$45a811d0@computer> Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" OUCH!!! I got this 25 minutes after voting... now what... I'd vote for the ammendment as well, and it makes more sense. --e > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Monday, December 18, 2000 5:05 PM > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Proposal 304 > > > Revision to 304: > > Render Part B to read, "The introducing Player shall receive 5 > (five) points > for an official Introduction." > > p.bernardo. > > I was reading the part about dice, and only realized later - "duh!" - that > that couldn't apply to this rule! > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Al Farabi > To: > Sent: Monday, December 18, 2000 4:57 PM > Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 304 > > > > A) Each player shall receive Points for the Introduction of a new > > player into the game. > > > > B) Points shall be determined in the same manner as the passage of a > > new rule. > > > > C)Introduction shall be determined by an affidavit posted to the > > group, by the new player, within 1 (one) day of joining, with the > > subject header "Introduction" and text consisting of the following > > declaration: "[Player name] has introduced me to Scatterbrains." > > > > D)This rule shall remain in effect until the game consists of 10 > > (ten) or more members. > > > > E) For the purposes of further discussion, this rule may also be > > referred to as the "Be Fruitful and Multiply" Bill. > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Mon Dec 18 15:21:05 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 18 Dec 2000 23:21:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 28214 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2000 23:21:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 18 Dec 2000 23:21:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 18 Dec 2000 23:21:03 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp03-07.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.67]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id eBINL1v46657 for ; Mon, 18 Dec 2000 18:21:02 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <001701c06949$1e8c1580$43a811d0@computer> To: References: Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Proposal 304 Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2000 18:20:30 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" I'd say to just amend it, and let it slide for now. I guess if we wanted to be sticklers about it, you could insist upon it being accepted in its original form, which you voted on. Unfortunately, though, according to 111, there is to be a suitable time for discussion and amendment, and the Proponent gets to say what the final form should be. I'd argue that my amendment (since it was SENT about 5 minutes after the original Proposal) falls under the suitable time threshold, and that, as Proponent, I'd insist that it take the amended form. Since we don't have a third to be judge, we'd be in a stalemate, probably. But if you like the amended form, we don't really need to go into these things. It can be unanimously adopted as amended. Oh yeah, I invited an ex-Fordhamite to join. I don't know if he will or not, but how does he (or anyone) go about actually getting in? ----- Original Message ----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia To: Sent: Monday, December 18, 2000 5:41 PM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 304 > OUCH!!! I got this 25 minutes after voting... now what... I'd vote for the > ammendment as well, and it makes more sense. > --e > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > Sent: Monday, December 18, 2000 5:05 PM > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Proposal 304 > > > > > > Revision to 304: > > > > Render Part B to read, "The introducing Player shall receive 5 > > (five) points > > for an official Introduction." > > > > p.bernardo. > > > > I was reading the part about dice, and only realized later - "duh!" - that > > that couldn't apply to this rule! > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Al Farabi > > To: > > Sent: Monday, December 18, 2000 4:57 PM > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 304 > > > > > > > A) Each player shall receive Points for the Introduction of a new > > > player into the game. > > > > > > B) Points shall be determined in the same manner as the passage of a > > > new rule. > > > > > > C)Introduction shall be determined by an affidavit posted to the > > > group, by the new player, within 1 (one) day of joining, with the > > > subject header "Introduction" and text consisting of the following > > > declaration: "[Player name] has introduced me to Scatterbrains." > > > > > > D)This rule shall remain in effect until the game consists of 10 > > > (ten) or more members. > > > > > > E) For the purposes of further discussion, this rule may also be > > > referred to as the "Be Fruitful and Multiply" Bill. > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@w... Mon Dec 18 17:59:11 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@w... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 19 Dec 2000 01:59:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 9444 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2000 01:59:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 19 Dec 2000 01:59:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ns1.wyndtell.com) (63.81.201.11) by mta3 with SMTP; 19 Dec 2000 03:00:10 -0000 Received: from nova.wyndtell.com (nova.wyndtell.com [63.81.201.78]) by ns1.wyndtell.com (8.11.0/8.9.3) with ESMTP id eBJ2tdm16819 for ; Mon, 18 Dec 2000 18:55:39 -0800 Received: (root@localhost) by nova.wyndtell.com (8.8.8/SCA-6.6) id UAA28555; Mon, 18 Dec 2000 20:59:04 -0500 (EST) To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: Proposal 305 Message-Id: <15308871.1022@w...> Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2000 17:59:04 -0800 X-eGroups-From: eventi@w... (Eugene Ventimiglia) From: eventi@w... "The My Cousin Paul Rule" If an action is required by a player, it must be made within one week. If the player does not act within one week, play continues as if that player were not in the game and that player loses 5 points. Note: I propose this as a safety measure against having a game become dormant due to lack of interrest of one player. My cousin Paul always does this... From bernardo@c... Mon Dec 18 19:55:06 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 19 Dec 2000 03:55:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 81917 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2000 03:55:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 19 Dec 2000 03:55:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 19 Dec 2000 03:55:02 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-19.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.204]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id eBJ3t0v69796 for ; Mon, 18 Dec 2000 22:55:01 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <002301c0696f$648380c0$cca811d0@computer> To: References: <15308871.1022@w...> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Proposal 305 Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2000 22:54:29 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" Hmm. I don't like it for a couple of reasons: 1) My next rule was going to cover this subject, but differently! (Hey, I'm being honest) 2) More importantly, it's too vague. Does "action" cover voting? I mean, if a person is apathetic, and kind of bails out of the game should they be penalized for not voting? It's the same thing with the vote here, plenty of people (close to half) didn't vote in this election. I'm inclined to count no-votes as yes votes. Or perhaps they should be discarded, and a prop's passage determined on the basis of the remaining votes. Either way, I'd rather see the rule phrased differently. 3) Will losing 5 points really discourage bailing out? If you really want to get tough, why not do something like a slavery rule? So, if a player does not propose a rule within a week, he/she is made a slave of (someone - highest bidder, point-wise, or something) and the slaves votes will be controlled by the master. Perhaps the slave account will be unable to propose new rules. Maybe there should be a time limit, say a week after declaration of interest in emancipation. Damn, now I gave you my rule. But really, this isn't a no vote - not yet - but I'd like to see it rewritten. (I'm assuming we're in the discussion phase, so you can still amend it... p. ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Monday, December 18, 2000 8:59 PM Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 305 > "The My Cousin Paul Rule" > > If an action is required by a player, it must be made within one week. If the player does not act within one week, play continues as if that player were not in the game and that player loses 5 points. > > Note: I propose this as a safety measure against having a game become dormant due to lack of interrest of one player. My cousin Paul always does this... > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@w... Mon Dec 18 20:48:12 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@w... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 19 Dec 2000 04:48:12 -0000 Received: (qmail 64736 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2000 04:48:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 19 Dec 2000 04:48:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ns1.wyndtell.com) (63.81.201.11) by mta3 with SMTP; 19 Dec 2000 05:49:17 -0000 Received: from nova.wyndtell.com (nova.wyndtell.com [63.81.201.78]) by ns1.wyndtell.com (8.11.0/8.9.3) with ESMTP id eBJ5ikm27655 for ; Mon, 18 Dec 2000 21:44:46 -0800 Received: (root@localhost) by nova.wyndtell.com (8.8.8/SCA-6.6) id XAA23356; Mon, 18 Dec 2000 23:48:11 -0500 (EST) To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: re[2]: [scatterbrains] Proposal 305 In-Reply-To: 696f648 X-Status: 6Y Message-Id: <15308871.1023@w...> Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2000 20:48:11 -0800 X-eGroups-From: eventi@w... (Eugene Ventimiglia) From: eventi@w... Damn, you're evil... I originally only included failure to propose, but as the rules are written, if 50% abstain from a vote, the rule can't pass... I'd agree that non-votes could be construed as afirmatives, but I was trying make the proposal one broad one, instead of multiple smaller issues (rule 111 again). Re-write is on the way. From bernardo@c... Mon Dec 18 21:11:48 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 19 Dec 2000 05:11:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 30700 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2000 05:11:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 19 Dec 2000 05:11:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 19 Dec 2000 05:11:47 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-19.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.204]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id eBJ5Bgv76185 for ; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 00:11:43 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <001301c0697a$1b9d63c0$cca811d0@computer> To: References: <15308871.1023@w...> Subject: Re: re[2]: [scatterbrains] Proposal 305 Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2000 00:11:11 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" Alright, since we're quoting chapter and verse here :), I should point out a couple of things: If you put together 111 and 116, you will see that it never directly says that compounded rules are illegal. I don't even think that the intent was such, as 111 only says that if a rule "arguably consists of two or more rule-changes compounded, ...then the other players may suggest amendments or argue against the proposal before the vote." It never says that such rules are illegal, but points out that it might be advisable to argue against that rule in discussion, and explicitly reserves judgement of the suitability of the rule to a debate and a vote. Therefore, using 116, we can say that compounded rules are ok as long as the public likes the particular case. (BTW, 103 does not specify that a rule change is exclusively one of the following three possibilities, and as such takes no stand on the issue of whether a rule change might consist of one or more rules.) The problem with your first (three) rules is that they were given different Prop. numbers, and not included under one. Besides, I don't see any problem with a proposal requiring logical steps, for example, to change 103 so that it might rule on this issue: Proposal Example - A) Proposition 103 is hereby made mutable B)Proposition 103 is hereby repealed C) A rule-change is any *one* 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. The game might be more fun if you made each rule change consist of only one of the steps, so that you have to enact your rule in pieces, and someone might get there first. But as it stands, I think that compound rules are fine. Rule 105 already says that you have to vote. Perhaps the non-vote issue should be appended there. But first, you'd have to make 105 mutable... ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Monday, December 18, 2000 11:48 PM Subject: re[2]: [scatterbrains] Proposal 305 > Damn, you're evil... I originally only included failure to propose, but as the rules are written, if 50% abstain from a vote, the rule can't pass... I'd agree that non-votes could be construed as afirmatives, but I was trying make the proposal one broad one, instead of multiple smaller issues (rule 111 again). Re-write is on the way. > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From scatterbrains@egroups.com Mon Dec 18 23:05:39 2000 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 81710 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2000 07:05:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 19 Dec 2000 07:05:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO cj.egroups.com) (10.1.2.82) by mta2 with SMTP; 19 Dec 2000 07:05:38 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: notify@egroups.com Received: from [10.1.2.161] by cj.egroups.com with NNFMP; 19 Dec 2000 07:05:37 -0000 Received: (qmail 17393 invoked by uid 65534); 19 Dec 2000 07:05:36 -0000 Date: 19 Dec 2000 07:05:36 -0000 Message-ID: <977209536.17391@egroups.com> X-eGroups-Notify: From: To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: New file uploaded to scatterbrains 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 scatterbrains group. File : /Rules Uploaded by : eventi@n... Description : The current Ruleset in handy TEXT format You can access this file at the URL http://www.egroups.com/files/scatterbrains/Rules To learn more about eGroups file sharing, please visit http://www.egroups.com/help/files.html Regards, eventi@n... From eventi@n... Mon Dec 18 23:07:41 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 19 Dec 2000 07:07:41 -0000 Received: (qmail 85717 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2000 07:07:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 19 Dec 2000 07:07:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 19 Dec 2000 08:08:46 -0000 Received: from win (win.venti.nyic.com [64.29.109.18]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id CAA07156 for ; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 02:07:40 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <002001c0698a$2b1873c0$126d1d40@v...> To: References: <15308871.1023@w...> <001301c0697a$1b9d63c0$cca811d0@computer> Subject: Re: Proposal 305 Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2000 02:06:10 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" > Alright, since we're quoting chapter and verse here :), I should point out a > couple of things: > > If you put together 111 and 116, you will see that it never directly says > that compounded rules are illegal. I don't even think that the intent was > such, as 111 only says that if a rule "arguably consists of two or more > rule-changes compounded, ...then the other players may suggest amendments or > argue against the proposal before the vote." It never says that such rules > are illegal, but points out that it might be advisable to argue against that > rule in discussion, and explicitly reserves judgement of the suitability of > the rule to a debate and a vote. Therefore, using 116, we can say that > compounded rules are ok as long as the public likes the particular case. Agreed completely. I think 111 can be stripped down to "Other Players may suggest..." cutting the first 20 or so words. As long as there's no challenge, any proposal can be voted on and passed. But.... > (BTW, 103 does not specify that a rule change is exclusively one of the > following three possibilities, and as such takes no stand on the issue of > whether a rule change might consist of one or more rules.) The problem with > your first (three) rules is that they were given different Prop. numbers, > and not included under one. I disagree. I think 103 _defines_ rule-change as it is used throughout the initial set, and that definition is _clearly singular_. It has effect on 202: "One turn consists of two parts in this order: (1) proposing one rule-change and having it voted on..." and thats why I withdrew 302 and 303. It can always be argued that a compound rule is one new rule, but you'd have a hard time with a rule that explicitly ammends more than one rule. > > Besides, I don't see any problem with a proposal requiring logical steps, > for example, to change 103 so that it might rule on this issue: Proposal > Example - A) Proposition 103 is hereby made mutable B)Proposition 103 is > hereby repealed C) A rule-change is any *one* 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. I see a big problem with it. See above, but that reads to me like 3 rule-changes, and quite distinct ones at that. The transmutation requires a unanimous vote, and parts B & C don't. I would vote for it, though ;) > > The game might be more fun if you made each rule change consist of only one > of the steps, so that you have to enact your rule in pieces, and someone > might get there first. But as it stands, I think that compound rules are > fine. > > Rule 105 already says that you have to vote. Perhaps the non-vote issue > should be appended there. But first, you'd have to make 105 mutable... Agreed, and again, I didn't take it into consideration when I proposed 305. It also does not prescribe a penalty, which I think is wisely left to the immutable rules. My proposal could be written to allow for an automatic abstain vote, cast in favor of the proposition, after a week of no activity. Rule 105 actually says the player has to participate, not necessarily for or against the proposition. If that's not good enough, I'll re-write to only effect proposals. Or maybe you have a better idea. BTW: 211 confuses me. If I add "This rule takes precedence over rule 105" to my proposal, does it then withstand a contest? If so, how is this different from "A) Transmute 105 B) Ammend to allow time limits?" I suppose it applies only to Mutable v. Mutable & Immutable v. Immutable contests. Anyway, I should definately be sleeping. --e > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: > Sent: Monday, December 18, 2000 11:48 PM > Subject: re[2]: [scatterbrains] Proposal 305 > > > > Damn, you're evil... I originally only included failure to propose, but as > the rules are written, if 50% abstain from a vote, the rule can't pass... > I'd agree that non-votes could be construed as afirmatives, but I was trying > make the proposal one broad one, instead of multiple smaller issues (rule > 111 again). Re-write is on the way. > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Tue Dec 19 07:23:22 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 19 Dec 2000 15:23:21 -0000 Received: (qmail 12460 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2000 15:22:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 19 Dec 2000 15:22:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 19 Dec 2000 15:22:44 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id KAA04403 for ; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 10:22:43 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: Proposal 305 Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2000 10:23:33 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <002001c0698a$2b1873c0$126d1d40@v...> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" Since I don't think it'll pass as stated, and restricting the proposal only to cover failure to propose would weaken the intention of the rule, and there's an issue with Rule 105, I'd like to propose that 105 be transmuted to become a mutable rule. From bernardo@c... Tue Dec 19 08:08:36 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 19 Dec 2000 16:08:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 60128 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2000 16:08:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 19 Dec 2000 16:08:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta1 with SMTP; 19 Dec 2000 16:08:34 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp03-03.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.63]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id eBJG8Qv25207 for ; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 11:08:27 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <000701c069d5$db11c7e0$3fa811d0@computer> To: References: Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] RE: Proposal 305 Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2000 11:07:54 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" Well, now we have an issue. We need another player. I don't mean to be a jerk about this, but doesn't this run afoul of the turn rule? I'd imagine that you can't propose a rule, see that it's going to fail, and then withdraw it and propose a new one. If that were so, nobody would ever "lose" on their turn. Besides, the rules only allow for amendment of a rule. The change that you want to make seems to go beyond amendment and into a proposition of a whole new rule. I'd want to call for judgement on this one... ----- Original Message ----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia To: Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2000 10:23 AM Subject: [scatterbrains] RE: Proposal 305 > Since I don't think it'll pass as stated, and restricting the proposal only > to cover failure to propose would weaken the intention of the rule, and > there's an issue with Rule 105, I'd like to propose that 105 be transmuted > to become a mutable rule. > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Tue Dec 19 09:42:12 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 19 Dec 2000 17:42:11 -0000 Received: (qmail 60263 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2000 17:42:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 19 Dec 2000 17:42:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 19 Dec 2000 18:43:16 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id MAA18214 for ; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 12:42:08 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] RE: Proposal 305 Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2000 12:42:58 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <000701c069d5$db11c7e0$3fa811d0@computer> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" I think it "runs afoul", but: (i realized after typing this that it's in no particular order) A) 111 says "...other players may suggest amendments or argue against the proposal before the vote" This doesn't limit changes I can make to the proposal to ammendments only; If it has any limitation, it's on you. Furthermore, "The proponent decides the final form in which the proposal is to be voted on." B) There's nothing allowing a proponent to revise his proposal except Rule 111, when it's been challenged. I could have challenged your change to 304, and I wouldn't be able to change a proposal once voting started. So it's always possible to lose one's proposal, I could lose if you'd vote... C) With 2 players, if you call for judgement, I'd win! You invoke judgement and act as judge; I (acting as ALL the other players) overrule your judgement. Judgement passes through me (since it's my turn,) and back to you. I'd win by 213, since "the legality of a move cannot be determined with finality", and I'm unable to complete my turn. "There oughta be a law..." --Pat Bernardo D) It does suck, but you pointed out that my proposal was contrary to 105. It could have been written "A)Transmute 105, B)Amend time limits and associated penalties." This is clearly 2 rule changes, and the remedy would be "Do part A, since B depends on it." The only remedy I had was to reduce it to the implied transmutation in the original. If you vote against it as it was, it sinks; Vote for it, and it's nullified by Rule 110. My change in the proposal seems to be the only possible remedy for a proposal that would enact a rule contradicting an immutable rule. I know I'm being a prick, so vote already!! --e > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2000 11:08 AM > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] RE: Proposal 305 > > > Well, now we have an issue. We need another player. I don't mean to be a > jerk about this, but doesn't this run afoul of the turn rule? I'd imagine > that you can't propose a rule, see that it's going to fail, and then > withdraw it and propose a new one. If that were so, nobody would ever > "lose" on their turn. Besides, the rules only allow for amendment > of a rule. > The change that you want to make seems to go beyond amendment and into a > proposition of a whole new rule. I'd want to call for judgement on this > one... > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Eugene Ventimiglia > To: > Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2000 10:23 AM > Subject: [scatterbrains] RE: Proposal 305 > > > > Since I don't think it'll pass as stated, and restricting the proposal > only > > to cover failure to propose would weaken the intention of the rule, and > > there's an issue with Rule 105, I'd like to propose that 105 be > transmuted > > to become a mutable rule. > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Thu Dec 21 07:54:10 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 21 Dec 2000 15:54:09 -0000 Received: (qmail 91571 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2000 15:36:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 21 Dec 2000 15:36:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta1 with SMTP; 21 Dec 2000 15:36:12 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp03-03.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.63]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id eBLFaAv91769 for ; Thu, 21 Dec 2000 10:36:10 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <002f01c06b63$aca1e7c0$3fa811d0@computer> To: References: Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] RE: Proposal 305 Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2000 10:35:38 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" I stand before you today a very disappointed citizen. This is a sad day for Scatterbrains democracy. Eugene has exploited a loophole in the law, and in a move that flouts the spirit - if not indeed the letter - has forced a proposal down our throats. Although I will vote for this proposal, as reform is desperately needed in our young system, this behaviour must be stopped. I pledge to you today, that I will not cease in my efforts until (etc...) Oh, ok. But if there were a judge around here, you would've lost. (ps - but isn't being a legalistic prick what this game is about?) ----- Original Message ----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia To: Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2000 12:42 PM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] RE: Proposal 305 > I think it "runs afoul", but: > > (i realized after typing this that it's in no particular order) > > A) 111 says "...other players may suggest amendments or argue against the > proposal before the vote" This doesn't limit changes I can make to the > proposal to ammendments only; If it has any limitation, it's on you. > Furthermore, "The proponent decides the final form in which the proposal is > to be voted on." > > B) There's nothing allowing a proponent to revise his proposal except Rule > 111, when it's been challenged. I could have challenged your change to 304, > and I wouldn't be able to change a proposal once voting started. So it's > always possible to lose one's proposal, I could lose if you'd vote... > > C) With 2 players, if you call for judgement, I'd win! You invoke judgement > and act as judge; I (acting as ALL the other players) overrule your > judgement. Judgement passes through me (since it's my turn,) and back to > you. I'd win by 213, since "the legality of a move cannot be determined > with finality", and I'm unable to complete my turn. "There oughta be a > law..." --Pat Bernardo > > D) It does suck, but you pointed out that my proposal was contrary to 105. > It could have been written "A)Transmute 105, B)Amend time limits and > associated penalties." This is clearly 2 rule changes, and the remedy would > be "Do part A, since B depends on it." > > The only remedy I had was to reduce it to the implied transmutation in the > original. If you vote against it as it was, it sinks; Vote for it, and it's > nullified by Rule 110. My change in the proposal seems to be the only > possible remedy for a proposal that would enact a rule contradicting an > immutable rule. > > I know I'm being a prick, so vote already!! > --e > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2000 11:08 AM > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] RE: Proposal 305 > > > > > > Well, now we have an issue. We need another player. I don't mean to be a > > jerk about this, but doesn't this run afoul of the turn rule? I'd imagine > > that you can't propose a rule, see that it's going to fail, and then > > withdraw it and propose a new one. If that were so, nobody would ever > > "lose" on their turn. Besides, the rules only allow for amendment > > of a rule. > > The change that you want to make seems to go beyond amendment and into a > > proposition of a whole new rule. I'd want to call for judgement on this > > one... > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Eugene Ventimiglia > > To: > > Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2000 10:23 AM > > Subject: [scatterbrains] RE: Proposal 305 > > > > > > > Since I don't think it'll pass as stated, and restricting the proposal > > only > > > to cover failure to propose would weaken the intention of the rule, and > > > there's an issue with Rule 105, I'd like to propose that 105 be > > transmuted > > > to become a mutable rule. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Thu Dec 21 08:31:13 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 21 Dec 2000 16:31:13 -0000 Received: (qmail 610 invoked from network); 21 Dec 2000 16:21:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 21 Dec 2000 16:21:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 21 Dec 2000 16:21:42 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id LAA20604 for ; Thu, 21 Dec 2000 11:21:40 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] RE: Proposal 305 Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2000 11:22:32 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <002f01c06b63$aca1e7c0$3fa811d0@computer> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" I commend you, and thank you... And since you can't change your vote now ;> In admitting that I "expoited a loophole" do you admit that it was legal? I think that's what the games about... At least being a legalistic prick makes it more fun. > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Thursday, December 21, 2000 10:36 AM > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] RE: Proposal 305 > > > I stand before you today a very disappointed citizen. This is a > sad day for > Scatterbrains democracy. Eugene has exploited a loophole in the > law, and in > a move that flouts the spirit - if not indeed the letter - has forced a > proposal down our throats. Although I will vote for this proposal, as > reform is desperately needed in our young system, this behaviour must be > stopped. I pledge to you today, that I will not cease in my efforts until > (etc...) > > Oh, ok. But if there were a judge around here, you would've lost. > > (ps - but isn't being a legalistic prick what this game is about?) > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Eugene Ventimiglia > To: > Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2000 12:42 PM > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] RE: Proposal 305 > > > > I think it "runs afoul", but: > > > > (i realized after typing this that it's in no particular order) > > > > A) 111 says "...other players may suggest amendments or argue > against the > > proposal before the vote" This doesn't limit changes I can make to the > > proposal to ammendments only; If it has any limitation, it's on you. > > Furthermore, "The proponent decides the final form in which the proposal > is > > to be voted on." > > > > B) There's nothing allowing a proponent to revise his proposal > except Rule > > 111, when it's been challenged. I could have challenged your change to > 304, > > and I wouldn't be able to change a proposal once voting > started. So it's > > always possible to lose one's proposal, I could lose if you'd vote... > > > > C) With 2 players, if you call for judgement, I'd win! You invoke > judgement > > and act as judge; I (acting as ALL the other players) overrule your > > judgement. Judgement passes through me (since it's my turn,) > and back to > > you. I'd win by 213, since "the legality of a move cannot be determined > > with finality", and I'm unable to complete my turn. "There oughta be a > > law..." --Pat Bernardo > > > > D) It does suck, but you pointed out that my proposal was > contrary to 105. > > It could have been written "A)Transmute 105, B)Amend time limits and > > associated penalties." This is clearly 2 rule changes, and the remedy > would > > be "Do part A, since B depends on it." > > > > The only remedy I had was to reduce it to the implied > transmutation in the > > original. If you vote against it as it was, it sinks; Vote for it, and > it's > > nullified by Rule 110. My change in the proposal seems to be the only > > possible remedy for a proposal that would enact a rule contradicting an > > immutable rule. > > > > I know I'm being a prick, so vote already!! > > --e > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > > Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2000 11:08 AM > > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] RE: Proposal 305 > > > > > > > > > Well, now we have an issue. We need another player. I don't > mean to be > a > > > jerk about this, but doesn't this run afoul of the turn rule? I'd > imagine > > > that you can't propose a rule, see that it's going to fail, and then > > > withdraw it and propose a new one. If that were so, nobody would ever > > > "lose" on their turn. Besides, the rules only allow for amendment > > > of a rule. > > > The change that you want to make seems to go beyond amendment > and into a > > > proposition of a whole new rule. I'd want to call for > judgement on this > > > one... > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: Eugene Ventimiglia > > > To: > > > Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2000 10:23 AM > > > Subject: [scatterbrains] RE: Proposal 305 > > > > > > > > > > Since I don't think it'll pass as stated, and restricting > the proposal > > > only > > > > to cover failure to propose would weaken the intention of the rule, > and > > > > there's an issue with Rule 105, I'd like to propose that 105 be > > > transmuted > > > > to become a mutable rule. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From barturo@e... Thu Dec 28 05:46:16 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: BArturo@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 28 Dec 2000 13:46:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 83364 invoked from network); 28 Dec 2000 13:46:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 28 Dec 2000 13:46:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 28 Dec 2000 13:46:14 -0000 Received: from batman.ess ([12.31.9.2]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with ESMTP id IAA24553 for ; Thu, 28 Dec 2000 08:46:13 -0500 (EST) Received: by BATMAN with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id ; Thu, 28 Dec 2000 08:42:46 -0500 Message-ID: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF03725A@BATMAN> To: "'scatterbrains@egroups.com'" Subject: Introduction Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2000 08:42:46 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" From: "Arturo, Bob" Hello All This is my official introduction. E Venti has introduced me to Scatterbrains. Regards, B Arturo * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at webmaster@e.... From bernardo@c... Sat Dec 30 16:53:27 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 31 Dec 2000 00:53:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 37977 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2000 00:53:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 31 Dec 2000 00:53:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta1 with SMTP; 31 Dec 2000 00:53:27 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp03-02.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.62]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id eBV0rPv99242 for ; Sat, 30 Dec 2000 19:53:25 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <000b01c072c4$020655e0$3ea811d0@computer> To: References: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF03725A@BATMAN> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Introduction Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2000 19:52:51 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" Uhh. I have a question that I'd like to get clarified, if that's ok with y'all. According to the rules, each turn is conducted in alphabetical order. That puts Bob first. Since we just ended a turn (Eug went last) does that mean it's Bob's turn? Or is it that it was kind of "my turn" after Eug went, so Bob entered after my turn started, and he has to wait for me to go and Eug to go. p ----- Original Message ----- From: Arturo, Bob To: Sent: Thursday, December 28, 2000 8:42 AM Subject: [scatterbrains] Introduction > Hello All > This is my official introduction. E Venti has introduced me to > Scatterbrains. > > Regards, > B Arturo > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > webmaster@e.... > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Sat Dec 30 22:11:39 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 31 Dec 2000 06:11:39 -0000 Received: (qmail 44538 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2000 06:11:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 31 Dec 2000 06:11:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hm.egroups.com) (10.1.10.45) by mta2 with SMTP; 31 Dec 2000 06:11:38 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: eventi@n... Received: from [10.1.10.105] by hm.egroups.com with NNFMP; 31 Dec 2000 06:11:38 -0000 Date: Sun, 31 Dec 2000 06:11:34 -0000 To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: Re: Introduction Message-ID: <92mimm+99es@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: <000b01c072c4$020655e0$3ea811d0@computer> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 1305 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 64.29.109.18 From: eventi@n... I'd say it's your turn. It's been your turn since mine was over. --e --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, "Patrick D. Bernardo" wrote: > Uhh. I have a question that I'd like to get clarified, if that's ok with > y'all. According to the rules, each turn is conducted in alphabetical > order. That puts Bob first. Since we just ended a turn (Eug went last) > does that mean it's Bob's turn? Or is it that it was kind of "my turn" > after Eug went, so Bob entered after my turn started, and he has to wait for > me to go and Eug to go. > > p > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Arturo, Bob > To: > Sent: Thursday, December 28, 2000 8:42 AM > Subject: [scatterbrains] Introduction > > > > Hello All > > This is my official introduction. E Venti has introduced me to > > Scatterbrains. > > > > Regards, > > B Arturo > > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or > copying > > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > > webmaster@e... > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > From scatterbrains@egroups.com Mon Jan 01 10:12:17 2001 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 93573 invoked by uid 7800); 1 Jan 2001 18:12:17 -0000 Date: 1 Jan 2001 18:12:17 -0000 Message-ID: <978372737.65712@egroups.com> X-eGroups-Application: files From: scatterbrains@egroups.com To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: File - Rules MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 101. All players must always abide by all the rules then in effect, in the form in which they are then in effect. The rules in the Initial Set are in effect whenever a game begins. The Initial Set consists of Rules 101-116 (immutable) and 201-213 (mutable). -- Immutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 102. Initially rules in the 100's are immutable and rules in the 200's are mutable. Rules subsequently enacted or transmuted (that is, changed from immutable to mutable or vice versa) may be immutable or mutable regardless of their numbers, and rules in the Initial Set may be transmuted regardless of their numbers. -- Immutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 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.(Note: This definition implies that, at least initially, all new rules are mutable; immutable rules, as long as they are immutable, may not be amended or repealed; mutable rules, as long as they are mutable, may be amended or repealed; any rule of any status may be transmuted; no rule is absolutely immune to change.) -- Immutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 104. All rule-changes proposed in the proper way shall be voted on. They will be adopted if and only if they receive the required number of votes. -- Immutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 106. All proposed rule-changes shall be written down before they are voted on. If they are adopted, they shall guide play in the form in which they were voted on. -- Immutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 107. No rule-change may take effect earlier than the moment of the completion of the vote that adopted it, even if its wording explicitly states otherwise. No rule-change may have retroactive application. -- Immutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 108. Each proposed rule-change shall be given a number for reference. The numbers shall begin with 301, and each rule-change proposed in the proper way shall receive the next successive integer, whether or not the proposal is adopted.If a rule is repealed and reenacted, it receives the number of the proposal to reenact it. If a rule is amended or transmuted, it receives the number of the proposal to amend or transmute it. If an amendment is amended or repealed, the entire rule of which it is a part receives the number of the proposal to amend or repeal the amendment. -- Immutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 109. Rule-changes that transmute immutable rules into mutable rules may be adopted if and only if the vote is unanimous among the eligible voters. Transmutation shall not be implied, but must be stated explicitly in a proposal to take effect. -- Immutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 110. In a conflict between a mutable and an immutable rule, the immutable rule takes precedence and the mutable rule shall be entirely void. For the purposes of this rule a proposal to transmute an immutable rule does not "conflict" with that immutable rule. -- Immutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 111. If a rule-change as proposed is unclear, ambiguous, paradoxical, or destructive of play, or if it arguably consists of two or more rule-changes compounded or is an amendment that makes no difference, or if it is otherwise of questionable value, then the other players may suggest amendments or argue against the proposal before the vote. A reasonable time must be allowed for this debate. The proponent decides the final form in which the proposal is to be voted on and, unless the Judge has been asked to do so, also decides the time to end debate and vote. -- Immutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 112. The state of affairs that constitutes winning may not be altered from achieving n points to any other state of affairs. The magnitude of n and the means of earning points may be changed, and rules that establish a winner when play cannot continue may be enacted and (while they are mutable) be amended or repealed. -- Immutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 113. A player always has the option to forfeit the game rather than continue to play or incur a game penalty. No penalty worse than losing, in the judgment of the player to incur it, may be imposed. -- Immutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 114. There must always be at least one mutable rule. The adoption of rule-changes must never become completely impermissible. -- Immutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 115. Rule-changes that affect rules needed to allow or apply rule-changes are as permissible as other rule-changes. Even rule-changes that amend or repeal their own authority are permissible. No rule-change or type of move is impermissible solely on account of the self-reference or self-application of a rule. -- Immutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 116. Whatever is not prohibited or regulated by a rule is permitted and unregulated, with the sole exception of changing the rules, which is permitted only when a rule or set of rules explicitly or implicitly permits it. -- Immutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 201. Players shall alternate in clockwise order, taking one whole turn apiece. Turns may not be skipped or passed, and parts of turns may not be omitted. All players begin with zero points. In mail and computer games, players shall alternate in alphabetical order by surname. -- Mutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 202. One turn consists of two parts in this order: (1) proposing one rule-change and having it voted on, and (2) throwing one die once and adding the number of points on its face to one's score. In mail and computer games, instead of throwing a die, players subtract 291 from the ordinal number of their proposal and multiply the result by the fraction of favorable votes it received, rounded to the nearest integer. (This yields a number between 0 and 10 for the first player, with the upper limit increasing by one each turn; more points are awarded for more popular proposals.) -- Mutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 203. A rule-change is adopted if and only if the vote is unanimous among the eligible voters. If this rule is not amended by the end of the second complete circuit of turns, it automatically changes to require only a simple majority. -- Mutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 204. If and when rule-changes can be adopted without unanimity, the players who vote against winning proposals shall receive 10 points each. -- Mutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 205. An adopted rule-change takes full effect at the moment of the completion of the vote that adopted it. -- Mutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 206. When a proposed rule-change is defeated, the player who proposed it loses 10 points. -- Mutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 207. Each player always has exactly one vote. -- Mutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 208. The winner is the first player to achieve 100 (positive) points. In mail and computer games, the winner is the first player to achieve 200 (positive) points. -- Mutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 209. At no time may there be more than 25 mutable rules. -- Mutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 210. Players may not conspire or consult on the making of future rule-changes unless they are team-mates. The first paragraph of this rule does not apply to games by mail or computer. -- Mutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 211. If two or more mutable rules conflict with one another, or if two or more immutable rules conflict with one another, then the rule with the lowest ordinal number takes precedence. If at least one of the rules in conflict explicitly says of itself that it defers to another rule (or type of rule) or takes precedence over another rule (or type of rule), then such provisions shall supersede the numerical method for determining precedence. If two or more rules claim to take precedence over one another or to defer to one another, then the numerical method again governs. -- Mutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 212. If players disagree about the legality of a move or the interpretation or application of a rule, then the player preceding the one moving is to be the Judge and decide the question. Disagreement for the purposes of this rule may be created by the insistence of any player. This process is called invoking Judgment. When Judgment has been invoked, the next player may not begin his or her turn without the consent of a majority of the other players. The Judge's Judgment may be overruled only by a unanimous vote of the other players taken before the next turn is begun. If a Judge's Judgment is overruled, then the player preceding the Judge in the playing order becomes the new Judge for the question, and so on, except that no player is to be Judge during his or her own turn or during the turn of a team-mate. Unless a Judge is overruled, one Judge settles all questions arising from the game until the next turn is begun, including questions as to his or her own legitimacy and jurisdiction as Judge. New Judges are not bound by the decisions of old Judges. New Judges may, however, settle only those questions on which the players currently disagree and that affect the completion of the turn in which Judgment was invoked. All decisions by Judges shall be in accordance with all the rules then in effect; but when the rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the point at issue, then the Judge shall consider game-custom and the spirit of the game before applying other standards. -- Mutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 213. If the rules are changed so that further play is impossible, or if the legality of a move cannot be determined with finality, or if by the Judge's best reasoning, not overruled, a move appears equally legal and illegal, then the first player unable to complete a turn is the winner. This rule takes precedence over every other rule determining the winner. -- Mutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 301. Each proposal shall be posted to the group with the subject consisting of the word "Proposal" followed by the proposal number. -- Mutable -- Author: E Venti -- History: Proposal 301 ---- 304. A) Each player shall receive Points for the Introduction of a new player into the game. B) The introducing Player shall receive 5 (five) points for an official Introduction. C)Introduction shall be determined by an affidavit posted to the group, by the new player, within 1 (one) day of joining, with the subject header "Introduction" and text consisting of the following declaration: "[Player name] has introduced me to Scatterbrains." D)This rule shall remain in effect until the game consists of 10 (ten) or more members. E) For the purposes of further discussion, this rule may also be referred to as the "Be Fruitful and Multiply" Bill. -- Mutable -- Author: Pat Bernardo -- History: Proposal 304 (12/18/00) ---- 305. Every player is an eligible voter. Every eligible voter must participate in every vote on rule-changes. -- Mutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Transmuted from 105 by eventi (12/21/00) ---- From eventi@w... Mon Jan 01 12:42:52 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@w... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 1 Jan 2001 20:42:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 24728 invoked from network); 1 Jan 2001 20:42:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 1 Jan 2001 20:42:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ns1.wyndtell.com) (63.81.201.11) by mta3 with SMTP; 1 Jan 2001 21:43:56 -0000 Received: from nova.wyndtell.com (nova.wyndtell.com [63.81.201.78]) by ns1.wyndtell.com (8.11.0/8.9.3) with ESMTP id f01Lcrm13704 for ; Mon, 1 Jan 2001 13:38:53 -0800 Received: (root@localhost) by nova.wyndtell.com (8.8.8/SCA-6.6) id PAA12960; Mon, 1 Jan 2001 15:42:50 -0500 (EST) To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: Rules file Message-Id: <15308871.1072@w...> Date: Mon, 01 Jan 2001 12:42:50 -0800 X-eGroups-From: eventi@w... (Eugene Ventimiglia) From: eventi@w... The mailing list sends it every 2 weeks, and right after you subscribe... From bernardo@c... Tue Jan 02 17:35:30 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 3 Jan 2001 01:35:30 -0000 Received: (qmail 68639 invoked from network); 3 Jan 2001 01:35:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 3 Jan 2001 01:35:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta3 with SMTP; 3 Jan 2001 02:36:21 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp03-09.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.69]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f031Ylv93007 for ; Tue, 2 Jan 2001 20:34:48 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <003001c07525$484fc140$45a811d0@computer> To: Subject: Proposal 306 Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2001 20:34:11 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_002D_01C074FB.5CFBE800" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" ------=_NextPart_000_002D_01C074FB.5CFBE800 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable This rule will change rule 202 to clarify things a bit. Rule: One turn consists of four parts, in this order 1) proposal of a rule, which= is not substantially alterable 2)discussion and amendment phase, which beg= ins immediately following the proposal 3) voting on the rule 4) scoring. Scoring shall be 15 points for each rule, multiplied by the fraction produc= ed by the ratio of postive to negative votes. All remainders should be rou= nded up. __ I think that this should do it. Written this way, the extent of amendment = should be open-ended (there's no way that I can think of at present to writ= e a rule to cover what amendments look like) and determined on a case by ca= se basis, open to calls to Judgement. I don't like the present scoring system. This seems right - it keeps the p= oints about where they are, and rewards people for popular measures. p. ------=_NextPart_000_002D_01C074FB.5CFBE800 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
This rule will change rule 202 to clarify = things a=20 bit.
 
Rule:
One turn consists of four parts, in t= his order=20 1) proposal of a rule, which is not substantially alterable 2)discussion an= d=20 amendment phase, which begins immediately following the proposal 3) voting = on=20 the rule 4) scoring.
 
Scoring shall be 15 points for each r= ule,=20 multiplied by the fraction produced by the ratio of postive to negative=20 votes.  All remainders should be rounded up.
 
__
I think that this should do it.  Writ= ten this=20 way, the extent of amendment should be open-ended (there's no way that I ca= n=20 think of at present to write a rule to cover what amendments look like) and= =20 determined on a case by case basis, open to calls to Judgement.
 
I don't like the present scoring system.&n= bsp; This=20 seems right - it keeps the points about where they are, and rewards people = for=20 popular measures.
 
p.
------=_NextPart_000_002D_01C074FB.5CFBE800-- From eventi@n... Tue Jan 02 20:58:08 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 3 Jan 2001 04:58:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 16597 invoked from network); 3 Jan 2001 04:58:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 3 Jan 2001 04:58:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mq.egroups.com) (10.1.1.36) by mta3 with SMTP; 3 Jan 2001 05:59:12 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: eventi@n... Received: from [10.1.2.74] by mq.egroups.com with NNFMP; 03 Jan 2001 04:58:07 -0000 Date: Wed, 03 Jan 2001 04:58:06 -0000 To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: Re: Proposal 306 Message-ID: <92ubgu+ujia@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: <003001c07525$484fc140$45a811d0@computer> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 1289 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 64.29.109.18 From: eventi@n... Only a few things, and minor ones at that. A) The language in part one, "which is not substantially alterable," should be clarified. It's possibly better suited to part two. B) There should be a clearly defined ending to phase two, to prevent partial vote abortions (Ouch...) Other than that, I'm cool. --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, "Patrick D. Bernardo" wrote: > This rule will change rule 202 to clarify things a bit. > > Rule: > One turn consists of four parts, in this order 1) proposal of a rule, which is not substantially alterable 2)discussion and amendment phase, which begins immediately following the proposal 3) voting on the rule 4) scoring. > > Scoring shall be 15 points for each rule, multiplied by the fraction produced by the ratio of postive to negative votes. All remainders should be rounded up. > > __ > I think that this should do it. Written this way, the extent of amendment should be open-ended (there's no way that I can think of at present to write a rule to cover what amendments look like) and determined on a case by case basis, open to calls to Judgement. > > I don't like the present scoring system. This seems right - it keeps the points about where they are, and rewards people for popular measures. > > p. From bernardo@c... Wed Jan 03 06:42:43 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 3 Jan 2001 14:42:37 -0000 Received: (qmail 45435 invoked from network); 3 Jan 2001 14:42:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 3 Jan 2001 14:42:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta3 with SMTP; 3 Jan 2001 15:43:37 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp03-02.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.62]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f03EgKv46985 for ; Wed, 3 Jan 2001 09:42:23 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <000a01c07593$51c85660$3ea811d0@computer> To: References: <92ubgu+ujia@eGroups.com> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 306 Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2001 09:41:35 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" This rule will change rule 202 to clarify things a bit. Rule: One turn consists of four parts, in this order 1) proposal of a rule 2)discussion and amendment phase, which begins immediately following the proposal, and which may change the rule based on the discussion, but may not included substitution of a new rule 3) voting on the rule, which begins when the final form of the rule is declared by the proposer 4) scoring. Scoring shall be 15 points for each rule, multiplied by the fraction produced by the ratio of postive votes to total possible votes. All remainders should be rounded up. ___ Ok, this should fix things, but I'd like to hear what you think before we go with it. The way that I saw it, there are four possibilities for the beginning of the vote: A)What I chose - self selecting by proposer B) Time limit - bad because if the discussion is good/long it might be cut off by the limit. If there is no discussion, this is also bad since you'd have to wait to vote. C) Creating an executive to call for votes. An interesting possibilitiy, but I though you guys might not like it. If we have more people, I might even propose this one. D) Just letting the first vote introduce the voting phase. This is obviously a bad idea, since someone might jump the gun. From eventi@n... Wed Jan 03 09:05:17 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 3 Jan 2001 17:05:16 -0000 Received: (qmail 88361 invoked from network); 3 Jan 2001 17:05:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 3 Jan 2001 17:05:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 3 Jan 2001 17:05:14 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id MAA02232 for ; Wed, 3 Jan 2001 12:05:08 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 306 Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2001 12:05:48 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <000a01c07593$51c85660$3ea811d0@computer> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" Only one small thing: The wording of the scoring paragraph. Remainders are for division, but I know you meant "All fractional scores are rounded up to the nearest integer." I'll pass it as it stands, but I'll have to weigh in on the second question when I've got more time. > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2001 9:42 AM > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 306 > > > This rule will change rule 202 to clarify things a bit. > > Rule: > One turn consists of four parts, in this order 1) proposal of a rule > 2)discussion and amendment phase, which begins immediately following the > proposal, and which may change the rule based on the discussion, > but may not > included substitution of a new rule 3) voting on the rule, which > begins when > the final form of the rule is declared by the proposer 4) scoring. > > Scoring shall be 15 points for each rule, multiplied by the fraction > produced by the ratio of postive votes to total possible votes. All > remainders should be rounded up. > ___ > Ok, this should fix things, but I'd like to hear what you think > before we go > with it. The way that I saw it, there are four possibilities for the > beginning of the vote: > > A)What I chose - self selecting by proposer > B) Time limit - bad because if the discussion is good/long it might be cut > off by the limit. If there is no discussion, this is also bad since you'd > have to wait to vote. > C) Creating an executive to call for votes. An interesting possibilitiy, > but I though you guys might not like it. If we have more people, I might > even propose this one. > D) Just letting the first vote introduce the voting phase. This is > obviously a bad idea, since someone might jump the gun. > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Wed Jan 03 10:14:24 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 3 Jan 2001 18:14:24 -0000 Received: (qmail 20069 invoked from network); 3 Jan 2001 18:13:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 3 Jan 2001 18:13:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta3 with SMTP; 3 Jan 2001 19:15:00 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp03-08.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.68]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f03IDqv65613 for ; Wed, 3 Jan 2001 13:13:53 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <000901c075b0$da64b1e0$44a811d0@computer> To: References: Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 306 Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2001 13:12:58 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" Doh! That is what I meant. You math geek. Change to read "All fractional scores shall be rounded up to the nearest integer." ----- Original Message ----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia To: Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2001 12:05 PM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 306 > Only one small thing: The wording of the scoring paragraph. Remainders are > for division, but I know you meant "All fractional scores are rounded up to > the nearest integer." I'll pass it as it stands, but I'll have to weigh in > on the second question when I've got more time. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2001 9:42 AM > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 306 > > > > > > This rule will change rule 202 to clarify things a bit. > > > > Rule: > > One turn consists of four parts, in this order 1) proposal of a rule > > 2)discussion and amendment phase, which begins immediately following the > > proposal, and which may change the rule based on the discussion, > > but may not > > included substitution of a new rule 3) voting on the rule, which > > begins when > > the final form of the rule is declared by the proposer 4) scoring. > > > > Scoring shall be 15 points for each rule, multiplied by the fraction > > produced by the ratio of postive votes to total possible votes. All > > remainders should be rounded up. > > ___ > > Ok, this should fix things, but I'd like to hear what you think > > before we go > > with it. The way that I saw it, there are four possibilities for the > > beginning of the vote: > > > > A)What I chose - self selecting by proposer > > B) Time limit - bad because if the discussion is good/long it might be cut > > off by the limit. If there is no discussion, this is also bad since you'd > > have to wait to vote. > > C) Creating an executive to call for votes. An interesting possibilitiy, > > but I though you guys might not like it. If we have more people, I might > > even propose this one. > > D) Just letting the first vote introduce the voting phase. This is > > obviously a bad idea, since someone might jump the gun. > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Wed Jan 03 10:24:27 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 3 Jan 2001 18:24:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 3077 invoked from network); 3 Jan 2001 18:24:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 3 Jan 2001 18:24:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 3 Jan 2001 18:24:24 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id NAA11462 for ; Wed, 3 Jan 2001 13:24:22 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 306 Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2001 13:25:03 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <000901c075b0$da64b1e0$44a811d0@computer> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" You still with us Bob? > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2001 1:13 PM > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 306 > > > Doh! That is what I meant. You math geek. > > Change to read "All fractional scores shall be rounded up to the nearest > integer." > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Eugene Ventimiglia > To: > Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2001 12:05 PM > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 306 > > > > Only one small thing: The wording of the scoring paragraph. > Remainders are > > for division, but I know you meant "All fractional scores are rounded up > to > > the nearest integer." I'll pass it as it stands, but I'll have to weigh > in > > on the second question when I've got more time. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2001 9:42 AM > > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 306 > > > > > > > > > This rule will change rule 202 to clarify things a bit. > > > > > > Rule: > > > One turn consists of four parts, in this order 1) proposal of a rule > > > 2)discussion and amendment phase, which begins immediately > following the > > > proposal, and which may change the rule based on the discussion, > > > but may not > > > included substitution of a new rule 3) voting on the rule, which > > > begins when > > > the final form of the rule is declared by the proposer 4) scoring. > > > > > > Scoring shall be 15 points for each rule, multiplied by the fraction > > > produced by the ratio of postive votes to total possible votes. All > > > remainders should be rounded up. > > > ___ > > > Ok, this should fix things, but I'd like to hear what you think > > > before we go > > > with it. The way that I saw it, there are four possibilities for the > > > beginning of the vote: > > > > > > A)What I chose - self selecting by proposer > > > B) Time limit - bad because if the discussion is good/long it might be > cut > > > off by the limit. If there is no discussion, this is also bad since > you'd > > > have to wait to vote. > > > C) Creating an executive to call for votes. An interesting > possibilitiy, > > > but I though you guys might not like it. If we have more people, I > might > > > even propose this one. > > > D) Just letting the first vote introduce the voting phase. This is > > > obviously a bad idea, since someone might jump the gun. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From barturo@e... Wed Jan 03 10:41:50 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: BArturo@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 3 Jan 2001 18:41:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 18789 invoked from network); 3 Jan 2001 18:41:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 3 Jan 2001 18:41:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 3 Jan 2001 18:41:44 -0000 Received: from batman.ess ([12.31.9.2]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA13270 for ; Wed, 3 Jan 2001 13:41:43 -0500 (EST) Received: by BATMAN with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id ; Wed, 3 Jan 2001 13:38:02 -0500 Message-ID: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF037263@BATMAN> To: "'scatterbrains@egroups.com'" Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 306 Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2001 13:37:52 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" From: "Arturo, Bob" Yea. I'm just waiting for the final proposal. -----Original Message----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia [mailto:eventi@n...] Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2001 1:25 PM To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 306 You still with us Bob? > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2001 1:13 PM > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 306 > > > Doh! That is what I meant. You math geek. > > Change to read "All fractional scores shall be rounded up to the nearest > integer." > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Eugene Ventimiglia > To: > Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2001 12:05 PM > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 306 > > > > Only one small thing: The wording of the scoring paragraph. > Remainders are > > for division, but I know you meant "All fractional scores are rounded up > to > > the nearest integer." I'll pass it as it stands, but I'll have to weigh > in > > on the second question when I've got more time. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2001 9:42 AM > > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 306 > > > > > > > > > This rule will change rule 202 to clarify things a bit. > > > > > > Rule: > > > One turn consists of four parts, in this order 1) proposal of a rule > > > 2)discussion and amendment phase, which begins immediately > following the > > > proposal, and which may change the rule based on the discussion, > > > but may not > > > included substitution of a new rule 3) voting on the rule, which > > > begins when > > > the final form of the rule is declared by the proposer 4) scoring. > > > > > > Scoring shall be 15 points for each rule, multiplied by the fraction > > > produced by the ratio of postive votes to total possible votes. All > > > remainders should be rounded up. > > > ___ > > > Ok, this should fix things, but I'd like to hear what you think > > > before we go > > > with it. The way that I saw it, there are four possibilities for the > > > beginning of the vote: > > > > > > A)What I chose - self selecting by proposer > > > B) Time limit - bad because if the discussion is good/long it might be > cut > > > off by the limit. If there is no discussion, this is also bad since > you'd > > > have to wait to vote. > > > C) Creating an executive to call for votes. An interesting > possibilitiy, > > > but I though you guys might not like it. If we have more people, I > might > > > even propose this one. > > > D) Just letting the first vote introduce the voting phase. This is > > > obviously a bad idea, since someone might jump the gun. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at webmaster@e.... From bernardo@c... Wed Jan 03 14:10:24 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 3 Jan 2001 22:10:23 -0000 Received: (qmail 2819 invoked from network); 3 Jan 2001 22:10:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 3 Jan 2001 22:10:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 3 Jan 2001 22:10:23 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp03-11.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.71]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f03MALv87254 for ; Wed, 3 Jan 2001 17:10:21 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <001301c075d1$e336adc0$47a811d0@computer> To: References: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF037263@BATMAN> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 306 Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2001 17:09:46 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" Wise ass. Here's the final form. Please vote as you see fit. I vote for it. This rule will change rule 202 to clarify things a bit. Rule: One turn consists of four parts, in this order 1) proposal of a rule 2)discussion and amendment phase, which begins immediately following the proposal, and which may change the rule based on the discussion, but may not include the substitution of a new rule 3) voting on the rule, which begins when the final form of the rule is declared by the proposer 4) scoring. Scoring shall be 15 points for each rule, multiplied by the fraction produced by the ratio of postive votes to total possible votes. All fractional scores shall be rounded up to the nearest integer. ----- Original Message ----- From: Arturo, Bob To: Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2001 1:37 PM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 306 > Yea. I'm just waiting for the final proposal. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Eugene Ventimiglia [mailto:eventi@n...] > Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2001 1:25 PM > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 306 > > > You still with us Bob? > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2001 1:13 PM > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 306 > > > > > > Doh! That is what I meant. You math geek. > > > > Change to read "All fractional scores shall be rounded up to the nearest > > integer." > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Eugene Ventimiglia > > To: > > Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2001 12:05 PM > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 306 > > > > > > > Only one small thing: The wording of the scoring paragraph. > > Remainders are > > > for division, but I know you meant "All fractional scores are rounded up > > to > > > the nearest integer." I'll pass it as it stands, but I'll have to weigh > > in > > > on the second question when I've got more time. > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2001 9:42 AM > > > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 306 > > > > > > > > > > > > This rule will change rule 202 to clarify things a bit. > > > > > > > > Rule: > > > > One turn consists of four parts, in this order 1) proposal of a rule > > > > 2)discussion and amendment phase, which begins immediately > > following the > > > > proposal, and which may change the rule based on the discussion, > > > > but may not > > > > included substitution of a new rule 3) voting on the rule, which > > > > begins when > > > > the final form of the rule is declared by the proposer 4) scoring. > > > > > > > > Scoring shall be 15 points for each rule, multiplied by the fraction > > > > produced by the ratio of postive votes to total possible votes. All > > > > remainders should be rounded up. > > > > ___ > > > > Ok, this should fix things, but I'd like to hear what you think > > > > before we go > > > > with it. The way that I saw it, there are four possibilities for the > > > > beginning of the vote: > > > > > > > > A)What I chose - self selecting by proposer > > > > B) Time limit - bad because if the discussion is good/long it might be > > cut > > > > off by the limit. If there is no discussion, this is also bad since > > you'd > > > > have to wait to vote. > > > > C) Creating an executive to call for votes. An interesting > > possibilitiy, > > > > but I though you guys might not like it. If we have more people, I > > might > > > > even propose this one. > > > > D) Just letting the first vote introduce the voting phase. This is > > > > obviously a bad idea, since someone might jump the gun. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > webmaster@e.... > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Wed Jan 03 15:00:12 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 3 Jan 2001 23:00:11 -0000 Received: (qmail 21891 invoked from network); 3 Jan 2001 23:00:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 3 Jan 2001 23:00:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 3 Jan 2001 23:00:10 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id SAA09655 for ; Wed, 3 Jan 2001 18:00:10 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 306 Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2001 18:00:49 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <001301c075d1$e336adc0$47a811d0@computer> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" I vote for it, and that bob wan't being a wise ass > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2001 5:10 PM > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 306 > > > Wise ass. > > Here's the final form. Please vote as you see fit. I vote for it. > > This rule will change rule 202 to clarify things a bit. > > Rule: > One turn consists of four parts, in this order 1) proposal of a rule > 2)discussion and amendment phase, which begins immediately following the > proposal, and which may change the rule based on the discussion, > but may not > include the substitution of a new rule 3) voting on the rule, which begins > when the final form of the rule is declared by the proposer 4) scoring. > Scoring shall be 15 points for each rule, multiplied by the fraction > produced by the ratio of postive votes to total possible votes. All > fractional scores shall be rounded up to the nearest integer. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Arturo, Bob > To: > Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2001 1:37 PM > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 306 > > > > Yea. I'm just waiting for the final proposal. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Eugene Ventimiglia [mailto:eventi@n...] > > Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2001 1:25 PM > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 306 > > > > > > You still with us Bob? > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2001 1:13 PM > > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 306 > > > > > > > > > Doh! That is what I meant. You math geek. > > > > > > Change to read "All fractional scores shall be rounded up to > the nearest > > > integer." > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: Eugene Ventimiglia > > > To: > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2001 12:05 PM > > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 306 > > > > > > > > > > Only one small thing: The wording of the scoring paragraph. > > > Remainders are > > > > for division, but I know you meant "All fractional scores > are rounded > up > > > to > > > > the nearest integer." I'll pass it as it stands, but I'll have to > weigh > > > in > > > > on the second question when I've got more time. > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2001 9:42 AM > > > > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 306 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This rule will change rule 202 to clarify things a bit. > > > > > > > > > > Rule: > > > > > One turn consists of four parts, in this order 1) > proposal of a rule > > > > > 2)discussion and amendment phase, which begins immediately > > > following the > > > > > proposal, and which may change the rule based on the discussion, > > > > > but may not > > > > > included substitution of a new rule 3) voting on the rule, which > > > > > begins when > > > > > the final form of the rule is declared by the proposer 4) scoring. > > > > > > > > > > Scoring shall be 15 points for each rule, multiplied by > the fraction > > > > > produced by the ratio of postive votes to total possible > votes. All > > > > > remainders should be rounded up. > > > > > ___ > > > > > Ok, this should fix things, but I'd like to hear what you think > > > > > before we go > > > > > with it. The way that I saw it, there are four possibilities for > the > > > > > beginning of the vote: > > > > > > > > > > A)What I chose - self selecting by proposer > > > > > B) Time limit - bad because if the discussion is > good/long it might > be > > > cut > > > > > off by the limit. If there is no discussion, this is > also bad since > > > you'd > > > > > have to wait to vote. > > > > > C) Creating an executive to call for votes. An interesting > > > possibilitiy, > > > > > but I though you guys might not like it. If we have more > people, I > > > might > > > > > even propose this one. > > > > > D) Just letting the first vote introduce the voting > phase. This is > > > > > obviously a bad idea, since someone might jump the gun. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or > copying > > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > > webmaster@e.... > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From barturo@e... Thu Jan 04 05:36:15 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: BArturo@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 4 Jan 2001 13:36:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 50032 invoked from network); 4 Jan 2001 13:36:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 4 Jan 2001 13:36:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 4 Jan 2001 14:37:19 -0000 Received: from batman.ess ([12.31.9.2]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with ESMTP id IAA23503 for ; Thu, 4 Jan 2001 08:36:10 -0500 (EST) Received: by BATMAN with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id ; Thu, 4 Jan 2001 08:32:27 -0500 Message-ID: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF03726C@BATMAN> To: "'scatterbrains@egroups.com'" Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 306 Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2001 08:32:26 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" From: "Arturo, Bob" Ok It sounds good to me. -----Original Message----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia [mailto:eventi@n...] Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2001 6:01 PM To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 306 I vote for it, and that bob wan't being a wise ass > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2001 5:10 PM > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 306 > > > Wise ass. > > Here's the final form. Please vote as you see fit. I vote for it. > > This rule will change rule 202 to clarify things a bit. > > Rule: > One turn consists of four parts, in this order 1) proposal of a rule > 2)discussion and amendment phase, which begins immediately following the > proposal, and which may change the rule based on the discussion, > but may not > include the substitution of a new rule 3) voting on the rule, which begins > when the final form of the rule is declared by the proposer 4) scoring. > Scoring shall be 15 points for each rule, multiplied by the fraction > produced by the ratio of postive votes to total possible votes. All > fractional scores shall be rounded up to the nearest integer. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Arturo, Bob > To: > Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2001 1:37 PM > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 306 > > > > Yea. I'm just waiting for the final proposal. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Eugene Ventimiglia [mailto:eventi@n...] > > Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2001 1:25 PM > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 306 > > > > > > You still with us Bob? > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2001 1:13 PM > > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 306 > > > > > > > > > Doh! That is what I meant. You math geek. > > > > > > Change to read "All fractional scores shall be rounded up to > the nearest > > > integer." > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: Eugene Ventimiglia > > > To: > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2001 12:05 PM > > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 306 > > > > > > > > > > Only one small thing: The wording of the scoring paragraph. > > > Remainders are > > > > for division, but I know you meant "All fractional scores > are rounded > up > > > to > > > > the nearest integer." I'll pass it as it stands, but I'll have to > weigh > > > in > > > > on the second question when I've got more time. > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2001 9:42 AM > > > > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 306 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This rule will change rule 202 to clarify things a bit. > > > > > > > > > > Rule: > > > > > One turn consists of four parts, in this order 1) > proposal of a rule > > > > > 2)discussion and amendment phase, which begins immediately > > > following the > > > > > proposal, and which may change the rule based on the discussion, > > > > > but may not > > > > > included substitution of a new rule 3) voting on the rule, which > > > > > begins when > > > > > the final form of the rule is declared by the proposer 4) scoring. > > > > > > > > > > Scoring shall be 15 points for each rule, multiplied by > the fraction > > > > > produced by the ratio of postive votes to total possible > votes. All > > > > > remainders should be rounded up. > > > > > ___ > > > > > Ok, this should fix things, but I'd like to hear what you think > > > > > before we go > > > > > with it. The way that I saw it, there are four possibilities for > the > > > > > beginning of the vote: > > > > > > > > > > A)What I chose - self selecting by proposer > > > > > B) Time limit - bad because if the discussion is > good/long it might > be > > > cut > > > > > off by the limit. If there is no discussion, this is > also bad since > > > you'd > > > > > have to wait to vote. > > > > > C) Creating an executive to call for votes. An interesting > > > possibilitiy, > > > > > but I though you guys might not like it. If we have more > people, I > > > might > > > > > even propose this one. > > > > > D) Just letting the first vote introduce the voting > phase. This is > > > > > obviously a bad idea, since someone might jump the gun. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or > copying > > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > > webmaster@e.... > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at webmaster@e.... From f_hemker@h... Thu Jan 04 07:42:52 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: f_hemker@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 4 Jan 2001 15:42:52 -0000 Received: (qmail 35393 invoked from network); 4 Jan 2001 15:42:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 4 Jan 2001 15:42:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mo.egroups.com) (10.1.1.34) by mta1 with SMTP; 4 Jan 2001 15:42:51 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: f_hemker@h... Received: from [10.1.10.67] by mo.egroups.com with NNFMP; 04 Jan 2001 15:42:51 -0000 Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2001 15:42:41 -0000 To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: Introduction Message-ID: <9325lh+kvev@eGroups.com> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 53 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 198.78.181.175 From: "Fritz Hemker" Patrick Bernardo has introduced me to Scatterbrains. From bernardo@c... Thu Jan 04 10:27:24 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 4 Jan 2001 18:27:23 -0000 Received: (qmail 10954 invoked from network); 4 Jan 2001 18:26:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 4 Jan 2001 18:26:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 4 Jan 2001 18:26:26 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp03-08.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.68]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f04IQOv84523 for ; Thu, 4 Jan 2001 13:26:24 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <000601c0767b$c480bc40$44a811d0@computer> To: References: <9325lh+kvev@eGroups.com> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Introduction Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2001 13:25:49 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" Welcome Fritz! It also seems that you go next, (after voting on my bill is done - I guess that you should vote, too!). If alphabetical order is to be followed, and since it's still my turn, the order'll be Bob, followed by me, followed by Fritz, followed by Eug. p. ----- Original Message ----- From: Fritz Hemker To: Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2001 10:42 AM Subject: [scatterbrains] Introduction > Patrick Bernardo has introduced me to Scatterbrains. > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Thu Jan 04 11:06:21 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 4 Jan 2001 19:06:21 -0000 Received: (qmail 89332 invoked from network); 4 Jan 2001 19:06:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 4 Jan 2001 19:06:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 4 Jan 2001 19:06:11 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id OAA25673 for ; Thu, 4 Jan 2001 14:06:08 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Introduction Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2001 14:06:47 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <000601c0767b$c480bc40$44a811d0@computer> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" Um, how's it your (Pat's) turn still? Bob's vote this morning was at 8:36, and Fritz joined at 10:43. I don't care either way, (since I really don't even have time to be writing this), but as we've already established, being a legalistic prick is half the fun. And Welcome Fritz. --e > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2001 1:26 PM > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Introduction > > > Welcome Fritz! > > It also seems that you go next, (after voting on my bill is done - I guess > that you should vote, too!). If alphabetical order is to be followed, and > since it's still my turn, the order'll be Bob, followed by me, followed by > Fritz, followed by Eug. > > p. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Fritz Hemker > To: > Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2001 10:42 AM > Subject: [scatterbrains] Introduction > > > > Patrick Bernardo has introduced me to Scatterbrains. > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From barturo@e... Thu Jan 04 11:44:28 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: BArturo@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 4 Jan 2001 19:44:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 83480 invoked from network); 4 Jan 2001 19:44:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 4 Jan 2001 19:44:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 4 Jan 2001 19:44:26 -0000 Received: from batman.ess ([12.31.9.2]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAA00165 for ; Thu, 4 Jan 2001 14:44:17 -0500 (EST) Received: by BATMAN with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id ; Thu, 4 Jan 2001 14:40:25 -0500 Message-ID: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF037277@BATMAN> To: "'scatterbrains@egroups.com'" Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Introduction Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2001 14:40:24 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" From: "Arturo, Bob" Hello Fritz How can it be his turn. I didn't get a turn when I joined. -----Original Message----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia [mailto:eventi@n...] Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2001 2:07 PM To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Introduction Um, how's it your (Pat's) turn still? Bob's vote this morning was at 8:36, and Fritz joined at 10:43. I don't care either way, (since I really don't even have time to be writing this), but as we've already established, being a legalistic prick is half the fun. And Welcome Fritz. --e > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2001 1:26 PM > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Introduction > > > Welcome Fritz! > > It also seems that you go next, (after voting on my bill is done - I guess > that you should vote, too!). If alphabetical order is to be followed, and > since it's still my turn, the order'll be Bob, followed by me, followed by > Fritz, followed by Eug. > > p. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Fritz Hemker > To: > Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2001 10:42 AM > Subject: [scatterbrains] Introduction > > > > Patrick Bernardo has introduced me to Scatterbrains. > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at webmaster@e.... From bernardo@c... Thu Jan 04 11:54:49 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 4 Jan 2001 19:54:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 18514 invoked from network); 4 Jan 2001 19:54:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 4 Jan 2001 19:54:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta3 with SMTP; 4 Jan 2001 20:55:53 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp03-08.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.68]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f04Jskv92952 for ; Thu, 4 Jan 2001 14:54:46 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <000701c07688$1cfac440$44a811d0@computer> To: References: Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Introduction Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2001 14:54:11 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" I don't think that I ever got Bob's vote for my prop. So you're right, it's not Fritz's turn, it's your turn. Damn, you guys jump all over me... ----- Original Message ----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia To: Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2001 2:06 PM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Introduction > Um, how's it your (Pat's) turn still? Bob's vote this morning was at 8:36, > and Fritz joined at 10:43. I don't care either way, (since I really don't > even have time to be writing this), but as we've already established, being > a legalistic prick is half the fun. > > And Welcome Fritz. > --e > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2001 1:26 PM > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Introduction > > > > > > Welcome Fritz! > > > > It also seems that you go next, (after voting on my bill is done - I guess > > that you should vote, too!). If alphabetical order is to be followed, and > > since it's still my turn, the order'll be Bob, followed by me, followed by > > Fritz, followed by Eug. > > > > p. > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Fritz Hemker > > To: > > Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2001 10:42 AM > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Introduction > > > > > > > Patrick Bernardo has introduced me to Scatterbrains. > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Thu Jan 04 12:20:57 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 4 Jan 2001 20:20:57 -0000 Received: (qmail 7155 invoked from network); 4 Jan 2001 20:20:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 4 Jan 2001 20:20:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 4 Jan 2001 21:22:02 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id PAA04185 for ; Thu, 4 Jan 2001 15:20:55 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Introduction Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2001 15:21:34 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <000701c07688$1cfac440$44a811d0@computer> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" There oughtta be a law... > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2001 2:54 PM > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Introduction > > > I don't think that I ever got Bob's vote for my prop. So you're > right, it's > not Fritz's turn, it's your turn. > > Damn, you guys jump all over me... > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Eugene Ventimiglia > To: > Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2001 2:06 PM > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Introduction > > > > Um, how's it your (Pat's) turn still? Bob's vote this morning was at > 8:36, > > and Fritz joined at 10:43. I don't care either way, (since I > really don't > > even have time to be writing this), but as we've already established, > being > > a legalistic prick is half the fun. > > > > And Welcome Fritz. > > --e > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > > Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2001 1:26 PM > > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Introduction > > > > > > > > > Welcome Fritz! > > > > > > It also seems that you go next, (after voting on my bill is done - I > guess > > > that you should vote, too!). If alphabetical order is to be followed, > and > > > since it's still my turn, the order'll be Bob, followed by > me, followed > by > > > Fritz, followed by Eug. > > > > > > p. > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: Fritz Hemker > > > To: > > > Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2001 10:42 AM > > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Introduction > > > > > > > > > > Patrick Bernardo has introduced me to Scatterbrains. > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From barturo@e... Thu Jan 04 12:24:51 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: BArturo@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 4 Jan 2001 20:24:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 55049 invoked from network); 4 Jan 2001 20:24:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 4 Jan 2001 20:24:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 4 Jan 2001 20:24:49 -0000 Received: from batman.ess ([12.31.9.2]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with ESMTP id PAA04608 for ; Thu, 4 Jan 2001 15:24:45 -0500 (EST) Received: by BATMAN with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id ; Thu, 4 Jan 2001 15:20:59 -0500 Message-ID: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF037279@BATMAN> To: "'scatterbrains@egroups.com'" Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Introduction Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2001 15:20:58 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" From: "Arturo, Bob" Ok I voted this morning. Now who goes I thought it was E then to me then Bat then Fritz then E.... -----Original Message----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia [mailto:eventi@n...] Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2001 3:22 PM To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Introduction There oughtta be a law... > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2001 2:54 PM > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Introduction > > > I don't think that I ever got Bob's vote for my prop. So you're > right, it's > not Fritz's turn, it's your turn. > > Damn, you guys jump all over me... > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Eugene Ventimiglia > To: > Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2001 2:06 PM > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Introduction > > > > Um, how's it your (Pat's) turn still? Bob's vote this morning was at > 8:36, > > and Fritz joined at 10:43. I don't care either way, (since I > really don't > > even have time to be writing this), but as we've already established, > being > > a legalistic prick is half the fun. > > > > And Welcome Fritz. > > --e > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > > Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2001 1:26 PM > > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Introduction > > > > > > > > > Welcome Fritz! > > > > > > It also seems that you go next, (after voting on my bill is done - I > guess > > > that you should vote, too!). If alphabetical order is to be followed, > and > > > since it's still my turn, the order'll be Bob, followed by > me, followed > by > > > Fritz, followed by Eug. > > > > > > p. > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: Fritz Hemker > > > To: > > > Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2001 10:42 AM > > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Introduction > > > > > > > > > > Patrick Bernardo has introduced me to Scatterbrains. > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at webmaster@e.... From eventi@n... Thu Jan 04 12:40:16 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 4 Jan 2001 20:40:16 -0000 Received: (qmail 57861 invoked from network); 4 Jan 2001 20:39:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 4 Jan 2001 20:39:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 4 Jan 2001 21:40:51 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id PAA06251 for ; Thu, 4 Jan 2001 15:39:46 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Introduction Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2001 15:40:25 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF037279@BATMAN> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" It's me... I'll write it up when I get the time. The order ( in glorious ASCII !!! ) YOU ARE HERE -> EV, BA, PB, FK --e > -----Original Message----- > From: Arturo, Bob [mailto:barturo@e...] > Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2001 3:21 PM > To: 'scatterbrains@egroups.com' > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Introduction > > > Ok I voted this morning. Now who goes I thought it was E then to > me then Bat > then Fritz then E.... > > -----Original Message----- > From: Eugene Ventimiglia [mailto:eventi@n...] > Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2001 3:22 PM > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Introduction > > > There oughtta be a law... > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2001 2:54 PM > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Introduction > > > > > > I don't think that I ever got Bob's vote for my prop. So you're > > right, it's > > not Fritz's turn, it's your turn. > > > > Damn, you guys jump all over me... > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Eugene Ventimiglia > > To: > > Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2001 2:06 PM > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Introduction > > > > > > > Um, how's it your (Pat's) turn still? Bob's vote this morning was at > > 8:36, > > > and Fritz joined at 10:43. I don't care either way, (since I > > really don't > > > even have time to be writing this), but as we've already established, > > being > > > a legalistic prick is half the fun. > > > > > > And Welcome Fritz. > > > --e > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > > > Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2001 1:26 PM > > > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Introduction > > > > > > > > > > > > Welcome Fritz! > > > > > > > > It also seems that you go next, (after voting on my bill is done - I > > guess > > > > that you should vote, too!). If alphabetical order is to > be followed, > > and > > > > since it's still my turn, the order'll be Bob, followed by > > me, followed > > by > > > > Fritz, followed by Eug. > > > > > > > > p. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > From: Fritz Hemker > > > > To: > > > > Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2001 10:42 AM > > > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Introduction > > > > > > > > > > > > > Patrick Bernardo has introduced me to Scatterbrains. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution > or copying > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > webmaster@e.... > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Fri Jan 05 06:52:23 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 5 Jan 2001 14:52:17 -0000 Received: (qmail 5391 invoked from network); 5 Jan 2001 14:52:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Jan 2001 14:52:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta3 with SMTP; 5 Jan 2001 15:53:21 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp03-08.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.68]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f05EqFa53668 for ; Fri, 5 Jan 2001 09:52:15 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <000d01c07727$03bb2480$44a811d0@computer> To: References: Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Introduction Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2001 09:51:39 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" > The order ( in glorious ASCII !!! ) > YOU ARE HERE -> EV, BA, PB, FK ^^ should be FH. From eventi@n... Fri Jan 05 06:57:26 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 5 Jan 2001 14:57:21 -0000 Received: (qmail 6678 invoked from network); 5 Jan 2001 14:57:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Jan 2001 14:57:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 5 Jan 2001 14:57:21 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id JAA11847 for ; Fri, 5 Jan 2001 09:57:19 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Introduction Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2001 09:58:28 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <000d01c07727$03bb2480$44a811d0@computer> From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" I meant to correct that, but I had already been polluting the list too much yesterday. > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Friday, January 05, 2001 9:52 AM > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Introduction > > > > The order ( in glorious ASCII !!! ) > > YOU ARE HERE -> EV, BA, PB, FK > ^^ > should be FH. > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Fri Jan 05 12:42:45 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 5 Jan 2001 20:42:44 -0000 Received: (qmail 15112 invoked from network); 5 Jan 2001 20:30:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Jan 2001 20:30:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 5 Jan 2001 20:30:05 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id PAA16242 for ; Fri, 5 Jan 2001 15:30:04 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: Proposal 307 Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2001 15:31:13 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" This is the best I could come up with before the end of the week... So much to do. --e --- Begin Proposal Offices: Any formally defined role other than the ordinary player role, shall be referred to as an "Office." Offices are each to be created by a proposal, describing the responsibilities of the office, the manner in which officers are selected, and the method of compensation (if any) the officer is to receive. --- End Proposal Possible offices include, but are not limited to Scorekeeper, Scribe (both of which are currently being held unofficially by me.), as well as Historian and Parliamentarian. It may soon become difficult for me to keep on top of recording scores and keeping the rules file up to date, and at such time I'd like to request that an Office be created, so that such responsibilities can be shared among the players. I was seriously considering a package of strict parliamentary rules, like "You gotta say FINAL for a proposal to be final." I was also considering proposing the keeping of an official history document, when it occurred to me that it's an opportunity for players to earn income, and some sort of economic system could develop from it... Anyway, it seems interresting. From f_hemker@h... Fri Jan 05 13:11:18 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: f_hemker@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 5 Jan 2001 21:11:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 50790 invoked from network); 5 Jan 2001 21:03:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Jan 2001 21:03:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hm.egroups.com) (10.1.10.45) by mta3 with SMTP; 5 Jan 2001 22:04:59 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: f_hemker@h... Received: from [10.1.2.41] by hm.egroups.com with NNFMP; 05 Jan 2001 21:03:54 -0000 Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2001 21:03:40 -0000 To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: Re: Proposal 307 Message-ID: <935crc+a8rf@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 1902 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 63.82.114.111 From: "Fritz Hemker" You should include a bit about the tenure of an office and whether one can be removed from an office, for what reasons, and how. I think those considerations ought to be understood before offices are created, as opposed to being detailed in the description of the specific offices themselves. Other questions: Should office be created with a simple majority? Should the creation of the office be seperate from filling it? Should offices exist forever, never needing reauthorization, or will their very existence be limited? -Fritz --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, "Eugene Ventimiglia" wrote: > > This is the best I could come up with before the end of the week... So much > to do. > --e > > --- Begin Proposal > > Offices: > Any formally defined role other than the ordinary player role, shall be > referred to as an "Office." Offices are each to be created by a proposal, > describing the responsibilities of the office, the manner in which officers > are selected, and the method of compensation (if any) the officer is to > receive. > > --- End Proposal > > Possible offices include, but are not limited to Scorekeeper, Scribe (both > of which are currently being held unofficially by me.), as well as Historian > and Parliamentarian. > > It may soon become difficult for me to keep on top of recording scores and > keeping the rules file up to date, and at such time I'd like to request that > an Office be created, so that such responsibilities can be shared among the > players. > > I was seriously considering a package of strict parliamentary rules, like > "You gotta say FINAL for a proposal to be final." I was also considering > proposing the keeping of an official history document, when it occurred to > me that it's an opportunity for players to earn income, and some sort of > economic system could develop from it... Anyway, From bernardo@c... Fri Jan 05 13:32:57 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 5 Jan 2001 21:32:56 -0000 Received: (qmail 7322 invoked from network); 5 Jan 2001 21:31:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Jan 2001 21:31:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 5 Jan 2001 21:31:55 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp03-06.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.66]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f05LVra91558 for ; Fri, 5 Jan 2001 16:31:53 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <000d01c0775e$d9992f20$42a811d0@computer> To: References: <935crc+a8rf@eGroups.com> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 307 Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2001 16:31:20 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" I think that tenure requirements (and filling) should be handled on an office-by-office basis. Why do you disagree? For instance, secretary (or scribe) would have a much longer tenure than grand poobah, I imagine. As it stands, if offices are created by proposal (as per this proposal), then a simple majority would be enough to create one. ----- Original Message ----- From: Fritz Hemker To: Sent: Friday, January 05, 2001 4:03 PM Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 307 > You should include a bit about the tenure of an office and whether one > can be removed from an office, for what reasons, and how. I think > those considerations ought to be understood before offices are > created, as opposed to being detailed in the description of the > specific offices themselves. > > Other questions: > Should office be created with a simple majority? Should the creation > of the office be seperate from filling it? Should offices exist > forever, never needing reauthorization, or will their very existence > be limited? > > -Fritz > > --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, "Eugene Ventimiglia" > wrote: > > > > This is the best I could come up with before the end of the week... > So much > > to do. > > --e > > > > --- Begin Proposal > > > > Offices: > > Any formally defined role other than the ordinary player role, > shall be > > referred to as an "Office." Offices are each to be created by a > proposal, > > describing the responsibilities of the office, the manner in which > officers > > are selected, and the method of compensation (if any) the officer > is to > > receive. > > > > --- End Proposal > > > > Possible offices include, but are not limited to Scorekeeper, > Scribe (both > > of which are currently being held unofficially by me.), as well as > Historian > > and Parliamentarian. > > > > It may soon become difficult for me to keep on top of recording > scores and > > keeping the rules file up to date, and at such time I'd like to > request that > > an Office be created, so that such responsibilities can be shared > among the > > players. > > > > I was seriously considering a package of strict parliamentary > rules, like > > "You gotta say FINAL for a proposal to be final." I was also > considering > > proposing the keeping of an official history document, when it > occurred to > > me that it's an opportunity for players to earn income, and some > sort of > > economic system could develop from it... Anyway, > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Fri Jan 05 15:10:23 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 5 Jan 2001 23:10:23 -0000 Received: (qmail 95529 invoked from network); 5 Jan 2001 23:09:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Jan 2001 23:09:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 6 Jan 2001 00:10:38 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id SAA00756 for ; Fri, 5 Jan 2001 18:09:32 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 307 Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2001 18:10:40 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <935crc+a8rf@eGroups.com> From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" You've got some interesting points, but I don't think at this point I'd like to rule out creating a variety of types of offices. I'm not entirely opposed to adding a laundry list of requirements for the proposal to _create_ an office, but I don't think it's strictly required of this proposal. I'll refine that list a bit, and re-propose later. I do think that the creation of the Office should be seperate from the nomination/election/selection of the Officer. I'll need some time to think it over. Thanks for the feedback, and again, welcome aboard. --e > > You should include a bit about the tenure of an office and whether one > can be removed from an office, for what reasons, and how. I think > those considerations ought to be understood before offices are > created, as opposed to being detailed in the description of the > specific offices themselves. > > Other questions: > Should office be created with a simple majority? Should the creation > of the office be seperate from filling it? Should offices exist > forever, never needing reauthorization, or will their very existence > be limited? > > -Fritz > > --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, "Eugene Ventimiglia" > wrote: > > > > This is the best I could come up with before the end of the week... > So much > > to do. > > --e > > > > --- Begin Proposal > > > > Offices: > > Any formally defined role other than the ordinary player role, > shall be > > referred to as an "Office." Offices are each to be created by a > proposal, > > describing the responsibilities of the office, the manner in which > officers > > are selected, and the method of compensation (if any) the officer > is to > > receive. > > > > --- End Proposal > > > > Possible offices include, but are not limited to Scorekeeper, > Scribe (both > > of which are currently being held unofficially by me.), as well as > Historian > > and Parliamentarian. > > > > It may soon become difficult for me to keep on top of recording > scores and > > keeping the rules file up to date, and at such time I'd like to > request that > > an Office be created, so that such responsibilities can be shared > among the > > players. > > > > I was seriously considering a package of strict parliamentary > rules, like > > "You gotta say FINAL for a proposal to be final." I was also > considering > > proposing the keeping of an official history document, when it > occurred to > > me that it's an opportunity for players to earn income, and some > sort of > > economic system could develop from it... Anyway, > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Sat Jan 06 22:40:05 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 7 Jan 2001 06:40:01 -0000 Received: (qmail 6107 invoked from network); 7 Jan 2001 06:40:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Jan 2001 06:40:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 7 Jan 2001 06:40:00 -0000 Received: from win (win.venti.nyic.com [64.29.109.18]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id BAA21962 for ; Sun, 7 Jan 2001 01:40:00 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <001101c07874$8cb53840$126d1d40@v...> To: References: Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Proposal 307 Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2001 01:39:13 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" --- Begin Revised Proposal Offices: Any formally defined role other than the ordinary player role, shall be referred to as an "Office." Offices are each to be created and defined by a proposal. The proposal shall include: Responsibilities of the office The method of selection of officers Term of office, and method of succession The method of removal from office --- End Revised Proposal From bernardo@c... Sun Jan 07 08:01:53 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 7 Jan 2001 16:01:50 -0000 Received: (qmail 35058 invoked from network); 7 Jan 2001 16:01:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Jan 2001 16:01:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta3 with SMTP; 7 Jan 2001 17:02:54 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp03-13.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.73]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f07G1la82076 for ; Sun, 7 Jan 2001 11:01:47 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <000701c078c3$0f605060$49a811d0@computer> To: References: <001101c07874$8cb53840$126d1d40@v...> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Proposal 307 Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2001 11:01:11 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" I think that you should change "shall" to "must". Nit-picky, but more precise. If that change is made, I vote for it. p. ----- Original Message ----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia To: Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2001 1:39 AM Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Proposal 307 > --- Begin Revised Proposal > > Offices: > Any formally defined role other than the ordinary player role, shall be > referred to as an "Office." > Offices are each to be created and defined by a proposal. > > The proposal shall include: > Responsibilities of the office > The method of selection of officers > Term of office, and method of succession > The method of removal from office > > --- End Revised Proposal > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Sun Jan 07 10:45:07 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 7 Jan 2001 18:45:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 12212 invoked from network); 7 Jan 2001 18:45:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Jan 2001 18:45:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 7 Jan 2001 19:46:12 -0000 Received: from win (win.venti.nyic.com [64.29.109.18]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id NAA20552 for ; Sun, 7 Jan 2001 13:45:05 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <001701c078d9$d7be8e80$126d1d40@v...> To: References: <001101c07874$8cb53840$126d1d40@v...> <000701c078c3$0f605060$49a811d0@computer> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Proposal 307 Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2001 13:44:18 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" --- Begin Revised Proposal Offices: Any formally defined role other than the ordinary player role, shall be referred to as an "Office." Offices are each to be created and defined by a proposal. The proposal must include: Responsibilities of the office The method of selection of officers Term of office, and method of succession The method of removal from office --- End Revised Proposal ----- Original Message ----- From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" To: Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2001 11:01 AM Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Proposal 307 > I think that you should change "shall" to "must". Nit-picky, but more > precise. If that change is made, I vote for it. > p. From eventi@n... Mon Jan 08 10:31:46 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 8 Jan 2001 18:31:45 -0000 Received: (qmail 77334 invoked from network); 8 Jan 2001 18:30:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 8 Jan 2001 18:30:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 8 Jan 2001 18:30:50 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id NAA04733 for ; Mon, 8 Jan 2001 13:30:49 -0500 (EST) Reply-To: To: References: <001101c07874$8cb53840$126d1d40@v...> <000701c078c3$0f605060$49a811d0@computer> Subject: Proposal 307 FINAL FORM Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2001 13:31:55 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-UIDL: b6de5da5af51985dfad6fdce1347e0ef List-Unsubscribe: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 X-Sender: eventi@n... Importance: Normal X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com X-eGroups-Return: sentto-2562747-69-978893108-eventi=nyic.com@returns.onelist.com From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" Offices: Any formally defined role other than the ordinary player role, shall be referred to as an "Office." Offices are each to be created and defined by a proposal. The proposal must include: Responsibilities of the office The method of selection of officers Term of office, and method of succession The method of removal from office From barturo@e... Mon Jan 08 12:00:04 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: BArturo@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 8 Jan 2001 20:00:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 40834 invoked from network); 8 Jan 2001 19:57:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 8 Jan 2001 19:57:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 8 Jan 2001 19:57:31 -0000 Received: from batman.ess ([12.31.9.2]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAA12993 for ; Mon, 8 Jan 2001 14:57:30 -0500 (EST) Received: by BATMAN with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id ; Mon, 8 Jan 2001 14:53:37 -0500 Message-ID: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF03727B@BATMAN> To: "'scatterbrains@egroups.com'" Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 307 FINAL FORM Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2001 14:53:36 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" From: "Arturo, Bob" OK, it sounds good to me. -----Original Message----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia [mailto:eventi@n...] Sent: Monday, January 08, 2001 1:32 PM To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 307 FINAL FORM Offices: Any formally defined role other than the ordinary player role, shall be referred to as an "Office." Offices are each to be created and defined by a proposal. The proposal must include: Responsibilities of the office The method of selection of officers Term of office, and method of succession The method of removal from office To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at webmaster@e.... From eventi@n... Mon Jan 08 14:52:50 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 8 Jan 2001 22:52:50 -0000 Received: (qmail 16678 invoked from network); 8 Jan 2001 22:50:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 8 Jan 2001 22:50:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 8 Jan 2001 22:50:03 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id RAA28924 for ; Mon, 8 Jan 2001 17:50:03 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 307 FINAL FORM Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2001 17:51:08 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF03727B@BATMAN> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" Me too! > -----Original Message----- > From: Arturo, Bob [mailto:barturo@e...] > Sent: Monday, January 08, 2001 2:54 PM > To: 'scatterbrains@egroups.com' > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 307 FINAL FORM > > > OK, it sounds good to me. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Eugene Ventimiglia [mailto:eventi@n...] > Sent: Monday, January 08, 2001 1:32 PM > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 307 FINAL FORM > > > Offices: > Any formally defined role other than the ordinary player > role, shall be > referred to as an "Office." > Offices are each to be created and defined by a proposal. > > The proposal must include: > Responsibilities of the office > The method of selection of officers > Term of office, and method of succession > The method of removal from office > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution > or copying > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > webmaster@e.... > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Tue Jan 09 05:47:56 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 9 Jan 2001 13:47:56 -0000 Received: (qmail 46241 invoked from network); 9 Jan 2001 13:47:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 9 Jan 2001 13:47:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta3 with SMTP; 9 Jan 2001 14:49:00 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp03-04.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.64]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f09Dlra87529 for ; Tue, 9 Jan 2001 08:47:53 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <000b01c07a42$af985480$40a811d0@computer> To: References: <001101c07874$8cb53840$126d1d40@v...> <000701c078c3$0f605060$49a811d0@computer> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Proposal 307 FINAL FORM Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2001 08:47:17 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" I vote for it. ----- Original Message ----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia To: Sent: Monday, January 08, 2001 1:31 PM Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 307 FINAL FORM > Offices: > Any formally defined role other than the ordinary player role, shall be > referred to as an "Office." > Offices are each to be created and defined by a proposal. > > The proposal must include: > Responsibilities of the office > The method of selection of officers > Term of office, and method of succession > The method of removal from office > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From f_hemker@h... Tue Jan 09 05:53:10 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: f_hemker@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 9 Jan 2001 13:53:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 63054 invoked from network); 9 Jan 2001 13:53:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 9 Jan 2001 13:53:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hl.egroups.com) (10.1.10.44) by mta1 with SMTP; 9 Jan 2001 13:53:09 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: f_hemker@h... Received: from [10.1.10.64] by hl.egroups.com with NNFMP; 09 Jan 2001 13:53:08 -0000 Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2001 13:52:58 -0000 To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: Re: Proposal 307 FINAL FORM Message-ID: <93f53q+4asb@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 524 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 199.95.76.231 From: "Fritz Hemker" I also vote for the passage of this proposal. --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, "Eugene Ventimiglia" wrote: > Offices: > Any formally defined role other than the ordinary player role, shall be > referred to as an "Office." > Offices are each to be created and defined by a proposal. > > The proposal must include: > Responsibilities of the office > The method of selection of officers > Term of office, and method of succession > The method of removal from offi From eventi@n... Tue Jan 09 07:14:27 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 9 Jan 2001 15:14:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 27992 invoked from network); 9 Jan 2001 15:06:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 9 Jan 2001 15:06:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 9 Jan 2001 15:06:20 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id KAA19888 for ; Tue, 9 Jan 2001 10:06:19 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: State of the Union Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2001 10:07:24 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <93f53q+4asb@eGroups.com> From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" OK, it's Bob's turn to propose, I've got 44 points, and Pat's got 33. BTW: Rules: http://www.egroups.com/files/scatterbrains/Rules Scores: http://www.egroups.com/database/scatterbrains?method=reportRows&tbl=2&sortBy =2 From barturo@e... Thu Jan 11 06:32:51 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: BArturo@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 11 Jan 2001 14:32:43 -0000 Received: (qmail 87748 invoked from network); 11 Jan 2001 14:31:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 11 Jan 2001 14:31:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 11 Jan 2001 14:31:14 -0000 Received: from batman.ess ([12.31.9.2]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with ESMTP id JAA24290 for ; Thu, 11 Jan 2001 09:31:13 -0500 (EST) Received: by BATMAN with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id ; Thu, 11 Jan 2001 09:27:14 -0500 Message-ID: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF037285@BATMAN> To: "'scatterbrains@egroups.com'" Subject: Proposal 308 Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 09:27:08 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" From: "Arturo, Bob" Ok here we go... Begin Proposal 308 Time Limit: There will be a time limit of 5 business days to submit a proposal. If a proposal is not submitted within 5 business days after the last person has cast there vote on the previous proposal there will be a "1 point a day" penalty enforced. End Proposal 308 * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at webmaster@e.... From f_hemker@h... Thu Jan 11 08:47:19 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: f_hemker@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 11 Jan 2001 16:47:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 72820 invoked from network); 11 Jan 2001 16:36:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 11 Jan 2001 16:36:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO fh.egroups.com) (10.1.2.135) by mta3 with SMTP; 11 Jan 2001 17:37:50 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: f_hemker@h... Received: from [10.1.10.63] by fh.egroups.com with NNFMP; 11 Jan 2001 16:36:44 -0000 Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 16:36:41 -0000 To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: Re: Proposal 308 Message-ID: <93knep+769o@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF037285@BATMAN> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 1682 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 63.82.114.15 From: "Fritz Hemker" How about: "If a proposal is not submitted within 5 days, excluding weekends and federally recognized holidays, after the last player has cast their vote for the previous proposal, a penalty will be applied to the offending player. The penalty shall consist of one point being deducted from the offending player's total score for each day that the player fails to submit a proposal after the initial five day grace period. Penalties shall not exceed 20 points. If a player fails to submit a proposal within 30 days after the acceptance of the last proposal that player shall be deemed in violation of the spirit of the game and removed, with the unanimous consent of the other players, from the roster of players." I'm of the opinion that everything in the proposals ought to be spelled out as clearly as possible, in stultifying, stupid detail. Implications should not be left to the imagination, since we don't have a trained staff of lawyers or a judicial process (as of yet). -Fritz --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, "Arturo, Bob" wrote: > Ok here we go... > > > Begin Proposal 308 > > Time Limit: > There will be a time limit of 5 business days to submit a proposal. If a > proposal is not submitted within 5 business days after the last person has > cast there vote on the previous proposal there will be a "1 point a day" > penalty enforced. > > End Proposal 308 > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at From f_hemker@h... Thu Jan 11 09:04:44 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: f_hemker@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 11 Jan 2001 17:04:24 -0000 Received: (qmail 28134 invoked from network); 11 Jan 2001 16:52:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 11 Jan 2001 16:52:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hp.egroups.com) (10.1.2.220) by mta2 with SMTP; 11 Jan 2001 16:52:43 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: f_hemker@h... Received: from [10.1.2.43] by hp.egroups.com with NNFMP; 11 Jan 2001 16:52:42 -0000 Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 16:52:41 -0000 To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: Re: Proposal 308 Message-ID: <93kocp+sqn5@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: <93knep+769o@eGroups.com> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 1929 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 63.82.114.15 From: "Fritz Hemker" Oh, here's a question that might need to be answered: Are negative point totals possible? --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, "Fritz Hemker" wrote: > How about: "If a proposal is not submitted within 5 days, excluding > weekends and federally recognized holidays, after the last player has > cast their vote for the previous proposal, a penalty will be applied > to the offending player. The penalty shall consist of one point > being deducted from the offending player's total score for each day > that the player fails to submit a proposal after the initial five day > grace period. Penalties shall not exceed 20 points. If a player > fails to submit a proposal within 30 days after the acceptance of the > last proposal that player shall be deemed in violation of the spirit > of the game and removed, with the unanimous consent of the other > players, from the roster of players." > > I'm of the opinion that everything in the proposals ought to be > spelled out as clearly as possible, in stultifying, stupid detail. > Implications should not be left to the imagination, since we don't > have a trained staff of lawyers or a judicial process (as of yet). > > -Fritz > > --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, "Arturo, Bob" wrote: > > Ok here we go... > > > > > > Begin Proposal 308 > > > > Time Limit: > > There will be a time limit of 5 business days to submit a proposal. > If a > > proposal is not submitted within 5 business days after the last > person has > > cast there vote on the previous proposal there will be a "1 point a > day" > > penalty enforced. > > > > End Proposal 308 > > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or > copying > > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > > If you are not the specified recipient, please not From f_hemker@h... Thu Jan 11 09:16:26 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: f_hemker@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 11 Jan 2001 17:16:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 87113 invoked from network); 11 Jan 2001 17:05:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 11 Jan 2001 17:05:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO fj.egroups.com) (10.1.10.46) by mta1 with SMTP; 11 Jan 2001 17:05:03 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: f_hemker@h... Received: from [10.1.2.23] by fj.egroups.com with NNFMP; 11 Jan 2001 17:05:03 -0000 Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 17:04:57 -0000 To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: Re: Proposal 308 Message-ID: <93kp3p+kd1v@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF037285@BATMAN> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 326 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 63.82.114.15 From: "Fritz Hemker" Doesn't this rule in the form initially presented conflict with the provisions of Rule 113? Or is losing points not a penalty worse than losing? What if I decide that losing points, in my case alone, is a penalty worse than losing. Am I then exempt? Sorry about the multiple mails, it has been a slow day at work. -Fr From eventi@n... Thu Jan 11 09:52:35 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 11 Jan 2001 17:52:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 48743 invoked from network); 11 Jan 2001 17:40:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 11 Jan 2001 17:40:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 11 Jan 2001 17:40:39 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id MAA15947 for ; Thu, 11 Jan 2001 12:40:32 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 308 Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 12:41:33 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <93kp3p+kd1v@eGroups.com> From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" I initially read 113 to only cover the penalty for forfeit. Now that I read it again, it seems to say that a player may opt to forfeit in order to avoid any penalty, which he deems to be worse than losing. --e > -----Original Message----- > From: Fritz Hemker [mailto:f_hemker@h...] > Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 12:05 PM > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 308 > > > Doesn't this rule in the form initially presented conflict with the > provisions of Rule 113? Or is losing points not a penalty worse than > losing? What if I decide that losing points, in my case alone, is a > penalty worse than losing. Am I then exempt? > > Sorry about the multiple mails, it has been a slow day at work. > > -Fr > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Thu Jan 11 10:13:42 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 11 Jan 2001 18:13:41 -0000 Received: (qmail 15726 invoked from network); 11 Jan 2001 17:59:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 11 Jan 2001 17:59:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 11 Jan 2001 17:59:41 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id MAA18364 for ; Thu, 11 Jan 2001 12:59:40 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 308 Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 13:00:43 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <93kocp+sqn5@eGroups.com> From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" As long as it's not forbidden in the rules, it's possible. > -----Original Message----- > From: Fritz Hemker [mailto:f_hemker@h...] > Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 11:53 AM > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 308 > > > Oh, here's a question that might need to be answered: Are negative > point totals possible? > > --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, "Fritz Hemker" > wrote: > > How about: "If a proposal is not submitted within 5 days, excluding > > weekends and federally recognized holidays, after the last player > has > > cast their vote for the previous proposal, a penalty will be applied > > to the offending player. The penalty shall consist of one point > > being deducted from the offending player's total score for each day > > that the player fails to submit a proposal after the initial five > day > > grace period. Penalties shall not exceed 20 points. If a player > > fails to submit a proposal within 30 days after the acceptance of > the > > last proposal that player shall be deemed in violation of the spirit > > of the game and removed, with the unanimous consent of the other > > players, from the roster of players." > > > > I'm of the opinion that everything in the proposals ought to be > > spelled out as clearly as possible, in stultifying, stupid detail. > > Implications should not be left to the imagination, since we don't > > have a trained staff of lawyers or a judicial process (as of yet). > > > > -Fritz > > > > --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, "Arturo, Bob" > wrote: > > > Ok here we go... > > > > > > > > > Begin Proposal 308 > > > > > > Time Limit: > > > There will be a time limit of 5 business days to submit a > proposal. > > If a > > > proposal is not submitted within 5 business days after the last > > person has > > > cast there vote on the previous proposal there will be a "1 point > a > > day" > > > penalty enforced. > > > > > > End Proposal 308 > > > > > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > > > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution > or > > copying > > > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > > > If you are not the specified recipient, please not > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From barturo@e... Thu Jan 11 11:00:15 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: BArturo@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 11 Jan 2001 19:00:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 22317 invoked from network); 11 Jan 2001 18:45:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 11 Jan 2001 18:45:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 11 Jan 2001 18:45:48 -0000 Received: from batman.ess ([12.31.9.2]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA23220 for ; Thu, 11 Jan 2001 13:45:45 -0500 (EST) Received: by BATMAN with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id ; Thu, 11 Jan 2001 13:41:43 -0500 Message-ID: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF03728A@BATMAN> To: "'scatterbrains@egroups.com'" Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 308 Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 13:41:43 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" From: "Arturo, Bob" You bring up some good points. Business days do not include weekends. Begin Revised Proposal 308 Time Limit: There will be a time limit of 5 business days, excluding federal holidays, to submit a proposal. If a proposal is not submitted within 5 business days after the last player has cast there vote on the previous proposal there will be a "1 point a day" penalty enforced. Penalty points will be deducted from the players total points and will not go below 0. If a player fails to submit a proposal within 25 business days that player will be held in violation and can be removed if all other players are in agreement. End Revised Proposal 308 -----Original Message----- From: Fritz Hemker [mailto:f_hemker@h...] Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 11:53 AM To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 308 Oh, here's a question that might need to be answered: Are negative point totals possible? --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, "Fritz Hemker" wrote: > How about: "If a proposal is not submitted within 5 days, excluding > weekends and federally recognized holidays, after the last player has > cast their vote for the previous proposal, a penalty will be applied > to the offending player. The penalty shall consist of one point > being deducted from the offending player's total score for each day > that the player fails to submit a proposal after the initial five day > grace period. Penalties shall not exceed 20 points. If a player > fails to submit a proposal within 30 days after the acceptance of the > last proposal that player shall be deemed in violation of the spirit > of the game and removed, with the unanimous consent of the other > players, from the roster of players." > > I'm of the opinion that everything in the proposals ought to be > spelled out as clearly as possible, in stultifying, stupid detail. > Implications should not be left to the imagination, since we don't > have a trained staff of lawyers or a judicial process (as of yet). > > -Fritz > > --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, "Arturo, Bob" wrote: > > Ok here we go... > > > > > > Begin Proposal 308 > > > > Time Limit: > > There will be a time limit of 5 business days to submit a proposal. > If a > > proposal is not submitted within 5 business days after the last > person has > > cast there vote on the previous proposal there will be a "1 point a > day" > > penalty enforced. > > > > End Proposal 308 > > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or > copying > > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > > If you are not the specified recipient, please not To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at webmaster@e.... From bernardo@c... Thu Jan 11 11:08:27 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 11 Jan 2001 19:08:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 62780 invoked from network); 11 Jan 2001 18:54:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 11 Jan 2001 18:54:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta1 with SMTP; 11 Jan 2001 18:54:19 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp03-09.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.69]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f0BIsHa57255 for ; Thu, 11 Jan 2001 13:54:17 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <001501c07bff$d21bfb60$45a811d0@computer> To: References: Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 308 Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 13:53:41 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" 113 is the Strauss rule (joke for Fritz). Any regime is not oppressive that allows its members to emigrate. You cannot be forced to stay in the game and suffer any penalty that you think sucks. So, to answer Fritz's question, yes, if you do decide that losing points is worse than quitting, you can evade the penalty. Guess how you do this? You quit. :) So, I don't think this law violates 113. ----- Original Message ----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia To: Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 12:41 PM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 308 > I initially read 113 to only cover the penalty for forfeit. Now that I read > it again, it seems to say that a player may opt to forfeit in order to avoid > any penalty, which he deems to be worse than losing. > --e > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Fritz Hemker [mailto:f_hemker@h...] > > Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 12:05 PM > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 308 > > > > > > Doesn't this rule in the form initially presented conflict with the > > provisions of Rule 113? Or is losing points not a penalty worse than > > losing? What if I decide that losing points, in my case alone, is a > > penalty worse than losing. Am I then exempt? > > > > Sorry about the multiple mails, it has been a slow day at work. > > > > -Fr > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Thu Jan 11 11:10:21 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 11 Jan 2001 19:10:21 -0000 Received: (qmail 70287 invoked from network); 11 Jan 2001 18:56:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 11 Jan 2001 18:56:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 11 Jan 2001 18:56:35 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp03-09.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.69]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f0BIuXa57611 for ; Thu, 11 Jan 2001 13:56:33 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <002701c07c00$2322c7a0$45a811d0@computer> To: References: <93knep+769o@eGroups.com> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 308 Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 13:55:57 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" You might be too specific here. I think that "work-days" generally means what you said - excluding weekends and holidays. As for the "federally recognized" bit, we're the feds here, and we get to say what holidays go. Bob, you might want to include a list (or at least point out that the holidays have to be specified in another law). I see no reason for a 20 point limit. p. ----- Original Message ----- From: Fritz Hemker To: Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 11:36 AM Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 308 > How about: "If a proposal is not submitted within 5 days, excluding > weekends and federally recognized holidays, after the last player has > cast their vote for the previous proposal, a penalty will be applied > to the offending player. The penalty shall consist of one point > being deducted from the offending player's total score for each day > that the player fails to submit a proposal after the initial five day > grace period. Penalties shall not exceed 20 points. If a player > fails to submit a proposal within 30 days after the acceptance of the > last proposal that player shall be deemed in violation of the spirit > of the game and removed, with the unanimous consent of the other > players, from the roster of players." > > I'm of the opinion that everything in the proposals ought to be > spelled out as clearly as possible, in stultifying, stupid detail. > Implications should not be left to the imagination, since we don't > have a trained staff of lawyers or a judicial process (as of yet). > > -Fritz > > --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, "Arturo, Bob" wrote: > > Ok here we go... > > > > > > Begin Proposal 308 > > > > Time Limit: > > There will be a time limit of 5 business days to submit a proposal. > If a > > proposal is not submitted within 5 business days after the last > person has > > cast there vote on the previous proposal there will be a "1 point a > day" > > penalty enforced. > > > > End Proposal 308 > > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or > copying > > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Thu Jan 11 11:38:43 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 11 Jan 2001 19:38:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 32038 invoked from network); 11 Jan 2001 19:25:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 11 Jan 2001 19:25:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta3 with SMTP; 11 Jan 2001 20:26:27 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp03-09.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.69]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f0BJPJa60334 for ; Thu, 11 Jan 2001 14:25:20 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <004201c07c04$28638ca0$45a811d0@computer> To: References: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF03728A@BATMAN> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 308 Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 14:24:44 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" "last player has cast there vote" should be "last player has cast their vote". ----- Original Message ----- From: Arturo, Bob To: Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 1:41 PM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 308 > You bring up some good points. Business days do not include weekends. > > Begin Revised Proposal 308 > > Time Limit: > There will be a time limit of 5 business days, excluding federal holidays, > to submit a proposal. If a proposal is not submitted within 5 business days > after the last player has cast there vote on the previous proposal there > will be a "1 point a day" penalty enforced. Penalty points will be deducted > from the players total points and will not go below 0. If a player fails to > submit a proposal within 25 business days that player will be held in > violation and can be removed if all other players are in agreement. > > End Revised Proposal 308 > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Fritz Hemker [mailto:f_hemker@h...] > Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 11:53 AM > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 308 > > > Oh, here's a question that might need to be answered: Are negative > point totals possible? > > --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, "Fritz Hemker" > wrote: > > How about: "If a proposal is not submitted within 5 days, excluding > > weekends and federally recognized holidays, after the last player > has > > cast their vote for the previous proposal, a penalty will be applied > > to the offending player. The penalty shall consist of one point > > being deducted from the offending player's total score for each day > > that the player fails to submit a proposal after the initial five > day > > grace period. Penalties shall not exceed 20 points. If a player > > fails to submit a proposal within 30 days after the acceptance of > the > > last proposal that player shall be deemed in violation of the spirit > > of the game and removed, with the unanimous consent of the other > > players, from the roster of players." > > > > I'm of the opinion that everything in the proposals ought to be > > spelled out as clearly as possible, in stultifying, stupid detail. > > Implications should not be left to the imagination, since we don't > > have a trained staff of lawyers or a judicial process (as of yet). > > > > -Fritz > > > > --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, "Arturo, Bob" > wrote: > > > Ok here we go... > > > > > > > > > Begin Proposal 308 > > > > > > Time Limit: > > > There will be a time limit of 5 business days to submit a > proposal. > > If a > > > proposal is not submitted within 5 business days after the last > > person has > > > cast there vote on the previous proposal there will be a "1 point > a > > day" > > > penalty enforced. > > > > > > End Proposal 308 > > > > > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > > > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution > or > > copying > > > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > > > If you are not the specified recipient, please not > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > webmaster@e.... > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Thu Jan 11 11:38:56 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 11 Jan 2001 19:38:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 84486 invoked from network); 11 Jan 2001 19:26:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 11 Jan 2001 19:26:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 11 Jan 2001 19:26:04 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp03-09.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.69]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f0BJQ2a60410 for ; Thu, 11 Jan 2001 14:26:02 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <004601c07c04$41a1a580$45a811d0@computer> To: References: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF03728A@BATMAN> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 308 Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 14:25:26 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" I don't like it. I'm not voting for anything capped. We need negative points and we need draconian laws.[slam fist on table] ----- Original Message ----- From: Arturo, Bob To: Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 1:41 PM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 308 > You bring up some good points. Business days do not include weekends. > > Begin Revised Proposal 308 > > Time Limit: > There will be a time limit of 5 business days, excluding federal holidays, > to submit a proposal. If a proposal is not submitted within 5 business days > after the last player has cast there vote on the previous proposal there > will be a "1 point a day" penalty enforced. Penalty points will be deducted > from the players total points and will not go below 0. If a player fails to > submit a proposal within 25 business days that player will be held in > violation and can be removed if all other players are in agreement. > > End Revised Proposal 308 > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Fritz Hemker [mailto:f_hemker@h...] > Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 11:53 AM > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 308 > > > Oh, here's a question that might need to be answered: Are negative > point totals possible? > > --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, "Fritz Hemker" > wrote: > > How about: "If a proposal is not submitted within 5 days, excluding > > weekends and federally recognized holidays, after the last player > has > > cast their vote for the previous proposal, a penalty will be applied > > to the offending player. The penalty shall consist of one point > > being deducted from the offending player's total score for each day > > that the player fails to submit a proposal after the initial five > day > > grace period. Penalties shall not exceed 20 points. If a player > > fails to submit a proposal within 30 days after the acceptance of > the > > last proposal that player shall be deemed in violation of the spirit > > of the game and removed, with the unanimous consent of the other > > players, from the roster of players." > > > > I'm of the opinion that everything in the proposals ought to be > > spelled out as clearly as possible, in stultifying, stupid detail. > > Implications should not be left to the imagination, since we don't > > have a trained staff of lawyers or a judicial process (as of yet). > > > > -Fritz > > > > --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, "Arturo, Bob" > wrote: > > > Ok here we go... > > > > > > > > > Begin Proposal 308 > > > > > > Time Limit: > > > There will be a time limit of 5 business days to submit a > proposal. > > If a > > > proposal is not submitted within 5 business days after the last > > person has > > > cast there vote on the previous proposal there will be a "1 point > a > > day" > > > penalty enforced. > > > > > > End Proposal 308 > > > > > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > > > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution > or > > copying > > > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > > > If you are not the specified recipient, please not > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > webmaster@e.... > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From barturo@e... Thu Jan 11 12:11:02 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: BArturo@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 11 Jan 2001 20:11:02 -0000 Received: (qmail 85057 invoked from network); 11 Jan 2001 19:59:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 11 Jan 2001 19:59:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 11 Jan 2001 19:59:30 -0000 Received: from batman.ess ([12.31.9.2]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAA01698 for ; Thu, 11 Jan 2001 14:59:26 -0500 (EST) Received: by BATMAN with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id ; Thu, 11 Jan 2001 14:55:22 -0500 Message-ID: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF03728C@BATMAN> To: "'scatterbrains@egroups.com'" Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 308 Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 14:55:21 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" From: "Arturo, Bob" No need to get hostile Begin Revised Proposal 308 Time Limit: There will be a time limit of 5 business days, excluding federal holidays*, to submit a proposal. If a proposal is not submitted within 5 business days after the last player has cast their vote on the previous proposal there will be a "1 point a day" penalty enforced. Penalty points will be deducted from the players total points and can go below 0. If a player fails to submit a proposal within 25 business days that player will be held in violation and can be removed if all other players are in agreement. *The list of Federal Holidays are as follows: New Years Day Birthday of Martin Luther King, Jr. Presidents Day Memorial Day Independence Day Labor Day Columbus Day Veterans Day Thanksgiving Day Christmas Day End Revised Proposal 308 -----Original Message----- From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 2:25 PM To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 308 I don't like it. I'm not voting for anything capped. We need negative points and we need draconian laws.[slam fist on table] ----- Original Message ----- From: Arturo, Bob To: Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 1:41 PM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 308 > You bring up some good points. Business days do not include weekends. > > Begin Revised Proposal 308 > > Time Limit: > There will be a time limit of 5 business days, excluding federal holidays, > to submit a proposal. If a proposal is not submitted within 5 business days > after the last player has cast there vote on the previous proposal there > will be a "1 point a day" penalty enforced. Penalty points will be deducted > from the players total points and will not go below 0. If a player fails to > submit a proposal within 25 business days that player will be held in > violation and can be removed if all other players are in agreement. > > End Revised Proposal 308 > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Fritz Hemker [mailto:f_hemker@h...] > Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 11:53 AM > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 308 > > > Oh, here's a question that might need to be answered: Are negative > point totals possible? > > --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, "Fritz Hemker" > wrote: > > How about: "If a proposal is not submitted within 5 days, excluding > > weekends and federally recognized holidays, after the last player > has > > cast their vote for the previous proposal, a penalty will be applied > > to the offending player. The penalty shall consist of one point > > being deducted from the offending player's total score for each day > > that the player fails to submit a proposal after the initial five > day > > grace period. Penalties shall not exceed 20 points. If a player > > fails to submit a proposal within 30 days after the acceptance of > the > > last proposal that player shall be deemed in violation of the spirit > > of the game and removed, with the unanimous consent of the other > > players, from the roster of players." > > > > I'm of the opinion that everything in the proposals ought to be > > spelled out as clearly as possible, in stultifying, stupid detail. > > Implications should not be left to the imagination, since we don't > > have a trained staff of lawyers or a judicial process (as of yet). > > > > -Fritz > > > > --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, "Arturo, Bob" > wrote: > > > Ok here we go... > > > > > > > > > Begin Proposal 308 > > > > > > Time Limit: > > > There will be a time limit of 5 business days to submit a > proposal. > > If a > > > proposal is not submitted within 5 business days after the last > > person has > > > cast there vote on the previous proposal there will be a "1 point > a > > day" > > > penalty enforced. > > > > > > End Proposal 308 > > > > > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > > > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution > or > > copying > > > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > > > If you are not the specified recipient, please not > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > webmaster@e.... > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at webmaster@e.... From eventi@n... Thu Jan 11 12:38:06 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 11 Jan 2001 20:38:05 -0000 Received: (qmail 91186 invoked from network); 11 Jan 2001 20:25:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 11 Jan 2001 20:25:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 11 Jan 2001 20:25:01 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id PAA04640 for ; Thu, 11 Jan 2001 15:24:59 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 308 Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 15:26:01 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF03728C@BATMAN> From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" Fuck Christopher Columbus!!!!! Otherwise it looks good > -----Original Message----- > From: Arturo, Bob [mailto:barturo@e...] > Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 2:55 PM > To: 'scatterbrains@egroups.com' > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 308 > > > No need to get hostile > > > Begin Revised Proposal 308 > > Time Limit: > There will be a time limit of 5 business days, excluding federal > holidays*, to submit a proposal. If a proposal is not submitted within 5 > business days after the last player has cast their vote on the previous > proposal there will be a "1 point a day" penalty enforced. Penalty points > will be deducted from the players total points and can go below 0. If a > player fails to submit a proposal within 25 business days that player will > be held in violation and can be removed if all other players are in > agreement. > > *The list of Federal Holidays are as follows: > > New Years Day > Birthday of Martin Luther King, Jr. > Presidents Day > Memorial Day > Independence Day > Labor Day > Columbus Day > Veterans Day > Thanksgiving Day > Christmas Day > > End Revised Proposal 308 > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 2:25 PM > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 308 > > > I don't like it. I'm not voting for anything capped. > > We need negative points and we need draconian laws.[slam fist on table] > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Arturo, Bob > To: > Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 1:41 PM > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 308 > > > > You bring up some good points. Business days do not include weekends. > > > > Begin Revised Proposal 308 > > > > Time Limit: > > There will be a time limit of 5 business days, excluding federal > holidays, > > to submit a proposal. If a proposal is not submitted within 5 business > days > > after the last player has cast there vote on the previous proposal there > > will be a "1 point a day" penalty enforced. Penalty points will be > deducted > > from the players total points and will not go below 0. If a player fails > to > > submit a proposal within 25 business days that player will be held in > > violation and can be removed if all other players are in agreement. > > > > End Revised Proposal 308 > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Fritz Hemker [mailto:f_hemker@h...] > > Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 11:53 AM > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 308 > > > > > > Oh, here's a question that might need to be answered: Are negative > > point totals possible? > > > > --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, "Fritz Hemker" > > wrote: > > > How about: "If a proposal is not submitted within 5 days, excluding > > > weekends and federally recognized holidays, after the last player > > has > > > cast their vote for the previous proposal, a penalty will be applied > > > to the offending player. The penalty shall consist of one point > > > being deducted from the offending player's total score for each day > > > that the player fails to submit a proposal after the initial five > > day > > > grace period. Penalties shall not exceed 20 points. If a player > > > fails to submit a proposal within 30 days after the acceptance of > > the > > > last proposal that player shall be deemed in violation of the spirit > > > of the game and removed, with the unanimous consent of the other > > > players, from the roster of players." > > > > > > I'm of the opinion that everything in the proposals ought to be > > > spelled out as clearly as possible, in stultifying, stupid detail. > > > Implications should not be left to the imagination, since we don't > > > have a trained staff of lawyers or a judicial process (as of yet). > > > > > > -Fritz > > > > > > --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, "Arturo, Bob" > > wrote: > > > > Ok here we go... > > > > > > > > > > > > Begin Proposal 308 > > > > > > > > Time Limit: > > > > There will be a time limit of 5 business days to submit a > > proposal. > > > If a > > > > proposal is not submitted within 5 business days after the last > > > person has > > > > cast there vote on the previous proposal there will be a "1 point > > a > > > day" > > > > penalty enforced. > > > > > > > > End Proposal 308 > > > > > > > > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > > > > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution > > or > > > copying > > > > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > > > > If you are not the specified recipient, please not > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or > copying > > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > > webmaster@e.... > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution > or copying > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > webmaster@e.... > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Thu Jan 11 14:47:25 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 11 Jan 2001 22:47:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 78092 invoked from network); 11 Jan 2001 22:39:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 11 Jan 2001 22:39:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 11 Jan 2001 23:40:28 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id RAA18536 for ; Thu, 11 Jan 2001 17:39:21 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 308 Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 17:40:24 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <004201c07c04$28638ca0$45a811d0@computer> From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" spelling geek! > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 2:25 PM > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 308 > > > "last player has cast there vote" should be "last player has cast their > vote". > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Arturo, Bob > To: > Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 1:41 PM > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 308 > > > > You bring up some good points. Business days do not include weekends. > > > > Begin Revised Proposal 308 > > > > Time Limit: > > There will be a time limit of 5 business days, excluding federal > holidays, > > to submit a proposal. If a proposal is not submitted within 5 business > days > > after the last player has cast there vote on the previous proposal there > > will be a "1 point a day" penalty enforced. Penalty points will be > deducted > > from the players total points and will not go below 0. If a player fails > to > > submit a proposal within 25 business days that player will be held in > > violation and can be removed if all other players are in agreement. > > > > End Revised Proposal 308 > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Fritz Hemker [mailto:f_hemker@h...] > > Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 11:53 AM > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 308 > > > > > > Oh, here's a question that might need to be answered: Are negative > > point totals possible? > > > > --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, "Fritz Hemker" > > wrote: > > > How about: "If a proposal is not submitted within 5 days, excluding > > > weekends and federally recognized holidays, after the last player > > has > > > cast their vote for the previous proposal, a penalty will be applied > > > to the offending player. The penalty shall consist of one point > > > being deducted from the offending player's total score for each day > > > that the player fails to submit a proposal after the initial five > > day > > > grace period. Penalties shall not exceed 20 points. If a player > > > fails to submit a proposal within 30 days after the acceptance of > > the > > > last proposal that player shall be deemed in violation of the spirit > > > of the game and removed, with the unanimous consent of the other > > > players, from the roster of players." > > > > > > I'm of the opinion that everything in the proposals ought to be > > > spelled out as clearly as possible, in stultifying, stupid detail. > > > Implications should not be left to the imagination, since we don't > > > have a trained staff of lawyers or a judicial process (as of yet). > > > > > > -Fritz > > > > > > --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, "Arturo, Bob" > > wrote: > > > > Ok here we go... > > > > > > > > > > > > Begin Proposal 308 > > > > > > > > Time Limit: > > > > There will be a time limit of 5 business days to submit a > > proposal. > > > If a > > > > proposal is not submitted within 5 business days after the last > > > person has > > > > cast there vote on the previous proposal there will be a "1 point > > a > > > day" > > > > penalty enforced. > > > > > > > > End Proposal 308 > > > > > > > > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > > > > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution > > or > > > copying > > > > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > > > > If you are not the specified recipient, please not > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or > copying > > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > > webmaster@e.... > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Thu Jan 11 16:34:37 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 12 Jan 2001 00:34:37 -0000 Received: (qmail 33860 invoked from network); 12 Jan 2001 00:26:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 12 Jan 2001 00:26:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 12 Jan 2001 00:26:25 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp03-02.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.62]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f0C0QNa04483 for ; Thu, 11 Jan 2001 19:26:24 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <001701c07c2e$36da7440$3ea811d0@computer> To: References: Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 308 Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 19:25:47 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" "spelling geek" below should read "grammar geek" ----- Original Message ----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia To: Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 5:40 PM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 308 > spelling geek! > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 2:25 PM > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 308 > > > > > > "last player has cast there vote" should be "last player has cast their > > vote". > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Arturo, Bob > > To: > > Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 1:41 PM > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 308 > > > > > > > You bring up some good points. Business days do not include weekends. > > > > > > Begin Revised Proposal 308 > > > > > > Time Limit: > > > There will be a time limit of 5 business days, excluding federal > > holidays, > > > to submit a proposal. If a proposal is not submitted within 5 business > > days > > > after the last player has cast there vote on the previous proposal there > > > will be a "1 point a day" penalty enforced. Penalty points will be > > deducted > > > from the players total points and will not go below 0. If a player fails > > to > > > submit a proposal within 25 business days that player will be held in > > > violation and can be removed if all other players are in agreement. > > > > > > End Revised Proposal 308 > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Fritz Hemker [mailto:f_hemker@h...] > > > Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 11:53 AM > > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 308 > > > > > > > > > Oh, here's a question that might need to be answered: Are negative > > > point totals possible? > > > > > > --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, "Fritz Hemker" > > > wrote: > > > > How about: "If a proposal is not submitted within 5 days, excluding > > > > weekends and federally recognized holidays, after the last player > > > has > > > > cast their vote for the previous proposal, a penalty will be applied > > > > to the offending player. The penalty shall consist of one point > > > > being deducted from the offending player's total score for each day > > > > that the player fails to submit a proposal after the initial five > > > day > > > > grace period. Penalties shall not exceed 20 points. If a player > > > > fails to submit a proposal within 30 days after the acceptance of > > > the > > > > last proposal that player shall be deemed in violation of the spirit > > > > of the game and removed, with the unanimous consent of the other > > > > players, from the roster of players." > > > > > > > > I'm of the opinion that everything in the proposals ought to be > > > > spelled out as clearly as possible, in stultifying, stupid detail. > > > > Implications should not be left to the imagination, since we don't > > > > have a trained staff of lawyers or a judicial process (as of yet). > > > > > > > > -Fritz > > > > > > > > --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, "Arturo, Bob" > > > wrote: > > > > > Ok here we go... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Begin Proposal 308 > > > > > > > > > > Time Limit: > > > > > There will be a time limit of 5 business days to submit a > > > proposal. > > > > If a > > > > > proposal is not submitted within 5 business days after the last > > > > person has > > > > > cast there vote on the previous proposal there will be a "1 point > > > a > > > > day" > > > > > penalty enforced. > > > > > > > > > > End Proposal 308 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > > > > > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution > > > or > > > > copying > > > > > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > > > > > If you are not the specified recipient, please not > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > > > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or > > copying > > > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > > > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > > > webmaster@e.... > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Thu Jan 11 20:58:38 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 12 Jan 2001 04:58:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 43496 invoked from network); 12 Jan 2001 04:58:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 12 Jan 2001 04:58:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO c9.egroups.com) (10.1.2.66) by mta2 with SMTP; 12 Jan 2001 04:58:38 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: eventi@n... Received: from [10.1.2.36] by c9.egroups.com with NNFMP; 12 Jan 2001 04:58:37 -0000 Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 04:58:36 -0000 To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: Re: Proposal 308 Message-ID: <93m2ts+o013@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: <001701c07c2e$36da7440$3ea811d0@computer> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 143 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 64.29.109.18 From: eventi@n... Uuuugh! --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, "Patrick D. Bernardo" wrote: > "spelling geek" below should read "grammar geek" > From eventi@n... Fri Jan 12 09:00:30 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 12 Jan 2001 17:00:29 -0000 Received: (qmail 28746 invoked from network); 12 Jan 2001 16:54:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 12 Jan 2001 16:54:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 12 Jan 2001 17:55:34 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id LAA23111 for ; Fri, 12 Jan 2001 11:54:28 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 308 Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 11:55:31 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF03728C@BATMAN> From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" I was just kidding about the Columbus thing... I'd pass it as written. --e > Begin Revised Proposal 308 > > Time Limit: > There will be a time limit of 5 business days, excluding federal > holidays*, to submit a proposal. If a proposal is not submitted within 5 > business days after the last player has cast their vote on the previous > proposal there will be a "1 point a day" penalty enforced. Penalty points > will be deducted from the players total points and can go below 0. If a > player fails to submit a proposal within 25 business days that player will > be held in violation and can be removed if all other players are in > agreement. > > *The list of Federal Holidays are as follows: > > New Years Day > Birthday of Martin Luther King, Jr. > Presidents Day > Memorial Day > Independence Day > Labor Day > Columbus Day > Veterans Day > Thanksgiving Day > Christmas Day > > End Revised Proposal 308 From barturo@e... Fri Jan 12 09:01:49 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: BArturo@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 12 Jan 2001 17:01:46 -0000 Received: (qmail 39415 invoked from network); 12 Jan 2001 16:55:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 12 Jan 2001 16:55:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 12 Jan 2001 17:56:21 -0000 Received: from batman.ess ([12.31.9.2]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA23200 for ; Fri, 12 Jan 2001 11:55:15 -0500 (EST) Received: by BATMAN with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id ; Fri, 12 Jan 2001 11:51:14 -0500 Message-ID: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF03728D@BATMAN> To: "'scatterbrains@egroups.com'" Subject: Proposal 308 Final Form Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 11:51:13 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" From: "Arturo, Bob" Begin Proposal 308 Time Limit: There will be a time limit of 5 business days, excluding federal holidays*, to submit a proposal. If a proposal is not submitted within 5 business days after the last player has cast their vote on the previous proposal there will be a "1 point a day" penalty enforced. Penalty points will be deducted from the players total points and can go below 0. If a player fails to submit a proposal within 25 business days that player will be held in violation and can be removed if all other players are in agreement. *The list of Federal Holidays are as follows: New Years Day Presidents Day Memorial Day Independence Day Labor Day Veterans Day Thanksgiving Day Christmas Day End Proposal 308 * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at webmaster@e.... From barturo@e... Fri Jan 12 09:09:49 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: BArturo@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 12 Jan 2001 17:09:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 60735 invoked from network); 12 Jan 2001 17:03:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 12 Jan 2001 17:03:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 12 Jan 2001 17:03:34 -0000 Received: from batman.ess ([12.31.9.2]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA24114 for ; Fri, 12 Jan 2001 12:03:33 -0500 (EST) Received: by BATMAN with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id ; Fri, 12 Jan 2001 11:59:31 -0500 Message-ID: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF03728E@BATMAN> To: "'scatterbrains@egroups.com'" Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 308 Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 11:59:31 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" From: "Arturo, Bob" Well I have to work that day so the game can go on. -----Original Message----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia [mailto:eventi@n...] Sent: Friday, January 12, 2001 11:56 AM To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 308 I was just kidding about the Columbus thing... I'd pass it as written. --e > Begin Revised Proposal 308 > > Time Limit: > There will be a time limit of 5 business days, excluding federal > holidays*, to submit a proposal. If a proposal is not submitted within 5 > business days after the last player has cast their vote on the previous > proposal there will be a "1 point a day" penalty enforced. Penalty points > will be deducted from the players total points and can go below 0. If a > player fails to submit a proposal within 25 business days that player will > be held in violation and can be removed if all other players are in > agreement. > > *The list of Federal Holidays are as follows: > > New Years Day > Birthday of Martin Luther King, Jr. > Presidents Day > Memorial Day > Independence Day > Labor Day > Columbus Day > Veterans Day > Thanksgiving Day > Christmas Day > > End Revised Proposal 308 To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at webmaster@e.... From sga5892@n... Sat Jan 13 10:59:28 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: sga5892@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 13 Jan 2001 18:59:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 59361 invoked from network); 13 Jan 2001 18:59:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Jan 2001 18:59:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-gw4.njit.edu) (128.235.251.32) by mta2 with SMTP; 13 Jan 2001 18:59:26 -0000 Received: from mailhost.njit.edu (mailhost.njit.edu [128.235.251.108]) by mail-gw4.njit.edu (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f0DK1GF12350 for ; Sat, 13 Jan 2001 15:01:16 -0500 Received: from steve0 (dhcp194-216.njit.edu) by mailhost.njit.edu (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9) with SMTP id <0G740065T7FVD6@m...> for scatterbrains@egroups.com; Sat, 13 Jan 2001 13:59:55 -0500 (EST) Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Sat, 13 Jan 2001 13:59:02 -0500 Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2001 13:59:01 -0500 Subject: Introduction To: "'scatterbrains@egroups.com'" Reply-to: "sga5892@n..." Message-id: <01C07D68.FC2492E0.sga5892@n...> Organization: NJIT MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit From: "Steven G. Arturo" Good day all. Bobby Arturo has introduced me to Scatterbrains. From eventi@w... Sat Jan 13 11:09:22 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@w... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 13 Jan 2001 19:09:22 -0000 Received: (qmail 20608 invoked from network); 13 Jan 2001 19:09:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Jan 2001 19:09:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ns1.wyndtell.com) (63.81.201.11) by mta3 with SMTP; 13 Jan 2001 20:10:26 -0000 Received: from nova.wyndtell.com (nova.wyndtell.com [63.81.201.78]) by ns1.wyndtell.com (8.11.0/8.9.3) with ESMTP id f0DK4um20614 for ; Sat, 13 Jan 2001 12:04:56 -0800 Received: (root@localhost) by nova.wyndtell.com (8.8.8/SCA-6.6) id OAA27558; Sat, 13 Jan 2001 14:09:20 -0500 (EST) To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: re: [scatterbrains] Introduction[3A60A97A] In-Reply-To: a5892 X-Status: 6Y Message-Id: <15308871.1131@w...> Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2001 11:09:20 -0800 X-eGroups-From: eventi@w... (Eugene Ventimiglia) From: eventi@w... Now what? Who goes after Bob? From sga5892@n... Sat Jan 13 11:18:08 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: sga5892@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 13 Jan 2001 19:18:08 -0000 Received: (qmail 10901 invoked from network); 13 Jan 2001 19:18:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Jan 2001 19:18:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-gw4.njit.edu) (128.235.251.32) by mta2 with SMTP; 13 Jan 2001 19:18:06 -0000 Received: from mailhost.njit.edu (mailhost.njit.edu [128.235.251.108]) by mail-gw4.njit.edu (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f0DKJuF12717 for ; Sat, 13 Jan 2001 15:19:56 -0500 Received: from steve0 (dhcp194-216.njit.edu) by mailhost.njit.edu (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9) with SMTP id <0G74006BH8AZD6@m...> for scatterbrains@egroups.com; Sat, 13 Jan 2001 14:18:35 -0500 (EST) Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Sat, 13 Jan 2001 14:17:37 -0500 Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2001 14:17:36 -0500 Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Introduction[3A60A97A] To: "'scatterbrains@egroups.com'" Reply-to: "sga5892@n..." Message-id: <01C07D6B.945D77A0.sga5892@n...> Organization: NJIT MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit From: "Steven G. Arturo" i do hate to impose my opinion at such an early stage, but it does seem to be my turn after bob's 'time limit' proposal is voted on, of which i plan on contributing to. the ordering of ba, pb, fh, ev, ba, sa, pb, ... seems odd especially if i were to contribute to the discussion on the floor. steve0 -----Original Message----- From: eventi@w... [SMTP:eventi@w...] Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2001 2:09 PM To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: re: [scatterbrains] Introduction[3A60A97A] Now what? Who goes after Bob? To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com From bernardo@c... Sat Jan 13 13:03:42 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 13 Jan 2001 21:03:41 -0000 Received: (qmail 84247 invoked from network); 13 Jan 2001 21:03:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 13 Jan 2001 21:03:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta1 with SMTP; 13 Jan 2001 21:03:39 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-09.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.194]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f0DL3ba41518 for ; Sat, 13 Jan 2001 16:03:37 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <000f01c07da4$378efc40$c2a811d0@computer> To: References: <01C07D6B.945D77A0.sga5892@n...> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Introduction[3A60A97A] Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2001 16:03:00 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" Absolutely right. It's still Bob's turn, until his proposal is voted up or down. Since Steve came in during B's turn, he goes next. Had he come after Bob's rule was voted on, precedent would have dictated that the turn would have already passed to me, and he would have had to wait. Here's the ascii: BA, SA, PB, FH, EV ^ We are here. Somebody really oughta write a law about this one. ----- Original Message ----- From: Steven G. Arturo To: Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2001 2:17 PM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Introduction[3A60A97A] > i do hate to impose my opinion at such an early stage, but it does seem to > be my turn after bob's 'time limit' proposal is voted on, of which i plan > on contributing to. the ordering of > > ba, pb, fh, ev, ba, sa, pb, ... > > seems odd especially if i were to contribute to the discussion on the > floor. > > steve0 > > > -----Original Message----- > From: eventi@w... [SMTP:eventi@w...] > Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2001 2:09 PM > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > Subject: re: [scatterbrains] Introduction[3A60A97A] > > Now what? Who goes after Bob? > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Sat Jan 13 13:03:57 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 13 Jan 2001 21:03:57 -0000 Received: (qmail 89889 invoked from network); 13 Jan 2001 21:03:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Jan 2001 21:03:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta3 with SMTP; 13 Jan 2001 22:05:00 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-09.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.194]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f0DL3ra41526 for ; Sat, 13 Jan 2001 16:03:53 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <001b01c07da4$410db5e0$c2a811d0@computer> To: References: <01C07D68.FC2492E0.sga5892@n...> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Introduction Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2001 16:03:16 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" Hey Steve. ----- Original Message ----- From: Steven G. Arturo To: Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2001 1:59 PM Subject: [scatterbrains] Introduction > Good day all. > > Bobby Arturo has introduced me to Scatterbrains. > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Sat Jan 13 13:33:13 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 13 Jan 2001 21:33:13 -0000 Received: (qmail 97209 invoked from network); 13 Jan 2001 21:33:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Jan 2001 21:33:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO fk.egroups.com) (10.1.10.47) by mta3 with SMTP; 13 Jan 2001 22:34:18 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: eventi@n... Received: from [10.1.2.117] by fk.egroups.com with NNFMP; 13 Jan 2001 21:33:12 -0000 Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2001 21:33:10 -0000 To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: Re: Introduction Message-ID: <93qhim+a1ss@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: <000f01c07da4$378efc40$c2a811d0@computer> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 1888 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 64.29.109.18 From: eventi@n... You are both assuming that "Arturo, Steven" comes after "Arturo, Bobby." Rule 201 doesn't state that... But since it's either Pat or Steven, I don't have any objection. Does he get a vote? I say no: We wouldn't want Bob calling his little brother in if the vote were tied, and just because it'll pass, I think we should apply the same standard. --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, "Patrick D. Bernardo" wrote: > Absolutely right. It's still Bob's turn, until his proposal is voted up or > down. Since Steve came in during B's turn, he goes next. Had he come after > Bob's rule was voted on, precedent would have dictated that the turn would > have already passed to me, and he would have had to wait. > > Here's the ascii: > > BA, SA, PB, FH, EV > ^ We are here. > > Somebody really oughta write a law about this one. > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Steven G. Arturo > To: > Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2001 2:17 PM > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Introduction[3A60A97A] > > > > i do hate to impose my opinion at such an early stage, but it does seem to > > be my turn after bob's 'time limit' proposal is voted on, of which i plan > > on contributing to. the ordering of > > > > ba, pb, fh, ev, ba, sa, pb, ... > > > > seems odd especially if i were to contribute to the discussion on the > > floor. > > > > steve0 > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: eventi@w... [SMTP:eventi@w...] > > Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2001 2:09 PM > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > Subject: re: [scatterbrains] Introduction[3A60A97A] > > > > Now what? Who goes after Bob? > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > From bernardo@c... Sat Jan 13 14:01:48 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 13 Jan 2001 22:01:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 71659 invoked from network); 13 Jan 2001 22:01:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Jan 2001 22:01:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 13 Jan 2001 22:01:47 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-09.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.194]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f0DM1ha45290 for ; Sat, 13 Jan 2001 17:01:43 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <003701c07dac$557a4fe0$c2a811d0@computer> To: References: <93qhim+a1ss@eGroups.com> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Introduction Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2001 17:01:06 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" There are no grounds to deny Steven the vote. First of all - who's to do it? There is no office created to police the group. Secondly, there are no rules that deny Steven the vote. Steven became a player the instant that he joined, and instantly gained all the rights and duties of any other player. As a matter of fact, if he didn't vote, he'd be in violation of 305. There is the possibility of abuse, but it's still legal. ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2001 4:33 PM Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Introduction > You are both assuming that "Arturo, Steven" comes after "Arturo, > Bobby." Rule 201 doesn't state that... But since it's either Pat or > Steven, I don't have any objection. > > Does he get a vote? I say no: We wouldn't want Bob calling his > little brother in if the vote were tied, and just because it'll pass, > I think we should apply the same standard. > > > --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, "Patrick D. Bernardo" > wrote: > > Absolutely right. It's still Bob's turn, until his proposal is > voted up or > > down. Since Steve came in during B's turn, he goes next. Had he > come after > > Bob's rule was voted on, precedent would have dictated that the > turn would > > have already passed to me, and he would have had to wait. > > > > Here's the ascii: > > > > BA, SA, PB, FH, EV > > ^ We are here. > > > > Somebody really oughta write a law about this one. > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Steven G. Arturo > > To: > > Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2001 2:17 PM > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Introduction[3A60A97A] > > > > > > > i do hate to impose my opinion at such an early stage, but it > does seem to > > > be my turn after bob's 'time limit' proposal is voted on, of > which i plan > > > on contributing to. the ordering of > > > > > > ba, pb, fh, ev, ba, sa, pb, ... > > > > > > seems odd especially if i were to contribute to the discussion on > the > > > floor. > > > > > > steve0 > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: eventi@w... [SMTP:eventi@w...] > > > Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2001 2:09 PM > > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > > Subject: re: [scatterbrains] Introduction[3A60A97A] > > > > > > Now what? Who goes after Bob? > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Sat Jan 13 18:59:58 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 14 Jan 2001 02:59:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 67573 invoked from network); 14 Jan 2001 02:59:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 14 Jan 2001 02:59:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 14 Jan 2001 04:01:02 -0000 Received: from win (win.venti.nyic.com [64.29.109.18]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id VAA11246 for ; Sat, 13 Jan 2001 21:59:57 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <002501c07dd5$fcd1fc60$126d1d40@v...> To: References: <93qhim+a1ss@eGroups.com> <003701c07dac$557a4fe0$c2a811d0@computer> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Introduction Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2001 21:59:18 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" OK, have it your way... ----- Original Message ----- From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" To: Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2001 5:01 PM Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Introduction > There are no grounds to deny Steven the vote. First of all - who's to do > it? There is no office created to police the group. Secondly, there are no > rules that deny Steven the vote. Steven became a player the instant that he > joined, and instantly gained all the rights and duties of any other player. > As a matter of fact, if he didn't vote, he'd be in violation of 305. > > There is the possibility of abuse, but it's still legal. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: > Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2001 4:33 PM > Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Introduction > > > > You are both assuming that "Arturo, Steven" comes after "Arturo, > > Bobby." Rule 201 doesn't state that... But since it's either Pat or > > Steven, I don't have any objection. > > > > Does he get a vote? I say no: We wouldn't want Bob calling his > > little brother in if the vote were tied, and just because it'll pass, > > I think we should apply the same standard. > > > > > > --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, "Patrick D. Bernardo" > > wrote: > > > Absolutely right. It's still Bob's turn, until his proposal is > > voted up or > > > down. Since Steve came in during B's turn, he goes next. Had he > > come after > > > Bob's rule was voted on, precedent would have dictated that the > > turn would > > > have already passed to me, and he would have had to wait. > > > > > > Here's the ascii: > > > > > > BA, SA, PB, FH, EV > > > ^ We are here. > > > > > > Somebody really oughta write a law about this one. > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: Steven G. Arturo > > > To: > > > Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2001 2:17 PM > > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Introduction[3A60A97A] > > > > > > > > > > i do hate to impose my opinion at such an early stage, but it > > does seem to > > > > be my turn after bob's 'time limit' proposal is voted on, of > > which i plan > > > > on contributing to. the ordering of > > > > > > > > ba, pb, fh, ev, ba, sa, pb, ... > > > > > > > > seems odd especially if i were to contribute to the discussion on > > the > > > > floor. > > > > > > > > steve0 > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: eventi@w... [SMTP:eventi@w...] > > > > Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2001 2:09 PM > > > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > > > Subject: re: [scatterbrains] Introduction[3A60A97A] > > > > > > > > Now what? Who goes after Bob? > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From sga5892@n... Sun Jan 14 16:44:04 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: sga5892@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 15 Jan 2001 00:44:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 1905 invoked from network); 15 Jan 2001 00:44:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 15 Jan 2001 00:44:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-gw3.njit.edu) (128.235.251.11) by mta1 with SMTP; 15 Jan 2001 00:44:02 -0000 Received: from mailhost.njit.edu (mailhost.njit.edu [128.235.251.108]) by mail-gw3.njit.edu (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f0F1bU118718 for ; Sun, 14 Jan 2001 20:37:30 -0500 Received: from steve0 (dhcp194-216.njit.edu) by mailhost.njit.edu (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9) with SMTP id <0G76000JVI27DP@m...> for scatterbrains@egroups.com; Sun, 14 Jan 2001 19:44:31 -0500 (EST) Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Sun, 14 Jan 2001 19:42:18 -0500 Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 19:42:17 -0500 Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Introduction To: "'scatterbrains@egroups.com'" Reply-to: "sga5892@n..." Message-id: <01C07E62.1A8B3780.sga5892@n...> Organization: NJIT MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit From: "Steven G. Arturo" from what i gather in the documentation since bobby's proposal, no one has voted on it, nor has most given hints of severe objection to this reasonable and thoughtful proposal (please do not think i am my brother's minion. i would have wrapped his christmas presents if i were:) ). anyway, since i am at school now, any smokeroom dealings would be physically impossible, as well as in violation of 210. hey, for the sake of argument of proposal 308, are there any true holidays anymore since the advent of e-mail? it seems to be that one knows it is a federal holiday or sunday when the snail-mail is not delivered. we will all be receiving e-mail on sunday and on mlk day. with various internet e-mail services, we can therefore receive e-mail for this wherever, whenever. btw, it might be deemed moral to not contribute to this on weekends or the us-deemed federal holidays, for those who do not have access to this group during those times may have info-overload on mondays. sorry so long fellas. my girlfriend just got a ride home from her father instead of me. i am quite disappointed and i am taking it out on you. steve0 -----Original Message----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia [SMTP:eventi@n...] Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2001 9:59 PM To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Introduction OK, have it your way... ----- Original Message ----- From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" To: Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2001 5:01 PM Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Introduction > There are no grounds to deny Steven the vote. First of all - who's to do > it? There is no office created to police the group. Secondly, there are no > rules that deny Steven the vote. Steven became a player the instant that he > joined, and instantly gained all the rights and duties of any other player. > As a matter of fact, if he didn't vote, he'd be in violation of 305. > > There is the possibility of abuse, but it's still legal. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: > Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2001 4:33 PM > Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Introduction > > > > You are both assuming that "Arturo, Steven" comes after "Arturo, > > Bobby." Rule 201 doesn't state that... But since it's either Pat or > > Steven, I don't have any objection. > > > > Does he get a vote? I say no: We wouldn't want Bob calling his > > little brother in if the vote were tied, and just because it'll pass, > > I think we should apply the same standard. > > > > > > --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, "Patrick D. Bernardo" > > wrote: > > > Absolutely right. It's still Bob's turn, until his proposal is > > voted up or > > > down. Since Steve came in during B's turn, he goes next. Had he > > come after > > > Bob's rule was voted on, precedent would have dictated that the > > turn would > > > have already passed to me, and he would have had to wait. > > > > > > Here's the ascii: > > > > > > BA, SA, PB, FH, EV > > > ^ We are here. > > > > > > Somebody really oughta write a law about this one. > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: Steven G. Arturo > > > To: > > > Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2001 2:17 PM > > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Introduction[3A60A97A] > > > > > > > > > > i do hate to impose my opinion at such an early stage, but it > > does seem to > > > > be my turn after bob's 'time limit' proposal is voted on, of > > which i plan > > > > on contributing to. the ordering of > > > > > > > > ba, pb, fh, ev, ba, sa, pb, ... > > > > > > > > seems odd especially if i were to contribute to the discussion on > > the > > > > floor. > > > > > > > > steve0 > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: eventi@w... [SMTP:eventi@w...] > > > > Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2001 2:09 PM > > > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > > > Subject: re: [scatterbrains] Introduction[3A60A97A] > > > > > > > > Now what? Who goes after Bob? > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com From eventi@n... Mon Jan 15 05:36:48 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 15 Jan 2001 13:36:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 42798 invoked from network); 15 Jan 2001 13:36:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 15 Jan 2001 13:36:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 15 Jan 2001 13:36:46 -0000 Received: from win (win.venti.nyic.com [64.29.109.18]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id IAA16878 for ; Mon, 15 Jan 2001 08:36:45 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <001b01c07ef8$1edd9080$126d1d40@v...> To: References: <01C07E62.1A8B3780.sga5892@n...> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Introduction Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 08:36:09 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" > from what i gather in the documentation since bobby's proposal, no one has > voted on it, nor has most given hints of severe objection to this > reasonable and thoughtful proposal (please do not think i am my brother's > minion. i would have wrapped his christmas presents if i were:) ). > anyway, since i am at school now, any smokeroom dealings would be > physically impossible, as well as in violation of 210. 210 doesn't apply to email games. There are other reasons why no one's voting. > hey, for the sake of argument of proposal 308, are there any true holidays > anymore since the advent of e-mail? it seems to be that one knows it is a > federal holiday or sunday when the snail-mail is not delivered. we will > all be receiving e-mail on sunday and on mlk day. with various internet > e-mail services, we can therefore receive e-mail for this wherever, > whenever. I guess the point is that many people don't have email except for at work. > btw, it might be deemed moral to not contribute to this on weekends or the > us-deemed federal holidays, for those who do not have access to this group > during those times may have info-overload on mondays. > > sorry so long fellas. my girlfriend just got a ride home from her father > instead of me. i am quite disappointed and i am taking it out on you. Life sucks, eh? Go make Iced Tea. > steve0 From scatterbrains@egroups.com Mon Jan 15 05:40:13 2001 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 52672 invoked from network); 15 Jan 2001 13:40:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 15 Jan 2001 13:40:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mr.egroups.com) (10.1.1.37) by mta2 with SMTP; 15 Jan 2001 13:40:06 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: notify@egroups.com Received: from [10.1.10.113] by mr.egroups.com with NNFMP; 15 Jan 2001 13:40:06 -0000 Received: (qmail 99995 invoked by uid 65534); 15 Jan 2001 13:40:01 -0000 Date: 15 Jan 2001 13:40:01 -0000 Message-ID: <979566001.99986@egroups.com> X-eGroups-Application: poll From: scatterbrains@egroups.com To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: New poll for scatterbrains MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Enter your vote today! Check out the new poll for the scatterbrains group: This is a test o Yes o No To vote, please visit the following web page: http://www.egroups.com/polls/scatterbrains Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the eGroups web site listed above. Thanks! From bernardo@c... Mon Jan 15 08:44:41 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 15 Jan 2001 16:44:40 -0000 Received: (qmail 45098 invoked from network); 15 Jan 2001 16:36:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 15 Jan 2001 16:36:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 15 Jan 2001 16:36:54 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-03.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.188]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f0FGaoa76898 for ; Mon, 15 Jan 2001 11:36:51 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <001901c07f11$48d89920$bca811d0@computer> To: References: <01C07E62.1A8B3780.sga5892@n...> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Introduction Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 11:36:15 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" Just because you don't get penalized for not contributing on the weekends, doesn't mean that you're prohibited from doing so... ----- Original Message ----- From: Steven G. Arturo To: Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2001 7:42 PM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Introduction > hey, for the sake of argument of proposal 308, are there any true holidays > anymore since the advent of e-mail? it seems to be that one knows it is a > federal holiday or sunday when the snail-mail is not delivered. we will > all be receiving e-mail on sunday and on mlk day. with various internet > e-mail services, we can therefore receive e-mail for this wherever, > whenever. > > btw, it might be deemed moral to not contribute to this on weekends or the > us-deemed federal holidays, for those who do not have access to this group > during those times may have info-overload on mondays. > > sorry so long fellas. my girlfriend just got a ride home from her father > instead of me. i am quite disappointed and i am taking it out on you. > > steve0 > > -----Original Message----- > From: Eugene Ventimiglia [SMTP:eventi@n...] > Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2001 9:59 PM > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Introduction > > OK, have it your way... > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" > To: > Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2001 5:01 PM > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Introduction > > > > There are no grounds to deny Steven the vote. First of all - who's to do > > it? There is no office created to police the group. Secondly, there are > no > > rules that deny Steven the vote. Steven became a player the instant that > he > > joined, and instantly gained all the rights and duties of any other > player. > > As a matter of fact, if he didn't vote, he'd be in violation of 305. > > > > There is the possibility of abuse, but it's still legal. > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: > > To: > > Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2001 4:33 PM > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Introduction > > > > > > > You are both assuming that "Arturo, Steven" comes after "Arturo, > > > Bobby." Rule 201 doesn't state that... But since it's either Pat or > > > Steven, I don't have any objection. > > > > > > Does he get a vote? I say no: We wouldn't want Bob calling his > > > little brother in if the vote were tied, and just because it'll pass, > > > I think we should apply the same standard. > > > > > > > > > --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, "Patrick D. Bernardo" > > > wrote: > > > > Absolutely right. It's still Bob's turn, until his proposal is > > > voted up or > > > > down. Since Steve came in during B's turn, he goes next. Had he > > > come after > > > > Bob's rule was voted on, precedent would have dictated that the > > > turn would > > > > have already passed to me, and he would have had to wait. > > > > > > > > Here's the ascii: > > > > > > > > BA, SA, PB, FH, EV > > > > ^ We are here. > > > > > > > > Somebody really oughta write a law about this one. > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > From: Steven G. Arturo > > > > To: > > > > Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2001 2:17 PM > > > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Introduction[3A60A97A] > > > > > > > > > > > > > i do hate to impose my opinion at such an early stage, but it > > > does seem to > > > > > be my turn after bob's 'time limit' proposal is voted on, of > > > which i plan > > > > > on contributing to. the ordering of > > > > > > > > > > ba, pb, fh, ev, ba, sa, pb, ... > > > > > > > > > > seems odd especially if i were to contribute to the discussion on > > > the > > > > > floor. > > > > > > > > > > steve0 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: eventi@w... [SMTP:eventi@w...] > > > > > Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2001 2:09 PM > > > > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > > > > Subject: re: [scatterbrains] Introduction[3A60A97A] > > > > > > > > > > Now what? Who goes after Bob? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From scatterbrains@egroups.com Mon Jan 15 19:18:03 2001 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 82512 invoked by uid 7800); 16 Jan 2001 03:03:42 -0000 Date: 16 Jan 2001 03:03:42 -0000 Message-ID: <979614222.65652@egroups.com> X-eGroups-Application: files From: scatterbrains@egroups.com To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: File - Rules MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 101. All players must always abide by all the rules then in effect, in the form in which they are then in effect. The rules in the Initial Set are in effect whenever a game begins. The Initial Set consists of Rules 101-116 (immutable) and 201-213 (mutable). -- Immutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 102. Initially rules in the 100's are immutable and rules in the 200's are mutable. Rules subsequently enacted or transmuted (that is, changed from immutable to mutable or vice versa) may be immutable or mutable regardless of their numbers, and rules in the Initial Set may be transmuted regardless of their numbers. -- Immutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 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.(Note: This definition implies that, at least initially, all new rules are mutable; immutable rules, as long as they are immutable, may not be amended or repealed; mutable rules, as long as they are mutable, may be amended or repealed; any rule of any status may be transmuted; no rule is absolutely immune to change.) -- Immutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 104. All rule-changes proposed in the proper way shall be voted on. They will be adopted if and only if they receive the required number of votes. -- Immutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 106. All proposed rule-changes shall be written down before they are voted on. If they are adopted, they shall guide play in the form in which they were voted on. -- Immutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 107. No rule-change may take effect earlier than the moment of the completion of the vote that adopted it, even if its wording explicitly states otherwise. No rule-change may have retroactive application. -- Immutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 108. Each proposed rule-change shall be given a number for reference. The numbers shall begin with 301, and each rule-change proposed in the proper way shall receive the next successive integer, whether or not the proposal is adopted.If a rule is repealed and reenacted, it receives the number of the proposal to reenact it. If a rule is amended or transmuted, it receives the number of the proposal to amend or transmute it. If an amendment is amended or repealed, the entire rule of which it is a part receives the number of the proposal to amend or repeal the amendment. -- Immutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 109. Rule-changes that transmute immutable rules into mutable rules may be adopted if and only if the vote is unanimous among the eligible voters. Transmutation shall not be implied, but must be stated explicitly in a proposal to take effect. -- Immutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 110. In a conflict between a mutable and an immutable rule, the immutable rule takes precedence and the mutable rule shall be entirely void. For the purposes of this rule a proposal to transmute an immutable rule does not "conflict" with that immutable rule. -- Immutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 111. If a rule-change as proposed is unclear, ambiguous, paradoxical, or destructive of play, or if it arguably consists of two or more rule-changes compounded or is an amendment that makes no difference, or if it is otherwise of questionable value, then the other players may suggest amendments or argue against the proposal before the vote. A reasonable time must be allowed for this debate. The proponent decides the final form in which the proposal is to be voted on and, unless the Judge has been asked to do so, also decides the time to end debate and vote. -- Immutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 112. The state of affairs that constitutes winning may not be altered from achieving n points to any other state of affairs. The magnitude of n and the means of earning points may be changed, and rules that establish a winner when play cannot continue may be enacted and (while they are mutable) be amended or repealed. -- Immutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 113. A player always has the option to forfeit the game rather than continue to play or incur a game penalty. No penalty worse than losing, in the judgment of the player to incur it, may be imposed. -- Immutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 114. There must always be at least one mutable rule. The adoption of rule-changes must never become completely impermissible. -- Immutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 115. Rule-changes that affect rules needed to allow or apply rule-changes are as permissible as other rule-changes. Even rule-changes that amend or repeal their own authority are permissible. No rule-change or type of move is impermissible solely on account of the self-reference or self-application of a rule. -- Immutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 116. Whatever is not prohibited or regulated by a rule is permitted and unregulated, with the sole exception of changing the rules, which is permitted only when a rule or set of rules explicitly or implicitly permits it. -- Immutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 201. Players shall alternate in clockwise order, taking one whole turn apiece. Turns may not be skipped or passed, and parts of turns may not be omitted. All players begin with zero points. In mail and computer games, players shall alternate in alphabetical order by surname. -- Mutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 203. A rule-change is adopted if and only if the vote is unanimous among the eligible voters. If this rule is not amended by the end of the second complete circuit of turns, it automatically changes to require only a simple majority. -- Mutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 204. If and when rule-changes can be adopted without unanimity, the players who vote against winning proposals shall receive 10 points each. -- Mutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 205. An adopted rule-change takes full effect at the moment of the completion of the vote that adopted it. -- Mutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 206. When a proposed rule-change is defeated, the player who proposed it loses 10 points. -- Mutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 207. Each player always has exactly one vote. -- Mutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 208. The winner is the first player to achieve 100 (positive) points. In mail and computer games, the winner is the first player to achieve 200 (positive) points. -- Mutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 209. At no time may there be more than 25 mutable rules. -- Mutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 210. Players may not conspire or consult on the making of future rule-changes unless they are team-mates. The first paragraph of this rule does not apply to games by mail or computer. -- Mutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 211. If two or more mutable rules conflict with one another, or if two or more immutable rules conflict with one another, then the rule with the lowest ordinal number takes precedence. If at least one of the rules in conflict explicitly says of itself that it defers to another rule (or type of rule) or takes precedence over another rule (or type of rule), then such provisions shall supersede the numerical method for determining precedence. If two or more rules claim to take precedence over one another or to defer to one another, then the numerical method again governs. -- Mutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 212. If players disagree about the legality of a move or the interpretation or application of a rule, then the player preceding the one moving is to be the Judge and decide the question. Disagreement for the purposes of this rule may be created by the insistence of any player. This process is called invoking Judgment. When Judgment has been invoked, the next player may not begin his or her turn without the consent of a majority of the other players. The Judge's Judgment may be overruled only by a unanimous vote of the other players taken before the next turn is begun. If a Judge's Judgment is overruled, then the player preceding the Judge in the playing order becomes the new Judge for the question, and so on, except that no player is to be Judge during his or her own turn or during the turn of a team-mate. Unless a Judge is overruled, one Judge settles all questions arising from the game until the next turn is begun, including questions as to his or her own legitimacy and jurisdiction as Judge. New Judges are not bound by the decisions of old Judges. New Judges may, however, settle only those questions on which the players currently disagree and that affect the completion of the turn in which Judgment was invoked. All decisions by Judges shall be in accordance with all the rules then in effect; but when the rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the point at issue, then the Judge shall consider game-custom and the spirit of the game before applying other standards. -- Mutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 213. If the rules are changed so that further play is impossible, or if the legality of a move cannot be determined with finality, or if by the Judge's best reasoning, not overruled, a move appears equally legal and illegal, then the first player unable to complete a turn is the winner. This rule takes precedence over every other rule determining the winner. -- Mutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 301. Each proposal shall be posted to the group with the subject consisting of the word "Proposal" followed by the proposal number. -- Mutable -- Author: E Venti -- History: Proposal 301 ---- 304. A) Each player shall receive Points for the Introduction of a new player into the game. B) The introducing Player shall receive 5 (five) points for an official Introduction. C)Introduction shall be determined by an affidavit posted to the group, by the new player, within 1 (one) day of joining, with the subject header "Introduction" and text consisting of the following declaration: "[Player name] has introduced me to Scatterbrains." D)This rule shall remain in effect until the game consists of 10 (ten) or more members. E) For the purposes of further discussion, this rule may also be referred to as the "Be Fruitful and Multiply" Bill. -- Mutable -- Author: Pat Bernardo -- History: Proposal 304 (12/18/00) ---- 305. Every player is an eligible voter. Every eligible voter must participate in every vote on rule-changes. -- Mutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Transmuted from 105 by eventi (12/21/00) ---- 306. One turn consists of four parts, in this order: 1) proposal of a rule 2)discussion and amendment phase, which begins immediately following the proposal, and which may change the rule based on the discussion, but may not include the substitution of a new rule 3) voting on the rule, which begins when the final form of the rule is declared by the proposer 4) scoring. Scoring shall be 15 points for each rule, multiplied by the fraction produced by the ratio of postive votes to total possible votes. All fractional scores shall be rounded up to the nearest integer. -- Mutable -- Author: Pat Bernardo -- History: Ammended 202 (1/4/01) ---- 307. Offices: Any formally defined role other than the ordinary player role, shall be referred to as an "Office." Offices are each to be created and defined by a proposal. The proposal must include: Responsibilities of the office The method of selection of officers Term of office, and method of succession The method of removal from office -- Mutable -- Author: Eugene Ventimiglia -- History: Proposal 307 ---- From eventi@n... Mon Jan 15 19:19:15 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 16 Jan 2001 03:19:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 32082 invoked from network); 16 Jan 2001 03:08:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 16 Jan 2001 03:08:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 16 Jan 2001 04:09:20 -0000 Received: from win (win.venti.nyic.com [64.29.109.18]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id WAA20293 for ; Mon, 15 Jan 2001 22:08:14 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <002101c07f69$7ca42640$126d1d40@v...> To: "Nomic" Subject: The suspicious lack of votes. Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 22:07:09 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" No one's voting, and it's probably due to Rule 206. Everyone wants it to pass, but if they vote against it, they get 10 points. This rule sorta makes the game more interesting, but with an email game, whoever votes last gets the benefit of knowledge that the proposition will pass, but gets to vote against it and get 10 points. So, I was considering voting against it NOW, so that I'll get the 10, unless someone's really greedy, and votes against it so no one gets the 10 points. But I had a better idea. If you go to the webpage (http://www.egroups.com/group/scatterbrains) you can create a poll ( the link's on the left ) so that we cant see the results until it's done. There's nothing in the rules specifying the method for voting, so the votes would be valid. There are 3 technical problems with this 1) Whoever creates the poll can see the partial results. That person should likely be Bobby, since it's his proposal. 2) There's no announcement to the list that the voting's finished, so the last person to vote should announce that the voting's finished, and the poll creator can 'close' the poll, causing the results to become public. 3) Voters can change their votes any time before closing the poll. This includes the creator of the poll, who can see the results. Bob- If you think it's a good idea, go ahead and create the poll. The server mails the list that there's been a poll created, and people can use it if they wish. Just be sure to select "Results are hidden until polling is over" and "Voting is enumerated (identity of the voter is displayed with each vote)" I was going to propose this early on in the game, but it seemed too difficult to manage at the time. I'm in no way proposing it now, but it does seem that we're at a bit of an impasse. --e From bernardo@c... Mon Jan 15 19:41:44 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 16 Jan 2001 03:41:40 -0000 Received: (qmail 91074 invoked from network); 16 Jan 2001 03:33:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 16 Jan 2001 03:33:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 16 Jan 2001 03:33:10 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-10.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.195]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f0G3X4a29681 for ; Mon, 15 Jan 2001 22:33:05 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <00ef01c07f6c$f4e4ba40$c3a811d0@computer> To: References: <002101c07f69$7ca42640$126d1d40@v...> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] The suspicious lack of votes. Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 22:32:28 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" Huh? Has the final form of the bill been posted? As far as I know, Bob's posted several revisions, but hasn't specified any as the final one. That's why I haven't voted. Sorry if I missed it, but... To quote Bob: "I'm just waiting for the final version." ----- Original Message ----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia To: Nomic Sent: Monday, January 15, 2001 10:07 PM Subject: [scatterbrains] The suspicious lack of votes. > No one's voting, and it's probably due to Rule 206. Everyone wants it to > pass, but if they vote against it, they get 10 points. This rule sorta > makes the game more interesting, but with an email game, whoever votes last > gets the benefit of knowledge that the proposition will pass, but gets to > vote against it and get 10 points. > > So, I was considering voting against it NOW, so that I'll get the 10, unless > someone's really greedy, and votes against it so no one gets the 10 points. > But I had a better idea. If you go to the webpage > (http://www.egroups.com/group/scatterbrains) you can create a poll ( the > link's on the left ) so that we cant see the results until it's done. > There's nothing in the rules specifying the method for voting, so the votes > would be valid. > > There are 3 technical problems with this > 1) Whoever creates the poll can see the partial results. That person > should likely be Bobby, since it's his proposal. > 2) There's no announcement to the list that the voting's finished, so > the last person to vote should announce that the voting's finished, and the > poll creator can 'close' the poll, causing the results to become public. > 3) Voters can change their votes any time before closing the poll. This > includes the creator of the poll, who can see the results. > > Bob- If you think it's a good idea, go ahead and create the poll. The > server mails the list that there's been a poll created, and people can use > it if they wish. Just be sure to select "Results are hidden until polling > is over" and "Voting is enumerated (identity of the voter is displayed with > each vote)" > > I was going to propose this early on in the game, but it seemed too > difficult to manage at the time. I'm in no way proposing it now, but it > does seem that we're at a bit of an impasse. > > --e > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Mon Jan 15 19:47:33 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 16 Jan 2001 03:47:32 -0000 Received: (qmail 14963 invoked from network); 16 Jan 2001 03:39:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 16 Jan 2001 03:39:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 16 Jan 2001 03:39:46 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-10.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.195]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f0G3dNa30071 for ; Mon, 15 Jan 2001 22:39:23 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <00fb01c07f6d$d67db7e0$c3a811d0@computer> To: References: <002101c07f69$7ca42640$126d1d40@v...> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] The suspicious lack of votes. Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 22:38:47 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" BTW - I like the idea of polls. I was trying to figure out a way for blind voting. ----- Original Message ----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia To: Nomic Sent: Monday, January 15, 2001 10:07 PM Subject: [scatterbrains] The suspicious lack of votes. > No one's voting, and it's probably due to Rule 206. Everyone wants it to > pass, but if they vote against it, they get 10 points. This rule sorta > makes the game more interesting, but with an email game, whoever votes last > gets the benefit of knowledge that the proposition will pass, but gets to > vote against it and get 10 points. > > So, I was considering voting against it NOW, so that I'll get the 10, unless > someone's really greedy, and votes against it so no one gets the 10 points. > But I had a better idea. If you go to the webpage > (http://www.egroups.com/group/scatterbrains) you can create a poll ( the > link's on the left ) so that we cant see the results until it's done. > There's nothing in the rules specifying the method for voting, so the votes > would be valid. > > There are 3 technical problems with this > 1) Whoever creates the poll can see the partial results. That person > should likely be Bobby, since it's his proposal. > 2) There's no announcement to the list that the voting's finished, so > the last person to vote should announce that the voting's finished, and the > poll creator can 'close' the poll, causing the results to become public. > 3) Voters can change their votes any time before closing the poll. This > includes the creator of the poll, who can see the results. > > Bob- If you think it's a good idea, go ahead and create the poll. The > server mails the list that there's been a poll created, and people can use > it if they wish. Just be sure to select "Results are hidden until polling > is over" and "Voting is enumerated (identity of the voter is displayed with > each vote)" > > I was going to propose this early on in the game, but it seemed too > difficult to manage at the time. I'm in no way proposing it now, but it > does seem that we're at a bit of an impasse. > > --e > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Mon Jan 15 19:59:01 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 16 Jan 2001 03:58:57 -0000 Received: (qmail 89529 invoked from network); 16 Jan 2001 03:52:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 16 Jan 2001 03:52:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 16 Jan 2001 04:53:37 -0000 Received: from win (win.venti.nyic.com [64.29.109.18]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id WAA23273 for ; Mon, 15 Jan 2001 22:52:31 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <006801c07f6f$ac40d000$126d1d40@v...> To: References: <002101c07f69$7ca42640$126d1d40@v...> <00ef01c07f6c$f4e4ba40$c3a811d0@computer> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] The suspicious lack of votes. Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 22:51:26 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0063_01C07F45.B13E6060" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" ------=_NextPart_000_0063_01C07F45.B13E6060 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Friday, noon... It was subtle, only in the subject. Sorry to be such a con= spiracy theorist. I was almost going to hold that back in case I was wrong= , but since everyone but Fritz has posted something since then, I assumed t= hat, well nevermind. Ok, now in hindsight, if _you_ missed it, Steven doesn't really know how to= vote yet, It slips Bob's mind to vote for his own proposal, and my mind's = all mucky with conspiracies, it all makes perfect sense... ----- Original Message -----=20 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" To: Sent: Monday, January 15, 2001 10:32 PM Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] The suspicious lack of votes. > Huh? Has the final form of the bill been posted? As far as I know, Bob'= s > posted several revisions, but hasn't specified any as the final one. Tha= t's > why I haven't voted. >=20 > Sorry if I missed it, but... >=20 > To quote Bob: "I'm just waiting for the final version." >=20 >=20 > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Eugene Ventimiglia > To: Nomic > Sent: Monday, January 15, 2001 10:07 PM > Subject: [scatterbrains] The suspicious lack of votes. >=20 >=20 > > No one's voting, and it's probably due to Rule 206. Everyone wants it = to > > pass, but if they vote against it, they get 10 points. This rule sorta > > makes the game more interesting, but with an email game, whoever votes > last > > gets the benefit of knowledge that the proposition will pass, but gets = to > > vote against it and get 10 points. > > > > So, I was considering voting against it NOW, so that I'll get the 10, > unless > > someone's really greedy, and votes against it so no one gets the 10 > points. > > But I had a better idea. If you go to the webpage > > (http://www.egroups.com/group/scatterbrains) you can create a poll ( th= e > > link's on the left ) so that we cant see the results until it's done. > > There's nothing in the rules specifying the method for voting, so the > votes > > would be valid. > > > > There are 3 technical problems with this > > 1) Whoever creates the poll can see the partial results. That pers= on > > should likely be Bobby, since it's his proposal. > > 2) There's no announcement to the list that the voting's finished, = so > > the last person to vote should announce that the voting's finished, and > the > > poll creator can 'close' the poll, causing the results to become public= . > > 3) Voters can change their votes any time before closing the poll. > This > > includes the creator of the poll, who can see the results. > > > > Bob- If you think it's a good idea, go ahead and create the poll. = The > > server mails the list that there's been a poll created, and people can = use > > it if they wish. Just be sure to select "Results are hidden until > polling > > is over" and "Voting is enumerated (identity of the voter is displayed > with > > each vote)" > > > > I was going to propose this early on in the game, but it seemed too > > difficult to manage at the time. I'm in no way proposing it now, but i= t > > does seem that we're at a bit of an impasse. > > > > --e > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > >=20 >=20 > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com >=20 >=20 >=20 ------=_NextPart_000_0063_01C07F45.B13E6060 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Friday, noon..= . It=20 was subtle, only in the subject.  Sorry to be such a conspiracy=20 theorist.  I was almost going to hold that back in case I was wrong, b= ut=20 since everyone but Fritz has posted something since then, I assumed that, w= ell=20 nevermind.
 
Ok, now in hindsight, if _you_ missed it, Steven doesn'= t=20 really know how to vote yet, It slips Bob's mind to vote for his own propos= al,=20 and my mind's all mucky with conspiracies, it all makes perfect=20 sense...
 
----- Original Message -----
From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" <bernardo@c...>
To: <scatterbrains@egroups.com>
Sent: Monday, January 15, 2001 10:32 PM
Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] The suspicious lack of=20 votes.

> Huh?  Has the= final=20 form of the bill been posted?  As far as I know, Bob's
> posted= =20 several revisions, but hasn't specified any as the final one. =20 That's
> why I haven't voted.
>
> Sorry if I missed it,= =20 but...
>
> To quote Bob: "I'm just waiting for the final=20 version."
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> Fr= om:=20 Eugene Ventimiglia <eventi@n...>
> To: Nomic=20 <scatterbrains@egroups.com>
> Se= nt:=20 Monday, January 15, 2001 10:07 PM
> Subject: [scatterbrains] The=20 suspicious lack of votes.
>
>
> > No one's voting, a= nd=20 it's probably due to Rule 206.  Everyone wants it to
> > pass= , but=20 if they vote against it, they get 10 points.  This rule sorta
> = >=20 makes the game more interesting, but with an email game, whoever votes
&= gt;=20 last
> > gets the benefit of knowledge that the proposition will p= ass,=20 but gets to
> > vote against it and get 10 points.
> >>=20 > So, I was considering voting against it NOW, so that I'll get the=20 10,
> unless
> > someone's really greedy, and votes against = it so=20 no one gets the 10
> points.
> > But I had a better idea.&nb= sp;=20 If you go to the webpage
> > (http://www.egroups.com/group/scatterbrains) you=20 can create a poll ( the
> > link's on the left ) so that we cant s= ee=20 the results until it's done.
> > There's nothing in the rules=20 specifying the method for voting, so the
> votes
> > would b= e=20 valid.
> >
> > There are 3 technical problems with=20 this
> >     1) Whoever creates the poll can s= ee=20 the partial results.  That person
> > should likely be = =20 Bobby, since it's his proposal.
> >     2) The= re's=20 no announcement to the list that the voting's finished, so
> > the= last=20 person to vote should announce that the voting's finished, and
>=20 the
> > poll creator can 'close' the poll, causing the results to= =20 become public.
> >     3) Voters can change th= eir=20 votes any time before closing the poll.
> This
> > includes = the=20 creator of the poll, who can see the results.
> >
>=20 >     Bob- If you think it's a good idea, go ahead a= nd=20 create the poll.  The
> > server mails the list that there's = been=20 a poll created, and people can use
> > it if they wish. =20 Just  be sure to select "Results are hidden until
> polling
&= gt;=20 > is over" and "Voting is enumerated (identity of the voter is=20 displayed
> with
> > each vote)"
> >
> > I= was=20 going to propose this early on in the game, but it seemed too
> >= =20 difficult to manage at the time.  I'm in no way proposing it now, but= =20 it
> > does seem that we're at a bit of an impasse.
>=20 >
> >     --e
> >
> >
= >=20 >
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>= >=20 scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>=20 >
> >
> >
>
>
> To unsubscribe fro= m=20 this group, send an email to:
> scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>=20
>
> ------=_NextPart_000_0063_01C07F45.B13E6060-- From eventi@n... Mon Jan 15 20:04:45 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 16 Jan 2001 04:04:45 -0000 Received: (qmail 36583 invoked from network); 16 Jan 2001 03:58:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 16 Jan 2001 03:58:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 16 Jan 2001 04:59:44 -0000 Received: from win (win.venti.nyic.com [64.29.109.18]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id WAA23654 for ; Mon, 15 Jan 2001 22:58:38 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <007801c07f70$8709b940$126d1d40@v...> To: References: <002101c07f69$7ca42640$126d1d40@v...> <00fb01c07f6d$d67db7e0$c3a811d0@computer> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] The suspicious lack of votes. Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 22:57:34 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" That was one of the three-pack we voted for, then sunk (I think 302) since we hadn't really started playing, yet. I'd propose it, but it's kinda awkward to do... Maybe it should be assigned to an office. You can create a sample poll and play with the settings a bit, aside from letting the creator see the results before they're all in they'd be perfect for blind voting. --e ----- Original Message ----- From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" To: Sent: Monday, January 15, 2001 10:38 PM Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] The suspicious lack of votes. > BTW - I like the idea of polls. I was trying to figure out a way for blind > voting. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Eugene Ventimiglia > To: Nomic > Sent: Monday, January 15, 2001 10:07 PM > Subject: [scatterbrains] The suspicious lack of votes. > > > > No one's voting, and it's probably due to Rule 206. Everyone wants it to > > pass, but if they vote against it, they get 10 points. This rule sorta > > makes the game more interesting, but with an email game, whoever votes > last > > gets the benefit of knowledge that the proposition will pass, but gets to > > vote against it and get 10 points. > > > > So, I was considering voting against it NOW, so that I'll get the 10, > unless > > someone's really greedy, and votes against it so no one gets the 10 > points. > > But I had a better idea. If you go to the webpage > > (http://www.egroups.com/group/scatterbrains) you can create a poll ( the > > link's on the left ) so that we cant see the results until it's done. > > There's nothing in the rules specifying the method for voting, so the > votes > > would be valid. > > > > There are 3 technical problems with this > > 1) Whoever creates the poll can see the partial results. That person > > should likely be Bobby, since it's his proposal. > > 2) There's no announcement to the list that the voting's finished, so > > the last person to vote should announce that the voting's finished, and > the > > poll creator can 'close' the poll, causing the results to become public. > > 3) Voters can change their votes any time before closing the poll. > This > > includes the creator of the poll, who can see the results. > > > > Bob- If you think it's a good idea, go ahead and create the poll. The > > server mails the list that there's been a poll created, and people can use > > it if they wish. Just be sure to select "Results are hidden until > polling > > is over" and "Voting is enumerated (identity of the voter is displayed > with > > each vote)" > > > > I was going to propose this early on in the game, but it seemed too > > difficult to manage at the time. I'm in no way proposing it now, but it > > does seem that we're at a bit of an impasse. > > > > --e > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From sga5892@n... Tue Jan 16 05:37:05 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: sga5892@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 16 Jan 2001 13:37:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 85260 invoked from network); 16 Jan 2001 13:37:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 16 Jan 2001 13:37:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-gw4.njit.edu) (128.235.251.32) by mta3 with SMTP; 16 Jan 2001 14:38:09 -0000 Received: from mailhost.njit.edu (mailhost.njit.edu [128.235.251.108]) by mail-gw4.njit.edu (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f0GEcul10145 for ; Tue, 16 Jan 2001 09:38:56 -0500 Received: from steve0 (dhcp194-216.njit.edu) by mailhost.njit.edu (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9) with SMTP id <0G7900KM8CILB5@m...> for scatterbrains@egroups.com; Tue, 16 Jan 2001 08:37:33 -0500 (EST) Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Tue, 16 Jan 2001 08:32:51 -0500 Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2001 08:32:50 -0500 Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] The suspicious lack of votes. To: "'scatterbrains@egroups.com'" Reply-to: "sga5892@n..." Message-id: <01C07F96.E9F5DCC0.sga5892@n...> Organization: NJIT MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit From: "Steven G. Arturo" ill wait until noon to vote, since i vote first. bobby, this should give you a channce to set up a poll if you deem it necessary at this point. other than that, i know what my vote will be. steve0 -----Original Message----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia [SMTP:eventi@n...] Sent: Monday, January 15, 2001 10:51 PM To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] The suspicious lack of votes. Friday, noon... It was subtle, only in the subject. Sorry to be such a conspiracy theorist. I was almost going to hold that back in case I was wrong, but since everyone but Fritz has posted something since then, I assumed that, well nevermind. Ok, now in hindsight, if _you_ missed it, Steven doesn't really know how to vote yet, It slips Bob's mind to vote for his own proposal, and my mind's all mucky with conspiracies, it all makes perfect sense... ----- Original Message ----- From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" To: Sent: Monday, January 15, 2001 10:32 PM Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] The suspicious lack of votes. > Huh? Has the final form of the bill been posted? As far as I know, Bob's > posted several revisions, but hasn't specified any as the final one. That's > why I haven't voted. > > Sorry if I missed it, but... > > To quote Bob: "I'm just waiting for the final version." > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Eugene Ventimiglia > To: Nomic > Sent: Monday, January 15, 2001 10:07 PM > Subject: [scatterbrains] The suspicious lack of votes. > > > > No one's voting, and it's probably due to Rule 206. Everyone wants it to > > pass, but if they vote against it, they get 10 points. This rule sorta > > makes the game more interesting, but with an email game, whoever votes > last > > gets the benefit of knowledge that the proposition will pass, but gets to > > vote against it and get 10 points. > > > > So, I was considering voting against it NOW, so that I'll get the 10, > unless > > someone's really greedy, and votes against it so no one gets the 10 > points. > > But I had a better idea. If you go to the webpage > > (http://www.egroups.com/group/scatterbrains) you can create a poll ( the > > link's on the left ) so that we cant see the results until it's done. > > There's nothing in the rules specifying the method for voting, so the > votes > > would be valid. > > > > There are 3 technical problems with this > > 1) Whoever creates the poll can see the partial results. That person > > should likely be Bobby, since it's his proposal. > > 2) There's no announcement to the list that the voting's finished, so > > the last person to vote should announce that the voting's finished, and > the > > poll creator can 'close' the poll, causing the results to become public. > > 3) Voters can change their votes any time before closing the poll. > This > > includes the creator of the poll, who can see the results. > > > > Bob- If you think it's a good idea, go ahead and create the poll. The > > server mails the list that there's been a poll created, and people can use > > it if they wish. Just be sure to select "Results are hidden until > polling > > is over" and "Voting is enumerated (identity of the voter is displayed > with > > each vote)" > > > > I was going to propose this early on in the game, but it seemed too > > difficult to manage at the time. I'm in no way proposing it now, but it > > does seem that we're at a bit of an impasse. > > > > --e > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > << File: ATT00001.htm >> From scatterbrains@egroups.com Tue Jan 16 06:13:52 2001 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 86641 invoked from network); 16 Jan 2001 14:12:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 16 Jan 2001 14:12:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hh.egroups.com) (10.1.10.40) by mta1 with SMTP; 16 Jan 2001 14:12:07 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: notify@egroups.com Received: from [10.1.10.95] by hh.egroups.com with NNFMP; 16 Jan 2001 14:12:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 13049 invoked by uid 65534); 16 Jan 2001 14:11:51 -0000 Date: 16 Jan 2001 14:11:50 -0000 Message-ID: <979654310.13046@egroups.com> X-eGroups-Application: poll From: scatterbrains@egroups.com To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: New poll for scatterbrains MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Enter your vote today! Check out the new poll for the scatterbrains group: Begin Proposal 308 Time Limit: There will be a time limit of 5 business days, excluding federal holidays*, to submit a proposal. If a proposal is not submitted within 5 business days after the last player has cast their vote on the previous proposal there will be a "1 point a day" penalty enforced. Penalty points will be deducted from the players total points and can go below 0. If a player fails to submit a proposal within 25 business days that player will be held in violation and can be removed if all other players are in agreement. *The list of Federal Holidays are as follows: New Years Day Presidents Day Memorial Day Independence Day Labor Day Veterans Day Thanksgiving Day Christmas Day End Proposal 308 o Yes, I love it !!! o No F'n way! To vote, please visit the following web page: http://www.egroups.com/polls/scatterbrains Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the eGroups web site listed above. Thanks! From eventi@n... Tue Jan 16 06:30:15 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 16 Jan 2001 14:30:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 80416 invoked from network); 16 Jan 2001 14:28:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 16 Jan 2001 14:28:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 16 Jan 2001 15:29:51 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id JAA06277 for ; Tue, 16 Jan 2001 09:28:45 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] New poll for scatterbrains WAIT!!!!! Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2001 09:29:44 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <979654310.13046@egroups.com> From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" I can see the results. No one's voted yet, so no harm done... I guess it's since I'm the list moderator. I'm going to create a "moderator-hat" account, and use it only when moderation is essential, but I just wanted to alert everyone that there's the possibility of foulplay. --e > -----Original Message----- > From: scatterbrains@egroups.com [mailto:scatterbrains@egroups.com] > Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 9:12 AM > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > Subject: [scatterbrains] New poll for scatterbrains > > > > Enter your vote today! Check out the new poll for the scatterbrains > group: > > > Begin Proposal 308 > > Time Limit: > There will be a time limit of 5 > business days, excluding federal > holidays*, to submit a proposal. If a > proposal is not submitted within 5 > business days after the last player > has cast their vote on the previous > proposal there will be a "1 point a > day" penalty enforced. Penalty points > will be deducted from the players > total points and can go below 0. If a > player fails to submit a proposal > within 25 business days that player will > be held in violation and can be > removed if all other players are in > agreement. > > *The list of Federal Holidays > are as follows: > > New Years Day > Presidents Day > Memorial Day > Independence Day > Labor Day > Veterans Day > Thanksgiving Day > Christmas Day > > End Proposal 308 > > > o Yes, I love it !!! > o No F'n way! > > > To vote, please visit the following web page: > > http://www.egroups.com/polls/scatterbrains > > Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are > not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the eGroups > web site listed above. > > Thanks! > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From sga5892@n... Tue Jan 16 06:33:55 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: sga5892@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 16 Jan 2001 14:33:55 -0000 Received: (qmail 63027 invoked from network); 16 Jan 2001 14:32:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 16 Jan 2001 14:32:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-gw3.njit.edu) (128.235.251.11) by mta1 with SMTP; 16 Jan 2001 14:32:01 -0000 Received: from mailhost.njit.edu (mailhost.njit.edu [128.235.251.108]) by mail-gw3.njit.edu (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f0GFPXO13476 for ; Tue, 16 Jan 2001 10:25:33 -0500 Received: from steve0 (dhcp194-216.njit.edu) by mailhost.njit.edu (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9) with SMTP id <0G7900MALF26O6@m...> for scatterbrains@egroups.com; Tue, 16 Jan 2001 09:32:30 -0500 (EST) Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Tue, 16 Jan 2001 09:31:22 -0500 Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2001 09:31:21 -0500 Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] New poll for scatterbrains To: "'scatterbrains@egroups.com'" Reply-to: "sga5892@n..." Message-id: <01C07F9F.16E1D380.sga5892@n...> Organization: NJIT MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit From: "Steven G. Arturo" i voted. is there a 'last person' if this is how we vote? steve0 -----Original Message----- From: scatterbrains@egroups.com [SMTP:scatterbrains@egroups.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 9:12 AM To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: [scatterbrains] New poll for scatterbrains Enter your vote today! Check out the new poll for the scatterbrains group: Begin Proposal 308 Time Limit: There will be a time limit of 5 business days, excluding federal holidays*, to submit a proposal. If a proposal is not submitted within 5 business days after the last player has cast their vote on the previous proposal there will be a "1 point a day" penalty enforced. Penalty points will be deducted from the players total points and can go below 0. If a player fails to submit a proposal within 25 business days that player will be held in violation and can be removed if all other players are in agreement. *The list of Federal Holidays are as follows: New Years Day Presidents Day Memorial Day Independence Day Labor Day Veterans Day Thanksgiving Day Christmas Day End Proposal 308 o Yes, I love it !!! o No F'n way! To vote, please visit the following web page: http://www.egroups.com/polls/scatterbrains Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the eGroups web site listed above. Thanks! To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com From eventi@n... Tue Jan 16 06:41:46 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 16 Jan 2001 14:41:41 -0000 Received: (qmail 19375 invoked from network); 16 Jan 2001 14:39:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 16 Jan 2001 14:39:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 16 Jan 2001 14:39:16 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id JAA07303 for ; Tue, 16 Jan 2001 09:39:15 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] New poll for scatterbrains Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2001 09:40:15 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <01C07F9F.16E1D380.sga5892@n...> From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" We've been quite informal about it. There oughta be a law (nudge) BTW- I sent you a "welcome aboard" message, but I must have fubbed it; so Welcome Aboard! > -----Original Message----- > From: Steven G. Arturo [mailto:sga5892@n...] > Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 9:31 AM > To: 'scatterbrains@egroups.com' > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] New poll for scatterbrains > > > i voted. is there a 'last person' if this is how we vote? > > steve0 > > -----Original Message----- > From: scatterbrains@egroups.com [SMTP:scatterbrains@egroups.com] > Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 9:12 AM > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > Subject: [scatterbrains] New poll for scatterbrains > > > Enter your vote today! Check out the new poll for the scatterbrains > group: > > > Begin Proposal 308 > > Time Limit: > There will be a time limit of 5 > business days, excluding federal > holidays*, to submit a proposal. If a > proposal is not submitted within 5 > business days after the last player > has cast their vote on the previous > proposal there will be a "1 point a > day" penalty enforced. Penalty points > will be deducted from the players > total points and can go below 0. If a > player fails to submit a proposal > within 25 business days that player will > be held in violation and can be > removed if all other players are in > agreement. > > *The list of Federal Holidays > are as follows: > > New Years Day > Presidents Day > Memorial Day > Independence Day > Labor Day > Veterans Day > Thanksgiving Day > Christmas Day > > End Proposal 308 > > > o Yes, I love it !!! > o No F'n way! > > > To vote, please visit the following web page: > > http://www.egroups.com/polls/scatterbrains > > Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are > not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the eGroups > web site listed above. > > Thanks! > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From barturo@e... Tue Jan 16 06:42:39 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: BArturo@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 16 Jan 2001 14:42:39 -0000 Received: (qmail 97323 invoked from network); 16 Jan 2001 14:41:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 16 Jan 2001 14:41:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 16 Jan 2001 15:42:29 -0000 Received: from batman.ess ([12.31.9.2]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with ESMTP id JAA07489 for ; Tue, 16 Jan 2001 09:41:23 -0500 (EST) Received: by BATMAN with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id ; Tue, 16 Jan 2001 09:37:13 -0500 Message-ID: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF037299@BATMAN> To: "'scatterbrains@egroups.com'" Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] New poll for scatterbrains Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2001 09:37:09 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" From: "Arturo, Bob" Did you see the results?? -----Original Message----- From: Steven G. Arturo [mailto:sga5892@n...] Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 9:31 AM To: 'scatterbrains@egroups.com' Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] New poll for scatterbrains i voted. is there a 'last person' if this is how we vote? steve0 -----Original Message----- From: scatterbrains@egroups.com [SMTP:scatterbrains@egroups.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 9:12 AM To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: [scatterbrains] New poll for scatterbrains Enter your vote today! Check out the new poll for the scatterbrains group: Begin Proposal 308 Time Limit: There will be a time limit of 5 business days, excluding federal holidays*, to submit a proposal. If a proposal is not submitted within 5 business days after the last player has cast their vote on the previous proposal there will be a "1 point a day" penalty enforced. Penalty points will be deducted from the players total points and can go below 0. If a player fails to submit a proposal within 25 business days that player will be held in violation and can be removed if all other players are in agreement. *The list of Federal Holidays are as follows: New Years Day Presidents Day Memorial Day Independence Day Labor Day Veterans Day Thanksgiving Day Christmas Day End Proposal 308 o Yes, I love it !!! o No F'n way! To vote, please visit the following web page: http://www.egroups.com/polls/scatterbrains Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the eGroups web site listed above. Thanks! To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at webmaster@e.... From eventi@n... Tue Jan 16 06:50:44 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 16 Jan 2001 14:50:44 -0000 Received: (qmail 13874 invoked from network); 16 Jan 2001 14:48:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 16 Jan 2001 14:48:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 16 Jan 2001 15:49:55 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id JAA08329 for ; Tue, 16 Jan 2001 09:48:50 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] New poll for scatterbrains WAIT!!!!! Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2001 09:49:49 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" OK, I'm a paeon now... I've added an 'eventi@c...' account which I'll use to moderate. > -----Original Message----- > From: Eugene Ventimiglia [mailto:eventi@n...] > Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 9:30 AM > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] New poll for scatterbrains WAIT!!!!! > > > I can see the results. No one's voted yet, so no harm done... I > guess it's > since I'm the list moderator. I'm going to create a "moderator-hat" > account, and use it only when moderation is essential, but I just > wanted to > alert everyone that there's the possibility of foulplay. > --e > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: scatterbrains@egroups.com [mailto:scatterbrains@egroups.com] > > Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 9:12 AM > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > Subject: [scatterbrains] New poll for scatterbrains > > > > > > > > Enter your vote today! Check out the new poll for the scatterbrains > > group: > > > > > > Begin Proposal 308 > > > > Time Limit: > > There will be a time limit of 5 > > business days, excluding federal > > holidays*, to submit a proposal. If a > > proposal is not submitted within 5 > > business days after the last player > > has cast their vote on the previous > > proposal there will be a "1 point a > > day" penalty enforced. Penalty points > > will be deducted from the players > > total points and can go below 0. If a > > player fails to submit a proposal > > within 25 business days that player will > > be held in violation and can be > > removed if all other players are in > > agreement. > > > > *The list of Federal Holidays > > are as follows: > > > > New Years Day > > Presidents Day > > Memorial Day > > Independence Day > > Labor Day > > Veterans Day > > Thanksgiving Day > > Christmas Day > > > > End Proposal 308 > > > > > > o Yes, I love it !!! > > o No F'n way! > > > > > > To vote, please visit the following web page: > > > > http://www.egroups.com/polls/scatterbrains > > > > Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are > > not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the eGroups > > web site listed above. > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From sga5892@n... Tue Jan 16 08:11:42 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: sga5892@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 16 Jan 2001 16:11:41 -0000 Received: (qmail 92786 invoked from network); 16 Jan 2001 16:04:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 16 Jan 2001 16:04:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-gw3.njit.edu) (128.235.251.11) by mta1 with SMTP; 16 Jan 2001 16:03:59 -0000 Received: from mailhost.njit.edu (mailhost.njit.edu [128.235.251.108]) by mail-gw3.njit.edu (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f0GGvUO20554 for ; Tue, 16 Jan 2001 11:57:30 -0500 Received: from steve0 (dhcp194-216.njit.edu) by mailhost.njit.edu (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9) with SMTP id <0G7900797JBGUI@m...> for scatterbrains@egroups.com; Tue, 16 Jan 2001 11:04:28 -0500 (EST) Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Tue, 16 Jan 2001 11:03:11 -0500 Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2001 11:03:10 -0500 Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] New poll for scatterbrains To: "'scatterbrains@egroups.com'" Reply-to: "sga5892@n..." Message-id: <01C07FAB.EA7BF020.sga5892@n...> Organization: NJIT MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit From: "Steven G. Arturo" i cannot see the results, and the poll is still open as of this e-mail -----Original Message----- From: Arturo, Bob [SMTP:barturo@e...] Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 9:37 AM To: 'scatterbrains@egroups.com' Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] New poll for scatterbrains Did you see the results?? -----Original Message----- From: Steven G. Arturo [mailto:sga5892@n...] Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 9:31 AM To: 'scatterbrains@egroups.com' Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] New poll for scatterbrains i voted. is there a 'last person' if this is how we vote? steve0 -----Original Message----- From: scatterbrains@egroups.com [SMTP:scatterbrains@egroups.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 9:12 AM To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: [scatterbrains] New poll for scatterbrains Enter your vote today! Check out the new poll for the scatterbrains group: Begin Proposal 308 Time Limit: There will be a time limit of 5 business days, excluding federal holidays*, to submit a proposal. If a proposal is not submitted within 5 business days after the last player has cast their vote on the previous proposal there will be a "1 point a day" penalty enforced. Penalty points will be deducted from the players total points and can go below 0. If a player fails to submit a proposal within 25 business days that player will be held in violation and can be removed if all other players are in agreement. *The list of Federal Holidays are as follows: New Years Day Presidents Day Memorial Day Independence Day Labor Day Veterans Day Thanksgiving Day Christmas Day End Proposal 308 o Yes, I love it !!! o No F'n way! To vote, please visit the following web page: http://www.egroups.com/polls/scatterbrains Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the eGroups web site listed above. Thanks! To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at webmaster@e.... To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com From f_hemker@h... Tue Jan 16 08:22:48 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: f_hemker@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 16 Jan 2001 16:22:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 46982 invoked from network); 16 Jan 2001 16:13:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 16 Jan 2001 16:13:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO jk.egroups.com) (10.1.10.92) by mta2 with SMTP; 16 Jan 2001 16:13:24 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: f_hemker@h... Received: from [10.1.2.41] by jk.egroups.com with NNFMP; 16 Jan 2001 16:13:23 -0000 Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2001 16:13:15 -0000 To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: Re: New poll for scatterbrains Message-ID: <941rur+9d4q@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: <01C07FAB.EA7BF020.sga5892@n...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 2807 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 199.75.225.158 From: "Fritz Hemker" I just voted on the proposal. I hope it works. -Fritz --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, "Steven G. Arturo" wrote: > i cannot see the results, and the poll is still open as of this e-mail > > -----Original Message----- > From: Arturo, Bob [SMTP:barturo@e...] > Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 9:37 AM > To: 'scatterbrains@egroups.com' > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] New poll for scatterbrains > > Did you see the results?? > > -----Original Message----- > From: Steven G. Arturo [mailto:sga5892@n...] > Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 9:31 AM > To: 'scatterbrains@egroups.com' > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] New poll for scatterbrains > > > i voted. is there a 'last person' if this is how we vote? > > steve0 > > -----Original Message----- > From: scatterbrains@egroups.com [SMTP:scatterbrains@egroups.com] > Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 9:12 AM > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > Subject: [scatterbrains] New poll for scatterbrains > > > Enter your vote today! Check out the new poll for the scatterbrains > group: > > > Begin Proposal 308 > > Time Limit: > There will be a time limit of 5 > business days, excluding federal > holidays*, to submit a proposal. If a > proposal is not submitted within 5 > business days after the last player > has cast their vote on the previous > proposal there will be a "1 point a > day" penalty enforced. Penalty points > will be deducted from the players > total points and can go below 0. If a > player fails to submit a proposal > within 25 business days that player will > be held in violation and can be > removed if all other players are in > agreement. > > *The list of Federal Holidays > are as follows: > > New Years Day > Presidents Day > Memorial Day > Independence Day > Labor Day > Veterans Day > Thanksgiving Day > Christmas Day > > End Proposal 308 > > > o Yes, I love it !!! > o No F'n way! > > > To vote, please visit the following web page: > > http://www.egroups.com/polls/scatterbrains > > Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are > not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the eGroups > web site listed above. > > Thanks! > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > webmaster@e... > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups. From scatterbrains@egroups.com Tue Jan 16 08:41:51 2001 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12139 invoked from network); 16 Jan 2001 16:32:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 16 Jan 2001 16:32:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO fj.egroups.com) (10.1.10.46) by mta3 with SMTP; 16 Jan 2001 17:33:09 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: notify@egroups.com Received: from [10.1.10.94] by fj.egroups.com with NNFMP; 16 Jan 2001 16:32:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 69963 invoked by uid 65534); 16 Jan 2001 16:32:03 -0000 Date: 16 Jan 2001 16:32:03 -0000 Message-ID: <979662723.69959@egroups.com> X-eGroups-Application: polls From: scatterbrains@egroups.com To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: Poll results for scatterbrains MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The following scatterbrains poll is now closed. Here are the final results: POLL QUESTION: Begin Proposal 308 Time Limit: There will be a time limit of 5 business days, excluding federal holidays*, to submit a proposal. If a proposal is not submitted within 5 business days after the last player has cast their vote on the previous proposal there will be a "1 point a day" penalty enforced. Penalty points will be deducted from the players total points and can go below 0. If a player fails to submit a proposal within 25 business days that player will be held in violation and can be removed if all other players are in agreement. *The list of Federal Holidays are as follows: New Years Day Presidents Day Memorial Day Independence Day Labor Day Veterans Day Thanksgiving Day Christmas Day End Proposal 308 CHOICES AND RESULTS - Yes, I love it !!!, 5 votes, 100.00% - No F'n way!, 0 votes, 0.00% INDIVIDUAL VOTES - Yes, I love it !!! - bernardo@c... - eventi@n... - barturo@e... - sga5892@n... - f_hemker@h... - No F'n way! For more information about this group, please visit http://www.egroups.com/group/scatterbrains For help with eGroups, please visit http://www.egroups.com/help From eventi@n... Tue Jan 16 08:50:38 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 16 Jan 2001 16:50:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 41266 invoked from network); 16 Jan 2001 16:38:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 16 Jan 2001 16:38:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 16 Jan 2001 17:39:06 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id LAA20047 for ; Tue, 16 Jan 2001 11:38:00 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: New poll for scatterbrains Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2001 11:39:21 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <941rur+9d4q@eGroups.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" And that's everyone... Your mailbox runneth over this morning Fritz? > -----Original Message----- > From: Fritz Hemker [mailto:f_hemker@h...] > Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 11:13 AM > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: New poll for scatterbrains > > > I just voted on the proposal. I hope it works. > > -Fritz > --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, "Steven G. Arturo" > wrote: > > i cannot see the results, and the poll is still open as of this > e-mail > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Arturo, Bob [SMTP:barturo@e...] > > Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 9:37 AM > > To: 'scatterbrains@egroups.com' > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] New poll for scatterbrains > > > > Did you see the results?? > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Steven G. Arturo [mailto:sga5892@n...] > > Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 9:31 AM > > To: 'scatterbrains@egroups.com' > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] New poll for scatterbrains > > > > > > i voted. is there a 'last person' if this is how we vote? > > > > steve0 > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: scatterbrains@egroups.com [SMTP:scatterbrains@egroups.com] > > Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 9:12 AM > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > Subject: [scatterbrains] New poll for scatterbrains > > > > > > Enter your vote today! Check out the new poll for the scatterbrains > > group: > > > > > > Begin Proposal 308 > > > > Time Limit: > > There will be a time limit of 5 > > business days, excluding federal > > holidays*, to submit a proposal. If a > > proposal is not submitted within 5 > > business days after the last player > > has cast their vote on the previous > > proposal there will be a "1 point a > > day" penalty enforced. Penalty points > > will be deducted from the players > > total points and can go below 0. If a > > player fails to submit a proposal > > within 25 business days that player will > > be held in violation and can be > > removed if all other players are in > > agreement. > > > > *The list of Federal Holidays > > are as follows: > > > > New Years Day > > Presidents Day > > Memorial Day > > Independence Day > > Labor Day > > Veterans Day > > Thanksgiving Day > > Christmas Day > > > > End Proposal 308 > > > > > > o Yes, I love it !!! > > o No F'n way! > > > > > > To vote, please visit the following web page: > > > > http://www.egroups.com/polls/scatterbrains > > > > Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are > > not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the eGroups > > web site listed above. > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or > copying > > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > > webmaster@e... > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups. > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Tue Jan 16 10:14:16 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 16 Jan 2001 18:14:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 54523 invoked from network); 16 Jan 2001 18:02:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 16 Jan 2001 18:02:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 16 Jan 2001 18:02:46 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id NAA28813 for ; Tue, 16 Jan 2001 13:02:44 -0500 (EST) To: "Scatterbrains Nomic" Subject: The dust settles... Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2001 13:04:06 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" Bob: 20pts, Pat: 33pts, Me: 44pts. I've updated the Rules file and Scores database And it's your turn Steven. --e From bernardo@c... Tue Jan 16 17:38:35 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 17 Jan 2001 01:38:30 -0000 Received: (qmail 75029 invoked from network); 17 Jan 2001 01:21:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 17 Jan 2001 01:21:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta3 with SMTP; 17 Jan 2001 02:23:01 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-03.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.188]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f0H1Loa63021 for ; Tue, 16 Jan 2001 20:21:50 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <002101c08023$c98ac760$bca811d0@computer> To: References: <979614222.65652@egroups.com> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] File - Rules Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2001 20:21:13 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" I just noticed something. Check out Rule 204. My 306 replaced this (although it was an implied change). Shouldn't it go away now? ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Monday, January 15, 2001 10:03 PM Subject: [scatterbrains] File - Rules > > 101. All players must always abide by all the rules then in effect, in the form in which they are then in effect. The rules in the Initial Set are in effect whenever a game begins. The Initial Set consists of Rules 101-116 (immutable) and 201-213 (mutable). > > -- Immutable > -- Author: P Suber > -- History: Initial > > ---- > > > 102. Initially rules in the 100's are immutable and rules in the 200's are mutable. Rules subsequently enacted or transmuted (that is, changed from immutable to mutable or vice versa) may be immutable or mutable regardless of their numbers, and rules in the Initial Set may be transmuted regardless of their numbers. > > -- Immutable > -- Author: P Suber > -- History: Initial > > ---- > > > 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.(Note: This definition implies that, at least initially, all new rules are mutable; immutable rules, as long as they are immutable, may not be amended or repealed; mutable rules, as long as they are mutable, may be amended or repealed; any rule of any status may be transmuted; no rule is absolutely immune to change.) > > -- Immutable > -- Author: P Suber > -- History: Initial > > ---- > > > 104. All rule-changes proposed in the proper way shall be voted on. They will be adopted if and only if they receive the required number of votes. > > -- Immutable > -- Author: P Suber > -- History: Initial > > ---- > > > > 106. All proposed rule-changes shall be written down before they are voted on. If they are adopted, they shall guide play in the form in which they were voted on. > > -- Immutable > -- Author: P Suber > -- History: Initial > > ---- > > > 107. No rule-change may take effect earlier than the moment of the completion of the vote that adopted it, even if its wording explicitly states otherwise. No rule-change may have retroactive application. > > -- Immutable > -- Author: P Suber > -- History: Initial > > ---- > > > 108. Each proposed rule-change shall be given a number for reference. The numbers shall begin with 301, and each rule-change proposed in the proper way shall receive the next successive integer, whether or not the proposal is adopted.If a rule is repealed and reenacted, it receives the number of the proposal to reenact it. If a rule is amended or transmuted, it receives the number of the proposal to amend or transmute it. If an amendment is amended or repealed, the entire rule of which it is a part receives the number of the proposal to amend or repeal the amendment. > > -- Immutable > -- Author: P Suber > -- History: Initial > > ---- > > > 109. Rule-changes that transmute immutable rules into mutable rules may be adopted if and only if the vote is unanimous among the eligible voters. Transmutation shall not be implied, but must be stated explicitly in a proposal to take effect. > > -- Immutable > -- Author: P Suber > -- History: Initial > > ---- > > > 110. In a conflict between a mutable and an immutable rule, the immutable rule takes precedence and the mutable rule shall be entirely void. For the purposes of this rule a proposal to transmute an immutable rule does not "conflict" with that immutable rule. > > -- Immutable > -- Author: P Suber > -- History: Initial > > ---- > > > 111. If a rule-change as proposed is unclear, ambiguous, paradoxical, or destructive of play, or if it arguably consists of two or more rule-changes compounded or is an amendment that makes no difference, or if it is otherwise of questionable value, then the other players may suggest amendments or argue against the proposal before the vote. A reasonable time must be allowed for this debate. The proponent decides the final form in which the proposal is to be voted on and, unless the Judge has been asked to do so, also decides the time to end debate and vote. > > -- Immutable > -- Author: P Suber > -- History: Initial > > ---- > > > 112. The state of affairs that constitutes winning may not be altered from achieving n points to any other state of affairs. The magnitude of n and the means of earning points may be changed, and rules that establish a winner when play cannot continue may be enacted and (while they are mutable) be amended or repealed. > > -- Immutable > -- Author: P Suber > -- History: Initial > > ---- > > > 113. A player always has the option to forfeit the game rather than continue to play or incur a game penalty. No penalty worse than losing, in the judgment of the player to incur it, may be imposed. > > -- Immutable > -- Author: P Suber > -- History: Initial > > ---- > > > 114. There must always be at least one mutable rule. The adoption of rule-changes must never become completely impermissible. > > -- Immutable > -- Author: P Suber > -- History: Initial > > ---- > > > 115. Rule-changes that affect rules needed to allow or apply rule-changes are as permissible as other rule-changes. Even rule-changes that amend or repeal their own authority are permissible. No rule-change or type of move is impermissible solely on account of the self-reference or self-application of a rule. > > -- Immutable > -- Author: P Suber > -- History: Initial > > ---- > > > 116. Whatever is not prohibited or regulated by a rule is permitted and unregulated, with the sole exception of changing the rules, which is permitted only when a rule or set of rules explicitly or implicitly permits it. > > -- Immutable > -- Author: P Suber > -- History: Initial > > ---- > > > 201. Players shall alternate in clockwise order, taking one whole turn apiece. Turns may not be skipped or passed, and parts of turns may not be omitted. All players begin with zero points. > In mail and computer games, players shall alternate in alphabetical order by surname. > > -- Mutable > -- Author: P Suber > -- History: Initial > > ---- > > > 203. A rule-change is adopted if and only if the vote is unanimous among the eligible voters. If this rule is not amended by the end of the second complete circuit of turns, it automatically changes to require only a simple majority. > > -- Mutable > -- Author: P Suber > -- History: Initial > > ---- > > > 204. If and when rule-changes can be adopted without unanimity, the players who vote against winning proposals shall receive 10 points each. > > -- Mutable > -- Author: P Suber > -- History: Initial > > ---- > > > 205. An adopted rule-change takes full effect at the moment of the completion of the vote that adopted it. > > -- Mutable > -- Author: P Suber > -- History: Initial > > ---- > > > 206. When a proposed rule-change is defeated, the player who proposed it loses 10 points. > > -- Mutable > -- Author: P Suber > -- History: Initial > > ---- > > > 207. Each player always has exactly one vote. > > -- Mutable > -- Author: P Suber > -- History: Initial > > ---- > > > 208. The winner is the first player to achieve 100 (positive) points. > > In mail and computer games, the winner is the first player to achieve 200 (positive) points. > > -- Mutable > -- Author: P Suber > -- History: Initial > > ---- > > > 209. At no time may there be more than 25 mutable rules. > > -- Mutable > -- Author: P Suber > -- History: Initial > > ---- > > > 210. Players may not conspire or consult on the making of future rule-changes unless they are team-mates. > > The first paragraph of this rule does not apply to games by mail or computer. > > -- Mutable > -- Author: P Suber > -- History: Initial > > ---- > > > 211. If two or more mutable rules conflict with one another, or if two or more immutable rules conflict with one another, then the rule with the lowest ordinal number takes precedence. > > If at least one of the rules in conflict explicitly says of itself that it defers to another rule (or type of rule) or takes precedence over another rule (or type of rule), then such provisions shall supersede the numerical method for determining precedence. > > If two or more rules claim to take precedence over one another or to defer to one another, then the numerical method again governs. > > -- Mutable > -- Author: P Suber > -- History: Initial > > ---- > > > 212. If players disagree about the legality of a move or the interpretation or application of a rule, then the player preceding the one moving is to be the Judge and decide the question. Disagreement for the purposes of this rule may be created by the insistence of any player. This process is called invoking Judgment. > > When Judgment has been invoked, the next player may not begin his or her turn without the consent of a majority of the other players. > > The Judge's Judgment may be overruled only by a unanimous vote of the other players taken before the next turn is begun. If a Judge's Judgment is overruled, then the player preceding the Judge in the playing order becomes the new Judge for the question, and so on, except that no player is to be Judge during his or her own turn or during the turn of a team-mate. > > Unless a Judge is overruled, one Judge settles all questions arising from the game until the next turn is begun, including questions as to his or her own legitimacy and jurisdiction as Judge. > > New Judges are not bound by the decisions of old Judges. New Judges may, however, settle only those questions on which the players currently disagree and that affect the completion of the turn in which Judgment was invoked. All decisions by Judges shall be in accordance with all the rules then in effect; but when the rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the point at issue, then the Judge shall consider game-custom and the spirit of the game before applying other standards. > > -- Mutable > -- Author: P Suber > -- History: Initial > > ---- > > > 213. If the rules are changed so that further play is impossible, or if the legality of a move cannot be determined with finality, or if by the Judge's best reasoning, not overruled, a move appears equally legal and illegal, then the first player unable to complete a turn is the winner. > > This rule takes precedence over every other rule determining the winner. > > -- Mutable > -- Author: P Suber > -- History: Initial > > ---- > > > 301. Each proposal shall be posted to the group with the subject consisting of the word "Proposal" followed by the proposal number. > > -- Mutable > -- Author: E Venti > -- History: Proposal 301 > > ---- > > > 304. A) Each player shall receive Points for the Introduction of a new player into the game. > > B) The introducing Player shall receive 5 (five) points for an official Introduction. > > C)Introduction shall be determined by an affidavit posted to the group, by the new player, within 1 (one) day of joining, with the subject header "Introduction" and text consisting of the following declaration: "[Player name] has introduced me to Scatterbrains." > > D)This rule shall remain in effect until the game consists of 10 (ten) or more members. > > E) For the purposes of further discussion, this rule may also be referred to as the "Be Fruitful and Multiply" Bill. > > -- Mutable > -- Author: Pat Bernardo > -- History: Proposal 304 (12/18/00) > > ---- > > > 305. Every player is an eligible voter. Every eligible voter must participate in every vote on rule-changes. > > -- Mutable > -- Author: P Suber > -- History: Transmuted from 105 by eventi (12/21/00) > > ---- > > > 306. One turn consists of four parts, in this order: > 1) proposal of a rule > 2)discussion and amendment phase, which begins immediately following the proposal, and which may change the rule based on the discussion, but may not include the substitution of a new rule > 3) voting on the rule, which begins when the final form of the rule is declared by the proposer > 4) scoring. > > Scoring shall be 15 points for each rule, multiplied by the fraction produced by the ratio of postive votes to total possible votes. All fractional scores shall be rounded up to the nearest integer. > > -- Mutable > -- Author: Pat Bernardo > -- History: Ammended 202 (1/4/01) > > ---- > > > 307. Offices: > Any formally defined role other than the ordinary player role, shall be referred to as an "Office." > Offices are each to be created and defined by a proposal. > > The proposal must include: > Responsibilities of the office > The method of selection of officers > Term of office, and method of succession > The method of removal from office > > -- Mutable > -- Author: Eugene Ventimiglia > -- History: Proposal 307 > > ---- > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Tue Jan 16 21:31:12 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 17 Jan 2001 05:31:12 -0000 Received: (qmail 76360 invoked from network); 17 Jan 2001 05:31:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 17 Jan 2001 05:31:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 17 Jan 2001 05:31:10 -0000 Received: from win (win.venti.nyic.com [64.29.109.18]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id AAA29396 for ; Wed, 17 Jan 2001 00:31:09 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <001301c08046$9eebe660$126d1d40@v...> To: References: <979614222.65652@egroups.com> <002101c08023$c98ac760$bca811d0@computer> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] File - Rules Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2001 00:30:06 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" I think you meant 202... 204 doesn't get replaced by 306. If you're referring to "Scoring shall be..." It can't take presidence over 204, or any other rule governing post-voting scores unless you stated it explicitly (by 211) I'm afraid that if you intended that, it didn't work, and I would have fought it anyway... ----- Original Message ----- From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" To: Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 8:21 PM Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] File - Rules > I just noticed something. Check out Rule 204. My 306 replaced this > (although it was an implied change). Shouldn't it go away now? > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: > Sent: Monday, January 15, 2001 10:03 PM > Subject: [scatterbrains] File - Rules > > > > > > 101. All players must always abide by all the rules then in effect, in the > form in which they are then in effect. The rules in the Initial Set are in > effect whenever a game begins. The Initial Set consists of Rules 101-116 > (immutable) and 201-213 (mutable). > > > > -- Immutable > > -- Author: P Suber > > -- History: Initial > > > > ---- > > > > > > 102. Initially rules in the 100's are immutable and rules in the 200's are > mutable. Rules subsequently enacted or transmuted (that is, changed from > immutable to mutable or vice versa) may be immutable or mutable regardless > of their numbers, and rules in the Initial Set may be transmuted regardless > of their numbers. > > > > -- Immutable > > -- Author: P Suber > > -- History: Initial > > > > ---- > > > > > > 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.(Note: This definition implies that, at > least initially, all new rules are mutable; immutable rules, as long as they > are immutable, may not be amended or repealed; mutable rules, as long as > they are mutable, may be amended or repealed; any rule of any status may be > transmuted; no rule is absolutely immune to change.) > > > > -- Immutable > > -- Author: P Suber > > -- History: Initial > > > > ---- > > > > > > 104. All rule-changes proposed in the proper way shall be voted on. They > will be adopted if and only if they receive the required number of votes. > > > > -- Immutable > > -- Author: P Suber > > -- History: Initial > > > > ---- > > > > > > > > 106. All proposed rule-changes shall be written down before they are voted > on. If they are adopted, they shall guide play in the form in which they > were voted on. > > > > -- Immutable > > -- Author: P Suber > > -- History: Initial > > > > ---- > > > > > > 107. No rule-change may take effect earlier than the moment of the > completion of the vote that adopted it, even if its wording explicitly > states otherwise. No rule-change may have retroactive application. > > > > -- Immutable > > -- Author: P Suber > > -- History: Initial > > > > ---- > > > > > > 108. Each proposed rule-change shall be given a number for reference. The > numbers shall begin with 301, and each rule-change proposed in the proper > way shall receive the next successive integer, whether or not the proposal > is adopted.If a rule is repealed and reenacted, it receives the number of > the proposal to reenact it. If a rule is amended or transmuted, it receives > the number of the proposal to amend or transmute it. If an amendment is > amended or repealed, the entire rule of which it is a part receives the > number of the proposal to amend or repeal the amendment. > > > > -- Immutable > > -- Author: P Suber > > -- History: Initial > > > > ---- > > > > > > 109. Rule-changes that transmute immutable rules into mutable rules may be > adopted if and only if the vote is unanimous among the eligible voters. > Transmutation shall not be implied, but must be stated explicitly in a > proposal to take effect. > > > > -- Immutable > > -- Author: P Suber > > -- History: Initial > > > > ---- > > > > > > 110. In a conflict between a mutable and an immutable rule, the immutable > rule takes precedence and the mutable rule shall be entirely void. For the > purposes of this rule a proposal to transmute an immutable rule does not > "conflict" with that immutable rule. > > > > -- Immutable > > -- Author: P Suber > > -- History: Initial > > > > ---- > > > > > > 111. If a rule-change as proposed is unclear, ambiguous, paradoxical, or > destructive of play, or if it arguably consists of two or more rule-changes > compounded or is an amendment that makes no difference, or if it is > otherwise of questionable value, then the other players may suggest > amendments or argue against the proposal before the vote. A reasonable time > must be allowed for this debate. The proponent decides the final form in > which the proposal is to be voted on and, unless the Judge has been asked to > do so, also decides the time to end debate and vote. > > > > -- Immutable > > -- Author: P Suber > > -- History: Initial > > > > ---- > > > > > > 112. The state of affairs that constitutes winning may not be altered from > achieving n points to any other state of affairs. The magnitude of n and the > means of earning points may be changed, and rules that establish a winner > when play cannot continue may be enacted and (while they are mutable) be > amended or repealed. > > > > -- Immutable > > -- Author: P Suber > > -- History: Initial > > > > ---- > > > > > > 113. A player always has the option to forfeit the game rather than > continue to play or incur a game penalty. No penalty worse than losing, in > the judgment of the player to incur it, may be imposed. > > > > -- Immutable > > -- Author: P Suber > > -- History: Initial > > > > ---- > > > > > > 114. There must always be at least one mutable rule. The adoption of > rule-changes must never become completely impermissible. > > > > -- Immutable > > -- Author: P Suber > > -- History: Initial > > > > ---- > > > > > > 115. Rule-changes that affect rules needed to allow or apply rule-changes > are as permissible as other rule-changes. Even rule-changes that amend or > repeal their own authority are permissible. No rule-change or type of move > is impermissible solely on account of the self-reference or self-application > of a rule. > > > > -- Immutable > > -- Author: P Suber > > -- History: Initial > > > > ---- > > > > > > 116. Whatever is not prohibited or regulated by a rule is permitted and > unregulated, with the sole exception of changing the rules, which is > permitted only when a rule or set of rules explicitly or implicitly permits > it. > > > > -- Immutable > > -- Author: P Suber > > -- History: Initial > > > > ---- > > > > > > 201. Players shall alternate in clockwise order, taking one whole turn > apiece. Turns may not be skipped or passed, and parts of turns may not be > omitted. All players begin with zero points. > > In mail and computer games, players shall alternate in alphabetical order > by surname. > > > > -- Mutable > > -- Author: P Suber > > -- History: Initial > > > > ---- > > > > > > 203. A rule-change is adopted if and only if the vote is unanimous among > the eligible voters. If this rule is not amended by the end of the second > complete circuit of turns, it automatically changes to require only a simple > majority. > > > > -- Mutable > > -- Author: P Suber > > -- History: Initial > > > > ---- > > > > > > 204. If and when rule-changes can be adopted without unanimity, the > players who vote against winning proposals shall receive 10 points each. > > > > -- Mutable > > -- Author: P Suber > > -- History: Initial > > > > ---- > > > > > > 205. An adopted rule-change takes full effect at the moment of the > completion of the vote that adopted it. > > > > -- Mutable > > -- Author: P Suber > > -- History: Initial > > > > ---- > > > > > > 206. When a proposed rule-change is defeated, the player who proposed it > loses 10 points. > > > > -- Mutable > > -- Author: P Suber > > -- History: Initial > > > > ---- > > > > > > 207. Each player always has exactly one vote. > > > > -- Mutable > > -- Author: P Suber > > -- History: Initial > > > > ---- > > > > > > 208. The winner is the first player to achieve 100 (positive) points. > > > > In mail and computer games, the winner is the first player to achieve 200 > (positive) points. > > > > -- Mutable > > -- Author: P Suber > > -- History: Initial > > > > ---- > > > > > > 209. At no time may there be more than 25 mutable rules. > > > > -- Mutable > > -- Author: P Suber > > -- History: Initial > > > > ---- > > > > > > 210. Players may not conspire or consult on the making of future > rule-changes unless they are team-mates. > > > > The first paragraph of this rule does not apply to games by mail or > computer. > > > > -- Mutable > > -- Author: P Suber > > -- History: Initial > > > > ---- > > > > > > 211. If two or more mutable rules conflict with one another, or if two or > more immutable rules conflict with one another, then the rule with the > lowest ordinal number takes precedence. > > > > If at least one of the rules in conflict explicitly says of itself that it > defers to another rule (or type of rule) or takes precedence over another > rule (or type of rule), then such provisions shall supersede the numerical > method for determining precedence. > > > > If two or more rules claim to take precedence over one another or to defer > to one another, then the numerical method again governs. > > > > -- Mutable > > -- Author: P Suber > > -- History: Initial > > > > ---- > > > > > > 212. If players disagree about the legality of a move or the > interpretation or application of a rule, then the player preceding the one > moving is to be the Judge and decide the question. Disagreement for the > purposes of this rule may be created by the insistence of any player. This > process is called invoking Judgment. > > > > When Judgment has been invoked, the next player may not begin his or her > turn without the consent of a majority of the other players. > > > > The Judge's Judgment may be overruled only by a unanimous vote of the > other players taken before the next turn is begun. If a Judge's Judgment is > overruled, then the player preceding the Judge in the playing order becomes > the new Judge for the question, and so on, except that no player is to be > Judge during his or her own turn or during the turn of a team-mate. > > > > Unless a Judge is overruled, one Judge settles all questions arising from > the game until the next turn is begun, including questions as to his or her > own legitimacy and jurisdiction as Judge. > > > > New Judges are not bound by the decisions of old Judges. New Judges may, > however, settle only those questions on which the players currently disagree > and that affect the completion of the turn in which Judgment was invoked. > All decisions by Judges shall be in accordance with all the rules then in > effect; but when the rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the point > at issue, then the Judge shall consider game-custom and the spirit of the > game before applying other standards. > > > > -- Mutable > > -- Author: P Suber > > -- History: Initial > > > > ---- > > > > > > 213. If the rules are changed so that further play is impossible, or if > the legality of a move cannot be determined with finality, or if by the > Judge's best reasoning, not overruled, a move appears equally legal and > illegal, then the first player unable to complete a turn is the winner. > > > > This rule takes precedence over every other rule determining the winner. > > > > -- Mutable > > -- Author: P Suber > > -- History: Initial > > > > ---- > > > > > > 301. Each proposal shall be posted to the group with the subject > consisting of the word "Proposal" followed by the proposal number. > > > > -- Mutable > > -- Author: E Venti > > -- History: Proposal 301 > > > > ---- > > > > > > 304. A) Each player shall receive Points for the Introduction of a new > player into the game. > > > > B) The introducing Player shall receive 5 (five) points for an official > Introduction. > > > > C)Introduction shall be determined by an affidavit posted to the group, by > the new player, within 1 (one) day of joining, with the subject header > "Introduction" and text consisting of the following declaration: "[Player > name] has introduced me to Scatterbrains." > > > > D)This rule shall remain in effect until the game consists of 10 (ten) or > more members. > > > > E) For the purposes of further discussion, this rule may also be referred > to as the "Be Fruitful and Multiply" Bill. > > > > -- Mutable > > -- Author: Pat Bernardo > > -- History: Proposal 304 (12/18/00) > > > > ---- > > > > > > 305. Every player is an eligible voter. Every eligible voter must > participate in every vote on rule-changes. > > > > -- Mutable > > -- Author: P Suber > > -- History: Transmuted from 105 by eventi (12/21/00) > > > > ---- > > > > > > 306. One turn consists of four parts, in this order: > > 1) proposal of a rule > > 2)discussion and amendment phase, which begins immediately following the > proposal, and which may change the rule based on the discussion, but may not > include the substitution of a new rule > > 3) voting on the rule, which begins when the final form of the rule is > declared by the proposer > > 4) scoring. > > > > Scoring shall be 15 points for each rule, multiplied by the fraction > produced by the ratio of postive votes to total possible votes. All > fractional scores shall be rounded up to the nearest integer. > > > > -- Mutable > > -- Author: Pat Bernardo > > -- History: Ammended 202 (1/4/01) > > > > ---- > > > > > > 307. Offices: > > Any formally defined role other than the ordinary player role, shall > be referred to as an "Office." > > Offices are each to be created and defined by a proposal. > > > > The proposal must include: > > Responsibilities of the office > > The method of selection of officers > > Term of office, and method of succession > > The method of removal from office > > > > -- Mutable > > -- Author: Eugene Ventimiglia > > -- History: Proposal 307 > > > > ---- > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Wed Jan 17 04:58:32 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 17 Jan 2001 12:58:31 -0000 Received: (qmail 91466 invoked from network); 17 Jan 2001 12:58:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 17 Jan 2001 12:58:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 17 Jan 2001 12:58:00 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-09.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.194]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f0HCvua14138 for ; Wed, 17 Jan 2001 07:57:56 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <000e01c08085$0776b640$c2a811d0@computer> To: References: <979614222.65652@egroups.com> <002101c08023$c98ac760$bca811d0@computer> <001301c08046$9eebe660$126d1d40@v...> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] File - Rules Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2001 07:57:18 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" I totally misread it. Even after you posted your conspiracy theory. Somehow I read that 204 gave 10 points for passage of the rule. Duh. I guess that I better re-check the work I did last night... ----- Original Message ----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia To: Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2001 12:30 AM Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] File - Rules > I think you meant 202... 204 doesn't get replaced by 306. If you're > referring to "Scoring shall be..." It can't take presidence over 204, or any > other rule governing post-voting scores unless you stated it explicitly (by > 211) I'm afraid that if you intended that, it didn't work, and I would have > fought it anyway... > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" > To: > Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 8:21 PM > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] File - Rules > > > > I just noticed something. Check out Rule 204. My 306 replaced this > > (although it was an implied change). Shouldn't it go away now? > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: > > To: > > Sent: Monday, January 15, 2001 10:03 PM > > Subject: [scatterbrains] File - Rules > > > > > > > > > > 101. All players must always abide by all the rules then in effect, in > the > > form in which they are then in effect. The rules in the Initial Set are in > > effect whenever a game begins. The Initial Set consists of Rules 101-116 > > (immutable) and 201-213 (mutable). > > > > > > -- Immutable > > > -- Author: P Suber > > > -- History: Initial > > > > > > ---- > > > > > > > > > 102. Initially rules in the 100's are immutable and rules in the 200's > are > > mutable. Rules subsequently enacted or transmuted (that is, changed from > > immutable to mutable or vice versa) may be immutable or mutable regardless > > of their numbers, and rules in the Initial Set may be transmuted > regardless > > of their numbers. > > > > > > -- Immutable > > > -- Author: P Suber > > > -- History: Initial > > > > > > ---- > > > > > > > > > 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.(Note: This definition implies that, at > > least initially, all new rules are mutable; immutable rules, as long as > they > > are immutable, may not be amended or repealed; mutable rules, as long as > > they are mutable, may be amended or repealed; any rule of any status may > be > > transmuted; no rule is absolutely immune to change.) > > > > > > -- Immutable > > > -- Author: P Suber > > > -- History: Initial > > > > > > ---- > > > > > > > > > 104. All rule-changes proposed in the proper way shall be voted on. They > > will be adopted if and only if they receive the required number of votes. > > > > > > -- Immutable > > > -- Author: P Suber > > > -- History: Initial > > > > > > ---- > > > > > > > > > > > > 106. All proposed rule-changes shall be written down before they are > voted > > on. If they are adopted, they shall guide play in the form in which they > > were voted on. > > > > > > -- Immutable > > > -- Author: P Suber > > > -- History: Initial > > > > > > ---- > > > > > > > > > 107. No rule-change may take effect earlier than the moment of the > > completion of the vote that adopted it, even if its wording explicitly > > states otherwise. No rule-change may have retroactive application. > > > > > > -- Immutable > > > -- Author: P Suber > > > -- History: Initial > > > > > > ---- > > > > > > > > > 108. Each proposed rule-change shall be given a number for reference. > The > > numbers shall begin with 301, and each rule-change proposed in the proper > > way shall receive the next successive integer, whether or not the proposal > > is adopted.If a rule is repealed and reenacted, it receives the number of > > the proposal to reenact it. If a rule is amended or transmuted, it > receives > > the number of the proposal to amend or transmute it. If an amendment is > > amended or repealed, the entire rule of which it is a part receives the > > number of the proposal to amend or repeal the amendment. > > > > > > -- Immutable > > > -- Author: P Suber > > > -- History: Initial > > > > > > ---- > > > > > > > > > 109. Rule-changes that transmute immutable rules into mutable rules may > be > > adopted if and only if the vote is unanimous among the eligible voters. > > Transmutation shall not be implied, but must be stated explicitly in a > > proposal to take effect. > > > > > > -- Immutable > > > -- Author: P Suber > > > -- History: Initial > > > > > > ---- > > > > > > > > > 110. In a conflict between a mutable and an immutable rule, the > immutable > > rule takes precedence and the mutable rule shall be entirely void. For the > > purposes of this rule a proposal to transmute an immutable rule does not > > "conflict" with that immutable rule. > > > > > > -- Immutable > > > -- Author: P Suber > > > -- History: Initial > > > > > > ---- > > > > > > > > > 111. If a rule-change as proposed is unclear, ambiguous, paradoxical, or > > destructive of play, or if it arguably consists of two or more > rule-changes > > compounded or is an amendment that makes no difference, or if it is > > otherwise of questionable value, then the other players may suggest > > amendments or argue against the proposal before the vote. A reasonable > time > > must be allowed for this debate. The proponent decides the final form in > > which the proposal is to be voted on and, unless the Judge has been asked > to > > do so, also decides the time to end debate and vote. > > > > > > -- Immutable > > > -- Author: P Suber > > > -- History: Initial > > > > > > ---- > > > > > > > > > 112. The state of affairs that constitutes winning may not be altered > from > > achieving n points to any other state of affairs. The magnitude of n and > the > > means of earning points may be changed, and rules that establish a winner > > when play cannot continue may be enacted and (while they are mutable) be > > amended or repealed. > > > > > > -- Immutable > > > -- Author: P Suber > > > -- History: Initial > > > > > > ---- > > > > > > > > > 113. A player always has the option to forfeit the game rather than > > continue to play or incur a game penalty. No penalty worse than losing, in > > the judgment of the player to incur it, may be imposed. > > > > > > -- Immutable > > > -- Author: P Suber > > > -- History: Initial > > > > > > ---- > > > > > > > > > 114. There must always be at least one mutable rule. The adoption of > > rule-changes must never become completely impermissible. > > > > > > -- Immutable > > > -- Author: P Suber > > > -- History: Initial > > > > > > ---- > > > > > > > > > 115. Rule-changes that affect rules needed to allow or apply > rule-changes > > are as permissible as other rule-changes. Even rule-changes that amend or > > repeal their own authority are permissible. No rule-change or type of move > > is impermissible solely on account of the self-reference or > self-application > > of a rule. > > > > > > -- Immutable > > > -- Author: P Suber > > > -- History: Initial > > > > > > ---- > > > > > > > > > 116. Whatever is not prohibited or regulated by a rule is permitted and > > unregulated, with the sole exception of changing the rules, which is > > permitted only when a rule or set of rules explicitly or implicitly > permits > > it. > > > > > > -- Immutable > > > -- Author: P Suber > > > -- History: Initial > > > > > > ---- > > > > > > > > > 201. Players shall alternate in clockwise order, taking one whole turn > > apiece. Turns may not be skipped or passed, and parts of turns may not be > > omitted. All players begin with zero points. > > > In mail and computer games, players shall alternate in alphabetical > order > > by surname. > > > > > > -- Mutable > > > -- Author: P Suber > > > -- History: Initial > > > > > > ---- > > > > > > > > > 203. A rule-change is adopted if and only if the vote is unanimous among > > the eligible voters. If this rule is not amended by the end of the second > > complete circuit of turns, it automatically changes to require only a > simple > > majority. > > > > > > -- Mutable > > > -- Author: P Suber > > > -- History: Initial > > > > > > ---- > > > > > > > > > 204. If and when rule-changes can be adopted without unanimity, the > > players who vote against winning proposals shall receive 10 points each. > > > > > > -- Mutable > > > -- Author: P Suber > > > -- History: Initial > > > > > > ---- > > > > > > > > > 205. An adopted rule-change takes full effect at the moment of the > > completion of the vote that adopted it. > > > > > > -- Mutable > > > -- Author: P Suber > > > -- History: Initial > > > > > > ---- > > > > > > > > > 206. When a proposed rule-change is defeated, the player who proposed it > > loses 10 points. > > > > > > -- Mutable > > > -- Author: P Suber > > > -- History: Initial > > > > > > ---- > > > > > > > > > 207. Each player always has exactly one vote. > > > > > > -- Mutable > > > -- Author: P Suber > > > -- History: Initial > > > > > > ---- > > > > > > > > > 208. The winner is the first player to achieve 100 (positive) points. > > > > > > In mail and computer games, the winner is the first player to achieve > 200 > > (positive) points. > > > > > > -- Mutable > > > -- Author: P Suber > > > -- History: Initial > > > > > > ---- > > > > > > > > > 209. At no time may there be more than 25 mutable rules. > > > > > > -- Mutable > > > -- Author: P Suber > > > -- History: Initial > > > > > > ---- > > > > > > > > > 210. Players may not conspire or consult on the making of future > > rule-changes unless they are team-mates. > > > > > > The first paragraph of this rule does not apply to games by mail or > > computer. > > > > > > -- Mutable > > > -- Author: P Suber > > > -- History: Initial > > > > > > ---- > > > > > > > > > 211. If two or more mutable rules conflict with one another, or if two > or > > more immutable rules conflict with one another, then the rule with the > > lowest ordinal number takes precedence. > > > > > > If at least one of the rules in conflict explicitly says of itself that > it > > defers to another rule (or type of rule) or takes precedence over another > > rule (or type of rule), then such provisions shall supersede the numerical > > method for determining precedence. > > > > > > If two or more rules claim to take precedence over one another or to > defer > > to one another, then the numerical method again governs. > > > > > > -- Mutable > > > -- Author: P Suber > > > -- History: Initial > > > > > > ---- > > > > > > > > > 212. If players disagree about the legality of a move or the > > interpretation or application of a rule, then the player preceding the one > > moving is to be the Judge and decide the question. Disagreement for the > > purposes of this rule may be created by the insistence of any player. This > > process is called invoking Judgment. > > > > > > When Judgment has been invoked, the next player may not begin his or her > > turn without the consent of a majority of the other players. > > > > > > The Judge's Judgment may be overruled only by a unanimous vote of the > > other players taken before the next turn is begun. If a Judge's Judgment > is > > overruled, then the player preceding the Judge in the playing order > becomes > > the new Judge for the question, and so on, except that no player is to be > > Judge during his or her own turn or during the turn of a team-mate. > > > > > > Unless a Judge is overruled, one Judge settles all questions arising > from > > the game until the next turn is begun, including questions as to his or > her > > own legitimacy and jurisdiction as Judge. > > > > > > New Judges are not bound by the decisions of old Judges. New Judges may, > > however, settle only those questions on which the players currently > disagree > > and that affect the completion of the turn in which Judgment was invoked. > > All decisions by Judges shall be in accordance with all the rules then in > > effect; but when the rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the > point > > at issue, then the Judge shall consider game-custom and the spirit of the > > game before applying other standards. > > > > > > -- Mutable > > > -- Author: P Suber > > > -- History: Initial > > > > > > ---- > > > > > > > > > 213. If the rules are changed so that further play is impossible, or if > > the legality of a move cannot be determined with finality, or if by the > > Judge's best reasoning, not overruled, a move appears equally legal and > > illegal, then the first player unable to complete a turn is the winner. > > > > > > This rule takes precedence over every other rule determining the winner. > > > > > > -- Mutable > > > -- Author: P Suber > > > -- History: Initial > > > > > > ---- > > > > > > > > > 301. Each proposal shall be posted to the group with the subject > > consisting of the word "Proposal" followed by the proposal number. > > > > > > -- Mutable > > > -- Author: E Venti > > > -- History: Proposal 301 > > > > > > ---- > > > > > > > > > 304. A) Each player shall receive Points for the Introduction of a new > > player into the game. > > > > > > B) The introducing Player shall receive 5 (five) points for an official > > Introduction. > > > > > > C)Introduction shall be determined by an affidavit posted to the group, > by > > the new player, within 1 (one) day of joining, with the subject header > > "Introduction" and text consisting of the following declaration: "[Player > > name] has introduced me to Scatterbrains." > > > > > > D)This rule shall remain in effect until the game consists of 10 (ten) > or > > more members. > > > > > > E) For the purposes of further discussion, this rule may also be > referred > > to as the "Be Fruitful and Multiply" Bill. > > > > > > -- Mutable > > > -- Author: Pat Bernardo > > > -- History: Proposal 304 (12/18/00) > > > > > > ---- > > > > > > > > > 305. Every player is an eligible voter. Every eligible voter must > > participate in every vote on rule-changes. > > > > > > -- Mutable > > > -- Author: P Suber > > > -- History: Transmuted from 105 by eventi (12/21/00) > > > > > > ---- > > > > > > > > > 306. One turn consists of four parts, in this order: > > > 1) proposal of a rule > > > 2)discussion and amendment phase, which begins immediately following the > > proposal, and which may change the rule based on the discussion, but may > not > > include the substitution of a new rule > > > 3) voting on the rule, which begins when the final form of the rule is > > declared by the proposer > > > 4) scoring. > > > > > > Scoring shall be 15 points for each rule, multiplied by the fraction > > produced by the ratio of postive votes to total possible votes. All > > fractional scores shall be rounded up to the nearest integer. > > > > > > -- Mutable > > > -- Author: Pat Bernardo > > > -- History: Ammended 202 (1/4/01) > > > > > > ---- > > > > > > > > > 307. Offices: > > > Any formally defined role other than the ordinary player role, shall > > be referred to as an "Office." > > > Offices are each to be created and defined by a proposal. > > > > > > The proposal must include: > > > Responsibilities of the office > > > The method of selection of officers > > > Term of office, and method of succession > > > The method of removal from office > > > > > > -- Mutable > > > -- Author: Eugene Ventimiglia > > > -- History: Proposal 307 > > > > > > ---- > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From sga5892@n... Thu Jan 18 18:46:27 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: sga5892@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 19 Jan 2001 02:46:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 23436 invoked from network); 19 Jan 2001 02:36:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 19 Jan 2001 02:36:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-gw3.njit.edu) (128.235.251.11) by mta1 with SMTP; 19 Jan 2001 02:36:17 -0000 Received: from mailhost.njit.edu (mailhost.njit.edu [128.235.251.108]) by mail-gw3.njit.edu (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f0J3Te603043 for ; Thu, 18 Jan 2001 22:29:40 -0500 Received: from steve0 (dhcp194-216.njit.edu) by mailhost.njit.edu (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9) with SMTP id <0G7E00D3R1XA05@m...> for scatterbrains@egroups.com; Thu, 18 Jan 2001 21:36:46 -0500 (EST) Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Thu, 18 Jan 2001 21:35:40 -0500 Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 21:35:39 -0500 Subject: Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law To: "'scatterbrains@egroups.com'" Reply-to: "sga5892@n..." Message-id: <01C08196.9AC73D40.sga5892@n...> Organization: NJIT MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit From: "Steven G. Arturo" Begin Proposal 309 A new participant will gain the right to vote immediately upon sending an introduction affidavit, if no open polls exists. If an open poll exists upon sending an introduction affidavit, a new participant's right to vote will be withheld until all open polls are closed. A new participant's position in the order will be alphabetically determined, depending on the person's surname, then the person's first name, if necessary. This new participant will enter the order after casting a vote. End Proposal 309 ahhh, that was easy after my grilled chicken and bacon sandwich on a burnt bun with barbeque sauce (the spellcheck had 'barbecue' instead of how i spelled it...?). enjoy this as much as i enjoyed the sandwich! steve0 From eventi@n... Fri Jan 19 06:30:20 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 19 Jan 2001 14:30:16 -0000 Received: (qmail 53016 invoked from network); 19 Jan 2001 14:29:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 19 Jan 2001 14:29:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 19 Jan 2001 14:29:31 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id JAA14879 for ; Fri, 19 Jan 2001 09:29:31 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 09:30:50 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <01C08196.9AC73D40.sga5892@n...> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" Problems: 1) Polls have not (yet) been established as the only voting method, in fact it was only used this one past time. So voting does not officially begin with the creation of the poll, rather any player can vote (in any manner) as soon as the proposal is finalized. Perhaps a better deadline would allow this portion of the proposal, but as is, it won't stand up to a challenge. 2) Since there's already a rule establishing turn order (201), any change to it would have to amend that rule, since there's a numerical heirarchy to rule disputes. The lower numbered rule wins, and a new proposal always has a higher number. But there's hope: You could rewrite the first part and ammend #201 so that it includes new player introduction. After all, it's relevant to turn order. --e (here we go again --Dolly Pardon) > -----Original Message----- > From: Steven G. Arturo [mailto:sga5892@n...] > Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2001 9:36 PM > To: 'scatterbrains@egroups.com' > Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > Begin Proposal 309 > > A new participant will gain the right to vote immediately upon sending an > introduction affidavit, if no open polls exists. > > If an open poll exists upon sending an introduction affidavit, a new > participant's right to vote will be withheld until all open polls are > closed. > > A new participant's position in the order will be alphabetically > determined, depending on the person's surname, then the person's first > name, if necessary. This new participant will enter the order after > casting a vote. > > End Proposal 309 > > ahhh, that was easy after my grilled chicken and bacon sandwich > on a burnt > bun with barbeque sauce (the spellcheck had 'barbecue' instead of how i > spelled it...?). enjoy this as much as i enjoyed the sandwich! > > steve0 > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@w... Fri Jan 19 16:07:39 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@w... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 20 Jan 2001 00:07:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 38409 invoked from network); 20 Jan 2001 00:06:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 20 Jan 2001 00:06:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ns1.wyndtell.com) (63.81.201.11) by mta3 with SMTP; 20 Jan 2001 01:08:04 -0000 Received: from nova.wyndtell.com (nova.wyndtell.com [63.81.201.78]) by ns1.wyndtell.com (8.11.0/8.9.3) with ESMTP id f0K12Jm26939 for ; Fri, 19 Jan 2001 17:02:19 -0800 Received: (root@localhost) by nova.wyndtell.com (8.8.8/SCA-6.6) id TAA13171; Fri, 19 Jan 2001 19:06:58 -0500 (EST) To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: Bored!!! Message-Id: <15308871.1172@w...> Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 16:06:58 -0800 X-eGroups-From: eventi@w... (Eugene Ventimiglia) From: eventi@w... Last Friday there were like 10 emails, today one... I'm friggin bored. --e From bernardo@c... Fri Jan 19 18:10:21 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 20 Jan 2001 02:10:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 17534 invoked from network); 20 Jan 2001 02:10:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 20 Jan 2001 02:10:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta3 with SMTP; 20 Jan 2001 03:11:24 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-20.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.205]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f0K2AHa25241 for ; Fri, 19 Jan 2001 21:10:17 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <000501c08286$0cb08f20$cda811d0@computer> To: References: <15308871.1172@w...> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Bored!!! Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 21:09:39 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" Play some net-hack. ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Friday, January 19, 2001 7:06 PM Subject: [scatterbrains] Bored!!! > Last Friday there were like 10 emails, today one... I'm friggin bored. > --e > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From sga5892@n... Mon Jan 22 05:01:59 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: sga5892@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 22 Jan 2001 13:01:57 -0000 Received: (qmail 27330 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2001 13:01:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 22 Jan 2001 13:01:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-gw3.njit.edu) (128.235.251.11) by mta3 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2001 14:03:00 -0000 Received: from mailhost.njit.edu (mailhost.njit.edu [128.235.251.108]) by mail-gw3.njit.edu (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f0MDtLX11768 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 08:55:21 -0500 Received: from steve0 (dhcp194-216.njit.edu) by mailhost.njit.edu (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9) with SMTP id <0G7K00C16EW0DE@m...> for scatterbrains@egroups.com; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 08:02:24 -0500 (EST) Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 08:01:29 -0500 Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 08:01:28 -0500 Subject: Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law To: "'scatterbrains@egroups.com'" Reply-to: "sga5892@n..." Message-id: <01C08449.86927C80.sga5892@n...> Organization: NJIT MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit From: "Steven G. Arturo" hello monday's children. a good week to all employed. ill try to have a more interesting proposal for discussion on the next turn. until then, chew on this for a day or two. Begin Revised Proposal 309 A new participant will gain the right to vote immediately upon sending an introduction affidavit, if all voting on final proposals is complete. If voting on a final proposal is not complete upon sending an introduction affidavit, a new participant's right to vote will be withheld until all voting on final proposals is complete. This new participant will enter the order of play upon casting his or her first vote. End Proposal 309 -----Original Message----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia [SMTP:eventi@n...] Sent: Friday, January 19, 2001 9:31 AM To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law Problems: 1) Polls have not (yet) been established as the only voting method, in fact it was only used this one past time. So voting does not officially begin with the creation of the poll, rather any player can vote (in any manner) as soon as the proposal is finalized. Perhaps a better deadline would allow this portion of the proposal, but as is, it won't stand up to a challenge. 2) Since there's already a rule establishing turn order (201), any change to it would have to amend that rule, since there's a numerical heirarchy to rule disputes. The lower numbered rule wins, and a new proposal always has a higher number. But there's hope: You could rewrite the first part and ammend #201 so that it includes new player introduction. After all, it's relevant to turn order. --e (here we go again --Dolly Pardon) > -----Original Message----- > From: Steven G. Arturo [mailto:sga5892@n...] > Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2001 9:36 PM > To: 'scatterbrains@egroups.com' > Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > Begin Proposal 309 > > A new participant will gain the right to vote immediately upon sending an > introduction affidavit, if no open polls exists. > > If an open poll exists upon sending an introduction affidavit, a new > participant's right to vote will be withheld until all open polls are > closed. > > A new participant's position in the order will be alphabetically > determined, depending on the person's surname, then the person's first > name, if necessary. This new participant will enter the order after > casting a vote. > > End Proposal 309 > > ahhh, that was easy after my grilled chicken and bacon sandwich > on a burnt > bun with barbeque sauce (the spellcheck had 'barbecue' instead of how i > spelled it...?). enjoy this as much as i enjoyed the sandwich! > > steve0 > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com From eventi@w... Mon Jan 22 06:12:20 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@w... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 22 Jan 2001 14:12:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 88230 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2001 14:10:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 22 Jan 2001 14:10:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ns1.wyndtell.com) (63.81.201.11) by mta1 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2001 14:10:33 -0000 Received: from nova.wyndtell.com (nova.wyndtell.com [63.81.201.78]) by ns1.wyndtell.com (8.11.0/8.9.3) with ESMTP id f0MF5em08046 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 07:05:44 -0800 Received: (root@localhost) by nova.wyndtell.com (8.8.8/SCA-6.6) id JAA27551; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 09:10:25 -0500 (EST) To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law In-Reply-To: a5892 X-Status: 6Y Message-Id: <15308871.1214@w...> Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 06:10:25 -0800 X-eGroups-From: eventi@w... (Eugene Ventimiglia) From: eventi@w... It looks ok to me. Any other objections? ------ From: Subject:[scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law[3A6C329D] hello monday's children. a good week to all employed. ill try to have a more interesting proposal for discussion on the next turn. until then, chew on this for a day or two. Begin Revised Proposal 309 A new participant will gain the right to vote immediately upon sending an introduction affidavit, if all voting on final proposals is complete. If voting on a final proposal is not complete upon sending an introduction affidavit, a new participant's right to vote will be withheld until all voting on final proposals is complete. This new participant will enter the order of play upon casting his or her first vote. End Proposal 309 -----Original Message----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia [SMTP:eventi@n...] Sent: Friday, January 19, 2001 9:31 AM To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law Problems: 1) Polls have not (yet) been established as the only voting method, in fact it was only used this one past time. So voting does not officially begin with the creation of the poll, rather any player can vote (in any manner) as soon as the proposal is finalized. Perhaps a better deadline would allow this portion of the proposal, but as is, it won't stand up to a challenge. 2) Since there's already a rule establishing turn order (201), any change to it would have to amend that rule, since there's a numerical heirarchy to rule disputes. The lower numbered rule wins, and a new proposal always has a higher number. But there's hope: You could rewrite the first part and ammend #201 so that it includes new player introduction. After all, it's relevant to turn order. --e (here we go again --Dolly Pardon) > -----Original Message----- > From: Steven G. Arturo [mailto:sga5892@n...] > Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2001 9:36 PM > To: 'scatterbrains@egroups.com' > Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > Begin Proposal 309 > > A new participant will gain the right to vote immediately upon sending an > introduction affidavit, if no open polls exists. > > If an open poll exists upon sending an introduction affidavit, a new > participant's right to vote will be withheld until all open polls are > closed. > > A new participant's position in the order will be alphabetically > determined, depending on the person's surname, then the person's first > name, if necessary. This new participant will enter the order after > casting a vote. > > End Proposal 309 > > ahhh, that was easy after my grilled chicken and bacon sandwich > on a burnt > bun with barbeque sauce (the spellcheck had 'barbecue' instead of how i > spelled it...?). enjoy this as much as i enjoyed the sandwich! > > steve0 > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com From bernardo@c... Mon Jan 22 06:30:21 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 22 Jan 2001 14:30:21 -0000 Received: (qmail 72485 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2001 14:30:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 22 Jan 2001 14:30:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta3 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2001 15:31:24 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-11.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.196]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f0MEUHa29433 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 09:30:17 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <000501c0847f$c2483900$c4a811d0@computer> To: References: <15308871.1214@w...> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 09:29:39 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" I'm not sold on the idea. Why restrict the right to vote at all? ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:10 AM Subject: re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > It looks ok to me. Any other objections? > ------ > From: > Subject:[scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law[3A6C329D] > hello monday's children. a good week to all employed. ill try to have a > more interesting proposal for discussion on the next turn. until then, > chew on this for a day or two. > > Begin Revised Proposal 309 > > A new participant will gain the right to vote immediately upon sending an > introduction affidavit, if all voting on final proposals is complete. > > If voting on a final proposal is not complete upon sending an introduction > affidavit, a new participant's right to vote will be withheld until all > voting on final proposals is complete. > > This new participant will enter the order of play upon casting his or her > first vote. > > End Proposal 309 > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Eugene Ventimiglia [SMTP:eventi@n...] > Sent: Friday, January 19, 2001 9:31 AM > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > Problems: > > 1) Polls have not (yet) been established as the only voting method, in fact > it was only used this one past time. So voting does not officially begin > with the creation of the poll, rather any player can vote (in any manner) > as > soon as the proposal is finalized. Perhaps a better deadline would allow > this portion of the proposal, but as is, it won't stand up to a challenge. > > 2) Since there's already a rule establishing turn order (201), any change > to > it would have to amend that rule, since there's a numerical heirarchy to > rule disputes. The lower numbered rule wins, and a new proposal always has > a > higher number. > > But there's hope: > You could rewrite the first part and ammend #201 so that it includes new > player introduction. After all, it's relevant to turn order. > > --e (here we go again --Dolly Pardon) > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Steven G. Arturo [mailto:sga5892@n...] > > Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2001 9:36 PM > > To: 'scatterbrains@egroups.com' > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > Begin Proposal 309 > > > > A new participant will gain the right to vote immediately upon sending an > > introduction affidavit, if no open polls exists. > > > > If an open poll exists upon sending an introduction affidavit, a new > > participant's right to vote will be withheld until all open polls are > > closed. > > > > A new participant's position in the order will be alphabetically > > determined, depending on the person's surname, then the person's first > > name, if necessary. This new participant will enter the order after > > casting a vote. > > > > End Proposal 309 > > > > ahhh, that was easy after my grilled chicken and bacon sandwich > > on a burnt > > bun with barbeque sauce (the spellcheck had 'barbecue' instead of how i > > spelled it...?). enjoy this as much as i enjoyed the sandwich! > > > > steve0 > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From sga5892@n... Mon Jan 22 06:37:32 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: sga5892@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 22 Jan 2001 14:37:32 -0000 Received: (qmail 89668 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2001 14:36:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 22 Jan 2001 14:36:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-gw3.njit.edu) (128.235.251.11) by mta1 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2001 14:36:39 -0000 Received: from mailhost.njit.edu (mailhost.njit.edu [128.235.251.108]) by mail-gw3.njit.edu (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f0MFU4X17019 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 10:30:04 -0500 Received: from steve0 (dhcp194-216.njit.edu) by mailhost.njit.edu (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9) with SMTP id <0G7K00E3KJ9WOD@m...> for scatterbrains@egroups.com; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 09:37:08 -0500 (EST) Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 09:36:13 -0500 Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 09:36:12 -0500 Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law To: "'scatterbrains@egroups.com'" Reply-to: "sga5892@n..." Message-id: <01C08456.C2831BC0.sga5892@n...> Organization: NJIT MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit From: "Steven G. Arturo" the right to vote is restricted in the case when a final propoal is to be voted on to aviod bringing in new players for the sole purpose of passing a proposal. for instance, say that bob brought me in because he needed one more vote to pass his proposal. this rule is made to aviod that senario. also, it clears up the dillema of when to allow a new player to propose a new rule. steve0 -----Original Message----- From: Patrick D. Bernardo [SMTP:bernardo@c...] Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:30 AM To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law I'm not sold on the idea. Why restrict the right to vote at all? ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:10 AM Subject: re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > It looks ok to me. Any other objections? > ------ > From: > Subject:[scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law[3A6C329D] > hello monday's children. a good week to all employed. ill try to have a > more interesting proposal for discussion on the next turn. until then, > chew on this for a day or two. > > Begin Revised Proposal 309 > > A new participant will gain the right to vote immediately upon sending an > introduction affidavit, if all voting on final proposals is complete. > > If voting on a final proposal is not complete upon sending an introduction > affidavit, a new participant's right to vote will be withheld until all > voting on final proposals is complete. > > This new participant will enter the order of play upon casting his or her > first vote. > > End Proposal 309 > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Eugene Ventimiglia [SMTP:eventi@n...] > Sent: Friday, January 19, 2001 9:31 AM > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > Problems: > > 1) Polls have not (yet) been established as the only voting method, in fact > it was only used this one past time. So voting does not officially begin > with the creation of the poll, rather any player can vote (in any manner) > as > soon as the proposal is finalized. Perhaps a better deadline would allow > this portion of the proposal, but as is, it won't stand up to a challenge. > > 2) Since there's already a rule establishing turn order (201), any change > to > it would have to amend that rule, since there's a numerical heirarchy to > rule disputes. The lower numbered rule wins, and a new proposal always has > a > higher number. > > But there's hope: > You could rewrite the first part and ammend #201 so that it includes new > player introduction. After all, it's relevant to turn order. > > --e (here we go again --Dolly Pardon) > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Steven G. Arturo [mailto:sga5892@n...] > > Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2001 9:36 PM > > To: 'scatterbrains@egroups.com' > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > Begin Proposal 309 > > > > A new participant will gain the right to vote immediately upon sending an > > introduction affidavit, if no open polls exists. > > > > If an open poll exists upon sending an introduction affidavit, a new > > participant's right to vote will be withheld until all open polls are > > closed. > > > > A new participant's position in the order will be alphabetically > > determined, depending on the person's surname, then the person's first > > name, if necessary. This new participant will enter the order after > > casting a vote. > > > > End Proposal 309 > > > > ahhh, that was easy after my grilled chicken and bacon sandwich > > on a burnt > > bun with barbeque sauce (the spellcheck had 'barbecue' instead of how i > > spelled it...?). enjoy this as much as i enjoyed the sandwich! > > > > steve0 > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com From bernardo@c... Mon Jan 22 06:43:34 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 22 Jan 2001 14:43:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 28041 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2001 14:42:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 22 Jan 2001 14:42:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta3 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2001 15:43:39 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-11.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.196]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f0MEgUa30525 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 09:42:31 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <000f01c08481$7790cd80$c4a811d0@computer> To: References: <01C08456.C2831BC0.sga5892@n...> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 09:41:53 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" I'm actually biased in the other direction. I still think that we need new players. If Bob brought you in just to pass his proposal, then it's a win-win situation. Bob gets his proposal passed, and the rest of us get another player added into the mix, which makes for a more interesting game. I *like* the incentive to add new players. ----- Original Message ----- From: Steven G. Arturo To: Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:36 AM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > the right to vote is restricted in the case when a final propoal is to be > voted on to aviod bringing in new players for the sole purpose of passing a > proposal. > > for instance, say that bob brought me in because he needed one more vote to > pass his proposal. this rule is made to aviod that senario. > > also, it clears up the dillema of when to allow a new player to propose a > new rule. > > steve0 > > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [SMTP:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:30 AM > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > I'm not sold on the idea. Why restrict the right to vote at all? > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:10 AM > Subject: re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > It looks ok to me. Any other objections? > > ------ > > From: > > Subject:[scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law[3A6C329D] > > hello monday's children. a good week to all employed. ill try to have a > > more interesting proposal for discussion on the next turn. until then, > > chew on this for a day or two. > > > > Begin Revised Proposal 309 > > > > A new participant will gain the right to vote immediately upon sending an > > introduction affidavit, if all voting on final proposals is complete. > > > > If voting on a final proposal is not complete upon sending an > introduction > > affidavit, a new participant's right to vote will be withheld until all > > voting on final proposals is complete. > > > > This new participant will enter the order of play upon casting his or her > > first vote. > > > > End Proposal 309 > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Eugene Ventimiglia [SMTP:eventi@n...] > > Sent: Friday, January 19, 2001 9:31 AM > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > Problems: > > > > 1) Polls have not (yet) been established as the only voting method, in > fact > > it was only used this one past time. So voting does not officially begin > > with the creation of the poll, rather any player can vote (in any manner) > > as > > soon as the proposal is finalized. Perhaps a better deadline would allow > > this portion of the proposal, but as is, it won't stand up to a > challenge. > > > > 2) Since there's already a rule establishing turn order (201), any change > > to > > it would have to amend that rule, since there's a numerical heirarchy to > > rule disputes. The lower numbered rule wins, and a new proposal always > has > > a > > higher number. > > > > But there's hope: > > You could rewrite the first part and ammend #201 so that it includes new > > player introduction. After all, it's relevant to turn order. > > > > --e (here we go again --Dolly Pardon) > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Steven G. Arturo [mailto:sga5892@n...] > > > Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2001 9:36 PM > > > To: 'scatterbrains@egroups.com' > > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > > Begin Proposal 309 > > > > > > A new participant will gain the right to vote immediately upon sending > an > > > introduction affidavit, if no open polls exists. > > > > > > If an open poll exists upon sending an introduction affidavit, a new > > > participant's right to vote will be withheld until all open polls are > > > closed. > > > > > > A new participant's position in the order will be alphabetically > > > determined, depending on the person's surname, then the person's first > > > name, if necessary. This new participant will enter the order after > > > casting a vote. > > > > > > End Proposal 309 > > > > > > ahhh, that was easy after my grilled chicken and bacon sandwich > > > on a burnt > > > bun with barbeque sauce (the spellcheck had 'barbecue' instead of how i > > > spelled it...?). enjoy this as much as i enjoyed the sandwich! > > > > > > steve0 > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From barturo@e... Mon Jan 22 06:53:24 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: BArturo@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 22 Jan 2001 14:53:24 -0000 Received: (qmail 69562 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2001 14:52:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 22 Jan 2001 14:52:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2001 15:53:48 -0000 Received: from batman.ess ([12.31.9.2]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with ESMTP id JAA28485 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 09:52:41 -0500 (EST) Received: by BATMAN with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id ; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 09:48:18 -0500 Message-ID: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF0372AA@BATMAN> To: "'scatterbrains@egroups.com'" Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 09:48:17 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" From: "Arturo, Bob" I like the proposal. You can't start playing until the round is over. New players can join in at any time I rather not have someone jumping in while there is a proposal on the table. -----Original Message----- From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:42 AM To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law I'm actually biased in the other direction. I still think that we need new players. If Bob brought you in just to pass his proposal, then it's a win-win situation. Bob gets his proposal passed, and the rest of us get another player added into the mix, which makes for a more interesting game. I *like* the incentive to add new players. ----- Original Message ----- From: Steven G. Arturo To: Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:36 AM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > the right to vote is restricted in the case when a final propoal is to be > voted on to aviod bringing in new players for the sole purpose of passing a > proposal. > > for instance, say that bob brought me in because he needed one more vote to > pass his proposal. this rule is made to aviod that senario. > > also, it clears up the dillema of when to allow a new player to propose a > new rule. > > steve0 > > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [SMTP:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:30 AM > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > I'm not sold on the idea. Why restrict the right to vote at all? > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:10 AM > Subject: re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > It looks ok to me. Any other objections? > > ------ > > From: > > Subject:[scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law[3A6C329D] > > hello monday's children. a good week to all employed. ill try to have a > > more interesting proposal for discussion on the next turn. until then, > > chew on this for a day or two. > > > > Begin Revised Proposal 309 > > > > A new participant will gain the right to vote immediately upon sending an > > introduction affidavit, if all voting on final proposals is complete. > > > > If voting on a final proposal is not complete upon sending an > introduction > > affidavit, a new participant's right to vote will be withheld until all > > voting on final proposals is complete. > > > > This new participant will enter the order of play upon casting his or her > > first vote. > > > > End Proposal 309 > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Eugene Ventimiglia [SMTP:eventi@n...] > > Sent: Friday, January 19, 2001 9:31 AM > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > Problems: > > > > 1) Polls have not (yet) been established as the only voting method, in > fact > > it was only used this one past time. So voting does not officially begin > > with the creation of the poll, rather any player can vote (in any manner) > > as > > soon as the proposal is finalized. Perhaps a better deadline would allow > > this portion of the proposal, but as is, it won't stand up to a > challenge. > > > > 2) Since there's already a rule establishing turn order (201), any change > > to > > it would have to amend that rule, since there's a numerical heirarchy to > > rule disputes. The lower numbered rule wins, and a new proposal always > has > > a > > higher number. > > > > But there's hope: > > You could rewrite the first part and ammend #201 so that it includes new > > player introduction. After all, it's relevant to turn order. > > > > --e (here we go again --Dolly Pardon) > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Steven G. Arturo [mailto:sga5892@n...] > > > Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2001 9:36 PM > > > To: 'scatterbrains@egroups.com' > > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > > Begin Proposal 309 > > > > > > A new participant will gain the right to vote immediately upon sending > an > > > introduction affidavit, if no open polls exists. > > > > > > If an open poll exists upon sending an introduction affidavit, a new > > > participant's right to vote will be withheld until all open polls are > > > closed. > > > > > > A new participant's position in the order will be alphabetically > > > determined, depending on the person's surname, then the person's first > > > name, if necessary. This new participant will enter the order after > > > casting a vote. > > > > > > End Proposal 309 > > > > > > ahhh, that was easy after my grilled chicken and bacon sandwich > > > on a burnt > > > bun with barbeque sauce (the spellcheck had 'barbecue' instead of how i > > > spelled it...?). enjoy this as much as i enjoyed the sandwich! > > > > > > steve0 > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at webmaster@e.... From sga5892@n... Mon Jan 22 06:53:41 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: sga5892@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 22 Jan 2001 14:53:41 -0000 Received: (qmail 12241 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2001 14:51:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 22 Jan 2001 14:51:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-gw3.njit.edu) (128.235.251.11) by mta1 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2001 14:51:42 -0000 Received: from mailhost.njit.edu (mailhost.njit.edu [128.235.251.108]) by mail-gw3.njit.edu (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f0MFj8X18138 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 10:45:08 -0500 Received: from steve0 (dhcp194-216.njit.edu) by mailhost.njit.edu (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9) with SMTP id <0G7K00EFAJYZOD@m...> for scatterbrains@egroups.com; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 09:52:11 -0500 (EST) Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 09:51:16 -0500 Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 09:51:15 -0500 Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law To: "'scatterbrains@egroups.com'" Reply-to: "sga5892@n..." Message-id: <01C08458.DD0D51C0.sga5892@n...> Organization: NJIT MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit From: "Steven G. Arturo" pat, would you suggest i include a number of players after which this rule kicks in, as in 304, but opposite? steve0 -----Original Message----- From: Patrick D. Bernardo [SMTP:bernardo@c...] Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:42 AM To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law I'm actually biased in the other direction. I still think that we need new players. If Bob brought you in just to pass his proposal, then it's a win-win situation. Bob gets his proposal passed, and the rest of us get another player added into the mix, which makes for a more interesting game. I *like* the incentive to add new players. ----- Original Message ----- From: Steven G. Arturo To: Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:36 AM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > the right to vote is restricted in the case when a final propoal is to be > voted on to aviod bringing in new players for the sole purpose of passing a > proposal. > > for instance, say that bob brought me in because he needed one more vote to > pass his proposal. this rule is made to aviod that senario. > > also, it clears up the dillema of when to allow a new player to propose a > new rule. > > steve0 > > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [SMTP:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:30 AM > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > I'm not sold on the idea. Why restrict the right to vote at all? > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:10 AM > Subject: re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > It looks ok to me. Any other objections? > > ------ > > From: > > Subject:[scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law[3A6C329D] > > hello monday's children. a good week to all employed. ill try to have a > > more interesting proposal for discussion on the next turn. until then, > > chew on this for a day or two. > > > > Begin Revised Proposal 309 > > > > A new participant will gain the right to vote immediately upon sending an > > introduction affidavit, if all voting on final proposals is complete. > > > > If voting on a final proposal is not complete upon sending an > introduction > > affidavit, a new participant's right to vote will be withheld until all > > voting on final proposals is complete. > > > > This new participant will enter the order of play upon casting his or her > > first vote. > > > > End Proposal 309 > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Eugene Ventimiglia [SMTP:eventi@n...] > > Sent: Friday, January 19, 2001 9:31 AM > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > Problems: > > > > 1) Polls have not (yet) been established as the only voting method, in > fact > > it was only used this one past time. So voting does not officially begin > > with the creation of the poll, rather any player can vote (in any manner) > > as > > soon as the proposal is finalized. Perhaps a better deadline would allow > > this portion of the proposal, but as is, it won't stand up to a > challenge. > > > > 2) Since there's already a rule establishing turn order (201), any change > > to > > it would have to amend that rule, since there's a numerical heirarchy to > > rule disputes. The lower numbered rule wins, and a new proposal always > has > > a > > higher number. > > > > But there's hope: > > You could rewrite the first part and ammend #201 so that it includes new > > player introduction. After all, it's relevant to turn order. > > > > --e (here we go again --Dolly Pardon) > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Steven G. Arturo [mailto:sga5892@n...] > > > Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2001 9:36 PM > > > To: 'scatterbrains@egroups.com' > > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > > Begin Proposal 309 > > > > > > A new participant will gain the right to vote immediately upon sending > an > > > introduction affidavit, if no open polls exists. > > > > > > If an open poll exists upon sending an introduction affidavit, a new > > > participant's right to vote will be withheld until all open polls are > > > closed. > > > > > > A new participant's position in the order will be alphabetically > > > determined, depending on the person's surname, then the person's first > > > name, if necessary. This new participant will enter the order after > > > casting a vote. > > > > > > End Proposal 309 > > > > > > ahhh, that was easy after my grilled chicken and bacon sandwich > > > on a burnt > > > bun with barbeque sauce (the spellcheck had 'barbecue' instead of how i > > > spelled it...?). enjoy this as much as i enjoyed the sandwich! > > > > > > steve0 > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com From eventi@n... Mon Jan 22 07:05:51 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 22 Jan 2001 15:05:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 48840 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2001 15:03:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 22 Jan 2001 15:03:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2001 16:05:02 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id KAA29691 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 10:03:56 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 10:05:18 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF0372AA@BATMAN> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" I Agree. Pat- you're asking Steven to basically propose the opposite of the intent of his original proposal. You know where I stand on this issue, but I think reversing the proposal at this point would be wrong. He can't make a non-proposal, and if he follows your reasoning, there would be no substance to it. > -----Original Message----- > From: Arturo, Bob [mailto:barturo@e...] > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:48 AM > To: 'scatterbrains@egroups.com' > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > I like the proposal. You can't start playing until the round is over. New > players can join in at any time I rather not have someone jumping in while > there is a proposal on the table. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:42 AM > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > I'm actually biased in the other direction. I still think that > we need new > players. If Bob brought you in just to pass his proposal, then it's a > win-win situation. Bob gets his proposal passed, and the rest of us get > another player added into the mix, which makes for a more > interesting game. > > I *like* the incentive to add new players. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Steven G. Arturo > To: > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:36 AM > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > the right to vote is restricted in the case when a final > propoal is to be > > voted on to aviod bringing in new players for the sole purpose > of passing > a > > proposal. > > > > for instance, say that bob brought me in because he needed one more vote > to > > pass his proposal. this rule is made to aviod that senario. > > > > also, it clears up the dillema of when to allow a new player to > propose a > > new rule. > > > > steve0 > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [SMTP:bernardo@c...] > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:30 AM > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > I'm not sold on the idea. Why restrict the right to vote at all? > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: > > To: > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:10 AM > > Subject: re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > It looks ok to me. Any other objections? > > > ------ > > > From: > > > Subject:[scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law[3A6C329D] > > > hello monday's children. a good week to all employed. ill > try to have > a > > > more interesting proposal for discussion on the next turn. > until then, > > > chew on this for a day or two. > > > > > > Begin Revised Proposal 309 > > > > > > A new participant will gain the right to vote immediately upon sending > an > > > introduction affidavit, if all voting on final proposals is complete. > > > > > > If voting on a final proposal is not complete upon sending an > > introduction > > > affidavit, a new participant's right to vote will be withheld > until all > > > voting on final proposals is complete. > > > > > > This new participant will enter the order of play upon casting his or > her > > > first vote. > > > > > > End Proposal 309 > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Eugene Ventimiglia [SMTP:eventi@n...] > > > Sent: Friday, January 19, 2001 9:31 AM > > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > Problems: > > > > > > 1) Polls have not (yet) been established as the only voting method, in > > fact > > > it was only used this one past time. So voting does not > officially begin > > > with the creation of the poll, rather any player can vote (in any > manner) > > > as > > > soon as the proposal is finalized. Perhaps a better deadline > would allow > > > this portion of the proposal, but as is, it won't stand up to a > > challenge. > > > > > > 2) Since there's already a rule establishing turn order (201), any > change > > > to > > > it would have to amend that rule, since there's a numerical > heirarchy to > > > rule disputes. The lower numbered rule wins, and a new proposal always > > has > > > a > > > higher number. > > > > > > But there's hope: > > > You could rewrite the first part and ammend #201 so that it > includes new > > > player introduction. After all, it's relevant to turn order. > > > > > > --e (here we go again --Dolly Pardon) > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Steven G. Arturo [mailto:sga5892@n...] > > > > Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2001 9:36 PM > > > > To: 'scatterbrains@egroups.com' > > > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > > > > > Begin Proposal 309 > > > > > > > > A new participant will gain the right to vote immediately > upon sending > > an > > > > introduction affidavit, if no open polls exists. > > > > > > > > If an open poll exists upon sending an introduction affidavit, a new > > > > participant's right to vote will be withheld until all open > polls are > > > > closed. > > > > > > > > A new participant's position in the order will be alphabetically > > > > determined, depending on the person's surname, then the > person's first > > > > name, if necessary. This new participant will enter the order after > > > > casting a vote. > > > > > > > > End Proposal 309 > > > > > > > > ahhh, that was easy after my grilled chicken and bacon sandwich > > > > on a burnt > > > > bun with barbeque sauce (the spellcheck had 'barbecue' > instead of how > i > > > > spelled it...?). enjoy this as much as i enjoyed the sandwich! > > > > > > > > steve0 > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution > or copying > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > webmaster@e.... > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Mon Jan 22 07:13:10 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 22 Jan 2001 15:13:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 75484 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2001 15:10:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 22 Jan 2001 15:10:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2001 15:10:05 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-11.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.196]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f0MFA2a32928 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 10:10:02 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <000b01c08485$4fefb440$c4a811d0@computer> To: References: Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 10:09:24 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" I'm not asking Steven to do anything. I'm just presenting my side of the argument. My post wasn't a suggestion for him to change the proposal. As I said in my original response, I'm still not sold on the proposal. Why is it such a bad idea to have new players coming in? ----- Original Message ----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia To: Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 10:05 AM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > I Agree. Pat- you're asking Steven to basically propose the opposite of the > intent of his original proposal. You know where I stand on this issue, but > I think reversing the proposal at this point would be wrong. He can't make > a non-proposal, and if he follows your reasoning, there would be no > substance to it. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Arturo, Bob [mailto:barturo@e...] > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:48 AM > > To: 'scatterbrains@egroups.com' > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > I like the proposal. You can't start playing until the round is over. New > > players can join in at any time I rather not have someone jumping in while > > there is a proposal on the table. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:42 AM > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > I'm actually biased in the other direction. I still think that > > we need new > > players. If Bob brought you in just to pass his proposal, then it's a > > win-win situation. Bob gets his proposal passed, and the rest of us get > > another player added into the mix, which makes for a more > > interesting game. > > > > I *like* the incentive to add new players. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Steven G. Arturo > > To: > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:36 AM > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > the right to vote is restricted in the case when a final > > propoal is to be > > > voted on to aviod bringing in new players for the sole purpose > > of passing > > a > > > proposal. > > > > > > for instance, say that bob brought me in because he needed one more vote > > to > > > pass his proposal. this rule is made to aviod that senario. > > > > > > also, it clears up the dillema of when to allow a new player to > > propose a > > > new rule. > > > > > > steve0 > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [SMTP:bernardo@c...] > > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:30 AM > > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > I'm not sold on the idea. Why restrict the right to vote at all? > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: > > > To: > > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:10 AM > > > Subject: re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > > > It looks ok to me. Any other objections? > > > > ------ > > > > From: > > > > Subject:[scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law[3A6C329D] > > > > hello monday's children. a good week to all employed. ill > > try to have > > a > > > > more interesting proposal for discussion on the next turn. > > until then, > > > > chew on this for a day or two. > > > > > > > > Begin Revised Proposal 309 > > > > > > > > A new participant will gain the right to vote immediately upon sending > > an > > > > introduction affidavit, if all voting on final proposals is complete. > > > > > > > > If voting on a final proposal is not complete upon sending an > > > introduction > > > > affidavit, a new participant's right to vote will be withheld > > until all > > > > voting on final proposals is complete. > > > > > > > > This new participant will enter the order of play upon casting his or > > her > > > > first vote. > > > > > > > > End Proposal 309 > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Eugene Ventimiglia [SMTP:eventi@n...] > > > > Sent: Friday, January 19, 2001 9:31 AM > > > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > Problems: > > > > > > > > 1) Polls have not (yet) been established as the only voting method, in > > > fact > > > > it was only used this one past time. So voting does not > > officially begin > > > > with the creation of the poll, rather any player can vote (in any > > manner) > > > > as > > > > soon as the proposal is finalized. Perhaps a better deadline > > would allow > > > > this portion of the proposal, but as is, it won't stand up to a > > > challenge. > > > > > > > > 2) Since there's already a rule establishing turn order (201), any > > change > > > > to > > > > it would have to amend that rule, since there's a numerical > > heirarchy to > > > > rule disputes. The lower numbered rule wins, and a new proposal always > > > has > > > > a > > > > higher number. > > > > > > > > But there's hope: > > > > You could rewrite the first part and ammend #201 so that it > > includes new > > > > player introduction. After all, it's relevant to turn order. > > > > > > > > --e (here we go again --Dolly Pardon) > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Steven G. Arturo [mailto:sga5892@n...] > > > > > Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2001 9:36 PM > > > > > To: 'scatterbrains@egroups.com' > > > > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Begin Proposal 309 > > > > > > > > > > A new participant will gain the right to vote immediately > > upon sending > > > an > > > > > introduction affidavit, if no open polls exists. > > > > > > > > > > If an open poll exists upon sending an introduction affidavit, a new > > > > > participant's right to vote will be withheld until all open > > polls are > > > > > closed. > > > > > > > > > > A new participant's position in the order will be alphabetically > > > > > determined, depending on the person's surname, then the > > person's first > > > > > name, if necessary. This new participant will enter the order after > > > > > casting a vote. > > > > > > > > > > End Proposal 309 > > > > > > > > > > ahhh, that was easy after my grilled chicken and bacon sandwich > > > > > on a burnt > > > > > bun with barbeque sauce (the spellcheck had 'barbecue' > > instead of how > > i > > > > > spelled it...?). enjoy this as much as i enjoyed the sandwich! > > > > > > > > > > steve0 > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution > > or copying > > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > > webmaster@e.... > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From sga5892@n... Mon Jan 22 07:22:55 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: sga5892@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 22 Jan 2001 15:22:52 -0000 Received: (qmail 31019 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2001 15:17:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 22 Jan 2001 15:17:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-gw3.njit.edu) (128.235.251.11) by mta2 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2001 15:17:15 -0000 Received: from mailhost.njit.edu (mailhost.njit.edu [128.235.251.108]) by mail-gw3.njit.edu (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f0MGAfX20377 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 11:10:41 -0500 Received: from steve0 (dhcp194-216.njit.edu) by mailhost.njit.edu (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9) with SMTP id <0G7K00F8YL5KR3@m...> for scatterbrains@egroups.com; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 10:17:44 -0500 (EST) Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 10:16:49 -0500 Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 10:16:48 -0500 Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law To: "'scatterbrains@egroups.com'" Reply-to: "sga5892@n..." Message-id: <01C0845C.6EDFEB00.sga5892@n...> Organization: NJIT MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit From: "Steven G. Arturo" call this an insurance. the players coming in should contribute constructively and not just be temporaries used as votes. i could legitimately sign my little sister up so i can pass this proposal. -----Original Message----- From: Patrick D. Bernardo [SMTP:bernardo@c...] Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 10:09 AM To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law I'm not asking Steven to do anything. I'm just presenting my side of the argument. My post wasn't a suggestion for him to change the proposal. As I said in my original response, I'm still not sold on the proposal. Why is it such a bad idea to have new players coming in? ----- Original Message ----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia To: Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 10:05 AM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > I Agree. Pat- you're asking Steven to basically propose the opposite of the > intent of his original proposal. You know where I stand on this issue, but > I think reversing the proposal at this point would be wrong. He can't make > a non-proposal, and if he follows your reasoning, there would be no > substance to it. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Arturo, Bob [mailto:barturo@e...] > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:48 AM > > To: 'scatterbrains@egroups.com' > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > I like the proposal. You can't start playing until the round is over. New > > players can join in at any time I rather not have someone jumping in while > > there is a proposal on the table. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:42 AM > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > I'm actually biased in the other direction. I still think that > > we need new > > players. If Bob brought you in just to pass his proposal, then it's a > > win-win situation. Bob gets his proposal passed, and the rest of us get > > another player added into the mix, which makes for a more > > interesting game. > > > > I *like* the incentive to add new players. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Steven G. Arturo > > To: > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:36 AM > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > the right to vote is restricted in the case when a final > > propoal is to be > > > voted on to aviod bringing in new players for the sole purpose > > of passing > > a > > > proposal. > > > > > > for instance, say that bob brought me in because he needed one more vote > > to > > > pass his proposal. this rule is made to aviod that senario. > > > > > > also, it clears up the dillema of when to allow a new player to > > propose a > > > new rule. > > > > > > steve0 > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [SMTP:bernardo@c...] > > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:30 AM > > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > I'm not sold on the idea. Why restrict the right to vote at all? > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: > > > To: > > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:10 AM > > > Subject: re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > > > It looks ok to me. Any other objections? > > > > ------ > > > > From: > > > > Subject:[scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law[3A6C329D] > > > > hello monday's children. a good week to all employed. ill > > try to have > > a > > > > more interesting proposal for discussion on the next turn. > > until then, > > > > chew on this for a day or two. > > > > > > > > Begin Revised Proposal 309 > > > > > > > > A new participant will gain the right to vote immediately upon sending > > an > > > > introduction affidavit, if all voting on final proposals is complete. > > > > > > > > If voting on a final proposal is not complete upon sending an > > > introduction > > > > affidavit, a new participant's right to vote will be withheld > > until all > > > > voting on final proposals is complete. > > > > > > > > This new participant will enter the order of play upon casting his or > > her > > > > first vote. > > > > > > > > End Proposal 309 > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Eugene Ventimiglia [SMTP:eventi@n...] > > > > Sent: Friday, January 19, 2001 9:31 AM > > > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > Problems: > > > > > > > > 1) Polls have not (yet) been established as the only voting method, in > > > fact > > > > it was only used this one past time. So voting does not > > officially begin > > > > with the creation of the poll, rather any player can vote (in any > > manner) > > > > as > > > > soon as the proposal is finalized. Perhaps a better deadline > > would allow > > > > this portion of the proposal, but as is, it won't stand up to a > > > challenge. > > > > > > > > 2) Since there's already a rule establishing turn order (201), any > > change > > > > to > > > > it would have to amend that rule, since there's a numerical > > heirarchy to > > > > rule disputes. The lower numbered rule wins, and a new proposal always > > > has > > > > a > > > > higher number. > > > > > > > > But there's hope: > > > > You could rewrite the first part and ammend #201 so that it > > includes new > > > > player introduction. After all, it's relevant to turn order. > > > > > > > > --e (here we go again --Dolly Pardon) > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Steven G. Arturo [mailto:sga5892@n...] > > > > > Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2001 9:36 PM > > > > > To: 'scatterbrains@egroups.com' > > > > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Begin Proposal 309 > > > > > > > > > > A new participant will gain the right to vote immediately > > upon sending > > > an > > > > > introduction affidavit, if no open polls exists. > > > > > > > > > > If an open poll exists upon sending an introduction affidavit, a new > > > > > participant's right to vote will be withheld until all open > > polls are > > > > > closed. > > > > > > > > > > A new participant's position in the order will be alphabetically > > > > > determined, depending on the person's surname, then the > > person's first > > > > > name, if necessary. This new participant will enter the order after > > > > > casting a vote. > > > > > > > > > > End Proposal 309 > > > > > > > > > > ahhh, that was easy after my grilled chicken and bacon sandwich > > > > > on a burnt > > > > > bun with barbeque sauce (the spellcheck had 'barbecue' > > instead of how > > i > > > > > spelled it...?). enjoy this as much as i enjoyed the sandwich! > > > > > > > > > > steve0 > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution > > or copying > > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > > webmaster@e.... > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com From barturo@e... Mon Jan 22 07:30:42 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: BArturo@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 22 Jan 2001 15:30:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 56919 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2001 15:25:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 22 Jan 2001 15:25:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2001 15:25:33 -0000 Received: from batman.ess ([12.31.9.2]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA02065 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 10:25:28 -0500 (EST) Received: by BATMAN with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id ; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 10:21:02 -0500 Message-ID: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF0372AC@BATMAN> To: "'scatterbrains@egroups.com'" Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 10:21:01 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" From: "Arturo, Bob" I think having someone come in when there is a proposal being voted on is wrong. Why can't they wait until the next vote. They don't have to wait until the whole round is over. -----Original Message----- From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 10:09 AM To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law I'm not asking Steven to do anything. I'm just presenting my side of the argument. My post wasn't a suggestion for him to change the proposal. As I said in my original response, I'm still not sold on the proposal. Why is it such a bad idea to have new players coming in? ----- Original Message ----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia To: Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 10:05 AM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > I Agree. Pat- you're asking Steven to basically propose the opposite of the > intent of his original proposal. You know where I stand on this issue, but > I think reversing the proposal at this point would be wrong. He can't make > a non-proposal, and if he follows your reasoning, there would be no > substance to it. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Arturo, Bob [mailto:barturo@e...] > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:48 AM > > To: 'scatterbrains@egroups.com' > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > I like the proposal. You can't start playing until the round is over. New > > players can join in at any time I rather not have someone jumping in while > > there is a proposal on the table. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:42 AM > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > I'm actually biased in the other direction. I still think that > > we need new > > players. If Bob brought you in just to pass his proposal, then it's a > > win-win situation. Bob gets his proposal passed, and the rest of us get > > another player added into the mix, which makes for a more > > interesting game. > > > > I *like* the incentive to add new players. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Steven G. Arturo > > To: > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:36 AM > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > the right to vote is restricted in the case when a final > > propoal is to be > > > voted on to aviod bringing in new players for the sole purpose > > of passing > > a > > > proposal. > > > > > > for instance, say that bob brought me in because he needed one more vote > > to > > > pass his proposal. this rule is made to aviod that senario. > > > > > > also, it clears up the dillema of when to allow a new player to > > propose a > > > new rule. > > > > > > steve0 > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [SMTP:bernardo@c...] > > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:30 AM > > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > I'm not sold on the idea. Why restrict the right to vote at all? > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: > > > To: > > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:10 AM > > > Subject: re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > > > It looks ok to me. Any other objections? > > > > ------ > > > > From: > > > > Subject:[scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law[3A6C329D] > > > > hello monday's children. a good week to all employed. ill > > try to have > > a > > > > more interesting proposal for discussion on the next turn. > > until then, > > > > chew on this for a day or two. > > > > > > > > Begin Revised Proposal 309 > > > > > > > > A new participant will gain the right to vote immediately upon sending > > an > > > > introduction affidavit, if all voting on final proposals is complete. > > > > > > > > If voting on a final proposal is not complete upon sending an > > > introduction > > > > affidavit, a new participant's right to vote will be withheld > > until all > > > > voting on final proposals is complete. > > > > > > > > This new participant will enter the order of play upon casting his or > > her > > > > first vote. > > > > > > > > End Proposal 309 > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Eugene Ventimiglia [SMTP:eventi@n...] > > > > Sent: Friday, January 19, 2001 9:31 AM > > > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > Problems: > > > > > > > > 1) Polls have not (yet) been established as the only voting method, in > > > fact > > > > it was only used this one past time. So voting does not > > officially begin > > > > with the creation of the poll, rather any player can vote (in any > > manner) > > > > as > > > > soon as the proposal is finalized. Perhaps a better deadline > > would allow > > > > this portion of the proposal, but as is, it won't stand up to a > > > challenge. > > > > > > > > 2) Since there's already a rule establishing turn order (201), any > > change > > > > to > > > > it would have to amend that rule, since there's a numerical > > heirarchy to > > > > rule disputes. The lower numbered rule wins, and a new proposal always > > > has > > > > a > > > > higher number. > > > > > > > > But there's hope: > > > > You could rewrite the first part and ammend #201 so that it > > includes new > > > > player introduction. After all, it's relevant to turn order. > > > > > > > > --e (here we go again --Dolly Pardon) > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Steven G. Arturo [mailto:sga5892@n...] > > > > > Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2001 9:36 PM > > > > > To: 'scatterbrains@egroups.com' > > > > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Begin Proposal 309 > > > > > > > > > > A new participant will gain the right to vote immediately > > upon sending > > > an > > > > > introduction affidavit, if no open polls exists. > > > > > > > > > > If an open poll exists upon sending an introduction affidavit, a new > > > > > participant's right to vote will be withheld until all open > > polls are > > > > > closed. > > > > > > > > > > A new participant's position in the order will be alphabetically > > > > > determined, depending on the person's surname, then the > > person's first > > > > > name, if necessary. This new participant will enter the order after > > > > > casting a vote. > > > > > > > > > > End Proposal 309 > > > > > > > > > > ahhh, that was easy after my grilled chicken and bacon sandwich > > > > > on a burnt > > > > > bun with barbeque sauce (the spellcheck had 'barbecue' > > instead of how > > i > > > > > spelled it...?). enjoy this as much as i enjoyed the sandwich! > > > > > > > > > > steve0 > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution > > or copying > > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > > webmaster@e.... > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at webmaster@e.... From sga5892@n... Mon Jan 22 07:43:01 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: sga5892@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 22 Jan 2001 15:42:55 -0000 Received: (qmail 93572 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2001 15:37:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 22 Jan 2001 15:37:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-gw3.njit.edu) (128.235.251.11) by mta3 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2001 16:38:34 -0000 Received: from mailhost.njit.edu (mailhost.njit.edu [128.235.251.108]) by mail-gw3.njit.edu (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f0MGUsX22182 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 11:30:54 -0500 Received: from steve0 (dhcp194-216.njit.edu) by mailhost.njit.edu (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9) with SMTP id <0G7K00G1YM3AS7@m...> for scatterbrains@egroups.com; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 10:37:58 -0500 (EST) Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 10:37:03 -0500 Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 10:37:02 -0500 Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law To: "'scatterbrains@egroups.com'" Reply-to: "sga5892@n..." Message-id: <01C0845F.42380120.sga5892@n...> Organization: NJIT MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit From: "Steven G. Arturo" i think this is good... may i open a poll? -----Original Message----- From: Arturo, Bob [SMTP:barturo@e...] Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 10:21 AM To: 'scatterbrains@egroups.com' Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law I think having someone come in when there is a proposal being voted on is wrong. Why can't they wait until the next vote. They don't have to wait until the whole round is over. -----Original Message----- From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 10:09 AM To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law I'm not asking Steven to do anything. I'm just presenting my side of the argument. My post wasn't a suggestion for him to change the proposal. As I said in my original response, I'm still not sold on the proposal. Why is it such a bad idea to have new players coming in? ----- Original Message ----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia To: Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 10:05 AM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > I Agree. Pat- you're asking Steven to basically propose the opposite of the > intent of his original proposal. You know where I stand on this issue, but > I think reversing the proposal at this point would be wrong. He can't make > a non-proposal, and if he follows your reasoning, there would be no > substance to it. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Arturo, Bob [mailto:barturo@e...] > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:48 AM > > To: 'scatterbrains@egroups.com' > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > I like the proposal. You can't start playing until the round is over. New > > players can join in at any time I rather not have someone jumping in while > > there is a proposal on the table. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:42 AM > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > I'm actually biased in the other direction. I still think that > > we need new > > players. If Bob brought you in just to pass his proposal, then it's a > > win-win situation. Bob gets his proposal passed, and the rest of us get > > another player added into the mix, which makes for a more > > interesting game. > > > > I *like* the incentive to add new players. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Steven G. Arturo > > To: > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:36 AM > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > the right to vote is restricted in the case when a final > > propoal is to be > > > voted on to aviod bringing in new players for the sole purpose > > of passing > > a > > > proposal. > > > > > > for instance, say that bob brought me in because he needed one more vote > > to > > > pass his proposal. this rule is made to aviod that senario. > > > > > > also, it clears up the dillema of when to allow a new player to > > propose a > > > new rule. > > > > > > steve0 > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [SMTP:bernardo@c...] > > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:30 AM > > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > I'm not sold on the idea. Why restrict the right to vote at all? > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: > > > To: > > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:10 AM > > > Subject: re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > > > It looks ok to me. Any other objections? > > > > ------ > > > > From: > > > > Subject:[scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law[3A6C329D] > > > > hello monday's children. a good week to all employed. ill > > try to have > > a > > > > more interesting proposal for discussion on the next turn. > > until then, > > > > chew on this for a day or two. > > > > > > > > Begin Revised Proposal 309 > > > > > > > > A new participant will gain the right to vote immediately upon sending > > an > > > > introduction affidavit, if all voting on final proposals is complete. > > > > > > > > If voting on a final proposal is not complete upon sending an > > > introduction > > > > affidavit, a new participant's right to vote will be withheld > > until all > > > > voting on final proposals is complete. > > > > > > > > This new participant will enter the order of play upon casting his or > > her > > > > first vote. > > > > > > > > End Proposal 309 > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Eugene Ventimiglia [SMTP:eventi@n...] > > > > Sent: Friday, January 19, 2001 9:31 AM > > > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > Problems: > > > > > > > > 1) Polls have not (yet) been established as the only voting method, in > > > fact > > > > it was only used this one past time. So voting does not > > officially begin > > > > with the creation of the poll, rather any player can vote (in any > > manner) > > > > as > > > > soon as the proposal is finalized. Perhaps a better deadline > > would allow > > > > this portion of the proposal, but as is, it won't stand up to a > > > challenge. > > > > > > > > 2) Since there's already a rule establishing turn order (201), any > > change > > > > to > > > > it would have to amend that rule, since there's a numerical > > heirarchy to > > > > rule disputes. The lower numbered rule wins, and a new proposal always > > > has > > > > a > > > > higher number. > > > > > > > > But there's hope: > > > > You could rewrite the first part and ammend #201 so that it > > includes new > > > > player introduction. After all, it's relevant to turn order. > > > > > > > > --e (here we go again --Dolly Pardon) > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Steven G. Arturo [mailto:sga5892@n...] > > > > > Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2001 9:36 PM > > > > > To: 'scatterbrains@egroups.com' > > > > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Begin Proposal 309 > > > > > > > > > > A new participant will gain the right to vote immediately > > upon sending > > > an > > > > > introduction affidavit, if no open polls exists. > > > > > > > > > > If an open poll exists upon sending an introduction affidavit, a new > > > > > participant's right to vote will be withheld until all open > > polls are > > > > > closed. > > > > > > > > > > A new participant's position in the order will be alphabetically > > > > > determined, depending on the person's surname, then the > > person's first > > > > > name, if necessary. This new participant will enter the order after > > > > > casting a vote. > > > > > > > > > > End Proposal 309 > > > > > > > > > > ahhh, that was easy after my grilled chicken and bacon sandwich > > > > > on a burnt > > > > > bun with barbeque sauce (the spellcheck had 'barbecue' > > instead of how > > i > > > > > spelled it...?). enjoy this as much as i enjoyed the sandwich! > > > > > > > > > > steve0 > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution > > or copying > > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > > webmaster@e.... > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at webmaster@e.... To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com From bernardo@c... Mon Jan 22 07:50:36 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 22 Jan 2001 15:50:36 -0000 Received: (qmail 85417 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2001 15:43:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 22 Jan 2001 15:43:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta3 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2001 16:45:02 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-11.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.196]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f0MFhma36303 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 10:43:50 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <002301c0848a$0a3b8500$c4a811d0@computer> To: References: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF0372AC@BATMAN> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 10:43:06 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" Well, I suppose the argument is moot. You and Eug and Steven will all vote for it, so it'll pass. It remains to be seen if I'll vote for it, or if Fritz will. I really don't think that this law does anything *except* remove an incentive to introduce new members. I'm not willing to do that. I don't mind if a new player comes in to pass a law, because once that player is in the game, they will play to win. That will make them independent enough. Secondly, if what you're worried about is "the Laura situation" (Fritz- Laura is Steve and Bob's little sister), then what is needed is not a law restricting the right to vote, but one that beefs up the penalty for non-participation (perhaps by extending the penalty to the introducing player, etc.). ----- Original Message ----- From: Arturo, Bob To: Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 10:21 AM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > I think having someone come in when there is a proposal being voted on is > wrong. Why can't they wait until the next vote. They don't have to wait > until the whole round is over. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 10:09 AM > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > I'm not asking Steven to do anything. I'm just presenting my side of the > argument. My post wasn't a suggestion for him to change the proposal. As I > said in my original response, I'm still not sold on the proposal. > > Why is it such a bad idea to have new players coming in? > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Eugene Ventimiglia > To: > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 10:05 AM > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > I Agree. Pat- you're asking Steven to basically propose the opposite of > the > > intent of his original proposal. You know where I stand on this issue, > but > > I think reversing the proposal at this point would be wrong. He can't > make > > a non-proposal, and if he follows your reasoning, there would be no > > substance to it. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Arturo, Bob [mailto:barturo@e...] > > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:48 AM > > > To: 'scatterbrains@egroups.com' > > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > > I like the proposal. You can't start playing until the round is over. > New > > > players can join in at any time I rather not have someone jumping in > while > > > there is a proposal on the table. > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:42 AM > > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > > I'm actually biased in the other direction. I still think that > > > we need new > > > players. If Bob brought you in just to pass his proposal, then it's a > > > win-win situation. Bob gets his proposal passed, and the rest of us get > > > another player added into the mix, which makes for a more > > > interesting game. > > > > > > I *like* the incentive to add new players. > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: Steven G. Arturo > > > To: > > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:36 AM > > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > > > the right to vote is restricted in the case when a final > > > propoal is to be > > > > voted on to aviod bringing in new players for the sole purpose > > > of passing > > > a > > > > proposal. > > > > > > > > for instance, say that bob brought me in because he needed one more > vote > > > to > > > > pass his proposal. this rule is made to aviod that senario. > > > > > > > > also, it clears up the dillema of when to allow a new player to > > > propose a > > > > new rule. > > > > > > > > steve0 > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [SMTP:bernardo@c...] > > > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:30 AM > > > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > I'm not sold on the idea. Why restrict the right to vote at all? > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > From: > > > > To: > > > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:10 AM > > > > Subject: re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > > > > > > It looks ok to me. Any other objections? > > > > > ------ > > > > > From: > > > > > Subject:[scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law[3A6C329D] > > > > > hello monday's children. a good week to all employed. ill > > > try to have > > > a > > > > > more interesting proposal for discussion on the next turn. > > > until then, > > > > > chew on this for a day or two. > > > > > > > > > > Begin Revised Proposal 309 > > > > > > > > > > A new participant will gain the right to vote immediately upon > sending > > > an > > > > > introduction affidavit, if all voting on final proposals is > complete. > > > > > > > > > > If voting on a final proposal is not complete upon sending an > > > > introduction > > > > > affidavit, a new participant's right to vote will be withheld > > > until all > > > > > voting on final proposals is complete. > > > > > > > > > > This new participant will enter the order of play upon casting his > or > > > her > > > > > first vote. > > > > > > > > > > End Proposal 309 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Eugene Ventimiglia [SMTP:eventi@n...] > > > > > Sent: Friday, January 19, 2001 9:31 AM > > > > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > > > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > > > Problems: > > > > > > > > > > 1) Polls have not (yet) been established as the only voting method, > in > > > > fact > > > > > it was only used this one past time. So voting does not > > > officially begin > > > > > with the creation of the poll, rather any player can vote (in any > > > manner) > > > > > as > > > > > soon as the proposal is finalized. Perhaps a better deadline > > > would allow > > > > > this portion of the proposal, but as is, it won't stand up to a > > > > challenge. > > > > > > > > > > 2) Since there's already a rule establishing turn order (201), any > > > change > > > > > to > > > > > it would have to amend that rule, since there's a numerical > > > heirarchy to > > > > > rule disputes. The lower numbered rule wins, and a new proposal > always > > > > has > > > > > a > > > > > higher number. > > > > > > > > > > But there's hope: > > > > > You could rewrite the first part and ammend #201 so that it > > > includes new > > > > > player introduction. After all, it's relevant to turn order. > > > > > > > > > > --e (here we go again --Dolly Pardon) > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > From: Steven G. Arturo [mailto:sga5892@n...] > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2001 9:36 PM > > > > > > To: 'scatterbrains@egroups.com' > > > > > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Begin Proposal 309 > > > > > > > > > > > > A new participant will gain the right to vote immediately > > > upon sending > > > > an > > > > > > introduction affidavit, if no open polls exists. > > > > > > > > > > > > If an open poll exists upon sending an introduction affidavit, a > new > > > > > > participant's right to vote will be withheld until all open > > > polls are > > > > > > closed. > > > > > > > > > > > > A new participant's position in the order will be alphabetically > > > > > > determined, depending on the person's surname, then the > > > person's first > > > > > > name, if necessary. This new participant will enter the order > after > > > > > > casting a vote. > > > > > > > > > > > > End Proposal 309 > > > > > > > > > > > > ahhh, that was easy after my grilled chicken and bacon sandwich > > > > > > on a burnt > > > > > > bun with barbeque sauce (the spellcheck had 'barbecue' > > > instead of how > > > i > > > > > > spelled it...?). enjoy this as much as i enjoyed the sandwich! > > > > > > > > > > > > steve0 > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > > > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution > > > or copying > > > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > > > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > > > webmaster@e.... > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > webmaster@e.... > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Mon Jan 22 07:56:05 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 22 Jan 2001 15:56:05 -0000 Received: (qmail 82455 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2001 15:49:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 22 Jan 2001 15:49:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2001 15:49:40 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id KAA04708 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 10:49:39 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 10:51:00 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <01C0845F.42380120.sga5892@n...> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" You can open it at any time you want. We've been re-posting a "Final Form" message, which is nice, but not required. As Pat pointed out, he's voicing opposition, but there don't seem to be any mechanical problems with it, so it would have force if passed. Just don't expect a unanimous vote. --e > -----Original Message----- > From: Steven G. Arturo [mailto:sga5892@n...] > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 10:37 AM > To: 'scatterbrains@egroups.com' > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > i think this is good... may i open a poll? > > -----Original Message----- > From: Arturo, Bob [SMTP:barturo@e...] > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 10:21 AM > To: 'scatterbrains@egroups.com' > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > I think having someone come in when there is a proposal being voted on is > wrong. Why can't they wait until the next vote. They don't have to wait > until the whole round is over. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 10:09 AM > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > I'm not asking Steven to do anything. I'm just presenting my side of the > argument. My post wasn't a suggestion for him to change the > proposal. As I > said in my original response, I'm still not sold on the proposal. > > Why is it such a bad idea to have new players coming in? > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Eugene Ventimiglia > To: > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 10:05 AM > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > I Agree. Pat- you're asking Steven to basically propose the opposite of > the > > intent of his original proposal. You know where I stand on this issue, > but > > I think reversing the proposal at this point would be wrong. He can't > make > > a non-proposal, and if he follows your reasoning, there would be no > > substance to it. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Arturo, Bob [mailto:barturo@e...] > > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:48 AM > > > To: 'scatterbrains@egroups.com' > > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > > I like the proposal. You can't start playing until the round is over. > New > > > players can join in at any time I rather not have someone jumping in > while > > > there is a proposal on the table. > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:42 AM > > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > > I'm actually biased in the other direction. I still think that > > > we need new > > > players. If Bob brought you in just to pass his proposal, then it's a > > > win-win situation. Bob gets his proposal passed, and the > rest of us get > > > another player added into the mix, which makes for a more > > > interesting game. > > > > > > I *like* the incentive to add new players. > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: Steven G. Arturo > > > To: > > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:36 AM > > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > > > the right to vote is restricted in the case when a final > > > propoal is to be > > > > voted on to aviod bringing in new players for the sole purpose > > > of passing > > > a > > > > proposal. > > > > > > > > for instance, say that bob brought me in because he needed one more > vote > > > to > > > > pass his proposal. this rule is made to aviod that senario. > > > > > > > > also, it clears up the dillema of when to allow a new player to > > > propose a > > > > new rule. > > > > > > > > steve0 > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [SMTP:bernardo@c...] > > > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:30 AM > > > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > I'm not sold on the idea. Why restrict the right to vote at all? > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > From: > > > > To: > > > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:10 AM > > > > Subject: re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > > > > > > It looks ok to me. Any other objections? > > > > > ------ > > > > > From: > > > > > Subject:[scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' > law[3A6C329D] > > > > > hello monday's children. a good week to all employed. ill > > > try to have > > > a > > > > > more interesting proposal for discussion on the next turn. > > > until then, > > > > > chew on this for a day or two. > > > > > > > > > > Begin Revised Proposal 309 > > > > > > > > > > A new participant will gain the right to vote immediately upon > sending > > > an > > > > > introduction affidavit, if all voting on final proposals is > complete. > > > > > > > > > > If voting on a final proposal is not complete upon sending an > > > > introduction > > > > > affidavit, a new participant's right to vote will be withheld > > > until all > > > > > voting on final proposals is complete. > > > > > > > > > > This new participant will enter the order of play upon casting his > or > > > her > > > > > first vote. > > > > > > > > > > End Proposal 309 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Eugene Ventimiglia [SMTP:eventi@n...] > > > > > Sent: Friday, January 19, 2001 9:31 AM > > > > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > > > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > > > Problems: > > > > > > > > > > 1) Polls have not (yet) been established as the only > voting method, > in > > > > fact > > > > > it was only used this one past time. So voting does not > > > officially begin > > > > > with the creation of the poll, rather any player can vote (in any > > > manner) > > > > > as > > > > > soon as the proposal is finalized. Perhaps a better deadline > > > would allow > > > > > this portion of the proposal, but as is, it won't stand up to a > > > > challenge. > > > > > > > > > > 2) Since there's already a rule establishing turn order (201), any > > > change > > > > > to > > > > > it would have to amend that rule, since there's a numerical > > > heirarchy to > > > > > rule disputes. The lower numbered rule wins, and a new proposal > always > > > > has > > > > > a > > > > > higher number. > > > > > > > > > > But there's hope: > > > > > You could rewrite the first part and ammend #201 so that it > > > includes new > > > > > player introduction. After all, it's relevant to turn order. > > > > > > > > > > --e (here we go again --Dolly Pardon) > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > From: Steven G. Arturo [mailto:sga5892@n...] > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2001 9:36 PM > > > > > > To: 'scatterbrains@egroups.com' > > > > > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Begin Proposal 309 > > > > > > > > > > > > A new participant will gain the right to vote immediately > > > upon sending > > > > an > > > > > > introduction affidavit, if no open polls exists. > > > > > > > > > > > > If an open poll exists upon sending an introduction affidavit, a > new > > > > > > participant's right to vote will be withheld until all open > > > polls are > > > > > > closed. > > > > > > > > > > > > A new participant's position in the order will be alphabetically > > > > > > determined, depending on the person's surname, then the > > > person's first > > > > > > name, if necessary. This new participant will enter the order > after > > > > > > casting a vote. > > > > > > > > > > > > End Proposal 309 > > > > > > > > > > > > ahhh, that was easy after my grilled chicken and bacon sandwich > > > > > > on a burnt > > > > > > bun with barbeque sauce (the spellcheck had 'barbecue' > > > instead of how > > > i > > > > > > spelled it...?). enjoy this as much as i enjoyed the sandwich! > > > > > > > > > > > > steve0 > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > > > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution > > > or copying > > > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > > > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > > > webmaster@e.... > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution > or copying > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > webmaster@e.... > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Mon Jan 22 08:46:34 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 22 Jan 2001 16:46:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 82004 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2001 16:31:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 22 Jan 2001 16:31:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta1 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2001 16:31:10 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-06.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.191]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f0MGV2a40631 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 11:31:06 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <000b01c08490$a25f8560$bfa811d0@computer> To: References: Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 11:30:24 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" Let me try again. According to Rule 210, conspiracies and teams are *explicitly* allowed. As such, I think that the idea of excluding people for tag-teaming the vote is dubious. I just don't see why it is overwhelmingly understood as morally wrong. The fact is, this may, in some situations, be a very good incentive for recruiting new members and it may lead to the formation of teams or alliances. I'm not a fanatic about this point, but I just don't see that the benefits of this rule (which still haven't been identified) out-weigh the costs. The funniest thing about this is that it doesn't even address the worst possible abuse that is still open in the system. I'm not going to say what it is, as I'm still toying with exploiting that loophole, but now that I've mentioned it, I'm sure someone else will figure it out. ----- Original Message ----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia To: Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 10:51 AM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > You can open it at any time you want. We've been re-posting a "Final Form" > message, which is nice, but not required. As Pat pointed out, he's voicing > opposition, but there don't seem to be any mechanical problems with it, so > it would have force if passed. Just don't expect a unanimous vote. > --e > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Steven G. Arturo [mailto:sga5892@n...] > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 10:37 AM > > To: 'scatterbrains@egroups.com' > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > i think this is good... may i open a poll? > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Arturo, Bob [SMTP:barturo@e...] > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 10:21 AM > > To: 'scatterbrains@egroups.com' > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > I think having someone come in when there is a proposal being voted on is > > wrong. Why can't they wait until the next vote. They don't have to wait > > until the whole round is over. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 10:09 AM > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > I'm not asking Steven to do anything. I'm just presenting my side of the > > argument. My post wasn't a suggestion for him to change the > > proposal. As I > > said in my original response, I'm still not sold on the proposal. > > > > Why is it such a bad idea to have new players coming in? > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Eugene Ventimiglia > > To: > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 10:05 AM > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > I Agree. Pat- you're asking Steven to basically propose the opposite of > > the > > > intent of his original proposal. You know where I stand on this issue, > > but > > > I think reversing the proposal at this point would be wrong. He can't > > make > > > a non-proposal, and if he follows your reasoning, there would be no > > > substance to it. > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Arturo, Bob [mailto:barturo@e...] > > > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:48 AM > > > > To: 'scatterbrains@egroups.com' > > > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > > > > > I like the proposal. You can't start playing until the round is over. > > New > > > > players can join in at any time I rather not have someone jumping in > > while > > > > there is a proposal on the table. > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:42 AM > > > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm actually biased in the other direction. I still think that > > > > we need new > > > > players. If Bob brought you in just to pass his proposal, then it's a > > > > win-win situation. Bob gets his proposal passed, and the > > rest of us get > > > > another player added into the mix, which makes for a more > > > > interesting game. > > > > > > > > I *like* the incentive to add new players. > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > From: Steven G. Arturo > > > > To: > > > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:36 AM > > > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > > > > > > the right to vote is restricted in the case when a final > > > > propoal is to be > > > > > voted on to aviod bringing in new players for the sole purpose > > > > of passing > > > > a > > > > > proposal. > > > > > > > > > > for instance, say that bob brought me in because he needed one more > > vote > > > > to > > > > > pass his proposal. this rule is made to aviod that senario. > > > > > > > > > > also, it clears up the dillema of when to allow a new player to > > > > propose a > > > > > new rule. > > > > > > > > > > steve0 > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [SMTP:bernardo@c...] > > > > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:30 AM > > > > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > > > I'm not sold on the idea. Why restrict the right to vote at all? > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > > From: > > > > > To: > > > > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:10 AM > > > > > Subject: re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It looks ok to me. Any other objections? > > > > > > ------ > > > > > > From: > > > > > > Subject:[scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' > > law[3A6C329D] > > > > > > hello monday's children. a good week to all employed. ill > > > > try to have > > > > a > > > > > > more interesting proposal for discussion on the next turn. > > > > until then, > > > > > > chew on this for a day or two. > > > > > > > > > > > > Begin Revised Proposal 309 > > > > > > > > > > > > A new participant will gain the right to vote immediately upon > > sending > > > > an > > > > > > introduction affidavit, if all voting on final proposals is > > complete. > > > > > > > > > > > > If voting on a final proposal is not complete upon sending an > > > > > introduction > > > > > > affidavit, a new participant's right to vote will be withheld > > > > until all > > > > > > voting on final proposals is complete. > > > > > > > > > > > > This new participant will enter the order of play upon casting his > > or > > > > her > > > > > > first vote. > > > > > > > > > > > > End Proposal 309 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > From: Eugene Ventimiglia [SMTP:eventi@n...] > > > > > > Sent: Friday, January 19, 2001 9:31 AM > > > > > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > > > > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > > > > > Problems: > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) Polls have not (yet) been established as the only > > voting method, > > in > > > > > fact > > > > > > it was only used this one past time. So voting does not > > > > officially begin > > > > > > with the creation of the poll, rather any player can vote (in any > > > > manner) > > > > > > as > > > > > > soon as the proposal is finalized. Perhaps a better deadline > > > > would allow > > > > > > this portion of the proposal, but as is, it won't stand up to a > > > > > challenge. > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) Since there's already a rule establishing turn order (201), any > > > > change > > > > > > to > > > > > > it would have to amend that rule, since there's a numerical > > > > heirarchy to > > > > > > rule disputes. The lower numbered rule wins, and a new proposal > > always > > > > > has > > > > > > a > > > > > > higher number. > > > > > > > > > > > > But there's hope: > > > > > > You could rewrite the first part and ammend #201 so that it > > > > includes new > > > > > > player introduction. After all, it's relevant to turn order. > > > > > > > > > > > > --e (here we go again --Dolly Pardon) > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > From: Steven G. Arturo [mailto:sga5892@n...] > > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2001 9:36 PM > > > > > > > To: 'scatterbrains@egroups.com' > > > > > > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Begin Proposal 309 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A new participant will gain the right to vote immediately > > > > upon sending > > > > > an > > > > > > > introduction affidavit, if no open polls exists. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If an open poll exists upon sending an introduction affidavit, a > > new > > > > > > > participant's right to vote will be withheld until all open > > > > polls are > > > > > > > closed. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A new participant's position in the order will be alphabetically > > > > > > > determined, depending on the person's surname, then the > > > > person's first > > > > > > > name, if necessary. This new participant will enter the order > > after > > > > > > > casting a vote. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > End Proposal 309 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ahhh, that was easy after my grilled chicken and bacon sandwich > > > > > > > on a burnt > > > > > > > bun with barbeque sauce (the spellcheck had 'barbecue' > > > > instead of how > > > > i > > > > > > > spelled it...?). enjoy this as much as i enjoyed the sandwich! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > steve0 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > > > > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution > > > > or copying > > > > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > > > > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > > > > webmaster@e.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution > > or copying > > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > > webmaster@e.... > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Mon Jan 22 08:48:41 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 22 Jan 2001 16:48:41 -0000 Received: (qmail 90347 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2001 16:34:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 22 Jan 2001 16:34:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2001 16:34:19 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id LAA09121 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 11:34:17 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 11:35:39 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <002301c0848a$0a3b8500$c4a811d0@computer> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" It's the wrong kind of incentive. It's in effect saying everyone gets one free vote for introducing a member. Also, when does the vote end? We've been ending it once everyone's voted, but now we don't know who everyone is. Allowing voters to enter during the vote will lead to far more problems than it will solve. I'd continue, but I've got work to do. > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 10:43 AM > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > Well, I suppose the argument is moot. You and Eug and Steven > will all vote > for it, so it'll pass. It remains to be seen if I'll vote for it, or if > Fritz will. > > I really don't think that this law does anything *except* remove an > incentive to introduce new members. I'm not willing to do that. I don't > mind if a new player comes in to pass a law, because once that > player is in > the game, they will play to win. That will make them independent enough. > > Secondly, if what you're worried about is "the Laura situation" (Fritz- > Laura is Steve and Bob's little sister), then what is needed is not a law > restricting the right to vote, but one that beefs up the penalty for > non-participation (perhaps by extending the penalty to the introducing > player, etc.). > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Arturo, Bob > To: > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 10:21 AM > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > I think having someone come in when there is a proposal being > voted on is > > wrong. Why can't they wait until the next vote. They don't have to wait > > until the whole round is over. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 10:09 AM > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > I'm not asking Steven to do anything. I'm just presenting my > side of the > > argument. My post wasn't a suggestion for him to change the > proposal. As > I > > said in my original response, I'm still not sold on the proposal. > > > > Why is it such a bad idea to have new players coming in? > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Eugene Ventimiglia > > To: > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 10:05 AM > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > I Agree. Pat- you're asking Steven to basically propose the > opposite of > > the > > > intent of his original proposal. You know where I stand on > this issue, > > but > > > I think reversing the proposal at this point would be wrong. He can't > > make > > > a non-proposal, and if he follows your reasoning, there would be no > > > substance to it. > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Arturo, Bob [mailto:barturo@e...] > > > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:48 AM > > > > To: 'scatterbrains@egroups.com' > > > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > > > > > I like the proposal. You can't start playing until the > round is over. > > New > > > > players can join in at any time I rather not have someone jumping in > > while > > > > there is a proposal on the table. > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:42 AM > > > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm actually biased in the other direction. I still think that > > > > we need new > > > > players. If Bob brought you in just to pass his proposal, > then it's a > > > > win-win situation. Bob gets his proposal passed, and the rest of us > get > > > > another player added into the mix, which makes for a more > > > > interesting game. > > > > > > > > I *like* the incentive to add new players. > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > From: Steven G. Arturo > > > > To: > > > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:36 AM > > > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > > > > > > the right to vote is restricted in the case when a final > > > > propoal is to be > > > > > voted on to aviod bringing in new players for the sole purpose > > > > of passing > > > > a > > > > > proposal. > > > > > > > > > > for instance, say that bob brought me in because he > needed one more > > vote > > > > to > > > > > pass his proposal. this rule is made to aviod that senario. > > > > > > > > > > also, it clears up the dillema of when to allow a new player to > > > > propose a > > > > > new rule. > > > > > > > > > > steve0 > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [SMTP:bernardo@c...] > > > > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:30 AM > > > > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > > > I'm not sold on the idea. Why restrict the right to vote at all? > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > > From: > > > > > To: > > > > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:10 AM > > > > > Subject: re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It looks ok to me. Any other objections? > > > > > > ------ > > > > > > From: > > > > > > Subject:[scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' > law[3A6C329D] > > > > > > hello monday's children. a good week to all employed. ill > > > > try to have > > > > a > > > > > > more interesting proposal for discussion on the next turn. > > > > until then, > > > > > > chew on this for a day or two. > > > > > > > > > > > > Begin Revised Proposal 309 > > > > > > > > > > > > A new participant will gain the right to vote immediately upon > > sending > > > > an > > > > > > introduction affidavit, if all voting on final proposals is > > complete. > > > > > > > > > > > > If voting on a final proposal is not complete upon sending an > > > > > introduction > > > > > > affidavit, a new participant's right to vote will be withheld > > > > until all > > > > > > voting on final proposals is complete. > > > > > > > > > > > > This new participant will enter the order of play upon > casting his > > or > > > > her > > > > > > first vote. > > > > > > > > > > > > End Proposal 309 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > From: Eugene Ventimiglia [SMTP:eventi@n...] > > > > > > Sent: Friday, January 19, 2001 9:31 AM > > > > > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > > > > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > > > > > Problems: > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) Polls have not (yet) been established as the only voting > method, > > in > > > > > fact > > > > > > it was only used this one past time. So voting does not > > > > officially begin > > > > > > with the creation of the poll, rather any player can > vote (in any > > > > manner) > > > > > > as > > > > > > soon as the proposal is finalized. Perhaps a better deadline > > > > would allow > > > > > > this portion of the proposal, but as is, it won't stand up to a > > > > > challenge. > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) Since there's already a rule establishing turn order > (201), any > > > > change > > > > > > to > > > > > > it would have to amend that rule, since there's a numerical > > > > heirarchy to > > > > > > rule disputes. The lower numbered rule wins, and a new proposal > > always > > > > > has > > > > > > a > > > > > > higher number. > > > > > > > > > > > > But there's hope: > > > > > > You could rewrite the first part and ammend #201 so that it > > > > includes new > > > > > > player introduction. After all, it's relevant to turn order. > > > > > > > > > > > > --e (here we go again --Dolly Pardon) > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > From: Steven G. Arturo [mailto:sga5892@n...] > > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2001 9:36 PM > > > > > > > To: 'scatterbrains@egroups.com' > > > > > > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Begin Proposal 309 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A new participant will gain the right to vote immediately > > > > upon sending > > > > > an > > > > > > > introduction affidavit, if no open polls exists. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If an open poll exists upon sending an introduction > affidavit, a > > new > > > > > > > participant's right to vote will be withheld until all open > > > > polls are > > > > > > > closed. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A new participant's position in the order will be > alphabetically > > > > > > > determined, depending on the person's surname, then the > > > > person's first > > > > > > > name, if necessary. This new participant will enter the order > > after > > > > > > > casting a vote. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > End Proposal 309 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ahhh, that was easy after my grilled chicken and > bacon sandwich > > > > > > > on a burnt > > > > > > > bun with barbeque sauce (the spellcheck had 'barbecue' > > > > instead of how > > > > i > > > > > > > spelled it...?). enjoy this as much as i enjoyed the > sandwich! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > steve0 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > > > > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution > > > > or copying > > > > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > > > > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > > > > webmaster@e.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or > copying > > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > > webmaster@e.... > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From scatterbrains@egroups.com Mon Jan 22 09:01:29 2001 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22362 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2001 16:47:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 22 Jan 2001 16:47:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mk.egroups.com) (10.1.1.30) by mta3 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2001 17:48:38 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: notify@egroups.com Received: from [10.1.2.59] by mk.egroups.com with NNFMP; 22 Jan 2001 16:47:29 -0000 Received: (qmail 66406 invoked by uid 65534); 22 Jan 2001 16:47:20 -0000 Date: 22 Jan 2001 16:47:20 -0000 Message-ID: <980182040.66401@egroups.com> X-eGroups-Notify: From: To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: New file uploaded to scatterbrains 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 scatterbrains group. File : /nomic.html Uploaded by : eventi@c... Description : EXPERIMENTAL Rules HTML Version You can access this file at the URL http://www.egroups.com/files/scatterbrains/nomic%2Ehtml To learn more about eGroups file sharing, please visit http://www.egroups.com/help/files.html Regards, eventi@c... From f_hemker@h... Mon Jan 22 09:08:32 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: f_hemker@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 22 Jan 2001 17:08:31 -0000 Received: (qmail 84379 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2001 16:57:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 22 Jan 2001 16:57:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hi.egroups.com) (10.1.10.41) by mta1 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2001 16:57:48 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: f_hemker@h... Received: from [10.1.10.126] by hi.egroups.com with NNFMP; 22 Jan 2001 16:57:48 -0000 Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 16:57:38 -0000 To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: Re: Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law Message-ID: <94hoq2+75oc@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 13603 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 199.95.76.187 From: "Fritz Hemker" Fellow Players, I'm sorry that I haven't had anything to say so far. What with my applications and work I've been too busy to thoughtfully consider the proposal. I like the fact that this proposal normalizes, or explicitly explains how the entrance of players works. I thought that with a player introducing in the middle of a vote that there was room for misunderstanding due to non-explicit rules. From that point of view, this is a good proposal. However, like Pat says, it does tend to take away an incentive to add new players. Of course, with the "be fruitfull and multiply rule" still in place I believe that there is still plenty of incentive left. While this may cut off some of Pat's future nefarious plans <;-p, it does not seem to be all doom and gloom. We might see it as a good thing that all the rules aren't being done unanimously. Now we are really starting to play. I wonder who's going to be unlucky enough to pass a rule that doesn't pass at all... -Fritz --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, "Eugene Ventimiglia" wrote: > It's the wrong kind of incentive. It's in effect saying everyone gets one > free vote for introducing a member. Also, when does the vote end? We've > been ending it once everyone's voted, but now we don't know who everyone is. > Allowing voters to enter during the vote will lead to far more problems than > it will solve. > > I'd continue, but I've got work to do. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 10:43 AM > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > Well, I suppose the argument is moot. You and Eug and Steven > > will all vote > > for it, so it'll pass. It remains to be seen if I'll vote for it, or if > > Fritz will. > > > > I really don't think that this law does anything *except* remove an > > incentive to introduce new members. I'm not willing to do that. I don't > > mind if a new player comes in to pass a law, because once that > > player is in > > the game, they will play to win. That will make them independent enough. > > > > Secondly, if what you're worried about is "the Laura situation" (Fritz- > > Laura is Steve and Bob's little sister), then what is needed is not a law > > restricting the right to vote, but one that beefs up the penalty for > > non-participation (perhaps by extending the penalty to the introducing > > player, etc.). > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Arturo, Bob > > To: > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 10:21 AM > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > I think having someone come in when there is a proposal being > > voted on is > > > wrong. Why can't they wait until the next vote. They don't have to wait > > > until the whole round is over. > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 10:09 AM > > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > > I'm not asking Steven to do anything. I'm just presenting my > > side of the > > > argument. My post wasn't a suggestion for him to change the > > proposal. As > > I > > > said in my original response, I'm still not sold on the proposal. > > > > > > Why is it such a bad idea to have new players coming in? > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: Eugene Ventimiglia > > > To: > > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 10:05 AM > > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > > > I Agree. Pat- you're asking Steven to basically propose the > > opposite of > > > the > > > > intent of his original proposal. You know where I stand on > > this issue, > > > but > > > > I think reversing the proposal at this point would be wrong. He can't > > > make > > > > a non-proposal, and if he follows your reasoning, there would be no > > > > substance to it. > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Arturo, Bob [mailto:barturo@e...] > > > > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:48 AM > > > > > To: 'scatterbrains@egroups.com' > > > > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I like the proposal. You can't start playing until the > > round is over. > > > New > > > > > players can join in at any time I rather not have someone jumping in > > > while > > > > > there is a proposal on the table. > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > > > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:42 AM > > > > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm actually biased in the other direction. I still think that > > > > > we need new > > > > > players. If Bob brought you in just to pass his proposal, > > then it's a > > > > > win-win situation. Bob gets his proposal passed, and the rest of us > > get > > > > > another player added into the mix, which makes for a more > > > > > interesting game. > > > > > > > > > > I *like* the incentive to add new players. > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > > From: Steven G. Arturo > > > > > To: > > > > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:36 AM > > > > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the right to vote is restricted in the case when a final > > > > > propoal is to be > > > > > > voted on to aviod bringing in new players for the sole purpose > > > > > of passing > > > > > a > > > > > > proposal. > > > > > > > > > > > > for instance, say that bob brought me in because he > > needed one more > > > vote > > > > > to > > > > > > pass his proposal. this rule is made to aviod that senario. > > > > > > > > > > > > also, it clears up the dillema of when to allow a new player to > > > > > propose a > > > > > > new rule. > > > > > > > > > > > > steve0 > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [SMTP:bernardo@c...] > > > > > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:30 AM > > > > > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > > > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm not sold on the idea. Why restrict the right to vote at all? > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > > > From: > > > > > > To: > > > > > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:10 AM > > > > > > Subject: re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It looks ok to me. Any other objections? > > > > > > > ------ > > > > > > > From: > > > > > > > Subject:[scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' > > law[3A6C329D] > > > > > > > hello monday's children. a good week to all employed. ill > > > > > try to have > > > > > a > > > > > > > more interesting proposal for discussion on the next turn. > > > > > until then, > > > > > > > chew on this for a day or two. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Begin Revised Proposal 309 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A new participant will gain the right to vote immediately upon > > > sending > > > > > an > > > > > > > introduction affidavit, if all voting on final proposals is > > > complete. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If voting on a final proposal is not complete upon sending an > > > > > > introduction > > > > > > > affidavit, a new participant's right to vote will be withheld > > > > > until all > > > > > > > voting on final proposals is complete. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This new participant will enter the order of play upon > > casting his > > > or > > > > > her > > > > > > > first vote. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > End Proposal 309 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > From: Eugene Ventimiglia [SMTP:eventi@n...] > > > > > > > Sent: Friday, January 19, 2001 9:31 AM > > > > > > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > > > > > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Problems: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) Polls have not (yet) been established as the only voting > > method, > > > in > > > > > > fact > > > > > > > it was only used this one past time. So voting does not > > > > > officially begin > > > > > > > with the creation of the poll, rather any player can > > vote (in any > > > > > manner) > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > soon as the proposal is finalized. Perhaps a better deadline > > > > > would allow > > > > > > > this portion of the proposal, but as is, it won't stand up to a > > > > > > challenge. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) Since there's already a rule establishing turn order > > (201), any > > > > > change > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > it would have to amend that rule, since there's a numerical > > > > > heirarchy to > > > > > > > rule disputes. The lower numbered rule wins, and a new proposal > > > always > > > > > > has > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > higher number. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But there's hope: > > > > > > > You could rewrite the first part and ammend #201 so that it > > > > > includes new > > > > > > > player introduction. After all, it's relevant to turn order. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --e (here we go again --Dolly Pardon) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > From: Steven G. Arturo [mailto:sga5892@n...] > > > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2001 9:36 PM > > > > > > > > To: 'scatterbrains@egroups.com' > > > > > > > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Begin Proposal 309 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A new participant will gain the right to vote immediately > > > > > upon sending > > > > > > an > > > > > > > > introduction affidavit, if no open polls exists. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If an open poll exists upon sending an introduction > > affidavit, a > > > new > > > > > > > > participant's right to vote will be withheld until all open > > > > > polls are > > > > > > > > closed. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A new participant's position in the order will be > > alphabetically > > > > > > > > determined, depending on the person's surname, then the > > > > > person's first > > > > > > > > name, if necessary. This new participant will enter the order > > > after > > > > > > > > casting a vote. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > End Proposal 309 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ahhh, that was easy after my grilled chicken and > > bacon sandwich > > > > > > > > on a burnt > > > > > > > > bun with barbeque sauce (the spellcheck had 'barbecue' > > > > > instead of how > > > > > i > > > > > > > > spelled it...?). enjoy this as much as i enjoyed the > > sandwich! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > steve0 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > > > > > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution > > > > > or copying > > > > > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > > > > > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > > > > > webmaster@e... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > > > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or > > copying > > > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > > > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > > > webmaster@e... > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an e From eventi@n... Mon Jan 22 09:37:41 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 22 Jan 2001 17:37:41 -0000 Received: (qmail 90042 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2001 17:24:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 22 Jan 2001 17:24:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2001 17:24:23 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id MAA14155 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 12:24:22 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] New file uploaded to scatterbrains Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 12:25:45 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <980182040.66401@egroups.com> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" This is marked EXPERIMENTAL, since it was generated somewhat automatically... Please review it, and remember that it's a good faith representation of the Rules currently in play, and not necessarily the final word. Let me know if you see any errors, or if the formatting can be improved. --e > -----Original Message----- > From: scatterbrains@egroups.com [mailto:scatterbrains@egroups.com] > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 11:47 AM > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > Subject: [scatterbrains] New file uploaded to scatterbrains > > > > Hello, > > This email message is a notification to let you know that > a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the scatterbrains > group. > > File : /nomic.html > Uploaded by : eventi@c... > Description : EXPERIMENTAL Rules HTML Version > > You can access this file at the URL > > http://www.egroups.com/files/scatterbrains/nomic%2Ehtml > > To learn more about eGroups file sharing, please visit > > http://www.egroups.com/help/files.html > > > Regards, > > eventi@c... > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Mon Jan 22 11:50:50 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 22 Jan 2001 19:50:50 -0000 Received: (qmail 40814 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2001 19:35:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 22 Jan 2001 19:35:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2001 19:35:28 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-13.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.198]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f0MJZQa58052 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 14:35:26 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <001401c084aa$6297dbc0$c6a811d0@computer> To: References: Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] New file uploaded to scatterbrains Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 14:34:47 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" This looks real nice and shiny! Much easier format to read. Very cool. Just run the spell-check! ----- Original Message ----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia To: Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 12:25 PM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] New file uploaded to scatterbrains > This is marked EXPERIMENTAL, since it was generated somewhat > automatically... Please review it, and remember that it's a good faith > representation of the Rules currently in play, and not necessarily the final > word. Let me know if you see any errors, or if the formatting can be > improved. > --e > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: scatterbrains@egroups.com [mailto:scatterbrains@egroups.com] > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 11:47 AM > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > Subject: [scatterbrains] New file uploaded to scatterbrains > > > > > > > > Hello, > > > > This email message is a notification to let you know that > > a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the scatterbrains > > group. > > > > File : /nomic.html > > Uploaded by : eventi@c... > > Description : EXPERIMENTAL Rules HTML Version > > > > You can access this file at the URL > > > > http://www.egroups.com/files/scatterbrains/nomic%2Ehtml > > > > To learn more about eGroups file sharing, please visit > > > > http://www.egroups.com/help/files.html > > > > > > Regards, > > > > eventi@c... > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Mon Jan 22 12:53:14 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 22 Jan 2001 20:53:13 -0000 Received: (qmail 15057 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2001 20:33:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 22 Jan 2001 20:33:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 22 Jan 2001 21:34:20 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id PAA04929 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 15:33:14 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] New file uploaded to scatterbrains Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 15:34:37 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <001401c084aa$6297dbc0$c6a811d0@computer> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" OK, done... > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 2:35 PM > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] New file uploaded to scatterbrains > > > This looks real nice and shiny! Much easier format to read. Very cool. > > Just run the spell-check! > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Eugene Ventimiglia > To: > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 12:25 PM > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] New file uploaded to scatterbrains > > > > This is marked EXPERIMENTAL, since it was generated somewhat > > automatically... Please review it, and remember that it's a good faith > > representation of the Rules currently in play, and not necessarily the > final > > word. Let me know if you see any errors, or if the formatting can be > > improved. > > --e > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: scatterbrains@egroups.com [mailto:scatterbrains@egroups.com] > > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 11:47 AM > > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > > Subject: [scatterbrains] New file uploaded to scatterbrains > > > > > > > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > This email message is a notification to let you know that > > > a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the scatterbrains > > > group. > > > > > > File : /nomic.html > > > Uploaded by : eventi@c... > > > Description : EXPERIMENTAL Rules HTML Version > > > > > > You can access this file at the URL > > > > > > http://www.egroups.com/files/scatterbrains/nomic%2Ehtml > > > > > > To learn more about eGroups file sharing, please visit > > > > > > http://www.egroups.com/help/files.html > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > eventi@c... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Tue Jan 23 07:21:50 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 23 Jan 2001 15:21:50 -0000 Received: (qmail 89722 invoked from network); 23 Jan 2001 15:13:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 23 Jan 2001 15:13:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta3 with SMTP; 23 Jan 2001 16:14:08 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-07.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.192]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f0NFCva86973 for ; Tue, 23 Jan 2001 10:12:57 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <000d01c0854e$e229afe0$c0a811d0@computer> To: References: <94hoq2+75oc@eGroups.com> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 10:12:18 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" So when's the vote? ----- Original Message ----- From: Fritz Hemker To: Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 11:57 AM Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > Fellow Players, > > I'm sorry that I haven't had anything to say so far. What with my > applications and work I've been too busy to thoughtfully consider the > proposal. > > I like the fact that this proposal normalizes, or explicitly explains > how the entrance of players works. I thought that with a player > introducing in the middle of a vote that there was room for > misunderstanding due to non-explicit rules. From that point of view, > this is a good proposal. > > However, like Pat says, it does tend to take away an incentive to add > new players. Of course, with the "be fruitfull and multiply rule" > still in place I believe that there is still plenty of incentive left. > While this may cut off some of Pat's future nefarious plans <;-p, it > does not seem to be all doom and gloom. > > We might see it as a good thing that all the rules aren't being done > unanimously. Now we are really starting to play. I wonder who's > going to be unlucky enough to pass a rule that doesn't pass at all... > > -Fritz > --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, "Eugene Ventimiglia" > wrote: > > It's the wrong kind of incentive. It's in effect saying everyone > gets one > > free vote for introducing a member. Also, when does the vote end? > We've > > been ending it once everyone's voted, but now we don't know who > everyone is. > > Allowing voters to enter during the vote will lead to far more > problems than > > it will solve. > > > > I'd continue, but I've got work to do. > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 10:43 AM > > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > > Well, I suppose the argument is moot. You and Eug and Steven > > > will all vote > > > for it, so it'll pass. It remains to be seen if I'll vote for it, > or if > > > Fritz will. > > > > > > I really don't think that this law does anything *except* remove > an > > > incentive to introduce new members. I'm not willing to do that. > I don't > > > mind if a new player comes in to pass a law, because once that > > > player is in > > > the game, they will play to win. That will make them independent > enough. > > > > > > Secondly, if what you're worried about is "the Laura situation" > (Fritz- > > > Laura is Steve and Bob's little sister), then what is needed is > not a law > > > restricting the right to vote, but one that beefs up the penalty > for > > > non-participation (perhaps by extending the penalty to the > introducing > > > player, etc.). > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: Arturo, Bob > > > To: > > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 10:21 AM > > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > > > I think having someone come in when there is a proposal being > > > voted on is > > > > wrong. Why can't they wait until the next vote. They don't have > to wait > > > > until the whole round is over. > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 10:09 AM > > > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm not asking Steven to do anything. I'm just presenting my > > > side of the > > > > argument. My post wasn't a suggestion for him to change the > > > proposal. As > > > I > > > > said in my original response, I'm still not sold on the > proposal. > > > > > > > > Why is it such a bad idea to have new players coming in? > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > From: Eugene Ventimiglia > > > > To: > > > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 10:05 AM > > > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > > > > > > I Agree. Pat- you're asking Steven to basically propose the > > > opposite of > > > > the > > > > > intent of his original proposal. You know where I stand on > > > this issue, > > > > but > > > > > I think reversing the proposal at this point would be wrong. > He can't > > > > make > > > > > a non-proposal, and if he follows your reasoning, there would > be no > > > > > substance to it. > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > From: Arturo, Bob [mailto:barturo@e...] > > > > > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:48 AM > > > > > > To: 'scatterbrains@egroups.com' > > > > > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' > law > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I like the proposal. You can't start playing until the > > > round is over. > > > > New > > > > > > players can join in at any time I rather not have someone > jumping in > > > > while > > > > > > there is a proposal on the table. > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > > > > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:42 AM > > > > > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > > > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' > law > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm actually biased in the other direction. I still think > that > > > > > > we need new > > > > > > players. If Bob brought you in just to pass his proposal, > > > then it's a > > > > > > win-win situation. Bob gets his proposal passed, and the > rest of us > > > get > > > > > > another player added into the mix, which makes for a more > > > > > > interesting game. > > > > > > > > > > > > I *like* the incentive to add new players. > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > > > From: Steven G. Arturo > > > > > > To: > > > > > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:36 AM > > > > > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' > law > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the right to vote is restricted in the case when a final > > > > > > propoal is to be > > > > > > > voted on to aviod bringing in new players for the sole > purpose > > > > > > of passing > > > > > > a > > > > > > > proposal. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for instance, say that bob brought me in because he > > > needed one more > > > > vote > > > > > > to > > > > > > > pass his proposal. this rule is made to aviod that > senario. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > also, it clears up the dillema of when to allow a new > player to > > > > > > propose a > > > > > > > new rule. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > steve0 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [SMTP:bernardo@c...] > > > > > > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:30 AM > > > > > > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' > law > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm not sold on the idea. Why restrict the right to vote > at all? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > > > > From: > > > > > > > To: > > > > > > > Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:10 AM > > > > > > > Subject: re: [scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' > law > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It looks ok to me. Any other objections? > > > > > > > > ------ > > > > > > > > From: > > > > > > > > Subject:[scatterbrains] Revised Proposal 309: 'Newbe' > > > law[3A6C329D] > > > > > > > > hello monday's children. a good week to all employed. > ill > > > > > > try to have > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > more interesting proposal for discussion on the next > turn. > > > > > > until then, > > > > > > > > chew on this for a day or two. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Begin Revised Proposal 309 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A new participant will gain the right to vote > immediately upon > > > > sending > > > > > > an > > > > > > > > introduction affidavit, if all voting on final proposals > is > > > > complete. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If voting on a final proposal is not complete upon > sending an > > > > > > > introduction > > > > > > > > affidavit, a new participant's right to vote will be > withheld > > > > > > until all > > > > > > > > voting on final proposals is complete. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This new participant will enter the order of play upon > > > casting his > > > > or > > > > > > her > > > > > > > > first vote. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > End Proposal 309 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > From: Eugene Ventimiglia [SMTP:eventi@n...] > > > > > > > > Sent: Friday, January 19, 2001 9:31 AM > > > > > > > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > > > > > > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Problems: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) Polls have not (yet) been established as the only > voting > > > method, > > > > in > > > > > > > fact > > > > > > > > it was only used this one past time. So voting does not > > > > > > officially begin > > > > > > > > with the creation of the poll, rather any player can > > > vote (in any > > > > > > manner) > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > soon as the proposal is finalized. Perhaps a better > deadline > > > > > > would allow > > > > > > > > this portion of the proposal, but as is, it won't stand > up to a > > > > > > > challenge. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) Since there's already a rule establishing turn order > > > (201), any > > > > > > change > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > it would have to amend that rule, since there's a > numerical > > > > > > heirarchy to > > > > > > > > rule disputes. The lower numbered rule wins, and a new > proposal > > > > always > > > > > > > has > > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > higher number. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But there's hope: > > > > > > > > You could rewrite the first part and ammend #201 so that > it > > > > > > includes new > > > > > > > > player introduction. After all, it's relevant to turn > order. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --e (here we go again --Dolly Pardon) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > From: Steven G. Arturo [mailto:sga5892@n...] > > > > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2001 9:36 PM > > > > > > > > > To: 'scatterbrains@egroups.com' > > > > > > > > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 309: 'Newbe' law > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Begin Proposal 309 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A new participant will gain the right to vote > immediately > > > > > > upon sending > > > > > > > an > > > > > > > > > introduction affidavit, if no open polls exists. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If an open poll exists upon sending an introduction > > > affidavit, a > > > > new > > > > > > > > > participant's right to vote will be withheld until all > open > > > > > > polls are > > > > > > > > > closed. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A new participant's position in the order will be > > > alphabetically > > > > > > > > > determined, depending on the person's surname, then > the > > > > > > person's first > > > > > > > > > name, if necessary. This new participant will enter > the order > > > > after > > > > > > > > > casting a vote. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > End Proposal 309 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ahhh, that was easy after my grilled chicken and > > > bacon sandwich > > > > > > > > > on a burnt > > > > > > > > > bun with barbeque sauce (the spellcheck had 'barbecue' > > > > > > instead of how > > > > > > i > > > > > > > > > spelled it...?). enjoy this as much as i enjoyed the > > > sandwich! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > steve0 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of > this > > > > > > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any > distribution > > > > > > or copying > > > > > > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > > > > > > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > > > > > > webmaster@e... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of > this > > > > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any > distribution or > > > copying > > > > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > > > > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > > > > webmaster@e... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an e > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From scatterbrains@egroups.com Tue Jan 23 07:35:30 2001 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 84616 invoked from network); 23 Jan 2001 15:29:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 23 Jan 2001 15:29:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ef.egroups.com) (10.1.2.111) by mta1 with SMTP; 23 Jan 2001 15:29:40 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: notify@egroups.com Received: from [10.1.10.118] by ef.egroups.com with NNFMP; 23 Jan 2001 15:29:32 -0000 Received: (qmail 31997 invoked by uid 65534); 23 Jan 2001 15:29:32 -0000 Date: 23 Jan 2001 15:29:32 -0000 Message-ID: <980263772.31994@egroups.com> X-eGroups-Application: poll From: scatterbrains@egroups.com To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: New poll for scatterbrains MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Enter your vote today! Check out the new poll for the scatterbrains group: Begin Final Proposal 309 A new participant will gain the right to vote immediately upon sending an introduction affidavit, if all voting on final proposals is complete. If voting on a final proposal is not complete upon sending an introduction affidavit, a new participant's right to vote will be withheld until all voting on final proposals is complete. This new participant will enter the order of play upon casting his or her first vote. End Final Proposal 309 o in favor o not in favor To vote, please visit the following web page: http://www.egroups.com/polls/scatterbrains Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the eGroups web site listed above. Thanks! From sga5892@n... Tue Jan 23 07:37:55 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: sga5892@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 23 Jan 2001 15:37:55 -0000 Received: (qmail 4491 invoked from network); 23 Jan 2001 15:31:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 23 Jan 2001 15:31:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-gw4.njit.edu) (128.235.251.32) by mta1 with SMTP; 23 Jan 2001 15:31:44 -0000 Received: from mailhost.njit.edu (mailhost.njit.edu [128.235.251.108]) by mail-gw4.njit.edu (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f0NGXcq19465 for ; Tue, 23 Jan 2001 11:33:38 -0500 Received: from steve0 (dhcp194-216.njit.edu) by mailhost.njit.edu (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9) with SMTP id <0G7M0063ZGGTES@m...> for scatterbrains@egroups.com; Tue, 23 Jan 2001 10:31:41 -0500 (EST) Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Tue, 23 Jan 2001 10:31:17 -0500 Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 10:31:16 -0500 Subject: Proposal 309 Final Form To: "'scatterbrains@egroups.com'" Reply-to: "sga5892@n..." Message-id: <01C08527.9E5A2320.sga5892@n...> Organization: NJIT MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit From: "Steven G. Arturo" Begin Final Form of Proposal 309 A new participant will gain the right to vote immediately upon sending an introduction affidavit, if all voting on final proposals is complete. If voting on a final proposal is not complete upon sending an introduction affidavit, a new participant's right to vote will be withheld until all voting on final proposals is complete. This new participant will enter the order of play upon casting his or her first vote. End Final Form of Proposal 309 steve0 From eventi@n... Tue Jan 23 21:45:05 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 24 Jan 2001 05:45:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 47802 invoked from network); 24 Jan 2001 05:45:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 24 Jan 2001 05:45:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mw.egroups.com) (10.1.2.2) by mta3 with SMTP; 24 Jan 2001 06:46:09 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: eventi@n... Received: from [10.1.2.113] by mw.egroups.com with NNFMP; 24 Jan 2001 05:45:02 -0000 Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 05:44:54 -0000 To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: Re: New poll for scatterbrains Message-ID: <94lq4m+8uq9@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: <980263772.31994@egroups.com> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 223 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 64.29.109.18 From: eventi@n... Looks like all 5 votes are in. --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, scatterbrains@egroups.com wrote: > > Enter your vote today! Check out the new poll for the scatterbrains > group: > > > Begin Final Proposal 309 > ... From bernardo@c... Wed Jan 24 05:51:14 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 24 Jan 2001 13:51:09 -0000 Received: (qmail 85844 invoked from network); 24 Jan 2001 13:51:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 24 Jan 2001 13:51:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta3 with SMTP; 24 Jan 2001 14:52:14 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-12.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.197]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f0ODoxa94611 for ; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 08:51:02 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <002601c0860c$9c9ae3e0$c5a811d0@computer> To: References: <94lq4m+8uq9@eGroups.com> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: New poll for scatterbrains Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 08:50:11 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" Does that mean that it's my turn? Or should I wait for the results to be posted? ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 12:44 AM Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: New poll for scatterbrains > Looks like all 5 votes are in. > > --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, scatterbrains@egroups.com wrote: > > > > Enter your vote today! Check out the new poll for the > scatterbrains > > group: > > > > > > Begin Final Proposal 309 > > ... > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Wed Jan 24 06:41:39 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 24 Jan 2001 14:41:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 61286 invoked from network); 24 Jan 2001 14:39:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 24 Jan 2001 14:39:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 24 Jan 2001 14:39:36 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id JAA03056 for ; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 09:39:35 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: New poll for scatterbrains Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 09:40:56 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <002601c0860c$9c9ae3e0$c5a811d0@computer> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" It's your rule (306) that decides, I can't score it until the results are shown. I really don't think anyone would challenge it, though. > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 8:50 AM > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: New poll for scatterbrains > > > Does that mean that it's my turn? Or should I wait for the results to be > posted? > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: > Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 12:44 AM > Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: New poll for scatterbrains > > > > Looks like all 5 votes are in. > > > > --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, scatterbrains@egroups.com wrote: > > > > > > Enter your vote today! Check out the new poll for the > > scatterbrains > > > group: > > > > > > > > > Begin Final Proposal 309 > > > ... > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Wed Jan 24 06:48:59 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 24 Jan 2001 14:48:59 -0000 Received: (qmail 91577 invoked from network); 24 Jan 2001 14:46:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 24 Jan 2001 14:46:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 24 Jan 2001 14:46:22 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-12.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.197]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f0OEkKa99449 for ; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 09:46:20 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <004d01c08614$54e16760$c5a811d0@computer> To: References: Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: New poll for scatterbrains Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 09:45:42 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" No, I'll wait. I just wasn't sure, with the whole poll thing. I guess we just have to wait for Steven to finish kissing his girlfriend or something. ----- Original Message ----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia To: Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 9:40 AM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: New poll for scatterbrains > It's your rule (306) that decides, I can't score it until the results are > shown. I really don't think anyone would challenge it, though. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 8:50 AM > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: New poll for scatterbrains > > > > > > Does that mean that it's my turn? Or should I wait for the results to be > > posted? > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: > > To: > > Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 12:44 AM > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: New poll for scatterbrains > > > > > > > Looks like all 5 votes are in. > > > > > > --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, scatterbrains@egroups.com wrote: > > > > > > > > Enter your vote today! Check out the new poll for the > > > scatterbrains > > > > group: > > > > > > > > > > > > Begin Final Proposal 309 > > > > ... > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From sga5892@n... Wed Jan 24 07:00:29 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: sga5892@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 24 Jan 2001 15:00:28 -0000 Received: (qmail 22837 invoked from network); 24 Jan 2001 14:57:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 24 Jan 2001 14:57:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-gw3.njit.edu) (128.235.251.11) by mta1 with SMTP; 24 Jan 2001 14:57:01 -0000 Received: from mailhost.njit.edu (mailhost.njit.edu [128.235.251.108]) by mail-gw3.njit.edu (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f0OEv0E15150 for ; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 09:57:00 -0500 Received: from steve0 (dhcp194-216.njit.edu) by mailhost.njit.edu (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9) with SMTP id <0G7O00FIW9IYGE@m...> for scatterbrains@egroups.com; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 09:56:58 -0500 (EST) Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 09:56:39 -0500 Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 09:56:38 -0500 Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: New poll for scatterbrains To: "'scatterbrains@egroups.com'" Reply-to: "sga5892@n..." Message-id: <01C085EB.F269C280.sga5892@n...> Organization: NJIT MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit From: "Steven G. Arturo" haha...Done! -----Original Message----- From: Patrick D. Bernardo [SMTP:bernardo@c...] Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 9:46 AM To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: New poll for scatterbrains No, I'll wait. I just wasn't sure, with the whole poll thing. I guess we just have to wait for Steven to finish kissing his girlfriend or something. ----- Original Message ----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia To: Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 9:40 AM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: New poll for scatterbrains > It's your rule (306) that decides, I can't score it until the results are > shown. I really don't think anyone would challenge it, though. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 8:50 AM > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: New poll for scatterbrains > > > > > > Does that mean that it's my turn? Or should I wait for the results to be > > posted? > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: > > To: > > Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 12:44 AM > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: New poll for scatterbrains > > > > > > > Looks like all 5 votes are in. > > > > > > --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, scatterbrains@egroups.com wrote: > > > > > > > > Enter your vote today! Check out the new poll for the > > > scatterbrains > > > > group: > > > > > > > > > > > > Begin Final Proposal 309 > > > > ... > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com From scatterbrains@egroups.com Wed Jan 24 07:01:21 2001 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13149 invoked from network); 24 Jan 2001 14:57:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 24 Jan 2001 14:57:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO fl.egroups.com) (10.1.10.48) by mta1 with SMTP; 24 Jan 2001 14:57:37 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: notify@egroups.com Received: from [10.1.2.99] by fl.egroups.com with NNFMP; 24 Jan 2001 14:57:36 -0000 Received: (qmail 34663 invoked by uid 65534); 24 Jan 2001 14:57:35 -0000 Date: 24 Jan 2001 14:57:35 -0000 Message-ID: <980348255.34660@egroups.com> X-eGroups-Application: polls From: scatterbrains@egroups.com To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: Poll results for scatterbrains MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The following scatterbrains poll is now closed. Here are the final results: POLL QUESTION: Begin Final Proposal 309 A new participant will gain the right to vote immediately upon sending an introduction affidavit, if all voting on final proposals is complete. If voting on a final proposal is not complete upon sending an introduction affidavit, a new participant's right to vote will be withheld until all voting on final proposals is complete. This new participant will enter the order of play upon casting his or her first vote. End Final Proposal 309 CHOICES AND RESULTS - in favor, 3 votes, 60.00% - not in favor, 2 votes, 40.00% For more information about this group, please visit http://www.egroups.com/group/scatterbrains For help with eGroups, please visit http://www.egroups.com/help From bernardo@c... Wed Jan 24 07:11:17 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 24 Jan 2001 15:11:17 -0000 Received: (qmail 50999 invoked from network); 24 Jan 2001 15:06:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 24 Jan 2001 15:06:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta3 with SMTP; 24 Jan 2001 16:07:30 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-12.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.197]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f0OF6Ha01430 for ; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 10:06:19 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <006e01c08617$218359c0$c5a811d0@computer> To: References: <980348255.34660@egroups.com> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Poll results for scatterbrains Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 10:05:33 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" OH! That's interesting... ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 9:57 AM Subject: [scatterbrains] Poll results for scatterbrains > > The following scatterbrains poll is now closed. Here are the > final results: > > > POLL QUESTION: Begin Final Proposal 309 > > A new participant will gain the right > to vote immediately upon sending an > introduction affidavit, if all voting > on final proposals is complete. > > If voting on a final proposal is not > complete upon sending an introduction > affidavit, a new participant's right to > vote will be withheld until all > voting on final proposals is complete. > > This new participant will enter the > order of play upon casting his or her > first vote. > > End Final Proposal 309 > > > CHOICES AND RESULTS > - in favor, 3 votes, 60.00% > - not in favor, 2 votes, 40.00% > > > > For more information about this group, please visit > http://www.egroups.com/group/scatterbrains > > For help with eGroups, please visit > http://www.egroups.com/help > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Wed Jan 24 07:13:31 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 24 Jan 2001 15:13:31 -0000 Received: (qmail 2535 invoked from network); 24 Jan 2001 15:06:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 24 Jan 2001 15:06:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta3 with SMTP; 24 Jan 2001 16:07:51 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-12.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.197]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f0OF6ba01591 for ; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 10:06:39 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <007101c08617$2d339960$c5a811d0@computer> To: Subject: Proposal 310 Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 10:05:46 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_006B_01C085ED.38303280" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" ------=_NextPart_000_006B_01C085ED.38303280 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Proposal 310: An office shall be created, called the Chief Magistrate, for the purpose of= smiting people (handing out punishments). The Chief Magistrate shall have= the responsibility to assess penalties up to the penalty of death (removal= from the game), according to the law and for the general maintenance of go= od order within the regime. All smitings must be done publicly within 2 days (excluding those days excl= uded by 308), except for offenses which carry the penalty of death, which s= hall have no time limitation. All punishments less than death are final, t= hough they may be appealed by a call to judgment (which may alter the sever= ity of the penalty or dismiss it altogether). All death penalty cases are = immediately "appealed" in that they must be supported unanimously by the pe= ople at large. The office of Chief Magistrate shall originally be filled by election from = the group at large, but successors shall be appointed by the out-going Magi= strate, with the consent of the populace at large. A unanimous vote (not i= ncluding the former Magistrate or the nominee) shall be required to deny th= e candidate the office. If for any reason the Chief Magistrate is unable t= o fulfill his duties for a short period of time, he may swear in a Deputy. = The Deputy will have all the powers of the Magistrate, with the exception = of the death penalty, until the Magistrate returns to power. Although the = Deputy may not inflict the death penalty, cases may be referred to the Magi= strate, which may be prosecuted upon the Magistrate's return. The term of the Chief Magistrate will be for life, given good behavior. If= at any time the people decide to remove the Magistrate, they may do so wit= h a unanimous vote (excluding the vote of the Magistrate). In addition, an= overturned death penalty shall result in the automatic removal of the Magi= strate from office. However, in either of these cases the Magistrate shall= appoint his successor.=20 The Magistrate shall receive one (1) point for each successful smiting (a s= miting is still considered successful if the sentence is altered by judgmen= t, but not if it has been dismissed), and ten (10) points for each successf= ul death penalty administered. =20 End Proposal 310.=20 ------=_NextPart_000_006B_01C085ED.38303280 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Proposal 310:
 
An office shall be created, called the Chi= ef=20 Magistrate, for the purpose of smiting people (handing out punishments).&nb= sp;=20 The Chief Magistrate shall have the responsibility to assess penalties up t= o the=20 penalty of death (removal from the game), according to the law and for the= =20 general maintenance of good order within the regime.
 
All smitings must be done publicly wi= thin 2=20 days (excluding those days excluded by 308), except for offenses which carr= y the=20 penalty of death, which shall have no time limitation.  All punishment= s=20 less than death are final, though they may be appealed by a call to judgmen= t=20 (which may alter the severity of the penalty or dismiss it altogether).&nbs= p;=20 All death penalty cases are immediately "appealed" in that they must be=20 supported unanimously by the people at large.
 
The office of Chief Magistrate shall origi= nally be=20 filled by election from the group at large, but successors shall be appoint= ed by=20 the out-going Magistrate, with the consent of the populace at large.  = A=20 unanimous vote (not including the former Magistrate or the nominee) shall b= e=20 required to deny the candidate the office.  If for any reason the Chie= f=20 Magistrate is unable to fulfill his duties for a short period of time, he m= ay=20 swear in a Deputy.  The Deputy will have all the powers of the Magistr= ate,=20 with the exception of the death penalty, until the Magistrate returns to=20 power.  Although the Deputy may not inflict the death penalty, cases m= ay be=20 referred to the Magistrate, which may be prosecuted upon the Magistrate's=20 return.
 
The term of the Chief Magistrate will be f= or life,=20 given good behavior.  If at any time the people decide to remove the=20 Magistrate, they may do so with a unanimous vote (excluding the vote of the= =20 Magistrate).  In addition, an overturned death penalty shall result in= the=20 automatic removal of the Magistrate from office.  However, in either o= f=20 these cases the Magistrate shall appoint his successor. 
 
The Magistrate shall receive one (1) point= for each=20 successful smiting (a smiting is still considered successful if the sentenc= e is=20 altered by judgment, but not if it has been dismissed), and ten (10) points= for=20 each successful death penalty administered.
 
End Proposal 310. 
------=_NextPart_000_006B_01C085ED.38303280-- From eventi@n... Wed Jan 24 07:15:02 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 24 Jan 2001 15:15:02 -0000 Received: (qmail 20892 invoked from network); 24 Jan 2001 15:10:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 24 Jan 2001 15:10:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 24 Jan 2001 15:10:02 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id KAA06007 for ; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 10:10:01 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Poll results for scatterbrains Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 10:11:22 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <980348255.34660@egroups.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" One problem: I need to know who the 2 opposing voters were, since by 204 they each get 10 points. Steven There was an option for this at poll creation, maybe someone should write simple instructions for that. If you can see who they were, let us know, otherwise we'll have to take their word for it. --e > -----Original Message----- > From: scatterbrains@egroups.com [mailto:scatterbrains@egroups.com] > Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 9:58 AM > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > Subject: [scatterbrains] Poll results for scatterbrains > > > > The following scatterbrains poll is now closed. Here are the > final results: > > > POLL QUESTION: Begin Final Proposal 309 > > A new participant will gain the right > to vote immediately upon sending an > introduction affidavit, if all voting > on final proposals is complete. > > If voting on a final proposal is not > complete upon sending an introduction > affidavit, a new participant's right to > vote will be withheld until all > voting on final proposals is complete. > > This new participant will enter the > order of play upon casting his or her > first vote. > > End Final Proposal 309 > > > CHOICES AND RESULTS > - in favor, 3 votes, 60.00% > - not in favor, 2 votes, 40.00% > > > > For more information about this group, please visit > http://www.egroups.com/group/scatterbrains > > For help with eGroups, please visit > http://www.egroups.com/help > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From sga5892@n... Wed Jan 24 07:19:54 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: sga5892@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 24 Jan 2001 15:19:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 35810 invoked from network); 24 Jan 2001 15:15:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 24 Jan 2001 15:15:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-gw3.njit.edu) (128.235.251.11) by mta1 with SMTP; 24 Jan 2001 15:15:19 -0000 Received: from mailhost.njit.edu (mailhost.njit.edu [128.235.251.108]) by mail-gw3.njit.edu (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f0OFFHE16747 for ; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 10:15:17 -0500 Received: from steve0 (dhcp194-216.njit.edu) by mailhost.njit.edu (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9) with SMTP id <0G7O00G8DADFP4@m...> for scatterbrains@egroups.com; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 10:15:15 -0500 (EST) Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 10:14:57 -0500 Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 10:14:56 -0500 Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 310 To: "'scatterbrains@egroups.com'" Reply-to: "sga5892@n..." Message-id: <01C085EE.808CDDC0.sga5892@n...> Organization: NJIT MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit From: "Steven G. Arturo" this was building up, wasn't it? you couldn't wait a half a day to burst? -----Original Message----- From: Patrick D. Bernardo [SMTP:bernardo@c...] Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 10:06 AM To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 310 Proposal 310: An office shall be created, called the Chief Magistrate, for the purpose of smiting people (handing out punishments). The Chief Magistrate shall have the responsibility to assess penalties up to the penalty of death (removal from the game), according to the law and for the general maintenance of good order within the regime. All smitings must be done publicly within 2 days (excluding those days excluded by 308), except for offenses which carry the penalty of death, which shall have no time limitation. All punishments less than death are final, though they may be appealed by a call to judgment (which may alter the severity of the penalty or dismiss it altogether). All death penalty cases are immediately "appealed" in that they must be supported unanimously by the people at large. The office of Chief Magistrate shall originally be filled by election from the group at large, but successors shall be appointed by the out-going Magistrate, with the consent of the populace at large. A unanimous vote (not including the former Magistrate or the nominee) shall be required to deny the candidate the office. If for any reason the Chief Magistrate is unable to fulfill his duties for a short period of time, he may swear in a Deputy. The Deputy will have all the powers of the Magistrate, with the exception of the death penalty, until the Magistrate returns to power. Although the Deputy may not inflict the death penalty, cases may be referred to the Magistrate, which may be prosecuted upon the Magistrate's return. The term of the Chief Magistrate will be for life, given good behavior. If at any time the people decide to remove the Magistrate, they may do so with a unanimous vote (excluding the vote of the Magistrate). In addition, an overturned death penalty shall result in the automatic removal of the Magistrate from office. However, in either of these cases the Magistrate shall appoint his successor. The Magistrate shall receive one (1) point for each successful smiting (a smiting is still considered successful if the sentence is altered by judgment, but not if it has been dismissed), and ten (10) points for each successful death penalty administered. End Proposal 310. << File: ATT00001.htm >> From bernardo@c... Wed Jan 24 07:23:59 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 24 Jan 2001 15:23:59 -0000 Received: (qmail 34642 invoked from network); 24 Jan 2001 15:18:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 24 Jan 2001 15:18:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta3 with SMTP; 24 Jan 2001 16:19:47 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-12.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.197]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f0OFIea02940 for ; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 10:18:41 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <008901c08618$d972f260$c5a811d0@computer> To: References: Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Poll results for scatterbrains Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 10:18:02 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" I don't think that it's any mystery that I was one of them. [nothing personal, Steve, of course.] ----- Original Message ----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia To: Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 10:11 AM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Poll results for scatterbrains > One problem: I need to know who the 2 opposing voters were, since by 204 > they each get 10 points. > > Steven > There was an option for this at poll creation, maybe someone should write > simple instructions for that. If you can see who they were, let us know, > otherwise we'll have to take their word for it. > --e > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: scatterbrains@egroups.com [mailto:scatterbrains@egroups.com] > > Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 9:58 AM > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Poll results for scatterbrains > > > > > > > > The following scatterbrains poll is now closed. Here are the > > final results: > > > > > > POLL QUESTION: Begin Final Proposal 309 > > > > A new participant will gain the right > > to vote immediately upon sending an > > introduction affidavit, if all voting > > on final proposals is complete. > > > > If voting on a final proposal is not > > complete upon sending an introduction > > affidavit, a new participant's right to > > vote will be withheld until all > > voting on final proposals is complete. > > > > This new participant will enter the > > order of play upon casting his or her > > first vote. > > > > End Final Proposal 309 > > > > > > CHOICES AND RESULTS > > - in favor, 3 votes, 60.00% > > - not in favor, 2 votes, 40.00% > > > > > > > > For more information about this group, please visit > > http://www.egroups.com/group/scatterbrains > > > > For help with eGroups, please visit > > http://www.egroups.com/help > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Wed Jan 24 07:34:48 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 24 Jan 2001 15:34:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 3251 invoked from network); 24 Jan 2001 15:28:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 24 Jan 2001 15:28:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 24 Jan 2001 15:28:56 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id KAA07905 for ; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 10:28:55 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Poll results for scatterbrains Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 10:30:16 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <008901c08618$d972f260$c5a811d0@computer> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" OK, and I was the other, so we can score... I was just in it for the points. This gives Steven (15*(3/5))=9 Points, and Pat and I each get 10. > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 10:18 AM > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Poll results for scatterbrains > > > I don't think that it's any mystery that I was one of them. [nothing > personal, Steve, of course.] > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Eugene Ventimiglia > To: > Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 10:11 AM > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Poll results for scatterbrains > > > > One problem: I need to know who the 2 opposing voters were, since by 204 > > they each get 10 points. > > > > Steven > > There was an option for this at poll creation, maybe someone > should write > > simple instructions for that. If you can see who they were, > let us know, > > otherwise we'll have to take their word for it. > > --e > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: scatterbrains@egroups.com [mailto:scatterbrains@egroups.com] > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 9:58 AM > > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Poll results for scatterbrains > > > > > > > > > > > > The following scatterbrains poll is now closed. Here are the > > > final results: > > > > > > > > > POLL QUESTION: Begin Final Proposal 309 > > > > > > A new participant will gain the right > > > to vote immediately upon sending an > > > introduction affidavit, if all voting > > > on final proposals is complete. > > > > > > If voting on a final proposal is not > > > complete upon sending an introduction > > > affidavit, a new participant's right to > > > vote will be withheld until all > > > voting on final proposals is complete. > > > > > > This new participant will enter the > > > order of play upon casting his or her > > > first vote. > > > > > > End Final Proposal 309 > > > > > > > > > CHOICES AND RESULTS > > > - in favor, 3 votes, 60.00% > > > - not in favor, 2 votes, 40.00% > > > > > > > > > > > > For more information about this group, please visit > > > http://www.egroups.com/group/scatterbrains > > > > > > For help with eGroups, please visit > > > http://www.egroups.com/help > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Wed Jan 24 07:53:43 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 24 Jan 2001 15:53:43 -0000 Received: (qmail 27630 invoked from network); 24 Jan 2001 15:46:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 24 Jan 2001 15:46:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta1 with SMTP; 24 Jan 2001 15:46:14 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-12.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.197]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f0OFkBa05371 for ; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 10:46:11 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <009901c0861c$b1871480$c5a811d0@computer> To: References: <01C085EE.808CDDC0.sga5892@n...> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Proposal 310 Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 10:45:34 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" Had this thing sitting in my Draft box for days. My finger was getting itchy on the send button. ----- Original Message ----- From: Steven G. Arturo To: Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 10:14 AM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 310 > this was building up, wasn't it? > > you couldn't wait a half a day to burst? > > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [SMTP:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 10:06 AM > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 310 > > Proposal 310: > > An office shall be created, called the Chief Magistrate, for the purpose of > smiting people (handing out punishments). The Chief Magistrate shall have > the responsibility to assess penalties up to the penalty of death (removal > from the game), according to the law and for the general maintenance of > good order within the regime. > > All smitings must be done publicly within 2 days (excluding those days > excluded by 308), except for offenses which carry the penalty of death, > which shall have no time limitation. All punishments less than death are > final, though they may be appealed by a call to judgment (which may alter > the severity of the penalty or dismiss it altogether). All death penalty > cases are immediately "appealed" in that they must be supported unanimously > by the people at large. > > The office of Chief Magistrate shall originally be filled by election from > the group at large, but successors shall be appointed by the out-going > Magistrate, with the consent of the populace at large. A unanimous vote > (not including the former Magistrate or the nominee) shall be required to > deny the candidate the office. If for any reason the Chief Magistrate is > unable to fulfill his duties for a short period of time, he may swear in a > Deputy. The Deputy will have all the powers of the Magistrate, with the > exception of the death penalty, until the Magistrate returns to power. > Although the Deputy may not inflict the death penalty, cases may be > referred to the Magistrate, which may be prosecuted upon the Magistrate's > return. > > The term of the Chief Magistrate will be for life, given good behavior. If > at any time the people decide to remove the Magistrate, they may do so with > a unanimous vote (excluding the vote of the Magistrate). In addition, an > overturned death penalty shall result in the automatic removal of the > Magistrate from office. However, in either of these cases the Magistrate > shall appoint his successor. > > The Magistrate shall receive one (1) point for each successful smiting (a > smiting is still considered successful if the sentence is altered by > judgment, but not if it has been dismissed), and ten (10) points for each > successful death penalty administered. > > End Proposal 310. > << File: ATT00001.htm >> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From f_hemker@h... Wed Jan 24 07:53:50 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: f_hemker@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 24 Jan 2001 15:53:50 -0000 Received: (qmail 69423 invoked from network); 24 Jan 2001 15:45:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 24 Jan 2001 15:45:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ho.egroups.com) (10.1.2.219) by mta2 with SMTP; 24 Jan 2001 15:45:52 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: f_hemker@h... Received: from [10.1.10.119] by ho.egroups.com with NNFMP; 24 Jan 2001 15:45:52 -0000 Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 15:45:47 -0000 To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: Re: Proposal 310 Message-ID: <94mtbb+dd5u@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: <007101c08617$2d339960$c5a811d0@computer> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 2651 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 63.82.115.205 From: "Fritz Hemker" Easy now, Pat. I object to the very idea of giving any one player that much power. I don't have any recommendations or amendments because I think the whole idea is too much. Adoption of this proposal would be disruptive to the game. Perhaps you could give us a rundown of your thinking behind this proposal. -Fritz --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, "Patrick D. Bernardo" wrote: > Proposal 310: > > An office shall be created, called the Chief Magistrate, for the purpose of smiting people (handing out punishments). The Chief Magistrate shall have the responsibility to assess penalties up to the penalty of death (removal from the game), according to the law and for the general maintenance of good order within the regime. > > All smitings must be done publicly within 2 days (excluding those days excluded by 308), except for offenses which carry the penalty of death, which shall have no time limitation. All punishments less than death are final, though they may be appealed by a call to judgment (which may alter the severity of the penalty or dismiss it altogether). All death penalty cases are immediately "appealed" in that they must be supported unanimously by the people at large. > > The office of Chief Magistrate shall originally be filled by election from the group at large, but successors shall be appointed by the out-going Magistrate, with the consent of the populace at large. A unanimous vote (not including the former Magistrate or the nominee) shall be required to deny the candidate the office. If for any reason the Chief Magistrate is unable to fulfill his duties for a short period of time, he may swear in a Deputy. The Deputy will have all the powers of the Magistrate, with the exception of the death penalty, until the Magistrate returns to power. Although the Deputy may not inflict the death penalty, cases may be referred to the Magistrate, which may be prosecuted upon the Magistrate's return. > > The term of the Chief Magistrate will be for life, given good behavior. If at any time the people decide to remove the Magistrate, they may do so with a unanimous vote (excluding the vote of the Magistrate). In addition, an overturned death penalty shall result in the automatic removal of the Magistrate from office. However, in either of these cases the Magistrate shall appoint his successor. > > The Magistrate shall receive one (1) point for each successful smiting (a smiting is still considered successful if the sentence is altered by judgment, but not if it has been dismissed), and ten (10) points for each successful death penalty admi From scatterbrains@egroups.com Wed Jan 24 07:54:38 2001 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17200 invoked from network); 24 Jan 2001 15:46:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 24 Jan 2001 15:46:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hi.egroups.com) (10.1.10.41) by mta2 with SMTP; 24 Jan 2001 15:46:50 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: notify@egroups.com Received: from [10.1.2.11] by hi.egroups.com with NNFMP; 24 Jan 2001 15:46:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 71895 invoked by uid 65534); 24 Jan 2001 15:46:42 -0000 Date: 24 Jan 2001 15:46:42 -0000 Message-ID: <980351202.71891@egroups.com> X-eGroups-Notify: From: To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: New file uploaded to scatterbrains 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 scatterbrains group. File : /nomic.html Uploaded by : eventi@c... Description : The HTML Rules File You can access this file at the URL http://www.egroups.com/files/scatterbrains/nomic%2Ehtml To learn more about eGroups file sharing, please visit http://www.egroups.com/help/files.html Regards, eventi@c... From sga5892@n... Wed Jan 24 07:55:19 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: sga5892@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 24 Jan 2001 15:55:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 62779 invoked from network); 24 Jan 2001 15:48:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 24 Jan 2001 15:48:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-gw3.njit.edu) (128.235.251.11) by mta1 with SMTP; 24 Jan 2001 15:48:15 -0000 Received: from mailhost.njit.edu (mailhost.njit.edu [128.235.251.108]) by mail-gw3.njit.edu (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f0OFmDE19784 for ; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 10:48:13 -0500 Received: from steve0 (dhcp194-216.njit.edu) by mailhost.njit.edu (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9) with SMTP id <0G7O00HC2BWCHB@m...> for scatterbrains@egroups.com; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 10:48:12 -0500 (EST) Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 10:47:53 -0500 Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 10:47:52 -0500 Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Poll results for scatterbrains To: "'scatterbrains@egroups.com'" Reply-to: "sga5892@n..." Message-id: <01C085F3.1AAA7620.sga5892@n...> Organization: NJIT MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit From: "Steven G. Arturo" my bad... i misread 204. i thought the opposition would get points if the rule did not pass. ill keep this in mind for the future -----Original Message----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia [SMTP:eventi@n...] Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 10:30 AM To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Poll results for scatterbrains OK, and I was the other, so we can score... I was just in it for the points. This gives Steven (15*(3/5))=9 Points, and Pat and I each get 10. > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 10:18 AM > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Poll results for scatterbrains > > > I don't think that it's any mystery that I was one of them. [nothing > personal, Steve, of course.] > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Eugene Ventimiglia > To: > Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 10:11 AM > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Poll results for scatterbrains > > > > One problem: I need to know who the 2 opposing voters were, since by 204 > > they each get 10 points. > > > > Steven > > There was an option for this at poll creation, maybe someone > should write > > simple instructions for that. If you can see who they were, > let us know, > > otherwise we'll have to take their word for it. > > --e > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: scatterbrains@egroups.com [mailto:scatterbrains@egroups.com] > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 9:58 AM > > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Poll results for scatterbrains > > > > > > > > > > > > The following scatterbrains poll is now closed. Here are the > > > final results: > > > > > > > > > POLL QUESTION: Begin Final Proposal 309 > > > > > > A new participant will gain the right > > > to vote immediately upon sending an > > > introduction affidavit, if all voting > > > on final proposals is complete. > > > > > > If voting on a final proposal is not > > > complete upon sending an introduction > > > affidavit, a new participant's right to > > > vote will be withheld until all > > > voting on final proposals is complete. > > > > > > This new participant will enter the > > > order of play upon casting his or her > > > first vote. > > > > > > End Final Proposal 309 > > > > > > > > > CHOICES AND RESULTS > > > - in favor, 3 votes, 60.00% > > > - not in favor, 2 votes, 40.00% > > > > > > > > > > > > For more information about this group, please visit > > > http://www.egroups.com/group/scatterbrains > > > > > > For help with eGroups, please visit > > > http://www.egroups.com/help > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com From bernardo@c... Wed Jan 24 08:11:25 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 24 Jan 2001 16:11:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 60208 invoked from network); 24 Jan 2001 16:01:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 24 Jan 2001 16:01:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta1 with SMTP; 24 Jan 2001 16:01:03 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-12.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.197]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f0OG10a06810 for ; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 11:01:01 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <00b201c0861e$c3a846a0$c5a811d0@computer> To: References: <94mtbb+dd5u@eGroups.com> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 11:00:23 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" He, He. I knew that you would be my chief interlocutor on this one. My thinking behind it was basically that we do need a Magistrate. As it stands, Eug actually already has this power because he is the one who controls the scoreboard. It's just that power is completely divorced from the game. He could do pretty much whatever he wants, if he got it in his head. My proposal brings this power into the structure of the game. ----- Original Message ----- From: Fritz Hemker To: Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 10:45 AM Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 > Easy now, Pat. I object to the very idea of giving any one player > that much power. I don't have any recommendations or amendments > because I think the whole idea is too much. Adoption of this proposal > would be disruptive to the game. > > Perhaps you could give us a rundown of your thinking behind this > proposal. > > -Fritz > > --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, "Patrick D. Bernardo" > wrote: > > Proposal 310: > > > > An office shall be created, called the Chief Magistrate, for the > purpose of smiting people (handing out punishments). The Chief > Magistrate shall have the responsibility to assess penalties up to the > penalty of death (removal from the game), according to the law and for > the general maintenance of good order within the regime. > > > > All smitings must be done publicly within 2 days (excluding those > days excluded by 308), except for offenses which carry the penalty of > death, which shall have no time limitation. All punishments less than > death are final, though they may be appealed by a call to judgment > (which may alter the severity of the penalty or dismiss it > altogether). All death penalty cases are immediately "appealed" in > that they must be supported unanimously by the people at large. > > > > The office of Chief Magistrate shall originally be filled by > election from the group at large, but successors shall be appointed by > the out-going Magistrate, with the consent of the populace at large. > A unanimous vote (not including the former Magistrate or the nominee) > shall be required to deny the candidate the office. If for any reason > the Chief Magistrate is unable to fulfill his duties for a short > period of time, he may swear in a Deputy. The Deputy will have all > the powers of the Magistrate, with the exception of the death penalty, > until the Magistrate returns to power. Although the Deputy may not > inflict the death penalty, cases may be referred to the Magistrate, > which may be prosecuted upon the Magistrate's return. > > > > The term of the Chief Magistrate will be for life, given good > behavior. If at any time the people decide to remove the Magistrate, > they may do so with a unanimous vote (excluding the vote of the > Magistrate). In addition, an overturned death penalty shall result in > the automatic removal of the Magistrate from office. However, in > either of these cases the Magistrate shall appoint his successor. > > > > The Magistrate shall receive one (1) point for each successful > smiting (a smiting is still considered successful if the sentence is > altered by judgment, but not if it has been dismissed), and ten (10) > points for each successful death penalty admi > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Wed Jan 24 08:22:15 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 24 Jan 2001 16:22:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 56517 invoked from network); 24 Jan 2001 16:14:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 24 Jan 2001 16:14:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 24 Jan 2001 16:14:11 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-12.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.197]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f0OGE2a08229 for ; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 11:14:04 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <00db01c08620$98806280$c5a811d0@computer> To: References: <94mtbb+dd5u@eGroups.com> <00b201c0861e$c3a846a0$c5a811d0@computer> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 11:13:17 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" BTW - when you think about it, it's not really THAT much power, since there is a constant check on the Magistrate's authority... ----- Original Message ----- From: Patrick D. Bernardo To: Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 11:00 AM Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 > He, He. I knew that you would be my chief interlocutor on this one. > > My thinking behind it was basically that we do need a Magistrate. As it > stands, Eug actually already has this power because he is the one who > controls the scoreboard. It's just that power is completely divorced from > the game. He could do pretty much whatever he wants, if he got it in his > head. My proposal brings this power into the structure of the game. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Fritz Hemker > To: > Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 10:45 AM > Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 > > > > Easy now, Pat. I object to the very idea of giving any one player > > that much power. I don't have any recommendations or amendments > > because I think the whole idea is too much. Adoption of this proposal > > would be disruptive to the game. > > > > Perhaps you could give us a rundown of your thinking behind this > > proposal. > > > > -Fritz > > > > --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, "Patrick D. Bernardo" > > wrote: > > > Proposal 310: > > > > > > An office shall be created, called the Chief Magistrate, for the > > purpose of smiting people (handing out punishments). The Chief > > Magistrate shall have the responsibility to assess penalties up to the > > penalty of death (removal from the game), according to the law and for > > the general maintenance of good order within the regime. > > > > > > All smitings must be done publicly within 2 days (excluding those > > days excluded by 308), except for offenses which carry the penalty of > > death, which shall have no time limitation. All punishments less than > > death are final, though they may be appealed by a call to judgment > > (which may alter the severity of the penalty or dismiss it > > altogether). All death penalty cases are immediately "appealed" in > > that they must be supported unanimously by the people at large. > > > > > > The office of Chief Magistrate shall originally be filled by > > election from the group at large, but successors shall be appointed by > > the out-going Magistrate, with the consent of the populace at large. > > A unanimous vote (not including the former Magistrate or the nominee) > > shall be required to deny the candidate the office. If for any reason > > the Chief Magistrate is unable to fulfill his duties for a short > > period of time, he may swear in a Deputy. The Deputy will have all > > the powers of the Magistrate, with the exception of the death penalty, > > until the Magistrate returns to power. Although the Deputy may not > > inflict the death penalty, cases may be referred to the Magistrate, > > which may be prosecuted upon the Magistrate's return. > > > > > > The term of the Chief Magistrate will be for life, given good > > behavior. If at any time the people decide to remove the Magistrate, > > they may do so with a unanimous vote (excluding the vote of the > > Magistrate). In addition, an overturned death penalty shall result in > > the automatic removal of the Magistrate from office. However, in > > either of these cases the Magistrate shall appoint his successor. > > > > > > The Magistrate shall receive one (1) point for each successful > > smiting (a smiting is still considered successful if the sentence is > > altered by judgment, but not if it has been dismissed), and ten (10) > > points for each successful death penalty admi > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Wed Jan 24 08:28:48 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 24 Jan 2001 16:28:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 73668 invoked from network); 24 Jan 2001 16:19:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 24 Jan 2001 16:19:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 24 Jan 2001 16:19:44 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id LAA13103 for ; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 11:19:43 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 11:21:03 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <00b201c0861e$c3a846a0$c5a811d0@computer> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" That's why I'm opposed to it. BTW- Check your score. > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 11:00 AM > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 > > > He, He. I knew that you would be my chief interlocutor on this one. > > My thinking behind it was basically that we do need a Magistrate. As it > stands, Eug actually already has this power because he is the one who > controls the scoreboard. It's just that power is completely divorced from > the game. He could do pretty much whatever he wants, if he got it in his > head. My proposal brings this power into the structure of the game. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Fritz Hemker > To: > Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 10:45 AM > Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 > > > > Easy now, Pat. I object to the very idea of giving any one player > > that much power. I don't have any recommendations or amendments > > because I think the whole idea is too much. Adoption of this proposal > > would be disruptive to the game. > > > > Perhaps you could give us a rundown of your thinking behind this > > proposal. > > > > -Fritz > > > > --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, "Patrick D. Bernardo" > > wrote: > > > Proposal 310: > > > > > > An office shall be created, called the Chief Magistrate, for the > > purpose of smiting people (handing out punishments). The Chief > > Magistrate shall have the responsibility to assess penalties up to the > > penalty of death (removal from the game), according to the law and for > > the general maintenance of good order within the regime. > > > > > > All smitings must be done publicly within 2 days (excluding those > > days excluded by 308), except for offenses which carry the penalty of > > death, which shall have no time limitation. All punishments less than > > death are final, though they may be appealed by a call to judgment > > (which may alter the severity of the penalty or dismiss it > > altogether). All death penalty cases are immediately "appealed" in > > that they must be supported unanimously by the people at large. > > > > > > The office of Chief Magistrate shall originally be filled by > > election from the group at large, but successors shall be appointed by > > the out-going Magistrate, with the consent of the populace at large. > > A unanimous vote (not including the former Magistrate or the nominee) > > shall be required to deny the candidate the office. If for any reason > > the Chief Magistrate is unable to fulfill his duties for a short > > period of time, he may swear in a Deputy. The Deputy will have all > > the powers of the Magistrate, with the exception of the death penalty, > > until the Magistrate returns to power. Although the Deputy may not > > inflict the death penalty, cases may be referred to the Magistrate, > > which may be prosecuted upon the Magistrate's return. > > > > > > The term of the Chief Magistrate will be for life, given good > > behavior. If at any time the people decide to remove the Magistrate, > > they may do so with a unanimous vote (excluding the vote of the > > Magistrate). In addition, an overturned death penalty shall result in > > the automatic removal of the Magistrate from office. However, in > > either of these cases the Magistrate shall appoint his successor. > > > > > > The Magistrate shall receive one (1) point for each successful > > smiting (a smiting is still considered successful if the sentence is > > altered by judgment, but not if it has been dismissed), and ten (10) > > points for each successful death penalty admi > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From f_hemker@h... Wed Jan 24 08:37:24 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: f_hemker@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 24 Jan 2001 16:37:22 -0000 Received: (qmail 47882 invoked from network); 24 Jan 2001 16:26:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 24 Jan 2001 16:26:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hn.egroups.com) (10.1.2.221) by mta2 with SMTP; 24 Jan 2001 16:26:56 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: f_hemker@h... Received: from [10.1.4.69] by hn.egroups.com with NNFMP; 24 Jan 2001 16:26:54 -0000 Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 16:26:48 -0000 To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: Re: Proposal 310 Message-ID: <94mvo8+qr33@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: <00b201c0861e$c3a846a0$c5a811d0@computer> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 4251 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 63.82.115.205 From: "Fritz Hemker" For example, the lack of time limits on assesing the penatly of death. Does that mean that I could remember something you did at the very beggining of the game and get you kicked out for it? Is that ex post facto or what? All simitings must be done within two days of what? The offence, the actual indictment, what? The office should definatly be time limited. The failure to succesfully prosecute a death sentance should carry its own harsh penatly beyond simple removal from office. As you may know, I'm a big fan of law and order. However, this remedy is worse than the disease. -Fritz --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, "Patrick D. Bernardo" wrote: > He, He. I knew that you would be my chief interlocutor on this one. > > My thinking behind it was basically that we do need a Magistrate. As it > stands, Eug actually already has this power because he is the one who > controls the scoreboard. It's just that power is completely divorced from > the game. He could do pretty much whatever he wants, if he got it in his > head. My proposal brings this power into the structure of the game. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Fritz Hemker > To: > Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 10:45 AM > Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 > > > > Easy now, Pat. I object to the very idea of giving any one player > > that much power. I don't have any recommendations or amendments > > because I think the whole idea is too much. Adoption of this proposal > > would be disruptive to the game. > > > > Perhaps you could give us a rundown of your thinking behind this > > proposal. > > > > -Fritz > > > > --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, "Patrick D. Bernardo" > > wrote: > > > Proposal 310: > > > > > > An office shall be created, called the Chief Magistrate, for the > > purpose of smiting people (handing out punishments). The Chief > > Magistrate shall have the responsibility to assess penalties up to the > > penalty of death (removal from the game), according to the law and for > > the general maintenance of good order within the regime. > > > > > > All smitings must be done publicly within 2 days (excluding those > > days excluded by 308), except for offenses which carry the penalty of > > death, which shall have no time limitation. All punishments less than > > death are final, though they may be appealed by a call to judgment > > (which may alter the severity of the penalty or dismiss it > > altogether). All death penalty cases are immediately "appealed" in > > that they must be supported unanimously by the people at large. > > > > > > The office of Chief Magistrate shall originally be filled by > > election from the group at large, but successors shall be appointed by > > the out-going Magistrate, with the consent of the populace at large. > > A unanimous vote (not including the former Magistrate or the nominee) > > shall be required to deny the candidate the office. If for any reason > > the Chief Magistrate is unable to fulfill his duties for a short > > period of time, he may swear in a Deputy. The Deputy will have all > > the powers of the Magistrate, with the exception of the death penalty, > > until the Magistrate returns to power. Although the Deputy may not > > inflict the death penalty, cases may be referred to the Magistrate, > > which may be prosecuted upon the Magistrate's return. > > > > > > The term of the Chief Magistrate will be for life, given good > > behavior. If at any time the people decide to remove the Magistrate, > > they may do so with a unanimous vote (excluding the vote of the > > Magistrate). In addition, an overturned death penalty shall result in > > the automatic removal of the Magistrate from office. However, in > > either of these cases the Magistrate shall appoint his successor. > > > > > > The Magistrate shall receive one (1) point for each successful > > smiting (a smiting is still considered successful if the sentence is > > altered by judgment, but not if it has been dismissed), and ten (10) > > points for each successful death penalty admi > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsu From bernardo@c... Wed Jan 24 08:49:41 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 24 Jan 2001 16:49:40 -0000 Received: (qmail 83359 invoked from network); 24 Jan 2001 16:38:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 24 Jan 2001 16:38:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta3 with SMTP; 24 Jan 2001 17:39:51 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-12.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.197]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f0OGcha10735 for ; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 11:38:43 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <00e701c08624$08aa5860$c5a811d0@computer> To: References: Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 11:38:06 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" You see! You see! Technically, if he wanted to stand on this, there's NOTHING in the rules to stop him. However, if we codified the magistracy power, that would bring it under control! Secondly, I would have codified the point-giver role first, but the Magistrate seemed like more fun. Doing them both in the same law was arguably (alright obviously) an illegal combination of two laws. ----- Original Message ----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia To: Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 11:21 AM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 > That's why I'm opposed to it. BTW- Check your score. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 11:00 AM > > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 > > > > > > He, He. I knew that you would be my chief interlocutor on this one. > > > > My thinking behind it was basically that we do need a Magistrate. As it > > stands, Eug actually already has this power because he is the one who > > controls the scoreboard. It's just that power is completely divorced from > > the game. He could do pretty much whatever he wants, if he got it in his > > head. My proposal brings this power into the structure of the game. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Fritz Hemker > > To: > > Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 10:45 AM > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 > > > > > > > Easy now, Pat. I object to the very idea of giving any one player > > > that much power. I don't have any recommendations or amendments > > > because I think the whole idea is too much. Adoption of this proposal > > > would be disruptive to the game. > > > > > > Perhaps you could give us a rundown of your thinking behind this > > > proposal. > > > > > > -Fritz > > > > > > --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, "Patrick D. Bernardo" > > > wrote: > > > > Proposal 310: > > > > > > > > An office shall be created, called the Chief Magistrate, for the > > > purpose of smiting people (handing out punishments). The Chief > > > Magistrate shall have the responsibility to assess penalties up to the > > > penalty of death (removal from the game), according to the law and for > > > the general maintenance of good order within the regime. > > > > > > > > All smitings must be done publicly within 2 days (excluding those > > > days excluded by 308), except for offenses which carry the penalty of > > > death, which shall have no time limitation. All punishments less than > > > death are final, though they may be appealed by a call to judgment > > > (which may alter the severity of the penalty or dismiss it > > > altogether). All death penalty cases are immediately "appealed" in > > > that they must be supported unanimously by the people at large. > > > > > > > > The office of Chief Magistrate shall originally be filled by > > > election from the group at large, but successors shall be appointed by > > > the out-going Magistrate, with the consent of the populace at large. > > > A unanimous vote (not including the former Magistrate or the nominee) > > > shall be required to deny the candidate the office. If for any reason > > > the Chief Magistrate is unable to fulfill his duties for a short > > > period of time, he may swear in a Deputy. The Deputy will have all > > > the powers of the Magistrate, with the exception of the death penalty, > > > until the Magistrate returns to power. Although the Deputy may not > > > inflict the death penalty, cases may be referred to the Magistrate, > > > which may be prosecuted upon the Magistrate's return. > > > > > > > > The term of the Chief Magistrate will be for life, given good > > > behavior. If at any time the people decide to remove the Magistrate, > > > they may do so with a unanimous vote (excluding the vote of the > > > Magistrate). In addition, an overturned death penalty shall result in > > > the automatic removal of the Magistrate from office. However, in > > > either of these cases the Magistrate shall appoint his successor. > > > > > > > > The Magistrate shall receive one (1) point for each successful > > > smiting (a smiting is still considered successful if the sentence is > > > altered by judgment, but not if it has been dismissed), and ten (10) > > > points for each successful death penalty admi > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From sga5892@n... Wed Jan 24 08:52:48 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: sga5892@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 24 Jan 2001 16:52:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 83187 invoked from network); 24 Jan 2001 16:42:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 24 Jan 2001 16:42:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-gw3.njit.edu) (128.235.251.11) by mta1 with SMTP; 24 Jan 2001 16:42:00 -0000 Received: from mailhost.njit.edu (mailhost.njit.edu [128.235.251.108]) by mail-gw3.njit.edu (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f0OGfwE24893 for ; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 11:41:58 -0500 Received: from steve0 (dhcp194-216.njit.edu) by mailhost.njit.edu (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9) with SMTP id <0G7O00J9MEDWQA@m...> for scatterbrains@egroups.com; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 11:41:56 -0500 (EST) Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 11:41:38 -0500 Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 11:41:37 -0500 Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 310 To: "'scatterbrains@egroups.com'" Reply-to: "sga5892@n..." Message-id: <01C085FA.9C8EDB20.sga5892@n...> Organization: NJIT MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit From: "Steven G. Arturo" True, we do need an impartial voice as one who will uphold the rule of law. but i think an office of this magnitude is prese -----Original Message----- From: Patrick D. Bernardo [SMTP:bernardo@c...] Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 10:06 AM To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 310 Proposal 310: An office shall be created, called the Chief Magistrate, for the purpose of smiting people (handing out punishments). The Chief Magistrate shall have the responsibility to assess penalties up to the penalty of death (removal from the game), according to the law and for the general maintenance of good order within the regime. All smitings must be done publicly within 2 days (excluding those days excluded by 308), except for offenses which carry the penalty of death, which shall have no time limitation. All punishments less than death are final, though they may be appealed by a call to judgment (which may alter the severity of the penalty or dismiss it altogether). All death penalty cases are immediately "appealed" in that they must be supported unanimously by the people at large. The office of Chief Magistrate shall originally be filled by election from the group at large, but successors shall be appointed by the out-going Magistrate, with the consent of the populace at large. A unanimous vote (not including the former Magistrate or the nominee) shall be required to deny the candidate the office. If for any reason the Chief Magistrate is unable to fulfill his duties for a short period of time, he may swear in a Deputy. The Deputy will have all the powers of the Magistrate, with the exception of the death penalty, until the Magistrate returns to power. Although the Deputy may not inflict the death penalty, cases may be referred to the Magistrate, which may be prosecuted upon the Magistrate's return. The term of the Chief Magistrate will be for life, given good behavior. If at any time the people decide to remove the Magistrate, they may do so with a unanimous vote (excluding the vote of the Magistrate). In addition, an overturned death penalty shall result in the automatic removal of the Magistrate from office. However, in either of these cases the Magistrate shall appoint his successor. The Magistrate shall receive one (1) point for each successful smiting (a smiting is still considered successful if the sentence is altered by judgment, but not if it has been dismissed), and ten (10) points for each successful death penalty administered. End Proposal 310. << File: ATT00001.htm >> From sga5892@n... Wed Jan 24 09:02:19 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: sga5892@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 24 Jan 2001 17:02:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 50959 invoked from network); 24 Jan 2001 16:51:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 24 Jan 2001 16:51:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-gw3.njit.edu) (128.235.251.11) by mta3 with SMTP; 24 Jan 2001 17:52:13 -0000 Received: from mailhost.njit.edu (mailhost.njit.edu [128.235.251.108]) by mail-gw3.njit.edu (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f0OGp6E25631 for ; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 11:51:06 -0500 Received: from steve0 (dhcp194-216.njit.edu) by mailhost.njit.edu (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9) with SMTP id <0G7O00JHXET4QA@m...> for scatterbrains@egroups.com; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 11:51:04 -0500 (EST) Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 11:50:45 -0500 Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 11:50:44 -0500 Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 310 To: "'scatterbrains@egroups.com'" Reply-to: "sga5892@n..." Message-id: <01C085FB.E2EDE1A0.sga5892@n...> Organization: NJIT MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit From: "Steven G. Arturo" let me try this again... True, we do need an impartial voice as one who will uphold the rule of law. but i think an office with this much authority, for life no less, would be too intimidating for the rest of the players. for someone just introduced to the game, this magistrate can be looked upon them almost as 'big brother', scrutinizing every detail in each e-mail, waiting to capitalize on the naive flaws of a newbe. it is funny that this proposal will do more to discourage new players by intimidating them, thus hurting the 'be fruitful and mulitply' bill. at this stage of our rule making, i am more in favor of short, strong declarations toward a trim structure. pat, i'd rather not get bogged down in rule-abiding anxiety. this proposal needs a serious haircut. steve0 -----Original Message----- From: Patrick D. Bernardo [SMTP:bernardo@c...] Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 10:06 AM To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 310 Proposal 310: An office shall be created, called the Chief Magistrate, for the purpose of smiting people (handing out punishments). The Chief Magistrate shall have the responsibility to assess penalties up to the penalty of death (removal from the game), according to the law and for the general maintenance of good order within the regime. All smitings must be done publicly within 2 days (excluding those days excluded by 308), except for offenses which carry the penalty of death, which shall have no time limitation. All punishments less than death are final, though they may be appealed by a call to judgment (which may alter the severity of the penalty or dismiss it altogether). All death penalty cases are immediately "appealed" in that they must be supported unanimously by the people at large. The office of Chief Magistrate shall originally be filled by election from the group at large, but successors shall be appointed by the out-going Magistrate, with the consent of the populace at large. A unanimous vote (not including the former Magistrate or the nominee) shall be required to deny the candidate the office. If for any reason the Chief Magistrate is unable to fulfill his duties for a short period of time, he may swear in a Deputy. The Deputy will have all the powers of the Magistrate, with the exception of the death penalty, until the Magistrate returns to power. Although the Deputy may not inflict the death penalty, cases may be referred to the Magistrate, which may be prosecuted upon the Magistrate's return. The term of the Chief Magistrate will be for life, given good behavior. If at any time the people decide to remove the Magistrate, they may do so with a unanimous vote (excluding the vote of the Magistrate). In addition, an overturned death penalty shall result in the automatic removal of the Magistrate from office. However, in either of these cases the Magistrate shall appoint his successor. The Magistrate shall receive one (1) point for each successful smiting (a smiting is still considered successful if the sentence is altered by judgment, but not if it has been dismissed), and ten (10) points for each successful death penalty administered. End Proposal 310. << File: ATT00001.htm >> From eventi@n... Wed Jan 24 09:11:27 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 24 Jan 2001 17:11:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 92700 invoked from network); 24 Jan 2001 16:58:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 24 Jan 2001 16:58:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 24 Jan 2001 17:59:54 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id LAA17296 for ; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 11:58:48 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 310 Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 12:00:09 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <007101c08617$2d339960$c5a811d0@computer> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" Just a few questions: Is his power limited only to penalties prescribed "according to the law"? Why a different statute of limitations based on the _penalty_? Suppose the penalty for 30 days of inactivity is death. If a player returned on day 31, and the CM hadn't already executed him, what would be the point in doing it on day 354? -----Original Message----- From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 10:06 AM To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 310 Proposal 310: An office shall be created, called the Chief Magistrate, for the purpose of smiting people (handing out punishments). The Chief Magistrate shall have the responsibility to assess penalties up to the penalty of death (removal from the game), according to the law and for the general maintenance of good order within the regime. All smitings must be done publicly within 2 days (excluding those days excluded by 308), except for offenses which carry the penalty of death, which shall have no time limitation. All punishments less than death are final, though they may be appealed by a call to judgment (which may alter the severity of the penalty or dismiss it altogether). All death penalty cases are immediately "appealed" in that they must be supported unanimously by the people at large. The office of Chief Magistrate shall originally be filled by election from the group at large, but successors shall be appointed by the out-going Magistrate, with the consent of the populace at large. A unanimous vote (not including the former Magistrate or the nominee) shall be required to deny the candidate the office. If for any reason the Chief Magistrate is unable to fulfill his duties for a short period of time, he may swear in a Deputy. The Deputy will have all the powers of the Magistrate, with the exception of the death penalty, until the Magistrate returns to power. Although the Deputy may not inflict the death penalty, cases may be referred to the Magistrate, which may be prosecuted upon the Magistrate's return. The term of the Chief Magistrate will be for life, given good behavior. If at any time the people decide to remove the Magistrate, they may do so with a unanimous vote (excluding the vote of the Magistrate). In addition, an overturned death penalty shall result in the automatic removal of the Magistrate from office. However, in either of these cases the Magistrate shall appoint his successor. The Magistrate shall receive one (1) point for each successful smiting (a smiting is still considered successful if the sentence is altered by judgment, but not if it has been dismissed), and ten (10) points for each successful death penalty administered. End Proposal 310. From bernardo@c... Wed Jan 24 09:23:49 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 24 Jan 2001 17:23:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 80421 invoked from network); 24 Jan 2001 17:04:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 24 Jan 2001 17:04:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta1 with SMTP; 24 Jan 2001 17:04:52 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-12.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.197]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f0OH4na13355 for ; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 12:04:49 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <00ed01c08627$adff2540$c5a811d0@computer> To: References: <94mvo8+qr33@eGroups.com> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 12:04:12 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" > For example, the lack of time limits on assesing the penatly of death. > Does that mean that I could remember something you did at the very > beggining of the game and get you kicked out for it? Is that ex post > facto or what? > There's already a law prohibiting ex post facto *laws*. By nature all *punishment* is ex post facto. The key issue is whether a law can criminalize behavior before the law existed. Clearly, that's wrong. That's outside the sphere of this proposal, but as I said, it's already been prohibited. So, if a law is passed making it punishable by death to randomly subtract 10,000 points from somebody's score, we can't kill Eugene because he did it before the law. That, I agree, is right and as it should be. However, it *is* advisable to leave the time frame open otherwise. Suppose there was a law against the subtraction, Eug did it anyway, and nobody noticed for a while - shouldn't he still be killed? Also, I was thinking about the non-play rule, which is currently the only thing to carry the penalty of death. When does the "crime" actually occur? Since it's actually a compilation of crimes, which occur for longer than 2 days, it seems that the death penalty would have to be unlimited. Moreover, I think that the death penalty is generally going to be used for patterns of behavior, rather than serious and shocking blasphemies and crimes that immediately call for death. That means that the Magistrate has to be free to refer to a long train of injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny... Finally, minor crimes should be limited, time wise, to prevent the very thing that you worry about - a vindictive Magistrate from researching everyone's behavior and finding little crimes all the time. Most crimes that affect game play will be noticed fairly quickly, and so should be punished within the 2 day limit. I really do think that this strikes a compromise between the two positions, while still allowing the Magistrate the ability to do his job. > All simitings must be done within two days of what? The offence, the > actual indictment, what? > My original thought was 2 days from the offence. I envisioned a process where indictment was concurrent with smiting. > The office should definatly be time limited. The failure to > succesfully prosecute a death sentance should carry its own harsh > penatly beyond simple removal from office. > I'm somewhat flexible on these two issues. However, the time limit should be sufficiently long to provide the necessary independence of the Magistrate. You don't want someone afraid to smite to increase his popularity! Also - what about the end of term? Wouldn't the Magistrate be tempted to pardon his friends despite the opprobrium this might bring? I mean it won't hurt since he's leaving anyway... > As you may know, I'm a big fan of law and order. However, this remedy > is worse than the disease. > Oh, it's not that bad... I guess my monarchy proposal should wait awhile, though. (Royal House of Bernardo!) > > --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, "Patrick D. Bernardo" > wrote: > > He, He. I knew that you would be my chief interlocutor on this one. > > > > My thinking behind it was basically that we do need a Magistrate. > As it > > stands, Eug actually already has this power because he is the one > who > > controls the scoreboard. It's just that power is completely > divorced from > > the game. He could do pretty much whatever he wants, if he got it > in his > > head. My proposal brings this power into the structure of the game. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Fritz Hemker > > To: > > Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 10:45 AM > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 > > > > > > > Easy now, Pat. I object to the very idea of giving any one player > > > that much power. I don't have any recommendations or amendments > > > because I think the whole idea is too much. Adoption of this > proposal > > > would be disruptive to the game. > > > > > > Perhaps you could give us a rundown of your thinking behind this > > > proposal. > > > > > > -Fritz > > > > > > --- In scatterbrains@egroups.com, "Patrick D. Bernardo" > > > wrote: > > > > Proposal 310: > > > > > > > > An office shall be created, called the Chief Magistrate, for the > > > purpose of smiting people (handing out punishments). The Chief > > > Magistrate shall have the responsibility to assess penalties up to > the > > > penalty of death (removal from the game), according to the law and > for > > > the general maintenance of good order within the regime. > > > > > > > > All smitings must be done publicly within 2 days (excluding > those > > > days excluded by 308), except for offenses which carry the penalty > of > > > death, which shall have no time limitation. All punishments less > than > > > death are final, though they may be appealed by a call to judgment > > > (which may alter the severity of the penalty or dismiss it > > > altogether). All death penalty cases are immediately "appealed" > in > > > that they must be supported unanimously by the people at large. > > > > > > > > The office of Chief Magistrate shall originally be filled by > > > election from the group at large, but successors shall be > appointed by > > > the out-going Magistrate, with the consent of the populace at > large. > > > A unanimous vote (not including the former Magistrate or the > nominee) > > > shall be required to deny the candidate the office. If for any > reason > > > the Chief Magistrate is unable to fulfill his duties for a short > > > period of time, he may swear in a Deputy. The Deputy will have > all > > > the powers of the Magistrate, with the exception of the death > penalty, > > > until the Magistrate returns to power. Although the Deputy may > not > > > inflict the death penalty, cases may be referred to the > Magistrate, > > > which may be prosecuted upon the Magistrate's return. > > > > > > > > The term of the Chief Magistrate will be for life, given good > > > behavior. If at any time the people decide to remove the > Magistrate, > > > they may do so with a unanimous vote (excluding the vote of the > > > Magistrate). In addition, an overturned death penalty shall > result in > > > the automatic removal of the Magistrate from office. However, in > > > either of these cases the Magistrate shall appoint his successor. > > > > > > > > The Magistrate shall receive one (1) point for each successful > > > smiting (a smiting is still considered successful if the sentence > is > > > altered by judgment, but not if it has been dismissed), and ten > (10) > > > points for each successful death penalty admi > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsu > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Wed Jan 24 14:44:04 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 24 Jan 2001 22:44:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 95832 invoked from network); 24 Jan 2001 22:29:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 24 Jan 2001 22:29:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 24 Jan 2001 22:29:39 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id RAA20259 for ; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 17:29:38 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 310 Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 17:30:59 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <007101c08617$2d339960$c5a811d0@computer> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" I'm pretty much for it, with a couple of reservations: I'm not sure if i like the wording of the first paragraph. It could be read two ways: CM acts ( according to the law OR for "general maintenance of good order within the regime") or CM acts ( according to the law, for "general maintenance of good order within the regime" ) I'm not sold on the idea of defining the statue of limitations along with this law, and definately don't think it should hinge on the type of penalty. Clarify the original election procedings. Does everyone have to vote? Majority? etc... There should be a limit, however long, to the term. A de-frocked CM should NOT appoint his successor. There should be another election. There's no reason I see for giving 10 points for death penalty officiation. That said, I actually like the idea of a Chief Magistrate. It's really only technical differences I see. --e -----Original Message----- From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 10:06 AM To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 310 Proposal 310: An office shall be created, called the Chief Magistrate, for the purpose of smiting people (handing out punishments). The Chief Magistrate shall have the responsibility to assess penalties up to the penalty of death (removal from the game), according to the law and for the general maintenance of good order within the regime. All smitings must be done publicly within 2 days (excluding those days excluded by 308), except for offenses which carry the penalty of death, which shall have no time limitation. All punishments less than death are final, though they may be appealed by a call to judgment (which may alter the severity of the penalty or dismiss it altogether). All death penalty cases are immediately "appealed" in that they must be supported unanimously by the people at large. The office of Chief Magistrate shall originally be filled by election from the group at large, but successors shall be appointed by the out-going Magistrate, with the consent of the populace at large. A unanimous vote (not including the former Magistrate or the nominee) shall be required to deny the candidate the office. If for any reason the Chief Magistrate is unable to fulfill his duties for a short period of time, he may swear in a Deputy. The Deputy will have all the powers of the Magistrate, with the exception of the death penalty, until the Magistrate returns to power. Although the Deputy may not inflict the death penalty, cases may be referred to the Magistrate, which may be prosecuted upon the Magistrate's return. The term of the Chief Magistrate will be for life, given good behavior. If at any time the people decide to remove the Magistrate, they may do so with a unanimous vote (excluding the vote of the Magistrate). In addition, an overturned death penalty shall result in the automatic removal of the Magistrate from office. However, in either of these cases the Magistrate shall appoint his successor. The Magistrate shall receive one (1) point for each successful smiting (a smiting is still considered successful if the sentence is altered by judgment, but not if it has been dismissed), and ten (10) points for each successful death penalty administered. End Proposal 310. eGroups Sponsor Choose 3 DVDs for $0.49 each! To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com From bernardo@c... Wed Jan 24 19:07:51 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 25 Jan 2001 03:07:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 28634 invoked from network); 25 Jan 2001 03:07:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 25 Jan 2001 03:07:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 25 Jan 2001 03:07:21 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-18.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.203]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f0P37Ia70480 for ; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 22:07:18 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <000501c0867b$d71a5360$cba811d0@computer> To: References: Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Proposal 310 Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 22:06:38 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" > I'm pretty much for it, with a couple of reservations: Woo-hoo! I need every vote that I can get! > I'm not sold on the idea of defining the statue of limitations along with > this law, and definately don't think it should hinge on the type of penalty. > Why not? There is already a distinction between the death penalty and other violations, since the former has to be accepted by all, but minor violations don't. (Check the wording on 308) Secondly, I think, as I said before, that death penalty violations will generally be of the type that your behavior has been unacceptable, etc. The violations will stretch back longer than 2 days. OTOH, in order to avoid the concerns that both Fritz and Steven have raised, I thought that it would be necessary to include a sort of statute of limitations to make it absolutely clear, up front, that the Magistrate will not be spending his time snooping through the history of the group and smiting people for small infractions from long ago. Moreover, this will prevent an enterprising Magistrate from storing up smitings and then using them all at a time that's convenient. I guess that I could just remove the time limit language, but I think that that would be more objectionable to most people - is that true? Can you state more clearly your objection? > Clarify the original election procedings. Does everyone have to vote? > Majority? etc... > I'm currently uninterested in redefining election. AFAIK, with no law in place defining election, we can run with the common meaning. That'll be majority. > There should be a limit, however long, to the term. > I think that this weakens the office considerably, but I wouldn't object to a long term. > A de-frocked CM should NOT appoint his successor. There should be another > election. > But there is an election! The people get to say no if they want! > There's no reason I see for giving 10 points for death penalty officiation. > Considering the penalty for losing a death case, the Magistrate needs some inducement to pursue them. The penalty/reward system approximates the adversarial system, in some sense. Also, the Magistrate is doing some work, and should get a little something at the end of the week for a job well done. > That said, I actually like the idea of a Chief Magistrate. It's really > only technical differences I see. > > --e > > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 10:06 AM > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 310 > > > Proposal 310: > > An office shall be created, called the Chief Magistrate, for the purpose of > smiting people (handing out punishments). The Chief Magistrate shall have > the responsibility to assess penalties up to the penalty of death (removal > from the game), according to the law and for the general maintenance of good > order within the regime. > > All smitings must be done publicly within 2 days (excluding those days > excluded by 308), except for offenses which carry the penalty of death, > which shall have no time limitation. All punishments less than death are > final, though they may be appealed by a call to judgment (which may alter > the severity of the penalty or dismiss it altogether). All death penalty > cases are immediately "appealed" in that they must be supported unanimously > by the people at large. > > The office of Chief Magistrate shall originally be filled by election from > the group at large, but successors shall be appointed by the out-going > Magistrate, with the consent of the populace at large. A unanimous vote > (not including the former Magistrate or the nominee) shall be required to > deny the candidate the office. If for any reason the Chief Magistrate is > unable to fulfill his duties for a short period of time, he may swear in a > Deputy. The Deputy will have all the powers of the Magistrate, with the > exception of the death penalty, until the Magistrate returns to power. > Although the Deputy may not inflict the death penalty, cases may be referred > to the Magistrate, which may be prosecuted upon the Magistrate's return. > > The term of the Chief Magistrate will be for life, given good behavior. If > at any time the people decide to remove the Magistrate, they may do so with > a unanimous vote (excluding the vote of the Magistrate). In addition, an > overturned death penalty shall result in the automatic removal of the > Magistrate from office. However, in either of these cases the Magistrate > shall appoint his successor. > > The Magistrate shall receive one (1) point for each successful smiting (a > smiting is still considered successful if the sentence is altered by > judgment, but not if it has been dismissed), and ten (10) points for each > successful death penalty administered. > > End Proposal 310. > > eGroups Sponsor > > Choose 3 DVDs for $0.49 each! > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Wed Jan 24 19:15:13 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 25 Jan 2001 03:15:12 -0000 Received: (qmail 41480 invoked from network); 25 Jan 2001 03:14:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 25 Jan 2001 03:14:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta3 with SMTP; 25 Jan 2001 04:15:47 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-18.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.203]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f0P3Eea70983 for ; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 22:14:40 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <000b01c0867c$dece42a0$cba811d0@computer> To: References: <01C085FB.E2EDE1A0.sga5892@n...> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Proposal 310 Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 22:14:01 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" From: Steven G. Arturo > True, we do need an impartial voice as one who will uphold the rule of law. Right on! > but i think an office with this much authority, for life no less, would be > too intimidating for the rest of the players. for someone just introduced > to the game, this magistrate can be looked upon them almost as 'big > brother', scrutinizing every detail in each e-mail, waiting to capitalize > on the naive flaws of a newbe. it is funny that this proposal will do more > to discourage new players by intimidating them, thus hurting the 'be > fruitful and mulitply' bill. > Not at all. I see no way in which this might be intimidating to new players. TTYTT, we don't have people shopping around, and even if we did, I doubt that the first thing on their mind would be the big, scary magistrate in scatterbrains. Beside the fact that the Magistrate is neither big nor scary, they'd be more intimidated by NO procedures at all. I think it's a stretch to argue that this would have a chilling affect on recruitment. Besides, there is a mechanism already included for the cases in which the Magistrate acts like a big jerk. Kick him out. In addition, I don't think that "naive flaws" have been criminalized, yet. If you look again, I think that you will see that the Magistrate is much more limited than your initial reaction seems to suggest. > at this stage of our rule making, i am more in favor of short, strong > declarations toward a trim structure. pat, i'd rather not get bogged down > in rule-abiding anxiety. > Me too! I absolutely agree that rules shouldn't be any longer than necessary. But what in this is overly verbose? Don't forget, I did have certain qualifications to fulfill (307). In addition, I tried, as much as possible, to anticipate the objections, and deal with them in a straight-forward - and trim - manner. Worse than a wordy law is one too short and too vague. From bernardo@c... Wed Jan 24 19:18:57 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_1_2); 25 Jan 2001 03:18:57 -0000 Received: (qmail 59872 invoked from network); 25 Jan 2001 03:18:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 25 Jan 2001 03:18:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 25 Jan 2001 03:18:49 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-18.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.203]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f0P3Ila71332 for ; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 22:18:48 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <001501c0867d$724173e0$cba811d0@computer> To: References: Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Proposal 310 Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 22:18:09 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" ----- Original Message ----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia To: Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 12:00 PM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 310 > > Just a few questions: > > Is his power limited only to penalties prescribed "according to the law"? > I don't think that it is possible to grant other powers. The Magistrate is here to punish people for breaking the law. > Why a different statute of limitations based on the _penalty_? Suppose the > penalty for 30 days of inactivity is death. If a player returned on day 31, > and the CM hadn't already executed him, what would be the point in doing it > on day 354? > Rather, there's this question: for inactivity on which of the days is the death penalty imposed? For just the 26th? In fact it's for the whole time period - from the 1st day of activity up to the 25th (or 26 depending upon how you want to read 308). This time period is quite difficult to nail down in the sense of the criminal act was commited on day x and hence is within the statute of limitation... There is no point in punishing the criminal on day 354, really. If a Magistrate waits that long, he should be removed for failing to fulfill the duties of his office. From eventi@n... Wed Jan 24 22:09:41 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2); 25 Jan 2001 06:09:40 -0000 Received: (qmail 66338 invoked from network); 25 Jan 2001 06:09:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 25 Jan 2001 06:09:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 25 Jan 2001 06:09:39 -0000 Received: from win (win.venti.nyic.com [64.29.109.18]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id BAA15588 for ; Thu, 25 Jan 2001 01:09:38 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <002701c08695$5a080ce0$126d1d40@v...> To: References: <000501c0867b$d71a5360$cba811d0@computer> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Proposal 310 Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 01:08:47 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" I spent an hour replying to this, but Outlook Express crashed. So I'm going to try to recap, but with far less energy than before. You missed a truly inspired reply... This is all in an effort to refine what I believe to be a good proposal. > I guess that I could just remove the time limit language, but I think that > that would be more objectionable to most people - is that true? Can you > state more clearly your objection? Here's where I elloquently stated my point. Lost to the great bit-bucket in the sky... My understanding of CM is that he decides on penalties not prescribed by the violated rule. If a CM first decides that an offence is punishable by death, he could hold back administration of penalty indefinately. I'd back a longer time limit than two days for all violations. > > Clarify the original election procedings. Does everyone have to vote? > > Majority? etc... > > > I'm currently uninterested in redefining election. AFAIK, with no law in > place defining election, we can run with the common meaning. That'll be > majority. I had a really good paragraph here. If this proposition passes by majority only, and if one of us decides not to vote in the election, there's no CM... You better get interrested in defining elections. Remember, we've never had one. > > There should be a limit, however long, to the term. > > > I think that this weakens the office considerably, but I wouldn't object to > a long term. > > > A de-frocked CM should NOT appoint his successor. There should be another > > election. > > > But there is an election! The people get to say no if they want! I think you'd better defend you position a little better here... Suppose PB is corrupt, EV less so, and FH still less. BA & SA are virtuous beyond reproach. PB is dethroned, passing the post to EV. If FH backs him, there can't be unanimous objection. > > There's no reason I see for giving 10 points for death penalty > officiation. > > > Considering the penalty for losing a death case, the Magistrate needs some > inducement to pursue them. The penalty/reward system approximates the > adversarial system, in some sense. Also, the Magistrate is doing some work, > and should get a little something at the end of the week for a job well > done. I guess that's OK. Also, there's a loophole I saw when writing 307. Without giving away too much, a CM can be removed and replaced with a simple majority by the current rules, but I didn't see a way around it. Maybe I'll save it for later. with that i go to sleep... --e From sga5892@n... Thu Jan 25 05:45:08 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: sga5892@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2); 25 Jan 2001 13:45:08 -0000 Received: (qmail 28583 invoked from network); 25 Jan 2001 13:44:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 25 Jan 2001 13:44:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-gw3.njit.edu) (128.235.251.11) by mta1 with SMTP; 25 Jan 2001 13:44:48 -0000 Received: from mailhost.njit.edu (mailhost.njit.edu [128.235.251.108]) by mail-gw3.njit.edu (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f0PDij711928 for ; Thu, 25 Jan 2001 08:44:46 -0500 Received: from steve0 (dhcp194-216.njit.edu) by mailhost.njit.edu (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9) with SMTP id <0G7Q002FA0UK39@m...> for scatterbrains@egroups.com; Thu, 25 Jan 2001 08:44:44 -0500 (EST) Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Thu, 25 Jan 2001 08:44:26 -0500 Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 08:44:25 -0500 Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 310 To: "'scatterbrains@egroups.com'" Reply-to: "sga5892@n..." Message-id: <01C086AB.05EB2500.sga5892@n...> Organization: NJIT MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit From: "Steven G. Arturo" here is a summary of my objections and a few suggestions, keeping ongoing discussions in mind. i like eugene's point of offering a longer time frame for all punishments. there is a point to your not limiting the time for issuing a death penalty, where the CM can have time to accumulate and witness continuing bad behavior. assuming a limited time for issuing a death penalty, could a three strikes policy be implimented, to document the behavior of an individual? this is a bit of fat, but some fat is good. when you say 2 days, is this 2 business days? what kind of time frame for an appeal for a minor penalty? i do not like the magistrate appointing a successor when the CM is ousted. if teams are to be formed, we would have the family of punishers, all holding a pba card whenever they obliterate the speed limit. how's a supermajority for the ouster of a magistrate? pat, i haven't decided yet... i'll now wait for the first revision. steve0 -----Original Message----- From: Patrick D. Bernardo [SMTP:bernardo@c...] Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 10:06 AM To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 310 Proposal 310: An office shall be created, called the Chief Magistrate, for the purpose of smiting people (handing out punishments). The Chief Magistrate shall have the responsibility to assess penalties up to the penalty of death (removal from the game), according to the law and for the general maintenance of good order within the regime. All smitings must be done publicly within 2 days (excluding those days excluded by 308), except for offenses which carry the penalty of death, which shall have no time limitation. All punishments less than death are final, though they may be appealed by a call to judgment (which may alter the severity of the penalty or dismiss it altogether). All death penalty cases are immediately "appealed" in that they must be supported unanimously by the people at large. The office of Chief Magistrate shall originally be filled by election from the group at large, but successors shall be appointed by the out-going Magistrate, with the consent of the populace at large. A unanimous vote (not including the former Magistrate or the nominee) shall be required to deny the candidate the office. If for any reason the Chief Magistrate is unable to fulfill his duties for a short period of time, he may swear in a Deputy. The Deputy will have all the powers of the Magistrate, with the exception of the death penalty, until the Magistrate returns to power. Although the Deputy may not inflict the death penalty, cases may be referred to the Magistrate, which may be prosecuted upon the Magistrate's return. The term of the Chief Magistrate will be for life, given good behavior. If at any time the people decide to remove the Magistrate, they may do so with a unanimous vote (excluding the vote of the Magistrate). In addition, an overturned death penalty shall result in the automatic removal of the Magistrate from office. However, in either of these cases the Magistrate shall appoint his successor. The Magistrate shall receive one (1) point for each successful smiting (a smiting is still considered successful if the sentence is altered by judgment, but not if it has been dismissed), and ten (10) points for each successful death penalty administered. End Proposal 310. << File: ATT00001.htm >> From eventi@n... Fri Jan 26 07:21:00 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 26 Jan 2001 15:20:59 -0000 Received: (qmail 7360 invoked from network); 26 Jan 2001 15:20:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 26 Jan 2001 15:20:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 26 Jan 2001 15:20:06 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id KAA27130 for ; Fri, 26 Jan 2001 10:20:04 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 310 Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 10:21:23 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <001501c0867d$724173e0$cba811d0@computer> From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" OK, so you've had a day... Is there a revision on the horizon? From bernardo@c... Fri Jan 26 07:43:30 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 26 Jan 2001 15:43:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 59627 invoked from network); 26 Jan 2001 15:41:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 26 Jan 2001 15:41:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta3 with SMTP; 26 Jan 2001 16:42:23 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-08.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.193]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f0QFfDa90913 for ; Fri, 26 Jan 2001 10:41:14 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <012a01c087ae$543088a0$c1a811d0@computer> To: Subject: Re: Proposal 310 Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 10:40:35 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0127_01C08784.6A13F6E0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" ------=_NextPart_000_0127_01C08784.6A13F6E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Proposal 310: An office shall be created, called the Chief Magistrate, for the purpose = of smiting people (handing out punishments). The Chief Magistrate shall ha= ve the responsibility to assess penalties up to the penalty of death (remov= al from the game), according to the law, for the general maintenance of goo= d order within the regime. All smitings must be done publicly within 2 days of the offense(counting = those days as official which have been specified by 308), except for offens= es which carry the penalty of death, which shall have no time limitation. = All punishments less than death are final, though they may be appealed by a= call to judgment (which may alter the severity of the penalty or dismiss i= t altogether). All death penalty cases are immediately "appealed" in that = they must be supported unanimously by the people at large. The office of Chief Magistrate shall be filled by election from the group= at large. The Magistrate shall take power immediately upon election. If = for any reason the Chief Magistrate is unable to fulfill his duties for a s= hort period of time, he may swear in a Deputy. The Deputy will have all th= e powers of the Magistrate, with the exception of the death penalty, until = the Magistrate returns to power. Although the Deputy may not inflict the d= eath penalty, cases may be referred to the Magistrate, which may be prosecu= ted upon the Magistrate's return. The term of the Chief Magistrate will be for good behavior. If at any ti= me the people decide to remove the Magistrate, they may do so with a unanim= ous vote (excluding the vote of the Magistrate). In addition, an overturne= d death penalty shall result in the automatic removal of the Magistrate fro= m office.=20=20 The Magistrate shall receive one (1) point for each successful smiting (a= smiting is still considered successful if the sentence is altered by judgm= ent, but not if it has been dismissed), and ten (10) points for each succes= sful death penalty administered. =20=20=20 End Proposal 310.=20 ------=_NextPart_000_0127_01C08784.6A13F6E0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
 
Proposal 310:
 
An office shall be created, called the C= hief=20 Magistrate, for the purpose of smiting people (handing out punishments).&= nbsp;=20 The Chief Magistrate shall have the responsibility to assess penalties up= to=20 the penalty of death (removal from the game), according to the law, for t= he=20 general maintenance of good order within the regime.
 
All smitings must be done publicly = within 2=20 days of the offense(counting those days as official which have been speci= fied=20 by 308), except for offenses which carry the penalty of death, which shal= l=20 have no time limitation.  All punishments less than death are final,= =20 though they may be appealed by a call to judgment (which may alter the=20 severity of the penalty or dismiss it altogether).  All death penalt= y=20 cases are immediately "appealed" in that they must be supported unanimous= ly by=20 the people at large.
 
The office of Chief Magistrate shall&nbs= p;be=20 filled by election from the group at large.  The=20 Magistrate shall take power immediately upon election.  If fo= r any=20 reason the Chief Magistrate is unable to fulfill his duties for a short p= eriod=20 of time, he may swear in a Deputy.  The Deputy will have all the pow= ers=20 of the Magistrate, with the exception of the death penalty, until the=20 Magistrate returns to power.  Although the Deputy may not inflict th= e=20 death penalty, cases may be referred to the Magistrate, which may be=20 prosecuted upon the Magistrate's return.
 
The term of the Chief Magistrate will be= for good=20 behavior.  If at any time the people decide to remove the Magistrate= ,=20 they may do so with a unanimous vote (excluding the vote of the=20 Magistrate).  In addition, an overturned death penalty shall result = in=20 the automatic removal of the Magistrate from office. 
 
The Magistrate shall receive one (1) poi= nt for=20 each successful smiting (a smiting is still considered successful if the= =20 sentence is altered by judgment, but not if it has been dismissed), and t= en=20 (10) points for each successful death penalty administered.
 
End Proposal=20 310. 
------=_NextPart_000_0127_01C08784.6A13F6E0-- From eventi@n... Fri Jan 26 08:52:25 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 26 Jan 2001 16:52:24 -0000 Received: (qmail 69228 invoked from network); 26 Jan 2001 16:52:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 26 Jan 2001 16:52:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 26 Jan 2001 17:53:21 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id LAA06880 for ; Fri, 26 Jan 2001 11:52:15 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 11:53:34 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <012a01c087ae$543088a0$c1a811d0@computer> From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" I'm more than a little disappointed. Without a definition of election, the filling of this position could drag on indefinately. And fix "The term of the Chief Magistrate will be for good behavior" in Paragraph 4, it's not clear. & You didn't see the loophole. And to top it off, it looks like yahoo swallowed egroups. --e -----Original Message----- From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] Sent: Friday, January 26, 2001 10:41 AM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 Proposal 310: An office shall be created, called the Chief Magistrate, for the purpose of smiting people (handing out punishments). The Chief Magistrate shall have the responsibility to assess penalties up to the penalty of death (removal from the game), according to the law, for the general maintenance of good order within the regime. All smitings must be done publicly within 2 days of the offense(counting those days as official which have been specified by 308), except for offenses which carry the penalty of death, which shall have no time limitation. All punishments less than death are final, though they may be appealed by a call to judgment (which may alter the severity of the penalty or dismiss it altogether). All death penalty cases are immediately "appealed" in that they must be supported unanimously by the people at large. The office of Chief Magistrate shall be filled by election from the group at large. The Magistrate shall take power immediately upon election. If for any reason the Chief Magistrate is unable to fulfill his duties for a short period of time, he may swear in a Deputy. The Deputy will have all the powers of the Magistrate, with the exception of the death penalty, until the Magistrate returns to power. Although the Deputy may not inflict the death penalty, cases may be referred to the Magistrate, which may be prosecuted upon the Magistrate's return. The term of the Chief Magistrate will be for good behavior. If at any time the people decide to remove the Magistrate, they may do so with a unanimous vote (excluding the vote of the Magistrate). In addition, an overturned death penalty shall result in the automatic removal of the Magistrate from office. The Magistrate shall receive one (1) point for each successful smiting (a smiting is still considered successful if the sentence is altered by judgment, but not if it has been dismissed), and ten (10) points for each successful death penalty administered. End Proposal 310. eGroups Sponsor Grab the opportunity to market your company. Choose the domain name below and press GO! www. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com From bernardo@c... Fri Jan 26 09:40:16 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 26 Jan 2001 17:40:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 4986 invoked from network); 26 Jan 2001 17:38:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 26 Jan 2001 17:38:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 26 Jan 2001 17:38:59 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-13.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.198]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f0QHcsa04273 for ; Fri, 26 Jan 2001 12:38:54 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <000501c087be$c5351420$c6a811d0@computer> To: References: Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 12:38:16 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" Hey, man. Satisfaction was never guaranteed. If election should have been defined anywhere, it should have been in YOUR law. Now we're stuck with option of either office-specific elections, or my law doing two things - proposing the chief magistrate position and defining elections. And the latter is clearly illegal. As for the term of good behavior, I don't see how it is unclear. The paragraph defines it. This is still up for discussion, and I was hoping to see what people thought of the overall law with the changes made. As for the loophole, why don't you either share it, or just wait and try to exploit it. It's quite possible that you are misreading the law and it doesn't exist. I can see a couple if you twist the meaning of the phrases, but nothing if you follow careful interpretation. Finally, if the loophole is just that a majority vote can change/alter this law, then whatever. In all honesty, I'm ready to just let this thing die, take the point loss, and go home. It's becoming too much like work. The demands are in general reasonable, but would require me to write a GODAMNED GOVERNMENT, not a position. If you don't like the position as it is, remember that it is ONLY A PART. It will have a context that in many cases is STILL TO BE DETERMINED. It will not be the whole government of scatterbrains, nor will it have primary responsible for doing much, it won't take out your garbage, sing to you at night, or make you iced tea. You will see how much the definition of the election swells this proposal tremendously. Proposal 310: An office shall be created, called the Chief Magistrate, for the purpose of smiting people (handing out punishments). The Chief Magistrate shall have the responsibility to assess penalties up to the penalty of death (removal from the game), according to the law, for the general maintenance of good order within the regime. All smitings must be done publicly within 2 days of the offense(counting those days as official which have been specified by 308), except for offenses which carry the penalty of death, which shall have no time limitation. All punishments less than death are final, though they may be appealed by a call to judgment (which may alter the severity of the penalty or dismiss it altogether). All death penalty cases are immediately "appealed" in that they must be supported unanimously by the people at large. The office of Chief Magistrate shall be filled by election from the group at large. The Magistrate shall take power immediately upon election. Election for the purposes of this office shall take place as follows: a)the election process shall begin immediately upon passage of this law for the first magistrate, and hereafter, immediately upon the circumstances of the removal of the previous occupant b)this election shall be announced by either the outgoing magistrate, or by the author of the original law. There is NO discretion in calling the election, but this is a formality that will alert all members of the upcoming election. c) Candidates will declare themselves. d)a poll shall be created by the person who announced the poll. e) the candidate with the most votes will be named the new magistrate. f) if there is a tie, there will be a run-off vote between the highest scoring candidates. g) in the event that the runoff vote does not produce a clear winner, or that every player has declared himself a candidate the magistrate shall be appointed by the out-going magistrate, or, in the case of the original election, shall be the author of this proposal. If for any reason the Chief Magistrate is unable to fulfill his duties for a short period of time, he may swear in a Deputy. The Deputy will have all the powers of the Magistrate, with the exception of the death penalty, until the Magistrate returns to power. Although the Deputy may not inflict the death penalty, cases may be referred to the Magistrate, which may be prosecuted upon the Magistrate's return. The term of the Chief Magistrate will be for good behavior. If at any time the people decide to remove the Magistrate, they may do so with a unanimous vote (excluding the vote of the Magistrate). In addition, an overturned death penalty shall result in the automatic removal of the Magistrate from office. The Magistrate shall receive one (1) point for each successful smiting (a smiting is still considered successful if the sentence is altered by judgment, but not if it has been dismissed), and ten (10) points for each successful death penalty administered. End Proposal 310. ----- Original Message ----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia To: Sent: Friday, January 26, 2001 11:53 AM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 > I'm more than a little disappointed. Without a definition of election, the > filling of this position could drag on indefinately. And fix "The term of > the Chief Magistrate will be for good behavior" in Paragraph 4, it's not > clear. & You didn't see the loophole. > > And to top it off, it looks like yahoo swallowed egroups. > --e > > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Friday, January 26, 2001 10:41 AM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 > > > > Proposal 310: > > An office shall be created, called the Chief Magistrate, for the purpose of > smiting people (handing out punishments). The Chief Magistrate shall have > the responsibility to assess penalties up to the penalty of death (removal > from the game), according to the law, for the general maintenance of good > order within the regime. > > All smitings must be done publicly within 2 days of the offense(counting > those days as official which have been specified by 308), except for > offenses which carry the penalty of death, which shall have no time > limitation. All punishments less than death are final, though they may be > appealed by a call to judgment (which may alter the severity of the penalty > or dismiss it altogether). All death penalty cases are immediately > "appealed" in that they must be supported unanimously by the people at > large. > > The office of Chief Magistrate shall be filled by election from the group at > large. The Magistrate shall take power immediately upon election. If for > any reason the Chief Magistrate is unable to fulfill his duties for a short > period of time, he may swear in a Deputy. The Deputy will have all the > powers of the Magistrate, with the exception of the death penalty, until the > Magistrate returns to power. Although the Deputy may not inflict the death > penalty, cases may be referred to the Magistrate, which may be prosecuted > upon the Magistrate's return. > > The term of the Chief Magistrate will be for good behavior. If at any time > the people decide to remove the Magistrate, they may do so with a unanimous > vote (excluding the vote of the Magistrate). In addition, an overturned > death penalty shall result in the automatic removal of the Magistrate from > office. > > The Magistrate shall receive one (1) point for each successful smiting (a > smiting is still considered successful if the sentence is altered by > judgment, but not if it has been dismissed), and ten (10) points for each > successful death penalty administered. > > End Proposal 310. > > eGroups Sponsor > > Grab the opportunity to market your company. Choose the domain name below > and press GO! > www. > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Fri Jan 26 09:48:07 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 26 Jan 2001 17:48:06 -0000 Received: (qmail 9606 invoked from network); 26 Jan 2001 17:47:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 26 Jan 2001 17:47:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta1 with SMTP; 26 Jan 2001 17:47:22 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-13.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.198]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f0QHlIa05266 for ; Fri, 26 Jan 2001 12:47:18 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <001201c087bf$f1b5ca20$c6a811d0@computer> To: References: <000501c087be$c5351420$c6a811d0@computer> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 12:46:40 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" I changed my mind already. I'm not going to define elections for this position. It's both illegal and too tedious. > Proposal 310: > > An office shall be created, called the Chief Magistrate, for the purpose of > smiting people (handing out punishments). The Chief Magistrate shall have > the responsibility to assess penalties up to the penalty of death (removal > from the game), according to the law, for the general maintenance of good > order within the regime. > > All smitings must be done publicly within 2 days of the offense(counting > those days as official which have been specified by 308), except for > offenses which carry the penalty of death, which shall have no time > limitation. All punishments less than death are final, though they may be > appealed by a call to judgment (which may alter the severity of the penalty > or dismiss it altogether). All death penalty cases are immediately > "appealed" in that they must be supported unanimously by the people at > large. > > The office of Chief Magistrate shall be filled by election from the group at > large. The Magistrate shall take power immediately upon election. Election for the Chief Magistrate position shall take place when somebody else bothers to define them in another law. Then, elections shall take place immediately, to the great joy and excitment of all. > > If for any reason the Chief Magistrate is unable to fulfill his duties for a > short > period of time, he may swear in a Deputy. The Deputy will have all the > powers of the Magistrate, with the exception of the death penalty, until the > Magistrate returns to power. Although the Deputy may not inflict the death > penalty, cases may be referred to the Magistrate, which may be prosecuted > upon the Magistrate's return. > > The term of the Chief Magistrate will be for good behavior. If at any time > the people decide to remove the Magistrate, they may do so with a unanimous > vote (excluding the vote of the Magistrate). In addition, an overturned > death penalty shall result in the automatic removal of the Magistrate from > office. > > The Magistrate shall receive one (1) point for each successful smiting (a > smiting is still considered successful if the sentence is altered by > judgment, but not if it has been dismissed), and ten (10) points for each > successful death penalty administered. > > End Proposal 310. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Eugene Ventimiglia > To: > Sent: Friday, January 26, 2001 11:53 AM > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 > > > > I'm more than a little disappointed. Without a definition of election, > the > > filling of this position could drag on indefinately. And fix "The term of > > the Chief Magistrate will be for good behavior" in Paragraph 4, it's not > > clear. & You didn't see the loophole. > > > > And to top it off, it looks like yahoo swallowed egroups. > > --e > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > Sent: Friday, January 26, 2001 10:41 AM > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 > > > > > > > > Proposal 310: > > > > An office shall be created, called the Chief Magistrate, for the purpose > of > > smiting people (handing out punishments). The Chief Magistrate shall have > > the responsibility to assess penalties up to the penalty of death (removal > > from the game), according to the law, for the general maintenance of good > > order within the regime. > > > > All smitings must be done publicly within 2 days of the offense(counting > > those days as official which have been specified by 308), except for > > offenses which carry the penalty of death, which shall have no time > > limitation. All punishments less than death are final, though they may be > > appealed by a call to judgment (which may alter the severity of the > penalty > > or dismiss it altogether). All death penalty cases are immediately > > "appealed" in that they must be supported unanimously by the people at > > large. > > > > The office of Chief Magistrate shall be filled by election from the group > at > > large. The Magistrate shall take power immediately upon election. If for > > any reason the Chief Magistrate is unable to fulfill his duties for a > short > > period of time, he may swear in a Deputy. The Deputy will have all the > > powers of the Magistrate, with the exception of the death penalty, until > the > > Magistrate returns to power. Although the Deputy may not inflict the > death > > penalty, cases may be referred to the Magistrate, which may be prosecuted > > upon the Magistrate's return. > > > > The term of the Chief Magistrate will be for good behavior. If at any > time > > the people decide to remove the Magistrate, they may do so with a > unanimous > > vote (excluding the vote of the Magistrate). In addition, an overturned > > death penalty shall result in the automatic removal of the Magistrate from > > office. > > > > The Magistrate shall receive one (1) point for each successful smiting (a > > smiting is still considered successful if the sentence is altered by > > judgment, but not if it has been dismissed), and ten (10) points for each > > successful death penalty administered. > > > > End Proposal 310. > > > > eGroups Sponsor > > > > Grab the opportunity to market your company. Choose the domain name below > > and press GO! > > www. > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Fri Jan 26 10:09:25 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 26 Jan 2001 18:09:13 -0000 Received: (qmail 74125 invoked from network); 26 Jan 2001 18:08:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 26 Jan 2001 18:08:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 26 Jan 2001 18:08:39 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id NAA14719 for ; Fri, 26 Jan 2001 13:08:38 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 13:09:57 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <000501c087be$c5351420$c6a811d0@computer> From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" No need to get snippy... We all got at least as much shit as this. I chose not to define elections, and let them be either defined independently, or picked specifically for the office. And BA's last proposal shows that you can propose a law, and package it with a definition. You cited 308 to define Federal Holidays yourself. My interest in this is only in making it a forceful rule. And I also feel that requiring the players to vote outside the Let it stay the way it is, if you want. And yes, that's the loophole. Requiring a unanimous vote for the removal of the officer is imposible. My problem with that sentence was that I simply didn't understand it. I still don't on its own. Taken as an introduction to the paragraph, it makes sense, but if you mean for life, say for life. I'm really for it. I swear. I'd vote for it as is. --e > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Friday, January 26, 2001 12:38 PM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 > > > Hey, man. Satisfaction was never guaranteed. > > If election should have been defined anywhere, it should have been in YOUR > law. Now we're stuck with option of either office-specific > elections, or my > law doing two things - proposing the chief magistrate position > and defining > elections. And the latter is clearly illegal. > > As for the term of good behavior, I don't see how it is unclear. The > paragraph defines it. This is still up for discussion, and I was > hoping to > see what people thought of the overall law with the changes made. > > As for the loophole, why don't you either share it, or just wait > and try to > exploit it. It's quite possible that you are misreading the law and it > doesn't exist. I can see a couple if you twist the meaning of > the phrases, > but nothing if you follow careful interpretation. Finally, if > the loophole > is just that a majority vote can change/alter this law, then whatever. > > In all honesty, I'm ready to just let this thing die, take the point loss, > and go home. It's becoming too much like work. The demands are > in general > reasonable, but would require me to write a GODAMNED GOVERNMENT, not a > position. If you don't like the position as it is, remember that > it is ONLY > A PART. It will have a context that in many cases is STILL TO BE > DETERMINED. It will not be the whole government of > scatterbrains, nor will > it have primary responsible for doing much, it won't take out > your garbage, > sing to you at night, or make you iced tea. You will see how much the > definition of the election swells this proposal tremendously. > > Proposal 310: > > An office shall be created, called the Chief Magistrate, for the > purpose of > smiting people (handing out punishments). The Chief Magistrate shall have > the responsibility to assess penalties up to the penalty of death (removal > from the game), according to the law, for the general maintenance of good > order within the regime. > > All smitings must be done publicly within 2 days of the offense(counting > those days as official which have been specified by 308), except for > offenses which carry the penalty of death, which shall have no time > limitation. All punishments less than death are final, though they may be > appealed by a call to judgment (which may alter the severity of > the penalty > or dismiss it altogether). All death penalty cases are immediately > "appealed" in that they must be supported unanimously by the people at > large. > > The office of Chief Magistrate shall be filled by election from > the group at > large. The Magistrate shall take power immediately upon > election. Election > for the purposes > of this office shall take place as follows: a)the election process shall > begin immediately > upon passage of this law for the first magistrate, and hereafter, > immediately upon the circumstances > of the removal of the previous occupant b)this election shall be announced > by > either the outgoing magistrate, or by the author of the original > law. There > is NO > discretion in calling the election, but this is a formality that > will alert > all members of the > upcoming election. c) Candidates will declare themselves. d)a > poll shall be > created by the > person who announced the poll. e) the candidate with the most > votes will be > named the new > magistrate. f) if there is a tie, there will be a run-off vote > between the > highest scoring candidates. > g) in the event that the runoff vote does not produce a clear winner, or > that every player has > declared himself a candidate the magistrate shall be appointed by the > out-going magistrate, or, in > the case of the original election, shall be the author of this proposal. > > If for any reason the Chief Magistrate is unable to fulfill his > duties for a > short > period of time, he may swear in a Deputy. The Deputy will have all the > powers of the Magistrate, with the exception of the death > penalty, until the > Magistrate returns to power. Although the Deputy may not inflict > the death > penalty, cases may be referred to the Magistrate, which may be prosecuted > upon the Magistrate's return. > > The term of the Chief Magistrate will be for good behavior. If > at any time > the people decide to remove the Magistrate, they may do so with a > unanimous > vote (excluding the vote of the Magistrate). In addition, an overturned > death penalty shall result in the automatic removal of the Magistrate from > office. > > The Magistrate shall receive one (1) point for each successful smiting (a > smiting is still considered successful if the sentence is altered by > judgment, but not if it has been dismissed), and ten (10) points for each > successful death penalty administered. > > End Proposal 310. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Eugene Ventimiglia > To: > Sent: Friday, January 26, 2001 11:53 AM > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 > > > > I'm more than a little disappointed. Without a definition of election, > the > > filling of this position could drag on indefinately. And fix > "The term of > > the Chief Magistrate will be for good behavior" in Paragraph 4, it's not > > clear. & You didn't see the loophole. > > > > And to top it off, it looks like yahoo swallowed egroups. > > --e > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > Sent: Friday, January 26, 2001 10:41 AM > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 > > > > > > > > Proposal 310: > > > > An office shall be created, called the Chief Magistrate, for the purpose > of > > smiting people (handing out punishments). The Chief Magistrate > shall have > > the responsibility to assess penalties up to the penalty of > death (removal > > from the game), according to the law, for the general > maintenance of good > > order within the regime. > > > > All smitings must be done publicly within 2 days of the offense(counting > > those days as official which have been specified by 308), except for > > offenses which carry the penalty of death, which shall have no time > > limitation. All punishments less than death are final, though > they may be > > appealed by a call to judgment (which may alter the severity of the > penalty > > or dismiss it altogether). All death penalty cases are immediately > > "appealed" in that they must be supported unanimously by the people at > > large. > > > > The office of Chief Magistrate shall be filled by election from > the group > at > > large. The Magistrate shall take power immediately upon > election. If for > > any reason the Chief Magistrate is unable to fulfill his duties for a > short > > period of time, he may swear in a Deputy. The Deputy will have all the > > powers of the Magistrate, with the exception of the death penalty, until > the > > Magistrate returns to power. Although the Deputy may not inflict the > death > > penalty, cases may be referred to the Magistrate, which may be > prosecuted > > upon the Magistrate's return. > > > > The term of the Chief Magistrate will be for good behavior. If at any > time > > the people decide to remove the Magistrate, they may do so with a > unanimous > > vote (excluding the vote of the Magistrate). In addition, an overturned > > death penalty shall result in the automatic removal of the > Magistrate from > > office. > > > > The Magistrate shall receive one (1) point for each successful > smiting (a > > smiting is still considered successful if the sentence is altered by > > judgment, but not if it has been dismissed), and ten (10) > points for each > > successful death penalty administered. > > > > End Proposal 310. > > > > eGroups Sponsor > > > > Grab the opportunity to market your company. Choose the domain > name below > > and press GO! > > www. > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Fri Jan 26 10:14:07 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 26 Jan 2001 18:14:06 -0000 Received: (qmail 87902 invoked from network); 26 Jan 2001 18:13:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 26 Jan 2001 18:13:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 26 Jan 2001 18:13:26 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id NAA15208 for ; Fri, 26 Jan 2001 13:13:25 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: The switch to Yahoo Groups... Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 13:14:45 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <001201c087bf$f1b5ca20$c6a811d0@computer> From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" Well Y's servers finally caught up, and now it's possible to see the site somewhat like it was. To use the new system, you'll need a Yahoo ID, which apparently only Fritz & I have, and "convert" your eGroups account. The process is relatively painless goto http://groups.yahoo.com/convwiz and answer the questions. --e From barturo@e... Fri Jan 26 13:29:47 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: BArturo@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 26 Jan 2001 21:29:46 -0000 Received: (qmail 57952 invoked from network); 26 Jan 2001 21:29:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 26 Jan 2001 21:29:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 26 Jan 2001 21:29:43 -0000 Received: from batman.ess ([12.31.9.2]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with ESMTP id QAA04934 for ; Fri, 26 Jan 2001 16:29:39 -0500 (EST) Received: by BATMAN with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id ; Fri, 26 Jan 2001 16:25:04 -0500 Message-ID: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF0372B8@BATMAN> To: "'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'" Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 16:25:04 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" From: "Arturo, Bob" Ranting and raving won't get you any where. I don't like a couple of things the most of all the fact that the CM can impose a death penalty at any time for any reason. -----Original Message----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia [mailto:eventi@n...] Sent: Friday, January 26, 2001 1:10 PM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 No need to get snippy... We all got at least as much shit as this. I chose not to define elections, and let them be either defined independently, or picked specifically for the office. And BA's last proposal shows that you can propose a law, and package it with a definition. You cited 308 to define Federal Holidays yourself. My interest in this is only in making it a forceful rule. And I also feel that requiring the players to vote outside the Let it stay the way it is, if you want. And yes, that's the loophole. Requiring a unanimous vote for the removal of the officer is imposible. My problem with that sentence was that I simply didn't understand it. I still don't on its own. Taken as an introduction to the paragraph, it makes sense, but if you mean for life, say for life. I'm really for it. I swear. I'd vote for it as is. --e > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Friday, January 26, 2001 12:38 PM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 > > > Hey, man. Satisfaction was never guaranteed. > > If election should have been defined anywhere, it should have been in YOUR > law. Now we're stuck with option of either office-specific > elections, or my > law doing two things - proposing the chief magistrate position > and defining > elections. And the latter is clearly illegal. > > As for the term of good behavior, I don't see how it is unclear. The > paragraph defines it. This is still up for discussion, and I was > hoping to > see what people thought of the overall law with the changes made. > > As for the loophole, why don't you either share it, or just wait > and try to > exploit it. It's quite possible that you are misreading the law and it > doesn't exist. I can see a couple if you twist the meaning of > the phrases, > but nothing if you follow careful interpretation. Finally, if > the loophole > is just that a majority vote can change/alter this law, then whatever. > > In all honesty, I'm ready to just let this thing die, take the point loss, > and go home. It's becoming too much like work. The demands are > in general > reasonable, but would require me to write a GODAMNED GOVERNMENT, not a > position. If you don't like the position as it is, remember that > it is ONLY > A PART. It will have a context that in many cases is STILL TO BE > DETERMINED. It will not be the whole government of > scatterbrains, nor will > it have primary responsible for doing much, it won't take out > your garbage, > sing to you at night, or make you iced tea. You will see how much the > definition of the election swells this proposal tremendously. > > Proposal 310: > > An office shall be created, called the Chief Magistrate, for the > purpose of > smiting people (handing out punishments). The Chief Magistrate shall have > the responsibility to assess penalties up to the penalty of death (removal > from the game), according to the law, for the general maintenance of good > order within the regime. > > All smitings must be done publicly within 2 days of the offense(counting > those days as official which have been specified by 308), except for > offenses which carry the penalty of death, which shall have no time > limitation. All punishments less than death are final, though they may be > appealed by a call to judgment (which may alter the severity of > the penalty > or dismiss it altogether). All death penalty cases are immediately > "appealed" in that they must be supported unanimously by the people at > large. > > The office of Chief Magistrate shall be filled by election from > the group at > large. The Magistrate shall take power immediately upon > election. Election > for the purposes > of this office shall take place as follows: a)the election process shall > begin immediately > upon passage of this law for the first magistrate, and hereafter, > immediately upon the circumstances > of the removal of the previous occupant b)this election shall be announced > by > either the outgoing magistrate, or by the author of the original > law. There > is NO > discretion in calling the election, but this is a formality that > will alert > all members of the > upcoming election. c) Candidates will declare themselves. d)a > poll shall be > created by the > person who announced the poll. e) the candidate with the most > votes will be > named the new > magistrate. f) if there is a tie, there will be a run-off vote > between the > highest scoring candidates. > g) in the event that the runoff vote does not produce a clear winner, or > that every player has > declared himself a candidate the magistrate shall be appointed by the > out-going magistrate, or, in > the case of the original election, shall be the author of this proposal. > > If for any reason the Chief Magistrate is unable to fulfill his > duties for a > short > period of time, he may swear in a Deputy. The Deputy will have all the > powers of the Magistrate, with the exception of the death > penalty, until the > Magistrate returns to power. Although the Deputy may not inflict > the death > penalty, cases may be referred to the Magistrate, which may be prosecuted > upon the Magistrate's return. > > The term of the Chief Magistrate will be for good behavior. If > at any time > the people decide to remove the Magistrate, they may do so with a > unanimous > vote (excluding the vote of the Magistrate). In addition, an overturned > death penalty shall result in the automatic removal of the Magistrate from > office. > > The Magistrate shall receive one (1) point for each successful smiting (a > smiting is still considered successful if the sentence is altered by > judgment, but not if it has been dismissed), and ten (10) points for each > successful death penalty administered. > > End Proposal 310. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Eugene Ventimiglia > To: > Sent: Friday, January 26, 2001 11:53 AM > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 > > > > I'm more than a little disappointed. Without a definition of election, > the > > filling of this position could drag on indefinately. And fix > "The term of > > the Chief Magistrate will be for good behavior" in Paragraph 4, it's not > > clear. & You didn't see the loophole. > > > > And to top it off, it looks like yahoo swallowed egroups. > > --e > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > Sent: Friday, January 26, 2001 10:41 AM > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 > > > > > > > > Proposal 310: > > > > An office shall be created, called the Chief Magistrate, for the purpose > of > > smiting people (handing out punishments). The Chief Magistrate > shall have > > the responsibility to assess penalties up to the penalty of > death (removal > > from the game), according to the law, for the general > maintenance of good > > order within the regime. > > > > All smitings must be done publicly within 2 days of the offense(counting > > those days as official which have been specified by 308), except for > > offenses which carry the penalty of death, which shall have no time > > limitation. All punishments less than death are final, though > they may be > > appealed by a call to judgment (which may alter the severity of the > penalty > > or dismiss it altogether). All death penalty cases are immediately > > "appealed" in that they must be supported unanimously by the people at > > large. > > > > The office of Chief Magistrate shall be filled by election from > the group > at > > large. The Magistrate shall take power immediately upon > election. If for > > any reason the Chief Magistrate is unable to fulfill his duties for a > short > > period of time, he may swear in a Deputy. The Deputy will have all the > > powers of the Magistrate, with the exception of the death penalty, until > the > > Magistrate returns to power. Although the Deputy may not inflict the > death > > penalty, cases may be referred to the Magistrate, which may be > prosecuted > > upon the Magistrate's return. > > > > The term of the Chief Magistrate will be for good behavior. If at any > time > > the people decide to remove the Magistrate, they may do so with a > unanimous > > vote (excluding the vote of the Magistrate). In addition, an overturned > > death penalty shall result in the automatic removal of the > Magistrate from > > office. > > > > The Magistrate shall receive one (1) point for each successful > smiting (a > > smiting is still considered successful if the sentence is altered by > > judgment, but not if it has been dismissed), and ten (10) > points for each > > successful death penalty administered. > > > > End Proposal 310. > > > > eGroups Sponsor > > > > Grab the opportunity to market your company. Choose the domain > name below > > and press GO! > > www. > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at webmaster@e.... From eventi@n... Fri Jan 26 14:41:21 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 26 Jan 2001 22:41:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 50695 invoked from network); 26 Jan 2001 22:41:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 26 Jan 2001 22:41:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 26 Jan 2001 23:42:11 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id RAA11337 for ; Fri, 26 Jan 2001 17:41:05 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 17:42:24 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF0372B8@BATMAN> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" > Ranting and raving won't get you any where. I don't like a couple > of things > the most of all the fact that the CM can impose a death penalty > at any time > for any reason. Since Pat's getting tired, I'll take this one... If the CM does impose a death penalty, it's immediately challenged by all the players, and put to a vote. If the group's not unanimous, not only does the penalty not take place, but the CM's dethroned. --e From bernardo@c... Sat Jan 27 06:54:31 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 27 Jan 2001 14:54:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 37307 invoked from network); 27 Jan 2001 14:54:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 27 Jan 2001 14:54:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 27 Jan 2001 14:54:24 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-14.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.199]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f0REsIa10251 for ; Sat, 27 Jan 2001 09:54:18 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <000901c08870$ef88ab80$c7a811d0@computer> To: References: Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2001 09:53:38 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" My apologies to the group. I didn't mean to sound off that way. Yesterday was just a very *bad* day. Sorry for the general crankiness of that reply. Yeah, Eug has got it right. This power is in no way arbitrary: the CM canNOT impose a death penalty at any time nor for any reason... ----- Original Message ----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia To: Sent: Friday, January 26, 2001 5:42 PM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 > > Ranting and raving won't get you any where. I don't like a couple > > of things > > the most of all the fact that the CM can impose a death penalty > > at any time > > for any reason. > > Since Pat's getting tired, I'll take this one... If the CM does impose a > death penalty, it's immediately challenged by all the players, and put to a > vote. If the group's not unanimous, not only does the penalty not take > place, but the CM's dethroned. > --e > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Mon Jan 29 07:04:45 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 29 Jan 2001 15:04:45 -0000 Received: (qmail 95338 invoked from network); 29 Jan 2001 15:03:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 29 Jan 2001 15:03:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 29 Jan 2001 15:03:51 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-12.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.197]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f0TF3na18949 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 10:03:49 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <000a01c08a04$98bd02c0$c5a811d0@computer> To: References: <000901c08870$ef88ab80$c7a811d0@computer> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 10:03:09 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" I just wanted to reiterate my position regarding not defining elections (it's not just that I'm being peevish). If elections are defined relative to each and every position, it'll be much more difficult to change the tenor of the group overall. Let's say, for instance, that we begin with totally open and free elections. However, we discover that we want or need to restrict them in some way (for the sake of argument, let's just say that newbies need to wait a week). Now, we'd have to go around and change each and every single proposition that contained an election. If, rather, our proposals refer to "elections" which are defined by another proposal, all that we have to do is change the "elections" prop. Eug and Bob - this is like how C++ operates, if you like the metaphor... If nobody else has anything - pro or contra - I'd like to get a vote on it soon. But I don't want to do that before everyone has had a chance to tell me what they think is wrong, and I've gotten back on it. p. From eventi@n... Mon Jan 29 08:11:07 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 29 Jan 2001 16:11:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 86980 invoked from network); 29 Jan 2001 16:05:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 29 Jan 2001 16:05:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 29 Jan 2001 16:05:39 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id LAA10126 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 11:05:38 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 11:06:53 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <000a01c08a04$98bd02c0$c5a811d0@computer> From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" First of all: Go ahead and finalize. I think any discussion at this point is academic. C++ Reference: I guess you mean it's a "level of indirection" which is almost always good. You probably meant pointers, which are pretty language non-specific, but a good analogy none the less. The Office creating proposal refers to the election defining proposal. Either can change without the other being affected. I'm fine with not defining them here, and agree that they should be defined by a seperate proposal. I only intended to point out that it's a problem to not define it at all. We can always define it when it becomes necessary. --e > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Monday, January 29, 2001 10:03 AM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 > > > I just wanted to reiterate my position regarding not defining elections > (it's not just that I'm being peevish). If elections are defined relative > to each and every position, it'll be much more difficult to > change the tenor > of the group overall. Let's say, for instance, that we begin with totally > open and free elections. However, we discover that we want or need to > restrict them in some way (for the sake of argument, let's just say that > newbies need to wait a week). Now, we'd have to go around and change each > and every single proposition that contained an election. If, rather, our > proposals refer to "elections" which are defined by another proposal, all > that we have to do is change the "elections" prop. > > Eug and Bob - this is like how C++ operates, if you like the metaphor... > > If nobody else has anything - pro or contra - I'd like to get a vote on it > soon. But I don't want to do that before everyone has had a > chance to tell > me what they think is wrong, and I've gotten back on it. > > p. > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From sga5892@n... Mon Jan 29 09:03:10 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: sga5892@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 29 Jan 2001 17:03:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 6686 invoked from network); 29 Jan 2001 16:56:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 29 Jan 2001 16:56:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-gw4.njit.edu) (128.235.251.32) by mta3 with SMTP; 29 Jan 2001 17:58:03 -0000 Received: from mailhost.njit.edu (mailhost.njit.edu [128.235.251.108]) by mail-gw4.njit.edu (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f0TGuvm28016 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 11:56:57 -0500 Received: from steve0 (dhcp194-216.njit.edu) by mailhost.njit.edu (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9) with SMTP id <0G7X00J18OEV4O@m...> for scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 11:56:55 -0500 (EST) Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 11:56:51 -0500 Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 11:56:50 -0500 Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 To: "'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'" Reply-to: "sga5892@n..." Message-id: <01C089EA.914A6BA0.sga5892@n...> Organization: NJIT MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit From: "Steven G. Arturo" so far, we have not had any tainted votes or elections. we are few enough to be held accountable if we were to vote then renig on grounds that there is no definite election/voting procedure. it would be funny because if someone were to disrupt the group because of a lack of voting procedures, then a CM would be needed to reprimand that person. on the other hand the CM has no reason to reprimand due to no written law, thus the disobedient can continue. sorry for the tangent... since all our communications are written down to this point (ignoring the backroom dealings, if any), we can try and hold each other to our words. this should give us time to get an election procedure in writing. steve0 -----Original Message----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia [SMTP:eventi@n...] Sent: Monday, January 29, 2001 11:07 AM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 First of all: Go ahead and finalize. I think any discussion at this point is academic. C++ Reference: I guess you mean it's a "level of indirection" which is almost always good. You probably meant pointers, which are pretty language non-specific, but a good analogy none the less. The Office creating proposal refers to the election defining proposal. Either can change without the other being affected. I'm fine with not defining them here, and agree that they should be defined by a seperate proposal. I only intended to point out that it's a problem to not define it at all. We can always define it when it becomes necessary. --e > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Monday, January 29, 2001 10:03 AM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 > > > I just wanted to reiterate my position regarding not defining elections > (it's not just that I'm being peevish). If elections are defined relative > to each and every position, it'll be much more difficult to > change the tenor > of the group overall. Let's say, for instance, that we begin with totally > open and free elections. However, we discover that we want or need to > restrict them in some way (for the sake of argument, let's just say that > newbies need to wait a week). Now, we'd have to go around and change each > and every single proposition that contained an election. If, rather, our > proposals refer to "elections" which are defined by another proposal, all > that we have to do is change the "elections" prop. > > Eug and Bob - this is like how C++ operates, if you like the metaphor... > > If nobody else has anything - pro or contra - I'd like to get a vote on it > soon. But I don't want to do that before everyone has had a > chance to tell > me what they think is wrong, and I've gotten back on it. > > p. > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com From eventi@n... Mon Jan 29 09:46:38 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 29 Jan 2001 17:46:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 37038 invoked from network); 29 Jan 2001 17:39:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 29 Jan 2001 17:39:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 29 Jan 2001 18:40:05 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id MAA19546 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 12:38:59 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 12:40:34 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <01C089EA.914A6BA0.sga5892@n...> From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" Agreed- But I think in principle, at least, Proposals should be written to have the greatest effect possible, and not to leave anything up to the good intentions of the players. Of course the line has to be drawn somewhere... > -----Original Message----- > From: Steven G. Arturo [mailto:sga5892@n...] > Sent: Monday, January 29, 2001 11:57 AM > To: 'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com' > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 > > > so far, we have not had any tainted votes or elections. we are > few enough > to be held accountable if we were to vote then renig on grounds > that there > is no definite election/voting procedure. > > it would be funny because if someone were to disrupt the group > because of a > lack of voting procedures, then a CM would be needed to reprimand that > person. on the other hand the CM has no reason to reprimand due to no > written law, thus the disobedient can continue. sorry for the tangent... > > since all our communications are written down to this point (ignoring the > backroom dealings, if any), we can try and hold each other to our words. > this should give us time to get an election procedure in writing. > > steve0 > > -----Original Message----- > From: Eugene Ventimiglia [SMTP:eventi@n...] > Sent: Monday, January 29, 2001 11:07 AM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 > > First of all: Go ahead and finalize. I think any discussion at this point > is academic. > > C++ Reference: I guess you mean it's a "level of indirection" which is > almost always good. You probably meant pointers, which are > pretty language > non-specific, but a good analogy none the less. The Office creating > proposal refers to the election defining proposal. Either can change > without the other being affected. > > I'm fine with not defining them here, and agree that they should > be defined > by a seperate proposal. I only intended to point out that it's a problem > to > not define it at all. We can always define it when it becomes necessary. > --e > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > Sent: Monday, January 29, 2001 10:03 AM > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 > > > > > > I just wanted to reiterate my position regarding not defining elections > > (it's not just that I'm being peevish). If elections are defined > relative > > to each and every position, it'll be much more difficult to > > change the tenor > > of the group overall. Let's say, for instance, that we begin with > totally > > open and free elections. However, we discover that we want or need to > > restrict them in some way (for the sake of argument, let's just say that > > newbies need to wait a week). Now, we'd have to go around and change > each > > and every single proposition that contained an election. If, > rather, our > > proposals refer to "elections" which are defined by another > proposal, all > > that we have to do is change the "elections" prop. > > > > Eug and Bob - this is like how C++ operates, if you like the metaphor... > > > > If nobody else has anything - pro or contra - I'd like to get a vote on > it > > soon. But I don't want to do that before everyone has had a > > chance to tell > > me what they think is wrong, and I've gotten back on it. > > > > p. > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Mon Jan 29 12:11:55 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 29 Jan 2001 20:11:55 -0000 Received: (qmail 48234 invoked from network); 29 Jan 2001 19:59:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 29 Jan 2001 19:59:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta3 with SMTP; 29 Jan 2001 21:00:30 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-09.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.194]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f0TJxNa47843 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 14:59:23 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <001a01c08a2d$e29bda00$c2a811d0@computer> To: References: Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 14:58:42 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" Yeah. But now you could write an election law with some teeth in it because you could empower the CM to enforce it and set a penalty for breaking the election law. Of course there is the paradox that Steven points out (what to do if someone cheats on the election installing the CM?), but we do have to start somewhere... ----- Original Message ----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia To: Sent: Monday, January 29, 2001 12:40 PM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 > Agreed- > But I think in principle, at least, Proposals should be written to have the > greatest effect possible, and not to leave anything up to the good > intentions of the players. Of course the line has to be drawn somewhere... > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Steven G. Arturo [mailto:sga5892@n...] > > Sent: Monday, January 29, 2001 11:57 AM > > To: 'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com' > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 > > > > > > so far, we have not had any tainted votes or elections. we are > > few enough > > to be held accountable if we were to vote then renig on grounds > > that there > > is no definite election/voting procedure. > > > > it would be funny because if someone were to disrupt the group > > because of a > > lack of voting procedures, then a CM would be needed to reprimand that > > person. on the other hand the CM has no reason to reprimand due to no > > written law, thus the disobedient can continue. sorry for the tangent... > > > > since all our communications are written down to this point (ignoring the > > backroom dealings, if any), we can try and hold each other to our words. > > this should give us time to get an election procedure in writing. > > > > steve0 > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Eugene Ventimiglia [SMTP:eventi@n...] > > Sent: Monday, January 29, 2001 11:07 AM > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 > > > > First of all: Go ahead and finalize. I think any discussion at this point > > is academic. > > > > C++ Reference: I guess you mean it's a "level of indirection" which is > > almost always good. You probably meant pointers, which are > > pretty language > > non-specific, but a good analogy none the less. The Office creating > > proposal refers to the election defining proposal. Either can change > > without the other being affected. > > > > I'm fine with not defining them here, and agree that they should > > be defined > > by a seperate proposal. I only intended to point out that it's a problem > > to > > not define it at all. We can always define it when it becomes necessary. > > --e > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > > Sent: Monday, January 29, 2001 10:03 AM > > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 > > > > > > > > > I just wanted to reiterate my position regarding not defining elections > > > (it's not just that I'm being peevish). If elections are defined > > relative > > > to each and every position, it'll be much more difficult to > > > change the tenor > > > of the group overall. Let's say, for instance, that we begin with > > totally > > > open and free elections. However, we discover that we want or need to > > > restrict them in some way (for the sake of argument, let's just say that > > > newbies need to wait a week). Now, we'd have to go around and change > > each > > > and every single proposition that contained an election. If, > > rather, our > > > proposals refer to "elections" which are defined by another > > proposal, all > > > that we have to do is change the "elections" prop. > > > > > > Eug and Bob - this is like how C++ operates, if you like the metaphor... > > > > > > If nobody else has anything - pro or contra - I'd like to get a vote on > > it > > > soon. But I don't want to do that before everyone has had a > > > chance to tell > > > me what they think is wrong, and I've gotten back on it. > > > > > > p. > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Mon Jan 29 12:25:29 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 29 Jan 2001 20:25:29 -0000 Received: (qmail 61192 invoked from network); 29 Jan 2001 20:17:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 29 Jan 2001 20:17:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 29 Jan 2001 20:17:16 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id PAA06114 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 15:17:15 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 15:18:50 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <001a01c08a2d$e29bda00$c2a811d0@computer> From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" Agreed, get on with it ;) --e > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Monday, January 29, 2001 2:59 PM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 > > > Yeah. But now you could write an election law with some teeth in > it because > you could empower the CM to enforce it and set a penalty for breaking the > election law. Of course there is the paradox that Steven points out (what > to do if someone cheats on the election installing the CM?), but > we do have > to start somewhere... > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Eugene Ventimiglia > To: > Sent: Monday, January 29, 2001 12:40 PM > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 > > > > Agreed- > > But I think in principle, at least, Proposals should be written to have > the > > greatest effect possible, and not to leave anything up to the good > > intentions of the players. Of course the line has to be drawn > somewhere... > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Steven G. Arturo [mailto:sga5892@n...] > > > Sent: Monday, January 29, 2001 11:57 AM > > > To: 'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com' > > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 > > > > > > > > > so far, we have not had any tainted votes or elections. we are > > > few enough > > > to be held accountable if we were to vote then renig on grounds > > > that there > > > is no definite election/voting procedure. > > > > > > it would be funny because if someone were to disrupt the group > > > because of a > > > lack of voting procedures, then a CM would be needed to reprimand that > > > person. on the other hand the CM has no reason to reprimand due to no > > > written law, thus the disobedient can continue. sorry for the > tangent... > > > > > > since all our communications are written down to this point (ignoring > the > > > backroom dealings, if any), we can try and hold each other to > our words. > > > this should give us time to get an election procedure in writing. > > > > > > steve0 > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Eugene Ventimiglia [SMTP:eventi@n...] > > > Sent: Monday, January 29, 2001 11:07 AM > > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 > > > > > > First of all: Go ahead and finalize. I think any discussion at this > point > > > is academic. > > > > > > C++ Reference: I guess you mean it's a "level of indirection" which is > > > almost always good. You probably meant pointers, which are > > > pretty language > > > non-specific, but a good analogy none the less. The Office creating > > > proposal refers to the election defining proposal. Either can change > > > without the other being affected. > > > > > > I'm fine with not defining them here, and agree that they should > > > be defined > > > by a seperate proposal. I only intended to point out that it's a > problem > > > to > > > not define it at all. We can always define it when it becomes > necessary. > > > --e > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > > > Sent: Monday, January 29, 2001 10:03 AM > > > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 310 > > > > > > > > > > > > I just wanted to reiterate my position regarding not defining > elections > > > > (it's not just that I'm being peevish). If elections are defined > > > relative > > > > to each and every position, it'll be much more difficult to > > > > change the tenor > > > > of the group overall. Let's say, for instance, that we begin with > > > totally > > > > open and free elections. However, we discover that we want > or need to > > > > restrict them in some way (for the sake of argument, let's just say > that > > > > newbies need to wait a week). Now, we'd have to go around > and change > > > each > > > > and every single proposition that contained an election. If, > > > rather, our > > > > proposals refer to "elections" which are defined by another > > > proposal, all > > > > that we have to do is change the "elections" prop. > > > > > > > > Eug and Bob - this is like how C++ operates, if you like the > metaphor... > > > > > > > > If nobody else has anything - pro or contra - I'd like to get a vote > on > > > it > > > > soon. But I don't want to do that before everyone has had a > > > > chance to tell > > > > me what they think is wrong, and I've gotten back on it. > > > > > > > > p. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Mon Jan 29 14:47:46 2001 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 98868 invoked from network); 29 Jan 2001 22:31:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 29 Jan 2001 22:31:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mo.egroups.com) (10.1.1.34) by mta1 with SMTP; 29 Jan 2001 22:31:07 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: notify@yahoogroups.com Received: from [10.1.10.118] by mo.egroups.com with NNFMP; 29 Jan 2001 22:31:06 -0000 Date: 29 Jan 2001 22:31:03 -0000 Message-ID: <980807463.5676.38555.fc@yahoogroups.com> X-eGroups-Application: poll From: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: New poll for scatterbrains MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Enter your vote today! Check out the new poll for the scatterbrains group: Proposal 310 Creation of Chief Magistrate. [See email for Final Form] o ->Sounds like a good idea o ->No way To vote, please visit the following web page: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scatterbrains/polls Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the Yahoo! Groups web site listed above. Thanks! Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms From bernardo@c... Mon Jan 29 14:50:53 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 29 Jan 2001 22:50:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 39466 invoked from network); 29 Jan 2001 22:33:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 29 Jan 2001 22:33:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta3 with SMTP; 29 Jan 2001 23:34:33 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-16.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.201]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f0TMXLa52256 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 17:33:22 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <002601c08a43$65d0d280$c9a811d0@computer> To: Subject: Final Form of Proposal 310 Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 17:32:41 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0023_01C08A19.7BA377E0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" ------=_NextPart_000_0023_01C08A19.7BA377E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable A poll has been created for the purposes of voting on the following proposa= l. Due to the general dictatorial and world-domination oriented attitude o= f Yahoo!, I was unable to post the full text of the proposal on the poll. = This is the final form of the proposal, and the one that you are voting on. Hmm. I just voted, and it looks like either I goofed, or Yahoo! lies. My = guess is that it's the latter, those bastards. Ok, so this'll be a totally= open vote, I think. Proposal 310: An office shall be created, called the=20 Chief Magistrate, for the purpose of smiting people (handing out=20 punishments). The Chief Magistrate=20 shall have the responsibility to assess=20 penalties up to the penalty of death=20 (removal from the game), according to=20 the law, for the general maintenance of=20 good order within the regime. All smitings must be done publicly=20 within 2 days of the offense(counting=20 those days as official which have been=20 specified by 308), except for offenses=20 which carry the penalty of death, which=20 shall have no time limitation. All=20 punishments less than death are final,=20 though they may be appealed by a call=20 to judgment (which may alter the=20 severity of the penalty or dismiss it=20 altogether). All death penalty cases=20 are immediately "appealed" in that they=20 must be supported unanimously by the=20 people at large. The office of Chief Magistrate shall be=20 filled by election from the group at=20 large. The Magistrate shall take power=20 immediately upon election. Election for=20 the Chief Magistrate position shall=20 take place according to the accepted=20 form of election.=20=20 If for any reason the Chief Magistrate=20 is unable to fulfill his duties for a=20 short period of time, he may swear in a=20 Deputy. The Deputy will have all the=20 powers of the Magistrate, with the=20 exception of the death penalty, until the Magistrate returns to power.=20=20 Although the Deputy may not inflict the death penalty, cases may be referred to=20 the Magistrate, which may be prosecuted=20 upon the Magistrate's return. The term of the Chief Magistrate will=20 be for good behavior. If at any time the people decide to remove the=20 Magistrate, they may do so with a unanimous vote (excluding the vote of=20 the Magistrate). In addition, an=20 overturned death penalty shall result in the=20 automatic removal of the Magistrate=20 from office. The Magistrate shall receive one (1)=20 point for each successful smiting (a smiting is still considered successful=20 if the sentence is altered by judgment,=20 but not if it has been dismissed), and=20 ten (10) points for each successful=20 death penalty administered. ------=_NextPart_000_0023_01C08A19.7BA377E0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
A poll has been created for the purposes o= f voting=20 on the following proposal.  Due to the general dictatorial and=20 world-domination oriented attitude of Yahoo!, I was unable to post the full= text=20 of the proposal on the poll.  This is the final form of the proposal, = and=20 the one that you are voting on.
 
Hmm.  I just voted, and it looks like= either I=20 goofed, or Yahoo! lies.  My guess is that it's the latter, those=20 bastards.  Ok, so this'll be a totally open vote, I think.
 
 
Proposal 310:
An office shall be created, called the Chief=20 Magistrate, for the purpose
of smiting people (handing out=20
punishments).  The Chief Magistrate
shall have the responsibil= ity=20 to assess
penalties up to the penalty of death
(removal from the ga= me),=20 according to
the law, for the general maintenance of
good order wit= hin=20 the regime.
 
All smitings must be done publicly
wit= hin 2=20 days of the offense(counting
those days as official which have been=20
specified by 308), except for offenses
which carry the penalty of d= eath,=20 which
shall have no time limitation.  All
punishments less tha= n=20 death are final,
though they may be appealed by a call
to judgment= =20 (which may alter the
severity of the penalty or dismiss it=20
altogether).  All death penalty cases
are immediately "appeale= d" in=20 that they
must be supported unanimously by the
people at=20 large.
 
The office of Chief Magistrate shall be filled=20 by election from the group at
large.  The Magistrate shall take po= wer=20
immediately upon election. Election for
the Chief Magistrate positi= on=20 shall
take place according to the accepted
form of election. = =20
 
If for any reason the Chief Magistrate is=20 unable to fulfill his duties for a
short period of time, he may swear i= n a=20
Deputy.  The Deputy will have all the
powers of the Magistrate= ,=20 with the
exception of the death penalty, until
the Magistrate return= s to=20 power. 
Although the Deputy may not inflict the
death penalty, = cases=20 may be referred to
the Magistrate, which may be prosecuted
upon the= =20 Magistrate's return.
 
The term of the Chief Magistrate will
= be for=20 good behavior.  If at any
time the people decide to remove the=20
Magistrate, they may do so with a
unanimous vote (excluding the vote= of=20
the Magistrate).  In addition, an
overturned
death penalty = shall=20 result in the
automatic removal of the Magistrate
from=20 office.
 
 The Magistrate shall receive one (1)= =20
point for each successful smiting (a
smiting is still considered=20 successful
if the sentence is altered by judgment,
but not if it ha= s=20 been dismissed), and
ten (10) points for each successful
death pena= lty=20 administered.
------=_NextPart_000_0023_01C08A19.7BA377E0-- From bernardo@c... Mon Jan 29 14:52:27 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 29 Jan 2001 22:52:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 9307 invoked from network); 29 Jan 2001 22:34:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 29 Jan 2001 22:34:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta3 with SMTP; 29 Jan 2001 23:35:58 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-16.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.201]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f0TMYoa52370 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 17:34:51 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <003001c08a43$9ae33f80$c9a811d0@computer> To: Subject: Re: Final Form of Proposal 310 Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 17:34:11 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_002D_01C08A19.B0C52720" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" ------=_NextPart_000_002D_01C08A19.B0C52720 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I just realized that I can see the results because I'm the one who created = the poll (the light's burning dimly tonight). So maybe I didn't goof, and = maybe Yahoo! didn't lie to me. At any rate, it's time to vote! ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Patrick D. Bernardo=20 To: scatterbrains@egroups.com=20 Sent: Monday, January 29, 2001 5:32 PM Subject: Final Form of Proposal 310 A poll has been created for the purposes of voting on the following propo= sal. Due to the general dictatorial and world-domination oriented attitude= of Yahoo!, I was unable to post the full text of the proposal on the poll.= This is the final form of the proposal, and the one that you are voting o= n. Hmm. I just voted, and it looks like either I goofed, or Yahoo! lies. M= y guess is that it's the latter, those bastards. Ok, so this'll be a total= ly open vote, I think. =20=20=20 Proposal 310: An office shall be created, called the=20 Chief Magistrate, for the purpose of smiting people (handing out=20 punishments). The Chief Magistrate=20 shall have the responsibility to assess=20 penalties up to the penalty of death=20 (removal from the game), according to=20 the law, for the general maintenance of=20 good order within the regime. All smitings must be done publicly=20 within 2 days of the offense(counting=20 those days as official which have been=20 specified by 308), except for offenses=20 which carry the penalty of death, which=20 shall have no time limitation. All=20 punishments less than death are final,=20 though they may be appealed by a call=20 to judgment (which may alter the=20 severity of the penalty or dismiss it=20 altogether). All death penalty cases=20 are immediately "appealed" in that they=20 must be supported unanimously by the=20 people at large. The office of Chief Magistrate shall be=20 filled by election from the group at=20 large. The Magistrate shall take power=20 immediately upon election. Election for=20 the Chief Magistrate position shall=20 take place according to the accepted=20 form of election.=20=20 If for any reason the Chief Magistrate=20 is unable to fulfill his duties for a=20 short period of time, he may swear in a=20 Deputy. The Deputy will have all the=20 powers of the Magistrate, with the=20 exception of the death penalty, until the Magistrate returns to power.=20=20 Although the Deputy may not inflict the death penalty, cases may be referred to=20 the Magistrate, which may be prosecuted=20 upon the Magistrate's return. The term of the Chief Magistrate will=20 be for good behavior. If at any time the people decide to remove the=20 Magistrate, they may do so with a unanimous vote (excluding the vote of=20 the Magistrate). In addition, an=20 overturned death penalty shall result in the=20 automatic removal of the Magistrate=20 from office. The Magistrate shall receive one (1)=20 point for each successful smiting (a smiting is still considered successful=20 if the sentence is altered by judgment,=20 but not if it has been dismissed), and=20 ten (10) points for each successful=20 death penalty administered. ------=_NextPart_000_002D_01C08A19.B0C52720 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I just realized that I can see the results= because=20 I'm the one who created the poll (the light's burning dimly tonight). = So=20 maybe I didn't goof, and maybe Yahoo! didn't lie to me.
 
At any rate, it's time to vote!
 
----- Original Message -----
Fro= m:=20 Pa= trick D.=20 Bernardo
To: scatterbrains@egroups.com
Sent: Monday, January 29, 2001 5:3= 2=20 PM
Subject: Final Form of Proposal 31= 0

A poll has been created for the purposes= of=20 voting on the following proposal.  Due to the general dictatorial an= d=20 world-domination oriented attitude of Yahoo!, I was unable to post the fu= ll=20 text of the proposal on the poll.  This is the final form of the=20 proposal, and the one that you are voting on.
 
Hmm.  I just voted, and it looks li= ke either=20 I goofed, or Yahoo! lies.  My guess is that it's the latter, those=20 bastards.  Ok, so this'll be a totally open vote, I think.
 
 
Proposal 310:
An office shall be created, called the <= BR>Chief=20 Magistrate, for the purpose
of smiting people (handing out=20
punishments).  The Chief Magistrate
shall have the responsib= ility=20 to assess
penalties up to the penalty of death
(removal from the= =20 game), according to
the law, for the general maintenance of
good = order=20 within the regime.
 
All smitings must be done publicly
w= ithin 2=20 days of the offense(counting
those days as official which have been=20
specified by 308), except for offenses
which carry the penalty of= =20 death, which
shall have no time limitation.  All
punishments= less=20 than death are final,
though they may be appealed by a call
to=20 judgment (which may alter the
severity of the penalty or dismiss it=20
altogether).  All death penalty cases
are immediately "appea= led"=20 in that they
must be supported unanimously by the
people at=20 large.
 
The office of Chief Magistrate shall be= =20
filled by election from the group at
large.  The Magistrate = shall=20 take power
immediately upon election. Election for
the Chief=20 Magistrate position shall
take place according to the accepted
fo= rm of=20 election. 
 
If for any reason the Chief Magistrate <= BR>is=20 unable to fulfill his duties for a
short period of time, he may swear= in a=20
Deputy.  The Deputy will have all the
powers of the Magistra= te,=20 with the
exception of the death penalty, until
the Magistrate retu= rns=20 to power. 
Although the Deputy may not inflict the
death pena= lty,=20 cases may be referred to
the Magistrate, which may be prosecuted
= upon=20 the Magistrate's return.
 
The term of the Chief Magistrate will be for=20 good behavior.  If at any
time the people decide to remove the=20
Magistrate, they may do so with a
unanimous vote (excluding the vo= te of=20
the Magistrate).  In addition, an
overturned
death penalt= y=20 shall result in the
automatic removal of the Magistrate
from=20 office.
 
 The Magistrate shall receive one (= 1)=20
point for each successful smiting (a
smiting is still considered=20 successful
if the sentence is altered by judgment,
but not if it = has=20 been dismissed), and
ten (10) points for each successful
death pe= nalty=20 administered.
------=_NextPart_000_002D_01C08A19.B0C52720-- From scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Tue Jan 30 00:05:55 2001 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 78134 invoked by uid 7800); 30 Jan 2001 08:05:54 -0000 Date: 30 Jan 2001 08:05:54 -0000 Message-ID: <980841954.173153459.89175.l10@yahoogroups.com> X-eGroups-Application: files From: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: File - Rules MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 101. All players must always abide by all the rules then in effect, in the form in which they are then in effect. The rules in the Initial Set are in effect whenever a game begins. The Initial Set consists of Rules 101-116 (immutable) and 201-213 (mutable). -- Immutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 102. Initially rules in the 100's are immutable and rules in the 200's are mutable. Rules subsequently enacted or transmuted (that is, changed from immutable to mutable or vice versa) may be immutable or mutable regardless of their numbers, and rules in the Initial Set may be transmuted regardless of their numbers. -- Immutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 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.(Note: This definition implies that, at least initially, all new rules are mutable; immutable rules, as long as they are immutable, may not be amended or repealed; mutable rules, as long as they are mutable, may be amended or repealed; any rule of any status may be transmuted; no rule is absolutely immune to change.) -- Immutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 104. All rule-changes proposed in the proper way shall be voted on. They will be adopted if and only if they receive the required number of votes. -- Immutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 106. All proposed rule-changes shall be written down before they are voted on. If they are adopted, they shall guide play in the form in which they were voted on. -- Immutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 107. No rule-change may take effect earlier than the moment of the completion of the vote that adopted it, even if its wording explicitly states otherwise. No rule-change may have retroactive application. -- Immutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 108. Each proposed rule-change shall be given a number for reference. The numbers shall begin with 301, and each rule-change proposed in the proper way shall receive the next successive integer, whether or not the proposal is adopted.If a rule is repealed and reenacted, it receives the number of the proposal to reenact it. If a rule is amended or transmuted, it receives the number of the proposal to amend or transmute it. If an amendment is amended or repealed, the entire rule of which it is a part receives the number of the proposal to amend or repeal the amendment. -- Immutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 109. Rule-changes that transmute immutable rules into mutable rules may be adopted if and only if the vote is unanimous among the eligible voters. Transmutation shall not be implied, but must be stated explicitly in a proposal to take effect. -- Immutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 110. In a conflict between a mutable and an immutable rule, the immutable rule takes precedence and the mutable rule shall be entirely void. For the purposes of this rule a proposal to transmute an immutable rule does not "conflict" with that immutable rule. -- Immutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 111. If a rule-change as proposed is unclear, ambiguous, paradoxical, or destructive of play, or if it arguably consists of two or more rule-changes compounded or is an amendment that makes no difference, or if it is otherwise of questionable value, then the other players may suggest amendments or argue against the proposal before the vote. A reasonable time must be allowed for this debate. The proponent decides the final form in which the proposal is to be voted on and, unless the Judge has been asked to do so, also decides the time to end debate and vote. -- Immutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 112. The state of affairs that constitutes winning may not be altered from achieving n points to any other state of affairs. The magnitude of n and the means of earning points may be changed, and rules that establish a winner when play cannot continue may be enacted and (while they are mutable) be amended or repealed. -- Immutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 113. A player always has the option to forfeit the game rather than continue to play or incur a game penalty. No penalty worse than losing, in the judgment of the player to incur it, may be imposed. -- Immutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 114. There must always be at least one mutable rule. The adoption of rule-changes must never become completely impermissible. -- Immutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 115. Rule-changes that affect rules needed to allow or apply rule-changes are as permissible as other rule-changes. Even rule-changes that amend or repeal their own authority are permissible. No rule-change or type of move is impermissible solely on account of the self-reference or self-application of a rule. -- Immutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 116. Whatever is not prohibited or regulated by a rule is permitted and unregulated, with the sole exception of changing the rules, which is permitted only when a rule or set of rules explicitly or implicitly permits it. -- Immutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 201. Players shall alternate in clockwise order, taking one whole turn apiece. Turns may not be skipped or passed, and parts of turns may not be omitted. All players begin with zero points. In mail and computer games, players shall alternate in alphabetical order by surname. -- Mutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 203. A rule-change is adopted if and only if the vote is unanimous among the eligible voters. If this rule is not amended by the end of the second complete circuit of turns, it automatically changes to require only a simple majority. -- Mutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 204. If and when rule-changes can be adopted without unanimity, the players who vote against winning proposals shall receive 10 points each. -- Mutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 205. An adopted rule-change takes full effect at the moment of the completion of the vote that adopted it. -- Mutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 206. When a proposed rule-change is defeated, the player who proposed it loses 10 points. -- Mutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 207. Each player always has exactly one vote. -- Mutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 208. The winner is the first player to achieve 100 (positive) points. In mail and computer games, the winner is the first player to achieve 200 (positive) points. -- Mutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 209. At no time may there be more than 25 mutable rules. -- Mutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 210. Players may not conspire or consult on the making of future rule-changes unless they are team-mates. The first paragraph of this rule does not apply to games by mail or computer. -- Mutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 211. If two or more mutable rules conflict with one another, or if two or more immutable rules conflict with one another, then the rule with the lowest ordinal number takes precedence. If at least one of the rules in conflict explicitly says of itself that it defers to another rule (or type of rule) or takes precedence over another rule (or type of rule), then such provisions shall supersede the numerical method for determining precedence. If two or more rules claim to take precedence over one another or to defer to one another, then the numerical method again governs. -- Mutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 212. If players disagree about the legality of a move or the interpretation or application of a rule, then the player preceding the one moving is to be the Judge and decide the question. Disagreement for the purposes of this rule may be created by the insistence of any player. This process is called invoking Judgment. When Judgment has been invoked, the next player may not begin his or her turn without the consent of a majority of the other players. The Judge's Judgment may be overruled only by a unanimous vote of the other players taken before the next turn is begun. If a Judge's Judgment is overruled, then the player preceding the Judge in the playing order becomes the new Judge for the question, and so on, except that no player is to be Judge during his or her own turn or during the turn of a team-mate. Unless a Judge is overruled, one Judge settles all questions arising from the game until the next turn is begun, including questions as to his or her own legitimacy and jurisdiction as Judge. New Judges are not bound by the decisions of old Judges. New Judges may, however, settle only those questions on which the players currently disagree and that affect the completion of the turn in which Judgment was invoked. All decisions by Judges shall be in accordance with all the rules then in effect; but when the rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the point at issue, then the Judge shall consider game-custom and the spirit of the game before applying other standards. -- Mutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 213. If the rules are changed so that further play is impossible, or if the legality of a move cannot be determined with finality, or if by the Judge's best reasoning, not overruled, a move appears equally legal and illegal, then the first player unable to complete a turn is the winner. This rule takes precedence over every other rule determining the winner. -- Mutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Initial ---- 301. Each proposal shall be posted to the group with the subject consisting of the word "Proposal" followed by the proposal number. -- Mutable -- Author: E Venti -- History: Proposal 301 ---- 304. A) Each player shall receive Points for the Introduction of a new player into the game. B) The introducing Player shall receive 5 (five) points for an official Introduction. C)Introduction shall be determined by an affidavit posted to the group, by the new player, within 1 (one) day of joining, with the subject header "Introduction" and text consisting of the following declaration: "[Player name] has introduced me to Scatterbrains." D)This rule shall remain in effect until the game consists of 10 (ten) or more members. E) For the purposes of further discussion, this rule may also be referred to as the "Be Fruitful and Multiply" Bill. -- Mutable -- Author: Pat Bernardo -- History: Proposal 304 (12/18/00) ---- 305. Every player is an eligible voter. Every eligible voter must participate in every vote on rule-changes. -- Mutable -- Author: P Suber -- History: Transmuted from 105 by eventi (12/21/00) ---- 306. One turn consists of four parts, in this order: 1) proposal of a rule 2)discussion and amendment phase, which begins immediately following the proposal, and which may change the rule based on the discussion, but may not include the substitution of a new rule 3) voting on the rule, which begins when the final form of the rule is declared by the proposer 4) scoring. Scoring shall be 15 points for each rule, multiplied by the fraction produced by the ratio of postive votes to total possible votes. All fractional scores shall be rounded up to the nearest integer. -- Mutable -- Author: Pat Bernardo -- History: Ammended 202 (1/4/01) ---- 307. Offices: Any formally defined role other than the ordinary player role, shall be referred to as an "Office." Offices are each to be created and defined by a proposal. The proposal must include: Responsibilities of the office The method of selection of officers Term of office, and method of succession The method of removal from office -- Mutable -- Author: Eugene Ventimiglia -- History: Proposal 307 ---- 308. Time Limit: There will be a time limit of 5 business days, excluding federal holidays*, to submit a proposal. If a proposal is not submitted within 5 business days after the last player has cast their vote on the previous proposal there will be a "1 point a day" penalty enforced. Penalty points will be deducted from the players total points and can go below 0. If a player fails to submit a proposal within 25 business days that player will be held in violation and can be removed if all other players are in agreement. *The list of Federal Holidays are as follows: New Years Day Presidents Day Memorial Day Independence Day Labor Day Veterans Day Thanksgiving Day Christmas Day -- Mutable -- Author: Bob Arturo -- History: Proposal 308 ---- From scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Tue Jan 30 00:05:55 2001 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 78141 invoked by uid 7800); 30 Jan 2001 08:05:55 -0000 Date: 30 Jan 2001 08:05:55 -0000 Message-ID: <980841955.173153613.89175.l10@yahoogroups.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-eGroups-Application: files From: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: File - nomic.html Content-Type: text/html Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

101. All players must always abide by all the rules then in effect, in the form in which they are then in effect. The rules in the Initial Set are in effect whenever a game begins. The Initial Set consists of Rules 101-116 (immutable) and 201-213 (mutable).

  • Immutable
  • Author: P Suber
  • History: Initial

102. Initially rules in the 100's are immutable and rules in the 200's are mutable. Rules subsequently enacted or transmuted (that is, changed from immutable to mutable or vice versa) may be immutable or mutable regardless of their numbers, and rules in the Initial Set may be transmuted regardless of their numbers.

  • Immutable
  • Author: P Suber
  • History: Initial

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.(Note: This definition implies that, at least initially, all new rules are mutable; immutable rules, as long as they are immutable, may not be amended or repealed; mutable rules, as long as they are mutable, may be amended or repealed; any rule of any status may be transmuted; no rule is absolutely immune to change.)

  • Immutable
  • Author: P Suber
  • History: Initial

104. All rule-changes proposed in the proper way shall be voted on. They will be adopted if and only if they receive the required number of votes.

  • Immutable
  • Author: P Suber
  • History: Initial

106. All proposed rule-changes shall be written down before they are voted on. If they are adopted, they shall guide play in the form in which they were voted on.

  • Immutable
  • Author: P Suber
  • History: Initial

107. No rule-change may take effect earlier than the moment of the completion of the vote that adopted it, even if its wording explicitly states otherwise. No rule-change may have retroactive application.

  • Immutable
  • Author: P Suber
  • History: Initial

108. Each proposed rule-change shall be given a number for reference. The numbers shall begin with 301, and each rule-change proposed in the proper way shall receive the next successive integer, whether or not the proposal is adopted.If a rule is repealed and reenacted, it receives the number of the proposal to reenact it. If a rule is amended or transmuted, it receives the number of the proposal to amend or transmute it. If an amendment is amended or repealed, the entire rule of which it is a part receives the number of the proposal to amend or repeal the amendment.

  • Immutable
  • Author: P Suber
  • History: Initial

109. Rule-changes that transmute immutable rules into mutable rules may be adopted if and only if the vote is unanimous among the eligible voters. Transmutation shall not be implied, but must be stated explicitly in a proposal to take effect.

  • Immutable
  • Author: P Suber
  • History: Initial

110. In a conflict between a mutable and an immutable rule, the immutable rule takes precedence and the mutable rule shall be entirely void. For the purposes of this rule a proposal to transmute an immutable rule does not "conflict" with that immutable rule.

  • Immutable
  • Author: P Suber
  • History: Initial

111. If a rule-change as proposed is unclear, ambiguous, paradoxical, or destructive of play, or if it arguably consists of two or more rule-changes compounded or is an amendment that makes no difference, or if it is otherwise of questionable value, then the other players may suggest amendments or argue against the proposal before the vote. A reasonable time must be allowed for this debate. The proponent decides the final form in which the proposal is to be voted on and, unless the Judge has been asked to do so, also decides the time to end debate and vote.

  • Immutable
  • Author: P Suber
  • History: Initial

112. The state of affairs that constitutes winning may not be altered from achieving n points to any other state of affairs. The magnitude of n and the means of earning points may be changed, and rules that establish a winner when play cannot continue may be enacted and (while they are mutable) be amended or repealed.

  • Immutable
  • Author: P Suber
  • History: Initial

113. A player always has the option to forfeit the game rather than continue to play or incur a game penalty. No penalty worse than losing, in the judgment of the player to incur it, may be imposed.

  • Immutable
  • Author: P Suber
  • History: Initial

114. There must always be at least one mutable rule. The adoption of rule-changes must never become completely impermissible.

  • Immutable
  • Author: P Suber
  • History: Initial

115. Rule-changes that affect rules needed to allow or apply rule-changes are as permissible as other rule-changes. Even rule-changes that amend or repeal their own authority are permissible. No rule-change or type of move is impermissible solely on account of the self-reference or self-application of a rule.

  • Immutable
  • Author: P Suber
  • History: Initial

116. Whatever is not prohibited or regulated by a rule is permitted and unregulated, with the sole exception of changing the rules, which is permitted only when a rule or set of rules explicitly or implicitly permits it.

  • Immutable
  • Author: P Suber
  • History: Initial

201. Players shall alternate in clockwise order, taking one whole turn apiece. Turns may not be skipped or passed, and parts of turns may not be omitted. All players begin with zero points.

In mail and computer games, players shall alternate in alphabetical order by surname.

  • Mutable
  • Author: P Suber
  • History: Initial

203. A rule-change is adopted if and only if the vote is unanimous among the eligible voters. If this rule is not amended by the end of the second complete circuit of turns, it automatically changes to require only a simple majority.

  • Mutable
  • Author: P Suber
  • History: Initial

204. If and when rule-changes can be adopted without unanimity, the players who vote against winning proposals shall receive 10 points each.

  • Mutable
  • Author: P Suber
  • History: Initial

205. An adopted rule-change takes full effect at the moment of the completion of the vote that adopted it.

  • Mutable
  • Author: P Suber
  • History: Initial

206. When a proposed rule-change is defeated, the player who proposed it loses 10 points.

  • Mutable
  • Author: P Suber
  • History: Initial

207. Each player always has exactly one vote.

  • Mutable
  • Author: P Suber
  • History: Initial

208. The winner is the first player to achieve 100 (positive) points.

In mail and computer games, the winner is the first player to achieve 200 (positive) points.

  • Mutable
  • Author: P Suber
  • History: Initial

209. At no time may there be more than 25 mutable rules.

  • Mutable
  • Author: P Suber
  • History: Initial

210. Players may not conspire or consult on the making of future rule-changes unless they are team-mates.

The first paragraph of this rule does not apply to games by mail or computer.

  • Mutable
  • Author: P Suber
  • History: Initial

211. If two or more mutable rules conflict with one another, or if two or more immutable rules conflict with one another, then the rule with the lowest ordinal number takes precedence.

If at least one of the rules in conflict explicitly says of itself that it defers to another rule (or type of rule) or takes precedence over another rule (or type of rule), then such provisions shall supersede the numerical method for determining precedence.

If two or more rules claim to take precedence over one another or to defer to one another, then the numerical method again governs.

  • Mutable
  • Author: P Suber
  • History: Initial

212. If players disagree about the legality of a move or the interpretation or application of a rule, then the player preceding the one moving is to be the Judge and decide the question. Disagreement for the purposes of this rule may be created by the insistence of any player. This process is called invoking Judgment.

When Judgment has been invoked, the next player may not begin his or her turn without the consent of a majority of the other players.

The Judge's Judgment may be overruled only by a unanimous vote of the other players taken before the next turn is begun. If a Judge's Judgment is overruled, then the player preceding the Judge in the playing order becomes the new Judge for the question, and so on, except that no player is to be Judge during his or her own turn or during the turn of a team-mate.

Unless a Judge is overruled, one Judge settles all questions arising from the game until the next turn is begun, including questions as to his or her own legitimacy and jurisdiction as Judge.

New Judges are not bound by the decisions of old Judges. New Judges may, however, settle only those questions on which the players currently disagree and that affect the completion of the turn in which Judgment was invoked. All decisions by Judges shall be in accordance with all the rules then in effect; but when the rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the point at issue, then the Judge shall consider game-custom and the spirit of the game before applying other standards.

  • Mutable
  • Author: P Suber
  • History: Initial

213. If the rules are changed so that further play is impossible, or if the legality of a move cannot be determined with finality, or if by the Judge's best reasoning, not overruled, a move appears equally legal and illegal, then the first player unable to complete a turn is the winner.

This rule takes precedence over every other rule determining the winner.

  • Mutable
  • Author: P Suber
  • History: Initial

301. Each proposal shall be posted to the group with the subject consisting of the word "Proposal" followed by the proposal number.

  • Mutable
  • Author: E Venti
  • History: Proposal 301

304. A) Each player shall receive Points for the Introduction of a new player into the game.

B) The introducing Player shall receive 5 (five) points for an official Introduction.

C) Introduction shall be determined by an affidavit posted to the group, by the new player, within 1 (one) day of joining, with the subject header "Introduction" and text consisting of the following declaration: "[Player name] has introduced me to Scatterbrains."

D) This rule shall remain in effect until the game consists of 10 (ten) or more members.

E) For the purposes of further discussion, this rule may also be referred to as the "Be Fruitful and Multiply" Bill.

  • Mutable
  • Author: Pat Bernardo
  • History: Proposal 304 (12/18/00)

305. Every player is an eligible voter. Every eligible voter must participate in every vote on rule-changes.

  • Mutable
  • Author: P Suber
  • History: Transmuted from 105 by eventi (12/21/00)

306. One turn consists of four parts, in this order:

  1. proposal of a rule
  2. discussion and amendment phase, which begins immediately following the proposal, and which may change the rule based on the discussion, but may not include the substitution of a new rule
  3. voting on the rule, which begins when the final form of the rule is declared by the proposer
  4. scoring.
Scoring shall be 15 points for each rule, multiplied by the fraction produced by the ratio of positive votes to total possible votes. All fractional scores shall be rounded up to the nearest integer.

  • Mutable
  • Author: Pat Bernardo
  • History: Amended 202 (1/4/01)

307. Offices:

Any formally defined role other than the ordinary player role, shall be referred to as an "Office." Offices are each to be created and defined by a proposal.

The proposal must include:

  1. Responsibilities of the office
  2. The method of selection of officers
  3. Term of office, and method of succession
  4. The method of removal from office

  • Mutable
  • Author: Eugene Ventimiglia
  • History: Proposal 307

308. Time Limit:

There will be a time limit of 5 business days, excluding federal holidays*, to submit a proposal. If a proposal is not submitted within 5 business days after the last player has cast their vote on the previous proposal there will be a "1 point a day" penalty enforced. Penalty points will be deducted from the players total points and can go below 0. If a player fails to submit a proposal within 25 business days that player will be held in violation and can be removed if all other players are in agreement.

*The list of Federal Holidays are as follows:

  1. New Years Day
  2. Presidents Day
  3. Memorial Day
  4. Independence Day
  5. Labor Day
  6. Veterans Day
  7. Thanksgiving Day
  8. Christmas Day
  • Mutable
  • Author: Bob Arturo
  • History: Proposal 308

309. A new participant will gain the right to vote immediately upon sending an introduction affidavit, if all voting on final proposals is complete.

If voting on a final proposal is not complete upon sending an introduction affidavit, a new participant's right to vote will be withheld until all voting on final proposals is complete.

This new participant will enter the order of play upon casting his or her first vote.

  • Mutable
  • Author: Steven Arturo
  • History: Proposal 309
From sga5892@n... Tue Jan 30 06:29:34 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: sga5892@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 30 Jan 2001 14:29:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 4213 invoked from network); 30 Jan 2001 14:28:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 30 Jan 2001 14:28:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-gw4.njit.edu) (128.235.251.32) by mta3 with SMTP; 30 Jan 2001 15:29:41 -0000 Received: from mailhost.njit.edu (mailhost.njit.edu [128.235.251.108]) by mail-gw4.njit.edu (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f0UESZB13753 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 09:28:35 -0500 Received: from steve0 (dhcp194-216.njit.edu) by mailhost.njit.edu (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9) with SMTP id <0G7Z00GG7C7KUP@m...> for scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 09:28:32 -0500 (EST) Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 09:28:33 -0500 Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 09:28:31 -0500 Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Final Form of Proposal 310 To: "'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'" Reply-to: "sga5892@n..." Message-id: <01C08A9F.0388BD20.sga5892@n...> Organization: NJIT MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit From: "Steven G. Arturo" is this a poll or an open vote? don't we go in alphabetical order if it is an open vote? -----Original Message----- From: Patrick D. Bernardo [SMTP:bernardo@c...] Sent: Monday, January 29, 2001 5:34 PM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Final Form of Proposal 310 I just realized that I can see the results because I'm the one who created the poll (the light's burning dimly tonight). So maybe I didn't goof, and maybe Yahoo! didn't lie to me. At any rate, it's time to vote! ----- Original Message ----- From: Patrick D. Bernardo To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Sent: Monday, January 29, 2001 5:32 PM Subject: Final Form of Proposal 310 A poll has been created for the purposes of voting on the following proposal. Due to the general dictatorial and world-domination oriented attitude of Yahoo!, I was unable to post the full text of the proposal on the poll. This is the final form of the proposal, and the one that you are voting on. Hmm. I just voted, and it looks like either I goofed, or Yahoo! lies. My guess is that it's the latter, those bastards. Ok, so this'll be a totally open vote, I think. Proposal 310: An office shall be created, called the Chief Magistrate, for the purpose of smiting people (handing out punishments). The Chief Magistrate shall have the responsibility to assess penalties up to the penalty of death (removal from the game), according to the law, for the general maintenance of good order within the regime. All smitings must be done publicly within 2 days of the offense(counting those days as official which have been specified by 308), except for offenses which carry the penalty of death, which shall have no time limitation. All punishments less than death are final, though they may be appealed by a call to judgment (which may alter the severity of the penalty or dismiss it altogether). All death penalty cases are immediately "appealed" in that they must be supported unanimously by the people at large. The office of Chief Magistrate shall be filled by election from the group at large. The Magistrate shall take power immediately upon election. Election for the Chief Magistrate position shall take place according to the accepted form of election. If for any reason the Chief Magistrate is unable to fulfill his duties for a short period of time, he may swear in a Deputy. The Deputy will have all the powers of the Magistrate, with the exception of the death penalty, until the Magistrate returns to power. Although the Deputy may not inflict the death penalty, cases may be referred to the Magistrate, which may be prosecuted upon the Magistrate's return. The term of the Chief Magistrate will be for good behavior. If at any time the people decide to remove the Magistrate, they may do so with a unanimous vote (excluding the vote of the Magistrate). In addition, an overturned death penalty shall result in the automatic removal of the Magistrate from office. The Magistrate shall receive one (1) point for each successful smiting (a smiting is still considered successful if the sentence is altered by judgment, but not if it has been dismissed), and ten (10) points for each successful death penalty administered. << File: ATT00001.htm >> From bernardo@c... Tue Jan 30 06:37:49 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 30 Jan 2001 14:37:40 -0000 Received: (qmail 24877 invoked from network); 30 Jan 2001 14:36:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 30 Jan 2001 14:36:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 30 Jan 2001 14:36:09 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-06.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.191]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f0UEa6a06063 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 09:36:07 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <000c01c08ac9$e4089080$bfa811d0@computer> To: References: <01C08A9F.0388BD20.sga5892@n...> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Final Form of Proposal 310 Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 09:35:26 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" Steve - 201 applies only to turn order. There are no conventions regarding voting. Vote in any order that you like. This is just like the other proposals. A vote using the polling feature. (You shouldn't be able to see the preliminary results - can you? I may have screwed up in creating the poll). ----- Original Message ----- From: Steven G. Arturo To: Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2001 9:28 AM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Final Form of Proposal 310 > is this a poll or an open vote? don't we go in alphabetical order if it is > an open vote? > > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [SMTP:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Monday, January 29, 2001 5:34 PM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Final Form of Proposal 310 > > I just realized that I can see the results because I'm the one who created > the poll (the light's burning dimly tonight). So maybe I didn't goof, and > maybe Yahoo! didn't lie to me. > > At any rate, it's time to vote! > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo > To: scatterbrains@egroups.com > Sent: Monday, January 29, 2001 5:32 PM > Subject: Final Form of Proposal 310 > > > A poll has been created for the purposes of voting on the following > proposal. Due to the general dictatorial and world-domination oriented > attitude of Yahoo!, I was unable to post the full text of the proposal on > the poll. This is the final form of the proposal, and the one that you are > voting on. > > Hmm. I just voted, and it looks like either I goofed, or Yahoo! lies. > My guess is that it's the latter, those bastards. Ok, so this'll be a > totally open vote, I think. > > > Proposal 310: > An office shall be created, called the > Chief Magistrate, for the purpose > of smiting people (handing out > punishments). The Chief Magistrate > shall have the responsibility to assess > penalties up to the penalty of death > (removal from the game), according to > the law, for the general maintenance of > good order within the regime. > > All smitings must be done publicly > within 2 days of the offense(counting > those days as official which have been > specified by 308), except for offenses > which carry the penalty of death, which > shall have no time limitation. All > punishments less than death are final, > though they may be appealed by a call > to judgment (which may alter the > severity of the penalty or dismiss it > altogether). All death penalty cases > are immediately "appealed" in that they > must be supported unanimously by the > people at large. > > The office of Chief Magistrate shall be > filled by election from the group at > large. The Magistrate shall take power > immediately upon election. Election for > the Chief Magistrate position shall > take place according to the accepted > form of election. > > If for any reason the Chief Magistrate > is unable to fulfill his duties for a > short period of time, he may swear in a > Deputy. The Deputy will have all the > powers of the Magistrate, with the > exception of the death penalty, until > the Magistrate returns to power. > Although the Deputy may not inflict the > death penalty, cases may be referred to > the Magistrate, which may be prosecuted > upon the Magistrate's return. > > The term of the Chief Magistrate will > be for good behavior. If at any > time the people decide to remove the > Magistrate, they may do so with a > unanimous vote (excluding the vote of > the Magistrate). In addition, an > overturned > death penalty shall result in the > automatic removal of the Magistrate > from office. > > The Magistrate shall receive one (1) > point for each successful smiting (a > smiting is still considered successful > if the sentence is altered by judgment, > but not if it has been dismissed), and > ten (10) points for each successful > death penalty administered. > > << File: ATT00001.htm >> > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@w... Tue Jan 30 06:50:48 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@w... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 30 Jan 2001 14:50:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 63239 invoked from network); 30 Jan 2001 14:48:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 30 Jan 2001 14:48:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ns1.wyndtell.com) (63.81.201.11) by mta2 with SMTP; 30 Jan 2001 14:48:53 -0000 Received: from nova.wyndtell.com (nova.wyndtell.com [63.81.201.78]) by ns1.wyndtell.com (8.11.0/8.9.3) with ESMTP id f0UFhnm11739 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 07:43:49 -0800 Received: (root@localhost) by nova.wyndtell.com (8.8.8/SCA-6.6) id JAA01586; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 09:48:53 -0500 (EST) To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Final Form of Proposal 310 In-Reply-To: a5892 X-Status: 6Y Message-Id: <15308871.1286@w...> Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 06:48:53 -0800 X-eGroups-From: eventi@w... (Eugene Ventimiglia) From: eventi@w... Where'd you get that alpha order thing... There are no rules defining the mechanics of voting. And Pat's opened a poll. From sga5892@n... Tue Jan 30 07:04:00 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: sga5892@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 30 Jan 2001 15:04:00 -0000 Received: (qmail 10122 invoked from network); 30 Jan 2001 15:01:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 30 Jan 2001 15:01:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-gw3.njit.edu) (128.235.251.11) by mta2 with SMTP; 30 Jan 2001 15:01:46 -0000 Received: from mailhost.njit.edu (mailhost.njit.edu [128.235.251.108]) by mail-gw3.njit.edu (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f0UF1if14455 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 10:01:44 -0500 Received: from steve0 (dhcp194-216.njit.edu) by mailhost.njit.edu (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9) with SMTP id <0G7Z00GNODQUUT@m...> for scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 10:01:43 -0500 (EST) Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 10:01:43 -0500 Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 10:01:41 -0500 Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Final Form of Proposal 310 To: "'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'" Reply-to: "sga5892@n..." Message-id: <01C08AA3.A5AC2AC0.sga5892@n...> Organization: NJIT MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit From: "Steven G. Arturo" my bad... i must have grouped voting in abc order with the turns in abc order. i would have liked to take advantage of having to vote last on this proposal if an open vote were conducted... oh well steve0 -----Original Message----- From: eventi@w... [SMTP:eventi@w...] Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2001 9:49 AM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: [scatterbrains] Final Form of Proposal 310 Where'd you get that alpha order thing... There are no rules defining the mechanics of voting. And Pat's opened a poll. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com From scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Wed Jan 31 04:40:50 2001 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 50885 invoked from network); 31 Jan 2001 12:40:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 31 Jan 2001 12:40:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ef.egroups.com) (10.1.2.111) by mta1 with SMTP; 31 Jan 2001 12:40:49 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: notify@yahoogroups.com Received: from [10.1.10.118] by ef.egroups.com with NNFMP; 31 Jan 2001 12:40:49 -0000 Date: 31 Jan 2001 12:40:46 -0000 Message-ID: <980944846.339.82251.fc@yahoogroups.com> X-eGroups-Application: polls From: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Poll results for scatterbrains MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The following scatterbrains poll is now closed. Here are the final results: POLL QUESTION: Proposal 310 Creation of Chief Magistrate. [See email for Final Form] CHOICES AND RESULTS - ->Sounds like a good idea, 2 votes, 40.00% - ->No way, 3 votes, 60.00% INDIVIDUAL VOTES - ->Sounds like a good idea - bernardo@c... - eventi@n... - ->No way - barturo@e... - sga5892@n... - f_hemker@h... For more information about this group, please visit http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scatterbrains For help with Yahoo! Groups, please visit http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms From bernardo@c... Wed Jan 31 04:42:49 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 31 Jan 2001 12:42:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 40597 invoked from network); 31 Jan 2001 12:42:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 31 Jan 2001 12:42:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 31 Jan 2001 12:42:22 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-01.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.186]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f0VCgKa69519 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 07:42:21 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <000b01c08b83$29f25d60$baa811d0@computer> To: Subject: History has been made! Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 07:41:40 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0008_01C08B59.3FCCA3E0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" ------=_NextPart_000_0008_01C08B59.3FCCA3E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Well folks,=20 Y'all defeated the first proposal. The poll results should be out soon. (= Supposedly Yahoo! will do this automatically.) If not, I'll resend them ma= nually. But the upshot is that the CM law was defeated. I will now embark on a campaign of lawlessness and terror. ------=_NextPart_000_0008_01C08B59.3FCCA3E0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Well folks,
 
Y'all defeated the first proposal.  T= he poll=20 results should be out soon.  (Supposedly Yahoo! will do this=20 automatically.)  If not, I'll resend them manually.  But the upsh= ot is=20 that the CM law was defeated.
 
I will now embark on a campaign of lawless= ness and=20 terror.
 
------=_NextPart_000_0008_01C08B59.3FCCA3E0-- From eventi@w... Wed Jan 31 05:15:47 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@w... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 31 Jan 2001 13:15:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 7680 invoked from network); 31 Jan 2001 13:14:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 31 Jan 2001 13:14:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ns1.wyndtell.com) (63.81.201.11) by mta1 with SMTP; 31 Jan 2001 13:14:06 -0000 Received: from nova.wyndtell.com (nova.wyndtell.com [63.81.201.78]) by ns1.wyndtell.com (8.11.0/8.9.3) with ESMTP id f0VE90m16418 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 06:09:00 -0800 Received: (root@localhost) by nova.wyndtell.com (8.8.8/SCA-6.6) id IAA12057; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 08:14:05 -0500 (EST) To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: re: [scatterbrains] History has been made! In-Reply-To: 8b8329f X-Status: 6Y Message-Id: <15308871.1293@w...> Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 05:14:05 -0800 X-eGroups-From: eventi@w... (Eugene Ventimiglia) From: eventi@w... When you're off storming the castle, remember who your friends are... You have to 'close' the poll before the results are posted. And it might be a little delayed. -e From bernardo@c... Wed Jan 31 05:29:43 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 31 Jan 2001 13:29:43 -0000 Received: (qmail 32367 invoked from network); 31 Jan 2001 13:24:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 31 Jan 2001 13:24:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 31 Jan 2001 13:24:55 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-01.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.186]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f0VDOqa72549 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 08:24:53 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <001801c08b89$1adc4ec0$baa811d0@computer> To: References: <15308871.1293@w...> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] History has been made! Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 08:24:11 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" Join me, Luke, and together we will bring order to the universe! ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 8:14 AM Subject: re: [scatterbrains] History has been made! > When you're off storming the castle, remember who your friends are... > > You have to 'close' the poll before the results are posted. And it might be a little delayed. > -e > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From f_hemker@h... Wed Jan 31 06:45:18 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: f_hemker@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 31 Jan 2001 14:45:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 84762 invoked from network); 31 Jan 2001 14:28:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 31 Jan 2001 14:28:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hi.egroups.com) (10.1.10.41) by mta1 with SMTP; 31 Jan 2001 14:28:12 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: f_hemker@h... Received: from [10.1.2.55] by hi.egroups.com with NNFMP; 31 Jan 2001 14:28:12 -0000 Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 14:28:08 -0000 To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: History has been made! Message-ID: <9597do+jea9@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: <001801c08b89$1adc4ec0$baa811d0@computer> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 658 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 63.82.115.205 From: f_hemker@h... So, is it my turn yet? --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Patrick D. Bernardo" wrote: > Join me, Luke, and together we will bring order to the universe! > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 8:14 AM > Subject: re: [scatterbrains] History has been made! > > > > When you're off storming the castle, remember who your friends are... > > > > You have to 'close' the poll before the results are posted. And it might > be a little delayed. > > -e > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > From eventi@n... Wed Jan 31 07:02:36 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 31 Jan 2001 15:02:36 -0000 Received: (qmail 75597 invoked from network); 31 Jan 2001 14:42:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 31 Jan 2001 14:42:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 31 Jan 2001 15:43:50 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id JAA02072 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 09:42:44 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Final Form of Proposal 310 Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 09:44:18 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <01C08AA3.A5AC2AC0.sga5892@n...> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" Hence the use of blind polls... I think the dynamic of the game would be a little different if we were to vote that way. Might be interresting, but it'll be voted down. --e > -----Original Message----- > From: Steven G. Arturo [mailto:sga5892@n...] > Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2001 10:02 AM > To: 'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com' > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Final Form of Proposal 310 > > > my bad... i must have grouped voting in abc order with the turns in abc > order. i would have liked to take advantage of having to vote > last on this > proposal if an open vote were conducted... > > oh well > > steve0 > > -----Original Message----- > From: eventi@w... [SMTP:eventi@w...] > Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2001 9:49 AM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [scatterbrains] Final Form of Proposal 310 > > Where'd you get that alpha order thing... There are no rules defining the > mechanics of voting. And Pat's opened a poll. > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Wed Jan 31 07:11:07 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 31 Jan 2001 15:11:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 50696 invoked from network); 31 Jan 2001 14:49:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 31 Jan 2001 14:49:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 31 Jan 2001 14:49:04 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id JAA02669 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 09:49:03 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: History has been made! Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 09:50:38 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <9597do+jea9@eGroups.com> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" Yes! > -----Original Message----- > From: f_hemker@h... [mailto:f_hemker@h...] > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 9:28 AM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: History has been made! > > > So, is it my turn yet? > --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Patrick D. Bernardo" > wrote: > > Join me, Luke, and together we will bring order to the universe! > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: > > To: > > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 8:14 AM > > Subject: re: [scatterbrains] History has been made! > > > > > > > When you're off storming the castle, remember who your friends > are... > > > > > > You have to 'close' the poll before the results are posted. And > it might > > be a little delayed. > > > -e > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Wed Jan 31 07:13:24 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 31 Jan 2001 15:13:24 -0000 Received: (qmail 95868 invoked from network); 31 Jan 2001 14:50:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 31 Jan 2001 14:50:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 31 Jan 2001 14:50:39 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-01.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.186]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f0VEoba80468 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 09:50:37 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <000701c08b95$15b5d540$baa811d0@computer> To: References: <9597do+jea9@eGroups.com> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: History has been made! Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 09:49:56 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" Yup. Fire away. ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 9:28 AM Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: History has been made! > So, is it my turn yet? > --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Patrick D. Bernardo" > wrote: > > Join me, Luke, and together we will bring order to the universe! > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: > > To: > > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 8:14 AM > > Subject: re: [scatterbrains] History has been made! > > > > > > > When you're off storming the castle, remember who your friends > are... > > > > > > You have to 'close' the poll before the results are posted. And > it might > > be a little delayed. > > > -e > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From sga5892@n... Wed Jan 31 07:17:18 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: sga5892@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 31 Jan 2001 15:17:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 94554 invoked from network); 31 Jan 2001 14:47:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 31 Jan 2001 14:47:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-gw3.njit.edu) (128.235.251.11) by mta2 with SMTP; 31 Jan 2001 14:47:32 -0000 Received: from mailhost.njit.edu (mailhost.njit.edu [128.235.251.108]) by mail-gw3.njit.edu (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f0VElV413050 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 09:47:31 -0500 Received: from steve0 (dhcp194-216.njit.edu) by mailhost.njit.edu (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9) with SMTP id <0G8100HIO7R4PO@m...> for scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 09:47:29 -0500 (EST) Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 09:47:21 -0500 Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 09:47:20 -0500 Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] History has been made! To: "'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'" Reply-to: "sga5892@n..." Message-id: <01C08B6A.CE745AA0.sga5892@n...> Organization: NJIT MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit From: "Steven G. Arturo" it was either this or your usurping of the CM position and hanging everyone by their nipples. have it your way -----Original Message----- From: Patrick D. Bernardo [SMTP:bernardo@c...] Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 7:42 AM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: [scatterbrains] History has been made! Well folks, Y'all defeated the first proposal. The poll results should be out soon. (Supposedly Yahoo! will do this automatically.) If not, I'll resend them manually. But the upshot is that the CM law was defeated. I will now embark on a campaign of lawlessness and terror. << File: ATT00003.htm >> From sga5892@n... Wed Jan 31 07:55:27 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: sga5892@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 31 Jan 2001 15:55:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 55845 invoked from network); 31 Jan 2001 15:18:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 31 Jan 2001 15:18:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-gw3.njit.edu) (128.235.251.11) by mta1 with SMTP; 31 Jan 2001 15:18:47 -0000 Received: from mailhost.njit.edu (mailhost.njit.edu [128.235.251.108]) by mail-gw3.njit.edu (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f0VFIk415426 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 10:18:46 -0500 Received: from steve0 (dhcp194-216.njit.edu) by mailhost.njit.edu (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9) with SMTP id <0G8100J8L977F3@m...> for scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 10:18:43 -0500 (EST) Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 10:18:35 -0500 Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 10:18:34 -0500 Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] History has been made! To: "'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'" Reply-to: "sga5892@n..." Message-id: <01C08B6F.2BC5FC00.sga5892@n...> Organization: NJIT MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit From: "Steven G. Arturo" it was either this or your usurping of the CM position and hanging everyone by their nipples. have it your way -----Original Message----- From: Patrick D. Bernardo [SMTP:bernardo@c...] Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 7:42 AM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: [scatterbrains] History has been made! Well folks, Y'all defeated the first proposal. The poll results should be out soon. (Supposedly Yahoo! will do this automatically.) If not, I'll resend them manually. But the upshot is that the CM law was defeated. I will now embark on a campaign of lawlessness and terror. << File: ATT00003.htm >> From bernardo@c... Wed Jan 31 08:33:34 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 31 Jan 2001 16:33:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 72650 invoked from network); 31 Jan 2001 15:58:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 31 Jan 2001 15:58:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 31 Jan 2001 15:58:46 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-01.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.186]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f0VFwia86973 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 10:58:45 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <000c01c08b9e$9a1d9ee0$baa811d0@computer> To: References: <01C08B6F.2BC5FC00.sga5892@n...> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] History has been made! Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 10:58:05 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" Shit, I wasn't even going to run... (In fact, I goofed. I was planning on offering my support to one of you hippies in return for a positive vote on the prop.) But now I get to be Darth Vader. Gotta go teach now... ----- Original Message ----- From: Steven G. Arturo To: Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 10:18 AM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] History has been made! > it was either this or your usurping of the CM position and hanging everyone > by their nipples. > > have it your way > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [SMTP:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 7:42 AM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [scatterbrains] History has been made! > > Well folks, > > Y'all defeated the first proposal. The poll results should be out soon. > (Supposedly Yahoo! will do this automatically.) If not, I'll resend them > manually. But the upshot is that the CM law was defeated. > > I will now embark on a campaign of lawlessness and terror. > > << File: ATT00003.htm >> > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From f_hemker@h... Wed Jan 31 11:10:00 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Frederick_Hemker@m... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 31 Jan 2001 19:09:59 -0000 Received: (qmail 48301 invoked from network); 31 Jan 2001 18:24:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 31 Jan 2001 18:24:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailsims1.senate.gov) (199.95.76.9) by mta3 with SMTP; 31 Jan 2001 19:25:34 -0000 Received: from IMAEXC2.senate.gov (mailexch.senate.gov) by mailsims1.senate.gov (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.1999.07.30.00.05.p8) with ESMTP id <0G8100ENDHP173@m...> for scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 13:22:14 -0500 (EST) Received: from ccMail by IMAEXC2.senate.gov (IMA Internet Exchange 3.13) id 000043A4; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 13:18:01 -0500 Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 11:11:59 -0500 Subject: Proposal 311 To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Message-id: <000043A4.C22124@m...> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-description: cc:Mail note part Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-eGroups-From: Frederick_Hemker@m... (Frederick Hemker) From: f_hemker@h... Proposal 311 1.) All Players shall have the right to transfer points from their own score to the score of another in whatever amount, for whatever reason. At no point may a player's score fall below zero using this method. 2.) All point transfers shall be stated publicly. All point transfers shall be numbered sequentially, beginning with 1001. Point transfer statements shall have the following form: "Subject: Point Transfer X I [name of player], of my own free will, do transfer N points to [name of recipient]." 3.) Point transfers may take place at any time. They are effective exactly 24 hours after their public statement. 4.) Point transfers shall be deemed null and void if they do not follow the proscribed procedure. The current Judge, as determined in rule 212, shall determine the legality of any transfer. If that Judge is one of the parties to the current transfer he shall recuse himself and the previous Judge shall take responsibility, following the procedure found in rule 212. No party to the transfer shall be allowed to judge the legality of the transfer. From eventi@n... Wed Jan 31 12:54:29 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 31 Jan 2001 20:54:28 -0000 Received: (qmail 85977 invoked from network); 31 Jan 2001 20:26:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 31 Jan 2001 20:26:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 31 Jan 2001 21:27:36 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id PAA08269 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 15:26:30 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 311 Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 15:28:04 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <000043A4.C22124@m...> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" Is the Judge required to approve each transfer? I don't think it should be that way, but that's how I read it. Otherwise, a resounding YES!!! This gets scratched off my list of future proposals.... --e > -----Original Message----- > From: f_hemker@h... [mailto:f_hemker@h...] > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 11:12 AM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 311 > > > Proposal 311 > > 1.) All Players shall have the right to transfer points from > their own score to > the score of another in whatever amount, for whatever reason. At > no point may a > player's score fall below zero using this method. > > 2.) All point transfers shall be stated publicly. All point > transfers shall be > numbered sequentially, beginning with 1001. Point transfer > statements shall > have the following form: > > "Subject: Point Transfer X > I [name of player], of my own free will, do transfer N points to [name of > recipient]." > > 3.) Point transfers may take place at any time. They are > effective exactly 24 > hours after their public statement. > > 4.) Point transfers shall be deemed null and void if they do not > follow the > proscribed procedure. The current Judge, as determined in rule 212, shall > determine the legality of any transfer. If that Judge is one of > the parties to > the current transfer he shall recuse himself and the previous > Judge shall take > responsibility, following the procedure found in rule 212. No > party to the > transfer shall be allowed to judge the legality of the transfer. > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Wed Jan 31 12:58:00 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 31 Jan 2001 20:58:00 -0000 Received: (qmail 17957 invoked from network); 31 Jan 2001 20:32:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 31 Jan 2001 20:32:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 31 Jan 2001 20:32:50 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-16.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.201]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f0VKWma15091 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 15:32:48 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <001d01c08bc4$e26080c0$c9a811d0@computer> To: References: <000043A4.C22124@m...> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Proposal 311 Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 15:32:07 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" And you guys thought MY law would be change things. I LOVE this! It was, of course, legal to do this before, but this both codifies and encourages the procedure. ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 11:11 AM Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 311 > Proposal 311 > > 1.) All Players shall have the right to transfer points from their own score to > the score of another in whatever amount, for whatever reason. At no point may a > player's score fall below zero using this method. > > 2.) All point transfers shall be stated publicly. All point transfers shall be > numbered sequentially, beginning with 1001. Point transfer statements shall > have the following form: > > "Subject: Point Transfer X > I [name of player], of my own free will, do transfer N points to [name of > recipient]." > > 3.) Point transfers may take place at any time. They are effective exactly 24 > hours after their public statement. > > 4.) Point transfers shall be deemed null and void if they do not follow the > proscribed procedure. The current Judge, as determined in rule 212, shall > determine the legality of any transfer. If that Judge is one of the parties to > the current transfer he shall recuse himself and the previous Judge shall take > responsibility, following the procedure found in rule 212. No party to the > transfer shall be allowed to judge the legality of the transfer. > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From f_hemker@h... Wed Jan 31 14:21:49 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: f_hemker@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 31 Jan 2001 22:21:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 14337 invoked from network); 31 Jan 2001 22:06:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 31 Jan 2001 22:06:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mk.egroups.com) (10.1.1.30) by mta1 with SMTP; 31 Jan 2001 22:06:31 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: f_hemker@h... Received: from [10.1.2.113] by mk.egroups.com with NNFMP; 31 Jan 2001 21:24:40 -0000 Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 21:24:34 -0000 To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: Proposal 311 Message-ID: <959vqi+h593@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 2004 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 63.82.115.205 From: f_hemker@h... I should probably write something like "in the case of a dispute." But I also want the Judge to be able to step in and stop a transfer without someone explicitly complaining. --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Eugene Ventimiglia" wrote: > Is the Judge required to approve each transfer? I don't think it should be > that way, but that's how I read it. > > Otherwise, a resounding YES!!! This gets scratched off my list of future > proposals.... > > --e > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: f_hemker@h... [mailto:f_hemker@h...] > > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 11:12 AM > > To: scatterbrains@y... > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 311 > > > > > > Proposal 311 > > > > 1.) All Players shall have the right to transfer points from > > their own score to > > the score of another in whatever amount, for whatever reason. At > > no point may a > > player's score fall below zero using this method. > > > > 2.) All point transfers shall be stated publicly. All point > > transfers shall be > > numbered sequentially, beginning with 1001. Point transfer > > statements shall > > have the following form: > > > > "Subject: Point Transfer X > > I [name of player], of my own free will, do transfer N points to [name of > > recipient]." > > > > 3.) Point transfers may take place at any time. They are > > effective exactly 24 > > hours after their public statement. > > > > 4.) Point transfers shall be deemed null and void if they do not > > follow the > > proscribed procedure. The current Judge, as determined in rule 212, shall > > determine the legality of any transfer. If that Judge is one of > > the parties to > > the current transfer he shall recuse himself and the previous > > Judge shall take > > responsibility, following the procedure found in rule 212. No > > party to the > > transfer shall be allowed to judge the legality of the transfer. > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From sga5892@n... Wed Jan 31 14:32:11 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: sga5892@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 31 Jan 2001 22:32:11 -0000 Received: (qmail 65027 invoked from network); 31 Jan 2001 22:17:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 31 Jan 2001 22:17:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-gw3.njit.edu) (128.235.251.11) by mta2 with SMTP; 31 Jan 2001 22:17:02 -0000 Received: from mailhost.njit.edu (mailhost.njit.edu [128.235.251.108]) by mail-gw3.njit.edu (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f0VMH0417466 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 17:17:00 -0500 Received: from steve0 (dhcp194-216.njit.edu) by mailhost.njit.edu (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9) with SMTP id <0G810077HSK9CZ@m...> for scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 17:16:57 -0500 (EST) Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 17:16:44 -0500 Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 17:16:43 -0500 Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 311 To: "'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'" Reply-to: "sga5892@n..." Message-id: <01C08BA9.95830720.sga5892@n...> Organization: NJIT MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit From: "Steven G. Arturo" ooohhh, an economy. i like... -----Original Message----- From: f_hemker@h... [SMTP:f_hemker@h...] Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 11:12 AM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 311 Proposal 311 1.) All Players shall have the right to transfer points from their own score to the score of another in whatever amount, for whatever reason. At no point may a player's score fall below zero using this method. 2.) All point transfers shall be stated publicly. All point transfers shall be numbered sequentially, beginning with 1001. Point transfer statements shall have the following form: "Subject: Point Transfer X I [name of player], of my own free will, do transfer N points to [name of recipient]." 3.) Point transfers may take place at any time. They are effective exactly 24 hours after their public statement. 4.) Point transfers shall be deemed null and void if they do not follow the proscribed procedure. The current Judge, as determined in rule 212, shall determine the legality of any transfer. If that Judge is one of the parties to the current transfer he shall recuse himself and the previous Judge shall take responsibility, following the procedure found in rule 212. No party to the transfer shall be allowed to judge the legality of the transfer. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com From bernardo@c... Wed Jan 31 14:46:22 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 31 Jan 2001 22:46:22 -0000 Received: (qmail 82780 invoked from network); 31 Jan 2001 22:30:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 31 Jan 2001 22:30:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta1 with SMTP; 31 Jan 2001 22:30:38 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-22.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.207]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f0VMUaa53430 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 17:30:36 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <000a01c08bd5$57404aa0$cfa811d0@computer> To: References: <959vqi+h593@eGroups.com> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 311 Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 17:29:54 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" You know, come to think of it, I've gone a bit cold on the proposal. Let me put to you this hypothetical, and see how you respond: Eugene contracts with Bob to give Bob 100 points, in return for being able to direct Bob's vote on the next two proposals. He "freely transfers" these points, and then, on the next prop, Bob is passionately opposed to the proposition, while Eugene is for it. Bob reneges, and votes contra. It seems to me that as written, since Eugene followed the proper form in the transfer, he has no recourse to the law. If this is indeed the case, then we are making the opposite mistake from what you guys mistakenly believed my proposal was doing. This would prohibit far too much power from the government. I don't think anybody here would be in favor of a law that would prohibit someone from having recourse to the Judge in this kind of dispute. The law should explicitly allow for it. Secondly, you need to deal with the negative point situation - can I give Eug 1 million billion points? ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 4:24 PM Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 311 > I should probably write something like "in the case of a dispute." > But I also want the Judge to be able to step in and stop a transfer > without someone explicitly complaining. > > --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Eugene Ventimiglia" wrote: > > Is the Judge required to approve each transfer? I don't think it > should be > > that way, but that's how I read it. > > > > Otherwise, a resounding YES!!! This gets scratched off my list of > future > > proposals.... > > > > --e > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: f_hemker@h... [mailto:f_hemker@h...] > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 11:12 AM > > > To: scatterbrains@y... > > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 311 > > > > > > > > > Proposal 311 > > > > > > 1.) All Players shall have the right to transfer points from > > > their own score to > > > the score of another in whatever amount, for whatever reason. At > > > no point may a > > > player's score fall below zero using this method. > > > > > > 2.) All point transfers shall be stated publicly. All point > > > transfers shall be > > > numbered sequentially, beginning with 1001. Point transfer > > > statements shall > > > have the following form: > > > > > > "Subject: Point Transfer X > > > I [name of player], of my own free will, do transfer N points to > [name of > > > recipient]." > > > > > > 3.) Point transfers may take place at any time. They are > > > effective exactly 24 > > > hours after their public statement. > > > > > > 4.) Point transfers shall be deemed null and void if they do not > > > follow the > > > proscribed procedure. The current Judge, as determined in rule > 212, shall > > > determine the legality of any transfer. If that Judge is one of > > > the parties to > > > the current transfer he shall recuse himself and the previous > > > Judge shall take > > > responsibility, following the procedure found in rule 212. No > > > party to the > > > transfer shall be allowed to judge the legality of the transfer. > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Wed Jan 31 15:21:05 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 31 Jan 2001 23:21:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 53554 invoked from network); 31 Jan 2001 23:16:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 31 Jan 2001 23:16:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 31 Jan 2001 23:16:56 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id SAA05593 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 18:16:55 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 311 Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 18:18:28 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <959vqi+h593@eGroups.com> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" This goes back to the problem all you short-sited people had with the CM thing... I don't think you should expand the powers of the Judge. He's in place to resolve disputes. I'm in a rush to get home, so I'll type more later...... --e > -----Original Message----- > From: f_hemker@h... [mailto:f_hemker@h...] > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 4:25 PM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 311 > > > I should probably write something like "in the case of a dispute." > But I also want the Judge to be able to step in and stop a transfer > without someone explicitly complaining. > > --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Eugene Ventimiglia" wrote: > > Is the Judge required to approve each transfer? I don't think it > should be > > that way, but that's how I read it. > > > > Otherwise, a resounding YES!!! This gets scratched off my list of > future > > proposals.... > > > > --e > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: f_hemker@h... [mailto:f_hemker@h...] > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 11:12 AM > > > To: scatterbrains@y... > > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 311 > > > > > > > > > Proposal 311 > > > > > > 1.) All Players shall have the right to transfer points from > > > their own score to > > > the score of another in whatever amount, for whatever reason. At > > > no point may a > > > player's score fall below zero using this method. > > > > > > 2.) All point transfers shall be stated publicly. All point > > > transfers shall be > > > numbered sequentially, beginning with 1001. Point transfer > > > statements shall > > > have the following form: > > > > > > "Subject: Point Transfer X > > > I [name of player], of my own free will, do transfer N points to > [name of > > > recipient]." > > > > > > 3.) Point transfers may take place at any time. They are > > > effective exactly 24 > > > hours after their public statement. > > > > > > 4.) Point transfers shall be deemed null and void if they do not > > > follow the > > > proscribed procedure. The current Judge, as determined in rule > 212, shall > > > determine the legality of any transfer. If that Judge is one of > > > the parties to > > > the current transfer he shall recuse himself and the previous > > > Judge shall take > > > responsibility, following the procedure found in rule 212. No > > > party to the > > > transfer shall be allowed to judge the legality of the transfer. > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Wed Jan 31 15:23:56 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 31 Jan 2001 23:23:56 -0000 Received: (qmail 57349 invoked from network); 31 Jan 2001 23:20:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 31 Jan 2001 23:20:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 31 Jan 2001 23:20:37 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id SAA05874 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 18:20:36 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 311 Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 18:22:10 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <000a01c08bd5$57404aa0$cfa811d0@computer> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" The proposition doesn't require either party to disclose what the exchange is for. This leaves open all kindsa fun stuff like contracts. That's why I'm for limiting the judges power in part 4, not increasing it. Part 4 requires an interrested judge to recuse himself, but shouldn't expand the powers of the judge. I'm really trying to get on the subway... Why couldn't you guys have started earlier?!? --e > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 5:30 PM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 311 > > > You know, come to think of it, I've gone a bit cold on the > proposal. Let me > put to you this hypothetical, and see how you respond: > > Eugene contracts with Bob to give Bob 100 points, in return for being able > to direct Bob's vote on the next two proposals. He "freely > transfers" these > points, and then, on the next prop, Bob is passionately opposed to the > proposition, while Eugene is for it. Bob reneges, and votes contra. > > It seems to me that as written, since Eugene followed the proper > form in the > transfer, he has no recourse to the law. If this is indeed the case, then > we are making the opposite mistake from what you guys mistakenly > believed my > proposal was doing. This would prohibit far too much power from the > government. > > I don't think anybody here would be in favor of a law that would prohibit > someone from having recourse to the Judge in this kind of > dispute. The law > should explicitly allow for it. > > Secondly, you need to deal with the negative point situation - can I give > Eug 1 million billion points? > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 4:24 PM > Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 311 > > > > I should probably write something like "in the case of a dispute." > > But I also want the Judge to be able to step in and stop a transfer > > without someone explicitly complaining. > > > > --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Eugene Ventimiglia" wrote: > > > Is the Judge required to approve each transfer? I don't think it > > should be > > > that way, but that's how I read it. > > > > > > Otherwise, a resounding YES!!! This gets scratched off my list of > > future > > > proposals.... > > > > > > --e > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: f_hemker@h... [mailto:f_hemker@h...] > > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 11:12 AM > > > > To: scatterbrains@y... > > > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 311 > > > > > > > > > > > > Proposal 311 > > > > > > > > 1.) All Players shall have the right to transfer points from > > > > their own score to > > > > the score of another in whatever amount, for whatever reason. At > > > > no point may a > > > > player's score fall below zero using this method. > > > > > > > > 2.) All point transfers shall be stated publicly. All point > > > > transfers shall be > > > > numbered sequentially, beginning with 1001. Point transfer > > > > statements shall > > > > have the following form: > > > > > > > > "Subject: Point Transfer X > > > > I [name of player], of my own free will, do transfer N points to > > [name of > > > > recipient]." > > > > > > > > 3.) Point transfers may take place at any time. They are > > > > effective exactly 24 > > > > hours after their public statement. > > > > > > > > 4.) Point transfers shall be deemed null and void if they do not > > > > follow the > > > > proscribed procedure. The current Judge, as determined in rule > > 212, shall > > > > determine the legality of any transfer. If that Judge is one of > > > > the parties to > > > > the current transfer he shall recuse himself and the previous > > > > Judge shall take > > > > responsibility, following the procedure found in rule 212. No > > > > party to the > > > > transfer shall be allowed to judge the legality of the transfer. > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Wed Jan 31 16:25:30 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 1 Feb 2001 00:25:29 -0000 Received: (qmail 60031 invoked from network); 1 Feb 2001 00:25:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 1 Feb 2001 00:25:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 1 Feb 2001 00:25:23 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp08-04.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.214]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f110PKa63905 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 19:25:20 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <001501c08be5$5ee966a0$d6a811d0@computer> To: References: Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 311 Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 19:24:40 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" Right, so why bother with the law at all? It doesn't do anything but deny people from having access to the law. Secondly, contract law is historically an important part of government. You need a neutral arbiter to be able to step in - when called for - to resolve conflicts. Otherwise, it's as good as not having a government. We might as well be in the state of nature. I'm just not that optimistic about the good will of people. I agree that an activist judge would be a bad idea - but why limit the scope so severely? Contracts would of course still exist, but you need to have some kind of recourse to the law. Look at it this way - if you pay $100 to SST for punk rock records, and they blow you off, imagine trying to sue and having the judge tell you that the only thing that he was empowered to do is inspect whether or not you wrote your check correctly. That's *precisely* the way this law would tie the hands of the judge. This would suck. I would never contract with anybody - on either side, if this were the case. This law would in fact make contracts and an economy LESS likely, because you could never trust anyone, or have any option if you were screwed. ----- Original Message ----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia To: Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 6:22 PM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 311 > The proposition doesn't require either party to disclose what the exchange > is for. This leaves open all kindsa fun stuff like contracts. That's why > I'm for limiting the judges power in part 4, not increasing it. Part 4 > requires an interrested judge to recuse himself, but shouldn't expand the > powers of the judge. > > I'm really trying to get on the subway... Why couldn't you guys have started > earlier?!? > > --e > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 5:30 PM > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 311 > > > > > > You know, come to think of it, I've gone a bit cold on the > > proposal. Let me > > put to you this hypothetical, and see how you respond: > > > > Eugene contracts with Bob to give Bob 100 points, in return for being able > > to direct Bob's vote on the next two proposals. He "freely > > transfers" these > > points, and then, on the next prop, Bob is passionately opposed to the > > proposition, while Eugene is for it. Bob reneges, and votes contra. > > > > It seems to me that as written, since Eugene followed the proper > > form in the > > transfer, he has no recourse to the law. If this is indeed the case, then > > we are making the opposite mistake from what you guys mistakenly > > believed my > > proposal was doing. This would prohibit far too much power from the > > government. > > > > I don't think anybody here would be in favor of a law that would prohibit > > someone from having recourse to the Judge in this kind of > > dispute. The law > > should explicitly allow for it. > > > > Secondly, you need to deal with the negative point situation - can I give > > Eug 1 million billion points? > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: > > To: > > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 4:24 PM > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 311 > > > > > > > I should probably write something like "in the case of a dispute." > > > But I also want the Judge to be able to step in and stop a transfer > > > without someone explicitly complaining. > > > > > > --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Eugene Ventimiglia" wrote: > > > > Is the Judge required to approve each transfer? I don't think it > > > should be > > > > that way, but that's how I read it. > > > > > > > > Otherwise, a resounding YES!!! This gets scratched off my list of > > > future > > > > proposals.... > > > > > > > > --e > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: f_hemker@h... [mailto:f_hemker@h...] > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 11:12 AM > > > > > To: scatterbrains@y... > > > > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 311 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Proposal 311 > > > > > > > > > > 1.) All Players shall have the right to transfer points from > > > > > their own score to > > > > > the score of another in whatever amount, for whatever reason. At > > > > > no point may a > > > > > player's score fall below zero using this method. > > > > > > > > > > 2.) All point transfers shall be stated publicly. All point > > > > > transfers shall be > > > > > numbered sequentially, beginning with 1001. Point transfer > > > > > statements shall > > > > > have the following form: > > > > > > > > > > "Subject: Point Transfer X > > > > > I [name of player], of my own free will, do transfer N points to > > > [name of > > > > > recipient]." > > > > > > > > > > 3.) Point transfers may take place at any time. They are > > > > > effective exactly 24 > > > > > hours after their public statement. > > > > > > > > > > 4.) Point transfers shall be deemed null and void if they do not > > > > > follow the > > > > > proscribed procedure. The current Judge, as determined in rule > > > 212, shall > > > > > determine the legality of any transfer. If that Judge is one of > > > > > the parties to > > > > > the current transfer he shall recuse himself and the previous > > > > > Judge shall take > > > > > responsibility, following the procedure found in rule 212. No > > > > > party to the > > > > > transfer shall be allowed to judge the legality of the transfer. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Wed Jan 31 17:08:59 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 1 Feb 2001 01:08:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 70454 invoked from network); 1 Feb 2001 01:08:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 1 Feb 2001 01:08:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta1 with SMTP; 1 Feb 2001 01:08:56 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-03.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.188]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f1118sa67541 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 20:08:54 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <000c01c08beb$743b6980$bca811d0@computer> To: Subject: Call to Judgement Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 20:08:12 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0009_01C08BC1.8A15B000" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" ------=_NextPart_000_0009_01C08BC1.8A15B000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi all, I'm invoking a call to judgement. Since Fritz is moving, that makes me the= Judge. In the interests of fairness (since this is not prohibited by law)= I'll recuse myself, and allow Steven (the next in line) to take my place. Here's my beef: I'm disputing the subtraction of points from my score. There is nobody end= owed with the requisite power. According to the laws, although the points = should come off, there is nobody at the beginning endowed with such a power= . Since I know that you guys don't like arbitrary gov't., I'm sure you wil= l agree. Before you decide too quickly, Steven, consider this: Eugene cannot hold a position, *by the terms of his own law*, that has not = been legally created by a proposal. You must then either affirm that score= -keeping is open to everyone, or to noone. If you do the former, I will gl= adly remove the subtraction of points from the account myself, thank you ve= ry much! If you do the latter, I would appreciate that you temporarily end= ow either me, Eugene, or yourself with the power to remove the subtraction = from my score. Currently, I'm not disputing the addition of points, so this judgement will= only affect the subtraction of points, as I see it, although it does have = much wider implications. ------=_NextPart_000_0009_01C08BC1.8A15B000 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi all,
 
I'm invoking a call to judgement.  Si= nce Fritz=20 is moving, that makes me the Judge.  In the interests of fairness (sin= ce=20 this is not prohibited by law) I'll recuse myself, and allow Steven (the ne= xt in=20 line) to take my place.
 
Here's my beef:
 
I'm disputing the subtraction of points fr= om my=20 score.  There is nobody endowed with the requisite power.  Accord= ing=20 to the laws, although the points should come off, there is nobody at the=20 beginning endowed with such a power.  Since I know that you guys don't= like=20 arbitrary gov't., I'm sure you will agree.
 
Before you decide too quickly, Steven, con= sider=20 this:
 
Eugene cannot hold a position, *by the ter= ms of his=20 own law*, that has not been legally created by a proposal.  You must t= hen=20 either affirm that score-keeping is open to everyone, or to noone.  If= you=20 do the former, I will gladly remove the subtraction of points from the acco= unt=20 myself, thank you very much!  If you do the latter, I would appreciate= that=20 you temporarily endow either me, Eugene, or yourself with the power to remo= ve=20 the subtraction from my score.
 
Currently, I'm not disputing the addition = of=20 points, so this judgement will only affect the subtraction of points, as I = see=20 it, although it does have much wider implications.
 
 
------=_NextPart_000_0009_01C08BC1.8A15B000-- From eventi@n... Wed Jan 31 20:57:45 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 1 Feb 2001 04:57:45 -0000 Received: (qmail 80627 invoked from network); 1 Feb 2001 04:57:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 1 Feb 2001 04:57:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 1 Feb 2001 04:57:44 -0000 Received: from win (win.venti.nyic.com [64.29.109.18]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id XAA22848 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 23:57:43 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <008801c08c0b$7e1e0780$126d1d40@v...> To: References: <001501c08be5$5ee966a0$d6a811d0@computer> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 311 Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 23:57:04 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" I'm starting to see Fritz's (and oddly, your) reasoning to this... I'd be comfortable with either or both party in a points transfer *requesting* a disinterrested party to oversee that both sides of the implied contract are met, but what I'm not OK with is an arbitrary player policing a transfer. It leaves too much room for human interferance, and destroys any possibility of secrecy. If I offer Bob 10 points to vote for my proposal, and Fritz is vehemently opposed to vote selling, he's the chosen judge, so he could deem the purchase illegal, and Bob wouldn't get paid. If OTOH, I ask Pat to arbitrate, he'll make sure Bob votes and I pay. Again, this assumes no trust between players. I'd _prefer_ a sort of escrow service. I transfer money to Pat, Bob votes, Pat transfers to Bob. That's too complicated, though. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" To: Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 7:24 PM Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 311 > Right, so why bother with the law at all? It doesn't do anything but deny > people from having access to the law. Secondly, contract law is > historically an important part of government. You need a neutral arbiter to > be able to step in - when called for - to resolve conflicts. Otherwise, > it's as good as not having a government. We might as well be in the state > of nature. > > I'm just not that optimistic about the good will of people. I agree that an > activist judge would be a bad idea - but why limit the scope so severely? > Contracts would of course still exist, but you need to have some kind of > recourse to the law. > > Look at it this way - if you pay $100 to SST for punk rock records, and they > blow you off, imagine trying to sue and having the judge tell you that the > only thing that he was empowered to do is inspect whether or not you wrote > your check correctly. That's *precisely* the way this law would tie the > hands of the judge. This would suck. I would never contract with anybody - > on either side, if this were the case. This law would in fact make > contracts and an economy LESS likely, because you could never trust anyone, > or have any option if you were screwed. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Eugene Ventimiglia > To: > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 6:22 PM > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 311 > > > > The proposition doesn't require either party to disclose what the exchange > > is for. This leaves open all kindsa fun stuff like contracts. That's why > > I'm for limiting the judges power in part 4, not increasing it. Part 4 > > requires an interrested judge to recuse himself, but shouldn't expand the > > powers of the judge. > > > > I'm really trying to get on the subway... Why couldn't you guys have > started > > earlier?!? > > > > --e > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 5:30 PM > > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 311 > > > > > > > > > You know, come to think of it, I've gone a bit cold on the > > > proposal. Let me > > > put to you this hypothetical, and see how you respond: > > > > > > Eugene contracts with Bob to give Bob 100 points, in return for being > able > > > to direct Bob's vote on the next two proposals. He "freely > > > transfers" these > > > points, and then, on the next prop, Bob is passionately opposed to the > > > proposition, while Eugene is for it. Bob reneges, and votes contra. > > > > > > It seems to me that as written, since Eugene followed the proper > > > form in the > > > transfer, he has no recourse to the law. If this is indeed the case, > then > > > we are making the opposite mistake from what you guys mistakenly > > > believed my > > > proposal was doing. This would prohibit far too much power from the > > > government. > > > > > > I don't think anybody here would be in favor of a law that would > prohibit > > > someone from having recourse to the Judge in this kind of > > > dispute. The law > > > should explicitly allow for it. > > > > > > Secondly, you need to deal with the negative point situation - can I > give > > > Eug 1 million billion points? > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: > > > To: > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 4:24 PM > > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 311 > > > > > > > > > > I should probably write something like "in the case of a dispute." > > > > But I also want the Judge to be able to step in and stop a transfer > > > > without someone explicitly complaining. > > > > > > > > --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Eugene Ventimiglia" wrote: > > > > > Is the Judge required to approve each transfer? I don't think it > > > > should be > > > > > that way, but that's how I read it. > > > > > > > > > > Otherwise, a resounding YES!!! This gets scratched off my list of > > > > future > > > > > proposals.... > > > > > > > > > > --e > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > From: f_hemker@h... [mailto:f_hemker@h...] > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 11:12 AM > > > > > > To: scatterbrains@y... > > > > > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 311 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Proposal 311 > > > > > > > > > > > > 1.) All Players shall have the right to transfer points from > > > > > > their own score to > > > > > > the score of another in whatever amount, for whatever reason. At > > > > > > no point may a > > > > > > player's score fall below zero using this method. > > > > > > > > > > > > 2.) All point transfers shall be stated publicly. All point > > > > > > transfers shall be > > > > > > numbered sequentially, beginning with 1001. Point transfer > > > > > > statements shall > > > > > > have the following form: > > > > > > > > > > > > "Subject: Point Transfer X > > > > > > I [name of player], of my own free will, do transfer N points to > > > > [name of > > > > > > recipient]." > > > > > > > > > > > > 3.) Point transfers may take place at any time. They are > > > > > > effective exactly 24 > > > > > > hours after their public statement. > > > > > > > > > > > > 4.) Point transfers shall be deemed null and void if they do not > > > > > > follow the > > > > > > proscribed procedure. The current Judge, as determined in rule > > > > 212, shall > > > > > > determine the legality of any transfer. If that Judge is one of > > > > > > the parties to > > > > > > the current transfer he shall recuse himself and the previous > > > > > > Judge shall take > > > > > > responsibility, following the procedure found in rule 212. No > > > > > > party to the > > > > > > transfer shall be allowed to judge the legality of the transfer. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Wed Jan 31 21:14:22 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 1 Feb 2001 05:14:22 -0000 Received: (qmail 1231 invoked from network); 1 Feb 2001 05:14:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 1 Feb 2001 05:14:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 1 Feb 2001 06:15:26 -0000 Received: from win (win.venti.nyic.com [64.29.109.18]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id AAA24153 for ; Thu, 1 Feb 2001 00:14:21 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <009001c08c0d$d0e7f5a0$126d1d40@v...> To: References: <000c01c08beb$743b6980$bca811d0@computer> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Call to Judgement Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 00:13:42 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" I'm way to tired to go into this. Do I get a chance to defend myself? Actually, it's not technically against me, by your reasoning... I'm "Acting EVERYTHING". Get used to it. It's not entirely by choice. ----- Original Message ----- From: Patrick D. Bernardo To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 8:08 PM Subject: [scatterbrains] Call to Judgement Hi all, I'm invoking a call to judgement. Since Fritz is moving, that makes me the Judge. In the interests of fairness (since this is not prohibited by law) I'll recuse myself, and allow Steven (the next in line) to take my place. Here's my beef: I'm disputing the subtraction of points from my score. There is nobody endowed with the requisite power. According to the laws, although the points should come off, there is nobody at the beginning endowed with such a power. Since I know that you guys don't like arbitrary gov't., I'm sure you will agree. Before you decide too quickly, Steven, consider this: Eugene cannot hold a position, *by the terms of his own law*, that has not been legally created by a proposal. You must then either affirm that score-keeping is open to everyone, or to noone. If you do the former, I will gladly remove the subtraction of points from the account myself, thank you very much! If you do the latter, I would appreciate that you temporarily endow either me, Eugene, or yourself with the power to remove the subtraction from my score. Currently, I'm not disputing the addition of points, so this judgement will only affect the subtraction of points, as I see it, although it does have much wider implications. Yahoo! Groups Sponsor www. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com From bernardo@c... Thu Feb 01 04:32:02 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 1 Feb 2001 12:32:01 -0000 Received: (qmail 88285 invoked from network); 1 Feb 2001 12:32:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 1 Feb 2001 12:32:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 1 Feb 2001 12:32:01 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-09.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.194]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f11CVxa15659 for ; Thu, 1 Feb 2001 07:31:59 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <003501c08c4a$e13e5100$c2a811d0@computer> To: References: <000c01c08beb$743b6980$bca811d0@computer> <009001c08c0d$d0e7f5a0$126d1d40@v...> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Call to Judgement Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 07:31:17 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" I'm not sure why you need to defend yourself. As you point out, I'm not suing you. ----- Original Message ----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia To: Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2001 12:13 AM Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Call to Judgement > I'm way to tired to go into this. Do I get a chance to defend myself? > Actually, it's not technically against me, by your reasoning... I'm "Acting > EVERYTHING". Get used to it. It's not entirely by choice. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 8:08 PM > Subject: [scatterbrains] Call to Judgement > > > Hi all, > > I'm invoking a call to judgement. Since Fritz is moving, that makes me the > Judge. In the interests of fairness (since this is not prohibited by law) > I'll recuse myself, and allow Steven (the next in line) to take my place. > > Here's my beef: > > I'm disputing the subtraction of points from my score. There is nobody > endowed with the requisite power. According to the laws, although the > points should come off, there is nobody at the beginning endowed with such a > power. Since I know that you guys don't like arbitrary gov't., I'm sure you > will agree. > > Before you decide too quickly, Steven, consider this: > > Eugene cannot hold a position, *by the terms of his own law*, that has not > been legally created by a proposal. You must then either affirm that > score-keeping is open to everyone, or to noone. If you do the former, I > will gladly remove the subtraction of points from the account myself, thank > you very much! If you do the latter, I would appreciate that you > temporarily endow either me, Eugene, or yourself with the power to remove > the subtraction from my score. > > Currently, I'm not disputing the addition of points, so this judgement will > only affect the subtraction of points, as I see it, although it does have > much wider implications. > > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > www. > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Thu Feb 01 04:32:58 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 1 Feb 2001 12:32:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 90807 invoked from network); 1 Feb 2001 12:32:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 1 Feb 2001 12:32:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta3 with SMTP; 1 Feb 2001 13:34:02 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-09.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.194]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f11CWra15678 for ; Thu, 1 Feb 2001 07:32:53 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <004001c08c4b$017d5240$c2a811d0@computer> To: References: <001501c08be5$5ee966a0$d6a811d0@computer> <008801c08c0b$7e1e0780$126d1d40@v...> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 311 Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 07:32:12 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" Actually, then I think that we agree, Eug. ----- Original Message ----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia To: Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 11:57 PM Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 311 > I'm starting to see Fritz's (and oddly, your) reasoning to this... I'd be > comfortable with either or both party in a points transfer *requesting* a > disinterrested party to oversee that both sides of the implied contract are > met, but what I'm not OK with is an arbitrary player policing a transfer. > It leaves too much room for human interferance, and destroys any possibility > of secrecy. If I offer Bob 10 points to vote for my proposal, and Fritz is > vehemently opposed to vote selling, he's the chosen judge, so he could deem > the purchase illegal, and Bob wouldn't get paid. If OTOH, I ask Pat to > arbitrate, he'll make sure Bob votes and I pay. Again, this assumes no > trust between players. I'd _prefer_ a sort of escrow service. I transfer > money to Pat, Bob votes, Pat transfers to Bob. That's too complicated, > though. > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" > To: > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 7:24 PM > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 311 > > > > Right, so why bother with the law at all? It doesn't do anything but deny > > people from having access to the law. Secondly, contract law is > > historically an important part of government. You need a neutral arbiter > to > > be able to step in - when called for - to resolve conflicts. Otherwise, > > it's as good as not having a government. We might as well be in the state > > of nature. > > > > I'm just not that optimistic about the good will of people. I agree that > an > > activist judge would be a bad idea - but why limit the scope so severely? > > Contracts would of course still exist, but you need to have some kind of > > recourse to the law. > > > > Look at it this way - if you pay $100 to SST for punk rock records, and > they > > blow you off, imagine trying to sue and having the judge tell you that the > > only thing that he was empowered to do is inspect whether or not you wrote > > your check correctly. That's *precisely* the way this law would tie the > > hands of the judge. This would suck. I would never contract with > anybody - > > on either side, if this were the case. This law would in fact make > > contracts and an economy LESS likely, because you could never trust > anyone, > > or have any option if you were screwed. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Eugene Ventimiglia > > To: > > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 6:22 PM > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 311 > > > > > > > The proposition doesn't require either party to disclose what the > exchange > > > is for. This leaves open all kindsa fun stuff like contracts. That's > why > > > I'm for limiting the judges power in part 4, not increasing it. Part 4 > > > requires an interrested judge to recuse himself, but shouldn't expand > the > > > powers of the judge. > > > > > > I'm really trying to get on the subway... Why couldn't you guys have > > started > > > earlier?!? > > > > > > --e > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 5:30 PM > > > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 311 > > > > > > > > > > > > You know, come to think of it, I've gone a bit cold on the > > > > proposal. Let me > > > > put to you this hypothetical, and see how you respond: > > > > > > > > Eugene contracts with Bob to give Bob 100 points, in return for being > > able > > > > to direct Bob's vote on the next two proposals. He "freely > > > > transfers" these > > > > points, and then, on the next prop, Bob is passionately opposed to the > > > > proposition, while Eugene is for it. Bob reneges, and votes contra. > > > > > > > > It seems to me that as written, since Eugene followed the proper > > > > form in the > > > > transfer, he has no recourse to the law. If this is indeed the case, > > then > > > > we are making the opposite mistake from what you guys mistakenly > > > > believed my > > > > proposal was doing. This would prohibit far too much power from the > > > > government. > > > > > > > > I don't think anybody here would be in favor of a law that would > > prohibit > > > > someone from having recourse to the Judge in this kind of > > > > dispute. The law > > > > should explicitly allow for it. > > > > > > > > Secondly, you need to deal with the negative point situation - can I > > give > > > > Eug 1 million billion points? > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > From: > > > > To: > > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 4:24 PM > > > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 311 > > > > > > > > > > > > > I should probably write something like "in the case of a dispute." > > > > > But I also want the Judge to be able to step in and stop a transfer > > > > > without someone explicitly complaining. > > > > > > > > > > --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Eugene Ventimiglia" wrote: > > > > > > Is the Judge required to approve each transfer? I don't think it > > > > > should be > > > > > > that way, but that's how I read it. > > > > > > > > > > > > Otherwise, a resounding YES!!! This gets scratched off my list of > > > > > future > > > > > > proposals.... > > > > > > > > > > > > --e > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > From: f_hemker@h... [mailto:f_hemker@h...] > > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 11:12 AM > > > > > > > To: scatterbrains@y... > > > > > > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 311 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Proposal 311 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1.) All Players shall have the right to transfer points from > > > > > > > their own score to > > > > > > > the score of another in whatever amount, for whatever reason. > At > > > > > > > no point may a > > > > > > > player's score fall below zero using this method. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2.) All point transfers shall be stated publicly. All point > > > > > > > transfers shall be > > > > > > > numbered sequentially, beginning with 1001. Point transfer > > > > > > > statements shall > > > > > > > have the following form: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "Subject: Point Transfer X > > > > > > > I [name of player], of my own free will, do transfer N points to > > > > > [name of > > > > > > > recipient]." > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3.) Point transfers may take place at any time. They are > > > > > > > effective exactly 24 > > > > > > > hours after their public statement. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4.) Point transfers shall be deemed null and void if they do > not > > > > > > > follow the > > > > > > > proscribed procedure. The current Judge, as determined in rule > > > > > 212, shall > > > > > > > determine the legality of any transfer. If that Judge is one of > > > > > > > the parties to > > > > > > > the current transfer he shall recuse himself and the previous > > > > > > > Judge shall take > > > > > > > responsibility, following the procedure found in rule 212. No > > > > > > > party to the > > > > > > > transfer shall be allowed to judge the legality of the transfer. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From f_hemker@h... Thu Feb 01 07:11:01 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: f_hemker@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 1 Feb 2001 15:11:00 -0000 Received: (qmail 21069 invoked from network); 1 Feb 2001 15:08:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 1 Feb 2001 15:08:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hi.egroups.com) (10.1.10.41) by mta1 with SMTP; 1 Feb 2001 15:08:48 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: f_hemker@h... Received: from [10.1.10.101] by hi.egroups.com with NNFMP; 01 Feb 2001 15:08:47 -0000 Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2001 15:08:44 -0000 To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: Call to Judgement Message-ID: <95bu5s+ccmq@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: <000c01c08beb$743b6980$bca811d0@computer> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 2404 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 63.82.115.205 From: f_hemker@h... According to Rule 306 a turn only consists of four parts. Invoking judgement doesn't seem to be one of those parts. or, If you don't allow that the point have come off your score, even without the intervention of an agent, you are violating the fundamental spirit of the regieme. Since the scoring you disputed took place last turn I'm not sure that its legality is open to you as judge. A judge can only pass judgment on the actions and contents of the current turn. Whomever's turn it was before yours is the judge of the actions occuring during your turn. Right? Unless we allow for infinite regression of judgement. Then again, where do you get the idea that we need an agent to take the points off. It seems almost automatic to me. The soldiers don't have to come rushing onto the floor of the Senate to enforce every rule of palimentary procedure. While the parlimentarian cannot physically make a Senator stop talking, he does anyway when the rules say that he should. Are you willing to introduce this spirit into the game? --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Patrick D. Bernardo" wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm invoking a call to judgement. Since Fritz is moving, that makes me the Judge. In the interests of fairness (since this is not prohibited by law) I'll recuse myself, and allow Steven (the next in line) to take my place. > > Here's my beef: > > I'm disputing the subtraction of points from my score. There is nobody endowed with the requisite power. According to the laws, although the points should come off, there is nobody at the beginning endowed with such a power. Since I know that you guys don't like arbitrary gov't., I'm sure you will agree. > > Before you decide too quickly, Steven, consider this: > > Eugene cannot hold a position, *by the terms of his own law*, that has not been legally created by a proposal. You must then either affirm that score-keeping is open to everyone, or to noone. If you do the former, I will gladly remove the subtraction of points from the account myself, thank you very much! If you do the latter, I would appreciate that you temporarily endow either me, Eugene, or yourself with the power to remove the subtraction from my score. > > Currently, I'm not disputing the addition of points, so this judgement will only affect the subtraction of points, as I see it, although it does h From f_hemker@h... Thu Feb 01 07:13:45 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: f_hemker@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 1 Feb 2001 15:13:45 -0000 Received: (qmail 28390 invoked from network); 1 Feb 2001 15:11:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 1 Feb 2001 15:11:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hi.egroups.com) (10.1.10.41) by mta1 with SMTP; 1 Feb 2001 15:11:55 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: f_hemker@h... Received: from [10.1.10.117] by hi.egroups.com with NNFMP; 01 Feb 2001 15:11:55 -0000 Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2001 15:11:52 -0000 To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: Proposal 311 Message-ID: <95bubo+g6d8@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: <004001c08c4b$017d5240$c2a811d0@computer> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 9348 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 63.82.115.205 From: f_hemker@h... Well, if you believe that there is a need to protect and inforce contracts this might be the opportunity to begin drawing up your proposal. I don't think that every law has to be perfect in and of itself. As long as my proposal isn't destructive to game play you could just assume that it creates more opportunities for fine tuning in the future. Anyway, there's nothing to stop you from pointing out the hypocrisy of a business partner in a very public way. I'm sure that would bring a chill to their future dealings. -Fritz --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Patrick D. Bernardo" wrote: > Actually, then I think that we agree, Eug. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Eugene Ventimiglia > To: > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 11:57 PM > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 311 > > > > I'm starting to see Fritz's (and oddly, your) reasoning to this... I'd be > > comfortable with either or both party in a points transfer *requesting* a > > disinterrested party to oversee that both sides of the implied contract > are > > met, but what I'm not OK with is an arbitrary player policing a transfer. > > It leaves too much room for human interferance, and destroys any > possibility > > of secrecy. If I offer Bob 10 points to vote for my proposal, and Fritz > is > > vehemently opposed to vote selling, he's the chosen judge, so he could > deem > > the purchase illegal, and Bob wouldn't get paid. If OTOH, I ask Pat to > > arbitrate, he'll make sure Bob votes and I pay. Again, this assumes no > > trust between players. I'd _prefer_ a sort of escrow service. I transfer > > money to Pat, Bob votes, Pat transfers to Bob. That's too complicated, > > though. > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" > > To: > > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 7:24 PM > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 311 > > > > > > > Right, so why bother with the law at all? It doesn't do anything but > deny > > > people from having access to the law. Secondly, contract law is > > > historically an important part of government. You need a neutral > arbiter > > to > > > be able to step in - when called for - to resolve conflicts. Otherwise, > > > it's as good as not having a government. We might as well be in the > state > > > of nature. > > > > > > I'm just not that optimistic about the good will of people. I agree > that > > an > > > activist judge would be a bad idea - but why limit the scope so > severely? > > > Contracts would of course still exist, but you need to have some kind of > > > recourse to the law. > > > > > > Look at it this way - if you pay $100 to SST for punk rock records, and > > they > > > blow you off, imagine trying to sue and having the judge tell you that > the > > > only thing that he was empowered to do is inspect whether or not you > wrote > > > your check correctly. That's *precisely* the way this law would tie the > > > hands of the judge. This would suck. I would never contract with > > anybody - > > > on either side, if this were the case. This law would in fact make > > > contracts and an economy LESS likely, because you could never trust > > anyone, > > > or have any option if you were screwed. > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: Eugene Ventimiglia > > > To: > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 6:22 PM > > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 311 > > > > > > > > > > The proposition doesn't require either party to disclose what the > > exchange > > > > is for. This leaves open all kindsa fun stuff like contracts. That's > > why > > > > I'm for limiting the judges power in part 4, not increasing it. Part > 4 > > > > requires an interrested judge to recuse himself, but shouldn't expand > > the > > > > powers of the judge. > > > > > > > > I'm really trying to get on the subway... Why couldn't you guys have > > > started > > > > earlier?!? > > > > > > > > --e > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 5:30 PM > > > > > To: scatterbrains@y... > > > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 311 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You know, come to think of it, I've gone a bit cold on the > > > > > proposal. Let me > > > > > put to you this hypothetical, and see how you respond: > > > > > > > > > > Eugene contracts with Bob to give Bob 100 points, in return for > being > > > able > > > > > to direct Bob's vote on the next two proposals. He "freely > > > > > transfers" these > > > > > points, and then, on the next prop, Bob is passionately opposed to > the > > > > > proposition, while Eugene is for it. Bob reneges, and votes contra. > > > > > > > > > > It seems to me that as written, since Eugene followed the proper > > > > > form in the > > > > > transfer, he has no recourse to the law. If this is indeed the > case, > > > then > > > > > we are making the opposite mistake from what you guys mistakenly > > > > > believed my > > > > > proposal was doing. This would prohibit far too much power from the > > > > > government. > > > > > > > > > > I don't think anybody here would be in favor of a law that would > > > prohibit > > > > > someone from having recourse to the Judge in this kind of > > > > > dispute. The law > > > > > should explicitly allow for it. > > > > > > > > > > Secondly, you need to deal with the negative point situation - can I > > > give > > > > > Eug 1 million billion points? > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > > From: > > > > > To: > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 4:24 PM > > > > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 311 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I should probably write something like "in the case of a dispute." > > > > > > But I also want the Judge to be able to step in and stop a > transfer > > > > > > without someone explicitly complaining. > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Eugene Ventimiglia" > wrote: > > > > > > > Is the Judge required to approve each transfer? I don't think it > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > that way, but that's how I read it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Otherwise, a resounding YES!!! This gets scratched off my list > of > > > > > > future > > > > > > > proposals.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --e > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > From: f_hemker@h... [mailto:f_hemker@h...] > > > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 11:12 AM > > > > > > > > To: scatterbrains@y... > > > > > > > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 311 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Proposal 311 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1.) All Players shall have the right to transfer points from > > > > > > > > their own score to > > > > > > > > the score of another in whatever amount, for whatever reason. > > At > > > > > > > > no point may a > > > > > > > > player's score fall below zero using this method. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2.) All point transfers shall be stated publicly. All point > > > > > > > > transfers shall be > > > > > > > > numbered sequentially, beginning with 1001. Point transfer > > > > > > > > statements shall > > > > > > > > have the following form: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "Subject: Point Transfer X > > > > > > > > I [name of player], of my own free will, do transfer N points > to > > > > > > [name of > > > > > > > > recipient]." > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3.) Point transfers may take place at any time. They are > > > > > > > > effective exactly 24 > > > > > > > > hours after their public statement. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4.) Point transfers shall be deemed null and void if they do > > not > > > > > > > > follow the > > > > > > > > proscribed procedure. The current Judge, as determined in > rule > > > > > > 212, shall > > > > > > > > determine the legality of any transfer. If that Judge is one > of > > > > > > > > the parties to > > > > > > > > the current transfer he shall recuse himself and the previous > > > > > > > > Judge shall take > > > > > > > > responsibility, following the procedure found in rule 212. No > > > > > > > > party to the > > > > > > > > transfer shall be allowed to judge the legality of the > transfer. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an ema From bernardo@c... Thu Feb 01 07:37:10 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 1 Feb 2001 15:37:09 -0000 Received: (qmail 62405 invoked from network); 1 Feb 2001 15:32:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 1 Feb 2001 15:32:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta1 with SMTP; 1 Feb 2001 15:32:18 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-04.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.189]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f11FWGa30133 for ; Thu, 1 Feb 2001 10:32:16 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <001b01c08c64$11586d80$bda811d0@computer> To: References: <95bu5s+ccmq@eGroups.com> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Call to Judgement Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 10:31:35 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" > According to Rule 306 a turn only consists of four parts. Invoking > judgement doesn't seem to be one of those parts. > This reading would prevent anyone from ever making a call to Judgement. > or, > > If you don't allow that the point have come off your score, even > without the intervention of an agent, you are violating the > fundamental spirit of the regieme. Since the scoring you disputed > took place last turn I'm not sure that its legality is open to you as > judge. A judge can only pass judgment on the actions and contents of > the current turn. Whomever's turn it was before yours is the judge of > the actions occuring during your turn. > This isn't exactly right. First of all, the law doesn't specify when the offense has occured, as written you could appeal anything and at anytime. Secondly, it's not that the judge can only pass judgment on the actions and contents of the current turn, but that the judge's tenure lasts for exactly one turn. If there is another call to judgment during your turn, then SA will remain the judge, unless he is overruled. > Right? Unless we allow for infinite regression of judgement. > I'm not sure what you mean by this, but the law specifically allows for infinite regression in this sense: suppose SA rules poorly, and is overturned. The judiciary would pass to BA, and if he is overruled, to EV, etc. ad infinitum. This possibility is more theoretical than actual, but it's still a possibility. > Then again, where do you get the idea that we need an agent to take > the points off. It seems almost automatic to me. The soldiers don't > have to come rushing onto the floor of the Senate to enforce every > rule of palimentary procedure. While the parlimentarian cannot > physically make a Senator stop talking, he does anyway when the rules > say that he should. > Are you willing to introduce this spirit into the game? > In all honesty, I'm not a stormtrooper: don't misunderstand me. I'm not asking for soldiers to come rushing into anywhere, really. But I am disputing the possibility of it being "automatic" because it is no automatic. Somebody's got to do it. Parliamentary procedure depends upon the actions of all the members, as a group. If someone violates the procedure and is going to be punished for it, you can be damn sure that there is somebody who's going to do that punishing - and that person will be elected from the group. I'm taking issue with the ambiguity of our situation. I just want a ruling on it that will legally define it, and bring the matter into the horizon of the game. My loss of points is just a reason for the suit. (I've spaced the proper legal term here, but you get my drift.) At any rate, this conversation is somewhat moot, since SA is the judge. ;) From bernardo@c... Thu Feb 01 07:42:57 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 1 Feb 2001 15:42:57 -0000 Received: (qmail 12621 invoked from network); 1 Feb 2001 15:39:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 1 Feb 2001 15:39:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 1 Feb 2001 15:39:10 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-04.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.189]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f11Fd7a30788 for ; Thu, 1 Feb 2001 10:39:08 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <002101c08c65$06b848e0$bda811d0@computer> To: References: <95bubo+g6d8@eGroups.com> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 311 Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 10:38:27 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" Fritz, I'll be the first to support your contention that laws don't have to be perfect in and of themselves! :) However, I'm not sure that this is a case of asking for over-refinement. BTW - my prop wasn't "destructive to game play" either. It's just that people didn't like what they thought the game would look like post-CM. I'm simply asking (and I think Eug is too) that you don't prevent the Judge from being able to act in a contract dispute. Since contracts are already possible, the only thing that this law does is *take away the right to sue*. The anarchic solution of letting people call each other bad names is no solution at all. If I violate a contract with Steven, and there is no recourse to the Judge, it's just his word against mine. He'll loudly complain that I violated the contract, and I'll loudly complain that I fulfilled the contract, and that Steven is trying to screw me after the fact. Both of us will get covered in mud, and there will be no reasonable settlement of the issue. Justice requires the intervention of a third. ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2001 10:11 AM Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 311 > Well, if you believe that there is a need to protect and inforce > contracts this might be the opportunity to begin drawing up your > proposal. I don't think that every law has to be perfect in and of > itself. As long as my proposal isn't destructive to game play you > could just assume that it creates more opportunities for fine tuning > in the future. > > Anyway, there's nothing to stop you from pointing out the hypocrisy of > a business partner in a very public way. I'm sure that would bring a > chill to their future dealings. > > -Fritz > --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Patrick D. Bernardo" > wrote: > > Actually, then I think that we agree, Eug. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Eugene Ventimiglia > > To: > > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 11:57 PM > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 311 > > > > > > > I'm starting to see Fritz's (and oddly, your) reasoning to this... > I'd be > > > comfortable with either or both party in a points transfer > *requesting* a > > > disinterrested party to oversee that both sides of the implied > contract > > are > > > met, but what I'm not OK with is an arbitrary player policing a > transfer. > > > It leaves too much room for human interferance, and destroys any > > possibility > > > of secrecy. If I offer Bob 10 points to vote for my proposal, and > Fritz > > is > > > vehemently opposed to vote selling, he's the chosen judge, so he > could > > deem > > > the purchase illegal, and Bob wouldn't get paid. If OTOH, I ask > Pat to > > > arbitrate, he'll make sure Bob votes and I pay. Again, this > assumes no > > > trust between players. I'd _prefer_ a sort of escrow service. I > transfer > > > money to Pat, Bob votes, Pat transfers to Bob. That's too > complicated, > > > though. > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" > > > To: > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 7:24 PM > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 311 > > > > > > > > > > Right, so why bother with the law at all? It doesn't do > anything but > > deny > > > > people from having access to the law. Secondly, contract law is > > > > historically an important part of government. You need a > neutral > > arbiter > > > to > > > > be able to step in - when called for - to resolve conflicts. > Otherwise, > > > > it's as good as not having a government. We might as well be in > the > > state > > > > of nature. > > > > > > > > I'm just not that optimistic about the good will of people. I > agree > > that > > > an > > > > activist judge would be a bad idea - but why limit the scope so > > severely? > > > > Contracts would of course still exist, but you need to have some > kind of > > > > recourse to the law. > > > > > > > > Look at it this way - if you pay $100 to SST for punk rock > records, and > > > they > > > > blow you off, imagine trying to sue and having the judge tell > you that > > the > > > > only thing that he was empowered to do is inspect whether or not > you > > wrote > > > > your check correctly. That's *precisely* the way this law would > tie the > > > > hands of the judge. This would suck. I would never contract > with > > > anybody - > > > > on either side, if this were the case. This law would in fact > make > > > > contracts and an economy LESS likely, because you could never > trust > > > anyone, > > > > or have any option if you were screwed. > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > From: Eugene Ventimiglia > > > > To: > > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 6:22 PM > > > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 311 > > > > > > > > > > > > > The proposition doesn't require either party to disclose what > the > > > exchange > > > > > is for. This leaves open all kindsa fun stuff like contracts. > That's > > > why > > > > > I'm for limiting the judges power in part 4, not increasing > it. Part > > 4 > > > > > requires an interrested judge to recuse himself, but shouldn't > expand > > > the > > > > > powers of the judge. > > > > > > > > > > I'm really trying to get on the subway... Why couldn't you > guys have > > > > started > > > > > earlier?!? > > > > > > > > > > --e > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 5:30 PM > > > > > > To: scatterbrains@y... > > > > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 311 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You know, come to think of it, I've gone a bit cold on the > > > > > > proposal. Let me > > > > > > put to you this hypothetical, and see how you respond: > > > > > > > > > > > > Eugene contracts with Bob to give Bob 100 points, in return > for > > being > > > > able > > > > > > to direct Bob's vote on the next two proposals. He "freely > > > > > > transfers" these > > > > > > points, and then, on the next prop, Bob is passionately > opposed to > > the > > > > > > proposition, while Eugene is for it. Bob reneges, and votes > contra. > > > > > > > > > > > > It seems to me that as written, since Eugene followed the > proper > > > > > > form in the > > > > > > transfer, he has no recourse to the law. If this is indeed > the > > case, > > > > then > > > > > > we are making the opposite mistake from what you guys > mistakenly > > > > > > believed my > > > > > > proposal was doing. This would prohibit far too much power > from the > > > > > > government. > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't think anybody here would be in favor of a law that > would > > > > prohibit > > > > > > someone from having recourse to the Judge in this kind of > > > > > > dispute. The law > > > > > > should explicitly allow for it. > > > > > > > > > > > > Secondly, you need to deal with the negative point situation > - can I > > > > give > > > > > > Eug 1 million billion points? > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > > > From: > > > > > > To: > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 4:24 PM > > > > > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 311 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I should probably write something like "in the case of a > dispute." > > > > > > > But I also want the Judge to be able to step in and stop a > > transfer > > > > > > > without someone explicitly complaining. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Eugene Ventimiglia" > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Is the Judge required to approve each transfer? I don't > think it > > > > > > > should be > > > > > > > > that way, but that's how I read it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Otherwise, a resounding YES!!! This gets scratched off > my list > > of > > > > > > > future > > > > > > > > proposals.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --e > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > From: f_hemker@h... [mailto:f_hemker@h...] > > > > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 11:12 AM > > > > > > > > > To: scatterbrains@y... > > > > > > > > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 311 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Proposal 311 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1.) All Players shall have the right to transfer > points from > > > > > > > > > their own score to > > > > > > > > > the score of another in whatever amount, for whatever > reason. > > > At > > > > > > > > > no point may a > > > > > > > > > player's score fall below zero using this method. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2.) All point transfers shall be stated publicly. > All point > > > > > > > > > transfers shall be > > > > > > > > > numbered sequentially, beginning with 1001. Point > transfer > > > > > > > > > statements shall > > > > > > > > > have the following form: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "Subject: Point Transfer X > > > > > > > > > I [name of player], of my own free will, do transfer N > points > > to > > > > > > > [name of > > > > > > > > > recipient]." > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3.) Point transfers may take place at any time. They > are > > > > > > > > > effective exactly 24 > > > > > > > > > hours after their public statement. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4.) Point transfers shall be deemed null and void if > they do > > > not > > > > > > > > > follow the > > > > > > > > > proscribed procedure. The current Judge, as > determined in > > rule > > > > > > > 212, shall > > > > > > > > > determine the legality of any transfer. If that Judge > is one > > of > > > > > > > > > the parties to > > > > > > > > > the current transfer he shall recuse himself and the > previous > > > > > > > > > Judge shall take > > > > > > > > > responsibility, following the procedure found in rule > 212. No > > > > > > > > > party to the > > > > > > > > > transfer shall be allowed to judge the legality of the > > transfer. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an ema > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From sga5892@n... Thu Feb 01 12:27:04 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: sga5892@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 1 Feb 2001 20:27:02 -0000 Received: (qmail 77148 invoked from network); 1 Feb 2001 20:18:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 1 Feb 2001 20:18:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-gw3.njit.edu) (128.235.251.11) by mta1 with SMTP; 1 Feb 2001 20:18:39 -0000 Received: from mailhost.njit.edu (mailhost.njit.edu [128.235.251.108]) by mail-gw3.njit.edu (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f11KIbM08671 for ; Thu, 1 Feb 2001 15:18:37 -0500 Received: from steve0 (dhcp194-216.njit.edu) by mailhost.njit.edu (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9) with SMTP id <0G83005QCHQZUV@m...> for scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com; Thu, 1 Feb 2001 15:18:35 -0500 (EST) Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Thu, 01 Feb 2001 15:18:05 -0500 Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2001 15:18:04 -0500 Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Call to Judgement To: "'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'" Reply-to: "sga5892@n..." Message-id: <01C08C62.2D104AE0.sga5892@n...> Organization: NJIT MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit From: "Steven G. Arturo" so much for taking a day or two off to read... from what i understand, pat's turn has not finished by 306. there hasn't been a scoring of the turn, by anyone. after i reread pat's and fritz' arguments, among any others that come up, i, designated as judge for this dispute, shall pass judgement, and hopefully a procedure through future situations like this. i cannot recognize proposal 311 and the discussion that has followed, since the change of turns has not transpired. steve0 -----Original Message----- From: Patrick D. Bernardo [SMTP:bernardo@c...] Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2001 10:32 AM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Call to Judgement > According to Rule 306 a turn only consists of four parts. Invoking > judgement doesn't seem to be one of those parts. > This reading would prevent anyone from ever making a call to Judgement. > or, > > If you don't allow that the point have come off your score, even > without the intervention of an agent, you are violating the > fundamental spirit of the regieme. Since the scoring you disputed > took place last turn I'm not sure that its legality is open to you as > judge. A judge can only pass judgment on the actions and contents of > the current turn. Whomever's turn it was before yours is the judge of > the actions occuring during your turn. > This isn't exactly right. First of all, the law doesn't specify when the offense has occured, as written you could appeal anything and at anytime. Secondly, it's not that the judge can only pass judgment on the actions and contents of the current turn, but that the judge's tenure lasts for exactly one turn. If there is another call to judgment during your turn, then SA will remain the judge, unless he is overruled. > Right? Unless we allow for infinite regression of judgement. > I'm not sure what you mean by this, but the law specifically allows for infinite regression in this sense: suppose SA rules poorly, and is overturned. The judiciary would pass to BA, and if he is overruled, to EV, etc. ad infinitum. This possibility is more theoretical than actual, but it's still a possibility. > Then again, where do you get the idea that we need an agent to take > the points off. It seems almost automatic to me. The soldiers don't > have to come rushing onto the floor of the Senate to enforce every > rule of palimentary procedure. While the parlimentarian cannot > physically make a Senator stop talking, he does anyway when the rules > say that he should. > Are you willing to introduce this spirit into the game? > In all honesty, I'm not a stormtrooper: don't misunderstand me. I'm not asking for soldiers to come rushing into anywhere, really. But I am disputing the possibility of it being "automatic" because it is no automatic. Somebody's got to do it. Parliamentary procedure depends upon the actions of all the members, as a group. If someone violates the procedure and is going to be punished for it, you can be damn sure that there is somebody who's going to do that punishing - and that person will be elected from the group. I'm taking issue with the ambiguity of our situation. I just want a ruling on it that will legally define it, and bring the matter into the horizon of the game. My loss of points is just a reason for the suit. (I've spaced the proper legal term here, but you get my drift.) At any rate, this conversation is somewhat moot, since SA is the judge. ;) To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com From eventi@n... Thu Feb 01 13:43:42 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 1 Feb 2001 21:43:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 7364 invoked from network); 1 Feb 2001 21:29:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 1 Feb 2001 21:29:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 1 Feb 2001 21:29:30 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id QAA06889 for ; Thu, 1 Feb 2001 16:29:30 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Call to Judgement Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 16:31:02 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <01C08C62.2D104AE0.sga5892@n...> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" Very interresting! If Pat's assertion is true, then there has been no scoring, and it's still his turn. If Pat's claim is false, it's Fritz's turn. If, OTOH, you meant that I didn't record the score, I did. They're in the Score database, linked off of the webpage. > -----Original Message----- > From: Steven G. Arturo [mailto:sga5892@n...] > Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2001 3:18 PM > To: 'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com' > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Call to Judgement > > > so much for taking a day or two off to read... > > from what i understand, pat's turn has not finished by 306. there hasn't > been a scoring of the turn, by anyone. > > after i reread pat's and fritz' arguments, among any others that come up, > i, designated as judge for this dispute, shall pass judgement, and > hopefully a procedure through future situations like this. > > i cannot recognize proposal 311 and the discussion that has > followed, since > the change of turns has not transpired. > > steve0 > > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [SMTP:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2001 10:32 AM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Call to Judgement > > > According to Rule 306 a turn only consists of four parts. Invoking > > judgement doesn't seem to be one of those parts. > > > This reading would prevent anyone from ever making a call to Judgement. > > > or, > > > > If you don't allow that the point have come off your score, even > > without the intervention of an agent, you are violating the > > fundamental spirit of the regieme. Since the scoring you disputed > > took place last turn I'm not sure that its legality is open to you as > > judge. A judge can only pass judgment on the actions and contents of > > the current turn. Whomever's turn it was before yours is the judge of > > the actions occuring during your turn. > > > This isn't exactly right. First of all, the law doesn't specify when the > offense has occured, as written you could appeal anything and at anytime. > Secondly, it's not that the judge can only pass judgment on the > actions and > contents of the current turn, but that the judge's tenure lasts > for exactly > one turn. If there is another call to judgment during your turn, then SA > will remain the judge, unless he is overruled. > > > Right? Unless we allow for infinite regression of judgement. > > > I'm not sure what you mean by this, but the law specifically allows for > infinite regression in this sense: suppose SA rules poorly, and is > overturned. The judiciary would pass to BA, and if he is > overruled, to EV, > etc. ad infinitum. This possibility is more theoretical than actual, but > it's still a possibility. > > > Then again, where do you get the idea that we need an agent to take > > the points off. It seems almost automatic to me. The soldiers don't > > have to come rushing onto the floor of the Senate to enforce every > > rule of palimentary procedure. While the parlimentarian cannot > > physically make a Senator stop talking, he does anyway when the rules > > say that he should. > > Are you willing to introduce this spirit into the game? > > > In all honesty, I'm not a stormtrooper: don't misunderstand me. I'm not > asking for soldiers to come rushing into anywhere, really. But I am > disputing the possibility of it being "automatic" because it is no > automatic. Somebody's got to do it. Parliamentary procedure depends upon > the actions of all the members, as a group. If someone violates the > procedure and is going to be punished for it, you can be damn sure that > there is somebody who's going to do that punishing - and that person will > be > elected from the group. > > I'm taking issue with the ambiguity of our situation. I just > want a ruling > on it that will legally define it, and bring the matter into the > horizon of > the game. My loss of points is just a reason for the suit. (I've spaced > the > proper legal term here, but you get my drift.) > > At any rate, this conversation is somewhat moot, since SA is the judge. ;) > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From sga5892@n... Thu Feb 01 15:57:13 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: sga5892@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 1 Feb 2001 23:57:13 -0000 Received: (qmail 72683 invoked from network); 1 Feb 2001 23:50:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 1 Feb 2001 23:50:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-gw3.njit.edu) (128.235.251.11) by mta1 with SMTP; 1 Feb 2001 23:50:38 -0000 Received: from mailhost.njit.edu (mailhost.njit.edu [128.235.251.108]) by mail-gw3.njit.edu (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f11NobM26021 for ; Thu, 1 Feb 2001 18:50:37 -0500 Received: from steve0 (dhcp194-216.njit.edu) by mailhost.njit.edu (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9) with SMTP id <0G8300D2HRKA39@m...> for scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com; Thu, 1 Feb 2001 18:50:34 -0500 (EST) Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Thu, 01 Feb 2001 18:50:00 -0500 Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2001 18:49:59 -0500 Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Call to Judgement To: "'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'" Reply-to: "sga5892@n..." Message-id: <01C08C7F.C7A52CC0.sga5892@n...> Organization: NJIT MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit From: "Steven G. Arturo" ok, you did score it. then it is Fritz' turn. if we do not hear Pat's call to judgement now, we will hear it when his turn begins. his grievance will have grown from one score to everyone's score. The latter will be a disruption to our young regime. how nice would the second paragraph of 212 be if it were amended to say something like: When Judgment has been invoked, the next player may not begin (the next portion of) his or her turn without the consent of a majority of the other players. i would like to hear out Pat now, rather than later. steve0 -----Original Message----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia [SMTP:eventi@n...] Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2001 4:31 PM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Call to Judgement Very interresting! If Pat's assertion is true, then there has been no scoring, and it's still his turn. If Pat's claim is false, it's Fritz's turn. If, OTOH, you meant that I didn't record the score, I did. They're in the Score database, linked off of the webpage. > -----Original Message----- > From: Steven G. Arturo [mailto:sga5892@n...] > Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2001 3:18 PM > To: 'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com' > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Call to Judgement > > > so much for taking a day or two off to read... > > from what i understand, pat's turn has not finished by 306. there hasn't > been a scoring of the turn, by anyone. > > after i reread pat's and fritz' arguments, among any others that come up, > i, designated as judge for this dispute, shall pass judgement, and > hopefully a procedure through future situations like this. > > i cannot recognize proposal 311 and the discussion that has > followed, since > the change of turns has not transpired. > > steve0 > > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [SMTP:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2001 10:32 AM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Call to Judgement > > > According to Rule 306 a turn only consists of four parts. Invoking > > judgement doesn't seem to be one of those parts. > > > This reading would prevent anyone from ever making a call to Judgement. > > > or, > > > > If you don't allow that the point have come off your score, even > > without the intervention of an agent, you are violating the > > fundamental spirit of the regieme. Since the scoring you disputed > > took place last turn I'm not sure that its legality is open to you as > > judge. A judge can only pass judgment on the actions and contents of > > the current turn. Whomever's turn it was before yours is the judge of > > the actions occuring during your turn. > > > This isn't exactly right. First of all, the law doesn't specify when the > offense has occured, as written you could appeal anything and at anytime. > Secondly, it's not that the judge can only pass judgment on the > actions and > contents of the current turn, but that the judge's tenure lasts > for exactly > one turn. If there is another call to judgment during your turn, then SA > will remain the judge, unless he is overruled. > > > Right? Unless we allow for infinite regression of judgement. > > > I'm not sure what you mean by this, but the law specifically allows for > infinite regression in this sense: suppose SA rules poorly, and is > overturned. The judiciary would pass to BA, and if he is > overruled, to EV, > etc. ad infinitum. This possibility is more theoretical than actual, but > it's still a possibility. > > > Then again, where do you get the idea that we need an agent to take > > the points off. It seems almost automatic to me. The soldiers don't > > have to come rushing onto the floor of the Senate to enforce every > > rule of palimentary procedure. While the parlimentarian cannot > > physically make a Senator stop talking, he does anyway when the rules > > say that he should. > > Are you willing to introduce this spirit into the game? > > > In all honesty, I'm not a stormtrooper: don't misunderstand me. I'm not > asking for soldiers to come rushing into anywhere, really. But I am > disputing the possibility of it being "automatic" because it is no > automatic. Somebody's got to do it. Parliamentary procedure depends upon > the actions of all the members, as a group. If someone violates the > procedure and is going to be punished for it, you can be damn sure that > there is somebody who's going to do that punishing - and that person will > be > elected from the group. > > I'm taking issue with the ambiguity of our situation. I just > want a ruling > on it that will legally define it, and bring the matter into the > horizon of > the game. My loss of points is just a reason for the suit. (I've spaced > the > proper legal term here, but you get my drift.) > > At any rate, this conversation is somewhat moot, since SA is the judge. ;) > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com From bernardo@c... Thu Feb 01 19:52:20 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 2 Feb 2001 03:52:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 64976 invoked from network); 2 Feb 2001 03:52:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 2 Feb 2001 03:52:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 2 Feb 2001 03:52:18 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-16.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.201]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f123qFa98155 for ; Thu, 1 Feb 2001 22:52:16 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <001301c08ccb$716b96e0$c9a811d0@computer> To: References: <01C08C7F.C7A52CC0.sga5892@n...> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Call to Judgement Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 22:51:35 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" Ok. As far as I'm concerned, I'm willing to stand on my argument from the call to judgement. And I don't particularly mind if you take a couple of days off to read. I'd figure out something to do with my time.:) ----- Original Message ----- From: Steven G. Arturo To: Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2001 6:49 PM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Call to Judgement > ok, you did score it. then it is Fritz' turn. > > if we do not hear Pat's call to judgement now, we will hear it when his > turn begins. his grievance will have grown from one score to everyone's > score. The latter will be a disruption to our young regime. > > how nice would the second paragraph of 212 be if it were amended to say > something like: > When Judgment has been invoked, the next player may not begin (the next > portion of) his or her turn without the consent of a majority of the other > players. > > i would like to hear out Pat now, rather than later. > > steve0 > > -----Original Message----- > From: Eugene Ventimiglia [SMTP:eventi@n...] > Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2001 4:31 PM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Call to Judgement > > Very interresting! If Pat's assertion is true, then there has been no > scoring, and it's still his turn. If Pat's claim is false, it's Fritz's > turn. > > If, OTOH, you meant that I didn't record the score, I did. They're in the > Score database, linked off of the webpage. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Steven G. Arturo [mailto:sga5892@n...] > > Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2001 3:18 PM > > To: 'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com' > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Call to Judgement > > > > > > so much for taking a day or two off to read... > > > > from what i understand, pat's turn has not finished by 306. there hasn't > > been a scoring of the turn, by anyone. > > > > after i reread pat's and fritz' arguments, among any others that come up, > > i, designated as judge for this dispute, shall pass judgement, and > > hopefully a procedure through future situations like this. > > > > i cannot recognize proposal 311 and the discussion that has > > followed, since > > the change of turns has not transpired. > > > > steve0 > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [SMTP:bernardo@c...] > > Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2001 10:32 AM > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Call to Judgement > > > > > According to Rule 306 a turn only consists of four parts. Invoking > > > judgement doesn't seem to be one of those parts. > > > > > This reading would prevent anyone from ever making a call to Judgement. > > > > > or, > > > > > > If you don't allow that the point have come off your score, even > > > without the intervention of an agent, you are violating the > > > fundamental spirit of the regieme. Since the scoring you disputed > > > took place last turn I'm not sure that its legality is open to you as > > > judge. A judge can only pass judgment on the actions and contents of > > > the current turn. Whomever's turn it was before yours is the judge of > > > the actions occuring during your turn. > > > > > This isn't exactly right. First of all, the law doesn't specify when the > > offense has occured, as written you could appeal anything and at anytime. > > Secondly, it's not that the judge can only pass judgment on the > > actions and > > contents of the current turn, but that the judge's tenure lasts > > for exactly > > one turn. If there is another call to judgment during your turn, then SA > > will remain the judge, unless he is overruled. > > > > > Right? Unless we allow for infinite regression of judgement. > > > > > I'm not sure what you mean by this, but the law specifically allows for > > infinite regression in this sense: suppose SA rules poorly, and is > > overturned. The judiciary would pass to BA, and if he is > > overruled, to EV, > > etc. ad infinitum. This possibility is more theoretical than actual, but > > it's still a possibility. > > > > > Then again, where do you get the idea that we need an agent to take > > > the points off. It seems almost automatic to me. The soldiers don't > > > have to come rushing onto the floor of the Senate to enforce every > > > rule of palimentary procedure. While the parlimentarian cannot > > > physically make a Senator stop talking, he does anyway when the rules > > > say that he should. > > > Are you willing to introduce this spirit into the game? > > > > > In all honesty, I'm not a stormtrooper: don't misunderstand me. I'm not > > asking for soldiers to come rushing into anywhere, really. But I am > > disputing the possibility of it being "automatic" because it is no > > automatic. Somebody's got to do it. Parliamentary procedure depends > upon > > the actions of all the members, as a group. If someone violates the > > procedure and is going to be punished for it, you can be damn sure that > > there is somebody who's going to do that punishing - and that person will > > be > > elected from the group. > > > > I'm taking issue with the ambiguity of our situation. I just > > want a ruling > > on it that will legally define it, and bring the matter into the > > horizon of > > the game. My loss of points is just a reason for the suit. (I've spaced > > the > > proper legal term here, but you get my drift.) > > > > At any rate, this conversation is somewhat moot, since SA is the judge. > ;) > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Fri Feb 02 07:10:11 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 2 Feb 2001 15:10:11 -0000 Received: (qmail 98683 invoked from network); 2 Feb 2001 15:09:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 2 Feb 2001 15:09:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 2 Feb 2001 15:09:39 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id KAA05829 for ; Fri, 2 Feb 2001 10:09:38 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Call to Judgement Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 10:11:09 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <001301c08ccb$716b96e0$c9a811d0@computer> From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" But Fritz's turn should go on. He's got a great proposal, and we don't want to take the wind from his sails. > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2001 10:52 PM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Call to Judgement > > > Ok. As far as I'm concerned, I'm willing to stand on my argument from the > call to judgement. > > And I don't particularly mind if you take a couple of days off to > read. I'd > figure out something to do with my time.:) > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Steven G. Arturo > To: > Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2001 6:49 PM > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Call to Judgement > > > > ok, you did score it. then it is Fritz' turn. > > > > if we do not hear Pat's call to judgement now, we will hear it when his > > turn begins. his grievance will have grown from one score to everyone's > > score. The latter will be a disruption to our young regime. > > > > how nice would the second paragraph of 212 be if it were amended to say > > something like: > > When Judgment has been invoked, the next player may not begin (the next > > portion of) his or her turn without the consent of a majority > of the other > > players. > > > > i would like to hear out Pat now, rather than later. > > > > steve0 > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Eugene Ventimiglia [SMTP:eventi@n...] > > Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2001 4:31 PM > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Call to Judgement > > > > Very interresting! If Pat's assertion is true, then there has been no > > scoring, and it's still his turn. If Pat's claim is false, it's Fritz's > > turn. > > > > If, OTOH, you meant that I didn't record the score, I did. > They're in the > > Score database, linked off of the webpage. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Steven G. Arturo [mailto:sga5892@n...] > > > Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2001 3:18 PM > > > To: 'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com' > > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Call to Judgement > > > > > > > > > so much for taking a day or two off to read... > > > > > > from what i understand, pat's turn has not finished by 306. there > hasn't > > > been a scoring of the turn, by anyone. > > > > > > after i reread pat's and fritz' arguments, among any others that come > up, > > > i, designated as judge for this dispute, shall pass judgement, and > > > hopefully a procedure through future situations like this. > > > > > > i cannot recognize proposal 311 and the discussion that has > > > followed, since > > > the change of turns has not transpired. > > > > > > steve0 > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [SMTP:bernardo@c...] > > > Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2001 10:32 AM > > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Call to Judgement > > > > > > > According to Rule 306 a turn only consists of four parts. Invoking > > > > judgement doesn't seem to be one of those parts. > > > > > > > This reading would prevent anyone from ever making a call to > Judgement. > > > > > > > or, > > > > > > > > If you don't allow that the point have come off your score, even > > > > without the intervention of an agent, you are violating the > > > > fundamental spirit of the regieme. Since the scoring you disputed > > > > took place last turn I'm not sure that its legality is open > to you as > > > > judge. A judge can only pass judgment on the actions and > contents of > > > > the current turn. Whomever's turn it was before yours is > the judge of > > > > the actions occuring during your turn. > > > > > > > This isn't exactly right. First of all, the law doesn't specify when > the > > > offense has occured, as written you could appeal anything and at > anytime. > > > Secondly, it's not that the judge can only pass judgment on the > > > actions and > > > contents of the current turn, but that the judge's tenure lasts > > > for exactly > > > one turn. If there is another call to judgment during your turn, then > SA > > > will remain the judge, unless he is overruled. > > > > > > > Right? Unless we allow for infinite regression of judgement. > > > > > > > I'm not sure what you mean by this, but the law specifically > allows for > > > infinite regression in this sense: suppose SA rules poorly, and is > > > overturned. The judiciary would pass to BA, and if he is > > > overruled, to EV, > > > etc. ad infinitum. This possibility is more theoretical than actual, > but > > > it's still a possibility. > > > > > > > Then again, where do you get the idea that we need an agent to take > > > > the points off. It seems almost automatic to me. The > soldiers don't > > > > have to come rushing onto the floor of the Senate to enforce every > > > > rule of palimentary procedure. While the parlimentarian cannot > > > > physically make a Senator stop talking, he does anyway when > the rules > > > > say that he should. > > > > Are you willing to introduce this spirit into the game? > > > > > > > In all honesty, I'm not a stormtrooper: don't misunderstand > me. I'm not > > > asking for soldiers to come rushing into anywhere, really. But I am > > > disputing the possibility of it being "automatic" because it is no > > > automatic. Somebody's got to do it. Parliamentary procedure depends > > upon > > > the actions of all the members, as a group. If someone violates the > > > procedure and is going to be punished for it, you can be damn > sure that > > > there is somebody who's going to do that punishing - and that person > will > > > be > > > elected from the group. > > > > > > I'm taking issue with the ambiguity of our situation. I just > > > want a ruling > > > on it that will legally define it, and bring the matter into the > > > horizon of > > > the game. My loss of points is just a reason for the suit. > (I've spaced > > > the > > > proper legal term here, but you get my drift.) > > > > > > At any rate, this conversation is somewhat moot, since SA is > the judge. > > ;) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From f_hemker@h... Fri Feb 02 11:52:42 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Frederick_Hemker@m... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 2 Feb 2001 19:52:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 14750 invoked from network); 2 Feb 2001 19:43:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 2 Feb 2001 19:43:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailsims2.senate.gov) (198.78.181.133) by mta2 with SMTP; 2 Feb 2001 19:43:07 -0000 Received: from imaexc3.senate.gov (mail1.senate.gov) by mailsims2.senate.gov (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.1999.07.30.00.05.p8) with ESMTP id <0G850062LB5Y2V@m...> for scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com; Fri, 2 Feb 2001 14:51:34 -0500 (EST) Received: from ccMail by imaexc3.senate.gov (IMA Internet Exchange 3.13) id 00005996; Fri, 02 Feb 2001 14:34:37 -0500 Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 14:02:45 -0500 Subject: Proposal 311 (Draft #2) To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Message-id: <00005996.C22181@m...> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-description: cc:Mail note part Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-eGroups-From: Frederick_Hemker@m... (Frederick Hemker) From: f_hemker@h... Proposal 311 1.) All Players shall have the right to transfer points from their own score to the score of another in whatever amount, for whatever reason. In no case may a player's score fall below zero using this method. 2.) All point transfers shall be stated publicly. All point transfers shall be numbered sequentially, beginning with 1001. Point transfer statements shall have the following form: "Subject: Point Transfer X I [name of player], of my own free will, do transfer N points to [name of recipient]." 3.) Point transfers may take place at any time. They are effective exactly 24 hours after their public statement. Players may explain the reasons behind their transfer of points but are not required to. 4.) Point transfers shall be deemed null and void if they do not follow the proscribed procedure. In the case of a dispute or an accusation of fraud the current Judge, as determined in rule 212, shall determine the legality of any transfer using all available evidence. If that Judge is one of the immediate parties to the current transfer (either giving or receiving points) he shall be relived of his duties in this matter and the previous Judge shall take responsibility, following the procedure found in rule 212. End Proposal 311 Of course, it would be helpful if someone came up with a rule governing contracts and what constitutes fraud... -Fritz From eventi@n... Fri Feb 02 12:06:04 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 2 Feb 2001 20:06:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 18497 invoked from network); 2 Feb 2001 19:55:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 2 Feb 2001 19:55:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 2 Feb 2001 19:55:56 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id OAA04734 for ; Fri, 2 Feb 2001 14:55:55 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 311 (Draft #2) Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 14:57:27 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <00005996.C22181@m...> From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" PERFECT!!!!! > -----Original Message----- > From: f_hemker@h... [mailto:f_hemker@h...] > Sent: Friday, February 02, 2001 2:03 PM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 311 (Draft #2) > > > Proposal 311 > > 1.) All Players shall have the right to transfer points from > their own score to > the score of another in whatever amount, for whatever reason. In > no case may a > player's score fall below zero using this method. > > 2.) All point transfers shall be stated publicly. All point > transfers shall be > numbered sequentially, beginning with 1001. Point transfer > statements shall > have the following form: > > "Subject: Point Transfer X > I [name of player], of my own free will, do transfer N points to [name of > recipient]." > > 3.) Point transfers may take place at any time. They are > effective exactly 24 > hours after their public statement. Players may explain the > reasons behind > their transfer of points but are not required to. > > 4.) Point transfers shall be deemed null and void if they do not > follow the > proscribed procedure. In the case of a dispute or an accusation > of fraud the > current Judge, as determined in rule 212, shall determine the > legality of any > transfer using all available evidence. If that Judge is one of > the immediate > parties to the current transfer (either giving or receiving > points) he shall be > relived of his duties in this matter and the previous Judge shall take > responsibility, following the procedure found in rule 212. > > > End Proposal 311 > > > Of course, it would be helpful if someone came up with a rule governing > contracts and what constitutes fraud... > > -Fritz > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Fri Feb 02 12:07:48 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 2 Feb 2001 20:07:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 63692 invoked from network); 2 Feb 2001 19:58:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 2 Feb 2001 19:58:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta1 with SMTP; 2 Feb 2001 19:58:47 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-15.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.200]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f12Jwia74004 for ; Fri, 2 Feb 2001 14:58:44 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <000d01c08d52$6e3cffe0$c8a811d0@computer> To: References: <00005996.C22181@m...> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Proposal 311 (Draft #2) Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 14:57:51 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" > Of course, it would be helpful if someone came up with a rule governing > contracts and what constitutes fraud... That might be good, but I'm happy with the law as amended. It doesn't empower the Judge too much, nor does it prevent him from settling issues of fraud. From f_hemker@h... Fri Feb 02 12:35:59 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: f_hemker@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 2 Feb 2001 20:35:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 39855 invoked from network); 2 Feb 2001 20:26:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 2 Feb 2001 20:26:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ho.egroups.com) (10.1.2.219) by mta1 with SMTP; 2 Feb 2001 20:26:35 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: f_hemker@h... Received: from [10.1.2.104] by ho.egroups.com with NNFMP; 02 Feb 2001 20:26:35 -0000 Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 20:26:34 -0000 To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: Proposal 311 (Draft #2) Message-ID: <95f55q+68du@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: <000d01c08d52$6e3cffe0$c8a811d0@computer> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 457 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 63.82.115.205 From: f_hemker@h... Shall we vote? If no one else has any major objections or amendments I can set up the poll. -Fritz --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Patrick D. Bernardo" wrote: > > Of course, it would be helpful if someone came up with a rule governing > > contracts and what constitutes fraud... > > That might be good, but I'm happy with the law as amended. It doesn't > empower the Judge too much, nor does it prevent him from settling issues of > fr From barturo@e... Fri Feb 02 12:38:28 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: BArturo@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 2 Feb 2001 20:38:28 -0000 Received: (qmail 10350 invoked from network); 2 Feb 2001 20:26:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 2 Feb 2001 20:26:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 2 Feb 2001 20:26:13 -0000 Received: from batman.ess ([12.31.9.2]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with ESMTP id PAA07671 for ; Fri, 2 Feb 2001 15:26:12 -0500 (EST) Received: by BATMAN with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id ; Fri, 2 Feb 2001 15:21:20 -0500 Message-ID: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF0372CE@BATMAN> To: "'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'" Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 311 (Draft #2) Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 15:21:11 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain From: "Arturo, Bob" I don't know it all sounds shady to me. I don't like pay-o-la. Maybe because I never get any. Pay-O-la that is. -----Original Message----- From: f_hemker@h... [mailto:f_hemker@h...] Sent: Friday, February 02, 2001 2:03 PM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 311 (Draft #2) Proposal 311 1.) All Players shall have the right to transfer points from their own score to the score of another in whatever amount, for whatever reason. In no case may a player's score fall below zero using this method. 2.) All point transfers shall be stated publicly. All point transfers shall be numbered sequentially, beginning with 1001. Point transfer statements shall have the following form: "Subject: Point Transfer X I [name of player], of my own free will, do transfer N points to [name of recipient]." 3.) Point transfers may take place at any time. They are effective exactly 24 hours after their public statement. Players may explain the reasons behind their transfer of points but are not required to. 4.) Point transfers shall be deemed null and void if they do not follow the proscribed procedure. In the case of a dispute or an accusation of fraud the current Judge, as determined in rule 212, shall determine the legality of any transfer using all available evidence. If that Judge is one of the immediate parties to the current transfer (either giving or receiving points) he shall be relived of his duties in this matter and the previous Judge shall take responsibility, following the procedure found in rule 212. End Proposal 311 Of course, it would be helpful if someone came up with a rule governing contracts and what constitutes fraud... -Fritz To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at webmaster@e.... From eventi@n... Fri Feb 02 12:44:54 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 2 Feb 2001 20:44:54 -0000 Received: (qmail 78081 invoked from network); 2 Feb 2001 20:37:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 2 Feb 2001 20:37:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 2 Feb 2001 20:37:06 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id PAA08684 for ; Fri, 2 Feb 2001 15:37:04 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 311 (Draft #2) Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 15:38:36 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <95f55q+68du@eGroups.com> From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" I was going to suggest that, a majority's happy, so why not. --e > -----Original Message----- > From: f_hemker@h... [mailto:f_hemker@h...] > Sent: Friday, February 02, 2001 3:27 PM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 311 (Draft #2) > > > Shall we vote? > > If no one else has any major objections or amendments I can set up the > poll. > > -Fritz > --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Patrick D. Bernardo" > wrote: > > > Of course, it would be helpful if someone came up with a rule > governing > > > contracts and what constitutes fraud... > > > > That might be good, but I'm happy with the law as amended. It > doesn't > > empower the Judge too much, nor does it prevent him from settling > issues of > > fr > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Fri Feb 02 12:48:15 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 2 Feb 2001 20:48:13 -0000 Received: (qmail 38725 invoked from network); 2 Feb 2001 20:39:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 2 Feb 2001 20:39:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 2 Feb 2001 20:39:53 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id PAA08920 for ; Fri, 2 Feb 2001 15:39:52 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 311 (Draft #2) Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 15:41:24 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF0372CE@BATMAN> From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" I'll buy you a beer if you SHUT UP.... > -----Original Message----- > From: Arturo, Bob [mailto:barturo@e...] > Sent: Friday, February 02, 2001 3:21 PM > To: 'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com' > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 311 (Draft #2) > > > I don't know it all sounds shady to me. I don't like pay-o-la. > Maybe because > I never get any. Pay-O-la that is. > > -----Original Message----- > From: f_hemker@h... [mailto:f_hemker@h...] > Sent: Friday, February 02, 2001 2:03 PM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 311 (Draft #2) > > > Proposal 311 > > 1.) All Players shall have the right to transfer points from their own > score to > the score of another in whatever amount, for whatever reason. In no case > may a > player's score fall below zero using this method. > > 2.) All point transfers shall be stated publicly. All point transfers > shall be > numbered sequentially, beginning with 1001. Point transfer > statements shall > have the following form: > > "Subject: Point Transfer X > I [name of player], of my own free will, do transfer N points to [name of > recipient]." > > 3.) Point transfers may take place at any time. They are > effective exactly > 24 > hours after their public statement. Players may explain the > reasons behind > their transfer of points but are not required to. > > 4.) Point transfers shall be deemed null and void if they do not > follow the > proscribed procedure. In the case of a dispute or an accusation of fraud > the > current Judge, as determined in rule 212, shall determine the legality of > any > transfer using all available evidence. If that Judge is one of the > immediate > parties to the current transfer (either giving or receiving > points) he shall > be > relived of his duties in this matter and the previous Judge shall take > responsibility, following the procedure found in rule 212. > > > End Proposal 311 > > > Of course, it would be helpful if someone came up with a rule governing > contracts and what constitutes fraud... > > -Fritz > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution > or copying > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > webmaster@e.... > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Fri Feb 02 13:00:50 2001 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26845 invoked from network); 2 Feb 2001 20:53:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 2 Feb 2001 20:53:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO f19.egroups.com) (10.1.2.136) by mta1 with SMTP; 2 Feb 2001 20:53:54 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: notify@yahoogroups.com Received: from [10.1.2.104] by f19.egroups.com with NNFMP; 02 Feb 2001 20:53:54 -0000 Date: 2 Feb 2001 20:53:53 -0000 Message-ID: <981147233.1594.57895.e8@yahoogroups.com> X-eGroups-Application: poll From: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: New poll for scatterbrains MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Enter your vote today! Check out the new poll for the scatterbrains group: Proposal 311 1.) All Players shall have the right to transfer points from their own score to the score of another in whatever amount, for whatever reason. In no case may a player's score fall below zero using this method. 2.) All point transfers shall be stated publicly. All point transfers shall be numbered sequentially, beginning with 1001. Point transfer statements shall have the following form: "Subject: Point Transfer X I [name of player], of my own free will, do transfer N points to [name of recipient]." 3.) Point transfers may take place at any time. They are effective exactly 24 hours after their public statement. Players may explain the reasons behind their transfer of points but are not required to. 4.) Point transfers shall be deemed null and void if they do not follow the proscribed procedure. In the case of a dispute or an accusation of fraud the current Judge, as determined in rule 212, shall determine the legality of any transfer using all available evidence. If that Judge is one of the immediate parties to the current transfer (either giving or receiving points) he shall be relived of his duties in this matter and the previous Judge shall take responsibility, following the procedure fo o Yes, the best thing since sliced bread. o No, this sucked. To vote, please visit the following web page: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scatterbrains/polls Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the Yahoo! Groups web site listed above. Thanks! Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms From f_hemker@h... Fri Feb 02 13:03:12 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: f_hemker@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 2 Feb 2001 21:03:12 -0000 Received: (qmail 94875 invoked from network); 2 Feb 2001 20:55:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 2 Feb 2001 20:55:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ho.egroups.com) (10.1.2.219) by mta1 with SMTP; 2 Feb 2001 20:55:35 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: f_hemker@h... Received: from [10.1.2.104] by ho.egroups.com with NNFMP; 02 Feb 2001 20:55:34 -0000 Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 20:55:34 -0000 To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Final Form of Proposal 311 Message-ID: <95f6s6+vb7s@eGroups.com> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 1308 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 63.82.115.205 From: f_hemker@h... Go to the poll and cast your vote! Proposal 311 1.) All Players shall have the right to transfer points from their own score to the score of another in whatever amount, for whatever reason. In no case may a player's score fall below zero using this method. 2.) All point transfers shall be stated publicly. All point transfers shall be numbered sequentially, beginning with 1001. Point transfer statements shall have the following form: "Subject: Point Transfer X I [name of player], of my own free will, do transfer N points to [name of recipient]." 3.) Point transfers may take place at any time. They are effective exactly 24 hours after their public statement. Players may explain the reasons behind their transfer of points but are not required to. 4.) Point transfers shall be deemed null and void if they do not follow the proscribed procedure. In the case of a dispute or an accusation of fraud the current Judge, as determined in rule 212, shall determine the legality of any transfer using all available evidence. If that Judge is one of the immediate parties to the current transfer (either giving or receiving points) he shall be relived of his duties in this matter and the previous Judge shall take responsibility, following the procedure found in rule 212. End From barturo@e... Fri Feb 02 13:11:33 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: BArturo@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 2 Feb 2001 21:11:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 21800 invoked from network); 2 Feb 2001 21:05:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 2 Feb 2001 21:05:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 2 Feb 2001 22:06:17 -0000 Received: from batman.ess ([12.31.9.2]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with ESMTP id QAA11478 for ; Fri, 2 Feb 2001 16:05:10 -0500 (EST) Received: by BATMAN with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id ; Fri, 2 Feb 2001 16:00:20 -0500 Message-ID: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF0372CF@BATMAN> To: "'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'" Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 311 (Draft #2) Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 16:00:10 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain From: "Arturo, Bob" NOW! That's what I'm talking about ;) -----Original Message----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia [mailto:eventi@n...] Sent: Friday, February 02, 2001 3:41 PM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 311 (Draft #2) I'll buy you a beer if you SHUT UP.... > -----Original Message----- > From: Arturo, Bob [mailto:barturo@e...] > Sent: Friday, February 02, 2001 3:21 PM > To: 'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com' > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 311 (Draft #2) > > > I don't know it all sounds shady to me. I don't like pay-o-la. > Maybe because > I never get any. Pay-O-la that is. > > -----Original Message----- > From: f_hemker@h... [mailto:f_hemker@h...] > Sent: Friday, February 02, 2001 2:03 PM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 311 (Draft #2) > > > Proposal 311 > > 1.) All Players shall have the right to transfer points from their own > score to > the score of another in whatever amount, for whatever reason. In no case > may a > player's score fall below zero using this method. > > 2.) All point transfers shall be stated publicly. All point transfers > shall be > numbered sequentially, beginning with 1001. Point transfer > statements shall > have the following form: > > "Subject: Point Transfer X > I [name of player], of my own free will, do transfer N points to [name of > recipient]." > > 3.) Point transfers may take place at any time. They are > effective exactly > 24 > hours after their public statement. Players may explain the > reasons behind > their transfer of points but are not required to. > > 4.) Point transfers shall be deemed null and void if they do not > follow the > proscribed procedure. In the case of a dispute or an accusation of fraud > the > current Judge, as determined in rule 212, shall determine the legality of > any > transfer using all available evidence. If that Judge is one of the > immediate > parties to the current transfer (either giving or receiving > points) he shall > be > relived of his duties in this matter and the previous Judge shall take > responsibility, following the procedure found in rule 212. > > > End Proposal 311 > > > Of course, it would be helpful if someone came up with a rule governing > contracts and what constitutes fraud... > > -Fritz > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution > or copying > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > webmaster@e.... > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at webmaster@e.... From eventi@w... Fri Feb 02 20:19:53 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@w... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 3 Feb 2001 04:19:52 -0000 Received: (qmail 26603 invoked from network); 3 Feb 2001 04:19:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 3 Feb 2001 04:19:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ns1.wyndtell.com) (63.81.201.11) by mta1 with SMTP; 3 Feb 2001 04:19:51 -0000 Received: from nova.wyndtell.com (nova.wyndtell.com [63.81.201.78]) by ns1.wyndtell.com (8.11.0/8.9.3) with ESMTP id f135Ebm31502 for ; Fri, 2 Feb 2001 21:14:37 -0800 Received: (root@localhost) by nova.wyndtell.com (8.8.8/SCA-6.6) id XAA02461; Fri, 2 Feb 2001 23:19:49 -0500 (EST) To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Pat's Noodling Message-Id: <15308871.1310@w...> Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 20:19:49 -0800 X-eGroups-From: eventi@w... (Eugene Ventimiglia) From: eventi@w... From bernardo@c... Sat Feb 03 09:03:29 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 3 Feb 2001 17:03:28 -0000 Received: (qmail 4765 invoked from network); 3 Feb 2001 17:03:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 3 Feb 2001 17:03:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta3 with SMTP; 3 Feb 2001 18:04:33 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-12.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.197]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f13H3Qp11777 for ; Sat, 3 Feb 2001 12:03:27 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <001201c08e03$22025c40$c5a811d0@computer> To: References: <15308871.1310@w...> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Pat's Noodling Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2001 12:02:45 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" Actually, at the time you wrote this, the appropriate phrase would've been "Pat's Drinking". ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Friday, February 02, 2001 11:19 PM Subject: [scatterbrains] Pat's Noodling > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Sat Feb 03 10:06:30 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 3 Feb 2001 18:06:28 -0000 Received: (qmail 47877 invoked from network); 3 Feb 2001 18:06:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 3 Feb 2001 18:06:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 3 Feb 2001 18:06:27 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-12.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.197]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f13I6Pp16068 for ; Sat, 3 Feb 2001 13:06:25 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <006401c08e0b$ee74f280$c5a811d0@computer> To: Subject: Groovy! Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2001 13:05:44 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0061_01C08DE2.044F3900" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" ------=_NextPart_000_0061_01C08DE2.044F3900 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hey all! I just saw the new Nomic.html file and it looks great! Check it = out! Very stylish. Great job Eug.(You must have been bored) One suggestiong - how about coloring the header background of the mutable r= ules a different color than the immutable ones. Would make for easier dist= inction between the two. ------=_NextPart_000_0061_01C08DE2.044F3900 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hey all!  I just saw the new Nomic.ht= ml file=20 and it looks great!  Check it out!  Very stylish. Great job Eug.(= You=20 must have been bored)
 
One suggestiong - how about coloring the h= eader=20 background of the mutable rules a different color than the immutable ones.&= nbsp;=20 Would make for easier distinction between the two.
 
 
------=_NextPart_000_0061_01C08DE2.044F3900-- From bernardo@c... Sat Feb 03 10:13:23 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 3 Feb 2001 18:13:23 -0000 Received: (qmail 28336 invoked from network); 3 Feb 2001 18:13:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 3 Feb 2001 18:13:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta3 with SMTP; 3 Feb 2001 19:14:28 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-12.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.197]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f13IDLp16401 for ; Sat, 3 Feb 2001 13:13:22 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <006a01c08e0c$e6a504e0$c5a811d0@computer> To: References: <95f6s6+vb7s@eGroups.com> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Final Form of Proposal 311 Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2001 13:12:40 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" Here's one: If we all vote, then by 212, we'd have to vote again to let Eug's turn begin. If we do, then Steven's jurisdiction ends and Fritz's begins (at least in the sense that he would be the new Judge). I can see a couple of possible interpretations of the law that would follow: A) It works like a "pocket veto" in the sense that Steven gets kicked out of office, and then my case effectively ends. I could call for judgement again under the new justice, but I'd have to reinitiate the process. B) There is simply a transition of the case from Steven to the new Judge (Fritz). No reapplication is needed, and Fritz can rule immediately on the Judgement. (This looks illegal by the last paragraph, but the wording there is somewhat imprecise). C) Steven can decide (again according to 212) what he wants to do. He is explicitly allowed to settle questions concerning his own jurisdiction and legitimacy. Frankly, I'm not going to vote until Steven rules, because all of this is too confusing, and 212 definitely needs to be re-written. Besides, I don't like my chances if there is a change of venue. :) ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Friday, February 02, 2001 3:55 PM Subject: [scatterbrains] Final Form of Proposal 311 > Go to the poll and cast your vote! > > Proposal 311 > > 1.) All Players shall have the right to transfer points from their > own score to > the score of another in whatever amount, for whatever reason. In no > case may a > player's score fall below zero using this method. > > 2.) All point transfers shall be stated publicly. All point > transfers shall be > numbered sequentially, beginning with 1001. Point transfer statements > shall > have the following form: > > "Subject: Point Transfer X > I [name of player], of my own free will, do transfer N points to [name > of > recipient]." > > 3.) Point transfers may take place at any time. They are effective > exactly 24 > hours after their public statement. Players may explain the reasons > behind > their transfer of points but are not required to. > > 4.) Point transfers shall be deemed null and void if they do not > follow the > proscribed procedure. In the case of a dispute or an accusation of > fraud the > current Judge, as determined in rule 212, shall determine the legality > of any > transfer using all available evidence. If that Judge is one of the > immediate > parties to the current transfer (either giving or receiving points) he > shall be > relived of his duties in this matter and the previous Judge shall take > responsibility, following the procedure found in rule 212. > > > End > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Sat Feb 03 10:21:35 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 3 Feb 2001 18:21:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 58786 invoked from network); 3 Feb 2001 18:21:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 3 Feb 2001 18:21:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 3 Feb 2001 18:21:31 -0000 Received: from win (win.venti.nyic.com [64.29.109.18]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id NAA12719 for ; Sat, 3 Feb 2001 13:21:30 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <001101c08e0e$1de35d20$126d1d40@v...> To: References: <006401c08e0b$ee74f280$c5a811d0@computer> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Groovy! Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2001 13:20:54 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000E_01C08DE4.22D024A0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" ------=_NextPart_000_000E_01C08DE4.22D024A0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I'll think about it... It's generated from a massive XML source, so it may = have to be re-structured a bit. And I wasn't bored, It's proof of concept = for another (bigger) idea. Check the links section for the latest, and htt= p://www.scatterbrains.com/nomic.xml for the XML source. And if you're feel= ing courageous, check out nomic-xml.r, which generates rules.html & archive= .html (& soon proposals.html) ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Patrick D. Bernardo=20 To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com=20 Sent: Saturday, February 03, 2001 1:05 PM Subject: [scatterbrains] Groovy! Hey all! I just saw the new Nomic.html file and it looks great! Check i= t out! Very stylish. Great job Eug.(You must have been bored) One suggestiong - how about coloring the header background of the mutable= rules a different color than the immutable ones. Would make for easier di= stinction between the two. Yahoo! Groups Sponsor=20 =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 www. .com=20=20 =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 =20=20=20=20=20=20=20 =20=20=20=20=20=20=20 To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com ------=_NextPart_000_000E_01C08DE4.22D024A0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I'll think about it... It's generated from a massive XM= L=20 source, so it may have to be re-structured a bit.  And I wasn't bored,= It's=20 proof of concept for another (bigger) idea.  Check the links section f= or=20 the latest, and http://www.scatterbrains.co= m/nomic.xml=20 for the XML source.  And if you're feeling courageous, check out=20 nomic-xml.r, which generates rules.html & archive.html (& soon=20 proposals.html)
 
----- Original Message -----
Fro= m:=20 Pa= trick D.=20 Bernardo
To: scatterbrains@y...= om=20
Sent: Saturday, February 03, 2001 = 1:05=20 PM
Subject: [scatterbrains] Groovy!

Hey all!  I just saw the new Nomic.= html file=20 and it looks great!  Check it out!  Very stylish. Great job Eug= .(You=20 must have been bored)
 
One suggestiong - how about coloring the= header=20 background of the mutable rules a different color than the immutable=20 ones.  Would make for easier distinction between the two.
 
 


To=20 unsubscribe from this group, send an email=20 to:
scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com


------=_NextPart_000_000E_01C08DE4.22D024A0-- From bernardo@c... Sun Feb 04 08:32:35 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 4 Feb 2001 16:32:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 42317 invoked from network); 4 Feb 2001 16:32:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 4 Feb 2001 16:32:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 4 Feb 2001 16:32:33 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-11.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.196]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f14GWVp02450 for ; Sun, 4 Feb 2001 11:32:31 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <002101c08ec7$fab86b00$c4a811d0@computer> To: References: Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Proposal 311 (Draft #2) Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2001 11:31:50 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" Hey now, this sounds like bribery to me. ----- Original Message ----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia To: Sent: Friday, February 02, 2001 3:41 PM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 311 (Draft #2) > I'll buy you a beer if you SHUT UP.... > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Arturo, Bob [mailto:barturo@e...] > > Sent: Friday, February 02, 2001 3:21 PM > > To: 'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com' > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 311 (Draft #2) > > > > > > I don't know it all sounds shady to me. I don't like pay-o-la. > > Maybe because > > I never get any. Pay-O-la that is. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: f_hemker@h... [mailto:f_hemker@h...] > > Sent: Friday, February 02, 2001 2:03 PM > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 311 (Draft #2) > > > > > > Proposal 311 > > > > 1.) All Players shall have the right to transfer points from their own > > score to > > the score of another in whatever amount, for whatever reason. In no case > > may a > > player's score fall below zero using this method. > > > > 2.) All point transfers shall be stated publicly. All point transfers > > shall be > > numbered sequentially, beginning with 1001. Point transfer > > statements shall > > have the following form: > > > > "Subject: Point Transfer X > > I [name of player], of my own free will, do transfer N points to [name of > > recipient]." > > > > 3.) Point transfers may take place at any time. They are > > effective exactly > > 24 > > hours after their public statement. Players may explain the > > reasons behind > > their transfer of points but are not required to. > > > > 4.) Point transfers shall be deemed null and void if they do not > > follow the > > proscribed procedure. In the case of a dispute or an accusation of fraud > > the > > current Judge, as determined in rule 212, shall determine the legality of > > any > > transfer using all available evidence. If that Judge is one of the > > immediate > > parties to the current transfer (either giving or receiving > > points) he shall > > be > > relived of his duties in this matter and the previous Judge shall take > > responsibility, following the procedure found in rule 212. > > > > > > End Proposal 311 > > > > > > Of course, it would be helpful if someone came up with a rule governing > > contracts and what constitutes fraud... > > > > -Fritz > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution > > or copying > > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > > webmaster@e.... > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From pkirklan@e... Sun Feb 04 16:17:48 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 5 Feb 2001 00:17:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 70622 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2001 00:17:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Feb 2001 00:17:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta3 with SMTP; 5 Feb 2001 01:18:51 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Sun, 4 Feb 2001 18:34:42 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 4 Feb 01 18:27:01 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 4 Feb 01 18:26:58 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2001 18:26:55 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: introduction Priority: normal In-reply-to: <002101c08ec7$fab86b00$c4a811d0@computer> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <028864234000521ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" Was my introduction received? I got all of memos since Friday afternoon when I signed up, but no one has confirmed or acknowledged. if not, is repeating the official introduction acceptable here with other content to the message If so, Patrick Bernardo has introduced me to Scatterbrains if not, let me know and I'll try again. I will withhold all opinion on Prop 311 until I receive such confirmation From bernardo@c... Sun Feb 04 16:34:47 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 5 Feb 2001 00:34:46 -0000 Received: (qmail 21080 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2001 00:34:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Feb 2001 00:34:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta3 with SMTP; 5 Feb 2001 01:35:50 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-13.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.198]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f150Yhp36620 for ; Sun, 4 Feb 2001 19:34:43 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <000901c08f0b$56ea9400$c6a811d0@computer> To: References: <028864234000521ISWEBNT@d...> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] introduction Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2001 19:34:01 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" Ah, this one got through! Welcome, Paul. I was wondering if you were going to arrive. You can't vote on Prop 311, because of 309 - a measure I strenuously opposed - but you can certainly voice your opinion. ----- Original Message ----- From: Paul Kirkland To: Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2001 7:26 PM Subject: [scatterbrains] introduction > Was my introduction received? > > I got all of memos since Friday afternoon when I signed up, but no > one has confirmed or acknowledged. > > if not, is repeating the official introduction acceptable here with > other content to the message > > If so, > > Patrick Bernardo has introduced me to Scatterbrains > > if not, let me know and I'll try again. > I will withhold all opinion on Prop 311 until I receive such > confirmation > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From sga5892@n... Sun Feb 04 19:25:36 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: sga5892@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 5 Feb 2001 03:25:36 -0000 Received: (qmail 10355 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2001 03:25:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Feb 2001 03:25:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-gw4.njit.edu) (128.235.251.32) by mta1 with SMTP; 5 Feb 2001 03:25:35 -0000 Received: from mailhost.njit.edu (mailhost.njit.edu [128.235.251.108]) by mail-gw4.njit.edu (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f153PXM24519 for ; Sun, 4 Feb 2001 22:25:33 -0500 Received: from steve0 (dhcp194-216.njit.edu) by mailhost.njit.edu (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9) with SMTP id <0G890019DLIKY9@m...> for scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com; Sun, 4 Feb 2001 22:25:32 -0500 (EST) Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Sun, 04 Feb 2001 22:25:38 -0500 Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2001 22:25:37 -0500 Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] introduction To: "'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'" Reply-to: "sga5892@n..." Message-id: <01C08EF9.66D04520.sga5892@n...> Organization: NJIT MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit From: "Steven G. Arturo" hello paul -----Original Message----- From: Paul Kirkland [SMTP:pkirklan@e...] Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2001 7:27 PM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: [scatterbrains] introduction Was my introduction received? I got all of memos since Friday afternoon when I signed up, but no one has confirmed or acknowledged. if not, is repeating the official introduction acceptable here with other content to the message If so, Patrick Bernardo has introduced me to Scatterbrains if not, let me know and I'll try again. I will withhold all opinion on Prop 311 until I receive such confirmation To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com From eventi@w... Mon Feb 05 05:25:08 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@w... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 5 Feb 2001 13:25:08 -0000 Received: (qmail 34678 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2001 13:25:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Feb 2001 13:25:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ns1.wyndtell.com) (63.81.201.11) by mta2 with SMTP; 5 Feb 2001 13:25:07 -0000 Received: from nova.wyndtell.com (nova.wyndtell.com [63.81.201.78]) by ns1.wyndtell.com (8.11.0/8.9.3) with ESMTP id f15EJmm08722 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 06:19:49 -0800 Received: (root@localhost) by nova.wyndtell.com (8.8.8/SCA-6.6) id IAA23294; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 08:25:06 -0500 (EST) To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Steven's jurisdiction. Message-Id: <15308871.1316@w...> Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2001 05:25:06 -0800 X-eGroups-From: eventi@w... (Eugene Ventimiglia) From: eventi@w... I disagree with Pat that Steven's jurisdiction over this matter ends if the majority votes to continue play before it's resolved. Paragraph 4 of 212 could be read that way, but I read it differently. "Until the next turn is begun" refers to the time at which questions arise; it does not remove a judge from an open question when the play continues. Welcome Paul. From barturo@e... Mon Feb 05 05:41:01 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: BArturo@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 5 Feb 2001 13:41:01 -0000 Received: (qmail 73616 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2001 13:41:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Feb 2001 13:41:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 5 Feb 2001 14:42:05 -0000 Received: from batman.ess ([12.31.9.2]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with ESMTP id IAA29954 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 08:40:59 -0500 (EST) Received: by BATMAN with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id ; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 08:36:00 -0500 Message-ID: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF0372D3@BATMAN> To: "'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'" Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] introduction Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 08:35:59 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C08F78.932C37D0" From: "Arturo, Bob" ------_=_NextPart_001_01C08F78.932C37D0 Content-Type: text/plain Hello Paul -----Original Message----- From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2001 7:27 PM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: [scatterbrains] introduction Was my introduction received? I got all of memos since Friday afternoon when I signed up, but no one has confirmed or acknowledged. if not, is repeating the official introduction acceptable here with other content to the message If so, Patrick Bernardo has introduced me to Scatterbrains if not, let me know and I'll try again. I will withhold all opinion on Prop 311 until I receive such confirmation Yahoo! Groups Sponsor www. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at webmaster@e.... ------_=_NextPart_001_01C08F78.932C37D0 Content-Type: text/html Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hello=20 Paul
-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Kirkland=20 [mailto:pkirklan@e...]
Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2001= 7:27=20 PM
To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com
Subject:=20 [scatterbrains] introduction

Was my introduction= =20 received? 

I got all of memos since Friday afternoon when I= =20 signed up, but no
one has confirmed or acknowledged. 

if= not,=20 is repeating the official introduction acceptable here with
other cont= ent=20 to the message

If so,

Patrick Bernardo has introduced me t= o=20 Scatterbrains

if not, let me know and I'll try again. 
I = will=20 withhold all opinion on Prop 311 until I receive such=20
confirmation




To=20 unsubscribe from this group, send an email=20 to:
scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com




* NOTICE * - If the reader is not the s= pecified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that= any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. <= /FONT>

If you are not the specified recipient,= please notify us at webmaster@e....



------_=_NextPart_001_01C08F78.932C37D0-- From f_hemker@h... Mon Feb 05 05:42:06 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: f_hemker@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 5 Feb 2001 13:42:06 -0000 Received: (qmail 48898 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2001 13:42:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Feb 2001 13:42:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hp.egroups.com) (10.1.2.220) by mta1 with SMTP; 5 Feb 2001 13:42:06 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: f_hemker@h... Received: from [10.1.2.101] by hp.egroups.com with NNFMP; 05 Feb 2001 13:42:05 -0000 Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2001 13:42:03 -0000 To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: introduction Message-ID: <95majb+uinr@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: <028864234000521ISWEBNT@d...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 592 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 63.82.115.205 From: f_hemker@h... Paul, you maniac!!! How's it going? How's old Friedrich treating you? -Fritz --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Paul Kirkland" wrote: > Was my introduction received? > > I got all of memos since Friday afternoon when I signed up, but no > one has confirmed or acknowledged. > > if not, is repeating the official introduction acceptable here with > other content to the message > > If so, > > Patrick Bernardo has introduced me to Scatterbrains > > if not, let me know and I'll try again. > I will withhold all opinion on Prop 311 until I receive such > confirmatio From sga5892@n... Mon Feb 05 05:50:23 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: sga5892@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 5 Feb 2001 13:50:22 -0000 Received: (qmail 55840 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2001 13:50:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Feb 2001 13:50:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-gw4.njit.edu) (128.235.251.32) by mta2 with SMTP; 5 Feb 2001 13:50:20 -0000 Received: from mailhost.njit.edu (mailhost.njit.edu [128.235.251.108]) by mail-gw4.njit.edu (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f15DoJO08887 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 08:50:19 -0500 Received: from steve0 (dhcp194-216.njit.edu) by mailhost.njit.edu (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9) with SMTP id <0G8A000OSEFUQA@m...> for scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 08:50:18 -0500 (EST) Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Mon, 05 Feb 2001 08:50:26 -0500 Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2001 08:50:25 -0500 Subject: Judgement on Scoring To: "'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'" Reply-to: "sga5892@n..." Message-id: <01C08F50.AF6BB100.sga5892@n...> Organization: NJIT MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit From: "Steven G. Arturo" Good (snowy) day all. On the issue of Pat's Call to Judgement pertaining to the Nomic group's scoring procedure, I issue this opinion. By 306, scoring shall conclude a turn. It is the duty of the person whose turn it is to tally new scores according to what events transpired on the vote of a proposal (204, 306) and by initiations during the turn (304). Only after a message is sent to all by the scorer with the new tallies will said person's turn conclude and a new turn will being. Judgement can be called against incorrect scoring during the following turn. Someone must keep the group scoreboard up-to-date. I must default the job to Eugene at this point, for he is the author of the table. This judgement will hold until an office named 'Scorekeeper' is created. steve0 -----Original Message----- From: Patrick D. Bernardo [SMTP:bernardo@c...] Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 8:08 PM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: [scatterbrains] Call to Judgement Hi all, I'm invoking a call to judgement. Since Fritz is moving, that makes me the Judge. In the interests of fairness (since this is not prohibited by law) I'll recuse myself, and allow Steven (the next in line) to take my place. Here's my beef: I'm disputing the subtraction of points from my score. There is nobody endowed with the requisite power. According to the laws, although the points should come off, there is nobody at the beginning endowed with such a power. Since I know that you guys don't like arbitrary gov't., I'm sure you will agree. Before you decide too quickly, Steven, consider this: Eugene cannot hold a position, *by the terms of his own law*, that has not been legally created by a proposal. You must then either affirm that score-keeping is open to everyone, or to noone. If you do the former, I will gladly remove the subtraction of points from the account myself, thank you very much! If you do the latter, I would appreciate that you tempor arily endow either me, Eugene, or yourself with the power to remove the subtraction from my score. Currently, I'm not disputing the addition of points, so this judgement will only affect the subtraction of points, as I see it, although it does have much wider implications. << File: ATT00004.htm >> From bernardo@c... Mon Feb 05 06:19:42 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 5 Feb 2001 14:19:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 9070 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2001 14:19:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Feb 2001 14:19:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta1 with SMTP; 5 Feb 2001 14:19:41 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-11.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.196]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f15EJdp91834 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 09:19:39 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <001f01c08f7e$94bc6600$c4a811d0@computer> To: References: <01C08F50.AF6BB100.sga5892@n...> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Judgement on Scoring Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 09:18:54 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" So, in other words, Eugene has what amounts to a constitutional monarchy. I just wanted that clarified, thanks. ----- Original Message ----- From: Steven G. Arturo To: Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 8:50 AM Subject: [scatterbrains] Judgement on Scoring > Good (snowy) day all. > > On the issue of Pat's Call to Judgement pertaining to the Nomic group's > scoring procedure, I issue this opinion. > > By 306, scoring shall conclude a turn. It is the duty of the person whose > turn it is to tally new scores according to what events transpired on the > vote of a proposal (204, 306) and by initiations during the turn (304). > Only after a message is sent to all by the scorer with the new tallies > will said person's turn conclude and a new turn will being. Judgement can > be called against incorrect scoring during the following turn. > > Someone must keep the group scoreboard up-to-date. I must default the job > to Eugene at this point, for he is the author of the table. > > This judgement will hold until an office named 'Scorekeeper' is created. > > steve0 > > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [SMTP:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 8:08 PM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [scatterbrains] Call to Judgement > > Hi all, > > I'm invoking a call to judgement. Since Fritz is moving, that makes me the > Judge. In the interests of fairness (since this is not prohibited by law) > I'll recuse myself, and allow Steven (the next in line) to take my place. > > Here's my beef: > > I'm disputing the subtraction of points from my score. There is nobody > endowed with the requisite power. According to the laws, although the > points should come off, there is nobody at the beginning endowed with such > a power. Since I know that you guys don't like arbitrary gov't., I'm sure > you will agree. > > Before you decide too quickly, Steven, consider this: > > Eugene cannot hold a position, *by the terms of his own law*, that has not > been legally created by a proposal. You must then either affirm that > score-keeping is open to everyone, or to noone. If you do the former, I > will gladly remove the subtraction of points from the account myself, thank > you very much! If you do the latter, I would appreciate that you tempor > arily endow either me, Eugene, or yourself with the power to remove the > subtraction from my score. > > Currently, I'm not disputing the addition of points, so this judgement will > only affect the subtraction of points, as I see it, although it does have > much wider implications. > > > << File: ATT00004.htm >> > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Mon Feb 05 06:46:36 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 5 Feb 2001 14:46:36 -0000 Received: (qmail 26608 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2001 14:46:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Feb 2001 14:46:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 5 Feb 2001 14:46:35 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id JAA04921 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 09:46:34 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Judgement on Scoring Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 09:48:12 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-reply-to: <01C08F50.AF6BB100.sga5892@n...> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" I think you really overstepped your bounds on this. There's nothing in the rules requiring players to maintain their own scores, and 212 explicitly says that your judgement can only address the specific issue at hand, in other words, there's no presedent set by your judgement. That said, I believe you made the right decision in passing the responsibility for scoring to the player. It is after all a part of the turn. LETS VOTE AND MOVE ON!!! > -----Original Message----- > From: Steven G. Arturo [mailto:sga5892@n...] > Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 8:50 AM > To: 'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com' > Subject: [scatterbrains] Judgement on Scoring > > > Good (snowy) day all. > > On the issue of Pat's Call to Judgement pertaining to the Nomic group's > scoring procedure, I issue this opinion. > > By 306, scoring shall conclude a turn. It is the duty of the > person whose > turn it is to tally new scores according to what events transpired on the > vote of a proposal (204, 306) and by initiations during the turn (304). > Only after a message is sent to all by the scorer with the new tallies > will said person's turn conclude and a new turn will being. > Judgement can > be called against incorrect scoring during the following turn. > > Someone must keep the group scoreboard up-to-date. I must > default the job > to Eugene at this point, for he is the author of the table. > > This judgement will hold until an office named 'Scorekeeper' is created. > > steve0 > > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [SMTP:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 8:08 PM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [scatterbrains] Call to Judgement > > Hi all, > > I'm invoking a call to judgement. Since Fritz is moving, that > makes me the > Judge. In the interests of fairness (since this is not > prohibited by law) > I'll recuse myself, and allow Steven (the next in line) to take my place. > > Here's my beef: > > I'm disputing the subtraction of points from my score. There is nobody > endowed with the requisite power. According to the laws, although the > points should come off, there is nobody at the beginning endowed > with such > a power. Since I know that you guys don't like arbitrary gov't., > I'm sure > you will agree. > > Before you decide too quickly, Steven, consider this: > > Eugene cannot hold a position, *by the terms of his own law*, > that has not > been legally created by a proposal. You must then either affirm that > score-keeping is open to everyone, or to noone. If you do the former, I > will gladly remove the subtraction of points from the account > myself, thank > you very much! If you do the latter, I would appreciate that you tempor > arily endow either me, Eugene, or yourself with the power to remove the > subtraction from my score. > > Currently, I'm not disputing the addition of points, so this > judgement will > only affect the subtraction of points, as I see it, although it does have > much wider implications. > > > << File: ATT00004.htm >> > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From sga5892@n... Mon Feb 05 06:52:58 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: sga5892@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 5 Feb 2001 14:52:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 4697 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2001 14:52:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Feb 2001 14:52:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-gw3.njit.edu) (128.235.251.11) by mta3 with SMTP; 5 Feb 2001 15:54:01 -0000 Received: from mailhost.njit.edu (mailhost.njit.edu [128.235.251.108]) by mail-gw3.njit.edu (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f15EquL12827 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 09:52:56 -0500 Received: from steve0 (dhcp194-216.njit.edu) by mailhost.njit.edu (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9) with SMTP id <0G8A0026NHC6ZP@m...> for scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 09:52:54 -0500 (EST) Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Mon, 05 Feb 2001 09:53:03 -0500 Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2001 09:53:02 -0500 Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Judgement on Scoring To: "'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'" Reply-to: "sga5892@n..." Message-id: <01C08F59.6EBE4B00.sga5892@n...> Organization: NJIT MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit From: "Steven G. Arturo" thanks, i think. maybe i did step over a boundary lacking precedence. but hopefully, this problem can be solved the right way, by formation of a scorekeeper. i concede, this is only a temporary fix. steve0 -----Original Message----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia [SMTP:eventi@n...] Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 9:48 AM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Judgement on Scoring I think you really overstepped your bounds on this. There's nothing in the rules requiring players to maintain their own scores, and 212 explicitly says that your judgement can only address the specific issue at hand, in other words, there's no presedent set by your judgement. That said, I believe you made the right decision in passing the responsibility for scoring to the player. It is after all a part of the turn. LETS VOTE AND MOVE ON!!! > -----Original Message----- > From: Steven G. Arturo [mailto:sga5892@n...] > Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 8:50 AM > To: 'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com' > Subject: [scatterbrains] Judgement on Scoring > > > Good (snowy) day all. > > On the issue of Pat's Call to Judgement pertaining to the Nomic group's > scoring procedure, I issue this opinion. > > By 306, scoring shall conclude a turn. It is the duty of the > person whose > turn it is to tally new scores according to what events transpired on the > vote of a proposal (204, 306) and by initiations during the turn (304). > Only after a message is sent to all by the scorer with the new tallies > will said person's turn conclude and a new turn will being. > Judgement can > be called against incorrect scoring during the following turn. > > Someone must keep the group scoreboard up-to-date. I must > default the job > to Eugene at this point, for he is the author of the table. > > This judgement will hold until an office named 'Scorekeeper' is created. > > steve0 > > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [SMTP:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 8:08 PM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [scatterbrains] Call to Judgement > > Hi all, > > I'm invoking a call to judgement. Since Fritz is moving, that > makes me the > Judge. In the interests of fairness (since this is not > prohibited by law) > I'll recuse myself, and allow Steven (the next in line) to take my place. > > Here's my beef: > > I'm disputing the subtraction of points from my score. There is nobody > endowed with the requisite power. According to the laws, although the > points should come off, there is nobody at the beginning endowed > with such > a power. Since I know that you guys don't like arbitrary gov't., > I'm sure > you will agree. > > Before you decide too quickly, Steven, consider this: > > Eugene cannot hold a position, *by the terms of his own law*, > that has not > been legally created by a proposal. You must then either affirm that > score-keeping is open to everyone, or to noone. If you do the former, I > will gladly remove the subtraction of points from the account > myself, thank > you very much! If you do the latter, I would appreciate that you tempor > arily endow either me, Eugene, or yourself with the power to remove the > subtraction from my score. > > Currently, I'm not disputing the addition of points, so this > judgement will > only affect the subtraction of points, as I see it, although it does have > much wider implications. > > > << File: ATT00004.htm >> > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com From eventi@n... Mon Feb 05 06:57:46 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 5 Feb 2001 14:57:45 -0000 Received: (qmail 79131 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2001 14:57:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 5 Feb 2001 14:57:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 5 Feb 2001 15:58:50 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id JAA05856 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 09:57:44 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: OFF LIST - regarding Nomic Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 09:59:22 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-reply-to: <028864234000521ISWEBNT@d...> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" Paul- I just noticed something in 309. You actually don't enter the turn order until you vote, and cannot vote until the next proposal. This means you'll have to wait about 5 weeks to propose. If, on the other hand, you're ready to propose something, I won't make an issue of it. Someone else (*cough* PAT!) may, however. Let me know, because Fritz's turn is almost over. --e > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2001 7:27 PM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [scatterbrains] introduction > > > Was my introduction received? > > I got all of memos since Friday afternoon when I signed up, but no > one has confirmed or acknowledged. > > if not, is repeating the official introduction acceptable here with > other content to the message > > If so, > > Patrick Bernardo has introduced me to Scatterbrains > > if not, let me know and I'll try again. > I will withhold all opinion on Prop 311 until I receive such > confirmation > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Mon Feb 05 07:01:57 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 5 Feb 2001 15:01:57 -0000 Received: (qmail 330 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2001 15:01:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Feb 2001 15:01:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 5 Feb 2001 15:01:56 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id KAA06254 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 10:01:55 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] OFF LIST - regarding Nomic Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 10:03:34 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-reply-to: Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" OK - so it wasn't so OFF LIST. I was trying to be nice... > -----Original Message----- > From: Eugene Ventimiglia [mailto:eventi@n...] > Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 9:59 AM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [scatterbrains] OFF LIST - regarding Nomic > > > Paul- > I just noticed something in 309. You actually don't enter > the turn order > until you vote, and cannot vote until the next proposal. This > means you'll > have to wait about 5 weeks to propose. If, on the other hand, > you're ready > to propose something, I won't make an issue of it. Someone else (*cough* > PAT!) may, however. Let me know, because Fritz's turn is almost over. > --e > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2001 7:27 PM > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: [scatterbrains] introduction > > > > > > Was my introduction received? > > > > I got all of memos since Friday afternoon when I signed up, but no > > one has confirmed or acknowledged. > > > > if not, is repeating the official introduction acceptable here with > > other content to the message > > > > If so, > > > > Patrick Bernardo has introduced me to Scatterbrains > > > > if not, let me know and I'll try again. > > I will withhold all opinion on Prop 311 until I receive such > > confirmation > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From sga5892@n... Mon Feb 05 07:02:24 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: sga5892@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 5 Feb 2001 15:02:24 -0000 Received: (qmail 57825 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2001 15:02:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Feb 2001 15:02:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-gw3.njit.edu) (128.235.251.11) by mta2 with SMTP; 5 Feb 2001 15:02:15 -0000 Received: from mailhost.njit.edu (mailhost.njit.edu [128.235.251.108]) by mail-gw3.njit.edu (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f15F2EL13661 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 10:02:14 -0500 Received: from steve0 (dhcp194-216.njit.edu) by mailhost.njit.edu (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9) with SMTP id <0G8A002F6HRPZP@m...> for scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 10:02:13 -0500 (EST) Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Mon, 05 Feb 2001 10:02:22 -0500 Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2001 10:02:21 -0500 Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] OFF LIST - regarding Nomic To: "'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'" Reply-to: "sga5892@n..." Message-id: <01C08F5A.BBE2B780.sga5892@n...> Organization: NJIT MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit From: "Steven G. Arturo" -----Original Message----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia [SMTP:eventi@n...] Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 9:59 AM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: [scatterbrains] OFF LIST - regarding Nomic Paul- I just noticed something in 309. You actually don't enter the turn order until you vote, and cannot vote until the next proposal. This means you'll have to wait about 5 weeks to propose. If, on the other hand, you're ready to propose something, I won't make an issue of it. Someone else (*cough* PAT!) may, however. Let me know, because Fritz's turn is almost over. --e > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2001 7:27 PM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [scatterbrains] introduction > > > Was my introduction received? > > I got all of memos since Friday afternoon when I signed up, but no > one has confirmed or acknowledged. > > if not, is repeating the official introduction acceptable here with > other content to the message > > If so, > > Patrick Bernardo has introduced me to Scatterbrains > > if not, let me know and I'll try again. > I will withhold all opinion on Prop 311 until I receive such > confirmation > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com From sga5892@n... Mon Feb 05 07:03:21 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: sga5892@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 5 Feb 2001 15:03:21 -0000 Received: (qmail 4966 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2001 15:03:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Feb 2001 15:03:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-gw3.njit.edu) (128.235.251.11) by mta1 with SMTP; 5 Feb 2001 15:03:19 -0000 Received: from mailhost.njit.edu (mailhost.njit.edu [128.235.251.108]) by mail-gw3.njit.edu (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f15F3IL13764 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 10:03:18 -0500 Received: from steve0 (dhcp194-216.njit.edu) by mailhost.njit.edu (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9) with SMTP id <0G8A002H8HTHZP@m...> for scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 10:03:17 -0500 (EST) Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Mon, 05 Feb 2001 10:03:26 -0500 Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2001 10:03:25 -0500 Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] OFF LIST - regarding Nomic To: "'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'" Reply-to: "sga5892@n..." Message-id: <01C08F5A.E206D0E0.sga5892@n...> Organization: NJIT MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit From: "Steven G. Arturo" nothing against paul, but that is how the chips have fallen. its not like fritz was able to put up first proposal in a timely fashion -----Original Message----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia [SMTP:eventi@n...] Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 9:59 AM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: [scatterbrains] OFF LIST - regarding Nomic Paul- I just noticed something in 309. You actually don't enter the turn order until you vote, and cannot vote until the next proposal. This means you'll have to wait about 5 weeks to propose. If, on the other hand, you're ready to propose something, I won't make an issue of it. Someone else (*cough* PAT!) may, however. Let me know, because Fritz's turn is almost over. --e > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2001 7:27 PM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [scatterbrains] introduction > > > Was my introduction received? > > I got all of memos since Friday afternoon when I signed up, but no > one has confirmed or acknowledged. > > if not, is repeating the official introduction acceptable here with > other content to the message > > If so, > > Patrick Bernardo has introduced me to Scatterbrains > > if not, let me know and I'll try again. > I will withhold all opinion on Prop 311 until I receive such > confirmation > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com From eventi@n... Mon Feb 05 07:12:03 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 5 Feb 2001 15:12:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 30914 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2001 15:12:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Feb 2001 15:12:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 5 Feb 2001 16:13:07 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id KAA07186 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 10:12:02 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] OFF LIST - regarding Nomic Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 10:13:40 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-reply-to: <01C08F5A.E206D0E0.sga5892@n...> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" NOR DID YOU, for that matter! I had considered proposing that new players be subjected to a full round of play before entry, but now that I think more about it, it seems horribly unfair. I just think that's it's real important for players to grok the ruleset before proposing something. I was willing to let it slip if Paul was ready, esp. since he's now limited to 5 days, but my itchy trigger finger sent it off before changing the recip address. I even tried to abuse my sysadmin powers to catch it before it flew out, but I was too late. --e > -----Original Message----- > From: Steven G. Arturo [mailto:sga5892@n...] > Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 10:03 AM > To: 'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com' > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] OFF LIST - regarding Nomic > > > nothing against paul, but that is how the chips have fallen. > > its not like fritz was able to put up first proposal in a timely fashion > > -----Original Message----- > From: Eugene Ventimiglia [SMTP:eventi@n...] > Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 9:59 AM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [scatterbrains] OFF LIST - regarding Nomic > > Paul- > I just noticed something in 309. You actually don't enter > the turn order > until you vote, and cannot vote until the next proposal. This > means you'll > have to wait about 5 weeks to propose. If, on the other hand, > you're ready > to propose something, I won't make an issue of it. Someone else (*cough* > PAT!) may, however. Let me know, because Fritz's turn is almost over. > --e > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2001 7:27 PM > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: [scatterbrains] introduction > > > > > > Was my introduction received? > > > > I got all of memos since Friday afternoon when I signed up, but no > > one has confirmed or acknowledged. > > > > if not, is repeating the official introduction acceptable here with > > other content to the message > > > > If so, > > > > Patrick Bernardo has introduced me to Scatterbrains > > > > if not, let me know and I'll try again. > > I will withhold all opinion on Prop 311 until I receive such > > confirmation > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From sga5892@n... Mon Feb 05 07:23:08 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: sga5892@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 5 Feb 2001 15:23:08 -0000 Received: (qmail 64230 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2001 15:23:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Feb 2001 15:23:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-gw3.njit.edu) (128.235.251.11) by mta2 with SMTP; 5 Feb 2001 15:23:05 -0000 Received: from mailhost.njit.edu (mailhost.njit.edu [128.235.251.108]) by mail-gw3.njit.edu (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f15FN5L15650 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 10:23:05 -0500 Received: from steve0 (dhcp194-216.njit.edu) by mailhost.njit.edu (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9) with SMTP id <0G8A003B6IQFQ8@m...> for scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 10:23:04 -0500 (EST) Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Mon, 05 Feb 2001 10:23:13 -0500 Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2001 10:23:12 -0500 Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] OFF LIST - regarding Nomic To: "'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'" Reply-to: "sga5892@n..." Message-id: <01C08F5D.A51AC760.sga5892@n...> Organization: NJIT MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit From: "Steven G. Arturo" what about 5 days? paul, you are not a one week stand, are you? eug, i had my first proposal right after bob's time limits. i felt it unfair that i was able to do that, thus 309. about your near-stalking of your e-mail system, don't we all lust for a little bit more control? btw to all, heed 209. we are approaching a limit. steve0 -----Original Message----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia [SMTP:eventi@n...] Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 10:14 AM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] OFF LIST - regarding Nomic NOR DID YOU, for that matter! I had considered proposing that new players be subjected to a full round of play before entry, but now that I think more about it, it seems horribly unfair. I just think that's it's real important for players to grok the ruleset before proposing something. I was willing to let it slip if Paul was ready, esp. since he's now limited to 5 days, but my itchy trigger finger sent it off before changing the recip address. I even tried to abuse my sysadmin powers to catch it before it flew out, but I was too late. --e > -----Original Message----- > From: Steven G. Arturo [mailto:sga5892@n...] > Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 10:03 AM > To: 'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com' > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] OFF LIST - regarding Nomic > > > nothing against paul, but that is how the chips have fallen. > > its not like fritz was able to put up first proposal in a timely fashion > > -----Original Message----- > From: Eugene Ventimiglia [SMTP:eventi@n...] > Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 9:59 AM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [scatterbrains] OFF LIST - regarding Nomic > > Paul- > I just noticed something in 309. You actually don't enter > the turn order > until you vote, and cannot vote until the next proposal. This > means you'll > have to wait about 5 weeks to propose. If, on the other hand, > you're ready > to propose something, I won't make an issue of it. Someone else (*cough* > PAT!) may, however. Let me know, because Fritz's turn is almost over. > --e > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2001 7:27 PM > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: [scatterbrains] introduction > > > > > > Was my introduction received? > > > > I got all of memos since Friday afternoon when I signed up, but no > > one has confirmed or acknowledged. > > > > if not, is repeating the official introduction acceptable here with > > other content to the message > > > > If so, > > > > Patrick Bernardo has introduced me to Scatterbrains > > > > if not, let me know and I'll try again. > > I will withhold all opinion on Prop 311 until I receive such > > confirmation > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com From eventi@n... Mon Feb 05 07:36:23 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 5 Feb 2001 15:36:22 -0000 Received: (qmail 98719 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2001 15:36:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 5 Feb 2001 15:36:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 5 Feb 2001 15:36:16 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id KAA09511 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 10:36:16 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] OFF LIST - regarding Nomic Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 10:37:53 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-reply-to: <01C08F5D.A51AC760.sga5892@n...> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" All this discussion is making me dizzy... I wish Pat would vote already. > -----Original Message----- > From: Steven G. Arturo [mailto:sga5892@n...] > Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 10:23 AM > To: 'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com' > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] OFF LIST - regarding Nomic > > > what about 5 days? paul, you are not a one week stand, are you? > > eug, i had my first proposal right after bob's time limits. i > felt it unfair that i was able to do that, thus 309. > > about your near-stalking of your e-mail system, don't we all lust > for a little bit more control? > > btw to all, heed 209. we are approaching a limit. > > steve0 > > -----Original Message----- > From: Eugene Ventimiglia [SMTP:eventi@n...] > Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 10:14 AM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] OFF LIST - regarding Nomic > > NOR DID YOU, for that matter! I had considered proposing that new players > be subjected to a full round of play before entry, but now that I > think more > about it, it seems horribly unfair. I just think that's it's > real important > for players to grok the ruleset before proposing something. I was willing > to let it slip if Paul was ready, esp. since he's now limited to > 5 days, but > my itchy trigger finger sent it off before changing the recip address. I > even tried to abuse my sysadmin powers to catch it before it flew > out, but I > was too late. > --e > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Steven G. Arturo [mailto:sga5892@n...] > > Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 10:03 AM > > To: 'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com' > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] OFF LIST - regarding Nomic > > > > > > nothing against paul, but that is how the chips have fallen. > > > > its not like fritz was able to put up first proposal in a timely fashion > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Eugene Ventimiglia [SMTP:eventi@n...] > > Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 9:59 AM > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: [scatterbrains] OFF LIST - regarding Nomic > > > > Paul- > > I just noticed something in 309. You actually don't enter > > the turn order > > until you vote, and cannot vote until the next proposal. This > > means you'll > > have to wait about 5 weeks to propose. If, on the other hand, > > you're ready > > to propose something, I won't make an issue of it. Someone > else (*cough* > > PAT!) may, however. Let me know, because Fritz's turn is almost over. > > --e > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > > Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2001 7:27 PM > > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > > Subject: [scatterbrains] introduction > > > > > > > > > Was my introduction received? > > > > > > I got all of memos since Friday afternoon when I signed up, but no > > > one has confirmed or acknowledged. > > > > > > if not, is repeating the official introduction acceptable here with > > > other content to the message > > > > > > If so, > > > > > > Patrick Bernardo has introduced me to Scatterbrains > > > > > > if not, let me know and I'll try again. > > > I will withhold all opinion on Prop 311 until I receive such > > > confirmation > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Mon Feb 05 07:50:03 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 5 Feb 2001 15:50:02 -0000 Received: (qmail 40633 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2001 15:50:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 5 Feb 2001 15:50:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta3 with SMTP; 5 Feb 2001 16:51:06 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-16.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.201]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f15Fnsp99617 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 10:49:56 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <001a01c08f8b$33a129c0$c9a811d0@computer> To: References: <01C08F5D.A51AC760.sga5892@n...> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] OFF LIST - regarding Nomic Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 10:49:07 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" > btw to all, heed 209. we are approaching a limit. > STeve: SHHH! This rule is only useful if noone is paying attention. Everybody else: "Move on, nothing to see here. Please go back to watching your TV sets." From bernardo@c... Mon Feb 05 07:50:22 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 5 Feb 2001 15:50:22 -0000 Received: (qmail 41718 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2001 15:50:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 5 Feb 2001 15:50:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta1 with SMTP; 5 Feb 2001 15:50:20 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-16.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.201]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f15FoCp99660 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 10:50:14 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <002101c08f8b$3e55a440$c9a811d0@computer> To: References: Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] OFF LIST - regarding Nomic Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 10:49:23 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" Care to sweeten the pot? ----- Original Message ----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia To: Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 10:37 AM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] OFF LIST - regarding Nomic > All this discussion is making me dizzy... I wish Pat would vote already. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Steven G. Arturo [mailto:sga5892@n...] > > Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 10:23 AM > > To: 'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com' > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] OFF LIST - regarding Nomic > > > > > > what about 5 days? paul, you are not a one week stand, are you? > > > > eug, i had my first proposal right after bob's time limits. i > > felt it unfair that i was able to do that, thus 309. > > > > about your near-stalking of your e-mail system, don't we all lust > > for a little bit more control? > > > > btw to all, heed 209. we are approaching a limit. > > > > steve0 > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Eugene Ventimiglia [SMTP:eventi@n...] > > Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 10:14 AM > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] OFF LIST - regarding Nomic > > > > NOR DID YOU, for that matter! I had considered proposing that new players > > be subjected to a full round of play before entry, but now that I > > think more > > about it, it seems horribly unfair. I just think that's it's > > real important > > for players to grok the ruleset before proposing something. I was willing > > to let it slip if Paul was ready, esp. since he's now limited to > > 5 days, but > > my itchy trigger finger sent it off before changing the recip address. I > > even tried to abuse my sysadmin powers to catch it before it flew > > out, but I > > was too late. > > --e > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Steven G. Arturo [mailto:sga5892@n...] > > > Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 10:03 AM > > > To: 'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com' > > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] OFF LIST - regarding Nomic > > > > > > > > > nothing against paul, but that is how the chips have fallen. > > > > > > its not like fritz was able to put up first proposal in a timely fashion > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Eugene Ventimiglia [SMTP:eventi@n...] > > > Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 9:59 AM > > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > > Subject: [scatterbrains] OFF LIST - regarding Nomic > > > > > > Paul- > > > I just noticed something in 309. You actually don't enter > > > the turn order > > > until you vote, and cannot vote until the next proposal. This > > > means you'll > > > have to wait about 5 weeks to propose. If, on the other hand, > > > you're ready > > > to propose something, I won't make an issue of it. Someone > > else (*cough* > > > PAT!) may, however. Let me know, because Fritz's turn is almost over. > > > --e > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > > > Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2001 7:27 PM > > > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > > > Subject: [scatterbrains] introduction > > > > > > > > > > > > Was my introduction received? > > > > > > > > I got all of memos since Friday afternoon when I signed up, but no > > > > one has confirmed or acknowledged. > > > > > > > > if not, is repeating the official introduction acceptable here with > > > > other content to the message > > > > > > > > If so, > > > > > > > > Patrick Bernardo has introduced me to Scatterbrains > > > > > > > > if not, let me know and I'll try again. > > > > I will withhold all opinion on Prop 311 until I receive such > > > > confirmation > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Mon Feb 05 07:51:27 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 5 Feb 2001 15:51:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 51607 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2001 15:51:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Feb 2001 15:51:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta1 with SMTP; 5 Feb 2001 15:51:26 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-16.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.201]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f15FpOp99822 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 10:51:24 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <002d01c08f8b$6689b1e0$c9a811d0@computer> To: References: Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] OFF LIST - regarding Nomic Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 10:50:37 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" Hey man, I am *all for bending the rules concerning new members*. I hate 309, and would like to see salutary neglect regarding it. I'm only a stickler for rules that suit me. ----- Original Message ----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia To: Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 9:59 AM Subject: [scatterbrains] OFF LIST - regarding Nomic > Paul- > I just noticed something in 309. You actually don't enter the turn order > until you vote, and cannot vote until the next proposal. This means you'll > have to wait about 5 weeks to propose. If, on the other hand, you're ready > to propose something, I won't make an issue of it. Someone else (*cough* > PAT!) may, however. Let me know, because Fritz's turn is almost over. > --e > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2001 7:27 PM > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: [scatterbrains] introduction > > > > > > Was my introduction received? > > > > I got all of memos since Friday afternoon when I signed up, but no > > one has confirmed or acknowledged. > > > > if not, is repeating the official introduction acceptable here with > > other content to the message > > > > If so, > > > > Patrick Bernardo has introduced me to Scatterbrains > > > > if not, let me know and I'll try again. > > I will withhold all opinion on Prop 311 until I receive such > > confirmation > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Mon Feb 05 07:54:19 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 5 Feb 2001 15:54:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 91088 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2001 15:54:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Feb 2001 15:54:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 5 Feb 2001 15:54:17 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-16.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.201]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f15Fs9p99963 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 10:54:10 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <003501c08f8b$cb78eda0$c9a811d0@computer> To: References: Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Judgement on Scoring Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 10:53:21 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" Wait a second, let me try to parse this. I had originally understood this to be pretty much no change - player posts a message saying that his rule won/lost and Eug scores it. But now your reading seems to be that each player maintains the score on his turn? Steve, which is it? ps - we need some chicks in this city. It's looking a little too much like Socrates' thinkery. ----- Original Message ----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia To: Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 9:48 AM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Judgement on Scoring > I think you really overstepped your bounds on this. There's nothing in the > rules requiring players to maintain their own scores, and 212 explicitly > says that your judgement can only address the specific issue at hand, in > other words, there's no presedent set by your judgement. > > That said, I believe you made the right decision in passing the > responsibility for scoring to the player. It is after all a part of the > turn. LETS VOTE AND MOVE ON!!! > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Steven G. Arturo [mailto:sga5892@n...] > > Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 8:50 AM > > To: 'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com' > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Judgement on Scoring > > > > > > Good (snowy) day all. > > > > On the issue of Pat's Call to Judgement pertaining to the Nomic group's > > scoring procedure, I issue this opinion. > > > > By 306, scoring shall conclude a turn. It is the duty of the > > person whose > > turn it is to tally new scores according to what events transpired on the > > vote of a proposal (204, 306) and by initiations during the turn (304). > > Only after a message is sent to all by the scorer with the new tallies > > will said person's turn conclude and a new turn will being. > > Judgement can > > be called against incorrect scoring during the following turn. > > > > Someone must keep the group scoreboard up-to-date. I must > > default the job > > to Eugene at this point, for he is the author of the table. > > > > This judgement will hold until an office named 'Scorekeeper' is created. > > > > steve0 > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [SMTP:bernardo@c...] > > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 8:08 PM > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Call to Judgement > > > > Hi all, > > > > I'm invoking a call to judgement. Since Fritz is moving, that > > makes me the > > Judge. In the interests of fairness (since this is not > > prohibited by law) > > I'll recuse myself, and allow Steven (the next in line) to take my place. > > > > Here's my beef: > > > > I'm disputing the subtraction of points from my score. There is nobody > > endowed with the requisite power. According to the laws, although the > > points should come off, there is nobody at the beginning endowed > > with such > > a power. Since I know that you guys don't like arbitrary gov't., > > I'm sure > > you will agree. > > > > Before you decide too quickly, Steven, consider this: > > > > Eugene cannot hold a position, *by the terms of his own law*, > > that has not > > been legally created by a proposal. You must then either affirm that > > score-keeping is open to everyone, or to noone. If you do the former, I > > will gladly remove the subtraction of points from the account > > myself, thank > > you very much! If you do the latter, I would appreciate that you tempor > > arily endow either me, Eugene, or yourself with the power to remove the > > subtraction from my score. > > > > Currently, I'm not disputing the addition of points, so this > > judgement will > > only affect the subtraction of points, as I see it, although it does have > > much wider implications. > > > > > > << File: ATT00004.htm >> > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Mon Feb 05 07:56:10 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 5 Feb 2001 15:56:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 39704 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2001 15:56:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Feb 2001 15:56:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 5 Feb 2001 15:56:09 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id KAA11662 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 10:56:06 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] OFF LIST - regarding Nomic Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 10:57:44 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-reply-to: <002101c08f8b$3e55a440$c9a811d0@computer> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" Make it legal first... > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 10:49 AM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] OFF LIST - regarding Nomic > > > Care to sweeten the pot? > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Eugene Ventimiglia > To: > Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 10:37 AM > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] OFF LIST - regarding Nomic > > > > All this discussion is making me dizzy... I wish Pat would vote already. > From bernardo@c... Mon Feb 05 07:58:38 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 5 Feb 2001 15:58:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 4663 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2001 15:58:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Feb 2001 15:58:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 5 Feb 2001 15:58:36 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-16.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.201]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f15FwYp00499 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 10:58:35 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <004501c08f8c$672befe0$c9a811d0@computer> To: References: Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] OFF LIST - regarding Nomic Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 10:57:53 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" Ha ha ha! Good comeback. I guess it's enough to make me vote. I wonder if I'll decide the issue or not? hmmm. ----- Original Message ----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia To: Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 10:57 AM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] OFF LIST - regarding Nomic > Make it legal first... > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 10:49 AM > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] OFF LIST - regarding Nomic > > > > > > Care to sweeten the pot? > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Eugene Ventimiglia > > To: > > Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 10:37 AM > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] OFF LIST - regarding Nomic > > > > > > > All this discussion is making me dizzy... I wish Pat would vote already. > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From sga5892@n... Mon Feb 05 08:03:29 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: sga5892@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 5 Feb 2001 16:03:28 -0000 Received: (qmail 62905 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2001 16:03:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Feb 2001 16:03:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-gw4.njit.edu) (128.235.251.32) by mta3 with SMTP; 5 Feb 2001 17:04:32 -0000 Received: from mailhost.njit.edu (mailhost.njit.edu [128.235.251.108]) by mail-gw4.njit.edu (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f15G3QO20625 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 11:03:26 -0500 Received: from steve0 (dhcp194-216.njit.edu) by mailhost.njit.edu (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9) with SMTP id <0G8A004OCKLPPH@m...> for scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 11:03:25 -0500 (EST) Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Mon, 05 Feb 2001 11:03:34 -0500 Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2001 11:03:33 -0500 Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Judgement on Scoring To: "'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'" Reply-to: "sga5892@n..." Message-id: <01C08F63.4886C520.sga5892@n...> Organization: NJIT MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit From: "Steven G. Arturo" For scoring to end the turn, I want to see a person send an e-mail to all like this... After 309 was voted on , the results were 3 in favor (Bob, Fritz, Steven), 2 opposed (Pat, Eugene). +9 points to Steven [ 15*(3/5)] +10 points to Pat, in opposition to passed proposal +10 points to Eugene, in opposition to passed proposal Something like that. At least point changes are accounted for by me, since it was my turn. Total points could be included. I then ask Eugene to tabulate this, only after the e-mail gets sent out. steve0 -----Original Message----- From: Patrick D. Bernardo [SMTP:bernardo@c...] Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 10:53 AM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Judgement on Scoring Wait a second, let me try to parse this. I had originally understood this to be pretty much no change - player posts a message saying that his rule won/lost and Eug scores it. But now your reading seems to be that each player maintains the score on his turn? Steve, which is it? ps - we need some chicks in this city. It's looking a little too much like Socrates' thinkery. ----- Original Message ----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia To: Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 9:48 AM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Judgement on Scoring > I think you really overstepped your bounds on this. There's nothing in the > rules requiring players to maintain their own scores, and 212 explicitly > says that your judgement can only address the specific issue at hand, in > other words, there's no presedent set by your judgement. > > That said, I believe you made the right decision in passing the > responsibility for scoring to the player. It is after all a part of the > turn. LETS VOTE AND MOVE ON!!! > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Steven G. Arturo [mailto:sga5892@n...] > > Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 8:50 AM > > To: 'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com' > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Judgement on Scoring > > > > > > Good (snowy) day all. > > > > On the issue of Pat's Call to Judgement pertaining to the Nomic group's > > scoring procedure, I issue this opinion. > > > > By 306, scoring shall conclude a turn. It is the duty of the > > person whose > > turn it is to tally new scores according to what events transpired on the > > vote of a proposal (204, 306) and by initiations during the turn (304). > > Only after a message is sent to all by the scorer with the new tallies > > will said person's turn conclude and a new turn will being. > > Judgement can > > be called against incorrect scoring during the following turn. > > > > Someone must keep the group scoreboard up-to-date. I must > > default the job > > to Eugene at this point, for he is the author of the table. > > > > This judgement will hold until an office named 'Scorekeeper' is created. > > > > steve0 > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [SMTP:bernardo@c...] > > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 8:08 PM > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Call to Judgement > > > > Hi all, > > > > I'm invoking a call to judgement. Since Fritz is moving, that > > makes me the > > Judge. In the interests of fairness (since this is not > > prohibited by law) > > I'll recuse myself, and allow Steven (the next in line) to take my place. > > > > Here's my beef: > > > > I'm disputing the subtraction of points from my score. There is nobody > > endowed with the requisite power. According to the laws, although the > > points should come off, there is nobody at the beginning endowed > > with such > > a power. Since I know that you guys don't like arbitrary gov't., > > I'm sure > > you will agree. > > > > Before you decide too quickly, Steven, consider this: > > > > Eugene cannot hold a position, *by the terms of his own law*, > > that has not > > been legally created by a proposal. You must then either affirm that > > score-keeping is open to everyone, or to noone. If you do the former, I > > will gladly remove the subtraction of points from the account > > myself, thank > > you very much! If you do the latter, I would appreciate that you tempor > > arily endow either me, Eugene, or yourself with the power to remove the > > subtraction from my score. > > > > Currently, I'm not disputing the addition of points, so this > > judgement will > > only affect the subtraction of points, as I see it, although it does have > > much wider implications. > > > > > > << File: ATT00004.htm >> > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com From bernardo@c... Mon Feb 05 08:12:14 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 5 Feb 2001 16:12:13 -0000 Received: (qmail 74628 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2001 16:12:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Feb 2001 16:12:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 5 Feb 2001 16:12:12 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-05.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.190]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f15GC9p01703 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 11:12:10 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <000501c08f8e$4cf18ac0$bea811d0@computer> To: References: <01C08F63.4886C520.sga5892@n...> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Judgement on Scoring Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 11:11:28 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" Sheesh.. talk about an activist judge! How is this process contained within the law? I mean, I'd want to be declared unanimously a god by the city (has anybody seen Caligula?), but I wouldn't go about issuing a judgement on it... While I do agree that the point-scoring is inevitably part of the turn (kiss those 10 points goodbye), I do think that this is a stretch... ----- Original Message ----- From: Steven G. Arturo To: Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 11:03 AM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Judgement on Scoring > For scoring to end the turn, I want to see a person send an e-mail to all > like this... > > After 309 was voted on , the results were 3 in favor (Bob, Fritz, Steven), > 2 opposed (Pat, Eugene). > > +9 points to Steven [ 15*(3/5)] > +10 points to Pat, in opposition to passed proposal > +10 points to Eugene, in opposition to passed proposal > > Something like that. At least point changes are accounted for by me, since > it was my turn. Total points could be included. I then ask Eugene to > tabulate this, only after the e-mail gets sent out. > > steve0 > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [SMTP:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 10:53 AM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Judgement on Scoring > > Wait a second, let me try to parse this. > > I had originally understood this to be pretty much no change - player posts > a message saying that his rule won/lost and Eug scores it. But now your > reading seems to be that each player maintains the score on his turn? > > Steve, which is it? > > ps - we need some chicks in this city. It's looking a little too much like > Socrates' thinkery. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Eugene Ventimiglia > To: > Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 9:48 AM > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Judgement on Scoring > > > > I think you really overstepped your bounds on this. There's nothing in > the > > rules requiring players to maintain their own scores, and 212 explicitly > > says that your judgement can only address the specific issue at hand, in > > other words, there's no presedent set by your judgement. > > > > That said, I believe you made the right decision in passing the > > responsibility for scoring to the player. It is after all a part of the > > turn. LETS VOTE AND MOVE ON!!! > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Steven G. Arturo [mailto:sga5892@n...] > > > Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 8:50 AM > > > To: 'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com' > > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Judgement on Scoring > > > > > > > > > Good (snowy) day all. > > > > > > On the issue of Pat's Call to Judgement pertaining to the Nomic group's > > > scoring procedure, I issue this opinion. > > > > > > By 306, scoring shall conclude a turn. It is the duty of the > > > person whose > > > turn it is to tally new scores according to what events transpired on > the > > > vote of a proposal (204, 306) and by initiations during the turn (304). > > > Only after a message is sent to all by the scorer with the new tallies > > > will said person's turn conclude and a new turn will being. > > > Judgement can > > > be called against incorrect scoring during the following turn. > > > > > > Someone must keep the group scoreboard up-to-date. I must > > > default the job > > > to Eugene at this point, for he is the author of the table. > > > > > > This judgement will hold until an office named 'Scorekeeper' is > created. > > > > > > steve0 > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [SMTP:bernardo@c...] > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 8:08 PM > > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Call to Judgement > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > I'm invoking a call to judgement. Since Fritz is moving, that > > > makes me the > > > Judge. In the interests of fairness (since this is not > > > prohibited by law) > > > I'll recuse myself, and allow Steven (the next in line) to take my > place. > > > > > > Here's my beef: > > > > > > I'm disputing the subtraction of points from my score. There is nobody > > > endowed with the requisite power. According to the laws, although the > > > points should come off, there is nobody at the beginning endowed > > > with such > > > a power. Since I know that you guys don't like arbitrary gov't., > > > I'm sure > > > you will agree. > > > > > > Before you decide too quickly, Steven, consider this: > > > > > > Eugene cannot hold a position, *by the terms of his own law*, > > > that has not > > > been legally created by a proposal. You must then either affirm that > > > score-keeping is open to everyone, or to noone. If you do the former, > I > > > will gladly remove the subtraction of points from the account > > > myself, thank > > > you very much! If you do the latter, I would appreciate that you > tempor > > > arily endow either me, Eugene, or yourself with the power to remove the > > > subtraction from my score. > > > > > > Currently, I'm not disputing the addition of points, so this > > > judgement will > > > only affect the subtraction of points, as I see it, although it does > have > > > much wider implications. > > > > > > > > > << File: ATT00004.htm >> > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From sga5892@n... Mon Feb 05 08:19:04 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: sga5892@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 5 Feb 2001 16:19:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 66473 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2001 16:19:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Feb 2001 16:19:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-gw4.njit.edu) (128.235.251.32) by mta2 with SMTP; 5 Feb 2001 16:19:03 -0000 Received: from mailhost.njit.edu (mailhost.njit.edu [128.235.251.108]) by mail-gw4.njit.edu (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f15GJ1O22307 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 11:19:01 -0500 Received: from steve0 (dhcp194-216.njit.edu) by mailhost.njit.edu (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9) with SMTP id <0G8A005G6LBOCI@m...> for scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 11:19:00 -0500 (EST) Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Mon, 05 Feb 2001 11:19:09 -0500 Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2001 11:19:08 -0500 Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Judgement on Scoring To: "'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'" Reply-to: "sga5892@n..." Message-id: <01C08F65.75B2E0E0.sga5892@n...> Organization: NJIT MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit From: "Steven G. Arturo" assuming you didn't want to proclaim your loss of 10 points, this would make you do it. a rule states that you lost the 10 points. this procedure would make you show everyone that you agree to your loss of points. if you don't, then we have phantom scores, nothing tangible. -----Original Message----- From: Patrick D. Bernardo [SMTP:bernardo@c...] Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 11:11 AM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Judgement on Scoring Sheesh.. talk about an activist judge! How is this process contained within the law? I mean, I'd want to be declared unanimously a god by the city (has anybody seen Caligula?), but I wouldn't go about issuing a judgement on it... While I do agree that the point-scoring is inevitably part of the turn (kiss those 10 points goodbye), I do think that this is a stretch... ----- Original Message ----- From: Steven G. Arturo To: Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 11:03 AM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Judgement on Scoring > For scoring to end the turn, I want to see a person send an e-mail to all > like this... > > After 309 was voted on , the results were 3 in favor (Bob, Fritz, Steven), > 2 opposed (Pat, Eugene). > > +9 points to Steven [ 15*(3/5)] > +10 points to Pat, in opposition to passed proposal > +10 points to Eugene, in opposition to passed proposal > > Something like that. At least point changes are accounted for by me, since > it was my turn. Total points could be included. I then ask Eugene to > tabulate this, only after the e-mail gets sent out. > > steve0 > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [SMTP:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 10:53 AM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Judgement on Scoring > > Wait a second, let me try to parse this. > > I had originally understood this to be pretty much no change - player posts > a message saying that his rule won/lost and Eug scores it. But now your > reading seems to be that each player maintains the score on his turn? > > Steve, which is it? > > ps - we need some chicks in this city. It's looking a little too much like > Socrates' thinkery. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Eugene Ventimiglia > To: > Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 9:48 AM > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Judgement on Scoring > > > > I think you really overstepped your bounds on this. There's nothing in > the > > rules requiring players to maintain their own scores, and 212 explicitly > > says that your judgement can only address the specific issue at hand, in > > other words, there's no presedent set by your judgement. > > > > That said, I believe you made the right decision in passing the > > responsibility for scoring to the player. It is after all a part of the > > turn. LETS VOTE AND MOVE ON!!! > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Steven G. Arturo [mailto:sga5892@n...] > > > Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 8:50 AM > > > To: 'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com' > > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Judgement on Scoring > > > > > > > > > Good (snowy) day all. > > > > > > On the issue of Pat's Call to Judgement pertaining to the Nomic group's > > > scoring procedure, I issue this opinion. > > > > > > By 306, scoring shall conclude a turn. It is the duty of the > > > person whose > > > turn it is to tally new scores according to what events transpired on > the > > > vote of a proposal (204, 306) and by initiations during the turn (304). > > > Only after a message is sent to all by the scorer with the new tallies > > > will said person's turn conclude and a new turn will being. > > > Judgement can > > > be called against incorrect scoring during the following turn. > > > > > > Someone must keep the group scoreboard up-to-date. I must > > > default the job > > > to Eugene at this point, for he is the author of the table. > > > > > > This judgement will hold until an office named 'Scorekeeper' is > created. > > > > > > steve0 > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [SMTP:bernardo@c...] > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 8:08 PM > > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Call to Judgement > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > I'm invoking a call to judgement. Since Fritz is moving, that > > > makes me the > > > Judge. In the interests of fairness (since this is not > > > prohibited by law) > > > I'll recuse myself, and allow Steven (the next in line) to take my > place. > > > > > > Here's my beef: > > > > > > I'm disputing the subtraction of points from my score. There is nobody > > > endowed with the requisite power. According to the laws, although the > > > points should come off, there is nobody at the beginning endowed > > > with such > > > a power. Since I know that you guys don't like arbitrary gov't., > > > I'm sure > > > you will agree. > > > > > > Before you decide too quickly, Steven, consider this: > > > > > > Eugene cannot hold a position, *by the terms of his own law*, > > > that has not > > > been legally created by a proposal. You must then either affirm that > > > score-keeping is open to everyone, or to noone. If you do the former, > I > > > will gladly remove the subtraction of points from the account > > > myself, thank > > > you very much! If you do the latter, I would appreciate that you > tempor > > > arily endow either me, Eugene, or yourself with the power to remove the > > > subtraction from my score. > > > > > > Currently, I'm not disputing the addition of points, so this > > > judgement will > > > only affect the subtraction of points, as I see it, although it does > have > > > much wider implications. > > > > > > > > > << File: ATT00004.htm >> > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com From scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Mon Feb 05 08:19:59 2001 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 97126 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2001 16:19:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Feb 2001 16:19:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ef.egroups.com) (10.1.2.111) by mta1 with SMTP; 5 Feb 2001 16:19:59 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: notify@yahoogroups.com Received: from [10.1.10.118] by ef.egroups.com with NNFMP; 05 Feb 2001 16:19:58 -0000 Date: 5 Feb 2001 16:19:58 -0000 Message-ID: <981389998.276.8617.fc@yahoogroups.com> X-eGroups-Application: polls From: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Poll results for scatterbrains MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The following scatterbrains poll is now closed. Here are the final results: POLL QUESTION: Proposal 311 1.) All Players shall have the right to transfer points from their own score to the score of another in whatever amount, for whatever reason. In no case may a player's score fall below zero using this method. 2.) All point transfers shall be stated publicly. All point transfers shall be numbered sequentially, beginning with 1001. Point transfer statements shall have the following form: "Subject: Point Transfer X I [name of player], of my own free will, do transfer N points to [name of recipient]." 3.) Point transfers may take place at any time. They are effective exactly 24 hours after their public statement. Players may explain the reasons behind their transfer of points but are not required to. 4.) Point transfers shall be deemed null and void if they do not follow the proscribed procedure. In the case of a dispute or an accusation of fraud the current Judge, as determined in rule 212, shall determine the legality of any transfer using all available evidence. If that Judge is one of the immediate parties to the current transfer (either giving or receiving points) he shall be relived of his duties in this matter and the previous Judge shall take responsibility, following the procedure fo CHOICES AND RESULTS - Yes, the best thing since sliced bread., 3 votes, 60.00% - No, this sucked., 2 votes, 40.00% INDIVIDUAL VOTES - Yes, the best thing since sliced bread. - barturo@e... - bernardo@c... - eventi@n... - No, this sucked. - f_hemker@h... - sga5892@n... For more information about this group, please visit http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scatterbrains For help with Yahoo! Groups, please visit http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms From f_hemker@h... Mon Feb 05 08:22:21 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: f_hemker@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 5 Feb 2001 16:22:21 -0000 Received: (qmail 17191 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2001 16:22:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Feb 2001 16:22:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ef.egroups.com) (10.1.2.111) by mta1 with SMTP; 5 Feb 2001 16:22:21 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: f_hemker@h... Received: from [10.1.10.118] by ef.egroups.com with NNFMP; 05 Feb 2001 16:22:19 -0000 Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2001 16:22:17 -0000 To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Message-ID: <95mjvp+ekpp@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: <981389998.276.8617.fc@yahoogroups.com> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 2333 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 63.82.115.205 From: f_hemker@h... You guys are going to hate this, but I figured that I got more points for voting against my own winning proposal than I did for voting for it. 15 * 4/5 = 12 15 * 3/5 + 10(voting against a winner) = 19 What do you think? -Fritz --- In scatterbrains@y..., scatterbrains@y... wrote: > > The following scatterbrains poll is now closed. Here are the > final results: > > > POLL QUESTION: Proposal 311 > > 1.) All Players shall have the right to > transfer points from their own score to > the score of another in whatever amount, > for whatever reason. In no case may a > player's score fall below zero using > this method. > > 2.) All point transfers shall be stated > publicly. All point transfers shall be > numbered sequentially, beginning with > 1001. Point transfer statements shall > have the following form: > > "Subject: Point Transfer X > I [name of player], of my own free will, > do transfer N points to [name of > recipient]." > > 3.) Point transfers may take place at > any time. They are effective exactly 24 > hours after their public statement. > Players may explain the reasons behind > their transfer of points but are not > required to. > > 4.) Point transfers shall be deemed > null and void if they do not follow the > proscribed procedure. In the case of a > dispute or an accusation of fraud the > current Judge, as determined in rule > 212, shall determine the legality of any > transfer using all available evidence. > If that Judge is one of the immediate > parties to the current transfer (either > giving or receiving points) he shall be > relived of his duties in this matter and > the previous Judge shall take > responsibility, following the procedure > fo > > CHOICES AND RESULTS > - Yes, the best thing since sliced bread., 3 votes, 60.00% > - No, this sucked., 2 votes, 40.00% > > INDIVIDUAL VOTES > - Yes, the best thing since sliced bread. > - barturo@e... > - bernardo@c... > - eventi@n... > - No, this sucked. > - f_hemker@h... > - sga5892@n... > > > For more information about this group, please visit > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scatterbrains > > For help with Yahoo! Groups, please visit > http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/ > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/te From sga5892@n... Mon Feb 05 08:22:33 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: sga5892@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 5 Feb 2001 16:22:32 -0000 Received: (qmail 38278 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2001 16:22:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 5 Feb 2001 16:22:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-gw4.njit.edu) (128.235.251.32) by mta3 with SMTP; 5 Feb 2001 17:23:36 -0000 Received: from mailhost.njit.edu (mailhost.njit.edu [128.235.251.108]) by mail-gw4.njit.edu (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f15GMUO22720 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 11:22:30 -0500 Received: from steve0 (dhcp194-216.njit.edu) by mailhost.njit.edu (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9) with SMTP id <0G8A005K8LHHCI@m...> for scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 11:22:30 -0500 (EST) Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Mon, 05 Feb 2001 11:22:39 -0500 Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2001 11:22:38 -0500 Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Poll results for scatterbrains To: "'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'" Reply-to: "sga5892@n..." Message-id: <01C08F65.F2B08F20.sga5892@n...> Organization: NJIT MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit From: "Steven G. Arturo" fritz, you point monger! -----Original Message----- From: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com [SMTP:scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com] Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 11:20 AM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: [scatterbrains] Poll results for scatterbrains The following scatterbrains poll is now closed. Here are the final results: POLL QUESTION: Proposal 311 1.) All Players shall have the right to transfer points from their own score to the score of another in whatever amount, for whatever reason. In no case may a player's score fall below zero using this method. 2.) All point transfers shall be stated publicly. All point transfers shall be numbered sequentially, beginning with 1001. Point transfer statements shall have the following form: "Subject: Point Transfer X I [name of player], of my own free will, do transfer N points to [name of recipient]." 3.) Point transfers may take place at any time. They are effective exactly 24 hours after their public statement. Players may explain the reasons behind their transfer of points but are not required to. 4.) Point transfers shall be deemed null and void if they do not follow the proscribed procedure. In the case of a dispute or an accusation of fraud the current Judge, as determined in rule 212, shall determine the legality of any transfer using all available evidence. If that Judge is one of the immediate parties to the current transfer (either giving or receiving points) he shall be relived of his duties in this matter and the previous Judge shall take responsibility, following the procedure fo CHOICES AND RESULTS - Yes, the best thing since sliced bread., 3 votes, 60.00% - No, this sucked., 2 votes, 40.00% INDIVIDUAL VOTES - Yes, the best thing since sliced bread. - barturo@e... - bernardo@c... - eventi@n... - No, this sucked. - f_hemker@h... - sga5892@n... For more information about this group, please visit http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scatterbrains For help with Yahoo! Groups, please visit http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com From eventi@n... Mon Feb 05 08:29:10 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 5 Feb 2001 16:29:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 57455 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2001 16:29:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 5 Feb 2001 16:29:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 5 Feb 2001 17:30:13 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id LAA15335 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 11:29:08 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Judgement on Scoring Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 11:30:45 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-reply-to: <01C08F63.4886C520.sga5892@n...> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" There's an added bonus that any Opposition and Judgement comes during the turn. But again, Steven's ruling can't require us to do this. > -----Original Message----- > From: Steven G. Arturo [mailto:sga5892@n...] > Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 11:04 AM > To: 'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com' > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Judgement on Scoring > > > For scoring to end the turn, I want to see a person send an e-mail to all > like this... > > After 309 was voted on , the results were 3 in favor (Bob, Fritz, > Steven), > 2 opposed (Pat, Eugene). > > +9 points to Steven [ 15*(3/5)] > +10 points to Pat, in opposition to passed proposal > +10 points to Eugene, in opposition to passed proposal > > Something like that. At least point changes are accounted for by > me, since > it was my turn. Total points could be included. I then ask Eugene to > tabulate this, only after the e-mail gets sent out. > > steve0 > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [SMTP:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 10:53 AM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Judgement on Scoring > > Wait a second, let me try to parse this. > > I had originally understood this to be pretty much no change - > player posts > a message saying that his rule won/lost and Eug scores it. But now your > reading seems to be that each player maintains the score on his turn? > > Steve, which is it? > > ps - we need some chicks in this city. It's looking a little too > much like > Socrates' thinkery. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Eugene Ventimiglia > To: > Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 9:48 AM > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Judgement on Scoring > > > > I think you really overstepped your bounds on this. There's nothing in > the > > rules requiring players to maintain their own scores, and 212 explicitly > > says that your judgement can only address the specific issue at hand, in > > other words, there's no presedent set by your judgement. > > > > That said, I believe you made the right decision in passing the > > responsibility for scoring to the player. It is after all a part of the > > turn. LETS VOTE AND MOVE ON!!! > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Steven G. Arturo [mailto:sga5892@n...] > > > Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 8:50 AM > > > To: 'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com' > > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Judgement on Scoring > > > > > > > > > Good (snowy) day all. > > > > > > On the issue of Pat's Call to Judgement pertaining to the > Nomic group's > > > scoring procedure, I issue this opinion. > > > > > > By 306, scoring shall conclude a turn. It is the duty of the > > > person whose > > > turn it is to tally new scores according to what events transpired on > the > > > vote of a proposal (204, 306) and by initiations during the > turn (304). > > > Only after a message is sent to all by the scorer with the > new tallies > > > will said person's turn conclude and a new turn will being. > > > Judgement can > > > be called against incorrect scoring during the following turn. > > > > > > Someone must keep the group scoreboard up-to-date. I must > > > default the job > > > to Eugene at this point, for he is the author of the table. > > > > > > This judgement will hold until an office named 'Scorekeeper' is > created. > > > > > > steve0 > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [SMTP:bernardo@c...] > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 8:08 PM > > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Call to Judgement > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > I'm invoking a call to judgement. Since Fritz is moving, that > > > makes me the > > > Judge. In the interests of fairness (since this is not > > > prohibited by law) > > > I'll recuse myself, and allow Steven (the next in line) to take my > place. > > > > > > Here's my beef: > > > > > > I'm disputing the subtraction of points from my score. There > is nobody > > > endowed with the requisite power. According to the laws, although the > > > points should come off, there is nobody at the beginning endowed > > > with such > > > a power. Since I know that you guys don't like arbitrary gov't., > > > I'm sure > > > you will agree. > > > > > > Before you decide too quickly, Steven, consider this: > > > > > > Eugene cannot hold a position, *by the terms of his own law*, > > > that has not > > > been legally created by a proposal. You must then either affirm that > > > score-keeping is open to everyone, or to noone. If you do > the former, > I > > > will gladly remove the subtraction of points from the account > > > myself, thank > > > you very much! If you do the latter, I would appreciate that you > tempor > > > arily endow either me, Eugene, or yourself with the power to > remove the > > > subtraction from my score. > > > > > > Currently, I'm not disputing the addition of points, so this > > > judgement will > > > only affect the subtraction of points, as I see it, although it does > have > > > much wider implications. > > > > > > > > > << File: ATT00004.htm >> > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Mon Feb 05 08:29:21 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 5 Feb 2001 16:29:21 -0000 Received: (qmail 58128 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2001 16:29:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 5 Feb 2001 16:29:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta1 with SMTP; 5 Feb 2001 16:29:20 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-05.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.190]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f15GTIp03413 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 11:29:18 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <000b01c08f90$b241e760$bea811d0@computer> To: References: <981389998.276.8617.fc@yahoogroups.com> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Poll results for scatterbrains Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 11:28:37 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" Slick move Fritz, voting against your own bill! It almost cost you big time, though. I was in a good mood this morning, and voted my conscience, however, I was *this* close to voting against, for the points. ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 11:19 AM Subject: [scatterbrains] Poll results for scatterbrains > > The following scatterbrains poll is now closed. Here are the > final results: > > > POLL QUESTION: Proposal 311 > > 1.) All Players shall have the right to > transfer points from their own score to > the score of another in whatever amount, > for whatever reason. In no case may a > player's score fall below zero using > this method. > > 2.) All point transfers shall be stated > publicly. All point transfers shall be > numbered sequentially, beginning with > 1001. Point transfer statements shall > have the following form: > > "Subject: Point Transfer X > I [name of player], of my own free will, > do transfer N points to [name of > recipient]." > > 3.) Point transfers may take place at > any time. They are effective exactly 24 > hours after their public statement. > Players may explain the reasons behind > their transfer of points but are not > required to. > > 4.) Point transfers shall be deemed > null and void if they do not follow the > proscribed procedure. In the case of a > dispute or an accusation of fraud the > current Judge, as determined in rule > 212, shall determine the legality of any > transfer using all available evidence. > If that Judge is one of the immediate > parties to the current transfer (either > giving or receiving points) he shall be > relived of his duties in this matter and > the previous Judge shall take > responsibility, following the procedure > fo > > CHOICES AND RESULTS > - Yes, the best thing since sliced bread., 3 votes, 60.00% > - No, this sucked., 2 votes, 40.00% > > INDIVIDUAL VOTES > - Yes, the best thing since sliced bread. > - barturo@e... > - bernardo@c... > - eventi@n... > - No, this sucked. > - f_hemker@h... > - sga5892@n... > > > For more information about this group, please visit > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scatterbrains > > For help with Yahoo! Groups, please visit > http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/ > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From f_hemker@h... Mon Feb 05 08:37:54 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: f_hemker@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 5 Feb 2001 16:37:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 83874 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2001 16:37:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 5 Feb 2001 16:37:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ej.egroups.com) (10.1.10.49) by mta1 with SMTP; 5 Feb 2001 16:37:49 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: f_hemker@h... Received: from [10.1.10.127] by ej.egroups.com with NNFMP; 05 Feb 2001 16:37:49 -0000 Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2001 16:37:48 -0000 To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Message-ID: <95mkss+ehvo@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: <000b01c08f90$b241e760$bea811d0@computer> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 3108 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 63.82.115.205 From: f_hemker@h... Well, you have to remember that the creator of the poll is the one who closes it. I just waited until I had enough votes to win and then changed my mind. If you would have voted the other way I would have voted for it. The polling process keeps an in progress review, so I knew what was going on the whole time. No risk, no worries. -Fritz --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Patrick D. Bernardo" wrote: > Slick move Fritz, voting against your own bill! It almost cost you big > time, though. I was in a good mood this morning, and voted my conscience, > however, I was *this* close to voting against, for the points. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: > Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 11:19 AM > Subject: [scatterbrains] Poll results for scatterbrains > > > > > > The following scatterbrains poll is now closed. Here are the > > final results: > > > > > > POLL QUESTION: Proposal 311 > > > > 1.) All Players shall have the right to > > transfer points from their own score to > > the score of another in whatever amount, > > for whatever reason. In no case may a > > player's score fall below zero using > > this method. > > > > 2.) All point transfers shall be stated > > publicly. All point transfers shall be > > numbered sequentially, beginning with > > 1001. Point transfer statements shall > > have the following form: > > > > "Subject: Point Transfer X > > I [name of player], of my own free will, > > do transfer N points to [name of > > recipient]." > > > > 3.) Point transfers may take place at > > any time. They are effective exactly 24 > > hours after their public statement. > > Players may explain the reasons behind > > their transfer of points but are not > > required to. > > > > 4.) Point transfers shall be deemed > > null and void if they do not follow the > > proscribed procedure. In the case of a > > dispute or an accusation of fraud the > > current Judge, as determined in rule > > 212, shall determine the legality of any > > transfer using all available evidence. > > If that Judge is one of the immediate > > parties to the current transfer (either > > giving or receiving points) he shall be > > relived of his duties in this matter and > > the previous Judge shall take > > responsibility, following the procedure > > fo > > > > CHOICES AND RESULTS > > - Yes, the best thing since sliced bread., 3 votes, 60.00% > > - No, this sucked., 2 votes, 40.00% > > > > INDIVIDUAL VOTES > > - Yes, the best thing since sliced bread. > > - barturo@e... > > - bernardo@c... > > - eventi@n... > > - No, this sucked. > > - f_hemker@h... > > - sga5892@n... > > > > > > For more information about this group, please visit > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scatterbrains > > > > For help with Yahoo! Groups, please visit > > http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/ > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > From eventi@n... Mon Feb 05 09:53:20 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 5 Feb 2001 17:53:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 74497 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2001 17:53:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Feb 2001 17:53:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 5 Feb 2001 18:54:24 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id MAA24054 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 12:53:18 -0500 (EST) To: "Scatterbrains Nomic" Subject: State of the Nomic Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 12:54:56 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" The Scores (whether or not I have the right to tell you) Bob: 20 Fritz: 19 Steven: 19 Eugene: 54 Pat: 28 And so, without further ado... From eventi@n... Mon Feb 05 09:56:21 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 5 Feb 2001 17:56:21 -0000 Received: (qmail 15276 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2001 17:56:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 5 Feb 2001 17:56:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 5 Feb 2001 17:56:19 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id MAA24388 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 12:56:18 -0500 (EST) To: "Scatterbrains Nomic" Subject: Proposal 312 Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 12:57:56 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" Scorekeeper: The office of scorekeeper shall be created for the purpose of maintaining and reporting the official score of the game. The scorekeeper must record and make public any changes to a player's score within 2 business days of the event which causes the score change. Any disputes with the reported score must be announced within 5 business days of the report. The scorekeeping record shall consist of a detailed list of entries, each corresponding to a score adjustment. Each entry shall contain the date, the player's name, a brief description of the reason for the adjustment, and the positive or negative score adjustment. The scorekeeper is a public employee, and as such is hired and paid by the population. His salary is one point per turn, collected one point from each player after N turns, where N equals the number of players. The scorekeeper is selected from any applicants by the population. A poll shall be created with the names of perspective employees, and each player shall choose one. If the outcome is a tie, there shall be a runoff election, conducted in the same manner with only the tied applicants. The score maintained by the scorekeeper will be official and indisputable after the determined period. The scorekeeper may, at his discression, make adjustment records to remedy mistakes not caught before the dispute period. The scorekeeper is hired based on an infinately renewable contract. If a majority of players believe that the scorekeeper should be replaced, a new one is chosen in the afformentioned manner. The previous scorekeeper is entitled to apply for the job, and remains scorekeeper until such time as a new scorekeeper is selected. From scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Mon Feb 05 10:03:26 2001 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4685 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2001 18:03:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Feb 2001 18:03:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ch.egroups.com) (10.1.10.51) by mta1 with SMTP; 5 Feb 2001 18:03:22 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: notify@yahoogroups.com Received: from [10.1.2.74] by ch.egroups.com with NNFMP; 05 Feb 2001 18:03:20 -0000 Date: 5 Feb 2001 18:03:18 -0000 Message-ID: <981396198.4503.3766.cd@yahoogroups.com> X-eGroups-Notify: From: To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: New file uploaded to scatterbrains 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 scatterbrains group. File : /rules.html Uploaded by : eventi@c... Description : The HTML Rules File You can access this file at the URL http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scatterbrains/files/rules.html To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/files Regards, eventi@c... Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms From f_hemker@h... Mon Feb 05 10:12:11 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: f_hemker@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 5 Feb 2001 18:12:08 -0000 Received: (qmail 32775 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2001 18:12:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Feb 2001 18:12:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mq.egroups.com) (10.1.1.36) by mta1 with SMTP; 5 Feb 2001 18:12:07 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: f_hemker@h... Received: from [10.1.10.63] by mq.egroups.com with NNFMP; 05 Feb 2001 18:12:03 -0000 Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2001 18:12:00 -0000 To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: State of the Nomic Message-ID: <95mqdg+ebnt@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 303 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 63.82.115.205 From: f_hemker@h... Didn't I recieve an intial five points for joining in the proscribed manner? --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Eugene Ventimiglia" wrote: > The Scores (whether or not I have the right to tell you) > > Bob: 20 > Fritz: 19 > Steven: 19 > Eugene: 54 > Pat: 28 > > And so, without further ado.. From eventi@n... Mon Feb 05 10:26:07 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 5 Feb 2001 18:26:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 52314 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2001 18:26:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Feb 2001 18:26:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 5 Feb 2001 18:26:06 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id NAA27429 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 13:26:00 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: State of the Nomic Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 13:27:38 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-reply-to: <95mqdg+ebnt@eGroups.com> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" No, Pat gets 5 for the introduction. http://www.scatterbrains.com/rules.html#r304 --e > -----Original Message----- > From: f_hemker@h... [mailto:f_hemker@h...] > Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 1:12 PM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: State of the Nomic > > > Didn't I recieve an intial five points for joining in the proscribed > manner? > > --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Eugene Ventimiglia" wrote: > > The Scores (whether or not I have the right to tell you) > > > > Bob: 20 > > Fritz: 19 > > Steven: 19 > > Eugene: 54 > > Pat: 28 > > > > And so, without further ado.. > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From f_hemker@h... Mon Feb 05 11:03:38 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: f_hemker@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 5 Feb 2001 19:03:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 66862 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2001 19:03:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Feb 2001 19:03:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mk.egroups.com) (10.1.1.30) by mta1 with SMTP; 5 Feb 2001 19:03:37 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: f_hemker@h... Received: from [10.1.10.122] by mk.egroups.com with NNFMP; 05 Feb 2001 19:03:36 -0000 Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2001 19:03:35 -0000 To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: State of the Nomic Message-ID: <95mte7+dhvr@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 897 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 63.82.115.205 From: f_hemker@h... Oops, you're right. Sorry. -Fritz --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Eugene Ventimiglia" wrote: > No, Pat gets 5 for the introduction. > > http://www.scatterbrains.com/rules.html#r304 > > --e > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: f_hemker@h... [mailto:f_hemker@h...] > > Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 1:12 PM > > To: scatterbrains@y... > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: State of the Nomic > > > > > > Didn't I recieve an intial five points for joining in the proscribed > > manner? > > > > --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Eugene Ventimiglia" wrote: > > > The Scores (whether or not I have the right to tell you) > > > > > > Bob: 20 > > > Fritz: 19 > > > Steven: 19 > > > Eugene: 54 > > > Pat: 28 > > > > > > And so, without further ado.. > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > From pkirklan@e... Mon Feb 05 11:42:18 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 5 Feb 2001 19:42:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 86505 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2001 19:42:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Feb 2001 19:42:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta2 with SMTP; 5 Feb 2001 19:42:17 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Mon, 5 Feb 2001 13:59:57 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 5 Feb 01 13:51:35 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 5 Feb 01 13:51:18 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 13:51:11 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] introduction Priority: normal In-reply-to: <01C08EF9.66D04520.sga5892@n...> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <002795759190521ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" hi steve From pkirklan@e... Mon Feb 05 11:45:17 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 5 Feb 2001 19:45:16 -0000 Received: (qmail 56992 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2001 19:45:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Feb 2001 19:45:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta3 with SMTP; 5 Feb 2001 20:46:21 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Mon, 5 Feb 2001 14:02:56 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 5 Feb 01 13:54:33 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 5 Feb 01 13:54:15 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 13:54:10 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] introduction Priority: normal In-reply-to: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF0372D3@BATMAN> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <0040e5602200521ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" hello bob. Fritz, Eugene From pkirklan@e... Mon Feb 05 11:48:48 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 5 Feb 2001 19:48:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 42233 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2001 19:48:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Feb 2001 19:48:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta2 with SMTP; 5 Feb 2001 19:48:46 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Mon, 5 Feb 2001 14:06:25 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 5 Feb 01 13:58:01 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 5 Feb 01 13:57:54 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 13:57:44 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: introduction Priority: normal In-reply-to: <95majb+uinr@eGroups.com> References: <028864234000521ISWEBNT@d...> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <001ec2506200521ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" hey Fritz, how the hell are ya. Frierich is treating me poorly enought that I was in my office last night to send this. We should catch up "outside" By the way for those unaware, I am on CST From bernardo@c... Mon Feb 05 12:17:53 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 5 Feb 2001 20:17:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 46295 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2001 20:17:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 5 Feb 2001 20:17:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta1 with SMTP; 5 Feb 2001 20:17:48 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-17.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.202]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f15KHkp31688 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 15:17:46 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <002801c08fb0$9caeeea0$caa811d0@computer> To: References: <95mqdg+ebnt@eGroups.com> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: State of the Nomic Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 15:17:05 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" Actually, *I* received those points... ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 1:12 PM Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: State of the Nomic > Didn't I recieve an intial five points for joining in the proscribed > manner? > > --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Eugene Ventimiglia" wrote: > > The Scores (whether or not I have the right to tell you) > > > > Bob: 20 > > Fritz: 19 > > Steven: 19 > > Eugene: 54 > > Pat: 28 > > > > And so, without further ado.. > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From pkirklan@e... Mon Feb 05 12:28:27 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 5 Feb 2001 20:28:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 82346 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2001 20:28:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Feb 2001 20:28:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta1 with SMTP; 5 Feb 2001 20:28:26 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Mon, 5 Feb 2001 14:46:04 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 5 Feb 01 14:37:42 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 5 Feb 01 14:37:34 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 14:37:25 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: State of the Nomic Priority: normal In-reply-to: <002801c08fb0$9caeeea0$caa811d0@computer> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <0012a0446200521ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" Shouldn't I be on the list with an official 0 points unless anyone wants to give me some (now that you can) to win my favor before I make enemies, or just set a precedent to encourage "Be fruitful and multiply" P.S. Yes, we either need chicks or a different name for expansion From eventi@n... Mon Feb 05 12:33:46 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 5 Feb 2001 20:33:46 -0000 Received: (qmail 93152 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2001 20:33:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 5 Feb 2001 20:33:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 5 Feb 2001 20:33:45 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id PAA11114 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 15:33:44 -0500 (EST) To: "Scatterbrains Nomic" Subject: State of the Nomic (slight return) Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 15:35:22 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" You see why I wanna get paid for this?!?!?! The Scores (whether or not I have the right to tell you) Bob: 20 Fritz: 19 Steven: 19 Eugene: 54 Pat: 28 Paul: 0 From pkirklan@e... Mon Feb 05 12:40:48 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 5 Feb 2001 20:40:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 17506 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2001 20:40:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Feb 2001 20:40:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta3 with SMTP; 5 Feb 2001 21:41:53 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Mon, 5 Feb 2001 14:58:27 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 5 Feb 01 14:50:04 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 5 Feb 01 14:49:49 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 14:49:48 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] State of the Nomic (slight return) Priority: normal In-reply-to: X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <000f72758200521ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" thank you as point of inquiry, is scoring required to be in whole numbers. This seems to be the spirit of the rounding provision, but nowhere expressed? Would this be in the discretion of the scorekeeper? From eventi@n... Mon Feb 05 12:45:56 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 5 Feb 2001 20:45:56 -0000 Received: (qmail 8460 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2001 20:45:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Feb 2001 20:45:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 5 Feb 2001 20:45:54 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id PAA12353 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 15:45:53 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] State of the Nomic (slight return) Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 15:47:32 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-reply-to: <000f72758200521ISWEBNT@d...> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" Scoring is so far in whole numbers. It's up to the rules to allow fractional scores (or not to specify otherwise), and the Scorekeeper would only adhere to the rules. > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 3:50 PM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] State of the Nomic (slight return) > > > thank you > > as point of inquiry, is scoring required to be in whole numbers. > This seems to be the spirit of the rounding provision, but nowhere > expressed? Would this be in the discretion of the scorekeeper? > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Mon Feb 05 12:47:20 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 5 Feb 2001 20:47:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 98450 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2001 20:47:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Feb 2001 20:47:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 5 Feb 2001 20:47:19 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id PAA12483 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 15:47:18 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] State of the Nomic (slight return) Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 15:48:56 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-reply-to: <000f72758200521ISWEBNT@d...> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" By the way- It's customary (though certainly not required) to reply to the Proposal if your question is about the proposal. Someone should write a "Welcome to ..." document. --e > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 3:50 PM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] State of the Nomic (slight return) > > > thank you > > as point of inquiry, is scoring required to be in whole numbers. > This seems to be the spirit of the rounding provision, but nowhere > expressed? Would this be in the discretion of the scorekeeper? > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From pkirklan@e... Mon Feb 05 14:40:19 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 5 Feb 2001 22:40:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 30933 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2001 22:40:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Feb 2001 22:40:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta2 with SMTP; 5 Feb 2001 22:40:17 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Mon, 5 Feb 2001 16:57:56 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 5 Feb 01 16:49:35 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 5 Feb 01 16:49:25 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 16:49:22 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] State of the Nomic (slight return) Priority: normal In-reply-to: References: <000f72758200521ISWEBNT@d...> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <0019f5657220521ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" Thank you, but my question was more about scoring as it now stands than it was about the proposal. I understand that scoring is according to the rules, but prior to this point (the adoption of 311) there was no way to score in anything but round numbers. If under 311 someone were to award another player fractional points is the assumption that such a score would be rounded to the nearest intege because all other scoring requires such rounding. My secondary question is who if anyone has the authority to decide this question. Does it requrie the office of a scorekeeper to settle. From pkirklan@e... Mon Feb 05 14:51:42 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 5 Feb 2001 22:51:41 -0000 Received: (qmail 63337 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2001 22:51:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Feb 2001 22:51:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta3 with SMTP; 5 Feb 2001 23:52:45 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Mon, 5 Feb 2001 17:09:19 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 5 Feb 01 17:00:59 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 5 Feb 01 17:00:50 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 17:00:45 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Proposal 312 Priority: normal In-reply-to: X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <004ec1909230521ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" I have a question about the language of 312. first "per turn"needs to be clarified, the scorekeeper's turn or any player's turn? Second, I would like to question the use of points as a method of "payment" Are points to be understood as a currency, or are they not more properly to be understood as system of honors and awards. i have no objection to a scorekeeper beings awarded points for his service, but I am troubled about the degenaration of honors into payments. Are we already decaying to a system governed by honors to one by weatlh?! (For this reason I would have opposed 311, too late) It seems that the concern for the possibility of commerce would be best served by the creation of a currency (transferable awards other than points, for which we might find all sorts of creative uses) not the decay of points into a currency. I realize that this is largely besides the point, but it does weigh on the creation of the narrowness of the office of "Scorekeeper' when an office with broader powers may encompass this function. Is there no room between the proposed Chief Magistrate of 310 and the narrow administrative post of scorekeeper. P.S. I applaud you Eugene for your fine service to the community of Scatterbrains in tending ot the scoreboard and I hope that we find a way to reward you for it. From eventi@n... Mon Feb 05 14:54:10 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 5 Feb 2001 22:54:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 39837 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2001 22:54:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Feb 2001 22:54:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 5 Feb 2001 23:55:15 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id RAA24217 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 17:54:09 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] State of the Nomic (slight return) Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 17:55:47 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-reply-to: <0019f5657220521ISWEBNT@d...> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" Good point. You are correct that since it's not prohibited to transfer a fraction of a point, it's allowed. Even if all the other rules call for points to be in integers, you can still transfer a fraction of a point. And if there's an issue to be resolved, no-one but the Judge(212) has authority. --e (slow day) > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 5:49 PM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] State of the Nomic (slight return) > > > Thank you, but my question was more about scoring as it now > stands than it was about the proposal. I understand that scoring is > according to the rules, but prior to this point (the adoption of 311) > there was no way to score in anything but round numbers. If under > 311 someone were to award another player fractional points is the > assumption that such a score would be rounded to the nearest > intege because all other scoring requires such rounding. > > My secondary question is who if anyone has the authority to > decide this question. Does it requrie the office of a scorekeeper to > settle. > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Mon Feb 05 16:56:57 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 6 Feb 2001 00:56:54 -0000 Received: (qmail 31404 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2001 00:56:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 6 Feb 2001 00:56:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta3 with SMTP; 6 Feb 2001 01:57:58 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-13.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.198]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f160uqp55930 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:56:52 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <001501c08fd7$99c159e0$c6a811d0@computer> To: References: <004ec1909230521ISWEBNT@d...> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Proposal 312 Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:56:10 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" > P.S. I applaud you Eugene for your fine service to the community > of Scatterbrains in tending ot the scoreboard and I hope that we > find a way to reward you for it. > Hey! No ass-kissing the king! From bernardo@c... Mon Feb 05 17:02:56 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 6 Feb 2001 01:02:55 -0000 Received: (qmail 93258 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2001 01:02:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 6 Feb 2001 01:02:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta1 with SMTP; 6 Feb 2001 01:02:54 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-13.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.198]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f1612qp56359 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 20:02:52 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <002301c08fd8$704a4f80$c6a811d0@computer> To: References: <95mkss+ehvo@eGroups.com> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 20:02:10 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" Of course, of course. I thought that the polls closed automatically. It was a brilliant tactical move, in fact. This just reinforces my point: I'm not sure why people don't trust me. There are obviously others out here much more Machiavellian than I. I was just trying to help the community as a whole. ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 11:37 AM Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains > Well, you have to remember that the creator of the poll is the one who > closes it. I just waited until I had enough votes to win and then > changed my mind. If you would have voted the other way I would have > voted for it. The polling process keeps an in progress review, so I > knew what was going on the whole time. > > No risk, no worries. > > -Fritz > > --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Patrick D. Bernardo" > wrote: > > Slick move Fritz, voting against your own bill! It almost cost you > big > > time, though. I was in a good mood this morning, and voted my > conscience, > > however, I was *this* close to voting against, for the points. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: > > To: > > Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 11:19 AM > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Poll results for scatterbrains > > > > > > > > > > The following scatterbrains poll is now closed. Here are the > > > final results: > > > > > > > > > POLL QUESTION: Proposal 311 > > > > > > 1.) All Players shall have the right to > > > transfer points from their own score to > > > the score of another in whatever amount, > > > for whatever reason. In no case may a > > > player's score fall below zero using > > > this method. > > > > > > 2.) All point transfers shall be stated > > > publicly. All point transfers shall be > > > numbered sequentially, beginning with > > > 1001. Point transfer statements shall > > > have the following form: > > > > > > "Subject: Point Transfer X > > > I [name of player], of my own free will, > > > do transfer N points to [name of > > > recipient]." > > > > > > 3.) Point transfers may take place at > > > any time. They are effective exactly 24 > > > hours after their public statement. > > > Players may explain the reasons behind > > > their transfer of points but are not > > > required to. > > > > > > 4.) Point transfers shall be deemed > > > null and void if they do not follow the > > > proscribed procedure. In the case of a > > > dispute or an accusation of fraud the > > > current Judge, as determined in rule > > > 212, shall determine the legality of any > > > transfer using all available evidence. > > > If that Judge is one of the immediate > > > parties to the current transfer (either > > > giving or receiving points) he shall be > > > relived of his duties in this matter and > > > the previous Judge shall take > > > responsibility, following the procedure > > > fo > > > > > > CHOICES AND RESULTS > > > - Yes, the best thing since sliced bread., 3 votes, 60.00% > > > - No, this sucked., 2 votes, 40.00% > > > > > > INDIVIDUAL VOTES > > > - Yes, the best thing since sliced bread. > > > - barturo@e... > > > - bernardo@c... > > > - eventi@n... > > > - No, this sucked. > > > - f_hemker@h... > > > - sga5892@n... > > > > > > > > > For more information about this group, please visit > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scatterbrains > > > > > > For help with Yahoo! Groups, please visit > > > http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/ > > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Mon Feb 05 17:03:37 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 6 Feb 2001 01:03:37 -0000 Received: (qmail 38897 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2001 01:03:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 6 Feb 2001 01:03:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta3 with SMTP; 6 Feb 2001 02:04:40 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-13.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.198]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f1613Xp56408 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 20:03:34 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <002b01c08fd8$893c1d20$c6a811d0@computer> To: References: Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] State of the Nomic Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 20:02:52 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" Damn, man, losing that prop meant more than a 20 point swing in my relative score. ----- Original Message ----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia To: Scatterbrains Nomic Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 12:54 PM Subject: [scatterbrains] State of the Nomic > The Scores (whether or not I have the right to tell you) > > Bob: 20 > Fritz: 19 > Steven: 19 > Eugene: 54 > Pat: 28 > > And so, without further ado... > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From pkirklan@e... Mon Feb 05 17:03:47 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 6 Feb 2001 01:03:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 95559 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2001 01:03:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 6 Feb 2001 01:03:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta3 with SMTP; 6 Feb 2001 02:04:51 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:21:22 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 5 Feb 01 19:13:01 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 5 Feb 01 19:12:59 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:12:58 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Proposal 312 Priority: normal In-reply-to: <001501c08fd7$99c159e0$c6a811d0@computer> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <0015e2221010621ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" But only some players can here MY voice in the lines I write. I woudl like to take this oppurtunity as a plea for a gift of some points to give me a jump start at thsi late stage in the game. I would be grateful for any pure gift, but especially ask you Patrick as my introducer and thsu the beneficiary of rewards for my introuduction for an even split of the five points you gained through me. I hope that you take the new oppurtunity to proivde me this gift of 2.5 points, and the benefactor may be rewarded more than the beneficiary. (Although I fear that the wisdom of the author of 311(my office number reversed) may prevent the rewards being as great as I had once hoped p From pkirklan@e... Mon Feb 05 17:06:15 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 6 Feb 2001 01:06:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 45058 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2001 01:06:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 6 Feb 2001 01:06:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta1 with SMTP; 6 Feb 2001 01:06:13 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:23:50 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 5 Feb 01 19:15:30 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 5 Feb 01 19:15:08 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:15:08 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] State of the Nomic Priority: normal In-reply-to: <002b01c08fd8$893c1d20$c6a811d0@computer> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <003a75023010621ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" I hope it wasn't a bad time to ask From pkirklan@e... Mon Feb 05 17:14:39 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 6 Feb 2001 01:14:39 -0000 Received: (qmail 67558 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2001 01:14:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 6 Feb 2001 01:14:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta3 with SMTP; 6 Feb 2001 02:15:42 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:32:15 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 5 Feb 01 19:23:55 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 5 Feb 01 19:23:44 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 19:23:35 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Priority: normal In-reply-to: <002301c08fd8$704a4f80$c6a811d0@computer> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <001801532010621ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" i am leaving patrick I urge you to consider carefully From eventi@n... Mon Feb 05 20:42:40 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 6 Feb 2001 04:42:40 -0000 Received: (qmail 97546 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2001 04:42:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 6 Feb 2001 04:42:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 6 Feb 2001 05:43:44 -0000 Received: from win (win.venti.nyic.com [64.29.109.18]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id XAA11420 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2001 23:42:38 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <006501c08ff7$3aa72320$126d1d40@v...> To: References: <004ec1909230521ISWEBNT@d...> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Proposal 312 Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 23:42:06 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" I meant per players turn. 306 defines one turn. I suppose 311 makes points into the currency of the land. Any other currency we could come up with would just wind up being exchanged for points. And we don't have any real property, so in a way, you're awarded for success in proposals, and you can use that reward as a means of exchange. The reason for the narrowness of the Scorekeeper's role is that I'm tired. Seriously, it's gotta be done, and I want to make the job simple and non time consuming enough so that whoever gets the job will actually do it. And after Pat's Call For Judgement, it became quite obvious that the recording of the official score should not be taken for granted. And as for the personal tribute, you can buy me beer if you're ever in Jersey. I don't think I'll be going to Chicago soon. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Kirkland" To: Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 6:00 PM Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Proposal 312 > I have a question about the language of 312. first "per turn"needs > to be clarified, the scorekeeper's turn or any player's turn? > > Second, I would like to question the use of points as a method of > "payment" Are points to be understood as a currency, or are they > not more properly to be understood as system of honors and > awards. i have no objection to a scorekeeper beings awarded > points for his service, but I am troubled about the degenaration of > honors into payments. Are we already decaying to a system > governed by honors to one by weatlh?! > (For this reason I would have opposed 311, too late) > > It seems that the concern for the possibility of commerce would be > best served by the creation of a currency (transferable awards other > than points, for which we might find all sorts of creative uses) not > the decay of points into a currency. > > I realize that this is largely besides the point, but it does weigh on > the creation of the narrowness of the office of "Scorekeeper' when > an office with broader powers may encompass this function. Is > there no room between the proposed Chief Magistrate of 310 and > the narrow administrative post of scorekeeper. > > P.S. I applaud you Eugene for your fine service to the community > of Scatterbrains in tending ot the scoreboard and I hope that we > find a way to reward you for it. > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Mon Feb 05 20:46:34 2001 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 73350 invoked by uid 7800); 6 Feb 2001 04:46:33 -0000 Date: 6 Feb 2001 04:46:33 -0000 Message-ID: <981434793.161192986.42048.l10@yahoogroups.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-eGroups-Application: files From: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: File - rules.html Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="-----007813463900224565330037892161" -------007813463900224565330037892161 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit File : rules.html Description : The HTML Rules File Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms -------007813463900224565330037892161 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="rules.html" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 [Attachment content not displayed.] -------007813463900224565330037892161-- From eventi@n... Tue Feb 06 06:26:25 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 6 Feb 2001 14:26:24 -0000 Received: (qmail 81969 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2001 14:26:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 6 Feb 2001 14:26:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 6 Feb 2001 14:26:22 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id JAA09060 for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 09:26:21 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] File - rules.html Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 09:27:58 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-reply-to: <981434793.161192986.42048.l10@yahoogroups.com> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" If anyone hasn't noticed, I had a slight hack-attack on Thursday night, leading well into Saturday. The new files are at www.scatterbrains.com/rules.html --e > -----Original Message----- > From: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > [mailto:scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com] > Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 11:47 PM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [scatterbrains] File - rules.html > > > > > File : rules.html > Description : The HTML Rules File > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Tue Feb 06 07:42:31 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 6 Feb 2001 15:42:28 -0000 Received: (qmail 6881 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2001 15:42:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 6 Feb 2001 15:42:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 6 Feb 2001 15:42:22 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-14.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.199]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f16FgHp20386 for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 10:42:17 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <000f01c09053$4ae0b6a0$c7a811d0@computer> To: References: <001801532010621ISWEBNT@d...> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 10:41:35 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" What should I be considering? ----- Original Message ----- From: Paul Kirkland To: Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 8:23 PM Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains > i am leaving > patrick I urge you to consider carefully > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Tue Feb 06 07:46:35 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 6 Feb 2001 15:46:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 2029 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2001 15:46:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 6 Feb 2001 15:46:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 6 Feb 2001 15:46:32 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-14.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.199]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f16FkSp20850 for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 10:46:28 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <001f01c09053$e0762ba0$c7a811d0@computer> To: References: Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] File - rules.html Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 10:45:46 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" I'm confused. Do you mean that you had a hack-attack in the sense that some do-no-gooder broke into our site, and basically ran amok, or do you mean that you had a hack-attack in the sense that you were bored and decided to stay up all night making groovy Scatterbrains websites, or do you mean that you blew off work and Scatterbrains and played Hack, that cool, refreshing game? All this e-lingo in this place (pun *definitely* intended) is making me feel painfully unhip. ----- Original Message ----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia To: Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 9:27 AM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] File - rules.html > If anyone hasn't noticed, I had a slight hack-attack on Thursday night, > leading well into Saturday. The new files are at > www.scatterbrains.com/rules.html > --e > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > [mailto:scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com] > > Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 11:47 PM > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: [scatterbrains] File - rules.html > > > > > > > > > > File : rules.html > > Description : The HTML Rules File > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Tue Feb 06 07:54:19 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 6 Feb 2001 15:54:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 60259 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2001 15:54:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 6 Feb 2001 15:54:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 6 Feb 2001 15:54:17 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id KAA17421 for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 10:54:13 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] File - rules.html Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 10:55:50 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-reply-to: <001f01c09053$e0762ba0$c7a811d0@computer> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" >From the Jargon File: http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/jargon/html/entry/hack-attack.html It's basically typing until your fingers bleed. I stayed up Thurs. Worked Fri, came home and hacked at it until Saturday night. I even wrote parts of it on my pager and mailed it to myself... The design's mostly stolen, but the backend application which generates it is a true thing of beauty. > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 10:46 AM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] File - rules.html > > > I'm confused. Do you mean that you had a hack-attack in the > sense that some > do-no-gooder broke into our site, and basically ran amok, or do you mean > that you had a hack-attack in the sense that you were bored and decided to > stay up all night making groovy Scatterbrains websites, or do you > mean that > you blew off work and Scatterbrains and played Hack, that cool, refreshing > game? All this e-lingo in this place (pun *definitely* intended) > is making > me feel painfully unhip. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Eugene Ventimiglia > To: > Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 9:27 AM > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] File - rules.html > > > > If anyone hasn't noticed, I had a slight hack-attack on Thursday night, > > leading well into Saturday. The new files are at > > www.scatterbrains.com/rules.html > > --e > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > > [mailto:scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com] > > > Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 11:47 PM > > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > > Subject: [scatterbrains] File - rules.html > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > File : rules.html > > > Description : The HTML Rules File > > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com From pkirklan@e... Tue Feb 06 08:02:10 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 6 Feb 2001 16:02:09 -0000 Received: (qmail 84268 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2001 16:02:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 6 Feb 2001 16:02:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta1 with SMTP; 6 Feb 2001 16:02:04 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Tue, 6 Feb 2001 10:19:34 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 6 Feb 01 10:11:22 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 6 Feb 01 10:11:17 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 10:11:15 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Priority: normal In-reply-to: <000f01c09053$4ae0b6a0$c7a811d0@computer> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <004313419160621ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" Giving me points. 2.5 to be precise Did you see this? I woudl like to take this oppurtunity as a plea for a gift of some points to give me a jump start at thsi late stage in the game. I would be grateful for any pure gift, but especially ask you Patrick as my introducer and thsu the beneficiary of rewards for my introuduction for an even split of the five points you gained through me. I hope that you take the new oppurtunity to proivde me this gift of 2.5 points, and the benefactor may be rewarded more than the beneficiary. (Although I fear that the wisdom of the author of 311(my office number reversed) may prevent the rewards being as great as I had once hoped I was hoping for a gift in the course of the night From eventi@n... Tue Feb 06 08:06:15 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 6 Feb 2001 16:06:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 60640 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2001 16:06:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 6 Feb 2001 16:06:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 6 Feb 2001 16:06:12 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id LAA18655 for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 11:06:06 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 11:07:43 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-reply-to: <004313419160621ISWEBNT@d...> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" I think someone should give him the square root of seven points. It's a little more than 2.5, and irrational (in both the mathematical and the Spock sense). > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 11:11 AM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains > > > Giving me points. > 2.5 to be precise > > Did you see this? > > > I woudl like to take this oppurtunity as a plea for a gift of some > points to give me a jump start at thsi late stage in the game. I > would be grateful for any pure gift, but especially ask you Patrick > as my introducer and thsu the beneficiary of rewards for my > introuduction for an even split of the five points you gained through > me. > I hope that you take the new oppurtunity to proivde me this gift of > 2.5 > points, and the benefactor may be rewarded more than the > beneficiary. > (Although I fear that the wisdom of the author of 311(my office > number > reversed) may prevent the rewards being as great as I had once > hoped > > I was hoping for a gift in the course of the night > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From pkirklan@e... Tue Feb 06 08:13:33 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 6 Feb 2001 16:13:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 1297 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2001 16:13:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 6 Feb 2001 16:13:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta2 with SMTP; 6 Feb 2001 16:13:31 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Tue, 6 Feb 2001 10:31:00 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 6 Feb 01 10:22:48 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 6 Feb 01 10:22:28 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 10:22:22 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Priority: normal In-reply-to: References: <004313419160621ISWEBNT@d...> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <004000031160621ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" But 2.5 points would be rational incuding in the Spock sense. Maybe everyone could give me exactly half a point. From eventi@n... Tue Feb 06 08:16:21 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 6 Feb 2001 16:16:21 -0000 Received: (qmail 9803 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2001 16:16:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 6 Feb 2001 16:16:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 6 Feb 2001 17:17:22 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id LAA19572 for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 11:16:14 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 11:17:52 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-reply-to: <004000031160621ISWEBNT@d...> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" CLOSE THE BORDERS!!!!!!! These recent immigrants (well this one) has become a burden to the respectable citizens. > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 11:22 AM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains > > > But 2.5 points would be rational incuding in the Spock sense. > > Maybe everyone could give me exactly half a point. > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From sga5892@n... Tue Feb 06 08:17:42 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: sga5892@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 6 Feb 2001 16:17:39 -0000 Received: (qmail 94355 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2001 16:17:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 6 Feb 2001 16:17:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-gw4.njit.edu) (128.235.251.32) by mta2 with SMTP; 6 Feb 2001 16:17:38 -0000 Received: from mailhost.njit.edu (mailhost.njit.edu [128.235.251.108]) by mail-gw4.njit.edu (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f16GHaJ23841 for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 11:17:36 -0500 Received: from steve0 (dhcp194-216.njit.edu) by mailhost.njit.edu (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9) with SMTP id <0G8C004PKFXBD9@m...> for scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 11:17:35 -0500 (EST) Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Tue, 06 Feb 2001 11:17:44 -0500 Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 11:17:43 -0500 Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 312 To: "'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'" Reply-to: "sga5892@n..." Message-id: <01C0902E.6D2AF100.sga5892@n...> Organization: NJIT MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit From: "Steven G. Arturo" minor grips about this proposal... to make the job easier, i suggest not requring the scorekeeper to tally points until the scoring portion of the turn. the amount of points you begin the turn with will be the points you have through the vote. this is rather odd, since transactions can occur well before a vote has completed, such as a transaction to buy a vote. this does make the office easier to handle, and there is a definitive time when one is to get paid (a bi-weekly salary, say). with the above, disputes can be brought up during the next turn (do i get any points for being a co-author?) what date is to be listed? the date the scorer writes it on the table or the date of the occurance? other than details, you are in line to getting my vote (unless i smell a point gathering scheme brewing). eug, give paul a little incentive to play... you are in a good position to redistribute wealth and in a better position to guarantee the longevity of the group through charity. be a humanitarian monarch while you still can. steve0 -----Original Message----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia [SMTP:eventi@n...] Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 12:58 PM To: Scatterbrains Nomic Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 312 Scorekeeper: The office of scorekeeper shall be created for the purpose of maintaining and reporting the official score of the game. The scorekeeper must record and make public any changes to a player's score within 2 business days of the event which causes the score change. Any disputes with the reported score must be announced within 5 business days of the report. The scorekeeping record shall consist of a detailed list of entries, each corresponding to a score adjustment. Each entry shall contain the date, the player's name, a brief description of the reason for the adjustment, and the positive or negative score adjustment. The scorekeeper is a public employee, and as such is hired and paid by the population. His salary is one point per turn, collected one point from each player after N turns, where N equals the number of players. The scorekeeper is selected from any applicants by the population. A poll shall be created with the names of perspective employees, and each player shall choose one. If the outcome is a tie, there shall be a runoff election, conducted in the same manner with only the tied applicants. The score maintained by the scorekeeper will be official and indisputable after the determined period. The scorekeeper may, at his discression, make adjustment records to remedy mistakes not caught before the dispute period. The scorekeeper is hired based on an infinately renewable contract. If a majority of players believe that the scorekeeper should be replaced, a new one is chosen in the afformentioned manner. The previous scorekeeper is entitled to apply for the job, and remains scorekeeper until such time as a new scorekeeper is selected. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com From f_hemker@h... Tue Feb 06 08:57:14 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: f_hemker@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 6 Feb 2001 16:57:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 51407 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2001 16:57:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 6 Feb 2001 16:57:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO b05.egroups.com) (10.1.2.184) by mta1 with SMTP; 6 Feb 2001 16:57:11 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: f_hemker@h... Received: from [10.1.10.134] by b05.egroups.com with NNFMP; 06 Feb 2001 16:57:10 -0000 Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 16:57:07 -0000 To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Point Transfer 1001 Message-ID: <95pad3+i58f@eGroups.com> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 87 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 63.82.115.205 From: f_hemker@h... I Frederick M. Hemker IV, of my own free will, do transfer .5 points to Paul Kirkland. From pkirklan@e... Tue Feb 06 09:00:58 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 6 Feb 2001 17:00:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 24507 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2001 17:00:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 6 Feb 2001 17:00:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta2 with SMTP; 6 Feb 2001 17:00:48 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Tue, 6 Feb 2001 11:18:18 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 6 Feb 01 11:10:07 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 6 Feb 01 11:09:51 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 11:09:44 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Point Transfer 1001 Priority: normal In-reply-to: <95pad3+i58f@eGroups.com> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <006b01818170621ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" thank you fritz. I accept the .5 points From eventi@n... Tue Feb 06 10:04:38 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 6 Feb 2001 18:04:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 12959 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2001 18:04:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 6 Feb 2001 18:04:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 6 Feb 2001 19:05:41 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id NAA00122 for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 13:04:33 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 312 Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 13:06:10 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-reply-to: <01C0902E.6D2AF100.sga5892@n...> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" Responses below... > -----Original Message----- > From: Steven G. Arturo [mailto:sga5892@n...] > Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 11:18 AM > To: 'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com' > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 312 > > > minor grips about this proposal... > > to make the job easier, i suggest not requring the scorekeeper to tally > points until the scoring portion of the turn. the amount of points you > begin the turn with will be the points you have through the vote. > this is > rather odd, since transactions can occur well before a vote has > completed, > such as a transaction to buy a vote. this does make the office easier to > handle, and there is a definitive time when one is to get paid (a > bi-weekly > salary, say). This makes some sense, I don't think it's necessary, however. The scorekeeper can scan the list daily, see which transfers were made, and record them in the next 24 hours. Maybe the tally can be distributed after the vote, to cut down on noise pollution. > with the above, disputes can be brought up during the next turn (do i get > any points for being a co-author?) No. > > what date is to be listed? the date the scorer writes it on the table or > the date of the occurance? The date of the occurance. Like a checkbook. > > other than details, you are in line to getting my vote (unless i smell a > point gathering scheme brewing). > Thanks. > eug, give paul a little incentive to play... you are in a good > position to > redistribute wealth and in a better position to guarantee the > longevity of > the group through charity. be a humanitarian monarch while you still can. It's a game... play to win. Seriously, I'm setting up a little charity. Why don't you donate the money to me, and I'll match your contributions. --e > steve0 > > -----Original Message----- > From: Eugene Ventimiglia [SMTP:eventi@n...] > Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 12:58 PM > To: Scatterbrains Nomic > Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 312 > > Scorekeeper: > > The office of scorekeeper shall be created for the purpose of maintaining > and reporting the official score of the game. > > The scorekeeper must record and make public any changes to a > player's score > within 2 business days of the event which causes the score change. Any > disputes with the reported score must be announced within 5 business days > of > the report. > > The scorekeeping record shall consist of a detailed list of entries, each > corresponding to a score adjustment. Each entry shall contain the date, > the > player's name, a brief description of the reason for the adjustment, and > the > positive or negative score adjustment. > > The scorekeeper is a public employee, and as such is hired and paid by the > population. His salary is one point per turn, collected one point > from each > player after N turns, where N equals the number of players. > > The scorekeeper is selected from any applicants by the population. A poll > shall be created with the names of perspective employees, and each player > shall choose one. If the outcome is a tie, there shall be a runoff > election, > conducted in the same manner with only the tied applicants. > > The score maintained by the scorekeeper will be official and indisputable > after the determined period. The scorekeeper may, at his > discression, make > adjustment records to remedy mistakes not caught before the > dispute period. > > The scorekeeper is hired based on an infinately renewable contract. If a > majority of players believe that the scorekeeper should be replaced, a new > one is chosen in the afformentioned manner. The previous scorekeeper is > entitled to apply for the job, and remains scorekeeper until such > time as a > new scorekeeper is selected. > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From f_hemker@h... Tue Feb 06 10:17:22 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: f_hemker@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 6 Feb 2001 18:17:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 51599 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2001 18:17:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 6 Feb 2001 18:17:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO fl.egroups.com) (10.1.10.48) by mta1 with SMTP; 6 Feb 2001 18:17:14 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: f_hemker@h... Received: from [10.1.2.240] by fl.egroups.com with NNFMP; 06 Feb 2001 18:17:13 -0000 Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 18:17:12 -0000 To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: Proposal 312 Message-ID: <95pf38+frt5@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 2287 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 63.82.115.205 From: f_hemker@h... Instead of having the score keeper's tenure last until a majority objected, why don't you allow for periodic votes of confidence? You might have regularily scheduled votes of confidence where a majority must agree to keep the person in office, say every 10 turns, plus the option of getting rid of the person at an earlier point if need be. How about adding a term limit of some kind? Say, no more than 15 or 20 consecutive turns as score keeper. -Fritz --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Eugene Ventimiglia" wrote: > Scorekeeper: > > The office of scorekeeper shall be created for the purpose of maintaining > and reporting the official score of the game. > > The scorekeeper must record and make public any changes to a player's score > within 2 business days of the event which causes the score change. Any > disputes with the reported score must be announced within 5 business days of > the report. > > The scorekeeping record shall consist of a detailed list of entries, each > corresponding to a score adjustment. Each entry shall contain the date, the > player's name, a brief description of the reason for the adjustment, and the > positive or negative score adjustment. > > The scorekeeper is a public employee, and as such is hired and paid by the > population. His salary is one point per turn, collected one point from each > player after N turns, where N equals the number of players. > > The scorekeeper is selected from any applicants by the population. A poll > shall be created with the names of perspective employees, and each player > shall choose one. If the outcome is a tie, there shall be a runoff election, > conducted in the same manner with only the tied applicants. > > The score maintained by the scorekeeper will be official and indisputable > after the determined period. The scorekeeper may, at his discression, make > adjustment records to remedy mistakes not caught before the dispute period. > > The scorekeeper is hired based on an infinately renewable contract. If a > majority of players believe that the scorekeeper should be replaced, a new > one is chosen in the afformentioned manner. The previous scorekeeper is > entitled to apply for the job, and remains scorekeeper until such time as a > new From bernardo@c... Tue Feb 06 10:22:35 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 6 Feb 2001 18:22:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 85156 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2001 18:22:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 6 Feb 2001 18:22:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta3 with SMTP; 6 Feb 2001 19:23:38 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-15.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.200]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f16IMTp36908 for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 13:22:30 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <001401c09069$ad19f820$c8a811d0@computer> To: References: <004313419160621ISWEBNT@d...> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 13:21:49 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" > Giving me points. > 2.5 to be precise > I did know that you had that in mind, but, I'm still not sure what I need to consider. > Did you see this? > Yes. > > I woudl like to take this oppurtunity as a plea for a gift of some > points to give me a jump start at thsi late stage in the game. I > would be grateful for any pure gift, but especially ask you Patrick > as my introducer and thsu the beneficiary of rewards for my > introuduction for an even split of the five points you gained through > me. > I hope that you take the new oppurtunity to proivde me this gift of > 2.5 > points, and the benefactor may be rewarded more than the > beneficiary. In what way? From pkirklan@e... Tue Feb 06 10:26:48 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 6 Feb 2001 18:26:43 -0000 Received: (qmail 97687 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2001 18:26:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 6 Feb 2001 18:26:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta1 with SMTP; 6 Feb 2001 18:26:41 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Tue, 6 Feb 2001 12:44:04 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 6 Feb 01 12:35:54 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 6 Feb 01 12:35:36 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 12:35:27 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 312 Priority: normal In-reply-to: <95pf38+frt5@eGroups.com> References: X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <005db0444180621ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" periodic votes yes term limits, NO!!! From bernardo@c... Tue Feb 06 10:30:09 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 6 Feb 2001 18:30:09 -0000 Received: (qmail 7396 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2001 18:30:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 6 Feb 2001 18:30:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta3 with SMTP; 6 Feb 2001 19:31:12 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-15.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.200]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f16IU3p37658 for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 13:30:03 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <004801c0906a$bb6ba120$c8a811d0@computer> To: Subject: A suggestion to the new guy Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 13:29:23 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0045_01C09040.D15FD840" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" ------=_NextPart_000_0045_01C09040.D15FD840 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Paul, Is there a way that your email reader can include the replied to message as= well as your response? It can often make life easier. If you're unsure h= ow to do with your mail reader, you can say which one you are using, and I'= m sure one of the techno-geeks in this city can help you out. p. ------=_NextPart_000_0045_01C09040.D15FD840 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Paul,
 
Is there a way that your email reader can = include=20 the replied to message as well as your response?  It can often make li= fe=20 easier.  If you're unsure how to do with your mail reader, you can say= =20 which one you are using, and I'm sure one of the techno-geeks in this city = can=20 help you out.
 
p.
------=_NextPart_000_0045_01C09040.D15FD840-- From pkirklan@e... Tue Feb 06 10:31:07 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 6 Feb 2001 18:31:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 10259 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2001 18:31:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 6 Feb 2001 18:31:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta2 with SMTP; 6 Feb 2001 18:31:06 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Tue, 6 Feb 2001 12:48:32 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 6 Feb 01 12:40:22 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 6 Feb 01 12:40:14 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 12:40:07 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Priority: normal In-reply-to: <001401c09069$ad19f820$c8a811d0@computer> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <0067d3248180621ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" Consider giving me points. I am sure everyone is tired of hearing my pleas, but some of your points are because of me. You could give others the same split, but the added interest is to get me to concern myself with the good laws of the Scatterbrains community. My understanding of the CURRENT conventions regarding scoring suggest the possibility of giving points without losing points... that is where I was going... From pkirklan@e... Tue Feb 06 10:34:35 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 6 Feb 2001 18:34:06 -0000 Received: (qmail 267 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2001 18:34:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 6 Feb 2001 18:34:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta2 with SMTP; 6 Feb 2001 18:34:05 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Tue, 6 Feb 2001 12:51:31 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 6 Feb 01 12:43:20 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 6 Feb 01 12:43:03 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 12:43:02 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] A suggestion to the new guy Priority: normal In-reply-to: <004801c0906a$bb6ba120$c8a811d0@computer> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <0042e3151180621ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 6 Feb 01, at 13:29, Patrick D. Bernardo wrote: > Paul, > > Is there a way that your email reader can include the replied to > message as well as your response? It can often make life easier. If > you're unsure how to do with your mail reader, you can say which one > you are using, and I'm sure one of the techno-geeks in this city can > help you out. > > p. > yes, sorry From eventi@n... Tue Feb 06 10:46:35 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 6 Feb 2001 18:46:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 69288 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2001 18:46:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 6 Feb 2001 18:46:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 6 Feb 2001 18:46:33 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id NAA04693 for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 13:46:25 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] A suggestion to the new guy Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 13:48:02 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-reply-to: <004801c0906a$bb6ba120$c8a811d0@computer> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" Second that!!! What mail reader? I'll pass the request to my tech support dept. --e -----Original Message----- From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 1:29 PM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: [scatterbrains] A suggestion to the new guy Paul, Is there a way that your email reader can include the replied to message as well as your response? It can often make life easier. If you're unsure how to do with your mail reader, you can say which one you are using, and I'm sure one of the techno-geeks in this city can help you out. p. Yahoo! Groups Sponsor www. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com From pkirklan@e... Tue Feb 06 10:49:28 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 6 Feb 2001 18:49:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 76979 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2001 18:49:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 6 Feb 2001 18:49:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta1 with SMTP; 6 Feb 2001 18:49:26 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Tue, 6 Feb 2001 13:06:53 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 6 Feb 01 12:58:43 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 6 Feb 01 12:58:37 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 12:58:30 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] A suggestion to the new guy Priority: normal In-reply-to: References: <004801c0906a$bb6ba120$c8a811d0@computer> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <004a25306190621ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 6 Feb 01, at 13:48, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: OK OK > Second that!!! What mail reader? I'll pass the request to my tech > support dept. --e > > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 1:29 PM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [scatterbrains] A suggestion to the new guy > > > Paul, > > Is there a way that your email reader can include the replied to > message as well as your response? It can often make life easier. If > you're unsure how to do with your mail reader, you can say which one > you are using, and I'm sure one of the techno-geeks in this city can > help you out. > > p. > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > www. > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981485199/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > -> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Tue Feb 06 10:57:15 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 6 Feb 2001 18:57:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 82059 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2001 18:57:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 6 Feb 2001 18:57:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta1 with SMTP; 6 Feb 2001 18:57:12 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-15.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.200]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f16Iv7p40250 for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 13:57:08 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <005c01c0906e$83e996e0$c8a811d0@computer> To: References: <0067d3248180621ISWEBNT@d...> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 13:56:27 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" Paul: Please explain your understanding. As far as I see it, the only one who can give points without losing them is Eugene. Otherwise, I imagine that we are to read "transfer" in the literal sense (from Latin trans [=over] and the stem from fero ferre [to carry or bring] thus to bring or carry over.) It denotes that you are taking something from one place, and putting it in another. Hence, transferre ex nihilio is a logical absurdity. Patrick "don't make me bust out Cassel's Latin Dictionary on your ass" Bernardo ps- as for making you attached to the laws, well, I'm not sure why that's any concern of mine. First of all, the Man, who would have made you have respect for the law, was voted down. Secondly, if you desire to win, or at least have a little fun, that will bind you well enough. (I'm home sick with the flu, so I've got nothing better to do than be all pedantic. I can't really work.) ----- Original Message ----- From: Paul Kirkland To: Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 1:40 PM Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains > Consider giving me points. I am sure everyone is tired of hearing > my pleas, but some of your points are because of me. You could > give others the same split, but the added interest is to get me to > concern myself with the good laws of the Scatterbrains community. > > My understanding of the CURRENT conventions regarding scoring > suggest the possibility of giving points without losing points... that > is where I was going... > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Tue Feb 06 11:13:47 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 6 Feb 2001 19:13:46 -0000 Received: (qmail 12649 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2001 19:13:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 6 Feb 2001 19:13:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 6 Feb 2001 19:13:44 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id OAA07675 for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 14:13:41 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 14:15:18 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-reply-to: <005c01c0906e$83e996e0$c8a811d0@computer> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" SNIPPAGE > > (I'm home sick with the flu, so I've got nothing better to do than be all > pedantic. I can't really work.) Bob says go to Andy's Beer is good for the flu. --e From pkirklan@e... Tue Feb 06 11:36:05 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 6 Feb 2001 19:36:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 79609 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2001 19:36:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 6 Feb 2001 19:36:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta2 with SMTP; 6 Feb 2001 19:36:02 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Tue, 6 Feb 2001 13:53:27 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 6 Feb 01 13:45:17 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 6 Feb 01 13:44:56 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 13:44:48 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Priority: normal In-reply-to: <005c01c0906e$83e996e0$c8a811d0@computer> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <006ac2753190621ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 6 Feb 01, at 13:56, Patrick D. Bernardo wrote: . > Paul: > > Please explain your understanding. As far as I see it, the only one > who can give points without losing them is Eugene. Otherwise, I > imagine that we are to read "transfer" in the literal sense (from > Latin trans [=over] and the stem from fero ferre [to carry or bring] > thus to bring or carry over.) It denotes that you are taking > something from one place, and putting it in another. Hence, > transferre ex nihilio is a logical absurdity. > > Patrick "don't make me bust out Cassel's Latin Dictionary on your ass" > Bernardo > (Cf. TSZ I.15). This might be fun, but was an accident, I tried to paste somethng. patrick, since you are too busy reading the Latin dictionary to think I will spell out what I had in mind. My understanding is that the spirit of the law demands that all official scoring be done in whole numbers, but the new provision for exchange permits fractions. (I a also see no authority to prevent rounding up fractional gifts) I was working an a round and expand scheme. Thus if you could give me exactly .5 points, we could grow the economy with losses to no one. I suggested half of your reward for my introduction (which might be taken back) to veil the real reason for half points. Originally I hoped to hatch a plan to keep expanding both scores by giving points back and forth and build up points in one score with a deal to give some back. I.e, If i gave all of your points back a half at a time they woudl be doubled to one point in each of our scores. I am pretty sure the 24 hour waiting period would have screwed this up anyway. I asked you, patrick, because of the possiblity of starting these exchanges under the guise of a gift of joining points, but o well > ps- as for making you attached to the laws, well, I'm not sure why > that's any concern of mine. First of all, the Man, who would have > made you have respect for the law, was voted down. Secondly, if you > desire to win, or at least have a little fun, that will bind you well > enough. > As to the MAN too bad was not here in time for 310, Al. (unfortunately it appears to have turned you into the lesser rather than the greater Al) As to the laws, I did not say respect for the law, but "concern for GOOD law, at my current state of disadvantage on points, I am encouraged to vote agaisnt all laws as a method of scoring points and keeping them from my opponents regardless of the wisdom of those laws. Primarily the point was the need to close this loophole by either clarity or preferably an office with the power and discretion to avoid such idiocies. In any case, I believe I should be awarded a full point from the rounding of Fritz's gift at exactly 1200 est tomorrow. Anyone else who would like to share (literally) a point with me, I would be grateful. > (I'm home sick with the flu, so I've got nothing better to do than be > all pedantic. I can't really work.) ----- Original Message ----- > From: Paul Kirkland To: > Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 1:40 > PM Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains > > > > Consider giving me points. I am sure everyone is tired of hearing > > my pleas, but some of your points are because of me. You could give > > others the same split, but the added interest is to get me to > > concern myself with the good laws of the Scatterbrains community. > > > > My understanding of the CURRENT conventions regarding scoring > > suggest the possibility of giving points without losing points... > > that is where I was going... > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981485836/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > -> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From f_hemker@h... Tue Feb 06 11:46:54 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: f_hemker@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 6 Feb 2001 19:46:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 28387 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2001 19:46:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 6 Feb 2001 19:46:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hi.egroups.com) (10.1.10.41) by mta1 with SMTP; 6 Feb 2001 19:46:52 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: f_hemker@h... Received: from [10.1.10.109] by hi.egroups.com with NNFMP; 06 Feb 2001 19:46:52 -0000 Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 19:46:49 -0000 To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Message-ID: <95pkb9+a60s@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: <006ac2753190621ISWEBNT@d...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 4676 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 63.82.115.205 From: f_hemker@h... The evil specter of inflation raises its ugly head. Only points gained from getting rules passed cannot be fractional. I think that otherwise, especially in the sending of points from one to another, they are divisable. Somebody ought to pass a rule. Right? --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Paul Kirkland" wrote: > On 6 Feb 01, at 13:56, Patrick D. Bernardo wrote: > . > > > > Paul: > > > > Please explain your understanding. As far as I see it, the only one > > who can give points without losing them is Eugene. Otherwise, I > > imagine that we are to read "transfer" in the literal sense (from > > Latin trans [=over] and the stem from fero ferre [to carry or bring] > > thus to bring or carry over.) It denotes that you are taking > > something from one place, and putting it in another. Hence, > > transferre ex nihilio is a logical absurdity. > > > > Patrick "don't make me bust out Cassel's Latin Dictionary on your ass" > > Bernardo > > > (Cf. TSZ I.15). This might be fun, but was an accident, I tried to > paste somethng. > patrick, since you are too busy reading the Latin dictionary to think > I will spell out what I had in mind. My understanding is that the > spirit of the law demands that all official scoring be done in whole > numbers, but the new provision for exchange permits fractions. (I a > also see no authority to prevent rounding up fractional gifts) I was > working an a round and expand scheme. Thus if you could give me > exactly .5 points, we could grow the economy with losses to no > one. I suggested half of your reward for my introduction (which > might be taken back) to veil the real reason for half points. > > Originally I hoped to hatch a plan to keep expanding both scores > by giving points back and forth and build up points in one score > with a deal to give some back. I.e, If i gave all of your points back > a half at a time they woudl be doubled to one point in each of our > scores. > I am pretty sure the 24 hour waiting period would have screwed this > up anyway. > I asked you, patrick, because of the possiblity of starting these exchanges under the guise of a gift of joining points, but o well > > > ps- as for making you attached to the laws, well, I'm not sure why > > that's any concern of mine. First of all, the Man, who would have > > made you have respect for the law, was voted down. Secondly, if you > > desire to win, or at least have a little fun, that will bind you well > > enough. > > > As to the MAN too bad was not here in time for 310, Al. > (unfortunately it appears to have turned you into the lesser rather > than the greater Al) > > As to the laws, I did not say respect for the law, but "concern for > GOOD law, at my current state of disadvantage on points, I am > encouraged to vote agaisnt all laws as a method of scoring points > and keeping them from my opponents regardless of the wisdom of > those laws. > > Primarily the point was the need to close this loophole by either > clarity or preferably an office with the power and discretion to avoid > such idiocies. > > In any case, I believe I should be awarded a full point from the > rounding of Fritz's gift at exactly 1200 est tomorrow. Anyone else > who would like to share (literally) a point with me, I would be > grateful. > > > > (I'm home sick with the flu, so I've got nothing better to do than be > > all pedantic. I can't really work.) ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Paul Kirkland To: > > Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 1:40 > > PM Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains > > > > > > > Consider giving me points. I am sure everyone is tired of hearing > > > my pleas, but some of your points are because of me. You could give > > > others the same split, but the added interest is to get me to > > > concern myself with the good laws of the Scatterbrains community. > > > > > > My understanding of the CURRENT conventions regarding scoring > > > suggest the possibility of giving points without losing points... > > > that is where I was going... > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981485836/ > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > > -> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups From pkirklan@e... Tue Feb 06 12:03:48 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 6 Feb 2001 20:03:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 74299 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2001 20:03:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 6 Feb 2001 20:03:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta1 with SMTP; 6 Feb 2001 20:03:16 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Tue, 6 Feb 2001 14:20:42 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 6 Feb 01 14:12:33 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 6 Feb 01 14:12:14 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 14:12:09 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Priority: normal In-reply-to: <95pkb9+a60s@eGroups.com> References: <006ac2753190621ISWEBNT@d...> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <004dd4220200621ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 6 Feb 01, at 19:46, f_hemker@h... wrote: > The evil specter of inflation raises its ugly head. > > Only points gained from getting rules passed cannot be fractional. I > think that otherwise, especially in the sending of points from one to > another, they are divisable. > > Somebody ought to pass a rule. Right? Right. An authority to govern such matters woudl be even more efficient. but at present there is no such rule. But for now it is a question of interpretation. The rules as expressed do not leave room for fractional points. They offer a provison to preclude fractional points. It seems to me that the intention of the laws is to avoid fractioinal points. For now it must be assumed that rounding is essential to the efficiency of scoring, Otherwise no roundng would be permitted and a player could give someone an irrational number of (in the mathematical sense) points and the game could not continue because the scoring could not be completed. Without the expressed provison for it in the law, no one has the authority to determine the number of digits to which the scoring should be carried out. This problem can only be solved by default to the implied preference of the law for rounding. > > --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Paul Kirkland" wrote: > On > 6 Feb 01, at 13:56, Patrick D. Bernardo wrote: > . > > > > Paul: > > > > > Please explain your understanding. As far as I see it, the only one > > > who can give points without losing them is Eugene. Otherwise, I > > > imagine that we are to read "transfer" in the literal sense (from > > > Latin trans [=over] and the stem from fero ferre [to carry or bring] > > > thus to bring or carry over.) It denotes that you are taking > > > something from one place, and putting it in another. Hence, > > > transferre ex nihilio is a logical absurdity. > > > > Patrick "don't > make me bust out Cassel's Latin Dictionary on your ass" > > Bernardo > > > > (Cf. TSZ I.15). This might be fun, but was an accident, I tried > to > paste somethng. > patrick, since you are too busy reading the > Latin dictionary to think > I will spell out what I had in mind. My > understanding is that the > spirit of the law demands that all > official scoring be done in whole > numbers, but the new provision for > exchange permits fractions. (I a > also see no authority to prevent > rounding up fractional gifts) I was > working an a round and expand > scheme. Thus if you could give me > exactly .5 points, we could grow > the economy with losses to no > one. I suggested half of your reward > for my introduction (which > might be taken back) to veil the real > reason for half points. > > Originally I hoped to hatch a plan to keep > expanding both scores > by giving points back and forth and build up > points in one score > with a deal to give some back. I.e, If i gave > all of your points back > a half at a time they woudl be doubled to > one point in each of our > scores. > I am pretty sure the 24 hour > waiting period would have screwed this > up anyway. > I asked you, > patrick, because of the possiblity of starting these exchanges under > the guise of a gift of joining points, but o well > > > ps- as for > making you attached to the laws, well, I'm not sure why > > that's any > concern of mine. First of all, the Man, who would have > > made you > have respect for the law, was voted down. Secondly, if you > > desire > to win, or at least have a little fun, that will bind you well > > > enough. > > > As to the MAN too bad was not here in time for 310, Al. > > (unfortunately it appears to have turned you into the lesser rather > > than the greater Al) > > As to the laws, I did not say respect for > the law, but "concern for > GOOD law, at my current state of > disadvantage on points, I am > encouraged to vote agaisnt all laws as > a method of scoring points > and keeping them from my opponents > regardless of the wisdom of > those laws. > > Primarily the point was > the need to close this loophole by either > clarity or preferably an > office with the power and discretion to avoid > such idiocies. > > In > any case, I believe I should be awarded a full point from the > > rounding of Fritz's gift at exactly 1200 est tomorrow. Anyone else > > who would like to share (literally) a point with me, I would be > > grateful. > > > > (I'm home sick with the flu, so I've got nothing > better to do than be > > all pedantic. I can't really work.) ----- > Original Message ----- > > From: Paul Kirkland To: > > > Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 1:40 > > PM > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains > > > > > > > > Consider giving me points. I am sure everyone is tired of > hearing > > > my pleas, but some of your points are because of me. > You could give > > > others the same split, but the added interest is > to get me to > > > concern myself with the good laws of the > Scatterbrains community. > > > > > > My understanding of the CURRENT > conventions regarding scoring > > > suggest the possibility of giving > points without losing points... > > > that is where I was going... > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > > > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981485836/ > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > > > -> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981488814/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > -> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Tue Feb 06 12:41:22 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 6 Feb 2001 20:41:21 -0000 Received: (qmail 65305 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2001 20:41:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 6 Feb 2001 20:41:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 6 Feb 2001 20:41:18 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id PAA17432 for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 15:41:02 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 15:42:39 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-reply-to: <004dd4220200621ISWEBNT@d...> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" Implied presence of a law doesn't mean shit. Go fight it in court, if you want... Fritz is the current judge. Then again, your transfer isn't official until tomorrow, and might not ever get recorded... No law has been broken, so there's not much chance of getting a judgement in your favor. --e > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 3:12 PM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains > > > On 6 Feb 01, at 19:46, f_hemker@h... wrote: > > > The evil specter of inflation raises its ugly head. > > > > Only points gained from getting rules passed cannot be fractional. I > > think that otherwise, especially in the sending of points from one to > > another, they are divisable. > > > > Somebody ought to pass a rule. Right? > > Right. An authority to govern such matters woudl be even more > efficient. > but at present there is no such rule. > > But for now it is a question of interpretation. The rules as > expressed do not leave room for fractional points. They offer a > provison to preclude fractional points. It seems to me that the > intention of the laws is to avoid fractioinal points. For now it must > be assumed that rounding is essential to the efficiency of scoring, > Otherwise no roundng would be permitted and a player could give > someone an irrational number of (in the mathematical sense) > points and the game could not continue because the scoring could > not be completed. Without the expressed provison for it in the law, > no one has the authority to determine the number of digits to which > the scoring should be carried out. This problem can only be solved > by default to the implied preference of the law for rounding. > > > > > > --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Paul Kirkland" wrote: > On > > 6 Feb 01, at 13:56, Patrick D. Bernardo wrote: > . > > > > Paul: > > > > > > Please explain your understanding. As far as I see it, the only one > > > > who can give points without losing them is Eugene. Otherwise, I > > > > imagine that we are to read "transfer" in the literal sense (from > > > > Latin trans [=over] and the stem from fero ferre [to carry or bring] > > > > thus to bring or carry over.) It denotes that you are taking > > > > something from one place, and putting it in another. Hence, > > > > transferre ex nihilio is a logical absurdity. > > > > Patrick "don't > > make me bust out Cassel's Latin Dictionary on your ass" > > Bernardo > > > > > (Cf. TSZ I.15). This might be fun, but was an accident, I tried > > to > paste somethng. > patrick, since you are too busy reading the > > Latin dictionary to think > I will spell out what I had in mind. My > > understanding is that the > spirit of the law demands that all > > official scoring be done in whole > numbers, but the new provision for > > exchange permits fractions. (I a > also see no authority to prevent > > rounding up fractional gifts) I was > working an a round and expand > > scheme. Thus if you could give me > exactly .5 points, we could grow > > the economy with losses to no > one. I suggested half of your reward > > for my introduction (which > might be taken back) to veil the real > > reason for half points. > > Originally I hoped to hatch a plan to keep > > expanding both scores > by giving points back and forth and build up > > points in one score > with a deal to give some back. I.e, If i gave > > all of your points back > a half at a time they woudl be doubled to > > one point in each of our > scores. > I am pretty sure the 24 hour > > waiting period would have screwed this > up anyway. > I asked you, > > patrick, because of the possiblity of starting these exchanges under > > the guise of a gift of joining points, but o well > > > ps- as for > > making you attached to the laws, well, I'm not sure why > > that's any > > concern of mine. First of all, the Man, who would have > > made you > > have respect for the law, was voted down. Secondly, if you > > desire > > to win, or at least have a little fun, that will bind you well > > > > enough. > > > As to the MAN too bad was not here in time for 310, Al. > > > (unfortunately it appears to have turned you into the lesser rather > > > than the greater Al) > > As to the laws, I did not say respect for > > the law, but "concern for > GOOD law, at my current state of > > disadvantage on points, I am > encouraged to vote agaisnt all laws as > > a method of scoring points > and keeping them from my opponents > > regardless of the wisdom of > those laws. > > Primarily the point was > > the need to close this loophole by either > clarity or preferably an > > office with the power and discretion to avoid > such idiocies. > > In > > any case, I believe I should be awarded a full point from the > > > rounding of Fritz's gift at exactly 1200 est tomorrow. Anyone else > > > who would like to share (literally) a point with me, I would be > > > grateful. > > > > (I'm home sick with the flu, so I've got nothing > > better to do than be > > all pedantic. I can't really work.) ----- > > Original Message ----- > > From: Paul Kirkland To: > > > > Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 1:40 > > PM > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains > > > > > > > > > Consider giving me points. I am sure everyone is tired of > > hearing > > > my pleas, but some of your points are because of me. > > You could give > > > others the same split, but the added interest is > > to get me to > > > concern myself with the good laws of the > > Scatterbrains community. > > > > > > My understanding of the CURRENT > > conventions regarding scoring > > > suggest the possibility of giving > > points without losing points... > > > that is where I was going... > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > > > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > > > > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981485836/ > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > > > > -> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981488814/ > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > > -> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From f_hemker@h... Tue Feb 06 12:58:25 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: f_hemker@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 6 Feb 2001 20:58:24 -0000 Received: (qmail 29269 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2001 20:58:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 6 Feb 2001 20:58:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO cj.egroups.com) (10.1.2.82) by mta1 with SMTP; 6 Feb 2001 20:58:22 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: f_hemker@h... Received: from [10.1.2.91] by cj.egroups.com with NNFMP; 06 Feb 2001 20:58:21 -0000 Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 20:58:21 -0000 To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Message-ID: <95pohd+3cl6@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 7928 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 63.82.115.205 From: f_hemker@h... In rule 306, where it speaks of "all fractional scores shall be rounded up to the nearest integer," I take that to mean only in the sense that one is asinging points after multiplying 15 by n/t. In other senses, when I sent .5 to Paul for example, I can't see that the same thing applies. Only in asigning scores after the passing of a rule does one round up. Because I'm a party to this transfer, I sent Paul the .5, I don't think I can judge as to its legality or effect. I should have thought about that before I did it. I can see that we really need a scorekeeper for this sort of thing. However, I find it difficult to support any office that does not have a terminal point of tenure. -Fritz --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Eugene Ventimiglia" wrote: > Implied presence of a law doesn't mean shit. Go fight it in court, if you > want... Fritz is the current judge. Then again, your transfer isn't > official until tomorrow, and might not ever get recorded... No law has been > broken, so there's not much chance of getting a judgement in your favor. > > --e > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 3:12 PM > > To: scatterbrains@y... > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains > > > > > > On 6 Feb 01, at 19:46, f_hemker@h... wrote: > > > > > The evil specter of inflation raises its ugly head. > > > > > > Only points gained from getting rules passed cannot be fractional. I > > > think that otherwise, especially in the sending of points from one to > > > another, they are divisable. > > > > > > Somebody ought to pass a rule. Right? > > > > Right. An authority to govern such matters woudl be even more > > efficient. > > but at present there is no such rule. > > > > But for now it is a question of interpretation. The rules as > > expressed do not leave room for fractional points. They offer a > > provison to preclude fractional points. It seems to me that the > > intention of the laws is to avoid fractioinal points. For now it must > > be assumed that rounding is essential to the efficiency of scoring, > > Otherwise no roundng would be permitted and a player could give > > someone an irrational number of (in the mathematical sense) > > points and the game could not continue because the scoring could > > not be completed. Without the expressed provison for it in the law, > > no one has the authority to determine the number of digits to which > > the scoring should be carried out. This problem can only be solved > > by default to the implied preference of the law for rounding. > > > > > > > > > > --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Paul Kirkland" wrote: > On > > > 6 Feb 01, at 13:56, Patrick D. Bernardo wrote: > . > > > > Paul: > > > > > > > Please explain your understanding. As far as I see it, the only one > > > > > who can give points without losing them is Eugene. Otherwise, I > > > > > imagine that we are to read "transfer" in the literal sense (from > > > > > Latin trans [=over] and the stem from fero ferre [to carry or bring] > > > > > thus to bring or carry over.) It denotes that you are taking > > > > > something from one place, and putting it in another. Hence, > > > > > transferre ex nihilio is a logical absurdity. > > > > Patrick "don't > > > make me bust out Cassel's Latin Dictionary on your ass" > > Bernardo > > > > > > (Cf. TSZ I.15). This might be fun, but was an accident, I tried > > > to > paste somethng. > patrick, since you are too busy reading the > > > Latin dictionary to think > I will spell out what I had in mind. My > > > understanding is that the > spirit of the law demands that all > > > official scoring be done in whole > numbers, but the new provision for > > > exchange permits fractions. (I a > also see no authority to prevent > > > rounding up fractional gifts) I was > working an a round and expand > > > scheme. Thus if you could give me > exactly .5 points, we could grow > > > the economy with losses to no > one. I suggested half of your reward > > > for my introduction (which > might be taken back) to veil the real > > > reason for half points. > > Originally I hoped to hatch a plan to keep > > > expanding both scores > by giving points back and forth and build up > > > points in one score > with a deal to give some back. I.e, If i gave > > > all of your points back > a half at a time they woudl be doubled to > > > one point in each of our > scores. > I am pretty sure the 24 hour > > > waiting period would have screwed this > up anyway. > I asked you, > > > patrick, because of the possiblity of starting these exchanges under > > > the guise of a gift of joining points, but o well > > > ps- as for > > > making you attached to the laws, well, I'm not sure why > > that's any > > > concern of mine. First of all, the Man, who would have > > made you > > > have respect for the law, was voted down. Secondly, if you > > desire > > > to win, or at least have a little fun, that will bind you well > > > > > enough. > > > As to the MAN too bad was not here in time for 310, Al. > > > > (unfortunately it appears to have turned you into the lesser rather > > > > than the greater Al) > > As to the laws, I did not say respect for > > > the law, but "concern for > GOOD law, at my current state of > > > disadvantage on points, I am > encouraged to vote agaisnt all laws as > > > a method of scoring points > and keeping them from my opponents > > > regardless of the wisdom of > those laws. > > Primarily the point was > > > the need to close this loophole by either > clarity or preferably an > > > office with the power and discretion to avoid > such idiocies. > > In > > > any case, I believe I should be awarded a full point from the > > > > rounding of Fritz's gift at exactly 1200 est tomorrow. Anyone else > > > > who would like to share (literally) a point with me, I would be > > > > grateful. > > > > (I'm home sick with the flu, so I've got nothing > > > better to do than be > > all pedantic. I can't really work.) ----- > > > Original Message ----- > > From: Paul Kirkland To: > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 1:40 > > PM > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains > > > > > > > > > > Consider giving me points. I am sure everyone is tired of > > > hearing > > > my pleas, but some of your points are because of me. > > > You could give > > > others the same split, but the added interest is > > > to get me to > > > concern myself with the good laws of the > > > Scatterbrains community. > > > > > > My understanding of the CURRENT > > > conventions regarding scoring > > > suggest the possibility of giving > > > points without losing points... > > > that is where I was going... > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > > > > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > > > > > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981485836/ > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > > > > > -> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > > > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981488814/ > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > > > -> > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this g From pkirklan@e... Tue Feb 06 13:12:58 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 6 Feb 2001 21:12:40 -0000 Received: (qmail 85142 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2001 21:12:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 6 Feb 2001 21:12:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta1 with SMTP; 6 Feb 2001 21:12:38 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Tue, 6 Feb 2001 15:30:04 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 6 Feb 01 15:21:55 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 6 Feb 01 15:21:27 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 15:21:18 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Priority: normal In-reply-to: <95pohd+3cl6@eGroups.com> References: X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <0063e0430210621ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 6 Feb 01, at 20:58, f_hemker@h... wrote: > In rule 306, where it speaks of "all fractional scores shall be > rounded up to the nearest integer," I take that to mean only in the > sense that one is asinging points after multiplying 15 by n/t. In > other senses, when I sent .5 to Paul for example, I can't see that the > same thing applies. Only in asigning scores after the passing of a > rule does one round up. > > Because I'm a party to this transfer, I sent Paul the .5, I don't > think I can judge as to its legality or effect. I should have thought > about that before I did it. right your score is also in question. Under my theory it remains the same. who would be judge if it comes to that? > > I can see that we really need a scorekeeper for this sort of thing. > However, I find it difficult to support any office that does not have > a terminal point of tenure. > > -Fritz > > --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Eugene Ventimiglia" wrote: > > Implied presence of a law doesn't mean shit. Go fight it in court, if > you > want... Fritz is the current judge. Then again, your transfer > isn't > official until tomorrow, and might not ever get recorded... No > law has been > broken, so there's not much chance of getting a > judgement in your favor. > > --e > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > Sent: Tuesday, February > 06, 2001 3:12 PM > > To: scatterbrains@y... > > Subject: Re: > [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains > > > > > > On 6 > Feb 01, at 19:46, f_hemker@h... wrote: > > > > > The evil specter of > inflation raises its ugly head. > > > > > > Only points gained from > getting rules passed cannot be fractional. I > > > think that > otherwise, especially in the sending of points from one to > > > > another, they are divisable. > > > > > > Somebody ought to pass a > rule. Right? > > > > Right. An authority to govern such matters > woudl be even more > > efficient. > > but at present there is no such > rule. > > > > But for now it is a question of interpretation. The > rules as > > expressed do not leave room for fractional points. They > offer a > > provison to preclude fractional points. It seems to me > that the > > intention of the laws is to avoid fractioinal points. > For now it must > > be assumed that rounding is essential to the > efficiency of scoring, > > Otherwise no roundng would be permitted and > a player could give > > someone an irrational number of (in the > mathematical sense) > > points and the game could not continue because > the scoring could > > not be completed. Without the expressed > provison for it in the law, > > no one has the authority to determine > the number of digits to which > > the scoring should be carried out. > This problem can only be solved > > by default to the implied > preference of the law for rounding. > > > > > > > > > > --- In > scatterbrains@y..., "Paul Kirkland" wrote: > On > > > > 6 Feb 01, at 13:56, Patrick D. Bernardo wrote: > . > > > > Paul: > > > > > > > > Please explain your understanding. As far as I see it, the > only one > > > > > who can give points without losing them is Eugene. > Otherwise, I > > > > > imagine that we are to read "transfer" in the > literal sense (from > > > > > Latin trans [=over] and the stem from > fero ferre [to carry or bring] > > > > > thus to bring or carry over.) > It denotes that you are taking > > > > > something from one place, > and putting it in another. Hence, > > > > > transferre ex nihilio is > a logical absurdity. > > > > Patrick "don't > > > make me bust out > Cassel's Latin Dictionary on your ass" > > Bernardo > > > > > > (Cf. > TSZ I.15). This might be fun, but was an accident, I tried > > > to > > paste somethng. > patrick, since you are too busy reading the > > > > Latin dictionary to think > I will spell out what I had in mind. My > > > > understanding is that the > spirit of the law demands that all > > > > official scoring be done in whole > numbers, but the new provision > for > > > exchange permits fractions. (I a > also see no authority to > prevent > > > rounding up fractional gifts) I was > working an a round > and expand > > > scheme. Thus if you could give me > exactly .5 > points, we could grow > > > the economy with losses to no > one. I > suggested half of your reward > > > for my introduction (which > might > be taken back) to veil the real > > > reason for half points. > > > Originally I hoped to hatch a plan to keep > > > expanding both scores > > by giving points back and forth and build up > > > points in one > score > with a deal to give some back. I.e, If i gave > > > all of > your points back > a half at a time they woudl be doubled to > > > one > point in each of our > scores. > I am pretty sure the 24 hour > > > > waiting period would have screwed this > up anyway. > I asked you, > > > > patrick, because of the possiblity of starting these exchanges > under > > > the guise of a gift of joining points, but o well > > > > ps- as for > > > making you attached to the laws, well, I'm not sure > why > > that's any > > > concern of mine. First of all, the Man, who > would have > > made you > > > have respect for the law, was voted > down. Secondly, if you > > desire > > > to win, or at least have a > little fun, that will bind you well > > > > > enough. > > > As to the > MAN too bad was not here in time for 310, Al. > > > > (unfortunately > it appears to have turned you into the lesser rather > > > > than the > greater Al) > > As to the laws, I did not say respect for > > > the > law, but "concern for > GOOD law, at my current state of > > > > disadvantage on points, I am > encouraged to vote agaisnt all laws as > > > > a method of scoring points > and keeping them from my opponents > > > > regardless of the wisdom of > those laws. > > Primarily the > point was > > > the need to close this loophole by either > clarity or > preferably an > > > office with the power and discretion to avoid > > such idiocies. > > In > > > any case, I believe I should be awarded a > full point from the > > > > rounding of Fritz's gift at exactly 1200 > est tomorrow. Anyone else > > > > who would like to share (literally) > a point with me, I would be > > > > grateful. > > > > (I'm home sick > with the flu, so I've got nothing > > > better to do than be > > all > pedantic. I can't really work.) ----- > > > Original Message ----- > > > From: Paul Kirkland To: > > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 1:40 > > PM > > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains > > > > > > > > > > > Consider giving me points. I am sure everyone is > tired of > > > hearing > > > my pleas, but some of your points are > because of me. > > > You could give > > > others the same split, but > the added interest is > > > to get me to > > > concern myself with the > good laws of the > > > Scatterbrains community. > > > > > > My > understanding of the CURRENT > > > conventions regarding scoring > > > > suggest the possibility of giving > > > points without losing > points... > > > that is where I was going... > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > > > > > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > > > > > > more details > http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981485836/ > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > > > > > > -> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > > > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > > > > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981488814/ > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > > > > -> > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this g > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981493109/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > -> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Tue Feb 06 13:13:05 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 6 Feb 2001 21:12:55 -0000 Received: (qmail 69829 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2001 21:12:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 6 Feb 2001 21:12:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta3 with SMTP; 6 Feb 2001 22:13:58 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-09.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.194]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f16LCmp55707 for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 16:12:48 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <000701c09081$76d315e0$c2a811d0@computer> To: References: Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 16:12:06 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" This is where it's good to be the eugene. He could simply ignore Paul's request for the rounding up, and Paul would have nothing to sue over - since there is no act to call him on. But I think that your interpretation of the law, Paul, is a stretch. I prohibited fractional scoring for getting a law precisely for the reason that Fritz suggested - the score is being multiplied by a fraction. Things would get messy that way. But this law in no way implies or requires that scores achieved under different circumstances should be rounded up. Secondly, Fritz, in writing his transfer law clearly could have prohibited fractional transfers. Since he did not, and moreover since he did himself transfer a fractional amount to you, then I think that it is safe to say that his intent was to allow for the possibility of fractional transfers. ----- Original Message ----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia To: Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 3:42 PM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains > Implied presence of a law doesn't mean shit. Go fight it in court, if you > want... Fritz is the current judge. Then again, your transfer isn't > official until tomorrow, and might not ever get recorded... No law has been > broken, so there's not much chance of getting a judgement in your favor. > > --e > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 3:12 PM > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains > > > > > > On 6 Feb 01, at 19:46, f_hemker@h... wrote: > > > > > The evil specter of inflation raises its ugly head. > > > > > > Only points gained from getting rules passed cannot be fractional. I > > > think that otherwise, especially in the sending of points from one to > > > another, they are divisable. > > > > > > Somebody ought to pass a rule. Right? > > > > Right. An authority to govern such matters woudl be even more > > efficient. > > but at present there is no such rule. > > > > But for now it is a question of interpretation. The rules as > > expressed do not leave room for fractional points. They offer a > > provison to preclude fractional points. It seems to me that the > > intention of the laws is to avoid fractioinal points. For now it must > > be assumed that rounding is essential to the efficiency of scoring, > > Otherwise no roundng would be permitted and a player could give > > someone an irrational number of (in the mathematical sense) > > points and the game could not continue because the scoring could > > not be completed. Without the expressed provison for it in the law, > > no one has the authority to determine the number of digits to which > > the scoring should be carried out. This problem can only be solved > > by default to the implied preference of the law for rounding. > > > > > > > > > > --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Paul Kirkland" wrote: > On > > > 6 Feb 01, at 13:56, Patrick D. Bernardo wrote: > . > > > > Paul: > > > > > > > Please explain your understanding. As far as I see it, the only one > > > > > who can give points without losing them is Eugene. Otherwise, I > > > > > imagine that we are to read "transfer" in the literal sense (from > > > > > Latin trans [=over] and the stem from fero ferre [to carry or bring] > > > > > thus to bring or carry over.) It denotes that you are taking > > > > > something from one place, and putting it in another. Hence, > > > > > transferre ex nihilio is a logical absurdity. > > > > Patrick "don't > > > make me bust out Cassel's Latin Dictionary on your ass" > > Bernardo > > > > > > (Cf. TSZ I.15). This might be fun, but was an accident, I tried > > > to > paste somethng. > patrick, since you are too busy reading the > > > Latin dictionary to think > I will spell out what I had in mind. My > > > understanding is that the > spirit of the law demands that all > > > official scoring be done in whole > numbers, but the new provision for > > > exchange permits fractions. (I a > also see no authority to prevent > > > rounding up fractional gifts) I was > working an a round and expand > > > scheme. Thus if you could give me > exactly .5 points, we could grow > > > the economy with losses to no > one. I suggested half of your reward > > > for my introduction (which > might be taken back) to veil the real > > > reason for half points. > > Originally I hoped to hatch a plan to keep > > > expanding both scores > by giving points back and forth and build up > > > points in one score > with a deal to give some back. I.e, If i gave > > > all of your points back > a half at a time they woudl be doubled to > > > one point in each of our > scores. > I am pretty sure the 24 hour > > > waiting period would have screwed this > up anyway. > I asked you, > > > patrick, because of the possiblity of starting these exchanges under > > > the guise of a gift of joining points, but o well > > > ps- as for > > > making you attached to the laws, well, I'm not sure why > > that's any > > > concern of mine. First of all, the Man, who would have > > made you > > > have respect for the law, was voted down. Secondly, if you > > desire > > > to win, or at least have a little fun, that will bind you well > > > > > enough. > > > As to the MAN too bad was not here in time for 310, Al. > > > > (unfortunately it appears to have turned you into the lesser rather > > > > than the greater Al) > > As to the laws, I did not say respect for > > > the law, but "concern for > GOOD law, at my current state of > > > disadvantage on points, I am > encouraged to vote agaisnt all laws as > > > a method of scoring points > and keeping them from my opponents > > > regardless of the wisdom of > those laws. > > Primarily the point was > > > the need to close this loophole by either > clarity or preferably an > > > office with the power and discretion to avoid > such idiocies. > > In > > > any case, I believe I should be awarded a full point from the > > > > rounding of Fritz's gift at exactly 1200 est tomorrow. Anyone else > > > > who would like to share (literally) a point with me, I would be > > > > grateful. > > > > (I'm home sick with the flu, so I've got nothing > > > better to do than be > > all pedantic. I can't really work.) ----- > > > Original Message ----- > > From: Paul Kirkland To: > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 1:40 > > PM > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains > > > > > > > > > > Consider giving me points. I am sure everyone is tired of > > > hearing > > > my pleas, but some of your points are because of me. > > > You could give > > > others the same split, but the added interest is > > > to get me to > > > concern myself with the good laws of the > > > Scatterbrains community. > > > > > > My understanding of the CURRENT > > > conventions regarding scoring > > > suggest the possibility of giving > > > points without losing points... > > > that is where I was going... > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > > > > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > > > > > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981485836/ > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > > > > > -> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > > > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981488814/ > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > > > -> > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From pkirklan@e... Tue Feb 06 13:18:07 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 6 Feb 2001 21:18:06 -0000 Received: (qmail 206 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2001 21:18:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 6 Feb 2001 21:18:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta1 with SMTP; 6 Feb 2001 21:18:04 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Tue, 6 Feb 2001 15:35:31 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 6 Feb 01 15:27:22 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 6 Feb 01 15:27:15 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 15:27:05 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Priority: normal In-reply-to: References: <004dd4220200621ISWEBNT@d...> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <006803135210621ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 6 Feb 01, at 15:42, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > Implied presence of a law doesn't mean shit. Go fight it in court, if > you want... Fritz is the current judge. Then again, your transfer > isn't official until tomorrow, and might not ever get recorded... No > law has been broken, so there's not much chance of getting a judgement > in your favor. > > --e so am I to take this to mean that you will record fractional scores as fractions? to how many decimal places? On what authority would you round an irrational number, for example. Or would you not, someone could end the game by giving another player pi pionts? it seems to me that avoiding such a problem is part of the reason for the rounding to an integer rule. there is not precedent for rounding to something other than an integer. > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 3:12 PM > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains > > > > > > On 6 Feb 01, at 19:46, f_hemker@h... wrote: > > > > > The evil specter of inflation raises its ugly head. > > > > > > Only points gained from getting rules passed cannot be fractional. > > > I think that otherwise, especially in the sending of points from > > > one to another, they are divisable. > > > > > > Somebody ought to pass a rule. Right? > > > > Right. An authority to govern such matters woudl be even more > > efficient. > > but at present there is no such rule. > > > > But for now it is a question of interpretation. The rules as > > expressed do not leave room for fractional points. They offer a > > provison to preclude fractional points. It seems to me that the > > intention of the laws is to avoid fractioinal points. For now it > > must be assumed that rounding is essential to the efficiency of > > scoring, Otherwise no roundng would be permitted and a player could > > give someone an irrational number of (in the mathematical sense) > > points and the game could not continue because the scoring could not > > be completed. Without the expressed provison for it in the law, no > > one has the authority to determine the number of digits to which the > > scoring should be carried out. This problem can only be solved by > > default to the implied preference of the law for rounding. > > > > > > > > > > --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Paul Kirkland" wrote: > > > > On 6 Feb 01, at 13:56, Patrick D. Bernardo wrote: > . > > > > > > > Paul: > > > > > > > Please explain your understanding. As far as I see it, the only > > > > one > > > > > who can give points without losing them is Eugene. Otherwise, > > > > > I > > > > > imagine that we are to read "transfer" in the literal sense > > > > (from > Latin trans [=over] and the stem from fero ferre [to > > > > carry or bring] > > > > > thus to bring or carry over.) It denotes that you are taking > > > > > > > > > > something from one place, and putting it in another. Hence, > > > > > transferre ex nihilio is a logical absurdity. > > > > Patrick > > > "don't make me bust out Cassel's Latin Dictionary on your ass" > > > > > Bernardo > > > > > > (Cf. TSZ I.15). This might be fun, but was an accident, I > > > > > tried > > > to > paste somethng. > patrick, since you are too busy reading > > > the Latin dictionary to think > I will spell out what I had in > > > mind. My understanding is that the > spirit of the law demands > > > that all official scoring be done in whole > numbers, but the new > > > provision for exchange permits fractions. (I a > also see no > > > authority to prevent rounding up fractional gifts) I was > working > > > an a round and expand scheme. Thus if you could give me > exactly > > > .5 points, we could grow the economy with losses to no > one. I > > > suggested half of your reward for my introduction (which > might > > > be taken back) to veil the real reason for half points. > > > > > Originally I hoped to hatch a plan to keep expanding both scores > > > > by giving points back and forth and build up points in one score > > > > with a deal to give some back. I.e, If i gave all of your points > > > back > a half at a time they woudl be doubled to one point in each > > > of our > scores. > I am pretty sure the 24 hour waiting period > > > would have screwed this > up anyway. > I asked you, patrick, > > > because of the possiblity of starting these exchanges under the > > > guise of a gift of joining points, but o well > > > ps- as for > > > making you attached to the laws, well, I'm not sure why > > that's > > > any concern of mine. First of all, the Man, who would have > > > > > made you have respect for the law, was voted down. Secondly, if > > > you > > desire to win, or at least have a little fun, that will > > > bind you well > > enough. > > > As to the MAN too bad was not here > > > in time for 310, Al. > > > > (unfortunately it appears to have turned you into the lesser > > > > rather than the greater Al) > > As to the laws, I did not say > > > > respect for > > > the law, but "concern for > GOOD law, at my current state of > > > disadvantage on points, I am > encouraged to vote agaisnt all laws > > > as a method of scoring points > and keeping them from my opponents > > > regardless of the wisdom of > those laws. > > Primarily the point > > > was the need to close this loophole by either > clarity or > > > preferably an office with the power and discretion to avoid > such > > > idiocies. > > In any case, I believe I should be awarded a full > > > point from the > rounding of Fritz's gift at exactly 1200 est > > > tomorrow. Anyone else > who would like to share (literally) a > > > point with me, I would be > grateful. > > > > (I'm home sick with > > > the flu, so I've got nothing better to do than be > > all > > > pedantic. I can't really work.) ----- Original Message ----- > > > > > From: Paul Kirkland To: > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 1:40 > > PM Subject: Re: > > > [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains > > > > > > > > > > Consider giving me points. I am sure everyone is tired of > > > hearing > > > my pleas, but some of your points are because of me. > > > You could give > > > others the same split, but the added interest > > > is to get me to > > > concern myself with the good laws of the > > > Scatterbrains community. > > > > > > My understanding of the > > > CURRENT conventions regarding scoring > > > suggest the > > > possibility of giving points without losing points... > > > that > > > is where I was going... > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > > > > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here > > > for > > > > > more details > > > > > http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981485836/ > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > ---_ > > > > > -> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here > > > for more details > > > http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981488814/ > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > ---_ -> > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981492084/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > -> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Tue Feb 06 13:19:28 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 6 Feb 2001 21:19:28 -0000 Received: (qmail 71493 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2001 21:19:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 6 Feb 2001 21:19:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta1 with SMTP; 6 Feb 2001 21:19:26 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-09.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.194]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f16LJMp56616 for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 16:19:22 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <000f01c09082$61b87280$c2a811d0@computer> To: References: <006ac2753190621ISWEBNT@d...> <004dd4220200621ISWEBNT@d...> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 16:18:40 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" > > Somebody ought to pass a rule. Right? > > Right. An authority to govern such matters woudl be even more > efficient. > but at present there is no such rule. > I disagree - we don't particularly need a rule. Points gained by passing a law cannot be fractional, points gained by transfers can be fractional. > Otherwise no roundng would be permitted and a player could give > someone an irrational number of (in the mathematical sense) > points and the game could not continue because the scoring could > not be completed. 10 + 7^1/2 is an irrational (in the mathematical sense), but a scorable score. For example, if you had 190 + 7^1/2 points, and you got 9 points for passing a law you would still be over the 200 and you would win. It's imaginary numbers (in the mathematical sense) that could represent a problem, but the sucker who takes this transfer would deserve the problems that it creates (do *you* want -8^1/2 points?). I think the problem is more theoretical than actual. From eventi@n... Tue Feb 06 13:21:15 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 6 Feb 2001 21:21:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 76458 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2001 21:21:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 6 Feb 2001 21:21:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 6 Feb 2001 21:21:11 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id QAA22055 for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 16:21:08 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 16:22:45 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-reply-to: <000701c09081$76d315e0$c2a811d0@computer> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" There are many reasons why it's good to be me... Not only _can_ I deny the request, I already did. There's no rule violation to cite. You can continue to claim to have the extra rounded up score, but you might as well claim you're Bugs Bunny. I'll be the King of France, while we're at it. --e > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 4:12 PM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains > > > This is where it's good to be the eugene. He could simply ignore Paul's > request for the rounding up, and Paul would have nothing to sue > over - since > there is no act to call him on. > > But I think that your interpretation of the law, Paul, is a stretch. I > prohibited fractional scoring for getting a law precisely for the reason > that Fritz suggested - the score is being multiplied by a > fraction. Things > would get messy that way. But this law in no way implies or requires that > scores achieved under different circumstances should be rounded up. > > Secondly, Fritz, in writing his transfer law clearly could have prohibited > fractional transfers. Since he did not, and moreover since he did himself > transfer a fractional amount to you, then I think that it is safe to say > that his intent was to allow for the possibility of fractional transfers. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Eugene Ventimiglia > To: > Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 3:42 PM > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains > > > > Implied presence of a law doesn't mean shit. Go fight it in > court, if you > > want... Fritz is the current judge. Then again, your transfer isn't > > official until tomorrow, and might not ever get recorded... No law has > been > > broken, so there's not much chance of getting a judgement in your favor. > > > > --e > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > > Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 3:12 PM > > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains > > > > > > > > > On 6 Feb 01, at 19:46, f_hemker@h... wrote: > > > > > > > The evil specter of inflation raises its ugly head. > > > > > > > > Only points gained from getting rules passed cannot be > fractional. I > > > > think that otherwise, especially in the sending of points > from one to > > > > another, they are divisable. > > > > > > > > Somebody ought to pass a rule. Right? > > > > > > Right. An authority to govern such matters woudl be even more > > > efficient. > > > but at present there is no such rule. > > > > > > But for now it is a question of interpretation. The rules as > > > expressed do not leave room for fractional points. They offer a > > > provison to preclude fractional points. It seems to me that the > > > intention of the laws is to avoid fractioinal points. For now it must > > > be assumed that rounding is essential to the efficiency of scoring, > > > Otherwise no roundng would be permitted and a player could give > > > someone an irrational number of (in the mathematical sense) > > > points and the game could not continue because the scoring could > > > not be completed. Without the expressed provison for it in the law, > > > no one has the authority to determine the number of digits to which > > > the scoring should be carried out. This problem can only be solved > > > by default to the implied preference of the law for rounding. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Paul Kirkland" > wrote: > On > > > > 6 Feb 01, at 13:56, Patrick D. Bernardo wrote: > . > > > > > Paul: > > > > > > > > Please explain your understanding. As far as I see it, > the only one > > > > > > who can give points without losing them is Eugene. > Otherwise, I > > > > > > imagine that we are to read "transfer" in the literal > sense (from > > > > > > Latin trans [=over] and the stem from fero ferre [to > carry or bring] > > > > > > thus to bring or carry over.) It denotes that you are > taking > > > > > > something from one place, and putting it in another. Hence, > > > > > > transferre ex nihilio is a logical absurdity. > > > > Patrick "don't > > > > make me bust out Cassel's Latin Dictionary on your ass" > > > Bernardo > > > > > > > (Cf. TSZ I.15). This might be fun, but was an accident, I tried > > > > to > paste somethng. > patrick, since you are too busy reading the > > > > Latin dictionary to think > I will spell out what I had in > mind. My > > > > understanding is that the > spirit of the law demands that all > > > > official scoring be done in whole > numbers, but the new > provision for > > > > exchange permits fractions. (I a > also see no authority to prevent > > > > rounding up fractional gifts) I was > working an a round and expand > > > > scheme. Thus if you could give me > exactly .5 points, we > could grow > > > > the economy with losses to no > one. I suggested half of > your reward > > > > for my introduction (which > might be taken back) to veil the real > > > > reason for half points. > > Originally I hoped to hatch a > plan to keep > > > > expanding both scores > by giving points back and forth and build up > > > > points in one score > with a deal to give some back. I.e, If i gave > > > > all of your points back > a half at a time they woudl be doubled to > > > > one point in each of our > scores. > I am pretty sure the 24 hour > > > > waiting period would have screwed this > up anyway. > I asked you, > > > > patrick, because of the possiblity of starting these exchanges under > > > > the guise of a gift of joining points, but o well > > > ps- as for > > > > making you attached to the laws, well, I'm not sure why > > > that's any > > > > concern of mine. First of all, the Man, who would have > > made you > > > > have respect for the law, was voted down. Secondly, if you > > > desire > > > > to win, or at least have a little fun, that will bind you well > > > > > > enough. > > > As to the MAN too bad was not here in time > for 310, Al. > > > > > (unfortunately it appears to have turned you into the > lesser rather > > > > > than the greater Al) > > As to the laws, I did not say respect for > > > > the law, but "concern for > GOOD law, at my current state of > > > > disadvantage on points, I am > encouraged to vote agaisnt > all laws as > > > > a method of scoring points > and keeping them from my opponents > > > > regardless of the wisdom of > those laws. > > Primarily > the point was > > > > the need to close this loophole by either > clarity or preferably an > > > > office with the power and discretion to avoid > such > idiocies. > > In > > > > any case, I believe I should be awarded a full point from the > > > > > rounding of Fritz's gift at exactly 1200 est tomorrow. > Anyone else > > > > > who would like to share (literally) a point with me, I would be > > > > > grateful. > > > > (I'm home sick with the flu, so I've got nothing > > > > better to do than be > > all pedantic. I can't really work.) ----- > > > > Original Message ----- > > From: Paul Kirkland > To: > > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 1:40 > > PM > > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for > scatterbrains > > > > > > > > > > > Consider giving me points. I am sure everyone is tired of > > > > hearing > > > my pleas, but some of your points are because of me. > > > > You could give > > > others the same split, but the added > interest is > > > > to get me to > > > concern myself with the good laws of the > > > > Scatterbrains community. > > > > > > My understanding of the CURRENT > > > > conventions regarding scoring > > > suggest the possibility > of giving > > > > points without losing points... > > > that is where I was > going... > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email > to: > > > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > > > > > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups > Click here for > > > > > > more details > http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981485836/ > > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > > > > > > -> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > > > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups > Click here for > > > > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981488814/ > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > > > > -> > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Tue Feb 06 13:24:59 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 6 Feb 2001 21:24:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 3037 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2001 21:24:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 6 Feb 2001 21:24:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 6 Feb 2001 22:25:51 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id QAA22444 for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 16:24:43 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 16:26:20 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-reply-to: <006803135210621ISWEBNT@d...> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" That's precisely why I wanted to give you an irrational number... They're more trouble than they're worth. You have 0.5 points. 1/7 is equal to precisely 1/7, and the square root of 7 is just that. I would too, except that 58 - the square root of 7 (it's already getting tedious) can't be reduced either. If you want there to be a prohibition of fractions (or irrational numbers), propose it. It doesn't do anyone any good to pretend there already is such a law. > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 4:27 PM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains > > > On 6 Feb 01, at 15:42, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > Implied presence of a law doesn't mean shit. Go fight it in court, if > > you want... Fritz is the current judge. Then again, your transfer > > isn't official until tomorrow, and might not ever get recorded... No > > law has been broken, so there's not much chance of getting a judgement > > in your favor. > > > > --e > so am I to take this to mean that you will record fractional scores > as fractions? to how many decimal places? On what authority > would you round an irrational number, for example. Or would you > not, someone could end the game by giving another player pi > pionts? it seems to me that avoiding such a problem is part of the > reason for the rounding to an integer rule. there is not precedent for > rounding to something other than an integer. > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > > Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 3:12 PM > > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains > > > > > > > > > On 6 Feb 01, at 19:46, f_hemker@h... wrote: > > > > > > > The evil specter of inflation raises its ugly head. > > > > > > > > Only points gained from getting rules passed cannot be fractional. > > > > I think that otherwise, especially in the sending of points from > > > > one to another, they are divisable. > > > > > > > > Somebody ought to pass a rule. Right? > > > > > > Right. An authority to govern such matters woudl be even more > > > efficient. > > > but at present there is no such rule. > > > > > > But for now it is a question of interpretation. The rules as > > > expressed do not leave room for fractional points. They offer a > > > provison to preclude fractional points. It seems to me that the > > > intention of the laws is to avoid fractioinal points. For now it > > > must be assumed that rounding is essential to the efficiency of > > > scoring, Otherwise no roundng would be permitted and a player could > > > give someone an irrational number of (in the mathematical sense) > > > points and the game could not continue because the scoring could not > > > be completed. Without the expressed provison for it in the law, no > > > one has the authority to determine the number of digits to which the > > > scoring should be carried out. This problem can only be solved by > > > default to the implied preference of the law for rounding. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Paul Kirkland" wrote: > > > > > On 6 Feb 01, at 13:56, Patrick D. Bernardo wrote: > . > > > > > > > > Paul: > > > > > > > > Please explain your understanding. As far as I see it, the only > > > > > one > > > > > > who can give points without losing them is Eugene. Otherwise, > > > > > > I > > > > > > imagine that we are to read "transfer" in the literal sense > > > > > (from > Latin trans [=over] and the stem from fero ferre [to > > > > > carry or bring] > > > > > > thus to bring or carry over.) It denotes that you are taking > > > > > > > > > > > > something from one place, and putting it in another. Hence, > > > > > > transferre ex nihilio is a logical absurdity. > > > > Patrick > > > > "don't make me bust out Cassel's Latin Dictionary on your ass" > > > > > > Bernardo > > > > > > > (Cf. TSZ I.15). This might be fun, but was an accident, I > > > > > > tried > > > > to > paste somethng. > patrick, since you are too busy reading > > > > the Latin dictionary to think > I will spell out what I had in > > > > mind. My understanding is that the > spirit of the law demands > > > > that all official scoring be done in whole > numbers, but the new > > > > provision for exchange permits fractions. (I a > also see no > > > > authority to prevent rounding up fractional gifts) I was > working > > > > an a round and expand scheme. Thus if you could give me > exactly > > > > .5 points, we could grow the economy with losses to no > one. I > > > > suggested half of your reward for my introduction (which > might > > > > be taken back) to veil the real reason for half points. > > > > > > Originally I hoped to hatch a plan to keep expanding both scores > > > > > by giving points back and forth and build up points in one score > > > > > with a deal to give some back. I.e, If i gave all of your points > > > > back > a half at a time they woudl be doubled to one point in each > > > > of our > scores. > I am pretty sure the 24 hour waiting period > > > > would have screwed this > up anyway. > I asked you, patrick, > > > > because of the possiblity of starting these exchanges under the > > > > guise of a gift of joining points, but o well > > > ps- as for > > > > making you attached to the laws, well, I'm not sure why > > that's > > > > any concern of mine. First of all, the Man, who would have > > > > > > made you have respect for the law, was voted down. Secondly, if > > > > you > > desire to win, or at least have a little fun, that will > > > > bind you well > > enough. > > > As to the MAN too bad was not here > > > > in time for 310, Al. > > > > > (unfortunately it appears to have turned you into the lesser > > > > > rather than the greater Al) > > As to the laws, I did not say > > > > > respect for > > > > the law, but "concern for > GOOD law, at my current state of > > > > disadvantage on points, I am > encouraged to vote agaisnt all laws > > > > as a method of scoring points > and keeping them from my opponents > > > > regardless of the wisdom of > those laws. > > Primarily the point > > > > was the need to close this loophole by either > clarity or > > > > preferably an office with the power and discretion to avoid > such > > > > idiocies. > > In any case, I believe I should be awarded a full > > > > point from the > rounding of Fritz's gift at exactly 1200 est > > > > tomorrow. Anyone else > who would like to share (literally) a > > > > point with me, I would be > grateful. > > > > (I'm home sick with > > > > the flu, so I've got nothing better to do than be > > all > > > > pedantic. I can't really work.) ----- Original Message ----- > > > > > > From: Paul Kirkland To: > > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 1:40 > > PM Subject: Re: > > > > [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains > > > > > > > > > > > Consider giving me points. I am sure everyone is tired of > > > > hearing > > > my pleas, but some of your points are because of me. > > > > You could give > > > others the same split, but the added interest > > > > is to get me to > > > concern myself with the good laws of the > > > > Scatterbrains community. > > > > > > My understanding of the > > > > CURRENT conventions regarding scoring > > > suggest the > > > > possibility of giving points without losing points... > > > that > > > > is where I was going... > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > > > > > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here > > > > for > > > > > > more details > > > > > > http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981485836/ > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > ---_ > > > > > > -> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > > > > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > > > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here > > > > for more details > > > > http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981488814/ > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > ---_ -> > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981492084/ > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > > -> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From f_hemker@h... Tue Feb 06 13:25:02 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: f_hemker@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 6 Feb 2001 21:24:29 -0000 Received: (qmail 18843 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2001 21:24:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 6 Feb 2001 21:24:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hj.egroups.com) (10.1.10.42) by mta1 with SMTP; 6 Feb 2001 21:24:28 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: f_hemker@h... Received: from [10.1.2.56] by hj.egroups.com with NNFMP; 06 Feb 2001 21:24:26 -0000 Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 21:24:24 -0000 To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Message-ID: <95pq28+4hdl@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: <000701c09081$76d315e0$c2a811d0@computer> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 8863 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 63.82.115.205 From: f_hemker@h... Thank God for original intent!!! At least I'm not dead so you can still ask me. Maybe I had an esoteric meaning in mind... Maybe it just never occured to me. -Fritz --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Patrick D. Bernardo" wrote: > This is where it's good to be the eugene. He could simply ignore Paul's > request for the rounding up, and Paul would have nothing to sue over - since > there is no act to call him on. > > But I think that your interpretation of the law, Paul, is a stretch. I > prohibited fractional scoring for getting a law precisely for the reason > that Fritz suggested - the score is being multiplied by a fraction. Things > would get messy that way. But this law in no way implies or requires that > scores achieved under different circumstances should be rounded up. > > Secondly, Fritz, in writing his transfer law clearly could have prohibited > fractional transfers. Since he did not, and moreover since he did himself > transfer a fractional amount to you, then I think that it is safe to say > that his intent was to allow for the possibility of fractional transfers. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Eugene Ventimiglia > To: > Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 3:42 PM > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains > > > > Implied presence of a law doesn't mean shit. Go fight it in court, if you > > want... Fritz is the current judge. Then again, your transfer isn't > > official until tomorrow, and might not ever get recorded... No law has > been > > broken, so there's not much chance of getting a judgement in your favor. > > > > --e > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > > Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 3:12 PM > > > To: scatterbrains@y... > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains > > > > > > > > > On 6 Feb 01, at 19:46, f_hemker@h... wrote: > > > > > > > The evil specter of inflation raises its ugly head. > > > > > > > > Only points gained from getting rules passed cannot be fractional. I > > > > think that otherwise, especially in the sending of points from one to > > > > another, they are divisable. > > > > > > > > Somebody ought to pass a rule. Right? > > > > > > Right. An authority to govern such matters woudl be even more > > > efficient. > > > but at present there is no such rule. > > > > > > But for now it is a question of interpretation. The rules as > > > expressed do not leave room for fractional points. They offer a > > > provison to preclude fractional points. It seems to me that the > > > intention of the laws is to avoid fractioinal points. For now it must > > > be assumed that rounding is essential to the efficiency of scoring, > > > Otherwise no roundng would be permitted and a player could give > > > someone an irrational number of (in the mathematical sense) > > > points and the game could not continue because the scoring could > > > not be completed. Without the expressed provison for it in the law, > > > no one has the authority to determine the number of digits to which > > > the scoring should be carried out. This problem can only be solved > > > by default to the implied preference of the law for rounding. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Paul Kirkland" wrote: > On > > > > 6 Feb 01, at 13:56, Patrick D. Bernardo wrote: > . > > > > Paul: > > > > > > > > Please explain your understanding. As far as I see it, the only one > > > > > > who can give points without losing them is Eugene. Otherwise, I > > > > > > imagine that we are to read "transfer" in the literal sense (from > > > > > > Latin trans [=over] and the stem from fero ferre [to carry or bring] > > > > > > thus to bring or carry over.) It denotes that you are taking > > > > > > something from one place, and putting it in another. Hence, > > > > > > transferre ex nihilio is a logical absurdity. > > > > Patrick "don't > > > > make me bust out Cassel's Latin Dictionary on your ass" > > Bernardo > > > > > > > (Cf. TSZ I.15). This might be fun, but was an accident, I tried > > > > to > paste somethng. > patrick, since you are too busy reading the > > > > Latin dictionary to think > I will spell out what I had in mind. My > > > > understanding is that the > spirit of the law demands that all > > > > official scoring be done in whole > numbers, but the new provision for > > > > exchange permits fractions. (I a > also see no authority to prevent > > > > rounding up fractional gifts) I was > working an a round and expand > > > > scheme. Thus if you could give me > exactly .5 points, we could grow > > > > the economy with losses to no > one. I suggested half of your reward > > > > for my introduction (which > might be taken back) to veil the real > > > > reason for half points. > > Originally I hoped to hatch a plan to keep > > > > expanding both scores > by giving points back and forth and build up > > > > points in one score > with a deal to give some back. I.e, If i gave > > > > all of your points back > a half at a time they woudl be doubled to > > > > one point in each of our > scores. > I am pretty sure the 24 hour > > > > waiting period would have screwed this > up anyway. > I asked you, > > > > patrick, because of the possiblity of starting these exchanges under > > > > the guise of a gift of joining points, but o well > > > ps- as for > > > > making you attached to the laws, well, I'm not sure why > > that's any > > > > concern of mine. First of all, the Man, who would have > > made you > > > > have respect for the law, was voted down. Secondly, if you > > desire > > > > to win, or at least have a little fun, that will bind you well > > > > > > enough. > > > As to the MAN too bad was not here in time for 310, Al. > > > > > (unfortunately it appears to have turned you into the lesser rather > > > > > than the greater Al) > > As to the laws, I did not say respect for > > > > the law, but "concern for > GOOD law, at my current state of > > > > disadvantage on points, I am > encouraged to vote agaisnt all laws as > > > > a method of scoring points > and keeping them from my opponents > > > > regardless of the wisdom of > those laws. > > Primarily the point was > > > > the need to close this loophole by either > clarity or preferably an > > > > office with the power and discretion to avoid > such idiocies. > > In > > > > any case, I believe I should be awarded a full point from the > > > > > rounding of Fritz's gift at exactly 1200 est tomorrow. Anyone else > > > > > who would like to share (literally) a point with me, I would be > > > > > grateful. > > > > (I'm home sick with the flu, so I've got nothing > > > > better to do than be > > all pedantic. I can't really work.) ----- > > > > Original Message ----- > > From: Paul Kirkland To: > > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 1:40 > > PM > > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains > > > > > > > > > > > Consider giving me points. I am sure everyone is tired of > > > > hearing > > > my pleas, but some of your points are because of me. > > > > You could give > > > others the same split, but the added interest is > > > > to get me to > > > concern myself with the good laws of the > > > > Scatterbrains community. > > > > > > My understanding of the CURRENT > > > > conventions regarding scoring > > > suggest the possibility of giving > > > > points without losing points... > > > that is where I was going... > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > > > > > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > > > > > > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981485836/ > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > > > > > > -> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > > > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > > > > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981488814/ > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > > > > -> > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe fr From bernardo@c... Tue Feb 06 13:30:51 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 6 Feb 2001 21:30:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 24351 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2001 21:30:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 6 Feb 2001 21:30:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta3 with SMTP; 6 Feb 2001 22:31:53 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-09.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.194]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f16LUfp57727 for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 16:30:41 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <001d01c09083$f664f1a0$c2a811d0@computer> To: References: <006ac2753190621ISWEBNT@d...> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 16:29:59 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" > (Cf. TSZ I.15). This might be fun, but was an accident, I tried to > paste somethng. I tried to Cf. this (BTW - Cf. is from another latin word built off of fero, ferre, this time with the prefix "con" [together] added, thus giving the sense of "bring together". Thus it should only be used when referring to multiple passages, and is especially useful when you mean that the sense can be gotten by "bringing together" the various quotes.) According to Kaufmann, Book I of TSZ only has 10 parts. Thereafter, Zarathustra's speeches begin. If you mean that I'm supposed to keep counting after that, well, ok, but that leaves me at "On enjoying and suffering the passions." I did find a nice line there ("You milked your cow, melancholy; now you drink the sweet milk of her udder." I'm going to save this one for my next breakup.) Otherwise, what did you mean... > patrick, since you are too busy reading the Latin dictionary to think I haven't even gotten out the dictionary yet. > I will spell out what I had in mind. I suggested half of your reward for my introduction (which > might be taken back) to veil the real reason for half points. > > Originally I hoped to hatch a plan to keep expanding both scores > by giving points back and forth and build up points in one score > with a deal to give some back. I.e, If i gave all of your points back > a half at a time they woudl be doubled to one point in each of our > scores. > I asked you, patrick, because of the possiblity of starting these exchanges under the guise of a gift of joining points, but o well > Note to Paul: you have my off-list email address. It is helpful to advise hoped-for confederates of your plot, preferably far before you have revealed said plot to the rest of the group. > > ps- as for making you attached to the laws, well, I'm not sure why > > that's any concern of mine. First of all, the Man, who would have > > made you have respect for the law, was voted down. Secondly, if you > > desire to win, or at least have a little fun, that will bind you well > > enough. > > > As to the MAN too bad was not here in time for 310, Al. > (unfortunately it appears to have turned you into the lesser rather > than the greater Al) > It took me awhile to figure this one out, but then I remembered that when I sent you the original email about joining up, I said that I was "playing Al Gore" by suing after I had lost. > As to the laws, I did not say respect for the law, but "concern for > GOOD law, at my current state of disadvantage on points, I am > encouraged to vote agaisnt all laws as a method of scoring points > and keeping them from my opponents regardless of the wisdom of > those laws. > I'm not sure that this makes sense. You should obviously have as a first priority those laws which benefit yourself first and foremost. However, it is possible for laws to benefit both yourself and others. If there is any perception that you are trying to profit at the expense of others, it will probably be rather difficult to pass the bill. OTOH, if you succeed in getting bills stopped which will give out points, how in the world will you ever move up? From pkirklan@e... Tue Feb 06 13:32:31 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 6 Feb 2001 21:32:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 41345 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2001 21:32:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 6 Feb 2001 21:32:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta1 with SMTP; 6 Feb 2001 21:32:01 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Tue, 6 Feb 2001 15:49:27 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 6 Feb 01 15:41:18 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 6 Feb 01 15:40:55 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 15:40:46 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Priority: normal In-reply-to: <95pq28+4hdl@eGroups.com> References: <000701c09081$76d315e0$c2a811d0@computer> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <007752749210621ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 6 Feb 01, at 21:24, f_hemker@h... wrote: I suppose it is hard to invent implied laws when the framers are at there to tell you there intention. > Thank God for original intent!!! At least I'm not dead so you can > still ask me. Maybe I had an esoteric meaning in mind... Maybe it > just never occured to me. > > -Fritz > --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Patrick D. Bernardo" > wrote: > This is where it's good to be the eugene. He could simply > ignore Paul's > request for the rounding up, and Paul would have > nothing to sue over - since > there is no act to call him on. > > But > I think that your interpretation of the law, Paul, is a stretch. I > > prohibited fractional scoring for getting a law precisely for the > reason > that Fritz suggested - the score is being multiplied by a > fraction. Things > would get messy that way. But this law in no way > implies or requires that > scores achieved under different > circumstances should be rounded up. > > Secondly, Fritz, in writing > his transfer law clearly could have prohibited > fractional transfers. > Since he did not, and moreover since he did himself > transfer a > fractional amount to you, then I think that it is safe to say > that > his intent was to allow for the possibility of fractional transfers. > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Eugene Ventimiglia > > To: > Sent: Tuesday, February 06, > 2001 3:42 PM > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for > scatterbrains > > > > Implied presence of a law doesn't mean shit. Go > fight it in court, if you > > want... Fritz is the current judge. > Then again, your transfer isn't > > official until tomorrow, and might > not ever get recorded... No law has > been > > broken, so there's not > much chance of getting a judgement in your favor. > > > > --e > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Paul Kirkland > [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > > Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 3:12 PM > > > > To: scatterbrains@y... > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: > Poll results for scatterbrains > > > > > > > > > On 6 Feb 01, at > 19:46, f_hemker@h... wrote: > > > > > > > The evil specter of > inflation raises its ugly head. > > > > > > > > Only points gained > from getting rules passed cannot be fractional. I > > > > think that > otherwise, especially in the sending of points from one to > > > > > another, they are divisable. > > > > > > > > Somebody ought to pass a > rule. Right? > > > > > > Right. An authority to govern such matters > woudl be even more > > > efficient. > > > but at present there is no > such rule. > > > > > > But for now it is a question of interpretation. > The rules as > > > expressed do not leave room for fractional points. > They offer a > > > provison to preclude fractional points. It seems to > me that the > > > intention of the laws is to avoid fractioinal > points. For now it must > > > be assumed that rounding is essential > to the efficiency of scoring, > > > Otherwise no roundng would be > permitted and a player could give > > > someone an irrational number > of (in the mathematical sense) > > > points and the game could not > continue because the scoring could > > > not be completed. Without > the expressed provison for it in the law, > > > no one has the > authority to determine the number of digits to which > > > the scoring > should be carried out. This problem can only be solved > > > by > default to the implied preference of the law for rounding. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Paul Kirkland" > wrote: > On > > > > 6 Feb 01, at 13:56, Patrick D. > Bernardo wrote: > . > > > > Paul: > > > > > > > > Please explain your > understanding. As far as I see it, the only one > > > > > > who can > give points without losing them is Eugene. Otherwise, I > > > > > > > imagine that we are to read "transfer" in the literal sense (from > > > > > > > Latin trans [=over] and the stem from fero ferre [to carry or > bring] > > > > > > thus to bring or carry over.) It denotes that you > are taking > > > > > > something from one place, and putting it in > another. Hence, > > > > > > transferre ex nihilio is a logical > absurdity. > > > > Patrick "don't > > > > make me bust out Cassel's > Latin Dictionary on your ass" > > Bernardo > > > > > > > (Cf. TSZ > I.15). This might be fun, but was an accident, I tried > > > > to > > paste somethng. > patrick, since you are too busy reading the > > > > > Latin dictionary to think > I will spell out what I had in mind. My > > > > > understanding is that the > spirit of the law demands that all > > > > > official scoring be done in whole > numbers, but the new > provision for > > > > exchange permits fractions. (I a > also see no > authority to prevent > > > > rounding up fractional gifts) I was > > working an a round and expand > > > > scheme. Thus if you could give > me > exactly .5 points, we could grow > > > > the economy with losses > to no > one. I suggested half of your reward > > > > for my > introduction (which > might be taken back) to veil the real > > > > > reason for half points. > > Originally I hoped to hatch a plan to keep > > > > > expanding both scores > by giving points back and forth and > build up > > > > points in one score > with a deal to give some back. > I.e, If i gave > > > > all of your points back > a half at a time they > woudl be doubled to > > > > one point in each of our > scores. > I am > pretty sure the 24 hour > > > > waiting period would have screwed this > > up anyway. > I asked you, > > > > patrick, because of the > possiblity of starting these exchanges under > > > > the guise of a > gift of joining points, but o well > > > ps- as for > > > > making you > attached to the laws, well, I'm not sure why > > that's any > > > > > concern of mine. First of all, the Man, who would have > > made you > > > > > have respect for the law, was voted down. Secondly, if you > > > desire > > > > to win, or at least have a little fun, that will bind > you well > > > > > > enough. > > > As to the MAN too bad was not here > in time for 310, Al. > > > > > (unfortunately it appears to have > turned you into the lesser rather > > > > > than the greater Al) > > > As to the laws, I did not say respect for > > > > the law, but > "concern for > GOOD law, at my current state of > > > > disadvantage > on points, I am > encouraged to vote agaisnt all laws as > > > > a > method of scoring points > and keeping them from my opponents > > > > > regardless of the wisdom of > those laws. > > Primarily the point was > > > > > the need to close this loophole by either > clarity or > preferably an > > > > office with the power and discretion to avoid > > such idiocies. > > In > > > > any case, I believe I should be awarded > a full point from the > > > > > rounding of Fritz's gift at exactly > 1200 est tomorrow. Anyone else > > > > > who would like to share > (literally) a point with me, I would be > > > > > grateful. > > > > > (I'm home sick with the flu, so I've got nothing > > > > better to do > than be > > all pedantic. I can't really work.) ----- > > > > > Original Message ----- > > From: Paul Kirkland To: > > > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 1:40 > > > PM > > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for > scatterbrains > > > > > > > > > > > Consider giving me points. I am > sure everyone is tired of > > > > hearing > > > my pleas, but some of > your points are because of me. > > > > You could give > > > others the > same split, but the added interest is > > > > to get me to > > > > concern myself with the good laws of the > > > > Scatterbrains > community. > > > > > > My understanding of the CURRENT > > > > > conventions regarding scoring > > > suggest the possibility of giving > > > > > points without losing points... > > > that is where I was > going... > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, > send an email to: > > > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! > Groups Sponsor > > > > > > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now > Yahoo! Groups Click here for > > > > > > more details > http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981485836/ > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > > > > > > > -> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email > to: > > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > > > > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > > > > > more details > http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981488814/ > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > > > > > -> > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an > email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this > group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe fr > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981494705/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > -> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From pkirklan@e... Tue Feb 06 13:44:55 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 6 Feb 2001 21:44:55 -0000 Received: (qmail 47092 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2001 21:44:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 6 Feb 2001 21:44:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta1 with SMTP; 6 Feb 2001 21:44:54 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Tue, 6 Feb 2001 16:02:20 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 6 Feb 01 15:54:12 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 6 Feb 01 15:54:12 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 15:54:04 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Priority: normal In-reply-to: <001d01c09083$f664f1a0$c2a811d0@computer> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <006422002220621ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 6 Feb 01, at 16:29, Patrick D. Bernardo wrote: patrick good luck with the flu: clarification I realized the origin and meaning of Cf. as confer, but it can be used to suggest that you consider the reference along with the text to which it is a note. I have been operating under the convention of referring to the Parts of TSZ by Roman numerals so TSZ I.15 is "On the Thousand and One Goals." However, this was an accidental paste when I tried to copy an earlier email, it was left on the clipboard from a cutting and pasting footnotes from something... Otherwise I am sure all are grateful for the Latin lesson, perhpas we should all Cf. Cf. and transfer, or you could organizing a mini Nomic (from Gr. for laws, etc., but we all know that) lesson on the uses of compounds of ferre, fero. Someone needs to quote from Shakespeare to round out our daily lessons in Scatterbrains land. And who says the purpose of the laws is not educate. > > (Cf. TSZ I.15). This might be fun, but was an accident, I tried to > > paste somethng. > > I tried to Cf. this (BTW - Cf. is from another latin word built off of > fero, ferre, this time with the prefix "con" [together] added, thus > giving the sense of "bring together". Thus it should only be used > when referring to multiple passages, and is especially useful when you > mean that the sense can be gotten by "bringing together" the various > quotes.) According to Kaufmann, Book I of TSZ only has 10 parts. > Thereafter, Zarathustra's speeches begin. If you mean that I'm > supposed to keep counting after that, well, ok, but that leaves me at > "On enjoying and suffering the passions." I did find a nice line > there ("You milked your cow, melancholy; now you drink the sweet milk > of her udder." I'm going to save this one for my next breakup.) > > Otherwise, what did you mean... > > > > patrick, since you are too busy reading the Latin dictionary to > > think > > I haven't even gotten out the dictionary yet. > > > I will spell out what I had in mind. I suggested half of your > > reward for > my introduction (which > > might be taken back) to veil the real reason for half points. > > > > Originally I hoped to hatch a plan to keep expanding both scores by > > giving points back and forth and build up points in one score with a > > deal to give some back. I.e, If i gave all of your points back a > > half at a time they woudl be doubled to one point in each of our > > scores. I asked you, patrick, because of the possiblity of starting > > these > exchanges under the guise of a gift of joining points, but o well > > Note to Paul: you have my off-list email address. It is helpful to > advise hoped-for confederates of your plot, preferably far before you > have revealed said plot to the rest of the group. > > > > ps- as for making you attached to the laws, well, I'm not sure why > > > that's any concern of mine. First of all, the Man, who would have > > > made you have respect for the law, was voted down. Secondly, if > > > you desire to win, or at least have a little fun, that will bind > > > you well enough. > > > > > As to the MAN too bad was not here in time for 310, Al. > > (unfortunately it appears to have turned you into the lesser rather > > than the greater Al) > > > > It took me awhile to figure this one out, but then I remembered that > when I sent you the original email about joining up, I said that I was > "playing Al Gore" by suing after I had lost. > > > As to the laws, I did not say respect for the law, but "concern for > > GOOD law, at my current state of disadvantage on points, I am > > encouraged to vote agaisnt all laws as a method of scoring points > > and keeping them from my opponents regardless of the wisdom of those > > laws. > > > I'm not sure that this makes sense. You should obviously have as a > first priority those laws which benefit yourself first and foremost. > However, it is possible for laws to benefit both yourself and others. > If there is any perception that you are trying to profit at the > expense of others, it will probably be rather difficult to pass the > bill. OTOH, if you succeed in getting bills stopped which will give > out points, how in the world will you ever move up? > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981495052/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > -> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Tue Feb 06 14:00:19 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 6 Feb 2001 22:00:16 -0000 Received: (qmail 10462 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2001 22:00:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 6 Feb 2001 22:00:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 6 Feb 2001 22:00:12 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-09.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.194]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f16M09k93637 for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 17:00:10 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <004401c09088$14d306a0$c2a811d0@computer> To: References: <006422002220621ISWEBNT@d...> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 16:59:28 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" > patrick good luck with the flu: > I think it's reached my brain. > I have been operating under the convention of referring to the Parts > of TSZ by Roman numerals so TSZ I.15 is "On the Thousand and > One Goals." However, this was an accidental paste when I tried to > copy an earlier email, it was left on the clipboard from a cutting and > pasting footnotes from something... > So wait - and I don't mean this facetiously - why don't you count the Prologue? > Otherwise I am sure all are grateful for the Latin lesson, perhpas > we should all Cf. Cf. and transfer, or you could organizing a mini > Nomic (from Gr. for laws, etc., but we all know that) lesson on the > uses of compounds of ferre, fero. > Might be interesting and informative. > Someone needs to quote from Shakespeare to round out our daily > lessons in Scatterbrains land. My little life spent with the flu Is rounded with a sleep. Sir, I am vex'd; Bear with my weakness; my, brain is troubled: Be not disturb'd with my infirmity: > And who says the purpose of the laws is not educate. > Meletus, for one. Thrasymachus, for another. From f_hemker@h... Tue Feb 06 14:16:56 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: f_hemker@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 6 Feb 2001 22:16:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 40990 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2001 22:16:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 6 Feb 2001 22:16:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO jj.egroups.com) (10.1.10.91) by mta1 with SMTP; 6 Feb 2001 22:16:42 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: f_hemker@h... Received: from [10.1.2.133] by jj.egroups.com with NNFMP; 06 Feb 2001 22:16:41 -0000 Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 22:16:39 -0000 To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Message-ID: <95pt47+cuiv@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: <004401c09088$14d306a0$c2a811d0@computer> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 1359 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 63.82.115.205 From: f_hemker@h... As edifying as this all may be... perhaps there should be a rule punishing off topic discussion... ;-p Fritz --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Patrick D. Bernardo" wrote: > > patrick good luck with the flu: > > > I think it's reached my brain. > > > > I have been operating under the convention of referring to the Parts > > of TSZ by Roman numerals so TSZ I.15 is "On the Thousand and > > One Goals." However, this was an accidental paste when I tried to > > copy an earlier email, it was left on the clipboard from a cutting and > > pasting footnotes from something... > > > So wait - and I don't mean this facetiously - why don't you count the > Prologue? > > > Otherwise I am sure all are grateful for the Latin lesson, perhpas > > we should all Cf. Cf. and transfer, or you could organizing a mini > > Nomic (from Gr. for laws, etc., but we all know that) lesson on the > > uses of compounds of ferre, fero. > > > Might be interesting and informative. > > > Someone needs to quote from Shakespeare to round out our daily > > lessons in Scatterbrains land. > > My little life spent with the flu > Is rounded with a sleep. Sir, I am vex'd; > Bear with my weakness; my, brain is troubled: > Be not disturb'd with my infirmity: > > > And who says the purpose of the laws is not educate. > > > Meletus, for one. Thrasymachus, for an From pkirklan@e... Tue Feb 06 14:18:05 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 6 Feb 2001 22:18:05 -0000 Received: (qmail 36748 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2001 22:18:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 6 Feb 2001 22:18:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta2 with SMTP; 6 Feb 2001 22:18:03 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Tue, 6 Feb 2001 16:35:30 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 6 Feb 01 16:27:22 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 6 Feb 01 16:27:14 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 16:27:09 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Priority: normal In-reply-to: <004401c09088$14d306a0$c2a811d0@computer> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <007353035220621ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 6 Feb 01, at 16:59, Patrick D. Bernardo wrote: > > patrick good luck with the flu: > > > I think it's reached my brain. > > > > I have been operating under the convention of referring to the Parts > > of TSZ by Roman numerals so TSZ I.15 is "On the Thousand and One > > Goals." However, this was an accidental paste when I tried to copy > > an earlier email, it was left on the clipboard from a cutting and > > pasting footnotes from something... > > > So wait - and I don't mean this facetiously - why don't you count the > Prologue? > it is part of part one, but a prologue to its sections. Like, Preface, chapter *1*, etc. For citation puposes I have used TSZ Prologue 5, for example, as I have used BGE Preface. The only other way to do this would be to count it as Zarathustra's prologue not the prologue to the book, but in TSZ Prologue 5, Nietzsche writes, "here ended Z's first speech which is called "the Prologue" but the Prologue to the book continues. BTW, if you are really having fun, cf. TSZ Prologue 6-10 and Clouds, Apology (Republic, Phaedo) > > Otherwise I am sure all are grateful for the Latin lesson, perhpas > > we should all Cf. Cf. and transfer, or you could organizing a mini > > Nomic (from Gr. for laws, etc., but we all know that) lesson on the > > uses of compounds of ferre, fero. > > > Might be interesting and informative. > > > Someone needs to quote from Shakespeare to round out our daily > > lessons in Scatterbrains land. > > My little life spent with the flu > Is rounded with a sleep. Sir, I am vex'd; > Bear with my weakness; my, brain is troubled: > Be not disturb'd with my infirmity: > A full day's lessons offered > > And who says the purpose of the laws is not *to* educate.(we can't have a good school with bad grammar > > > Meletus, for one. Thrasymachus, for another. > Thank you for responding to rhetorical questions. See other mail > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981496854/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > -> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From pkirklan@e... Tue Feb 06 14:36:26 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 6 Feb 2001 22:36:24 -0000 Received: (qmail 10335 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2001 22:36:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 6 Feb 2001 22:36:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta2 with SMTP; 6 Feb 2001 22:36:23 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Tue, 6 Feb 2001 16:53:50 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 6 Feb 01 16:45:41 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 6 Feb 01 16:45:35 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 16:45:29 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Priority: normal In-reply-to: <95pt47+cuiv@eGroups.com> References: <004401c09088$14d306a0$c2a811d0@computer> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <005d45053220621ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" sOn 6 Feb 01, at 22:16, f_hemker@h... wrote: > As edifying as this all may be... perhaps there should be a rule > punishing off topic discussion... > First, sorry meant to send prior "outside" So you take M's position on the function of law, punishment not educ. Unfortunately, as I am sure P (patrick not Plato) would be glad to tell you there is no one in Nomic with the power to punish. how on earth would we judge off-topic discussion, would mentioning the flu in passing be an equal penalty to an all day discussion of Plato. Might one not argue that his all day discussion of Plato was for the sake of legal principles in Nomic (or that his Latin clarifaction were for the sake of more precise expression of law)? > ;-p > > Fritz > --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Patrick D. Bernardo" > wrote: > > patrick good luck with the flu: > > > I think it's reached > my brain. > > > > I have been operating under the convention of > referring to the Parts > > of TSZ by Roman numerals so TSZ I.15 is "On > the Thousand and > > One Goals." However, this was an accidental > paste when I tried to > > copy an earlier email, it was left on the > clipboard from a cutting and > > pasting footnotes from something... > > > > So wait - and I don't mean this facetiously - why don't you count > the > Prologue? > > > Otherwise I am sure all are grateful for the > Latin lesson, perhpas > > we should all Cf. Cf. and transfer, or you > could organizing a mini > > Nomic (from Gr. for laws, etc., but we all > know that) lesson on the > > uses of compounds of ferre, fero. > > > > Might be interesting and informative. > > > Someone needs to quote > from Shakespeare to round out our daily > > lessons in Scatterbrains > land. > > My little life spent with the flu > Is rounded with a sleep. > Sir, I am vex'd; > Bear with my weakness; my, brain is troubled: > Be > not disturb'd with my infirmity: > > > And who says the purpose of the > laws is not educate. > > > Meletus, for one. Thrasymachus, for an > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981497832/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > -> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Tue Feb 06 16:38:56 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 7 Feb 2001 00:38:56 -0000 Received: (qmail 33080 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 00:38:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 00:38:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta1 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 00:38:54 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-05.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.190]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f170cpk97472 for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 19:38:51 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <000d01c0909e$3fb912e0$bea811d0@computer> To: References: <95pt47+cuiv@eGroups.com> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 19:38:09 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" Well now, if there were a CM around, perhaps we could have such a rule. ;-p right back at you. ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 5:16 PM Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains > As edifying as this all may be... perhaps there should be a rule > punishing off topic discussion... > > ;-p > > Fritz > --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Patrick D. Bernardo" > wrote: > > > patrick good luck with the flu: > > > > > I think it's reached my brain. > > > > > > > I have been operating under the convention of referring to the > Parts > > > of TSZ by Roman numerals so TSZ I.15 is "On the Thousand and > > > One Goals." However, this was an accidental paste when I tried to > > > copy an earlier email, it was left on the clipboard from a cutting > and > > > pasting footnotes from something... > > > > > So wait - and I don't mean this facetiously - why don't you count > the > > Prologue? > > > > > Otherwise I am sure all are grateful for the Latin lesson, perhpas > > > we should all Cf. Cf. and transfer, or you could organizing a mini > > > Nomic (from Gr. for laws, etc., but we all know that) lesson on > the > > > uses of compounds of ferre, fero. > > > > > Might be interesting and informative. > > > > > Someone needs to quote from Shakespeare to round out our daily > > > lessons in Scatterbrains land. > > > > My little life spent with the flu > > Is rounded with a sleep. Sir, I am vex'd; > > Bear with my weakness; my, brain is troubled: > > Be not disturb'd with my infirmity: > > > > > And who says the purpose of the laws is not educate. > > > > > Meletus, for one. Thrasymachus, for an > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@w... Tue Feb 06 18:08:29 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@w... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 02:08:28 -0000 Received: (qmail 67540 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 02:08:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 02:08:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ns1-3.wyndtell.com) (63.81.201.11) by mta1 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 02:08:27 -0000 Received: from nova.wyndtell.com (nova.wyndtell.com [63.81.201.78]) by ns1-3.wyndtell.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f1735lB23843 for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 19:05:48 -0800 Received: (root@localhost) by nova.wyndtell.com (8.8.8/SCA-6.6) id VAA22209; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 21:08:26 -0500 (EST) To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: Poll results for scatterbrains In-Reply-To: 909e3fb X-Status: 6Y Message-Id: <15308871.1321@w...> Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 18:08:26 -0800 X-eGroups-From: eventi@w... (Eugene Ventimiglia) From: eventi@w... There is a moderator(sitting at Andy's) From bernardo@c... Tue Feb 06 18:26:25 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 02:26:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 33873 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 02:26:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 02:26:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 02:26:24 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-06.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.191]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f172QLk59839 for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 21:26:21 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <001001c090ad$44208de0$bfa811d0@computer> To: References: <15308871.1321@w...> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 21:25:39 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" > There is a moderator(sitting at Andy's) > ? Have another, Eug. From barturo@e... Wed Feb 07 05:17:16 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: BArturo@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 13:17:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 92760 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 13:17:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 13:17:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 13:17:14 -0000 Received: from batman.ess ([12.31.9.2]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with ESMTP id IAA18446 for ; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 08:17:09 -0500 (EST) Received: by BATMAN with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id <1MR7KTZ0>; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 08:12:07 -0500 Message-ID: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF0372D4@BATMAN> To: "'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'" Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] A suggestion to the new guy Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 08:12:06 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C09107.92271F90" From: "Arturo, Bob" ------_=_NextPart_001_01C09107.92271F90 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Watch who you are calling a techno-geek you you..... -----Original Message----- From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 1:29 PM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: [scatterbrains] A suggestion to the new guy Paul, Is there a way that your email reader can include the replied to message as well as your response? It can often make life easier. If you're unsure how to do with your mail reader, you can say which one you are using, and I'm sure one of the techno-geeks in this city can help you out. p. Yahoo! Groups Sponsor www. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at webmaster@e.... ------_=_NextPart_001_01C09107.92271F90 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Watch=20 who you are calling a techno-geek you you.....
-----Original Message-----
From: Patrick D. Bernardo=20 [mailto:bernardo@c...]
Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001= 1:29=20 PM
To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com
Subject:=20 [scatterbrains] A suggestion to the new guy

Paul,
 
Is there a way that your email reader ca= n include=20 the replied to message as well as your response?  It can often make = life=20 easier.  If you're unsure how to do with your mail reader, you can s= ay=20 which one you are using, and I'm sure one of the techno-geeks in this cit= y can=20 help you out.
 
p.


To=20 unsubscribe from this group, send an email=20 to:
scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com




* NOTICE * - If the reader is not the s= pecified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that= any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. <= /FONT>

If you are not the specified recipient,= please notify us at webmaster@e....



------_=_NextPart_001_01C09107.92271F90-- From barturo@e... Wed Feb 07 05:36:39 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: BArturo@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 13:36:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 32266 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 13:36:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 13:36:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 13:36:31 -0000 Received: from batman.ess ([12.31.9.2]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with ESMTP id IAA19530 for ; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 08:36:29 -0500 (EST) Received: by BATMAN with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id <1MR7KT5A>; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 08:31:29 -0500 Message-ID: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF0372D5@BATMAN> To: "'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'" Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 08:31:28 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C0910A.4675F550" From: "Arturo, Bob" ------_=_NextPart_001_01C0910A.4675F550 Content-Type: text/plain Play the game Harding -----Original Message----- From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 7:38 PM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Well now, if there were a CM around, perhaps we could have such a rule. ;-p right back at you. ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 5:16 PM Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains > As edifying as this all may be... perhaps there should be a rule > punishing off topic discussion... > > ;-p > > Fritz > --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Patrick D. Bernardo" > wrote: > > > patrick good luck with the flu: > > > > > I think it's reached my brain. > > > > > > > I have been operating under the convention of referring to the > Parts > > > of TSZ by Roman numerals so TSZ I.15 is "On the Thousand and > > > One Goals." However, this was an accidental paste when I tried to > > > copy an earlier email, it was left on the clipboard from a cutting > and > > > pasting footnotes from something... > > > > > So wait - and I don't mean this facetiously - why don't you count > the > > Prologue? > > > > > Otherwise I am sure all are grateful for the Latin lesson, perhpas > > > we should all Cf. Cf. and transfer, or you could organizing a mini > > > Nomic (from Gr. for laws, etc., but we all know that) lesson on > the > > > uses of compounds of ferre, fero. > > > > > Might be interesting and informative. > > > > > Someone needs to quote from Shakespeare to round out our daily > > > lessons in Scatterbrains land. > > > > My little life spent with the flu > > Is rounded with a sleep. Sir, I am vex'd; > > Bear with my weakness; my, brain is troubled: > > Be not disturb'd with my infirmity: > > > > > And who says the purpose of the laws is not educate. > > > > > Meletus, for one. Thrasymachus, for an > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor Classmates.com Click here for Classmates.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at webmaster@e.... ------_=_NextPart_001_01C0910A.4675F550 Content-Type: text/html Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Play=20 the game Harding
-----Original Message-----
From: Patrick D. Bernardo=20 [mailto:bernardo@c...]
Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001= 7:38=20 PM
To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re:=20 [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for=20 scatterbrains

Well now, if there were a CM around= ,=20 perhaps we could have such a rule.

;-p right back at you.

-= ----=20 Original Message -----
From: <f_hemker@h...>
To:=20 <scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001= 5:16=20 PM
Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for=20 scatterbrains


> As edifying as this all may be... perhaps t= here=20 should be a rule
> punishing off topic discussion...
>
&= gt;=20 ;-p
>
> Fritz
> --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Patrick D.= =20 Bernardo" <bernardo@c...>
> wrote:
> > > patrick= good=20 luck with the flu:
> > >
> > I think it's reached my= =20 brain.
> >
> >
> > > I have been operatin= g=20 under the convention of referring to the
> Parts
> > >= of=20 TSZ by Roman numerals so TSZ I.15 is "On the Thousand and
> > &g= t;=20 One Goals."  However, this was an accidental paste when I tried=20 to
> > > copy an earlier email, it was left on the clipboard = from=20 a cutting
> and
> > > pasting footnotes from=20 something...
> > >
> > So wait - and I don't mean th= is=20 facetiously - why don't you count
> the
> > Prologue?
= >=20 >
> > > Otherwise I am sure all are grateful for the Lati= n=20 lesson, perhpas
> > > we should all Cf. Cf. and transfer, or = you=20 could organizing a mini
> > > Nomic (from Gr. for laws, etc.,= but=20 we all know that) lesson on
> the
> > > uses of compou= nds=20 of ferre, fero.
> > >
> > Might be interesting and=20 informative.
> >
> > > Someone needs to quote from= =20 Shakespeare to round out our daily
> > > lessons in Scatterbr= ains=20 land.
> >
> > My little life spent with the flu
>= ;=20 > Is rounded with a sleep. Sir, I am vex'd;
> > Bear with my= =20 weakness; my, brain is troubled:
> > Be not disturb'd with my=20 infirmity:
> >
> > > And who says the purpose of th= e=20 laws is not educate.
> > >
> > Meletus, for one.&nbs= p;=20 Thrasymachus, for an
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe fr= om=20 this group, send an email to:
>=20 scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>=20



To=20 unsubscribe from this group, send an email=20 to:
scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com




* NOTICE * - If the reader is not the s= pecified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that= any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. <= /FONT>

If you are not the specified recipient,= please notify us at webmaster@e....



------_=_NextPart_001_01C0910A.4675F550-- From barturo@e... Wed Feb 07 06:28:19 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: BArturo@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 14:28:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 68581 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 14:28:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 14:28:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 14:28:17 -0000 Received: from batman.ess ([12.31.9.2]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with ESMTP id JAA23358 for ; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 09:28:16 -0500 (EST) Received: by BATMAN with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id <1MR7KT5H>; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 09:23:16 -0500 Message-ID: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF0372D7@BATMAN> To: "'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'" Subject: Proposal Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 09:23:15 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" From: "Arturo, Bob" Eug Can you please resend your proposal I must have deleted it by mistake. * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at webmaster@e.... From eventi@n... Wed Feb 07 06:59:46 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 14:59:46 -0000 Received: (qmail 61484 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 14:59:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 14:59:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 14:59:42 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id JAA26248 for ; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 09:59:42 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 312 Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 10:01:18 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <95pf38+frt5@eGroups.com> From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" I don't really have any objections to votes of confidence, but I'm not sure if it's necessary to write it into the proposal. After all, you could call one every 10 turns if you want to. I'll have to be sold on the reason for a term limit. I don't really see any. --e > -----Original Message----- > From: f_hemker@h... [mailto:f_hemker@h...] > Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 1:17 PM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 312 > > > Instead of having the score keeper's tenure last until a majority > objected, why don't you allow for periodic votes of confidence? You > might have regularily scheduled votes of confidence where a majority > must agree to keep the person in office, say every 10 turns, plus the > option of getting rid of the person at an earlier point if need be. > > How about adding a term limit of some kind? Say, no more than 15 or > 20 consecutive turns as score keeper. > > -Fritz > > --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Eugene Ventimiglia" wrote: > > Scorekeeper: > > > > The office of scorekeeper shall be created for the purpose of > maintaining > > and reporting the official score of the game. > > > > The scorekeeper must record and make public any changes to a > player's score > > within 2 business days of the event which causes the score change. > Any > > disputes with the reported score must be announced within 5 business > days of > > the report. > > > > The scorekeeping record shall consist of a detailed list of entries, > each > > corresponding to a score adjustment. Each entry shall contain the > date, the > > player's name, a brief description of the reason for the adjustment, > and the > > positive or negative score adjustment. > > > > The scorekeeper is a public employee, and as such is hired and paid > by the > > population. His salary is one point per turn, collected one point > from each > > player after N turns, where N equals the number of players. > > > > The scorekeeper is selected from any applicants by the population. > A poll > > shall be created with the names of perspective employees, and each > player > > shall choose one. If the outcome is a tie, there shall be a runoff > election, > > conducted in the same manner with only the tied applicants. > > > > The score maintained by the scorekeeper will be official and > indisputable > > after the determined period. The scorekeeper may, at his > discression, make > > adjustment records to remedy mistakes not caught before the dispute > period. > > > > The scorekeeper is hired based on an infinately renewable contract. > If a > > majority of players believe that the scorekeeper should be replaced, > a new > > one is chosen in the afformentioned manner. The previous scorekeeper > is > > entitled to apply for the job, and remains scorekeeper until such > time as a > > new > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Wed Feb 07 07:11:51 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 15:11:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 11793 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 15:11:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 15:11:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 15:11:50 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id KAA27482 for ; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 10:11:49 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 10:13:25 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <95pohd+3cl6@eGroups.com> From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" ... > > I can see that we really need a scorekeeper for this sort of thing. > However, I find it difficult to support any office that does not have > a terminal point of tenure. If this is really a sticking point for you, though I'm curious why, it can be put in. I'm not sure why a scorekeeper would be needed for "this sort of thing" He would deduct .5 from your score, add .5 to Paul's (which I'm about to do) and life would go on. Paul could appeal to him(the scorekeeper) to round up, but if he did and someone didn't like it, the decision would go to the judge. Likewise, if the scorekeeper refused Paul could call for judgement. The one nice thing is that there's a system by which the score is made "official" so that if Paul claims have the extra half point, we can all look at the official score and see that he doesn't without having to read over the 50 messages from yesterday. > > -Fritz > > --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Eugene Ventimiglia" wrote: > > Implied presence of a law doesn't mean shit. Go fight it in court, > if you > > want... Fritz is the current judge. Then again, your transfer isn't > > official until tomorrow, and might not ever get recorded... No law > has been > > broken, so there's not much chance of getting a judgement in your > favor. > > > > --e > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > > Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 3:12 PM > > > To: scatterbrains@y... > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains > > > > > > > > > On 6 Feb 01, at 19:46, f_hemker@h... wrote: > > > > > > > The evil specter of inflation raises its ugly head. > > > > > > > > Only points gained from getting rules passed cannot be > fractional. I > > > > think that otherwise, especially in the sending of points from > one to > > > > another, they are divisable. > > > > > > > > Somebody ought to pass a rule. Right? > > > > > > Right. An authority to govern such matters woudl be even more > > > efficient. > > > but at present there is no such rule. > > > > > > But for now it is a question of interpretation. The rules as > > > expressed do not leave room for fractional points. They offer a > > > provison to preclude fractional points. It seems to me that the > > > intention of the laws is to avoid fractioinal points. For now it > must > > > be assumed that rounding is essential to the efficiency of > scoring, > > > Otherwise no roundng would be permitted and a player could give > > > someone an irrational number of (in the mathematical sense) > > > points and the game could not continue because the scoring could > > > not be completed. Without the expressed provison for it in the > law, > > > no one has the authority to determine the number of digits to > which > > > the scoring should be carried out. This problem can only be > solved > > > by default to the implied preference of the law for rounding. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Paul Kirkland" > wrote: > On > > > > 6 Feb 01, at 13:56, Patrick D. Bernardo wrote: > . > > > > Paul: > > > > > > > > > Please explain your understanding. As far as I see it, the > only one > > > > > > who can give points without losing them is Eugene. > Otherwise, I > > > > > > imagine that we are to read "transfer" in the literal sense > (from > > > > > > Latin trans [=over] and the stem from fero ferre [to carry or > bring] > > > > > > thus to bring or carry over.) It denotes that you are > taking > > > > > > something from one place, and putting it in another. Hence, > > > > > > transferre ex nihilio is a logical absurdity. > > > > Patrick > "don't > > > > make me bust out Cassel's Latin Dictionary on your ass" > > > Bernardo > > > > > > > (Cf. TSZ I.15). This might be fun, but was an accident, I > tried > > > > to > paste somethng. > patrick, since you are too busy reading > the > > > > Latin dictionary to think > I will spell out what I had in > mind. My > > > > understanding is that the > spirit of the law demands that all > > > > official scoring be done in whole > numbers, but the new > provision for > > > > exchange permits fractions. (I a > also see no authority to > prevent > > > > rounding up fractional gifts) I was > working an a round and > expand > > > > scheme. Thus if you could give me > exactly .5 points, we could > grow > > > > the economy with losses to no > one. I suggested half of your > reward > > > > for my introduction (which > might be taken back) to veil the > real > > > > reason for half points. > > Originally I hoped to hatch a plan > to keep > > > > expanding both scores > by giving points back and forth and > build up > > > > points in one score > with a deal to give some back. I.e, If i > gave > > > > all of your points back > a half at a time they woudl be doubled > to > > > > one point in each of our > scores. > I am pretty sure the 24 > hour > > > > waiting period would have screwed this > up anyway. > I asked > you, > > > > patrick, because of the possiblity of starting these exchanges > under > > > > the guise of a gift of joining points, but o well > > > ps- as > for > > > > making you attached to the laws, well, I'm not sure why > > > that's any > > > > concern of mine. First of all, the Man, who would have > > made > you > > > > have respect for the law, was voted down. Secondly, if you > > > desire > > > > to win, or at least have a little fun, that will bind you well > > > > > > > enough. > > > As to the MAN too bad was not here in time for > 310, Al. > > > > > (unfortunately it appears to have turned you into the lesser > rather > > > > > than the greater Al) > > As to the laws, I did not say respect > for > > > > the law, but "concern for > GOOD law, at my current state of > > > > disadvantage on points, I am > encouraged to vote agaisnt all > laws as > > > > a method of scoring points > and keeping them from my opponents > > > > regardless of the wisdom of > those laws. > > Primarily the > point was > > > > the need to close this loophole by either > clarity or > preferably an > > > > office with the power and discretion to avoid > such idiocies. > > > In > > > > any case, I believe I should be awarded a full point from the > > > > > rounding of Fritz's gift at exactly 1200 est tomorrow. Anyone > else > > > > > who would like to share (literally) a point with me, I would be > > > > > > grateful. > > > > (I'm home sick with the flu, so I've got > nothing > > > > better to do than be > > all pedantic. I can't really work.) > ----- > > > > Original Message ----- > > From: Paul Kirkland > To: > > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 1:40 > > > PM > > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains > > > > > > > > > > > > Consider giving me points. I am sure everyone is tired > of > > > > hearing > > > my pleas, but some of your points are because of > me. > > > > You could give > > > others the same split, but the added > interest is > > > > to get me to > > > concern myself with the good laws of the > > > > Scatterbrains community. > > > > > > My understanding of the > CURRENT > > > > conventions regarding scoring > > > suggest the possibility of > giving > > > > points without losing points... > > > that is where I was > going... > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > > > > > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click > here for > > > > > > more details > http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981485836/ > > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > > > > > > -> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > > > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click > here for > > > > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981488814/ > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > > > > -> > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this g > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Wed Feb 07 07:17:16 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 15:17:16 -0000 Received: (qmail 17649 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 15:17:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 15:17:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 15:17:16 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id KAA28027 for ; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 10:17:15 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 10:18:51 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <95pq28+4hdl@eGroups.com> From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" > > Thank God for original intent!!! At least I'm not dead so you can > still ask me. Maybe I had an esoteric meaning in mind... Maybe it > just never occured to me. > > -Fritz Too bad original intent doesn't carry any weight. Judges don't have to use it, and future judges can ignore any other judges precedent. Once again there oughta be a law (TOBAL?) --e > --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Patrick D. Bernardo" > wrote: > > This is where it's good to be the eugene. He could simply ignore > Paul's > > request for the rounding up, and Paul would have nothing to sue over > - since > > there is no act to call him on. > > > > But I think that your interpretation of the law, Paul, is a stretch. > I > > prohibited fractional scoring for getting a law precisely for the > reason > > that Fritz suggested - the score is being multiplied by a fraction. > Things > > would get messy that way. But this law in no way implies or > requires that > > scores achieved under different circumstances should be rounded up. > > > > Secondly, Fritz, in writing his transfer law clearly could have > prohibited > > fractional transfers. Since he did not, and moreover since he did > himself > > transfer a fractional amount to you, then I think that it is safe to > say > > that his intent was to allow for the possibility of fractional > transfers. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Eugene Ventimiglia > > To: > > Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 3:42 PM > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains > > > > > > > Implied presence of a law doesn't mean shit. Go fight it in > court, if you > > > want... Fritz is the current judge. Then again, your transfer > isn't > > > official until tomorrow, and might not ever get recorded... No law > has > > been > > > broken, so there's not much chance of getting a judgement in your > favor. > > > > > > --e > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > > > Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 3:12 PM > > > > To: scatterbrains@y... > > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains > > > > > > > > > > > > On 6 Feb 01, at 19:46, f_hemker@h... wrote: > > > > > > > > > The evil specter of inflation raises its ugly head. > > > > > > > > > > Only points gained from getting rules passed cannot be > fractional. I > > > > > think that otherwise, especially in the sending of points from > one to > > > > > another, they are divisable. > > > > > > > > > > Somebody ought to pass a rule. Right? > > > > > > > > Right. An authority to govern such matters woudl be even more > > > > efficient. > > > > but at present there is no such rule. > > > > > > > > But for now it is a question of interpretation. The rules as > > > > expressed do not leave room for fractional points. They offer a > > > > provison to preclude fractional points. It seems to me that the > > > > intention of the laws is to avoid fractioinal points. For now > it must > > > > be assumed that rounding is essential to the efficiency of > scoring, > > > > Otherwise no roundng would be permitted and a player could give > > > > someone an irrational number of (in the mathematical sense) > > > > points and the game could not continue because the scoring could > > > > not be completed. Without the expressed provison for it in the > law, > > > > no one has the authority to determine the number of digits to > which > > > > the scoring should be carried out. This problem can only be > solved > > > > by default to the implied preference of the law for rounding. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Paul Kirkland" > wrote: > On > > > > > 6 Feb 01, at 13:56, Patrick D. Bernardo wrote: > . > > > > > Paul: > > > > > > > > > Please explain your understanding. As far as I see it, the > only one > > > > > > > who can give points without losing them is Eugene. > Otherwise, I > > > > > > > imagine that we are to read "transfer" in the literal sense > (from > > > > > > > Latin trans [=over] and the stem from fero ferre [to carry > or bring] > > > > > > > thus to bring or carry over.) It denotes that you are > taking > > > > > > > something from one place, and putting it in another. Hence, > > > > > > > > transferre ex nihilio is a logical absurdity. > > > > Patrick > "don't > > > > > make me bust out Cassel's Latin Dictionary on your ass" > > > Bernardo > > > > > > > > (Cf. TSZ I.15). This might be fun, but was an accident, I > tried > > > > > to > paste somethng. > patrick, since you are too busy > reading the > > > > > Latin dictionary to think > I will spell out what I had in > mind. My > > > > > understanding is that the > spirit of the law demands that all > > > > > official scoring be done in whole > numbers, but the new > provision for > > > > > exchange permits fractions. (I a > also see no authority to > prevent > > > > > rounding up fractional gifts) I was > working an a round and > expand > > > > > scheme. Thus if you could give me > exactly .5 points, we > could grow > > > > > the economy with losses to no > one. I suggested half of your > reward > > > > > for my introduction (which > might be taken back) to veil the > real > > > > > reason for half points. > > Originally I hoped to hatch a plan > to keep > > > > > expanding both scores > by giving points back and forth and > build up > > > > > points in one score > with a deal to give some back. I.e, If > i gave > > > > > all of your points back > a half at a time they woudl be > doubled to > > > > > one point in each of our > scores. > I am pretty sure the 24 > hour > > > > > waiting period would have screwed this > up anyway. > I asked > you, > > > > > patrick, because of the possiblity of starting these exchanges > under > > > > > the guise of a gift of joining points, but o well > > > ps- as > for > > > > > making you attached to the laws, well, I'm not sure why > > > that's any > > > > > concern of mine. First of all, the Man, who would have > > > made you > > > > > have respect for the law, was voted down. Secondly, if you > > > desire > > > > > to win, or at least have a little fun, that will bind you well > > > > > > > > enough. > > > As to the MAN too bad was not here in time for > 310, Al. > > > > > > (unfortunately it appears to have turned you into the lesser > rather > > > > > > than the greater Al) > > As to the laws, I did not say > respect for > > > > > the law, but "concern for > GOOD law, at my current state of > > > > > disadvantage on points, I am > encouraged to vote agaisnt all > laws as > > > > > a method of scoring points > and keeping them from my > opponents > > > > > regardless of the wisdom of > those laws. > > Primarily the > point was > > > > > the need to close this loophole by either > clarity or > preferably an > > > > > office with the power and discretion to avoid > such idiocies. > > > In > > > > > any case, I believe I should be awarded a full point from the > > > > > > > rounding of Fritz's gift at exactly 1200 est tomorrow. > Anyone else > > > > > > who would like to share (literally) a point with me, I would > be > > > > > > grateful. > > > > (I'm home sick with the flu, so I've got > nothing > > > > > better to do than be > > all pedantic. I can't really work.) > ----- > > > > > Original Message ----- > > From: Paul Kirkland > To: > > > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 1:40 > > > PM > > > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for > scatterbrains > > > > > > > > > > > > Consider giving me points. I am sure everyone is > tired of > > > > > hearing > > > my pleas, but some of your points are because of > me. > > > > > You could give > > > others the same split, but the added > interest is > > > > > to get me to > > > concern myself with the good laws of the > > > > > Scatterbrains community. > > > > > > My understanding of the > CURRENT > > > > > conventions regarding scoring > > > suggest the possibility of > giving > > > > > points without losing points... > > > that is where I was > going... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email > to: > > > > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > > > > > > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click > here for > > > > > > > more details > http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981485836/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > > > > > > > -> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email > to: > > > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > > > > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click > here for > > > > > more details > http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981488814/ > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > > > > > -> > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe fr > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Wed Feb 07 07:19:47 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 15:19:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 53313 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 15:19:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 15:19:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 15:19:46 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id KAA28262 for ; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 10:19:46 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 10:21:22 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <001d01c09083$f664f1a0$c2a811d0@computer> From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" <<< Mucho off topic snippage >>>> > It took me awhile to figure this one out, but then I remembered > that when I > sent you the original email about joining up, I said that I was > "playing Al > Gore" by suing after I had lost. HA! > > As to the laws, I did not say respect for the law, but "concern for > > GOOD law, at my current state of disadvantage on points, I am > > encouraged to vote agaisnt all laws as a method of scoring points > > and keeping them from my opponents regardless of the wisdom of > > those laws. This should be fun... From eventi@n... Wed Feb 07 07:23:08 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 15:23:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 28821 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 15:23:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 15:23:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 16:24:11 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id KAA28607 for ; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 10:23:06 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 10:24:42 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <95pt47+cuiv@eGroups.com> From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" Well said fritz. > As edifying as this all may be... perhaps there should be a rule > punishing off topic discussion... > > ;-p > > Fritz From eventi@n... Wed Feb 07 07:36:27 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 15:36:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 73758 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 15:36:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 15:36:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 16:37:30 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id KAA00122 for ; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 10:36:25 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 10:38:01 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <005d45053220621ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" > > As edifying as this all may be... perhaps there should be a rule > > punishing off topic discussion... > > > First, sorry meant to send prior "outside" Forgiven... > So you take M's position on the function of law, punishment not > educ. > Unfortunately, as I am sure P (patrick not Plato) would be glad to > tell you there is no one in Nomic with the power to punish. > how on earth would we judge off-topic discussion, would > mentioning the flu in passing be an equal penalty to an all day > discussion of Plato. Might one not argue that his all day > discussion of Plato was for the sake of legal principles in Nomic (or > that his Latin clarifaction were for the sake of more precise > expression of law)? Whatever. There is one person who has power: Since the game is being played on a mailing list, there is a moderator. The power wasn't given by law, and I've been trying to minimize my use of that role, but it's there. List moderators typically admonish repeated lapses in etiquite first, then ban the offending user. I still hold the hope that we can be a self governing society (thanks again fritz), but I do hesitantly wear that hat. --e From eventi@n... Wed Feb 07 07:44:07 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 15:44:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 21813 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 15:44:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 15:44:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 15:44:06 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id KAA00983 for ; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 10:44:05 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 10:45:41 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF0372D7@BATMAN> From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" Resent- It's also available in the highly experimental Proposals page. www.scatterbrains.com/proposals.html > -----Original Message----- > From: Arturo, Bob [mailto:barturo@e...] > Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 9:23 AM > To: 'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com' > Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal > > > Eug > Can you please resend your proposal I must have deleted it by > mistake. > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution > or copying > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > webmaster@e.... > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From barturo@e... Wed Feb 07 09:17:44 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: BArturo@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 17:17:44 -0000 Received: (qmail 66729 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 17:17:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 17:17:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 18:18:24 -0000 Received: from batman.ess ([12.31.9.2]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA10768 for ; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 12:17:16 -0500 (EST) Received: by BATMAN with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id <1MR7KT61>; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 12:12:15 -0500 Message-ID: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF0372D8@BATMAN> To: "'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'" Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 12:12:14 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C09129.1DEF42C0" From: "Arturo, Bob" ------_=_NextPart_001_01C09129.1DEF42C0 Content-Type: text/plain Yea thanks I just had to reset my connection from this email address. I can now view the page. -----Original Message----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia [mailto:eventi@n...] Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 10:46 AM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal Resent- It's also available in the highly experimental Proposals page. www.scatterbrains.com/proposals.html > -----Original Message----- > From: Arturo, Bob [mailto:barturo@e...] > Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 9:23 AM > To: 'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com' > Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal > > > Eug > Can you please resend your proposal I must have deleted it by > mistake. > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution > or copying > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > webmaster@e.... > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor Choose 3 DVDs for $0.49 each! Choose 3 DVDs for $0.49 each! To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at webmaster@e.... ------_=_NextPart_001_01C09129.1DEF42C0 Content-Type: text/html Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Yea=20 thanks I just had to reset my connection from this email address. I can now= view=20 the page.
-----Original Message-----
From: Eugene Ventimiglia=20 [mailto:eventi@n...]
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 10:= 46=20 AM
To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE:=20 [scatterbrains]=20 Proposal

Resent-
     = ;=20 It's also available in the highly experimental Proposals=20 page.
www.scatterbrains.com/proposals.html

> -----Original=20 Message-----
> From: Arturo, Bob=20 [mailto:barturo@e...]
> Sent: Wednesday, February= 07,=20 2001 9:23 AM
> To: 'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'
> Subject:= =20 [scatterbrains] Proposal
>
>
> Eug
>=20       Can you please resend your proposal I must= have=20 deleted it by
> mistake.
>
>
> * NOTICE * - If = the=20 reader is not the specified recipient of this
> confidential email,= you=20 are hereby notified that any distribution
> or copying
> of = this=20 transmission is strictly prohibited.
> If you are not the specifie= d=20 recipient, please notify us at
> webmaster@e....= =20
>
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this gro= up,=20 send an email to:
> scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>=20
>
>


To=20 unsubscribe from this group, send an email=20 to:
scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com




* NOTICE * - If the reader is not the s= pecified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that= any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. <= /FONT>

If you are not the specified recipient,= please notify us at webmaster@e....



------_=_NextPart_001_01C09129.1DEF42C0-- From barturo@e... Wed Feb 07 09:20:24 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: BArturo@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 17:20:24 -0000 Received: (qmail 3551 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 17:19:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 17:19:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 18:20:29 -0000 Received: from batman.ess ([12.31.9.2]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA10988 for ; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 12:19:23 -0500 (EST) Received: by BATMAN with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id <1MR7KT6F>; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 12:14:23 -0500 Message-ID: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF0372D9@BATMAN> To: "'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'" Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 12:14:20 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C09129.6919F790" From: "Arturo, Bob" ------_=_NextPart_001_01C09129.6919F790 Content-Type: text/plain Just play the game, or go make some iced tea -----Original Message----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia [mailto:eventi@n...] Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 10:25 AM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Well said fritz. > As edifying as this all may be... perhaps there should be a rule > punishing off topic discussion... > > ;-p > > Fritz Yahoo! Groups Sponsor Click here for Business information Click here for Business information To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at webmaster@e.... ------_=_NextPart_001_01C09129.6919F790 Content-Type: text/html Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Just=20 play the game, or go make some iced tea
-----Original Message-----
From: Eugene Ventimiglia=20 [mailto:eventi@n...]
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 10:= 25=20 AM
To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE:=20 [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for=20 scatterbrains

Well said fritz.

> As edi= fying=20 as this all may be... perhaps there should be a rule
> punishing o= ff=20 topic discussion...
>
> ;-p
>
>=20 Fritz



To=20 unsubscribe from this group, send an email=20 to:
scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com




* NOTICE * - If the reader is not the s= pecified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that= any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. <= /FONT>

If you are not the specified recipient,= please notify us at webmaster@e....



------_=_NextPart_001_01C09129.6919F790-- From barturo@e... Wed Feb 07 09:26:59 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: BArturo@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 17:26:59 -0000 Received: (qmail 27077 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 17:25:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 17:25:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 17:25:41 -0000 Received: from batman.ess ([12.31.9.2]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA11664 for ; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 12:25:36 -0500 (EST) Received: by BATMAN with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id <1MR7KT62>; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 12:20:34 -0500 Message-ID: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF0372DA@BATMAN> To: "'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'" Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 12:20:34 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C0912A.478C39C0" From: "Arturo, Bob" ------_=_NextPart_001_01C0912A.478C39C0 Content-Type: text/plain Any penalty for not doing the job? I don't mind paying but if the score keeper doesn't update the score well then I think that person should be penalized . -----Original Message----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia [mailto:eventi@n...] Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 10:46 AM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal Resent- It's also available in the highly experimental Proposals page. www.scatterbrains.com/proposals.html > -----Original Message----- > From: Arturo, Bob [mailto:barturo@e...] > Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 9:23 AM > To: 'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com' > Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal > > > Eug > Can you please resend your proposal I must have deleted it by > mistake. > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution > or copying > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > webmaster@e.... > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor Choose 3 DVDs for $0.49 each! Choose 3 DVDs for $0.49 each! To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at webmaster@e.... ------_=_NextPart_001_01C0912A.478C39C0 Content-Type: text/html Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Any=20 penalty for not doing the job? I don't mind paying but if the score keeper= =20 doesn't update the score well then I think that person should be penalized= =20 .
-----Original Message-----
From: Eugene Ventimiglia=20 [mailto:eventi@n...]
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 10:= 46=20 AM
To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE:=20 [scatterbrains]=20 Proposal

Resent-
     = ;=20 It's also available in the highly experimental Proposals=20 page.
www.scatterbrains.com/proposals.html

> -----Original=20 Message-----
> From: Arturo, Bob=20 [mailto:barturo@e...]
> Sent: Wednesday, February= 07,=20 2001 9:23 AM
> To: 'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'
> Subject:= =20 [scatterbrains] Proposal
>
>
> Eug
>=20       Can you please resend your proposal I must= have=20 deleted it by
> mistake.
>
>
> * NOTICE * - If = the=20 reader is not the specified recipient of this
> confidential email,= you=20 are hereby notified that any distribution
> or copying
> of = this=20 transmission is strictly prohibited.
> If you are not the specifie= d=20 recipient, please notify us at
> webmaster@e....= =20
>
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this gro= up,=20 send an email to:
> scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>=20
>
>


To=20 unsubscribe from this group, send an email=20 to:
scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com




* NOTICE * - If the reader is not the s= pecified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that= any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. <= /FONT>

If you are not the specified recipient,= please notify us at webmaster@e....



------_=_NextPart_001_01C0912A.478C39C0-- From eventi@n... Wed Feb 07 09:41:21 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 17:41:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 76625 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 17:40:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 17:40:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 17:40:15 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id MAA13103 for ; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 12:40:14 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 12:41:50 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0006_01C09103.57ACB680" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF0372DA@BATMAN> From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01C09103.57ACB680 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I was thinking he should be replaced... I suppose there could be a penalty, let's say 1 point for each day past the second day. -----Original Message----- From: Arturo, Bob [mailto:barturo@e...] Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 12:21 PM To: 'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com' Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal Any penalty for not doing the job? I don't mind paying but if the score keeper doesn't update the score well then I think that person should be penalized . ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01C09103.57ACB680 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I was=20 thinking he should be replaced... I suppose there could be a penalty, let's= say=20 1 point for each day past the second day.
-----Original Message-----
From: Arturo, Bob=20 [mailto:barturo@e...]
Sent: Wednesday, Februa= ry=20 07, 2001 12:21 PM
To:=20 'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'
Subject: RE: [scatterbrains]=20 Proposal

Any=20 penalty for not doing the job? I don't mind paying but if the score keepe= r=20 doesn't update the score well then I think that person should be penalize= d=20 .
------=_NextPart_000_0006_01C09103.57ACB680-- From pkirklan@e... Wed Feb 07 10:21:35 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 18:21:32 -0000 Received: (qmail 8337 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 18:19:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 18:19:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta3 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 19:20:57 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Wed, 7 Feb 2001 12:37:10 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 7 Feb 01 12:29:13 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 7 Feb 01 12:29:08 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 12:29:00 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Priority: normal In-reply-to: <000d01c0909e$3fb912e0$bea811d0@computer> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <007b01037180721ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 6 Feb 01, at 19:38, Patrick D. Bernardo wrote: > Well now, if there were a CM around, perhaps we could have such a > rule. > > ;-p right back at you. We don't need the CM, but we need an office with more power. i missed it if there were attempts to limit this hombre's power and perhaps make futuire CM's elected, but does anyone else want to work on that > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: > Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 5:16 PM > Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains > > > > As edifying as this all may be... perhaps there should be a rule > > punishing off topic discussion... > > > > ;-p > > > > Fritz > > --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Patrick D. Bernardo" > > wrote: > > > > patrick good luck with the flu: > > > > > > > I think it's reached my brain. > > > > > > > > > > I have been operating under the convention of referring to the > > Parts > > > > of TSZ by Roman numerals so TSZ I.15 is "On the Thousand and One > > > > Goals." However, this was an accidental paste when I tried to > > > > copy an earlier email, it was left on the clipboard from a > > > > cutting > > and > > > > pasting footnotes from something... > > > > > > > So wait - and I don't mean this facetiously - why don't you count > > the > > > Prologue? > > > > > > > Otherwise I am sure all are grateful for the Latin lesson, > > > > perhpas we should all Cf. Cf. and transfer, or you could > > > > organizing a mini Nomic (from Gr. for laws, etc., but we all > > > > know that) lesson on > > the > > > > uses of compounds of ferre, fero. > > > > > > > Might be interesting and informative. > > > > > > > Someone needs to quote from Shakespeare to round out our daily > > > > lessons in Scatterbrains land. > > > > > > My little life spent with the flu > > > Is rounded with a sleep. Sir, I am vex'd; > > > Bear with my weakness; my, brain is troubled: > > > Be not disturb'd with my infirmity: > > > > > > > And who says the purpose of the laws is not educate. > > > > > > > Meletus, for one. Thrasymachus, for an > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981506337/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > -> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Wed Feb 07 11:21:13 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 19:21:12 -0000 Received: (qmail 99491 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 19:20:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 19:20:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 19:20:55 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id OAA24254 for ; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 14:20:54 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: Pimp-slap of Reality Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 14:22:31 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" Sorry about that... I really didn't mean to come off threatening, or whatever, but on second read, it sounds like a coup attempt. Just to clarify: I have never, and will never, use my position as real-world moderator to my advantage, or to anyone else's disadvantage in the game. I'd never ban a legitimate player, or delete a post. I only said what I said to stress a point that Pat keeps making: There are existing inequalities in the 'power' structure here. Everything not illegal is legal, and there are things I can get away with that you can't. > > > > As edifying as this all may be... perhaps there should be a rule > > > punishing off topic discussion... > > > > > First, sorry meant to send prior "outside" > > Forgiven... > > > So you take M's position on the function of law, punishment not > > educ. > > Unfortunately, as I am sure P (patrick not Plato) would be glad to > > tell you there is no one in Nomic with the power to punish. > > how on earth would we judge off-topic discussion, would > > mentioning the flu in passing be an equal penalty to an all day > > discussion of Plato. Might one not argue that his all day > > discussion of Plato was for the sake of legal principles in Nomic (or > > that his Latin clarifaction were for the sake of more precise > > expression of law)? > > Whatever. There is one person who has power: Since the game is > being played > on a mailing list, there is a moderator. The power wasn't given > by law, and > I've been trying to minimize my use of that role, but it's there. > > List moderators typically admonish repeated lapses in etiquite first, then > ban the offending user. I still hold the hope that we can be a self > governing society (thanks again fritz), but I do hesitantly wear that hat. > --e > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From pkirklan@e... Wed Feb 07 12:15:19 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 20:15:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 58881 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 20:15:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 20:15:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta1 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 20:15:08 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Wed, 7 Feb 2001 14:32:28 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 7 Feb 01 14:24:31 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 7 Feb 01 14:24:29 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 14:24:23 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 312 Priority: normal In-reply-to: References: <95pf38+frt5@eGroups.com> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <007842832200721ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" Regular votes of confidence allow popular support as an expressed grant, and it avoids any particular player insisting on such a vote. I think it is a good idea. I repeat my emphatic opposition to term limits. From pkirklan@e... Wed Feb 07 12:24:05 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 20:24:05 -0000 Received: (qmail 86976 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 20:24:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 20:24:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta2 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 20:24:04 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Wed, 7 Feb 2001 14:41:23 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 7 Feb 01 14:33:27 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 7 Feb 01 14:33:20 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 14:33:18 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Priority: normal In-reply-to: References: <95pq28+4hdl@eGroups.com> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <008b02341200721ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" it doesn't carry any official weight, but it carries a lot of weight. It was in the face of the expression of orignal intent that I dropped my claim. Otherwise I could have had recourse under 306 and its implied preference for whole numbers. Any judge that ignored Patrick's expressed declaration that he meant no sucht thing would have been grossly irresponsible Since the authors of 311 and 306 both explained their strange intentions (as well as the fact that at least 3 of you rejected my interpretation), I stopped the claim. P.S Anyone got a half point. From pkirklan@e... Wed Feb 07 12:28:07 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 20:28:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 22437 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 20:28:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 20:28:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta1 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 20:28:05 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Wed, 7 Feb 2001 14:45:23 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 7 Feb 01 14:37:27 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 7 Feb 01 14:36:58 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 14:36:55 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Priority: normal In-reply-to: References: <001d01c09083$f664f1a0$c2a811d0@computer> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <008d12345200721ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 7 Feb 01, at 10:21, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > <<< Mucho off topic snippage >>>> > > > It took me awhile to figure this one out, but then I remembered that > > when I sent you the original email about joining up, I said that I > > was "playing Al Gore" by suing after I had lost. > > HA! > > > > As to the laws, I did not say respect for the law, but "concern > > > for GOOD law, at my current state of disadvantage on points, I am > > > encouraged to vote agaisnt all laws as a method of scoring points > > > and keeping them from my opponents regardless of the wisdom of > > > those laws. > > This should be fun... > Request for clarification: What should be fun? my voting against everything or the game shoudl be fun and thus my incentive regardless of points > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981559194/ > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > -> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From pkirklan@e... Wed Feb 07 12:31:34 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 20:31:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 11278 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 20:31:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 20:31:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta2 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 20:31:33 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Wed, 7 Feb 2001 14:48:51 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 7 Feb 01 14:40:55 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 7 Feb 01 14:40:52 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 14:40:42 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Priority: normal In-reply-to: References: <005d45053220621ISWEBNT@d...> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <008ca5148200721ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 7 Feb 01, at 10:38, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > > As edifying as this all may be... perhaps there should be a rule > > > punishing off topic discussion... > > > > > First, sorry meant to send prior "outside" > > Forgiven... > > > So you take M's position on the function of law, punishment not > > educ. Unfortunately, as I am sure P (patrick not Plato) would be > > glad to tell you there is no one in Nomic with the power to punish. > > how on earth would we judge off-topic discussion, would mentioning > > the flu in passing be an equal penalty to an all day discussion of > > Plato. Might one not argue that his all day discussion of Plato was > > for the sake of legal principles in Nomic (or that his Latin > > clarifaction were for the sake of more precise expression of law)? > > Whatever. There is one person who has power: Since the game is being > played on a mailing list, there is a moderator. The power wasn't > given by law, and I've been trying to minimize my use of that role, > but it's there. > > List moderators typically admonish repeated lapses in etiquite first, > then ban the offending user. I still hold the hope that we can be a > self governing society (thanks again fritz), but I do hesitantly wear > that hat. > --e > > But, why are you opposed to the institutionalization of such a role? > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981560187/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > -> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Wed Feb 07 12:35:48 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 20:35:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 20173 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 20:35:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 20:35:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta3 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 21:36:51 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp08-01.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.211]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f17KZik46647 for ; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 15:35:44 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <002d01c09145$74292b80$d3a811d0@computer> To: References: <005d45053220621ISWEBNT@d...> <008ca5148200721ISWEBNT@d...> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 15:35:03 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" > But, why are you opposed to the institutionalization of such a role? Vid. current proposal. From eventi@n... Wed Feb 07 12:36:32 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 20:36:32 -0000 Received: (qmail 22500 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 20:36:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 20:36:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 21:37:34 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id PAA03231 for ; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 15:36:29 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 15:38:05 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <008d12345200721ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" > > > > As to the laws, I did not say respect for the law, but "concern > > > > for GOOD law, at my current state of disadvantage on points, I am > > > > encouraged to vote agaisnt all laws as a method of scoring points > > > > and keeping them from my opponents regardless of the wisdom of > > > > those laws. > > > > This should be fun... > > > Request for clarification: What should be fun? my voting against > everything or the game shoudl be fun and thus my incentive > regardless of points Touche. I had intended the first. I meant it will be interresting to see you play with that strategy, esp. since you stated it publicly... 204 makes that strategy quite profitable, but I think the do-gooders among us (myself included) would repeal it rather quickly. From bernardo@c... Wed Feb 07 12:39:09 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 20:39:09 -0000 Received: (qmail 52565 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 20:39:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 20:39:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 20:39:09 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp08-01.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.211]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f17Kd7k46898 for ; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 15:39:07 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <003501c09145$ecee8740$d3a811d0@computer> To: References: <95pf38+frt5@eGroups.com> <007842832200721ISWEBNT@d...> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 312 Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 15:38:25 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" > Regular votes of confidence allow popular support as an expressed > grant, and it avoids any particular player insisting on such a vote. I > think it is a good idea. > There is a way to combine these. It could be specified that after, say 20 turns (to pull a number off the top of my head), you MUST call for a vote, but the SK'er - or others, perhaps require a request and one concurring opinion - can call it earlier if it is desired. The new 20 turn limit would start from the previous vote. This'll make it more of a strategic decision when to call votes. From eventi@n... Wed Feb 07 12:41:35 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 20:41:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 40282 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 20:41:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 20:41:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 21:42:39 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id PAA03909 for ; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 15:41:34 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 15:43:10 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <008ca5148200721ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 3:41 PM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains > > > On 7 Feb 01, at 10:38, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > > > > > As edifying as this all may be... perhaps there should be a rule > > > > punishing off topic discussion... > > > > > > > First, sorry meant to send prior "outside" > > > > Forgiven... > > > > > So you take M's position on the function of law, punishment not > > > educ. Unfortunately, as I am sure P (patrick not Plato) would be > > > glad to tell you there is no one in Nomic with the power to punish. > > > how on earth would we judge off-topic discussion, would mentioning > > > the flu in passing be an equal penalty to an all day discussion of > > > Plato. Might one not argue that his all day discussion of Plato was > > > for the sake of legal principles in Nomic (or that his Latin > > > clarifaction were for the sake of more precise expression of law)? > > > > Whatever. There is one person who has power: Since the game is being > > played on a mailing list, there is a moderator. The power wasn't > > given by law, and I've been trying to minimize my use of that role, > > but it's there. > > > > List moderators typically admonish repeated lapses in etiquite first, > > then ban the offending user. I still hold the hope that we can be a > > self governing society (thanks again fritz), but I do hesitantly wear > > that hat. > > --e > > > > > But, why are you opposed to the institutionalization of such a role? Where did that come from? I've never opposed it. I've been legislating toward totally shared responsibilities. I even voted for the evil Chief Magistrate. --e From eventi@n... Wed Feb 07 12:47:27 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 20:47:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 54472 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 20:47:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 20:47:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 21:48:32 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id PAA04721 for ; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 15:47:26 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 312 Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 15:49:03 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <003501c09145$ecee8740$d3a811d0@computer> From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" How about "A vote of confidence can be called by any player at any time. If there has not been a vote of confidence for 20 turns, an automatic VOC is called." ? It's acceptable to me. > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 3:38 PM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 312 > > > > > Regular votes of confidence allow popular support as an expressed > > grant, and it avoids any particular player insisting on such a vote. I > > think it is a good idea. > > > > There is a way to combine these. It could be specified that after, say 20 > turns (to pull a number off the top of my head), you MUST call for a vote, > but the SK'er - or others, perhaps require a request and one concurring > opinion - can call it earlier if it is desired. The new 20 turn > limit would > start from the previous vote. This'll make it more of a > strategic decision > when to call votes. > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Wed Feb 07 12:49:34 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 20:49:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 57682 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 20:49:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 20:49:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta1 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 20:49:33 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp08-01.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.211]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f17KnWk47904 for ; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 15:49:32 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <005b01c09147$61546400$d3a811d0@computer> To: References: Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 312 Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 15:48:50 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" That's much more concise than my version. (And BTW - the CM wasn't "evil", just misunderstood.) > How about "A vote of confidence can be called by any player at any time. If > there has not been a vote of confidence for 20 turns, an automatic VOC is > called." ? It's acceptable to me. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 3:38 PM > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 312 > > > > > > > > > Regular votes of confidence allow popular support as an expressed > > > grant, and it avoids any particular player insisting on such a vote. I > > > think it is a good idea. > > > > > > > There is a way to combine these. It could be specified that after, say 20 > > turns (to pull a number off the top of my head), you MUST call for a vote, > > but the SK'er - or others, perhaps require a request and one concurring > > opinion - can call it earlier if it is desired. The new 20 turn > > limit would > > start from the previous vote. This'll make it more of a > > strategic decision > > when to call votes. > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From pkirklan@e... Wed Feb 07 12:51:27 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 20:51:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 87596 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 20:51:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 20:51:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta3 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 21:52:30 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Wed, 7 Feb 2001 15:08:42 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 7 Feb 01 15:00:46 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 7 Feb 01 15:00:19 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 15:00:17 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Priority: normal In-reply-to: References: <008ca5148200721ISWEBNT@d...> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <00a314208210721ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 7 Feb 01, at 15:43, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 3:41 PM > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains > > > > > > On 7 Feb 01, at 10:38, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > > > > > > > > As edifying as this all may be... perhaps there should be a > > > > > rule punishing off topic discussion... > > > > > > > > > First, sorry meant to send prior "outside" > > > > > > Forgiven... > > > > > > > So you take M's position on the function of law, punishment not > > > > educ. Unfortunately, as I am sure P (patrick not Plato) would > > > > be glad to tell you there is no one in Nomic with the power to > > > > punish. how on earth would we judge off-topic discussion, would > > > > mentioning the flu in passing be an equal penalty to an all day > > > > discussion of Plato. Might one not argue that his all day > > > > discussion of Plato was for the sake of legal principles in > > > > Nomic (or that his Latin clarifaction were for the sake of more > > > > precise expression of law)? > > > > > > Whatever. There is one person who has power: Since the game is > > > being played on a mailing list, there is a moderator. The power > > > wasn't given by law, and I've been trying to minimize my use of > > > that role, but it's there. > > > > > > List moderators typically admonish repeated lapses in etiquite > > > first, then ban the offending user. I still hold the hope that we > > > can be a self governing society (thanks again fritz), but I do > > > hesitantly wear that hat. > > > --e > > > > > > > > But, why are you opposed to the institutionalization of such a role? > > Where did that come from? I've never opposed it. I've been > legislating toward totally shared responsibilities. I even voted for > the evil Chief Magistrate. > > --e My mistake I wasnt't here, I did not check the voting record. The current proposal would indeed go in this direction; I only think it should be stronger (ah, maybe later) I think we are have a misunderstanding becasue you aeem to have been so insistent that all of these contigencies are already taken care of and that there are not areas (such as my fractional point nonsense) in need of greater authority to settle disputes. This was my real point, or test, anyway. I just needed a ground to stand on to test it. > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981578496/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > -> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Wed Feb 07 12:55:14 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 20:55:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 75701 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 20:55:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 20:55:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 20:55:13 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id PAA05771 for ; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 15:55:13 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 312 Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 15:56:49 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <005b01c09147$61546400$d3a811d0@computer> From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" Fritz- Would you accept a periodic vote of confidence in lieu of a term limit? > > That's much more concise than my version. > > (And BTW - the CM wasn't "evil", just misunderstood.) Like Darth Vader. > > > > How about "A vote of confidence can be called by any player at any time. > If > > there has not been a vote of confidence for 20 turns, an > automatic VOC is > > called." ? It's acceptable to me. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > > Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 3:38 PM > > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 312 > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regular votes of confidence allow popular support as an expressed > > > > grant, and it avoids any particular player insisting on such a vote. > I > > > > think it is a good idea. > > > > > > > > > > There is a way to combine these. It could be specified that > after, say > 20 > > > turns (to pull a number off the top of my head), you MUST call for a > vote, > > > but the SK'er - or others, perhaps require a request and one > concurring > > > opinion - can call it earlier if it is desired. The new 20 turn > > > limit would > > > start from the previous vote. This'll make it more of a > > > strategic decision > > > when to call votes. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From pkirklan@e... Wed Feb 07 13:00:53 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 21:00:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 14561 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 21:00:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 21:00:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta1 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 21:00:53 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Wed, 7 Feb 2001 15:18:11 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 7 Feb 01 15:10:15 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 7 Feb 01 15:10:10 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 15:10:05 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 312 Priority: normal In-reply-to: <005b01c09147$61546400$d3a811d0@computer> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <007fe1118210721ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 7 Feb 01, at 15:48, Patrick D. Bernardo wrote: Sounds good to me. I could go shorter on the term (even 10 turns). 20 could easily get someone from here to 200, so it is not much of a limit. PB is not really pullin numbers from the "air" > > That's much more concise than my version. > > (And BTW - the CM wasn't "evil", just misunderstood.) > > > > How about "A vote of confidence can be called by any player at any > > time. > If > > there has not been a vote of confidence for 20 turns, an automatic > > VOC is called." ? It's acceptable to me. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > > Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 3:38 PM > > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 312 > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regular votes of confidence allow popular support as an > > > > expressed grant, and it avoids any particular player insisting > > > > on such a vote. > I > > > > think it is a good idea. > > > > > > > > > > There is a way to combine these. It could be specified that > > > after, say > 20 > > > turns (to pull a number off the top of my head), you MUST call for > > > a > vote, > > > but the SK'er - or others, perhaps require a request and one > > > concurring opinion - can call it earlier if it is desired. The > > > new 20 turn limit would start from the previous vote. This'll > > > make it more of a strategic decision when to call votes. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981578977/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > -> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Wed Feb 07 13:03:18 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 21:03:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 98192 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 21:03:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 21:03:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 21:03:17 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp08-01.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.211]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f17L3Gk49322 for ; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 16:03:16 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <007601c09149$4c98db20$d3a811d0@computer> To: References: Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 312 Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 16:02:34 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" > > (And BTW - the CM wasn't "evil", just misunderstood.) > > Like Darth Vader. > Yes! You read my mind. Bringing order to the universe is really a noble undertaking. So he had to suffocate a few generals and snuff a couple of Ewoks. All part of a days work, really. And those Ewoks aren't really what they seem. Under that "cute and furry" exterior lies the soul of a vicious, malicious beast, hostile to all order and good sense. From eventi@n... Wed Feb 07 13:04:02 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 21:04:02 -0000 Received: (qmail 24060 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 21:04:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 21:04:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 21:04:02 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id QAA07045 for ; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 16:04:00 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 16:05:35 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <00a314208210721ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" Paul- You immediately gain stature in my book for being an unabashed "in-quoter" as opposed to those rat-bastard top-quoters... More below. > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 4:00 PM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains > > > On 7 Feb 01, at 15:43, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > > Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 3:41 PM > > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains > > > > > > > > > On 7 Feb 01, at 10:38, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > As edifying as this all may be... perhaps there should be a > > > > > > rule punishing off topic discussion... > > > > > > > > > > > First, sorry meant to send prior "outside" > > > > > > > > Forgiven... > > > > > > > > > So you take M's position on the function of law, punishment not > > > > > educ. Unfortunately, as I am sure P (patrick not Plato) would > > > > > be glad to tell you there is no one in Nomic with the power to > > > > > punish. how on earth would we judge off-topic discussion, would > > > > > mentioning the flu in passing be an equal penalty to an all day > > > > > discussion of Plato. Might one not argue that his all day > > > > > discussion of Plato was for the sake of legal principles in > > > > > Nomic (or that his Latin clarifaction were for the sake of more > > > > > precise expression of law)? > > > > > > > > Whatever. There is one person who has power: Since the game is > > > > being played on a mailing list, there is a moderator. The power > > > > wasn't given by law, and I've been trying to minimize my use of > > > > that role, but it's there. > > > > > > > > List moderators typically admonish repeated lapses in etiquite > > > > first, then ban the offending user. I still hold the hope that we > > > > can be a self governing society (thanks again fritz), but I do > > > > hesitantly wear that hat. > > > > --e > > > > > > > > > > > But, why are you opposed to the institutionalization of such a role? > > > > Where did that come from? I've never opposed it. I've been > > legislating toward totally shared responsibilities. I even voted for > > the evil Chief Magistrate. > > > > --e > > My mistake I wasnt't here, I did not check the voting record. > The current proposal would indeed go in this direction; I only think > it should be stronger (ah, maybe later) > > I think we are have a misunderstanding becasue you aeem to have > been so insistent that all of these contigencies are already taken > care of and that there are not areas (such as my fractional point > nonsense) in need of greater authority to settle disputes. This was > my real point, or test, anyway. I just needed a ground to stand on > to test it. To me it's a simple matter. If it's not in the rules, it's not a rule. There are ambiguities, but they can't be resolved by calling in the judge, because he can't write law. I think you may end up tripping on your poly-sci background if you expect things like "implied preference" and "original intent" to mean anything to the 3 techies who make up half the population. From barturo@e... Wed Feb 07 13:06:29 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: BArturo@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 21:06:29 -0000 Received: (qmail 6583 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 21:06:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 21:06:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 22:07:33 -0000 Received: from batman.ess ([12.31.9.2]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with ESMTP id QAA07427 for ; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 16:06:26 -0500 (EST) Received: by BATMAN with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id <1MR7KT6Z>; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 16:01:26 -0500 Message-ID: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF0372DE@BATMAN> To: "'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'" Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 16:01:25 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C09149.222DA230" From: "Arturo, Bob" ------_=_NextPart_001_01C09149.222DA230 Content-Type: text/plain That's not a dime! This is a dime. -----Original Message----- From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 3:33 PM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains it doesn't carry any official weight, but it carries a lot of weight. It was in the face of the expression of orignal intent that I dropped my claim. Otherwise I could have had recourse under 306 and its implied preference for whole numbers. Any judge that ignored Patrick's expressed declaration that he meant no sucht thing would have been grossly irresponsible Since the authors of 311 and 306 both explained their strange intentions (as well as the fact that at least 3 of you rejected my interpretation), I stopped the claim. P.S Anyone got a half point. Yahoo! Groups Sponsor FREE 2001 Forecast from Astrocenter.com! To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at webmaster@e.... ------_=_NextPart_001_01C09149.222DA230 Content-Type: text/html Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
That's=20 not a dime!  This is a dime.
-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Kirkland=20 [mailto:pkirklan@e...]
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2= 001=20 3:33 PM
To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE= :=20 [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains

it=20 doesn't carry any official weight, but it carries a lot of weight.  = It=20
was in the face of the expression of orignal intent that I dropped my= =20
claim.  Otherwise I could have had recourse under 306 and its=20
implied preference for whole numbers.  Any judge that ignored=20
Patrick's expressed declaration that he meant no sucht thing would=20
have been grossly irresponsible
Since the authors of 311 and 306 = both=20 explained their strange
intentions (as well as the fact that at least= 3 of=20 you rejected my
interpretation), I stopped the claim.

P.S Any= one=20 got a half point. 



To=20 unsubscribe from this group, send an email=20 to:
scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com




* NOTICE * - If the reader is not the s= pecified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that= any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. <= /FONT>

If you are not the specified recipient,= please notify us at webmaster@e....



------_=_NextPart_001_01C09149.222DA230-- From eventi@n... Wed Feb 07 13:07:51 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 21:07:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 7729 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 21:07:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 21:07:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 21:07:50 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id QAA07600 for ; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 16:07:48 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 312 Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 16:09:25 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <007601c09149$4c98db20$d3a811d0@computer> From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" > > > (And BTW - the CM wasn't "evil", just misunderstood.) > > > > Like Darth Vader. > > > Yes! You read my mind. Actually I felt a disturbance in the force which I havn't felt since... Hmmmmmm. > Bringing order to the universe is really a noble > undertaking. So he had to suffocate a few generals and snuff a couple of > Ewoks. All part of a days work, really. And those Ewoks aren't > really what > they seem. Under that "cute and furry" exterior lies the soul of > a vicious, > malicious beast, hostile to all order and good sense. Those little shits ruined what would have otherwise been a half-assed sequal. With that I smite thee... This is getting off topic. From eventi@n... Wed Feb 07 13:10:53 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 21:10:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 43450 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 21:10:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 21:10:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 21:10:53 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id QAA07978 for ; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 16:10:52 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 16:12:29 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0012_01C09120.C4BFF7B0" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF0372DE@BATMAN> From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" ------=_NextPart_000_0012_01C09120.C4BFF7B0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit THIS...... is shit. -----Original Message----- From: Arturo, Bob [mailto:barturo@e...] Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 4:01 PM To: 'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com' Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains That's not a dime! This is a dime. -----Original Message----- From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 3:33 PM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains it doesn't carry any official weight, but it carries a lot of weight. It was in the face of the expression of orignal intent that I dropped my claim. Otherwise I could have had recourse under 306 and its implied preference for whole numbers. Any judge that ignored Patrick's expressed declaration that he meant no sucht thing would have been grossly irresponsible Since the authors of 311 and 306 both explained their strange intentions (as well as the fact that at least 3 of you rejected my interpretation), I stopped the claim. P.S Anyone got a half point. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor www. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at webmaster@e.... ------=_NextPart_000_0012_01C09120.C4BFF7B0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
THIS...... is shit.
-----Original Message-----
From: Arturo, Bob=20 [mailto:barturo@e...]
Sent: Wednesday, Februa= ry=20 07, 2001 4:01 PM
To:=20 'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'
Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re= :=20 Poll results for scatterbrains

That's not a dime!  This is a=20 dime.
-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Kirkland=20 [mailto:pkirklan@e...]
Sent: Wednesday, February 07,= 2001=20 3:33 PM
To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com
Subject: = RE:=20 [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for=20 scatterbrains

it doesn't carry any official wei= ght,=20 but it carries a lot of weight.  It
was in the face of the=20 expression of orignal intent that I dropped my
claim.  Otherwi= se I=20 could have had recourse under 306 and its
implied preference for wh= ole=20 numbers.  Any judge that ignored
Patrick's expressed declarati= on=20 that he meant no sucht thing would
have been grossly irresponsible= =20
Since the authors of 311 and 306 both explained their strange=20
intentions (as well as the fact that at least 3 of you rejected my= =20
interpretation), I stopped the claim.

P.S Anyone got a half= =20 point. 



To unsubscribe from this group, s= end=20 an email=20 to:
scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com




To=20 unsubscribe from this group, send an email=20 to:
scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com




* NOTICE * - If the reader is not the s= pecified=20 recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any=20 distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited.=20

If you are not the specified recipient,= please=20 notify us at webmaster@e....=20



------=_NextPart_000_0012_01C09120.C4BFF7B0-- From barturo@e... Wed Feb 07 13:18:54 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: BArturo@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 21:18:54 -0000 Received: (qmail 34039 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 21:17:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 21:17:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 21:17:00 -0000 Received: from batman.ess ([12.31.9.2]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with ESMTP id QAA08949 for ; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 16:16:58 -0500 (EST) Received: by BATMAN with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id <1MR7KT65>; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 16:11:58 -0500 Message-ID: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF0372DF@BATMAN> To: "'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'" Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 312 Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 16:11:57 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C0914A.9AAA66C0" From: "Arturo, Bob" ------_=_NextPart_001_01C0914A.9AAA66C0 Content-Type: text/plain Work what do you know about it. You have only been working for a year, maybe less. -----Original Message----- From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 4:03 PM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 312 > > (And BTW - the CM wasn't "evil", just misunderstood.) > > Like Darth Vader. > Yes! You read my mind. Bringing order to the universe is really a noble undertaking. So he had to suffocate a few generals and snuff a couple of Ewoks. All part of a days work, really. And those Ewoks aren't really what they seem. Under that "cute and furry" exterior lies the soul of a vicious, malicious beast, hostile to all order and good sense. Yahoo! Groups Sponsor FREE 2001 Forecast from Astrocenter.com! To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at webmaster@e.... ------_=_NextPart_001_01C0914A.9AAA66C0 Content-Type: text/html Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Work=20 what do you know about it. You have only been working for a year, maybe les= s.=20
-----Original Message-----
From: Patrick D. Bernardo=20 [mailto:bernardo@c...]
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 20= 01=20 4:03 PM
To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re= :=20 [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 312

> > (And B= TW -=20 the CM wasn't "evil", just misunderstood.)
>
> Like Darth=20 Vader.
>
Yes!  You read my mind.  Bringing order to th= e=20 universe is really a noble
undertaking.  So he had to suffocate a= few=20 generals and snuff a couple of
Ewoks.  All part of a days work,=20 really.  And those Ewoks aren't really what
they seem.  Unde= r=20 that "cute and furry" exterior lies the soul of a vicious,
malicious b= east,=20 hostile to all order and good sense.





To=20 unsubscribe from this group, send an email=20 to:
scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com




* NOTICE * - If the reader is not the s= pecified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that= any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. <= /FONT>

If you are not the specified recipient,= please notify us at webmaster@e....



------_=_NextPart_001_01C0914A.9AAA66C0-- From barturo@e... Wed Feb 07 13:19:19 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: BArturo@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 21:19:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 41209 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 21:19:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 21:19:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 21:19:04 -0000 Received: from batman.ess ([12.31.9.2]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with ESMTP id QAA09291 for ; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 16:18:59 -0500 (EST) Received: by BATMAN with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id <1MR7KT66>; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 16:13:59 -0500 Message-ID: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF0372E0@BATMAN> To: "'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'" Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 16:13:58 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C0914A.E2BDA260" From: "Arturo, Bob" ------_=_NextPart_001_01C0914A.E2BDA260 Content-Type: text/plain That's right. I got your back Eug....... (cough) Way back -----Original Message----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia [mailto:eventi@n...] Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 4:06 PM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Paul- You immediately gain stature in my book for being an unabashed "in-quoter" as opposed to those rat-bastard top-quoters... More below. > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 4:00 PM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains > > > On 7 Feb 01, at 15:43, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > > Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 3:41 PM > > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains > > > > > > > > > On 7 Feb 01, at 10:38, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > As edifying as this all may be... perhaps there should be a > > > > > > rule punishing off topic discussion... > > > > > > > > > > > First, sorry meant to send prior "outside" > > > > > > > > Forgiven... > > > > > > > > > So you take M's position on the function of law, punishment not > > > > > educ. Unfortunately, as I am sure P (patrick not Plato) would > > > > > be glad to tell you there is no one in Nomic with the power to > > > > > punish. how on earth would we judge off-topic discussion, would > > > > > mentioning the flu in passing be an equal penalty to an all day > > > > > discussion of Plato. Might one not argue that his all day > > > > > discussion of Plato was for the sake of legal principles in > > > > > Nomic (or that his Latin clarifaction were for the sake of more > > > > > precise expression of law)? > > > > > > > > Whatever. There is one person who has power: Since the game is > > > > being played on a mailing list, there is a moderator. The power > > > > wasn't given by law, and I've been trying to minimize my use of > > > > that role, but it's there. > > > > > > > > List moderators typically admonish repeated lapses in etiquite > > > > first, then ban the offending user. I still hold the hope that we > > > > can be a self governing society (thanks again fritz), but I do > > > > hesitantly wear that hat. > > > > --e > > > > > > > > > > > But, why are you opposed to the institutionalization of such a role? > > > > Where did that come from? I've never opposed it. I've been > > legislating toward totally shared responsibilities. I even voted for > > the evil Chief Magistrate. > > > > --e > > My mistake I wasnt't here, I did not check the voting record. > The current proposal would indeed go in this direction; I only think > it should be stronger (ah, maybe later) > > I think we are have a misunderstanding becasue you aeem to have > been so insistent that all of these contigencies are already taken > care of and that there are not areas (such as my fractional point > nonsense) in need of greater authority to settle disputes. This was > my real point, or test, anyway. I just needed a ground to stand on > to test it. To me it's a simple matter. If it's not in the rules, it's not a rule. There are ambiguities, but they can't be resolved by calling in the judge, because he can't write law. I think you may end up tripping on your poly-sci background if you expect things like "implied preference" and "original intent" to mean anything to the 3 techies who make up half the population. Yahoo! Groups Sponsor Choose 3 DVDs for $0.49 each! Choose 3 DVDs for $0.49 each! To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at webmaster@e.... ------_=_NextPart_001_01C0914A.E2BDA260 Content-Type: text/html
That's right. I got your back Eug....... (cough) Way back
-----Original Message-----
From: Eugene Ventimiglia [mailto:eventi@n...]
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 4:06 PM
To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains

Paul- You immediately gain stature in my book for being an unabashed
"in-quoter" as opposed to those rat-bastard top-quoters... More below.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 4:00 PM
> To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains
>
>
> On 7 Feb 01, at 15:43, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 3:41 PM
> > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com
> > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains
> > >
> > >
> > > On 7 Feb 01, at 10:38, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > > > As edifying as this all may be... perhaps there should be a
> > > > > > rule punishing off topic discussion...
> > > > > >
> > > > > First, sorry meant to send prior "outside"
> > > >
> > > > Forgiven...
> > > >
> > > > > So you take M's position on the function of law, punishment not
> > > > > educ. Unfortunately, as I am sure P (patrick not Plato)  would
> > > > > be glad to tell you there is no one in Nomic with the power to
> > > > > punish. how on earth would we judge off-topic discussion, would
> > > > > mentioning the flu in passing be an equal penalty to an all day
> > > > > discussion of Plato.  Might one not argue that his all day
> > > > > discussion of Plato was for the sake of legal principles in
> > > > > Nomic (or that his Latin clarifaction were for the sake of more
> > > > > precise expression of law)?
> > > >
> > > > Whatever.  There is one person who has power: Since the game is
> > > > being played on a mailing list, there is a moderator.  The power
> > > > wasn't given by law, and I've been trying to minimize my use of
> > > > that role, but it's there.
> > > >
> > > > List moderators typically admonish repeated lapses in etiquite
> > > > first, then ban the offending user.  I still hold the hope that we
> > > > can be a self governing society (thanks again fritz), but I do
> > > > hesitantly wear that hat.
> > > >  --e
> > > >
> > > >
> > > But, why are you opposed to the institutionalization of such a role?
> >
> > Where did that come from?  I've never opposed it.  I've been
> > legislating toward totally shared responsibilities.  I even voted for
> > the evil Chief Magistrate.
> >
> >  --e
>
> My mistake I wasnt't here, I did not check the voting record.
> The current proposal would indeed go in this direction; I only think
> it should be stronger (ah, maybe later)
>
> I think we are have a misunderstanding becasue you aeem to have
> been so insistent that all of these contigencies are already taken
> care of and that there are not areas (such as my fractional point
> nonsense) in need of greater authority to settle disputes.  This was
> my real point, or test, anyway.  I just needed a ground to stand on
> to test it.

To me it's a simple matter.  If it's not in the rules, it's not a rule.
There are ambiguities, but they can't be resolved by calling in the judge,
because he can't write law.  I think you may end up tripping on your
poly-sci background if you expect things like "implied  preference" and
"original intent" to mean anything to the 3 techies who make up half the
population.



To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com




* NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited.

If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at webmaster@e....



------_=_NextPart_001_01C0914A.E2BDA260-- From pkirklan@e... Wed Feb 07 13:19:39 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 21:19:39 -0000 Received: (qmail 63463 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 21:18:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 21:18:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta3 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 22:19:18 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Wed, 7 Feb 2001 15:35:32 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 7 Feb 01 15:27:36 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 7 Feb 01 15:27:26 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 15:27:20 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Priority: normal In-reply-to: References: <00a314208210721ISWEBNT@d...> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <008393235210721ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 7 Feb 01, at 16:05, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > Paul- You immediately gain stature in my book for being an unabashed > "in-quoter" as opposed to those rat-bastard top-quoters... More below. Is it worth a half point? (Dammit I am back to begging. Maybe I'll find something for sale) > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 4:00 PM > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains > > > > > > On 7 Feb 01, at 15:43, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > > > Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 3:41 PM > > > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains > > > > > > > > > > > > On 7 Feb 01, at 10:38, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As edifying as this all may be... perhaps there should be > > > > > > > a rule punishing off topic discussion... > > > > > > > > > > > > > First, sorry meant to send prior "outside" > > > > > > > > > > Forgiven... > > > > > > > > > > > So you take M's position on the function of law, punishment > > > > > > not educ. Unfortunately, as I am sure P (patrick not Plato) > > > > > > would be glad to tell you there is no one in Nomic with the > > > > > > power to punish. how on earth would we judge off-topic > > > > > > discussion, would mentioning the flu in passing be an equal > > > > > > penalty to an all day discussion of Plato. Might one not > > > > > > argue that his all day discussion of Plato was for the sake > > > > > > of legal principles in Nomic (or that his Latin clarifaction > > > > > > were for the sake of more precise expression of law)? > > > > > > > > > > Whatever. There is one person who has power: Since the game > > > > > is being played on a mailing list, there is a moderator. The > > > > > power wasn't given by law, and I've been trying to minimize my > > > > > use of that role, but it's there. > > > > > > > > > > List moderators typically admonish repeated lapses in etiquite > > > > > first, then ban the offending user. I still hold the hope > > > > > that we can be a self governing society (thanks again fritz), > > > > > but I do hesitantly wear that hat. > > > > > --e > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But, why are you opposed to the institutionalization of such a > > > > role? > > > > > > Where did that come from? I've never opposed it. I've been > > > legislating toward totally shared responsibilities. I even voted > > > for the evil Chief Magistrate. > > > > > > --e > > > > My mistake I wasnt't here, I did not check the voting record. > > The current proposal would indeed go in this direction; I only think > > it should be stronger (ah, maybe later) > > > > I think we are have a misunderstanding becasue you aeem to have been > > so insistent that all of these contigencies are already taken care > > of and that there are not areas (such as my fractional point > > nonsense) in need of greater authority to settle disputes. This was > > my real point, or test, anyway. I just needed a ground to stand on > > to test it. > > To me it's a simple matter. If it's not in the rules, it's not a > rule. There are ambiguities, but they can't be resolved by calling in > the judge, because he can't write law. I think you may end up > tripping on your poly-sci background if you expect things like > "implied preference" and "original intent" to mean anything to the 3 > techies who make up half the population. > So its now a 50-50 pop and we all know what the architechtonic art is. I am also teaching class called "Technology, Work, and Leisure" (Sure we're really just reading a bunch of philosophy books), but I hope to show them all that good sound political judgment needs to rule technology before the techies take over. BTW, I didn't used the phrase "implied preference of the law" while I thought I had a case I also new that there was little support for such a legal theory among known members (of course its even harder in the phase of expressed preference) > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981579842/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > -> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From pkirklan@e... Wed Feb 07 13:23:59 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 21:23:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 50091 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 21:21:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 21:21:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta1 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 21:21:43 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Wed, 7 Feb 2001 15:39:01 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 7 Feb 01 15:31:06 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 7 Feb 01 15:30:45 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 15:30:41 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Priority: normal In-reply-to: References: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF0372DE@BATMAN> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <00ada0139210721ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 7 Feb 01, at 16:12, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > THIS...... is shit. let me explain, My only point was that I could have called to judgment under 306 until Patrick explicitly stated that it was not his intention to avoid all fractional scores. Clearer? > -----Original Message----- > From: Arturo, Bob [mailto:barturo@e...] > Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 4:01 PM > To: 'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com' > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains > > > That's not a dime! This is a dime. > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 3:33 PM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains > > > it doesn't carry any official weight, but it carries a lot of > weight. > It > was in the face of the expression of orignal intent that I dropped > my claim. Otherwise I could have had recourse under 306 and its > implied preference for whole numbers. Any judge that ignored > Patrick's expressed declaration that he meant no sucht thing would > have been grossly irresponsible Since the authors of 311 and 306 > both explained their strange intentions (as well as the fact that > at least 3 of you rejected my interpretation), I stopped the > claim. > > P.S Anyone got a half point. > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > www. > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or > copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > webmaster@e.... > > > > > From f_hemker@h... Wed Feb 07 13:33:06 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: f_hemker@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 21:33:06 -0000 Received: (qmail 14948 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 21:33:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 21:33:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hk.egroups.com) (10.1.10.43) by mta1 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 21:33:04 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: f_hemker@h... Received: from [10.1.4.66] by hk.egroups.com with NNFMP; 07 Feb 2001 21:33:04 -0000 Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 21:33:03 -0000 To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: Proposal 312 Message-ID: <95seuf+h516@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 2379 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 63.82.115.205 From: f_hemker@h... Yes, I would. However, I would still like to see a term limit if at all possible. I'm just afraid that, because of apathy, one person might sit in the position for a very long time, thus accumulating a vast number of points, putting him at an advantage for winning the game. I feel that a term limit would lesson this possibility. Periodic votes of confidence would add a certain humility to the holder of this office. A term limit would eliminate the possibility of entrenchment. -Fritz --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Eugene Ventimiglia" wrote: > Fritz- > Would you accept a periodic vote of confidence in lieu of a term limit? > > > > > That's much more concise than my version. > > > > (And BTW - the CM wasn't "evil", just misunderstood.) > > Like Darth Vader. > > > > > > > > How about "A vote of confidence can be called by any player at any time. > > If > > > there has not been a vote of confidence for 20 turns, an > > automatic VOC is > > > called." ? It's acceptable to me. > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > > > Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 3:38 PM > > > > To: scatterbrains@y... > > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 312 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regular votes of confidence allow popular support as an expressed > > > > > grant, and it avoids any particular player insisting on such a vote. > > I > > > > > think it is a good idea. > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is a way to combine these. It could be specified that > > after, say > > 20 > > > > turns (to pull a number off the top of my head), you MUST call for a > > vote, > > > > but the SK'er - or others, perhaps require a request and one > > concurring > > > > opinion - can call it earlier if it is desired. The new 20 turn > > > > limit would > > > > start from the previous vote. This'll make it more of a > > > > strategic decision > > > > when to call votes. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com From eventi@n... Wed Feb 07 13:35:10 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 21:35:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 82257 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 21:33:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 21:33:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 21:33:40 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id QAA11119 for ; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 16:33:39 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 16:35:15 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <008393235210721ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" > > Paul- You immediately gain stature in my book for being an unabashed > > "in-quoter" as opposed to those rat-bastard top-quoters... More below. > > Is it worth a half point? > (Dammit I am back to begging. Maybe I'll find something for sale) Ummmm, no. > > To me it's a simple matter. If it's not in the rules, it's not a > > rule. There are ambiguities, but they can't be resolved by calling in > > the judge, because he can't write law. I think you may end up > > tripping on your poly-sci background if you expect things like > > "implied preference" and "original intent" to mean anything to the 3 > > techies who make up half the population. > > > So its now a 50-50 pop and we all know what the architechtonic art > is. I am also teaching class called "Technology, Work, and > Leisure" (Sure we're really just reading a bunch of philosophy > books), but I hope to show them all that good sound political > judgment needs to rule technology before the techies take over. You are so fucking right. We've got you all by the balls, and you're just now starting to realize it. The Amish have the best policy for the introduction of new technology. AFAIK, it's fully evaluated by society before it's allowed in. Vint Cerf (the guy who _really_ invented the internet) said "The internet sees Censorship as a communications problem, and routes around it." In other words, this thing is practically unstoppable, even if it were to be legislated. > > BTW, I didn't used the phrase "implied preference of the law" while > I thought I had a case > > I also new that there was little support for such a legal theory > among known members (of course its even harder in the phase of > expressed preference) > From eventi@n... Wed Feb 07 13:35:21 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 21:35:21 -0000 Received: (qmail 90274 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 21:34:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 21:34:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 22:35:42 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id QAA11260 for ; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 16:34:37 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 16:36:13 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <00ada0139210721ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" It worked!!!!!!!! > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 4:31 PM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains > > > On 7 Feb 01, at 16:12, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > THIS...... is shit. > > let me explain, > My only point was that I could have called to judgment under 306 > until Patrick explicitly stated that it was not his intention to avoid > all fractional scores. Clearer? > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Arturo, Bob [mailto:barturo@e...] > > Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 4:01 PM > > To: 'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com' > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains > > > > > > That's not a dime! This is a dime. > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 3:33 PM > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains > > > > > > it doesn't carry any official weight, but it carries a lot of > > weight. > > It > > was in the face of the expression of orignal intent that I dropped > > my claim. Otherwise I could have had recourse under 306 and its > > implied preference for whole numbers. Any judge that ignored > > Patrick's expressed declaration that he meant no sucht thing would > > have been grossly irresponsible Since the authors of 311 and 306 > > both explained their strange intentions (as well as the fact that > > at least 3 of you rejected my interpretation), I stopped the > > claim. > > > > P.S Anyone got a half point. > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > > > www. > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or > > copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > > > > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > > webmaster@e.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From f_hemker@h... Wed Feb 07 13:35:37 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: f_hemker@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 21:35:37 -0000 Received: (qmail 93648 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 21:35:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 21:35:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hk.egroups.com) (10.1.10.43) by mta1 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 21:35:01 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: f_hemker@h... Received: from [10.1.4.66] by hk.egroups.com with NNFMP; 07 Feb 2001 21:34:54 -0000 Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 21:34:53 -0000 To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: Proposal 312 Message-ID: <95sf1t+e1lf@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: <007601c09149$4c98db20$d3a811d0@computer> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 648 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 63.82.115.205 From: f_hemker@h... Order for the sole sake of order is really no order at all. We can only used justified means to reach justified ends. --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Patrick D. Bernardo" wrote: > > > (And BTW - the CM wasn't "evil", just misunderstood.) > > > > Like Darth Vader. > > > Yes! You read my mind. Bringing order to the universe is really a noble > undertaking. So he had to suffocate a few generals and snuff a couple of > Ewoks. All part of a days work, really. And those Ewoks aren't really what > they seem. Under that "cute and furry" exterior lies the soul of a vicious, > malicious beast, hostile to all order and good From pkirklan@e... Wed Feb 07 13:37:10 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 21:37:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 93030 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 21:37:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 21:37:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta1 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 21:37:09 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Wed, 7 Feb 2001 15:54:27 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 7 Feb 01 15:46:31 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 7 Feb 01 15:46:13 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 15:46:05 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 312 Priority: normal In-reply-to: <95seuf+h516@eGroups.com> References: X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <0090a2754210721ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 7 Feb 01, at 21:33, f_hemker@h... wrote: > Yes, I would. > > However, I would still like to see a term limit if at all possible. > I'm just afraid that, because of apathy, one person might sit in the > position for a very long time, thus accumulating a vast number of > points, putting him at an advantage for winning the game. I feel that > a term limit would lesson this possibility. > > Periodic votes of confidence would add a certain humility to the > holder of this office. A term limit would eliminate the possibility > of entrenchment. > > -Fritz > For the same reason I woudl prefer a shorter term (10 turns) to term limits. That alone would fulfill Fritz's concerns > --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Eugene Ventimiglia" wrote: > > Fritz- > Would you accept a periodic vote of confidence in lieu of a > term limit? > > > > > That's much more concise than my version. > > > > > (And BTW - the CM wasn't "evil", just misunderstood.) > > Like Darth > Vader. > > > > > > > > How about "A vote of confidence can be called > by any player at any time. > > If > > > there has not been a vote of > confidence for 20 turns, an > > automatic VOC is > > > called." ? > It's acceptable to me. > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > > > Sent: > Wednesday, February 07, 2001 3:38 PM > > > > To: scatterbrains@y... > > > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 312 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regular votes of confidence allow popular support as > an expressed > > > > > grant, and it avoids any particular player > insisting on such a vote. > > I > > > > > think it is a good idea. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is a way to combine these. It could be > specified that > > after, say > > 20 > > > > turns (to pull a number > off the top of my head), you MUST call for a > > vote, > > > > but the > SK'er - or others, perhaps require a request and one > > concurring > > > > > opinion - can call it earlier if it is desired. The new 20 turn > > > > > limit would > > > > start from the previous vote. This'll > make it more of a > > > > strategic decision > > > > when to call > votes. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe > from this group, send an email to: > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981581587/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > -> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Wed Feb 07 13:39:30 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 21:39:30 -0000 Received: (qmail 97112 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 21:38:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 21:38:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 21:38:25 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id QAA11660 for ; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 16:38:24 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 312 Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 16:40:00 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_001E_01C09124.9D3FACE0" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <95sf1t+e1lf@eGroups.com> From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" ------=_NextPart_000_001E_01C09124.9D3FACE0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_001F_01C09124.9D3FACE0" ------=_NextPart_001_001F_01C09124.9D3FACE0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Wanna touch my mittens? > -----Original Message----- > From: f_hemker@h... [mailto:f_hemker@h...] > Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 4:35 PM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 312 > > > Order for the sole sake of order is really no order at all. We can > only used justified means to reach justified ends. > > --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Patrick D. Bernardo" > wrote: > > > > (And BTW - the CM wasn't "evil", just misunderstood.) > > > > > > Like Darth Vader. > > > > > Yes! You read my mind. Bringing order to the universe is really a > noble > > undertaking. So he had to suffocate a few generals and snuff a > couple of > > Ewoks. All part of a days work, really. And those Ewoks aren't > really what > > they seem. Under that "cute and furry" exterior lies the soul of a > vicious, > > malicious beast, hostile to all order and good > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > ------=_NextPart_001_001F_01C09124.9D3FACE0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Wanna touch my mittens?3D""

>= ;=20 -----Original Message-----
> From: f_hemker@h... [mailto:f_hemker@h...]
&g= t;=20 Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 4:35 PM
> To:=20 scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal= =20 312
>
>
> Order for the sole sake of order is really no o= rder=20 at all.  We can
> only used justified means to reach justified=20 ends.
>
> --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Patrick D. Bernardo"=20 <bernardo@c...>
> wrote:
> > > > (And BTW - the = CM=20 wasn't "evil", just misunderstood.)
> > >
> > > Lik= e=20 Darth Vader.
> > >
> > Yes!  You read my mind.&nb= sp;=20 Bringing order to the universe is really a
> noble
> >=20 undertaking.  So he had to suffocate a few generals and snuff a
>= ;=20 couple of
> > Ewoks.  All part of a days work, really.  = And=20 those Ewoks aren't
> really what
> > they seem.  Under = that=20 "cute and furry" exterior lies the soul of a
> vicious,
> >= =20 malicious beast, hostile to all order and good
>
>
>=20 ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor=20 ---------------------~-~>
> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups
> C= lick=20 here for more details
> http://click.e= groups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981581738/
>=20 ---------------------------------------------------------------------_->=
>
>=20 To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>=20 scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>=20

------=_NextPart_001_001F_01C09124.9D3FACE0-- ------=_NextPart_000_001E_01C09124.9D3FACE0 Content-Type: image/gif; name="yessmall.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <381004021@07022001-3030> [Attachment content not displayed.] ------=_NextPart_000_001E_01C09124.9D3FACE0-- From pkirklan@e... Wed Feb 07 13:41:16 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 21:41:16 -0000 Received: (qmail 35198 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 21:40:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 21:40:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta1 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 21:40:08 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Wed, 7 Feb 2001 15:57:25 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 7 Feb 01 15:49:30 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 7 Feb 01 15:49:02 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 15:48:54 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Priority: normal In-reply-to: References: <008393235210721ISWEBNT@d...> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <009932557210721ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 7 Feb 01, at 16:35, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > Paul- You immediately gain stature in my book for being an > > > unabashed "in-quoter" as opposed to those rat-bastard > > > top-quoters... More below. > > > > Is it worth a half point? > > (Dammit I am back to begging. Maybe I'll find something for sale) > > Ummmm, no. > > > > > > To me it's a simple matter. If it's not in the rules, it's not a > > > rule. There are ambiguities, but they can't be resolved by calling > > > in the judge, because he can't write law. I think you may end up > > > tripping on your poly-sci background if you expect things like > > > "implied preference" and "original intent" to mean anything to > > > the 3 techies who make up half the population. > > > > > So its now a 50-50 pop and we all know what the architechtonic art > > is. I am also teaching class called "Technology, Work, and Leisure" > > (Sure we're really just reading a bunch of philosophy books), but I > > hope to show them all that good sound political judgment needs to > > rule technology before the techies take over. > > You are so fucking right. We've got you all by the balls, and you're > just now starting to realize it. The Amish have the best policy for > the introduction of new technology. AFAIK, it's fully evaluated by > society before it's allowed in. > > Vint Cerf (the guy who _really_ invented the internet) said "The > internet sees Censorship as a communications problem, and routes > around it." In other words, this thing is practically unstoppable, > even if it were to be legislated. > It's a good thing you don't have control of the bomb I didn't say stop (the Amish) I said rule > > > > BTW, I didn't used the phrase "implied preference of the law" while > > I thought I had a case > > > > I also new that there was little support for such a legal theory > > among known members (of course its even harder in the phase of > > expressed preference) > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981581718/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > -> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Wed Feb 07 13:41:41 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 21:41:41 -0000 Received: (qmail 36379 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 21:40:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 21:40:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 22:41:36 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id QAA11886 for ; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 16:40:31 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 312 Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 16:42:07 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <0090a2754210721ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" How about 10 between VOC's and no term limits --e > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 4:46 PM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 312 > > > On 7 Feb 01, at 21:33, f_hemker@h... wrote: > > > Yes, I would. > > > > However, I would still like to see a term limit if at all possible. > > I'm just afraid that, because of apathy, one person might sit in the > > position for a very long time, thus accumulating a vast number of > > points, putting him at an advantage for winning the game. I feel that > > a term limit would lesson this possibility. > > > > Periodic votes of confidence would add a certain humility to the > > holder of this office. A term limit would eliminate the possibility > > of entrenchment. > > > > -Fritz > > > For the same reason I woudl prefer a shorter term (10 turns) to > term limits. That alone would fulfill Fritz's concerns > > > --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Eugene Ventimiglia" wrote: > > > Fritz- > Would you accept a periodic vote of confidence in lieu of a > > term limit? > > > > > That's much more concise than my version. > > > > > > (And BTW - the CM wasn't "evil", just misunderstood.) > > Like Darth > > Vader. > > > > > > > > How about "A vote of confidence can be called > > by any player at any time. > > If > > > there has not been a vote of > > confidence for 20 turns, an > > automatic VOC is > > > called." ? > > It's acceptable to me. > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > > > Sent: > > Wednesday, February 07, 2001 3:38 PM > > > > To: scatterbrains@y... > > > > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 312 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regular votes of confidence allow popular support as > > an expressed > > > > > grant, and it avoids any particular player > > insisting on such a vote. > > I > > > > > think it is a good idea. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is a way to combine these. It could be > > specified that > > after, say > > 20 > > > > turns (to pull a number > > off the top of my head), you MUST call for a > > vote, > > > > but the > > SK'er - or others, perhaps require a request and one > > concurring > > > > > > opinion - can call it earlier if it is desired. The new 20 turn > > > > > > limit would > > > > start from the previous vote. This'll > > make it more of a > > > > strategic decision > > > > when to call > > votes. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe > > from this group, send an email to: > > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981581587/ > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > > -> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From pkirklan@e... Wed Feb 07 13:47:11 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 21:47:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 30330 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 21:46:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 21:46:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta2 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 21:46:37 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Wed, 7 Feb 2001 16:03:53 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 7 Feb 01 15:55:57 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 7 Feb 01 15:55:49 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 15:55:43 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 312 Priority: normal In-reply-to: References: <0090a2754210721ISWEBNT@d...> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <008d65303220721ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 7 Feb 01, at 16:42, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > How about 10 between VOC's and no term limits > --e > Come on Fritz TL's are bullshit, do you all of our judgment is that poor Another issue: What about this payment issue. E, would you be opposed to changing the language to "awarded..." Setting aside the convulted prnciple fo honor/ principle of weath issue, it would complicate things if a future currency were created. Otherwise I prefer my "public employees to be "paid" via taxes > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 4:46 PM > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 312 > > > > > > On 7 Feb 01, at 21:33, f_hemker@h... wrote: > > > > > Yes, I would. > > > > > > However, I would still like to see a term limit if at all > > > possible. I'm just afraid that, because of apathy, one person > > > might sit in the position for a very long time, thus accumulating > > > a vast number of points, putting him at an advantage for winning > > > the game. I feel that a term limit would lesson this possibility. > > > > > > Periodic votes of confidence would add a certain humility to the > > > holder of this office. A term limit would eliminate the > > > possibility of entrenchment. > > > > > > -Fritz > > > > > For the same reason I woudl prefer a shorter term (10 turns) to term > > limits. That alone would fulfill Fritz's concerns > > > > > --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Eugene Ventimiglia" > > > wrote: > Fritz- > Would you accept a periodic vote of confidence > > > in lieu of a term limit? > > > > > That's much more concise than > > > my version. > > > > > > > (And BTW - the CM wasn't "evil", just misunderstood.) > > Like > > > > Darth > > > Vader. > > > > > > > > How about "A vote of confidence can be > > > called by any player at any time. > > If > > > there has not been > > > a vote of confidence for 20 turns, an > > automatic VOC is > > > > > > called." ? It's acceptable to me. > > > > > > > -----Original > > > Message----- > > > > > > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > > > Sent: > > > Wednesday, February 07, 2001 3:38 PM > > > > To: > > > scatterbrains@y... > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 312 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regular votes of confidence allow popular support > > > > > > > > > > > as > > > an expressed > > > > > grant, and it avoids any particular player > > > insisting on such a vote. > > I > > > > > think it is a good idea. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is a way to combine these. It could > > > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > specified that > > after, say > > 20 > > > > turns (to pull a > > > number off the top of my head), you MUST call for a > > vote, > > > > > > > but the SK'er - or others, perhaps require a request and one > > > > > concurring > > > > > > > opinion - can call it earlier if it is desired. The new 20 > > > > > > turn > > > > > > > limit would > > > > start from the previous vote. This'll > > > make it more of a > > > > strategic decision > > > > when to call > > > votes. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To > > > unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here > > > for more details > > > http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981581587/ > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > ---_ -> > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981582104/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > -> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Wed Feb 07 14:02:23 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 22:02:23 -0000 Received: (qmail 1182 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 22:02:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 22:02:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 23:03:27 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id RAA14368 for ; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 17:02:22 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 17:03:58 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <009932557210721ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" > > > > > > > So its now a 50-50 pop and we all know what the architechtonic art > > > is. I am also teaching class called "Technology, Work, and Leisure" > > > (Sure we're really just reading a bunch of philosophy books), but I > > > hope to show them all that good sound political judgment needs to > > > rule technology before the techies take over. > > > > You are so fucking right. We've got you all by the balls, and you're > > just now starting to realize it. The Amish have the best policy for > > the introduction of new technology. AFAIK, it's fully evaluated by > > society before it's allowed in. > > > > Vint Cerf (the guy who _really_ invented the internet) said "The > > internet sees Censorship as a communications problem, and routes > > around it." In other words, this thing is practically unstoppable, > > even if it were to be legislated. > > > It's a good thing you don't have control of the bomb > > I didn't say stop (the Amish) I said rule It is a good thing indeed. We just design & build 'em, and can walk away blameless when you politicos use them. Interresting article about the Amish and Technology http://criglernajjar.terrashare.com//FromNYT.htm From eventi@n... Wed Feb 07 14:04:21 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 22:04:21 -0000 Received: (qmail 74611 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 22:04:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 22:04:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 23:05:26 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id RAA14577 for ; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 17:04:20 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 312 Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 17:05:56 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <008d65303220721ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" > On 7 Feb 01, at 16:42, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > How about 10 between VOC's and no term limits > > --e > > > Come on Fritz TL's are bullshit, do you all of our judgment is that > poor I can't even begin to parse that... From eventi@n... Wed Feb 07 14:13:51 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 22:13:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 35931 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 22:13:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 22:13:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 22:13:50 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id RAA15588 for ; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 17:13:48 -0500 (EST) To: "Scatterbrains Nomic" Subject: Proposal 312 (revised) Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 17:15:25 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" BEGIN Scorekeeper: The office of scorekeeper shall be created for the purpose of maintaining and reporting the official score of the game. The scorekeeper must record and make public any changes to a player's score within 2 business days of the event which causes the score change. Any disputes with the reported score must be announced within 5 business days of the report. The scorekeeping record shall consist of a detailed list of entries, each corresponding to a score adjustment. Each entry shall contain the date, the player's name, a brief description of the reason for the adjustment, and the positive or negative score adjustment. The scorekeeper is a public employee, and as such is hired and paid by the population. His salary is one point per turn, collected one point from each player after N turns, where N equals the number of players. The scorekeeper is selected from any applicants by the population. A poll shall be created with the names of perspective employees, and each player shall choose one. If the outcome is a tie, there shall be a runoff election, conducted in the same manner with only the tied applicants. The score maintained by the scorekeeper will be official and indisputable after the determined period. The scorekeeper may, at his discression, make adjustment records to remedy mistakes not caught before the dispute period. The scorekeeper is hired based on an infinately renewable contract. A vote of confidence can be called by any player at any time. If there has not been a vote of confidence for 10 turns, an automatic vote is called. If a majority of players believe that the scorekeeper should be replaced, a new one is chosen in the afformentioned manner. The previous scorekeeper is entitled to apply for the job, and remains scorekeeper until such time as a new scorekeeper is selected. END This is also available at www.scatterbrains.com/proposals.html#312 --e From pkirklan@e... Wed Feb 07 14:14:53 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 22:14:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 15161 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 22:14:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 22:14:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta3 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 23:15:57 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Wed, 7 Feb 2001 16:32:09 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 7 Feb 01 16:24:14 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 7 Feb 01 16:23:47 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 16:23:42 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 312 Priority: normal In-reply-to: References: <008d65303220721ISWEBNT@d...> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <009260932220721ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 7 Feb 01, at 17:05, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > On 7 Feb 01, at 16:42, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > > > How about 10 between VOC's and no term limits > > > --e > > > > > Come on Fritz TL's are bullshit, do you all of our judgment is that > > poor > > I can't even begin to parse that... Term Limits (TL's) suck! Do you think, Fritz (TL supporter) that are judgment is so poor, we need to end terms by an automatic mechanism. I urge you Fritz to support E's Suggested revison 10-turn VOC's w/o TL's (and cease all support for real world term limits) > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981583462/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > -> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From f_hemker@h... Wed Feb 07 14:15:14 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: f_hemker@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 22:15:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 13399 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 22:15:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 22:15:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO fj.egroups.com) (10.1.10.46) by mta1 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 22:15:13 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: f_hemker@h... Received: from [10.1.10.119] by fj.egroups.com with NNFMP; 07 Feb 2001 22:15:12 -0000 Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 22:15:10 -0000 To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: Proposal 312 Message-ID: <95shdf+4b87@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: <008d65303220721ISWEBNT@d...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 661 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 63.82.115.205 From: f_hemker@h... --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Paul Kirkland" wrote: > > On 7 Feb 01, at 16:42, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > How about 10 between VOC's and no term limits > > --e > > > Come on Fritz TL's are bullshit, do you all of our judgment is that > poor Uh....Yes? Rather, I would not want to rely on your judgment, poor or not. Indeed, given that we may be setting up a certain player to use this to win, I would want some assurance in place that takes this issue out of your hands. No offence but I'm not here to go around trusting people. In so far as our situation relies on trust I would want us to do what we can to remedy that pro From pkirklan@e... Wed Feb 07 14:21:50 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 22:21:50 -0000 Received: (qmail 25504 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 22:21:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 22:21:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta2 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 22:21:48 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Wed, 7 Feb 2001 16:39:05 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 7 Feb 01 16:31:09 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 7 Feb 01 16:30:54 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 16:30:47 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 312 Priority: normal In-reply-to: <95shdf+4b87@eGroups.com> References: <008d65303220721ISWEBNT@d...> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <008da0539220721ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 7 Feb 01, at 22:15, f_hemker@h... wrote: That's the reason for shorter terms and anytime call for VOC. Run if you want the damn job don't just wait for it to be defered to you. > --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Paul Kirkland" wrote: > > > On 7 Feb 01, at 16:42, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > How about 10 > between VOC's and no term limits > > --e > > > Come on Fritz TL's are > bullshit, do you all of our judgment is that > poor > > Uh....Yes? Rather, I would not want to rely on your judgment, poor > or not. Indeed, given that we may be setting up a certain player to > use this to win, I would want some assurance in place that takes this > issue out of your hands. No offence but I'm not here to go around > trusting people. In so far as our situation relies on trust I would > want us to do what we can to remedy that pro > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981584114/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > -> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From pkirklan@e... Wed Feb 07 14:30:48 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 22:30:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 58799 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 22:30:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 22:30:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta1 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 22:30:46 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Wed, 7 Feb 2001 16:48:00 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 7 Feb 01 16:40:05 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 7 Feb 01 16:39:53 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 16:39:49 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Proposal 312 (revised) Priority: normal In-reply-to: X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <008f70048220721ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 7 Feb 01, at 17:15, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: Would it go too far (and far enough for Fritz if you made every 10 turn vote a new open vote rather than a VOC on an infinitely renewable contract. i would like at least a reply on the question of the language of payment, taxation,etc. A simple change of wording would satisfy me and leave more possibilties for the future. "payed" 1 point... to "awarded one point.." and the word contract eliminated. Clarifiications First you need to change the word perspective employees (or candidates) to PROspective Second, the manner of election is not expressly laid out. Does it require a majority or a plurality? If a majority, shouldn't the "top two" candidates appear in the runoff. As it is written If you got Four votes s, pat and bob each got 1, there woudl be a runoff between p and b because they tied. I assume that is not what you mean, but that paragraph needs to be cleaned up. Sorry to quibble, but it is not clear whether the winner needs a majority or not. > BEGIN > > Scorekeeper: > > The office of scorekeeper shall be created for the purpose of > maintaining and reporting the official score of the game. > > The scorekeeper must record and make public any changes to a player's > score within 2 business days of the event which causes the score > change. Any disputes with the reported score must be announced within > 5 business days of the report. > > The scorekeeping record shall consist of a detailed list of entries, > each corresponding to a score adjustment. Each entry shall contain > the date, the player's name, a brief description of the reason for the > adjustment, and the positive or negative score adjustment. > > The scorekeeper is a public employee, and as such is hired and paid by > the population. His salary is one point per turn, collected one point > from each player after N turns, where N equals the number of players. > > The scorekeeper is selected from any applicants by the population. A > poll shall be created with the names of perspective employees, and > each player shall choose one. If the outcome is a tie, there shall be > a runoff election, conducted in the same manner with only the tied > applicants. > > The score maintained by the scorekeeper will be official and > indisputable after the determined period. The scorekeeper may, at his > discression, make adjustment records to remedy mistakes not caught > before the dispute period. > > The scorekeeper is hired based on an infinately renewable contract. A > vote of confidence can be called by any player at any time. If there > has not been a vote of confidence for 10 turns, an automatic vote is > called. If a majority of players believe that the scorekeeper should > be replaced, a new one is chosen in the afformentioned manner. The > previous scorekeeper is entitled to apply for the job, and remains > scorekeeper until such time as a new scorekeeper is selected. > > END > > This is also available at www.scatterbrains.com/proposals.html#312 --e > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981584033/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > -> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Wed Feb 07 14:46:09 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 22:46:09 -0000 Received: (qmail 95429 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 22:46:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 22:46:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 7 Feb 2001 22:46:06 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id RAA19073 for ; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 17:46:06 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 312 (revised) Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 17:47:42 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <008f70048220721ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" > On 7 Feb 01, at 17:15, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > Would it go too far (and far enough for Fritz if you made every 10 > turn vote a new open vote rather than a VOC on an infinitely > renewable contract. If you'll scroll back a bit, you'll see that I've gone far enough for Fritz. He's not happy, but he's onboard. I'm sure you can change his mind if you keep fighting him on it. > i would like at least a reply on the question of the language of > payment, taxation,etc. A simple change of wording would satisfy > me and leave more possibilties for the future. > "payed" 1 point... to "awarded one point.." and the word contract > eliminated. I think you'll have to explain what's wrong with it. I still see this office as a job, hence paid contract. > Clarifiications > First you need to change the word perspective employees (or > candidates) to PROspective OK, done. And you change Clarifiications to Clarifications ;) > Second, the manner of election is not expressly laid out. Does it > require a majority or a plurality? If a majority, shouldn't the "top > two" candidates appear in the runoff. As it is written If you got Four > votes s, pat and bob each got 1, there woudl be a runoff between p > and b because they tied. I assume that is not what you mean, but > that paragraph needs to be cleaned up. Sorry to quibble, but it is > not clear whether the winner needs a majority or not. I've added the explaination is CAPS. It's a plurality ... The scorekeeper is selected from any applicants by the population. A poll shall be created with the names of perspective employees, and each player shall choose one. THE APPLICANT RECIEVING THE MOST VOTES BECOMES THE SCOREKEEPER AT THE START OF THE NEXT TURN. If the outcome is a tie, there shall be a runoff election, conducted in the same manner with only THOSE APPLICANTS WHO RECIEVED THE MOST VOTES. ... From pkirklan@e... Wed Feb 07 14:59:32 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 7 Feb 2001 22:59:31 -0000 Received: (qmail 34554 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2001 22:59:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 7 Feb 2001 22:59:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta3 with SMTP; 8 Feb 2001 00:00:36 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Wed, 7 Feb 2001 17:16:41 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 7 Feb 01 17:08:47 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 7 Feb 01 17:08:33 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 17:08:32 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 312 (revised) Priority: normal In-reply-to: References: <008f70048220721ISWEBNT@d...> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <00a014116230721ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 7 Feb 01, at 17:47, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > On 7 Feb 01, at 17:15, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > > Would it go too far (and far enough for Fritz if you made every 10 > > turn vote a new open vote rather than a VOC on an infinitely > > renewable contract. > > If you'll scroll back a bit, you'll see that I've gone far enough for > Fritz. He's not happy, but he's onboard. I'm sure you can change his > mind if you keep fighting him on it. > I would be happier with an OPEN vote rather than a VOC every ten turns. > > i would like at least a reply on the question of the language of > > payment, taxation,etc. A simple change of wording would satisfy me > > and leave more possibilties for the future. "payed" 1 point... to > > "awarded one point.." and the word contract eliminated. > > I think you'll have to explain what's wrong with it. I still see this > office as a job, hence paid contract. > To may understandings payments are exchanges. If you want to raise taxes from points, so that we have funds to "pay" officeholders, do it. I can give you an honor or award without giving anything away. If you insist that it is a payment, I believe I will have to insist that it be "paid" from somewhere. If you want to turn everything into a system of payments then I should perhaps be paid for a vote. I will accept only exactly the amount you gain due to my vote (you can decide whether before or after rounding) made as a payment. I.E., you gain as much from making me happy with the law. > > Clarifiications > > First you need to change the word perspective employees (or > > candidates) to PROspective > > OK, done. And you change Clarifiications to Clarifications ;) > this is not a PROPOSAL > > Second, the manner of election is not expressly laid out. Does it > > require a majority or a plurality? If a majority, shouldn't the "top > > two" candidates appear in the runoff. As it is written If you got > > Four votes s, pat and bob each got 1, there woudl be a runoff > > between p and b because they tied. I assume that is not what you > > mean, but that paragraph needs to be cleaned up. Sorry to quibble, > > but it is not clear whether the winner needs a majority or not. > > I've added the explaination is CAPS. It's a plurality > > ... > The scorekeeper is selected from any applicants by the population. A > poll shall be created with the names of perspective employees, and > each player shall choose one. THE APPLICANT RECIEVING THE MOST VOTES > BECOMES THE SCOREKEEPER AT THE START OF THE NEXT TURN. If the outcome > is a tie, there shall be a runoff election, conducted in the same > manner with only THOSE APPLICANTS WHO RECIEVED THE MOST VOTES. ... > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981585969/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > -> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Wed Feb 07 16:53:53 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 8 Feb 2001 00:53:52 -0000 Received: (qmail 36997 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2001 00:53:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 8 Feb 2001 00:53:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 8 Feb 2001 00:53:51 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp08-02.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.212]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f180rnk70649 for ; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 19:53:49 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <004c01c09169$812bd160$d4a811d0@computer> To: References: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF0372DE@BATMAN> <00ada0139210721ISWEBNT@d...> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 19:53:06 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" From: Paul Kirkland > On 7 Feb 01, at 16:12, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > THIS...... is shit. > > let me explain, Don't bother, Paul. They're channeling "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest." I knew this group would go to pot, eventually. Especially once people started discussing movies and stuff. From bernardo@c... Wed Feb 07 16:57:09 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 8 Feb 2001 00:57:09 -0000 Received: (qmail 46059 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2001 00:57:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 8 Feb 2001 00:57:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta3 with SMTP; 8 Feb 2001 01:58:13 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp08-02.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.212]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f180v7k71003 for ; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 19:57:07 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <005201c09169$f6f7c340$d4a811d0@computer> To: References: <00a314208210721ISWEBNT@d...> <008393235210721ISWEBNT@d...> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 19:56:24 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" From: Paul Kirkland > On 7 Feb 01, at 16:05, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > Paul- You immediately gain stature in my book for being an unabashed > > "in-quoter" as opposed to those rat-bastard top-quoters... More below. > > Is it worth a half point? > (Dammit I am back to begging. Maybe I'll find something for sale) > > Uh... Nah. It's too easy. > So its now a 50-50 pop and we all know what the architechtonic art > is. I am also teaching class called "Technology, Work, and > Leisure" (Sure we're really just reading a bunch of philosophy > books), but I hope to show them all that good sound political > judgment needs to rule technology before the techies take over. > Actually Paul, only 3 of us know what the architechtonic art is. The other 3 immediately think of buildings when they hear that phrase. Did anyone see the Simpsons where the scientists take over and try to rule the town? As for "implied preference of the law", etc. It can come in handy. I just think that your case was a bit of a stretch to begin with. In a case that does have some merit, it'll be a concept that we come back to. From eventi@w... Wed Feb 07 19:00:35 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@w... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 8 Feb 2001 03:00:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 56016 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2001 03:00:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 8 Feb 2001 03:00:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ns1-3.wyndtell.com) (63.81.201.11) by mta2 with SMTP; 8 Feb 2001 03:00:33 -0000 Received: from nova.wyndtell.com (nova.wyndtell.com [63.81.201.78]) by ns1-3.wyndtell.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f183vpB11318 for ; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 19:57:51 -0800 Received: (root@localhost) by nova.wyndtell.com (8.8.8/SCA-6.6) id WAA28208; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 22:00:32 -0500 (EST) To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Cuckoo's nest In-Reply-To: 9169812 X-Status: 6Y Message-Id: <15308871.1336@w...> Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 19:00:32 -0800 X-eGroups-From: eventi@w... (Eugene Ventimiglia) From: eventi@w... Intentional or not, Bobby's was actually a really appropriate comment. ------ From: Subject:Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains[3A8200B5] From: Paul Kirkland > On 7 Feb 01, at 16:12, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > THIS...... is shit. > > let me explain, Don't bother, Paul. They're channeling "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest." I knew this group would go to pot, eventually. Especially once people started discussing movies and stuff. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com From eventi@n... Wed Feb 07 21:40:49 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 8 Feb 2001 05:40:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 42989 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2001 05:40:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 8 Feb 2001 05:40:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 8 Feb 2001 05:40:48 -0000 Received: from win (win.venti.nyic.com [64.29.109.18]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id AAA11379 for ; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 00:40:48 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <015301c09191$b1c2e840$126d1d40@v...> To: References: <00a314208210721ISWEBNT@d...> <008393235210721ISWEBNT@d...> <005201c09169$f6f7c340$d4a811d0@computer> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 00:40:20 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" > > So its now a 50-50 pop and we all know what the architechtonic art > > is. I am also teaching class called "Technology, Work, and > > Leisure" (Sure we're really just reading a bunch of philosophy > > books), but I hope to show them all that good sound political > > judgment needs to rule technology before the techies take over. > > > Actually Paul, only 3 of us know what the architechtonic art is. The other > 3 immediately think of buildings when they hear that phrase. Actually, Myla and I were just talking about earthquakes, so I read Archi-tectonic The subject of architechtonic art reminds me of this: http://www.elsewhere.org/cgi-bin/postmodern > Did anyone see the Simpsons where the scientists take over and try to rule > the town? > > As for "implied preference of the law", etc. It can come in handy. I just > think that your case was a bit of a stretch to begin with. In a case that > does have some merit, it'll be a concept that we come back to. From bernardo@c... Thu Feb 08 05:11:20 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 8 Feb 2001 13:11:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 24418 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2001 13:11:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 8 Feb 2001 13:11:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 8 Feb 2001 13:11:19 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-06.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.191]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f18DBHk89911 for ; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 08:11:17 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <000e01c091d0$873079a0$bfa811d0@computer> To: References: <00a314208210721ISWEBNT@d...> <008393235210721ISWEBNT@d...> <005201c09169$f6f7c340$d4a811d0@computer> <015301c09191$b1c2e840$126d1d40@v...> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 08:10:35 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" > > Actually Paul, only 3 of us know what the architechtonic art is. The > other > > 3 immediately think of buildings when they hear that phrase. > > Actually, Myla and I were just talking about earthquakes, so I read > Archi-tectonic > The subject of architechtonic art reminds me of this: > http://www.elsewhere.org/cgi-bin/postmodern > Hey now, don't lets get started on whose discipline has the more outrageous jargon. Don't forget, I've seen slashdot. Besides, nobody here is a postmodernist. From bernardo@c... Thu Feb 08 05:12:07 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 8 Feb 2001 13:12:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 21367 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2001 13:12:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 8 Feb 2001 13:12:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta3 with SMTP; 8 Feb 2001 14:13:11 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-06.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.191]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f18DC4k89937 for ; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 08:12:05 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <001a01c091d0$a3b447a0$bfa811d0@computer> To: References: <15308871.1336@w...> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Cuckoo's nest Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 08:11:22 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" > Intentional or not, Bobby's was actually a really appropriate comment. > Maybe... My reply was meant to be ironic. I was the one talking about Lord Vader, after all... > ------ > From: > Subject:Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains[3A8200B5] > From: Paul Kirkland > > On 7 Feb 01, at 16:12, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > > > THIS...... is shit. > > > > let me explain, > > Don't bother, Paul. They're channeling "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest." > I knew this group would go to pot, eventually. Especially once people > started discussing movies and stuff. > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From pkirklan@e... Thu Feb 08 06:20:29 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 8 Feb 2001 14:20:28 -0000 Received: (qmail 22007 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2001 14:20:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 8 Feb 2001 14:20:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta3 with SMTP; 8 Feb 2001 15:21:33 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Thu, 8 Feb 2001 08:37:39 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 8 Feb 01 08:29:52 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 8 Feb 01 08:29:32 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 08:29:25 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Priority: normal In-reply-to: <005201c09169$f6f7c340$d4a811d0@computer> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <00ca83937140821ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 7 Feb 01, at 19:56, Patrick D. Bernardo wrote: > From: Paul Kirkland > > On 7 Feb 01, at 16:05, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > > > Paul- You immediately gain stature in my book for being an > > > unabashed "in-quoter" as opposed to those rat-bastard > > > top-quoters... More below. > > > > Is it worth a half point? > > (Dammit I am back to begging. Maybe I'll find something for sale) > > > > Uh... Nah. It's too easy. > > > So its now a 50-50 pop and we all know what the architechtonic art > > is. I am also teaching class called "Technology, Work, and Leisure" > > (Sure we're really just reading a bunch of philosophy books), but I > > hope to show them all that good sound political judgment needs to > > rule technology before the techies take over. > > > Actually Paul, only 3 of us know what the architechtonic art is. The > other 3 immediately think of buildings when they hear that phrase. > I think that was my point, I only wanted to emphasize the potentially budding factions. > Did anyone see the Simpsons where the scientists take over and try to > rule the town? no > > As for "implied preference of the law", etc. It can come in handy. I > just think that your case was a bit of a stretch to begin with. In a > case that does have some merit, it'll be a concept that we come back > to. yeah I know it was a stretch, I was testing things > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981593829/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > -> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From f_hemker@h... Thu Feb 08 06:51:41 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: f_hemker@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 8 Feb 2001 14:51:40 -0000 Received: (qmail 79237 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2001 14:50:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 8 Feb 2001 14:50:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO c9.egroups.com) (10.1.2.66) by mta1 with SMTP; 8 Feb 2001 14:50:29 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: f_hemker@h... Received: from [10.1.2.109] by c9.egroups.com with NNFMP; 08 Feb 2001 14:50:28 -0000 Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 14:50:24 -0000 To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Summing Up Message-ID: <95ubng+3aq4@eGroups.com> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 275 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 63.82.115.205 From: f_hemker@h... In my efforts to follow this discussion, do my job, and actually have a life I've managed to lose the thread of the argument. Could someone sum up what we've arrived at? By the way, I find in-quotes hard to follow from a strictly logical progression point of view. -Fr From bernardo@c... Thu Feb 08 06:53:21 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 8 Feb 2001 14:53:21 -0000 Received: (qmail 89209 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2001 14:53:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 8 Feb 2001 14:53:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta1 with SMTP; 8 Feb 2001 14:53:06 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-06.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.191]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f18Er3k98559 for ; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 09:53:03 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <000d01c091de$bf604ae0$bfa811d0@computer> To: References: <95ubng+3aq4@eGroups.com> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Summing Up Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 09:52:22 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" I was hoping for the same. ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 9:50 AM Subject: [scatterbrains] Summing Up > In my efforts to follow this discussion, do my job, and actually have > a life I've managed to lose the thread of the argument. Could someone > sum up what we've arrived at? > > By the way, I find in-quotes hard to follow from a strictly logical > progression point of view. > > -Fr > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Thu Feb 08 06:55:04 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 8 Feb 2001 14:55:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 70949 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2001 14:53:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 8 Feb 2001 14:53:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 8 Feb 2001 14:53:44 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id JAA09748 for ; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 09:53:43 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Summing Up Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 09:55:18 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <95ubng+3aq4@eGroups.com> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" We were having a discussion? Seriously, which one? > -----Original Message----- > From: f_hemker@h... [mailto:f_hemker@h...] > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 9:50 AM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [scatterbrains] Summing Up > > > In my efforts to follow this discussion, do my job, and actually have > a life I've managed to lose the thread of the argument. Could someone > sum up what we've arrived at? > > By the way, I find in-quotes hard to follow from a strictly logical > progression point of view. > > -Fr > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From f_hemker@h... Thu Feb 08 07:04:09 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: f_hemker@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 8 Feb 2001 15:04:06 -0000 Received: (qmail 45464 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2001 15:02:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 8 Feb 2001 15:02:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mu.egroups.com) (10.1.1.40) by mta1 with SMTP; 8 Feb 2001 15:02:49 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: f_hemker@h... Received: from [10.1.2.56] by mu.egroups.com with NNFMP; 08 Feb 2001 15:02:49 -0000 Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 15:02:45 -0000 To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: Summing Up Message-ID: <95ucel+2rnv@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 917 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 63.82.115.205 From: f_hemker@h... Nothing like a smart-ass to muddy the waters even more. I keep thinking of that Talking Heads song from Remain in Light "Well, how did I get here?" -Fritz --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Eugene Ventimiglia" wrote: > We were having a discussion? Seriously, which one? > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: f_hemker@h... [mailto:f_hemker@h...] > > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 9:50 AM > > To: scatterbrains@y... > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Summing Up > > > > > > In my efforts to follow this discussion, do my job, and actually have > > a life I've managed to lose the thread of the argument. Could someone > > sum up what we've arrived at? > > > > By the way, I find in-quotes hard to follow from a strictly logical > > progression point of view. > > > > -Fr > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > From bernardo@c... Thu Feb 08 07:05:37 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 8 Feb 2001 15:05:37 -0000 Received: (qmail 26443 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2001 15:04:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 8 Feb 2001 15:04:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 8 Feb 2001 15:04:47 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-06.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.191]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f18F4jk99496 for ; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 10:04:45 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <001b01c091e0$61ab6c20$bfa811d0@computer> To: References: Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Summing Up Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 10:04:04 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" I guess basically I'd like to know: What does the prop look like at this stage? Are there any changes that people still want to make, or should we go ahead and vote? Would you (e) like to make a defense speech or something? Aren't we ready to keep on keepin' on? ----- Original Message ----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia To: Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 9:55 AM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Summing Up > We were having a discussion? Seriously, which one? > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: f_hemker@h... [mailto:f_hemker@h...] > > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 9:50 AM > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Summing Up > > > > > > In my efforts to follow this discussion, do my job, and actually have > > a life I've managed to lose the thread of the argument. Could someone > > sum up what we've arrived at? > > > > By the way, I find in-quotes hard to follow from a strictly logical > > progression point of view. > > > > -Fr > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Thu Feb 08 07:07:42 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 8 Feb 2001 15:07:41 -0000 Received: (qmail 24498 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2001 15:07:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 8 Feb 2001 15:07:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 8 Feb 2001 15:07:29 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id KAA11094 for ; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 10:07:28 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Summing Up Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 10:09:04 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <95ucel+2rnv@eGroups.com> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" Well, is it Muddy Waters or Talking Heads? Only the first sentence was facetious. Which discussion were you talking about? > -----Original Message----- > From: f_hemker@h... [mailto:f_hemker@h...] > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 10:03 AM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Summing Up > > > Nothing like a smart-ass to muddy the waters even more. > > I keep thinking of that Talking Heads song from Remain in Light > > "Well, how did I get here?" > > -Fritz > > --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Eugene Ventimiglia" wrote: > > We were having a discussion? Seriously, which one? > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: f_hemker@h... [mailto:f_hemker@h...] > > > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 9:50 AM > > > To: scatterbrains@y... > > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Summing Up > > > > > > > > > In my efforts to follow this discussion, do my job, and actually > have > > > a life I've managed to lose the thread of the argument. Could > someone > > > sum up what we've arrived at? > > > > > > By the way, I find in-quotes hard to follow from a strictly > logical > > > progression point of view. > > > > > > -Fr > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Thu Feb 08 07:11:35 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 8 Feb 2001 15:11:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 22016 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2001 15:11:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 8 Feb 2001 15:11:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 8 Feb 2001 15:11:32 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id KAA11510 for ; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 10:11:31 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Summing Up Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 10:13:07 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <001b01c091e0$61ab6c20$bfa811d0@computer> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" I don't really see the need for a defense speech. Fritz said he'd accept a periodic VOC in lieu of a term limit. Paul asked for some changes, and they're in. Steven is crouched over test-tubes, waiting for this to settle, and Bob's cool. I'll give it till noon to make it final, and be done with it. > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 10:04 AM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Summing Up > > > I guess basically I'd like to know: > > What does the prop look like at this stage? Are there any changes that > people still want to make, or should we go ahead and vote? Would you (e) > like to make a defense speech or something? > > Aren't we ready to keep on keepin' on? > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Eugene Ventimiglia > To: > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 9:55 AM > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Summing Up > > > > We were having a discussion? Seriously, which one? > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: f_hemker@h... [mailto:f_hemker@h...] > > > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 9:50 AM > > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Summing Up > > > > > > > > > In my efforts to follow this discussion, do my job, and actually have > > > a life I've managed to lose the thread of the argument. Could someone > > > sum up what we've arrived at? > > > > > > By the way, I find in-quotes hard to follow from a strictly logical > > > progression point of view. > > > > > > -Fr > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From f_hemker@h... Thu Feb 08 07:13:33 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: f_hemker@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 8 Feb 2001 15:13:32 -0000 Received: (qmail 37847 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2001 15:13:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 8 Feb 2001 15:13:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hi.egroups.com) (208.50.99.211) by mta1 with SMTP; 8 Feb 2001 15:13:27 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: f_hemker@h... Received: from [10.1.10.109] by hi.egroups.com with NNFMP; 08 Feb 2001 15:13:26 -0000 Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 15:13:26 -0000 To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: Summing Up Proposal 312 Message-ID: <95ud2m+k60a@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 1807 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 63.82.115.205 From: f_hemker@h... Proposal 312. Where do we stand? I don't imagine that every proposal will be unanimously passed. I don't imagine that everyone will always be happy with everything. Give us what we've got and let's see how it shakes out. -Fritz --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Eugene Ventimiglia" wrote: > Well, is it Muddy Waters or Talking Heads? > > Only the first sentence was facetious. Which discussion were you talking > about? > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: f_hemker@h... [mailto:f_hemker@h...] > > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 10:03 AM > > To: scatterbrains@y... > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Summing Up > > > > > > Nothing like a smart-ass to muddy the waters even more. > > > > I keep thinking of that Talking Heads song from Remain in Light > > > > "Well, how did I get here?" > > > > -Fritz > > > > --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Eugene Ventimiglia" wrote: > > > We were having a discussion? Seriously, which one? > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: f_hemker@h... [mailto:f_hemker@h...] > > > > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 9:50 AM > > > > To: scatterbrains@y... > > > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Summing Up > > > > > > > > > > > > In my efforts to follow this discussion, do my job, and actually > > have > > > > a life I've managed to lose the thread of the argument. Could > > someone > > > > sum up what we've arrived at? > > > > > > > > By the way, I find in-quotes hard to follow from a strictly > > logical > > > > progression point of view. > > > > > > > > -Fr > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Thu Feb 08 07:23:41 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 8 Feb 2001 15:23:41 -0000 Received: (qmail 57727 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2001 15:23:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 8 Feb 2001 15:23:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 8 Feb 2001 16:24:32 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id KAA12856 for ; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 10:23:27 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Summing Up Proposal 312 Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 10:25:02 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <95ud2m+k60a@eGroups.com> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" in-quoted below... > -----Original Message----- > From: f_hemker@h... [mailto:f_hemker@h...] > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 10:13 AM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Summing Up Proposal 312 > > > Proposal 312. Where do we stand? > > I don't imagine that every proposal will be unanimously passed. I > don't imagine that everyone will always be happy with everything. > Give us what we've got and let's see how it shakes out. No, I don't think they should be. But I think the feedback and revision makes for a better proposal. I would argue more vehemently with someone who had a "really close" proposal, that a "no f-in way" proposal. One argument's constructive, the other's just listening to yourself talk. If I can get you onboard with a small change, I'd rather it pass diluted than not at all. > > -Fritz > > --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Eugene Ventimiglia" wrote: > > Well, is it Muddy Waters or Talking Heads? > > > > Only the first sentence was facetious. Which discussion were you > talking > > about? > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: f_hemker@h... [mailto:f_hemker@h...] > > > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 10:03 AM > > > To: scatterbrains@y... > > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Summing Up > > > > > > > > > Nothing like a smart-ass to muddy the waters even more. > > > > > > I keep thinking of that Talking Heads song from Remain in Light > > > > > > "Well, how did I get here?" > > > > > > -Fritz > > > > > > --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Eugene Ventimiglia" > wrote: > > > > We were having a discussion? Seriously, which one? > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: f_hemker@h... [mailto:f_hemker@h...] > > > > > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 9:50 AM > > > > > To: scatterbrains@y... > > > > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Summing Up > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In my efforts to follow this discussion, do my job, and > actually > > > have > > > > > a life I've managed to lose the thread of the argument. Could > > > someone > > > > > sum up what we've arrived at? > > > > > > > > > > By the way, I find in-quotes hard to follow from a strictly > > > logical > > > > > progression point of view. > > > > > > > > > > -Fr > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From pkirklan@e... Thu Feb 08 08:10:08 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 8 Feb 2001 16:10:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 261 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2001 16:09:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 8 Feb 2001 16:09:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta3 with SMTP; 8 Feb 2001 17:10:07 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Thu, 8 Feb 2001 10:26:12 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 8 Feb 01 10:18:27 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 8 Feb 01 10:18:18 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 10:18:11 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Summing Up Proposal 312 Priority: normal In-reply-to: References: <95ud2m+k60a@eGroups.com> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <00c8b1226160821ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 8 Feb 01, at 10:25, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: Looks like a defense speech to me. This many summing up's looks a bit ridiculous, eh? > > in-quoted below... > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: f_hemker@h... [mailto:f_hemker@h...] > > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 10:13 AM > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Summing Up Proposal 312 > > > > > > Proposal 312. Where do we stand? > > > > I don't imagine that every proposal will be unanimously passed. I > > don't imagine that everyone will always be happy with everything. > > Give us what we've got and let's see how it shakes out. > > No, I don't think they should be. But I think the feedback and > revision makes for a better proposal. I would argue more vehemently > with someone who had a "really close" proposal, that a "no f-in way" > proposal. One argument's constructive, the other's just listening to > yourself talk. If I can get you onboard with a small change, I'd > rather it pass diluted than not at all. > > > > > -Fritz > > > > --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Eugene Ventimiglia" wrote: > > > Well, is it Muddy Waters or Talking Heads? > > > > > > Only the first sentence was facetious. Which discussion were you > > talking > > > about? > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: f_hemker@h... [mailto:f_hemker@h...] > > > > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 10:03 AM > > > > To: scatterbrains@y... > > > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Summing Up > > > > > > > > > > > > Nothing like a smart-ass to muddy the waters even more. > > > > > > > > I keep thinking of that Talking Heads song from Remain in Light > > > > > > > > "Well, how did I get here?" > > > > > > > > -Fritz > > > > > > > > --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Eugene Ventimiglia" > > wrote: > > > > > We were having a discussion? Seriously, which one? > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > From: f_hemker@h... [mailto:f_hemker@h...] > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 9:50 AM > > > > > > To: scatterbrains@y... > > > > > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Summing Up > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In my efforts to follow this discussion, do my job, and > > actually > > > > have > > > > > > a life I've managed to lose the thread of the argument. > > > > > > Could > > > > someone > > > > > > sum up what we've arrived at? > > > > > > > > > > > > By the way, I find in-quotes hard to follow from a strictly > > > > logical > > > > > > progression point of view. > > > > > > > > > > > > -Fr > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981645822/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > -> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Thu Feb 08 08:16:36 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 8 Feb 2001 16:16:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 63158 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2001 16:16:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 8 Feb 2001 16:16:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 8 Feb 2001 16:16:33 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id LAA18914 for ; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 11:16:33 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Summing Up Proposal 312 Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 11:18:09 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <00c8b1226160821ISWEBNT@d...> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 11:18 AM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Summing Up Proposal 312 > > > On 8 Feb 01, at 10:25, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > Looks like a defense speech to me. I'm not being defensive!!! You're the one who's being defensive!!! > This many summing up's looks a bit ridiculous, eh? Take a breath, and try this sentence again... From pkirklan@e... Thu Feb 08 08:24:26 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 8 Feb 2001 16:24:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 47789 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2001 16:24:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 8 Feb 2001 16:24:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta3 with SMTP; 8 Feb 2001 17:25:29 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Thu, 8 Feb 2001 10:41:34 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 8 Feb 01 10:33:49 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 8 Feb 01 10:33:46 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 10:33:44 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Summing Up Proposal 312 Priority: normal In-reply-to: References: <00c8b1226160821ISWEBNT@d...> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <00cde3441160821ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 8 Feb 01, at 11:18, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 11:18 AM > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Summing Up Proposal 312 > > > > > > On 8 Feb 01, at 10:25, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > > Looks like a defense speech to me. > > I'm not being defensive!!! You're the one who's being defensive!!! > > > This many "summing up's" (as subject headings) looks a bit ridiculous, eh? > > Take a breath, and try this sentence again... > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981648997/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > -> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Thu Feb 08 08:34:22 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 8 Feb 2001 16:34:22 -0000 Received: (qmail 92173 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2001 16:34:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 8 Feb 2001 16:34:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 8 Feb 2001 16:34:20 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-08.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.193]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f18GYHk08198 for ; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 11:34:17 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <001101c091ec$e33b5640$c1a811d0@computer> To: References: <00c8b1226160821ISWEBNT@d...> <00cde3441160821ISWEBNT@d...> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Summing Up Proposal 312 Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 11:33:33 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" Play nice, now. We were just about to get somewhere... ----- Original Message ----- From: Paul Kirkland To: Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 11:33 AM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Summing Up Proposal 312 > On 8 Feb 01, at 11:18, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 11:18 AM > > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Summing Up Proposal 312 > > > > > > > > > On 8 Feb 01, at 10:25, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > > > > Looks like a defense speech to me. > > > > I'm not being defensive!!! You're the one who's being defensive!!! > > > > > This many "summing up's" (as subject headings) looks a bit ridiculous, eh? > > > > Take a breath, and try this sentence again... > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981648997/ > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > > -> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Thu Feb 08 08:38:41 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 8 Feb 2001 16:38:41 -0000 Received: (qmail 88413 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2001 16:38:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 8 Feb 2001 16:38:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 8 Feb 2001 17:39:45 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id LAA21618 for ; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 11:38:39 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: Proposal 312 (latest revision) Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 11:40:15 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" LAST CALL: This goes Final at noon (EST) All this discussion is going nowhere. If you have any constructive criticism, speak now, or don't. --e Scorekeeper: The office of scorekeeper shall be created for the purpose of maintaining and reporting the official score of the game. The scorekeeper must record and make public any changes to a player's score within 2 business days of the event which causes the score change. Any disputes with the reported score must be announced within 5 business days of the report. The scorekeeping record shall consist of a detailed list of entries, each corresponding to a score adjustment. Each entry shall contain the date, the player's name, a brief description of the reason for the adjustment, and the positive or negative score adjustment. The scorekeeper is a public employee, and as such is hired and paid by the population. His salary is one point per turn, collected one point from each player after N turns, where N equals the number of players. The scorekeeper is selected from any applicants by the population. A poll shall be created with the names of perspective employees, and each player shall choose one. If the outcome is a tie, there shall be a runoff election, conducted in the same manner with only the tied applicants. The score maintained by the scorekeeper will be official and indisputable after the determined period. The scorekeeper may, at his discression, make adjustment records to remedy mistakes not caught before the dispute period. The scorekeeper is hired based on an infinately renewable contract. A vote of confidence can be called by any player at any time. If there has not been a vote of confidence for 10 turns, an automatic vote is called. If a majority of players believe that the scorekeeper should be replaced, a new one is chosen in the afformentioned manner. The previous scorekeeper is entitled to apply for the job, and remains scorekeeper until such time as a new scorekeeper is selected. From pkirklan@e... Thu Feb 08 09:19:33 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 8 Feb 2001 17:19:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 2335 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2001 17:19:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 8 Feb 2001 17:19:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta1 with SMTP; 8 Feb 2001 17:19:32 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Thu, 8 Feb 2001 11:36:42 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 8 Feb 01 11:28:57 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 8 Feb 01 11:28:36 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 11:28:36 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Summing Up Proposal 312 Priority: normal In-reply-to: <001101c091ec$e33b5640$c1a811d0@computer> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <00c274236170821ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 8 Feb 01, at 11:33, Patrick D. Bernardo wrote: I urge you all (or those with good sense and healthy sense of self- interest) to vote NO. 1 point per player per turn will add up really quickly. This looks more and more like just a point grab!!! and it will too strongly favor one player. I know there will be an open election, but how many of you really want to deal with the scoreboard. (I can now only pray that it is only three) This payment could be reduced if the real interest is good scoring and appropriate compensation > Play nice, now. We were just about to get somewhere... > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Paul Kirkland > To: > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 11:33 AM > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Summing Up Proposal 312 > > > > On 8 Feb 01, at 11:18, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > > > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 11:18 AM > > > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Summing Up Proposal 312 > > > > > > > > > > > > On 8 Feb 01, at 10:25, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > > > > > > Looks like a defense speech to me. > > > > > > I'm not being defensive!!! You're the one who's being defensive!!! > > > > > > > This many "summing up's" (as subject headings) looks a bit > ridiculous, eh? > > > > > > Take a breath, and try this sentence again... > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here > > > for more details > > > http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981648997/ > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > ---_ -> > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981650063/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > -> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From pkirklan@e... Thu Feb 08 09:28:36 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 8 Feb 2001 17:28:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 34885 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2001 17:28:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 8 Feb 2001 17:28:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta2 with SMTP; 8 Feb 2001 17:28:32 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Thu, 8 Feb 2001 11:45:40 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 8 Feb 01 11:37:56 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 8 Feb 01 11:37:27 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 11:37:19 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Proposal 312 (reasons for delay Priority: normal In-reply-to: References: X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <00ccc4045170821ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 8 Feb 01, at 11:40, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: Instead of replying to that last email, I'll transfer 10 points to > > your score if you drop all opposition and vote for my proposal. This > > is a one time offer. You'd get 10 for voting against it anyway, and > > if I were to pay you the fraction you contributed to my win, it would > > only be 2.5 points. Just ask why > LAST CALL: This goes Final at noon (EST) All this discussion is going > nowhere. If you have any constructive criticism, speak now, or don't. > --e > > Scorekeeper: > > The office of scorekeeper shall be created for the purpose of > maintaining and reporting the official score of the game. > > The scorekeeper must record and make public any changes to a player's > score within 2 business days of the event which causes the score > change. Any disputes with the reported score must be announced within > 5 business days of the report. > > The scorekeeping record shall consist of a detailed list of entries, > each corresponding to a score adjustment. Each entry shall contain the > date, the player's name, a brief description of the reason for the > adjustment, and the positive or negative score adjustment. > > The scorekeeper is a public employee, and as such is hired and paid by > the population. His salary is one point per turn, collected one point > from each player after N turns, where N equals the number of players. > > The scorekeeper is selected from any applicants by the population. A > poll shall be created with the names of perspective employees, and > each player shall choose one. If the outcome is a tie, there shall be > a runoff election, conducted in the same manner with only the tied > applicants. > > The score maintained by the scorekeeper will be official and > indisputable after the determined period. The scorekeeper may, at his > discression, make adjustment records to remedy mistakes not caught > before the dispute period. > > The scorekeeper is hired based on an infinately renewable contract. A > vote of confidence can be called by any player at any time. If there > has not been a vote of confidence for 10 turns, an automatic vote is > called. If a majority of players believe that the scorekeeper should > be replaced, a new one is chosen in the afformentioned manner. The > previous scorekeeper is entitled to apply for the job, and remains > scorekeeper until such time as a new scorekeeper is selected. > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981650322/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > -> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Thu Feb 08 09:29:54 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 8 Feb 2001 17:29:54 -0000 Received: (qmail 29621 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2001 17:29:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 8 Feb 2001 17:29:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 8 Feb 2001 17:29:51 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id MAA27445 for ; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 12:29:48 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Summing Up Proposal 312 Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 12:31:23 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <00c274236170821ISWEBNT@d...> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" READ CAREFULLY: One point per player per N TURNS. After 6 turns, the scorekeeper gets 6 points. One point from each of N players after N turns. And if YOU say something, remove the "Patrick Bernardo wrote:" line from the quote. > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 12:29 PM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Summing Up Proposal 312 > > > On 8 Feb 01, at 11:33, Patrick D. Bernardo wrote: > I urge you all (or those with good sense and healthy sense of self- > interest) to vote NO. 1 point per player per turn will add up really > quickly. This looks more and more like just a point grab!!! > and it will too strongly favor one player. > I know there will be an open election, but how many of you really > want to deal with the scoreboard. (I can now only pray that it is > only three) > This payment could be reduced if the real interest is good scoring > and appropriate compensation > > Play nice, now. We were just about to get somewhere... > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Paul Kirkland > > To: > > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 11:33 AM > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Summing Up Proposal 312 > > > > > > > On 8 Feb 01, at 11:18, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > > > > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 11:18 AM > > > > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > > > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Summing Up Proposal 312 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 8 Feb 01, at 10:25, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Looks like a defense speech to me. > > > > > > > > I'm not being defensive!!! You're the one who's being defensive!!! > > > > > > > > > This many "summing up's" (as subject headings) looks a bit > > ridiculous, eh? > > > > > > > > Take a breath, and try this sentence again... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > > > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here > > > > for more details > > > > http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981648997/ > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > ---_ -> > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981650063/ > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > > -> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Thu Feb 08 09:29:54 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 8 Feb 2001 17:29:54 -0000 Received: (qmail 38358 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2001 17:29:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 8 Feb 2001 17:29:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 8 Feb 2001 17:29:53 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id MAA27450; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 12:29:51 -0500 (EST) To: "Scatterbrains Nomic" Cc: "Paul Kirkland" Subject: FW: Re: OFF LIST OFFER Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 12:31:26 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" Enough. Extortion & Blackmail vs. a simple tactical bribe? And a legal one at that... -----Original Message----- From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 12:32 PM To: Eugene Ventimiglia Subject: RE: Re: OFF LIST OFFER On 8 Feb 01, at 12:21, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: how many votes are you sure of? > Nope. I don't care who knows. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 12:27 PM > > To: Eugene Ventimiglia > > Subject: RE: Re: OFF LIST OFFER > > > > > > On 8 Feb 01, at 12:13, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > > Would you offer 5 not to mention the bribery scheme. > > > > You can state your reason if asked as payment for not considering > > term limits (somewhat plausible) or just the philanthropy following > > your newfound wealth (and I could pay 'taxes without debt) > > > > > > > I need an assurance that you don't take my 7.5 and the 10 for > > > voting against. You've already stated your intention to do so, so > > > it's reasonable to believe you will. > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > > > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 12:17 PM > > > > To: Eugene Ventimiglia > > > > Subject: RE: Re: OFF LIST OFFER > > > > > > > > > > > > On 8 Feb 01, at 11:59, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > > > > > > 7.5 is still the price to just shut up. I will accept a point > > > > transfer in that amount and vote my conscience quietly > > > > > > > > > So begging and extortion are not beneath you, but accepting a > > > > > bribe is. > > > > > > > > > > OK, it's a gamble for me, but my offer of 10 points was to > > > > > make up for the 10 you'd lose by not cashing in on 204. I'm > > > > > 90% sure I've got my 4 votes without you, so the offer stands > > > > > at 10 points. You get the added bonus of me losing 10 points > > > > > besides. And the one point the scorekeeper would collect from > > > > > you is not due for 6 turns, so it shouldn't be too taxing on > > > > > you (pun somewhat intentional.) > > > > > > > > > > Clock's ticking... 5 minutes to go. > > > > > --e > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 11:58 AM > > > > > > To: Eugene Ventimiglia > > > > > > Subject: RE: Re: OFF LIST OFFER > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 8 Feb 01, at 11:46, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm really going for a coffee and a smoke... 10 minutes... > > > > > > Can I bum a cigarette? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 11:50 AM To: Eugene > > > > > > > > Ventimiglia Subject: RE: Re: OFF LIST OFFER > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 8 Feb 01, at 11:15, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tick tock > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > PROPOSAL PARAGRAPH 4: > > > > > > > > > > > The scorekeeper is a public OFFICER . HE WILL BE > > > > > > > > > > > AWARDED one > > > > > > > > > > point per turn, collected one point > > > > > > > > > > > from each player after N turns, where N equals the > > > > > > > > > > > number of players. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here's the scheme: the scorekeeper is PAID. His > > > > > > > > > salary is COLLECTED FROM EACH PLAYER. You're trying > > > > > > > > > hard not to read the words... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > see caps for revision, OR devise a scheme for > > > > > > > > > > taxation. My theory is that payment must come from > > > > > > > > > > somewhere and my hunch is that it must come from > > > > > > > > > > somewhere. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It might also be a good idea to keep the poor (if > > > > > > > > > > points are wealth) inforned about your need for > > > > > > > > > > votes. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From eventi@n... Thu Feb 08 09:30:29 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 8 Feb 2001 17:30:29 -0000 Received: (qmail 62662 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2001 17:30:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 8 Feb 2001 17:30:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 8 Feb 2001 17:30:29 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id MAA27570 for ; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 12:30:28 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 312 (reasons for delay Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 12:32:03 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <00ccc4045170821ISWEBNT@d...> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" You're funny... > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 12:37 PM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Proposal 312 (reasons for delay > > > On 8 Feb 01, at 11:40, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > Instead of replying to that last email, I'll transfer 10 points to > > > your score if you drop all opposition and vote for my proposal. > This > > > is a one time offer. You'd get 10 for voting against it anyway, > and > > > if I were to pay you the fraction you contributed to my win, it > would > > > only be 2.5 points. > > Just ask why > > > > > > LAST CALL: This goes Final at noon (EST) All this discussion is going > > nowhere. If you have any constructive criticism, speak now, or don't. > > --e > > > > Scorekeeper: > > > > The office of scorekeeper shall be created for the purpose of > > maintaining and reporting the official score of the game. > > > > The scorekeeper must record and make public any changes to a player's > > score within 2 business days of the event which causes the score > > change. Any disputes with the reported score must be announced within > > 5 business days of the report. > > > > The scorekeeping record shall consist of a detailed list of entries, > > each corresponding to a score adjustment. Each entry shall contain the > > date, the player's name, a brief description of the reason for the > > adjustment, and the positive or negative score adjustment. > > > > The scorekeeper is a public employee, and as such is hired and paid by > > the population. His salary is one point per turn, collected one point > > from each player after N turns, where N equals the number of players. > > > > The scorekeeper is selected from any applicants by the population. A > > poll shall be created with the names of perspective employees, and > > each player shall choose one. If the outcome is a tie, there shall be > > a runoff election, conducted in the same manner with only the tied > > applicants. > > > > The score maintained by the scorekeeper will be official and > > indisputable after the determined period. The scorekeeper may, at his > > discression, make adjustment records to remedy mistakes not caught > > before the dispute period. > > > > The scorekeeper is hired based on an infinately renewable contract. A > > vote of confidence can be called by any player at any time. If there > > has not been a vote of confidence for 10 turns, an automatic vote is > > called. If a majority of players believe that the scorekeeper should > > be replaced, a new one is chosen in the afformentioned manner. The > > previous scorekeeper is entitled to apply for the job, and remains > > scorekeeper until such time as a new scorekeeper is selected. > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981650322/ > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > > -> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Thu Feb 08 09:31:17 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 8 Feb 2001 17:31:17 -0000 Received: (qmail 80155 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2001 17:31:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 8 Feb 2001 17:31:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 8 Feb 2001 17:31:16 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id MAA27697 for ; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 12:31:15 -0500 (EST) To: "Scatterbrains Nomic" Subject: RE: Re: OFF LIST OFFER Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 12:32:51 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <00a944719170821ISWEBNT@d...> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" Here's a real gem... > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 12:12 PM > To: Eugene Ventimiglia > Subject: RE: Re: OFF LIST OFFER > > > On 8 Feb 01, at 11:59, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > That only equals what I would get voting no. (your deduction aside) > Where is your interest in doing this if you have the votes. Pick a > number higher than 10 and I'll consider. My vote NO message is > queud to send (who knows if F is still wavering) > > > So begging and extortion are not beneath you, but accepting a bribe > > is. > > > > OK, it's a gamble for me, but my offer of 10 points was to make up for > > the 10 you'd lose by not cashing in on 204. I'm 90% sure I've got my > > 4 votes without you, so the offer stands at 10 points. You get the > > added bonus of me losing 10 points besides. And the one point the > > scorekeeper would collect from you is not due for 6 turns, so it > > shouldn't be too taxing on you (pun somewhat intentional.) > > > > Clock's ticking... 5 minutes to go. > > --e > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 11:58 AM > > > To: Eugene Ventimiglia > > > Subject: RE: Re: OFF LIST OFFER > > > > > > > > > On 8 Feb 01, at 11:46, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > > > > > I'm really going for a coffee and a smoke... 10 minutes... > > > Can I bum a cigarette? > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > > > > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 11:50 AM > > > > > To: Eugene Ventimiglia > > > > > Subject: RE: Re: OFF LIST OFFER > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 8 Feb 01, at 11:15, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Tick tock > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > PROPOSAL PARAGRAPH 4: > > > > > > > > The scorekeeper is a public OFFICER . HE WILL BE AWARDED > > > > > > > > one > > > > > > > point per turn, collected one point > > > > > > > > from each player after N turns, where N equals the number > > > > > > > > of players. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here's the scheme: the scorekeeper is PAID. His salary is > > > > > > COLLECTED FROM EACH PLAYER. You're trying hard not to read the > > > > > > words... > > > > > > > > > > > > > see caps for revision, OR devise a scheme for taxation. My > > > > > > > theory is that payment must come from somewhere and my hunch > > > > > > > is that it must come from somewhere. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It might also be a good idea to keep the poor (if points are > > > > > > > wealth) inforned about your need for votes. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From eventi@n... Thu Feb 08 09:33:56 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 8 Feb 2001 17:33:56 -0000 Received: (qmail 49572 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2001 17:33:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 8 Feb 2001 17:33:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 8 Feb 2001 17:33:54 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id MAA27963 for ; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 12:33:52 -0500 (EST) To: "Scatterbrains Nomic" Subject: And so without further ado... PROPOSAL 312 FINAL Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 12:35:28 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" Scorekeeper: The office of scorekeeper shall be created for the purpose of maintaining and reporting the official score of the game. The scorekeeper must record and make public any changes to a player's score within 2 business days of the event which causes the score change. Any disputes with the reported score must be announced within 5 business days of the report. The scorekeeping record shall consist of a detailed list of entries, each corresponding to a score adjustment. Each entry shall contain the date, the player's name, a brief description of the reason for the adjustment, and the positive or negative score adjustment. The scorekeeper is a public employee, and as such is hired and paid by the population. His salary is one point per turn, collected one point from each player after N turns, where N equals the number of players. The scorekeeper is selected from any applicants by the population. A poll shall be created with the names of perspective employees, and each player shall choose one. If the outcome is a tie, there shall be a runoff election, conducted in the same manner with only the tied applicants. The score maintained by the scorekeeper will be official and indisputable after the determined period. The scorekeeper may, at his discression, make adjustment records to remedy mistakes not caught before the dispute period. The scorekeeper is hired based on an infinately renewable contract. A vote of confidence can be called by any player at any time. If there has not been a vote of confidence for 10 turns, an automatic vote is called. If a majority of players believe that the scorekeeper should be replaced, a new one is chosen in the afformentioned manner. The previous scorekeeper is entitled to apply for the job, and remains scorekeeper until such time as a new scorekeeper is selected. From scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Thu Feb 08 09:39:40 2001 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 64328 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2001 17:39:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 8 Feb 2001 17:39:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mv.egroups.com) (10.1.1.41) by mta1 with SMTP; 8 Feb 2001 17:39:14 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: notify@yahoogroups.com Received: from [10.1.2.48] by mv.egroups.com with NNFMP; 08 Feb 2001 17:39:11 -0000 Date: 8 Feb 2001 17:39:08 -0000 Message-ID: <981653948.386.36492.a8@yahoogroups.com> X-eGroups-Application: poll From: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: New poll for scatterbrains MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Enter your vote today! A new poll has been created for the scatterbrains group: Should Proposal 312 become law? Full text in the list, and at http://www.scatterbrains.com/proposals.h tml#312 o Yes o Hell No To vote, please visit the following web page: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scatterbrains/polls Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the Yahoo! Groups web site listed above. Thanks! Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms From eventi@n... Thu Feb 08 09:54:49 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 8 Feb 2001 17:54:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 10660 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2001 17:54:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 8 Feb 2001 17:54:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 8 Feb 2001 17:54:47 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id MAA00745; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 12:54:44 -0500 (EST) To: "Paul Kirkland" Cc: "Scatterbrains Nomic" Subject: RE: FW: Re: OFF LIST OFFER Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 12:56:19 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <00ac33457170821ISWEBNT@d...> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" I was waiting for my wife to pick me up from BurgerKing, and I was bored... I wanted to see how big a points whore you were, and now I know. --e > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 12:50 PM > To: Eugene Ventimiglia > Subject: Re: FW: Re: OFF LIST OFFER > > > On 8 Feb 01, at 12:31, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > Can you just satisfy my curiosity and tell me why you offered a > bribe in the first place. If you have enough votes, my vote was never > worth 10 points. > I was only persistent because I assumed you offered because you > needed it. > Otherwise you are trading 10 points for 2.5 > and you refused to offer 7.5 to essentially end the debate > Wait until after the vote if you think it matters but I am just > genuinely curious. > > I will reply to otherwise in public > > > Enough. Extortion & Blackmail vs. a simple tactical bribe? And a legal > > one at that... > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 12:32 PM > > To: Eugene Ventimiglia > > Subject: RE: Re: OFF LIST OFFER > > > > > > > > On 8 Feb 01, at 12:21, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > > how many votes are you sure of? > > > > > Nope. I don't care who knows. > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > > > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 12:27 PM > > > > To: Eugene Ventimiglia > > > > Subject: RE: Re: OFF LIST OFFER > > > > > > > > > > > > On 8 Feb 01, at 12:13, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > > > > > > Would you offer 5 not to mention the bribery scheme. > > > > > > > > You can state your reason if asked as payment for not considering > > > > term limits (somewhat plausible) or just the philanthropy > > > > following your newfound wealth (and I could pay 'taxes without > > > > debt) > > > > > > > > > > > > > I need an assurance that you don't take my 7.5 and the 10 for > > > > > voting against. You've already stated your intention to do so, > > > > > so it's reasonable to believe you will. > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 12:17 PM > > > > > > To: Eugene Ventimiglia > > > > > > Subject: RE: Re: OFF LIST OFFER > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 8 Feb 01, at 11:59, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > 7.5 is still the price to just shut up. I will accept a point > > > > > > transfer in that amount and vote my conscience quietly > > > > > > > > > > > > > So begging and extortion are not beneath you, but accepting > > > > > > > a bribe is. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > OK, it's a gamble for me, but my offer of 10 points was to > > > > > > > make up for the 10 you'd lose by not cashing in on 204. I'm > > > > > > > 90% sure I've got my 4 votes without you, so the offer > > > > > > > stands at 10 points. You get the added bonus of me losing > > > > > > > 10 points besides. And the one point the scorekeeper would > > > > > > > collect from you is not due for 6 turns, so it shouldn't be > > > > > > > too taxing on you (pun somewhat intentional.) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Clock's ticking... 5 minutes to go. > > > > > > > --e > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 11:58 AM > > > > > > > > To: Eugene Ventimiglia > > > > > > > > Subject: RE: Re: OFF LIST OFFER > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 8 Feb 01, at 11:46, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm really going for a coffee and a smoke... 10 > > > > > > > > > minutes... > > > > > > > > Can I bum a cigarette? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > > > > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 11:50 AM To: Eugene > > > > > > > > > > Ventimiglia Subject: RE: Re: OFF LIST OFFER > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 8 Feb 01, at 11:15, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tick tock > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > PROPOSAL PARAGRAPH 4: > > > > > > > > > > > > > The scorekeeper is a public OFFICER . HE WILL > > > > > > > > > > > > > BE AWARDED one > > > > > > > > > > > > point per turn, collected one point > > > > > > > > > > > > > from each player after N turns, where N equals > > > > > > > > > > > > > the number of players. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here's the scheme: the scorekeeper is PAID. His > > > > > > > > > > > salary is COLLECTED FROM EACH PLAYER. You're trying > > > > > > > > > > > hard not to read the words... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > see caps for revision, OR devise a scheme for > > > > > > > > > > > > taxation. My theory is that payment must come from > > > > > > > > > > > > somewhere and my hunch is that it must come from > > > > > > > > > > > > somewhere. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It might also be a good idea to keep the poor (if > > > > > > > > > > > > points are wealth) inforned about your need for > > > > > > > > > > > > votes. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From pkirklan@e... Thu Feb 08 10:07:42 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 8 Feb 2001 18:07:41 -0000 Received: (qmail 71731 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2001 18:07:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 8 Feb 2001 18:07:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta1 with SMTP; 8 Feb 2001 18:07:40 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Thu, 8 Feb 2001 12:24:49 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 8 Feb 01 12:17:05 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 8 Feb 01 12:16:50 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 12:16:46 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] RE: FW: Re: OFF LIST OFFER Priority: normal In-reply-to: References: <00ac33457170821ISWEBNT@d...> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <00d644924180821ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 8 Feb 01, at 12:56, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: Bullshit! You mean to say that you knew all along that there was no rationale for me to accept your offer. I kept it up to see if you would budge. I refused the initial 10 point offer because I preferred to vote on the merits. If you remember my original purpose was to try to get what I still think would have been a good change in the law. If you weren't willing to offer anything, case closed. I would know that you were sure had enough votes and it was a waste of time to try to get changes. You should have just said so. I am still not sure if I believe you. The requests for more points was for the sake of covering the tax. If everyone else wants a tax that I both disagree with and cannot yet afford why shouldn't I try to raise funds to pay it. > I was waiting for my wife to pick me up from BurgerKing, and I was > bored... I wanted to see how big a points whore you were, and now I > know. --e > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 12:50 PM > > To: Eugene Ventimiglia > > Subject: Re: FW: Re: OFF LIST OFFER > > > > > > On 8 Feb 01, at 12:31, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > > Can you just satisfy my curiosity and tell me why you offered a > > bribe in the first place. If you have enough votes, my vote was > > never worth 10 points. I was only persistent because I assumed you > > offered because you needed it. Otherwise you are trading 10 points > > for 2.5 and you refused to offer 7.5 to essentially end the debate > > Wait until after the vote if you think it matters but I am just > > genuinely curious. > > > > I will reply to otherwise in public > > > > > Enough. Extortion & Blackmail vs. a simple tactical bribe? And a > > > legal one at that... > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 12:32 PM > > > To: Eugene Ventimiglia > > > Subject: RE: Re: OFF LIST OFFER > > > > > > > > > > > > On 8 Feb 01, at 12:21, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > > > > how many votes are you sure of? > > > > > > > Nope. I don't care who knows. > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > > > > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 12:27 PM > > > > > To: Eugene Ventimiglia > > > > > Subject: RE: Re: OFF LIST OFFER > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 8 Feb 01, at 12:13, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Would you offer 5 not to mention the bribery scheme. > > > > > > > > > > You can state your reason if asked as payment for not > > > > > considering term limits (somewhat plausible) or just the > > > > > philanthropy following your newfound wealth (and I could pay > > > > > 'taxes without debt) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I need an assurance that you don't take my 7.5 and the 10 > > > > > > for voting against. You've already stated your intention to > > > > > > do so, so it's reasonable to believe you will. > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 12:17 PM > > > > > > > To: Eugene Ventimiglia > > > > > > > Subject: RE: Re: OFF LIST OFFER > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 8 Feb 01, at 11:59, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 7.5 is still the price to just shut up. I will accept a > > > > > > > point transfer in that amount and vote my conscience > > > > > > > quietly > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So begging and extortion are not beneath you, but > > > > > > > > accepting a bribe is. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > OK, it's a gamble for me, but my offer of 10 points was > > > > > > > > to make up for the 10 you'd lose by not cashing in on > > > > > > > > 204. I'm 90% sure I've got my 4 votes without you, so > > > > > > > > the offer stands at 10 points. You get the added bonus > > > > > > > > of me losing 10 points besides. And the one point the > > > > > > > > scorekeeper would collect from you is not due for 6 > > > > > > > > turns, so it shouldn't be too taxing on you (pun > > > > > > > > somewhat intentional.) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Clock's ticking... 5 minutes to go. > > > > > > > > --e > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > > > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 11:58 AM To: Eugene > > > > > > > > > Ventimiglia Subject: RE: Re: OFF LIST OFFER > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 8 Feb 01, at 11:46, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm really going for a coffee and a smoke... 10 > > > > > > > > > > minutes... > > > > > > > > > Can I bum a cigarette? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > > > From: Paul Kirkland > > > > > > > > > > > [mailto:pkirklan@e...] Sent: Thursday, > > > > > > > > > > > February 08, 2001 11:50 AM To: Eugene Ventimiglia > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: RE: Re: OFF LIST OFFER > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 8 Feb 01, at 11:15, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tick tock > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > PROPOSAL PARAGRAPH 4: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The scorekeeper is a public OFFICER . HE > > > > > > > > > > > > > > WILL BE AWARDED one > > > > > > > > > > > > > point per turn, collected one point > > > > > > > > > > > > > > from each player after N turns, where N > > > > > > > > > > > > > > equals the number of players. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here's the scheme: the scorekeeper is PAID. His > > > > > > > > > > > > salary is COLLECTED FROM EACH PLAYER. You're > > > > > > > > > > > > trying hard not to read the words... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > see caps for revision, OR devise a scheme for > > > > > > > > > > > > > taxation. My theory is that payment must come > > > > > > > > > > > > > from somewhere and my hunch is that it must > > > > > > > > > > > > > come from somewhere. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It might also be a good idea to keep the poor > > > > > > > > > > > > > (if points are wealth) inforned about your > > > > > > > > > > > > > need for votes. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981654890/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > -> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From f_hemker@h... Thu Feb 08 10:24:32 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: f_hemker@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 8 Feb 2001 18:24:31 -0000 Received: (qmail 18260 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2001 18:24:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 8 Feb 2001 18:24:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mq.egroups.com) (10.1.1.36) by mta1 with SMTP; 8 Feb 2001 18:24:30 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: f_hemker@h... Received: from [10.1.10.64] by mq.egroups.com with NNFMP; 08 Feb 2001 18:24:28 -0000 Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 18:24:26 -0000 To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: FW: Re: OFF LIST OFFER Message-ID: <95uo8q+jabe@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: <00d644924180821ISWEBNT@d...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 7681 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 63.82.115.205 From: f_hemker@h... I didn't think anyone would burn through all their political capitol so quickly... Pick your battles, man, pick your battles. -Fritz --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Paul Kirkland" wrote: > On 8 Feb 01, at 12:56, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > Bullshit! > You mean to say that you knew all along that there was no > rationale for me to accept your offer. > I kept it up to see if you would budge. I refused the initial 10 point > offer because I preferred to vote on the merits. > If you remember my original purpose was to try to get what I still > think would have been a good change in the law. > If you weren't willing to offer anything, case closed. I would know > that you were sure had enough votes and it was a waste of time to > try to get changes. > You should have just said so. > I am still not sure if I believe you. > The requests for more points was for the sake of covering the tax. > If everyone else wants a tax that I both disagree with and cannot > yet afford why shouldn't I try to raise funds to pay it. > > > I was waiting for my wife to pick me up from BurgerKing, and I was > > bored... I wanted to see how big a points whore you were, and now I > > know. --e > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 12:50 PM > > > To: Eugene Ventimiglia > > > Subject: Re: FW: Re: OFF LIST OFFER > > > > > > > > > On 8 Feb 01, at 12:31, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > > > > Can you just satisfy my curiosity and tell me why you offered a > > > bribe in the first place. If you have enough votes, my vote was > > > never worth 10 points. I was only persistent because I assumed you > > > offered because you needed it. Otherwise you are trading 10 points > > > for 2.5 and you refused to offer 7.5 to essentially end the debate > > > Wait until after the vote if you think it matters but I am just > > > genuinely curious. > > > > > > I will reply to otherwise in public > > > > > > > Enough. Extortion & Blackmail vs. a simple tactical bribe? And a > > > > legal one at that... > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > > > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 12:32 PM > > > > To: Eugene Ventimiglia > > > > Subject: RE: Re: OFF LIST OFFER > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 8 Feb 01, at 12:21, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > > > > > > how many votes are you sure of? > > > > > > > > > Nope. I don't care who knows. > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 12:27 PM > > > > > > To: Eugene Ventimiglia > > > > > > Subject: RE: Re: OFF LIST OFFER > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 8 Feb 01, at 12:13, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Would you offer 5 not to mention the bribery scheme. > > > > > > > > > > > > You can state your reason if asked as payment for not > > > > > > considering term limits (somewhat plausible) or just the > > > > > > philanthropy following your newfound wealth (and I could pay > > > > > > 'taxes without debt) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I need an assurance that you don't take my 7.5 and the 10 > > > > > > > for voting against. You've already stated your intention to > > > > > > > do so, so it's reasonable to believe you will. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 12:17 PM > > > > > > > > To: Eugene Ventimiglia > > > > > > > > Subject: RE: Re: OFF LIST OFFER > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 8 Feb 01, at 11:59, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 7.5 is still the price to just shut up. I will accept a > > > > > > > > point transfer in that amount and vote my conscience > > > > > > > > quietly > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So begging and extortion are not beneath you, but > > > > > > > > > accepting a bribe is. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > OK, it's a gamble for me, but my offer of 10 points was > > > > > > > > > to make up for the 10 you'd lose by not cashing in on > > > > > > > > > 204. I'm 90% sure I've got my 4 votes without you, so > > > > > > > > > the offer stands at 10 points. You get the added bonus > > > > > > > > > of me losing 10 points besides. And the one point the > > > > > > > > > scorekeeper would collect from you is not due for 6 > > > > > > > > > turns, so it shouldn't be too taxing on you (pun > > > > > > > > > somewhat intentional.) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Clock's ticking... 5 minutes to go. > > > > > > > > > --e > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > > > > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 11:58 AM To: Eugene > > > > > > > > > > Ventimiglia Subject: RE: Re: OFF LIST OFFER > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 8 Feb 01, at 11:46, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm really going for a coffee and a smoke... 10 > > > > > > > > > > > minutes... > > > > > > > > > > Can I bum a cigarette? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Paul Kirkland > > > > > > > > > > > > [mailto:pkirklan@e...] Sent: Thursday, > > > > > > > > > > > > February 08, 2001 11:50 AM To: Eugene Ventimiglia > > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: RE: Re: OFF LIST OFFER > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 8 Feb 01, at 11:15, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tick tock > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > PROPOSAL PARAGRAPH 4: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The scorekeeper is a public OFFICER . HE > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > WILL BE AWARDED one > > > > > > > > > > > > > > point per turn, collected one point > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > from each player after N turns, where N > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > equals the number of players. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here's the scheme: the scorekeeper is PAID. His > > > > > > > > > > > > > salary is COLLECTED FROM EACH PLAYER. You're > > > > > > > > > > > > > trying hard not to read the words... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > see caps for revision, OR devise a scheme for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > taxation. My theory is that payment must come > > > > > > > > > > > > > > from somewhere and my hunch is that it must > > > > > > > > > > > > > > come from somewhere. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It might also be a good idea to keep the poor > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (if points are wealth) inforned about your > > > > > > > > > > > > > > need for votes. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981654890/ > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > > -> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscrib From f_hemker@h... Thu Feb 08 10:26:14 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Frederick_Hemker@m... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 8 Feb 2001 18:26:12 -0000 Received: (qmail 90855 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2001 18:26:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 8 Feb 2001 18:26:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailsims2.senate.gov) (198.78.181.133) by mta3 with SMTP; 8 Feb 2001 19:27:16 -0000 Received: from imaexc3.senate.gov (mail1.senate.gov) by mailsims2.senate.gov (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.1999.07.30.00.05.p8) with ESMTP id <0G8G00GORBGTMN@m...> for scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 13:31:45 -0500 (EST) Received: from ccMail by imaexc3.senate.gov (IMA Internet Exchange 3.13) id 0000C298; Thu, 08 Feb 2001 13:12:54 -0500 Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 13:23:07 -0500 Subject: Points Whore? To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Message-id: <0000C298.C22181@m...> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-description: cc:Mail note part Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-eGroups-From: Frederick_Hemker@m... (Frederick Hemker) From: f_hemker@h... Now I think that you will understand why I looked askance at the notion of the CM and am a strong proponent of term limits. Because we are all points whores, and I couldn't trust any of you further than I could throw you. All this nonsense reminds me of my job... -Fritz, Staff Assistant for Senator Frank H. Murkowski From eventi@n... Thu Feb 08 10:35:32 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 8 Feb 2001 18:35:31 -0000 Received: (qmail 16126 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2001 18:35:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 8 Feb 2001 18:35:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 8 Feb 2001 19:36:33 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id NAA05460 for ; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 13:35:24 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Points Whore? Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 13:37:00 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <0000C298.C22181@m...> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" > > All this nonsense reminds me of my job... It's a bit more fun though, I hope... > > -Fritz, Staff Assistant for Senator Frank H. Murkowski > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From f_hemker@h... Thu Feb 08 10:38:02 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: f_hemker@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 8 Feb 2001 18:38:00 -0000 Received: (qmail 57253 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2001 18:37:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 8 Feb 2001 18:37:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hp.egroups.com) (10.1.2.220) by mta1 with SMTP; 8 Feb 2001 18:37:56 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: f_hemker@h... Received: from [10.1.10.124] by hp.egroups.com with NNFMP; 08 Feb 2001 18:37:55 -0000 Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 18:37:52 -0000 To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Sense of the Senate Message-ID: <95up20+9e9r@eGroups.com> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 359 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 63.82.115.205 From: f_hemker@h... In the Senate there are some people who do not care for each other. The joke is that Sen. Barbara Boxer could offer a Sense of the Senate that the Sun will rise in the East tomorrow and Sen. Murkowski would vote against it. Civility, even in the midst of disagreement, goes a long way in keeping other people from burning you every chance they get. - From pkirklan@e... Thu Feb 08 10:55:42 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 8 Feb 2001 18:55:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 8701 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2001 18:55:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 8 Feb 2001 18:55:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta2 with SMTP; 8 Feb 2001 18:55:41 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Thu, 8 Feb 2001 13:12:49 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 8 Feb 01 13:05:06 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 8 Feb 01 13:05:06 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 13:05:02 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Sense of the Senate Priority: normal In-reply-to: <95up20+9e9r@eGroups.com> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <00cc74912190821ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 8 Feb 01, at 18:37, f_hemker@h... wrote: > In the Senate there are some people who do not care for each other. > The joke is that Sen. Barbara Boxer could offer a Sense of the Senate > that the Sun will rise in the East tomorrow and Sen. Murkowski would > vote against it. Civility, even in the midst of disagreement, goes a > long way in keeping other people from burning you every chance they > get. > > - > I was up all night trying to coordinate criticisms into revisions on my dissertation and then I taught the Apology this morning beginning from 28b and not taking into acct "the danger of living or dying" or the final judgment of the city I guess Fred and Socrates and sleep deprivation did not put me in the most accomodating mood. So how big tax cut are we going to get? BTW, this is the problem of poverty I will try to be less of a gadfly in my impoverished state Hell, I might still vote for that proposal. > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981657519/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > -> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From f_hemker@h... Thu Feb 08 10:59:36 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: f_hemker@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 8 Feb 2001 18:59:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 20674 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2001 18:59:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 8 Feb 2001 18:59:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ch.egroups.com) (10.1.10.51) by mta1 with SMTP; 8 Feb 2001 18:59:34 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: f_hemker@h... Received: from [10.1.10.124] by ch.egroups.com with NNFMP; 08 Feb 2001 18:59:34 -0000 Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 18:59:34 -0000 To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: Sense of the Senate Message-ID: <95uqam+ssj0@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: <00cc74912190821ISWEBNT@d...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 109 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 63.82.115.205 From: f_hemker@h... Paul, I can't believe you make enough money to even pay taxes now, let alone worry about a tax cut. -Frit From pkirklan@e... Thu Feb 08 11:04:08 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 8 Feb 2001 19:04:08 -0000 Received: (qmail 46866 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2001 19:04:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 8 Feb 2001 19:04:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta1 with SMTP; 8 Feb 2001 19:04:06 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Thu, 8 Feb 2001 13:21:14 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 8 Feb 01 13:13:31 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 8 Feb 01 13:13:24 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 13:13:23 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Sense of the Senate Priority: normal In-reply-to: <95uqam+ssj0@eGroups.com> References: <00cc74912190821ISWEBNT@d...> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <00b6b1421190821ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 8 Feb 01, at 18:59, f_hemker@h... wrote: > Paul, > > I can't believe you make enough money to even pay taxes now, let alone > worry about a tax cut. > I am not thinking of my personal share of any tax cut just the good of the country. LIFE is not reducible to points whoring. I will spare further opinions on this matter for the sake of everyone, besides debating a tax cut here might get confusing. > -Frit > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981658777/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > -> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Thu Feb 08 11:14:57 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 8 Feb 2001 19:14:57 -0000 Received: (qmail 43664 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2001 19:14:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 8 Feb 2001 19:14:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 8 Feb 2001 20:16:00 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id OAA10253 for ; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 14:14:55 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Sense of the Senate Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 14:16:30 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <00cc74912190821ISWEBNT@d...> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" I'm glad you replied first, Paul... I thought he was admonishing me for calling you a whore. > > In the Senate there are some people who do not care for each other. > > The joke is that Sen. Barbara Boxer could offer a Sense of the Senate > > that the Sun will rise in the East tomorrow and Sen. Murkowski would > > vote against it. Civility, even in the midst of disagreement, goes a > > long way in keeping other people from burning you every chance they > > get. > > > > I was up all night trying to coordinate criticisms into revisions on > my dissertation and then I taught the Apology this morning > beginning from 28b and not taking into acct "the danger of living or > dying" or the final judgment of the city > I guess Fred and Socrates and sleep deprivation did not put me in > the most accomodating mood. > > So how big tax cut are we going to get? > > BTW, this is the problem of poverty > I will try to be less of a gadfly in my impoverished state > > Hell, I might still vote for that proposal. > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981657519/ > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > > -> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From pkirklan@e... Thu Feb 08 11:27:28 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 8 Feb 2001 19:27:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 79086 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2001 19:27:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 8 Feb 2001 19:27:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta1 with SMTP; 8 Feb 2001 19:27:25 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Thu, 8 Feb 2001 13:44:34 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 8 Feb 01 13:36:50 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 8 Feb 01 13:36:24 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 13:36:19 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Sense of the Senate Priority: normal In-reply-to: References: <00cc74912190821ISWEBNT@d...> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <00d403444190821ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 8 Feb 01, at 14:16, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > I'm glad you replied first, Paul... I thought he was admonishing me > for calling you a whore. Well I would accept an apology if it were offered, but I am pretty sure that F doesn't see whoring as a bad thing. I guess that's the libertarian position > > > > In the Senate there are some people who do not care for each > > > other. The joke is that Sen. Barbara Boxer could offer a Sense of > > > the Senate that the Sun will rise in the East tomorrow and Sen. > > > Murkowski would vote against it. Civility, even in the midst of > > > disagreement, goes a long way in keeping other people from burning > > > you every chance they get. > > > > > > > I was up all night trying to coordinate criticisms into revisions on > > my dissertation and then I taught the Apology this morning beginning > > from 28b and not taking into acct "the danger of living or dying" or > > the final judgment of the city I guess Fred and Socrates and sleep > > deprivation did not put me in the most accomodating mood. > > > > So how big tax cut are we going to get? > > > > BTW, this is the problem of poverty > > I will try to be less of a gadfly in my impoverished state > > > > Hell, I might still vote for that proposal. > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here > > > for more details > > > http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981657519/ > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > ---_ -> > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981659698/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > -> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From pkirklan@e... Thu Feb 08 11:31:54 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 8 Feb 2001 19:31:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 27102 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2001 19:31:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 8 Feb 2001 19:31:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta3 with SMTP; 8 Feb 2001 20:32:58 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Thu, 8 Feb 2001 13:49:01 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 8 Feb 01 13:41:18 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 8 Feb 01 13:40:53 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 13:40:47 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Sense of the Senate Priority: normal References: <95up20+9e9r@eGroups.com> In-reply-to: <00cc74912190821ISWEBNT@d...> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <00df10149190821ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 8 Feb 01, at 13:05, Paul Kirkland wrote: > On 8 Feb 01, at 18:37, f_hemker@h... wrote: > > > In the Senate there are some people who do not care for each other. > > The joke is that Sen. Barbara Boxer could offer a Sense of the > > Senate that the Sun will rise in the East tomorrow and Sen. > > Murkowski would vote against it. Civility, even in the midst of > > disagreement, goes a long way in keeping other people from burning > > you every chance they get. > > > > - > > > > I was up all night trying to coordinate criticisms into revisions on > my dissertation and then I taught the Apology this morning beginning > from 28b and not taking into acct "the danger of living or dying" or > the final judgment of the city I guess Fred and Socrates and sleep > deprivation did not put me in the most accomodating mood. > I will offer my half point to whoever can point out the hypocrisy of my use of the Apology in this explanation (appropriate refereces a bonus) > So how big tax cut are we going to get? > > BTW, this is the problem of poverty > I will try to be less of a gadfly in my impoverished state > > Hell, I might still vote for that proposal. > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here > > for more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981657519/ > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > -_ -> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981658543/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > -> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From f_hemker@h... Thu Feb 08 11:46:44 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: f_hemker@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 8 Feb 2001 19:46:43 -0000 Received: (qmail 34474 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2001 19:45:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 8 Feb 2001 19:45:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hp.egroups.com) (10.1.2.220) by mta1 with SMTP; 8 Feb 2001 19:45:57 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: f_hemker@h... Received: from [10.1.10.124] by hp.egroups.com with NNFMP; 08 Feb 2001 19:45:56 -0000 Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 19:45:55 -0000 To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: Sense of the Senate Message-ID: <95ut1j+9ff1@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: <00d403444190821ISWEBNT@d...> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 312 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 63.82.115.205 From: f_hemker@h... --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Paul Kirkland" wrote: > On 8 Feb 01, at 14:16, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > Well I would accept an apology if it were offered, but I am pretty > sure that F doesn't see whoring as a bad thing. > I guess that's the libertarian position Easy there, Chuckles. -Fritz From bernardo@c... Thu Feb 08 18:00:02 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 9 Feb 2001 01:59:59 -0000 Received: (qmail 66875 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2001 01:59:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 9 Feb 2001 01:59:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta3 with SMTP; 9 Feb 2001 03:01:03 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp08-06.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.216]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f191xuk87258 for ; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 20:59:56 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <002301c0923b$e7de3880$d8a811d0@computer> To: References: <95uo8q+jabe@eGroups.com> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] FW: Re: OFF LIST OFFER Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 20:59:13 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" Seriously, this is making me look prudent. ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 1:24 PM Subject: [scatterbrains] FW: Re: OFF LIST OFFER > I didn't think anyone would burn through all their political capitol > so quickly... > > Pick your battles, man, pick your battles. > > -Fritz > > --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Paul Kirkland" wrote: > > On 8 Feb 01, at 12:56, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > > Bullshit! > > You mean to say that you knew all along that there was no > > rationale for me to accept your offer. > > I kept it up to see if you would budge. I refused the initial 10 > point > > offer because I preferred to vote on the merits. > > If you remember my original purpose was to try to get what I still > > think would have been a good change in the law. > > If you weren't willing to offer anything, case closed. I would know > > that you were sure had enough votes and it was a waste of time to > > try to get changes. > > You should have just said so. > > I am still not sure if I believe you. > > The requests for more points was for the sake of covering the tax. > > If everyone else wants a tax that I both disagree with and cannot > > yet afford why shouldn't I try to raise funds to pay it. > > > > > I was waiting for my wife to pick me up from BurgerKing, and I was > > > bored... I wanted to see how big a points whore you were, and now > I > > > know. --e > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > > > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 12:50 PM > > > > To: Eugene Ventimiglia > > > > Subject: Re: FW: Re: OFF LIST OFFER > > > > > > > > > > > > On 8 Feb 01, at 12:31, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > > > > > > Can you just satisfy my curiosity and tell me why you offered a > > > > bribe in the first place. If you have enough votes, my vote was > > > > never worth 10 points. I was only persistent because I assumed > you > > > > offered because you needed it. Otherwise you are trading 10 > points > > > > for 2.5 and you refused to offer 7.5 to essentially end the > debate > > > > Wait until after the vote if you think it matters but I am just > > > > genuinely curious. > > > > > > > > I will reply to otherwise in public > > > > > > > > > Enough. Extortion & Blackmail vs. a simple tactical bribe? And > a > > > > > legal one at that... > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > > > > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 12:32 PM > > > > > To: Eugene Ventimiglia > > > > > Subject: RE: Re: OFF LIST OFFER > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 8 Feb 01, at 12:21, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > > > > > > > > how many votes are you sure of? > > > > > > > > > > > Nope. I don't care who knows. > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 12:27 PM > > > > > > > To: Eugene Ventimiglia > > > > > > > Subject: RE: Re: OFF LIST OFFER > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 8 Feb 01, at 12:13, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Would you offer 5 not to mention the bribery scheme. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You can state your reason if asked as payment for not > > > > > > > considering term limits (somewhat plausible) or just the > > > > > > > philanthropy following your newfound wealth (and I could > pay > > > > > > > 'taxes without debt) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I need an assurance that you don't take my 7.5 and the > 10 > > > > > > > > for voting against. You've already stated your > intention to > > > > > > > > do so, so it's reasonable to believe you will. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > > > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 12:17 PM > > > > > > > > > To: Eugene Ventimiglia > > > > > > > > > Subject: RE: Re: OFF LIST OFFER > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 8 Feb 01, at 11:59, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 7.5 is still the price to just shut up. I will accept > a > > > > > > > > > point transfer in that amount and vote my conscience > > > > > > > > > quietly > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So begging and extortion are not beneath you, but > > > > > > > > > > accepting a bribe is. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > OK, it's a gamble for me, but my offer of 10 points > was > > > > > > > > > > to make up for the 10 you'd lose by not cashing in > on > > > > > > > > > > 204. I'm 90% sure I've got my 4 votes without you, > so > > > > > > > > > > the offer stands at 10 points. You get the added > bonus > > > > > > > > > > of me losing 10 points besides. And the one point > the > > > > > > > > > > scorekeeper would collect from you is not due for 6 > > > > > > > > > > turns, so it shouldn't be too taxing on you (pun > > > > > > > > > > somewhat intentional.) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Clock's ticking... 5 minutes to go. > > > > > > > > > > --e > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > > > > > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 11:58 AM To: > Eugene > > > > > > > > > > > Ventimiglia Subject: RE: Re: OFF LIST OFFER > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 8 Feb 01, at 11:46, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm really going for a coffee and a smoke... 10 > > > > > > > > > > > > minutes... > > > > > > > > > > > Can I bum a cigarette? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Paul Kirkland > > > > > > > > > > > > > [mailto:pkirklan@e...] Sent: Thursday, > > > > > > > > > > > > > February 08, 2001 11:50 AM To: Eugene > Ventimiglia > > > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: RE: Re: OFF LIST OFFER > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 8 Feb 01, at 11:15, Eugene Ventimiglia > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tick tock > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > PROPOSAL PARAGRAPH 4: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The scorekeeper is a public OFFICER . > HE > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > WILL BE AWARDED one > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > point per turn, collected one point > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > from each player after N turns, where N > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > equals the number of players. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here's the scheme: the scorekeeper is PAID. > His > > > > > > > > > > > > > > salary is COLLECTED FROM EACH PLAYER. You're > > > > > > > > > > > > > > trying hard not to read the words... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > see caps for revision, OR devise a scheme > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > taxation. My theory is that payment must > come > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > from somewhere and my hunch is that it > must > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > come from somewhere. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It might also be a good idea to keep the > poor > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (if points are wealth) inforned about your > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > need for votes. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here > for > > > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981654890/ > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > > > -> > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscrib > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From f_hemker@h... Fri Feb 09 07:32:39 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: f_hemker@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 9 Feb 2001 15:32:39 -0000 Received: (qmail 89233 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2001 15:32:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 9 Feb 2001 15:32:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO c9.egroups.com) (10.1.2.66) by mta1 with SMTP; 9 Feb 2001 15:32:38 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: f_hemker@h... Received: from [10.1.10.113] by c9.egroups.com with NNFMP; 09 Feb 2001 15:32:37 -0000 Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2001 15:32:34 -0000 To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: In the interest of levity... Message-ID: <9612ii+mi4o@eGroups.com> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 4073 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 63.82.115.205 From: f_hemker@h... let us break for a musical interlude: TITTIES & BEER by Frank Zappa It was the blackest night There was no moon in sight You know the stars ain't shinin' 'Cause the sky's too tight I heard the scarey wind I seen some ugly trees There was a werewolf honkin' 'Long the side of me I'm mean 'n I'm bad, y'know I ain't no sissy Got a big-titty girly by the name of Chrissy Talkin' about her 'n my bike 'n me... 'N this ride up the Mountain of Mystery, Mystery I noticed even the crickets Was actin' weird up here And So I figured I might Just drink a little beer I said, "Gimme summa that what yer suckin' on..." But there was no reply 'Cause she was gone... "Where's those titties that I like so well 'n my goddamn beer!" Is what I started to yell, then I heard this noise Like a crunchin' twig, 'n up jumped the Devil...he's about this big... He had a red suit on An' a widow's peak An' then a pointed tail 'N like a sulphur reek Yes, it was him awright I sweared I knowed it was He had some human flesh Stuck underneath his claws You know it looked to me Like it was titty skin I said, "You sonofabitch!" 'Cause I was mad at him, Well he just got out his floss 'N started cleanin' his fang So I shot him with my shooter Said: BANG BANG BANG Then the sucker just laughed 'n said, "Put it away... You know, I ate her all up...now what you gonna say?" YOU ATE MY CHRISSY? "Titties 'n all!" WELL, WHAT ABOUT THE BEER THEN, BOY? "Were the cans this tall?" EVEN HER BOOTS? "Would I lie to you?" SHIT, YOU MUSTA BEEN HUNGRY! "Yes, this is true." WELL DON'T THEY PAY YOU GOOD FOR THE STUFF THAT YOU DO? "Well, you know, I can't complain when the checks come through..." WELL I WANT MY CHRISSY, 'N I WANT MY BEER SO YOU JUST BARF IT BACK UP NOW, DEVIL, DO YOU HEAR? "Blow it out your ass, motorcycle man! I mean, I am the Devil, Do you understand? Just what will you give me for your Titties and beer? I suppose you noticed this little contract here..." YER GODDAM RIGHT, YOU SON-OF-A-WHORE, "Don't call me that" THAT'S ABOUT THE ONLY REASON ...GIMME THAT PAPER...BET YER ASS I'll SIGN... 'CAUSE I NEED A BEER, 'N IT'S TITTY-SQUEEZIN' TIME "Man, You can't fool me...you ain't that bad... I mean you shoulda seen some of the souls I had... Why there was Milhous Nixon 'n Agnew, too... 'n both of those suckers was worse 'n you..." WELL, LET'S MAKE A DEAL IF YOU THINK THAT'S TRUE I MEAN, YOU'RE THE DEVIL, SO WHATCHA GONNA DO? (improvised dialog) "Wait a minute...a tinge of doubt crosses my mind...when you say... that you want to make a deal with me..." "That's very, very true I'm only interested in two things "Yeah?" See if you can guess what they are" "I would think...uh...let's see, maybe Stravinsky..." "I'll give you two clues. Let go of your pickle" "What?" "Let go of your pickle!" "I'm not holding my pickle" "Well, who's holding your pickle then?" "I don't know...she's out in the audience... Hey Dale, would you like to come up here and hold my pickle to satisfy this weird man out on the stage?" "I'm only interested in two things, and that's titties and beer you know what I mean? "What?" titties and beer titties and beer titties and beer titties and beer titties and beer titties and beer titties and beer!" titties and beer!" "I don't know if you're the right guy?" titties and beer!" titties and beer!" "No! Don't sign it! Give me time to think... I mean hold on a second boy, 'cause that's magic ink!" And then the devil let go of his pickle and out come my girl, there was her titties flop-floppin'...all around the world She said "I got me three beers and a fistful of downs and I'm gonna get ripped, so fuck, you clowns!" Then she gave us the finger, it was rigid and stiff That's when the devil, he farted and she went right over the cliff! The devil was mad, I took off to my pad I swear I do declare, how did she get back there? I swear I do declare, how did she get back there? I swear I do declare, how did she get back there? I swear I do declare, how did she get back there? I swear I do declare, how did she get back there? From scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Fri Feb 09 08:17:45 2001 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 91573 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2001 16:17:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 9 Feb 2001 16:17:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ho.egroups.com) (10.1.2.219) by mta1 with SMTP; 9 Feb 2001 16:17:44 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: notify@yahoogroups.com Received: from [10.1.4.68] by ho.egroups.com with NNFMP; 09 Feb 2001 16:17:44 -0000 Date: 9 Feb 2001 16:17:41 -0000 Message-ID: <981735461.506.54689.k6@yahoogroups.com> X-eGroups-Application: polls From: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Poll results for scatterbrains MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The following scatterbrains poll is now closed. Here are the final results: POLL QUESTION: Should Proposal 312 become law? Full text in the list, and at http://www.scatterbrains.com/proposals.h tml#312 CHOICES AND RESULTS - Yes, 4 votes, 66.67% - Hell No, 2 votes, 33.33% INDIVIDUAL VOTES - Yes - f_hemker@h... - bernardo@c... - eventi@n... - barturo@e... - Hell No - pkirklan@e... - sga5892@n... For more information about this group, please visit http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scatterbrains For help with Yahoo! Groups, please visit http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms From sga5892@n... Fri Feb 09 08:46:36 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: sga5892@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 9 Feb 2001 16:46:36 -0000 Received: (qmail 44308 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2001 16:46:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 9 Feb 2001 16:46:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-gw4.njit.edu) (128.235.251.32) by mta1 with SMTP; 9 Feb 2001 16:46:34 -0000 Received: from mailhost.njit.edu (mailhost.njit.edu [128.235.251.108]) by mail-gw4.njit.edu (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f19GkWE27840 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 11:46:32 -0500 Received: from steve0 (dhcp194-216.njit.edu) by mailhost.njit.edu (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9) with SMTP id <0G8I00AOP19JKF@m...> for scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 11:46:31 -0500 (EST) Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Fri, 09 Feb 2001 11:46:47 -0500 Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2001 11:46:46 -0500 Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Poll results for scatterbrains To: "'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'" Reply-to: "sga5892@n..." Message-id: <01C0928D.FB633200.sga5892@n...> Organization: NJIT MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit From: "Steven G. Arturo" who will conclude the turn now, since we do not have an official scorekeeper? if anyone is still interested in respecting my prior ruling, it would be eugene. steve0 -----Original Message----- From: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com [SMTP:scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com] Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 11:18 AM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: [scatterbrains] Poll results for scatterbrains The following scatterbrains poll is now closed. Here are the final results: POLL QUESTION: Should Proposal 312 become law? Full text in the list, and at http://www.scatterbrains.com/proposals.h tml#312 CHOICES AND RESULTS - Yes, 4 votes, 66.67% - Hell No, 2 votes, 33.33% INDIVIDUAL VOTES - Yes - f_hemker@h... - bernardo@c... - eventi@n... - barturo@e... - Hell No - pkirklan@e... - sga5892@n... For more information about this group, please visit http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scatterbrains For help with Yahoo! Groups, please visit http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com From bernardo@c... Fri Feb 09 08:49:52 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 9 Feb 2001 16:49:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 82279 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2001 16:49:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 9 Feb 2001 16:49:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta1 with SMTP; 9 Feb 2001 16:49:50 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-09.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.194]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f19Gnmk59001 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 11:49:48 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <003401c092b8$391ccb40$c2a811d0@computer> To: References: <01C0928D.FB633200.sga5892@n...> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Poll results for scatterbrains Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 11:49:07 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" My guess would be that e is still the moderator until the scorekeeper is elected. and speaking of which... ----- Original Message ----- From: Steven G. Arturo To: Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 11:46 AM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Poll results for scatterbrains > who will conclude the turn now, since we do not have an official > scorekeeper? if anyone is still interested in respecting my prior ruling, > it would be eugene. > > steve0 > > -----Original Message----- > From: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com [SMTP:scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com] > Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 11:18 AM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [scatterbrains] Poll results for scatterbrains > > > The following scatterbrains poll is now closed. Here are the > final results: > > > POLL QUESTION: Should Proposal 312 become law? Full > text in the list, and at > http://www.scatterbrains.com/proposals.h > tml#312 > > CHOICES AND RESULTS > - Yes, 4 votes, 66.67% > - Hell No, 2 votes, 33.33% > > INDIVIDUAL VOTES > - Yes > - f_hemker@h... > - bernardo@c... > - eventi@n... > - barturo@e... > - Hell No > - pkirklan@e... > - sga5892@n... > > > For more information about this group, please visit > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scatterbrains > > For help with Yahoo! Groups, please visit > http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/ > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Fri Feb 09 08:50:40 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 9 Feb 2001 16:50:40 -0000 Received: (qmail 24342 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2001 16:50:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 9 Feb 2001 16:50:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 9 Feb 2001 16:50:39 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-09.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.194]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f19Goak59233 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 11:50:37 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <003801c092b8$55dc1ba0$c2a811d0@computer> To: Subject: Election of scorekeeper Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 11:49:55 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0035_01C0928E.6BCECC20" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" ------=_NextPart_000_0035_01C0928E.6BCECC20 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi! My name is Patrick Bernardo. I am running for scorekeeper of Scatterbrains= . If elected, I promise I'll be your friend. Thank you for your consideration. ------=_NextPart_000_0035_01C0928E.6BCECC20 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi!
 
My name is Patrick Bernardo.  I am ru= nning for=20 scorekeeper of Scatterbrains.  If elected, I promise I'll be your=20 friend.
 
Thank you for your consideration.
 
 
------=_NextPart_000_0035_01C0928E.6BCECC20-- From eventi@n... Fri Feb 09 09:06:56 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 9 Feb 2001 17:06:56 -0000 Received: (qmail 1018 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2001 17:06:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 9 Feb 2001 17:06:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 9 Feb 2001 17:06:54 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id MAA12903 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 12:06:53 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] In the interest of levity... Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 12:08:28 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <9612ii+mi4o@eGroups.com> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" Thanks Fritz! Kinda like music on hold: Your call is very important to us, Please stay on the line for the next available technician. We appologize for the delay... > let us break for a musical interlude: > > TITTIES & BEER by Frank Zappa From barturo@e... Fri Feb 09 09:32:34 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: BArturo@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 9 Feb 2001 17:32:31 -0000 Received: (qmail 72961 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2001 17:32:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 9 Feb 2001 17:32:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 9 Feb 2001 17:32:30 -0000 Received: from batman.ess ([12.31.9.2]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA16225 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 12:32:28 -0500 (EST) Received: by BATMAN with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id <1MR7KT8D>; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 12:27:23 -0500 Message-ID: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF0372E7@BATMAN> To: "'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'" Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Election of scorekeeper Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 12:27:22 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C092BD.900206A0" From: "Arturo, Bob" ------_=_NextPart_001_01C092BD.900206A0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" I think if you really want to run maybe a poll is in order. Who else wants to be the keeper of the score?? -----Original Message----- From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 11:50 AM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: [scatterbrains] Election of scorekeeper Hi! My name is Patrick Bernardo. I am running for scorekeeper of Scatterbrains. If elected, I promise I'll be your friend. Thank you for your consideration. Yahoo! Groups Sponsor www. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at webmaster@e.... ------_=_NextPart_001_01C092BD.900206A0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I=20 think if you really want to run maybe a poll is in order. Who else wants to= be=20 the keeper of the score??
-----Original Message-----
From: Patrick D. Bernardo=20 [mailto:bernardo@c...]
Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 = 11:50=20 AM
To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com
Subject:=20 [scatterbrains] Election of scorekeeper

Hi!
 
My name is Patrick Bernardo.  I am = running=20 for scorekeeper of Scatterbrains.  If elected, I promise I'll be you= r=20 friend.
 
Thank you for your consideration.=
 
 


To=20 unsubscribe from this group, send an email=20 to:
scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com




* NOTICE * - If the reader is not the s= pecified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that= any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. <= /FONT>

If you are not the specified recipient,= please notify us at webmaster@e....



------_=_NextPart_001_01C092BD.900206A0-- From eventi@n... Fri Feb 09 09:54:48 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 9 Feb 2001 17:54:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 34257 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2001 17:54:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 9 Feb 2001 17:54:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 9 Feb 2001 18:55:51 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id MAA18407 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 12:54:46 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Election of scorekeeper Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 12:56:20 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_003B_01C09297.B30D6390" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF0372E7@BATMAN> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" ------=_NextPart_000_003B_01C09297.B30D6390 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit By the new Rule, it has to be conducted with a poll... Let's give people some time to announce their intention to run -----Original Message----- From: Arturo, Bob [mailto:barturo@e...] Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 12:27 PM To: 'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com' Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Election of scorekeeper I think if you really want to run maybe a poll is in order. Who else wants to be the keeper of the score?? -----Original Message----- From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 11:50 AM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: [scatterbrains] Election of scorekeeper Hi! My name is Patrick Bernardo. I am running for scorekeeper of Scatterbrains. If elected, I promise I'll be your friend. Thank you for your consideration. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor www. .com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at webmaster@e.... ------=_NextPart_000_003B_01C09297.B30D6390 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
By the=20 new Rule, it has to be conducted with a poll... Let's give people some time= to=20 announce their intention to run
 
 -----Original Message-----
Fr= om:=20 Arturo, Bob [mailto:barturo@e...]
Sent: Friday,= =20 February 09, 2001 12:27 PM
To:=20 'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'
Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Elec= tion=20 of scorekeeper

I=20 think if you really want to run maybe a poll is in order. Who else wants = to be=20 the keeper of the score??
-----Original Message-----
From: Patrick D. Bernardo= =20 [mailto:bernardo@c...]
Sent: Friday, February 09, 200= 1=20 11:50 AM
To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com
Subject:= =20 [scatterbrains] Election of scorekeeper

Hi!
 
My name is Patrick Bernardo.  I a= m running=20 for scorekeeper of Scatterbrains.  If elected, I promise I'll be y= our=20 friend.
 
Thank you for your consideration.
 
 


To unsubscribe from this group, send an em= ail=20 to:
scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com




To=20 unsubscribe from this group, send an email=20 to:
scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com




* NOTICE * - If the reader is not the s= pecified=20 recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any=20 distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited.=20

If you are not the specified recipient,= please=20 notify us at webmaster@e....=20



------=_NextPart_000_003B_01C09297.B30D6390-- From pkirklan@e... Fri Feb 09 09:59:07 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 9 Feb 2001 17:59:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 95473 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2001 17:59:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 9 Feb 2001 17:59:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta2 with SMTP; 9 Feb 2001 17:59:06 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Fri, 9 Feb 2001 12:16:05 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 9 Feb 01 12:08:33 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 9 Feb 01 12:08:04 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 12:08:03 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] FW: Re: OFF LIST OFFER Priority: normal In-reply-to: <002301c0923b$e7de3880$d8a811d0@computer> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <00e1e0516180921ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" P I think i got a bad sense of the spirit of the game by entering amidst your dispute p From pkirklan@e... Fri Feb 09 10:01:06 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 9 Feb 2001 18:01:06 -0000 Received: (qmail 1205 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2001 18:01:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 9 Feb 2001 18:01:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta1 with SMTP; 9 Feb 2001 18:01:05 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Fri, 9 Feb 2001 12:18:04 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 9 Feb 01 12:10:32 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 9 Feb 01 12:10:13 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 12:10:09 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] In the interest of levity... Priority: normal In-reply-to: <9612ii+mi4o@eGroups.com> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <00e530418180921ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" that's just what this city is missing titties and beer From barturo@e... Fri Feb 09 10:04:24 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: BArturo@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 9 Feb 2001 18:04:23 -0000 Received: (qmail 10446 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2001 18:04:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 9 Feb 2001 18:04:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 9 Feb 2001 18:04:22 -0000 Received: from batman.ess ([12.31.9.2]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA19487 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 13:04:19 -0500 (EST) Received: by BATMAN with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id <1MR7KT8G>; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 12:59:15 -0500 Message-ID: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF0372EA@BATMAN> To: "'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'" Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Election of scorekeeper Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 12:59:14 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C092C2.038BD3E0" From: "Arturo, Bob" ------_=_NextPart_001_01C092C2.038BD3E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" OK -----Original Message----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia [mailto:eventi@n...] Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 12:56 PM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Election of scorekeeper By the new Rule, it has to be conducted with a poll... Let's give people some time to announce their intention to run -----Original Message----- From: Arturo, Bob [mailto:barturo@e...] Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 12:27 PM To: 'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com' Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Election of scorekeeper I think if you really want to run maybe a poll is in order. Who else wants to be the keeper of the score?? -----Original Message----- From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 11:50 AM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: [scatterbrains] Election of scorekeeper Hi! My name is Patrick Bernardo. I am running for scorekeeper of Scatterbrains. If elected, I promise I'll be your friend. Thank you for your consideration. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at webmaster@e.... Yahoo! Groups Sponsor www. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at webmaster@e.... ------_=_NextPart_001_01C092C2.038BD3E0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
OK
-----Original Message-----
From: Eugene Ventimiglia=20 [mailto:eventi@n...]
Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 12:56= =20 PM
To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE:=20 [scatterbrains] Election of scorekeeper

By=20 the new Rule, it has to be conducted with a poll... Let's give people som= e=20 time to announce their intention to run
 
 -----Original=20 Message-----
From: Arturo, Bob=20 [mailto:barturo@e...]
Sent: Friday, February = 09,=20 2001 12:27 PM
To: 'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'
Subject= :=20 RE: [scatterbrains] Election of scorekeeper

I=20 think if you really want to run maybe a poll is in order. Who else want= s to=20 be the keeper of the score??
-----Original Message-----
From: Patrick D. Bernar= do=20 [mailto:bernardo@c...]
Sent: Friday, February 09, 2= 001=20 11:50 AM
To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com
Subject:=20 [scatterbrains] Election of scorekeeper

Hi!
 
My name is Patrick Bernardo.  I= am=20 running for scorekeeper of Scatterbrains.  If elected, I promise= I'll=20 be your friend.
 
Thank you for your=20 consideration.
 
 


To unsubscribe from this group, send an = email=20 to:
scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com




To=20 unsubscribe from this group, send an email=20 to:
scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com




* NOTICE * - If the reader is not the= =20 specified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified= that=20 any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited= .=20

If you are not the specified recipien= t, please=20 notify us at webmaster@e....=20





To=20 unsubscribe from this group, send an email=20 to:
scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com




* NOTICE * - If the reader is not the s= pecified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that= any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. <= /FONT>

If you are not the specified recipient,= please notify us at webmaster@e....



------_=_NextPart_001_01C092C2.038BD3E0-- From barturo@e... Fri Feb 09 10:07:47 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: BArturo@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 9 Feb 2001 18:07:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 19191 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2001 18:07:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 9 Feb 2001 18:07:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 9 Feb 2001 19:08:51 -0000 Received: from batman.ess ([12.31.9.2]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA19860 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 13:07:43 -0500 (EST) Received: by BATMAN with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id <1MR7KT8H>; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 13:02:38 -0500 Message-ID: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF0372EB@BATMAN> To: "'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'" Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] In the interest of levity... Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 13:02:37 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C092C2.7CA0AF30" From: "Arturo, Bob" ------_=_NextPart_001_01C092C2.7CA0AF30 Content-Type: text/plain Well Pat's brewing a batch and I'll be tomorrow. So the beer is covered. -----Original Message----- From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 1:10 PM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] In the interest of levity... that's just what this city is missing titties and beer Yahoo! Groups Sponsor FREE 2001 Forecast from Astrocenter.com! To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at webmaster@e.... ------_=_NextPart_001_01C092C2.7CA0AF30 Content-Type: text/html Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Well=20 Pat's brewing a batch and I'll be tomorrow. So the beer is=20 covered.
-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Kirkland=20 [mailto:pkirklan@e...]
Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001= 1:10=20 PM
To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re:=20 [scatterbrains] In the interest of levity...

that= 's=20 just what this city is missing
titties and beer


To= =20 unsubscribe from this group, send an email=20 to:
scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com




* NOTICE * - If the reader is not the s= pecified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that= any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. <= /FONT>

If you are not the specified recipient,= please notify us at webmaster@e....



------_=_NextPart_001_01C092C2.7CA0AF30-- From pkirklan@e... Fri Feb 09 10:09:03 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 9 Feb 2001 18:09:02 -0000 Received: (qmail 45827 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2001 18:09:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 9 Feb 2001 18:09:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta1 with SMTP; 9 Feb 2001 18:09:01 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Fri, 9 Feb 2001 12:25:59 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 9 Feb 01 12:18:28 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 9 Feb 01 12:18:00 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 12:17:57 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Election of scorekeeper Priority: normal In-reply-to: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF0372EA@BATMAN> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <010995925180921ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" Since there is no specific time limit for nominations and announcements should there be an unofficial time limit From eventi@n... Fri Feb 09 10:17:36 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 9 Feb 2001 18:17:36 -0000 Received: (qmail 45165 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2001 18:17:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 9 Feb 2001 18:17:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 9 Feb 2001 18:17:34 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id NAA20882 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 13:17:33 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Election of scorekeeper Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 13:19:08 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <010995925180921ISWEBNT@d...> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" If all agree, how about by Monday Midnight(EST)? > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 1:18 PM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Election of scorekeeper > > > Since there is no specific time limit for nominations and > announcements should there be an unofficial time limit > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Fri Feb 09 10:19:22 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 9 Feb 2001 18:19:22 -0000 Received: (qmail 50085 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2001 18:19:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 9 Feb 2001 18:19:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 9 Feb 2001 19:20:26 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id NAA21060 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 13:19:21 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: Re: In the interest of levity... Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 13:20:55 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0047_01C0929B.2241D5E0" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF0372EB@BATMAN> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" ------=_NextPart_000_0047_01C0929B.2241D5E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit And let's just hope the titties are NOT covered You guys are making it too easy. --e -----Original Message----- From: Arturo, Bob [mailto:barturo@e...] Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 1:03 PM To: 'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com' Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] In the interest of levity... Well Pat's brewing a batch and I'll be tomorrow. So the beer is covered. -----Original Message----- From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 1:10 PM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] In the interest of levity... that's just what this city is missing titties and beer To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor www. .com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at webmaster@e.... ------=_NextPart_000_0047_01C0929B.2241D5E0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
And=20 let's just hope the titties are NOT covered
 
You=20 guys are making it too easy.
    --e
-----Original Message-----
From: Arturo, Bob=20 [mailto:barturo@e...]
Sent: Friday, February = 09,=20 2001 1:03 PM
To: 'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'
Subject:= =20 RE: [scatterbrains] In the interest of levity...

Well=20 Pat's brewing a batch and I'll be tomorrow. So the beer is=20 covered.
-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Kirkland=20 [mailto:pkirklan@e...]
Sent: Friday, February 09, 20= 01=20 1:10 PM
To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com
Subject: = Re:=20 [scatterbrains] In the interest of levity...

th= at's=20 just what this city is missing
titties and beer


= To=20 unsubscribe from this group, send an email=20 to:
scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com




To=20 unsubscribe from this group, send an email=20 to:
scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com




* NOTICE * - If the reader is not the s= pecified=20 recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any=20 distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited.=20

If you are not the specified recipient,= please=20 notify us at webmaster@e....=20



------=_NextPart_000_0047_01C0929B.2241D5E0-- From eventi@n... Fri Feb 09 10:25:14 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 9 Feb 2001 18:25:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 88949 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2001 18:25:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 9 Feb 2001 18:25:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 9 Feb 2001 18:25:13 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id NAA21646 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 13:25:12 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: Unofficial Score Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 13:26:47 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_004D_01C0929B.F3ED1140" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" ------=_NextPart_000_004D_01C0929B.F3ED1140 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hopefully the last... SA & PK: Ten points each for 204. EV: (4/6)*15 = 10 points for the Rule The full report is attatched and always at: http://www.scatterbrains.com/scores.html ------=_NextPart_000_004D_01C0929B.F3ED1140 Content-Type: text/html; name="scores.html" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="scores.html" =09=09 S ca tte rb r ai n s -- Nomic The Scores

The Scores
...
Main M= enu
  • Rule= s
  • Ar= chive
  • = Proposals
  • Sco= res
  • Polls
  • = Messages
  • XML Source
  • Reg= enerate Pages from Source

    • Links
    These are important sites one should not be without!

  • The Yahoo G= roups Page
  • The Origi= nal Ruleset
  • Bug tracking system
  • Nomic Weekly News
  • Unofficial sources
  • Debian ISO image site
  • Really super scie= ntific stuff
  • Always wear pants...

    • =3D''     		  
    =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20
    Bob Arturo2001/= 01/13Introduction of Steven+5
    Bob Arturo2001/= 01/16Rule 308 Passed+15
    eventi2000/12/1= 6Rule 301 Passed+= 10
    eventi2000/12/2= 1Rule 305 passed+= 14
    eventi2000/12/2= 8Introduction of Bob+5
    eventi2001/01/0= 9Rule 307 Passed+= 15
    eventi2001/01/2= 4Vote against 309= +10
    eventi2001/02/0= 9Rule 312 Passed+= 10
    Fritz Hemker200= 1/02/05Rule 311 Passed+9
    Fritz Hemker200= 1/02/05Vote against 311+10
    Fritz Hemker200= 1/02/06Transfer 1001-0.5
    pat2000/12/18Rule 304 passed+13<= /td>
    pat2001/01/04Introduction of Fritz+5
    pat2001/01/04Rule 306 passed+15<= /td>
    pat2001/01/24Vote against 309+10=
    pat2001/01/31Proposal 310 did not pass-10
    pat2001/02/05Introduction of Paul+5
    Paul Kirkland20= 01/02/06Transfer 1001+0.5
    Paul Kirkland20= 01/02/09Vote against 312+10
    Steven Arturo20= 01/01/24Rule 309 Passed+9
    Steven Arturo20= 01/02/05Vote against 311+10
    Steven Arturo20= 01/02/09Vote against 312+10

    		  
    This space for Rent
    If anyone can think of something to put here, let me kno= w

    Subscribe
    email address

    Don't have an account yet? As registered user you have = some advantages like yada yada, e-hoo-haa configuration and flarbing fleogr= les with your frop.

    =3D''


    Any bugs should be reported to eventi
    This design ripped off from Debian Planet
    *
    mug mug mug
    coffee mug - gonna clear away the haze - liquid proof - that i can win th= is race
    coffee mug - the grip that keeps me tall - my inter-link - keeps me quest= ing all
    i don't need no booze or drugs i just chug-a-lug-o my coffee mug and = i don't need your kiss and hug i just chug-a-lug- my coffee mug
    they haven't banned - my liquid drug of choice - there's too many hooked= - and they've got too much voice
    so for the moment - we're all pretty good to go - with 98 cups - with 98 = more to go
    i don't need no booze or drugs i just chug-a-lug-o my coffee mug and = i don't need your kiss and hug i just chug-a-lug- my coffee mug
    here a bean, there a bean everywhere a mean mean bean chug-a-lug -o- m= y coffee-mug, mug, mug, mug
    *
    buy me beer
    =09=20 ------=_NextPart_000_004D_01C0929B.F3ED1140-- From eventi@n... Fri Feb 09 10:30:36 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 9 Feb 2001 18:30:31 -0000 Received: (qmail 88093 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2001 18:30:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 9 Feb 2001 18:30:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 9 Feb 2001 18:30:29 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id NAA22147 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 13:30:27 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] FW: Re: OFF LIST OFFER Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 13:32:02 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <00e1e0516180921ISWEBNT@d...> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" Dude- Seriously, NO HARD FEELINGS!!! It's a game. I had fun, I hope you did, I'm not sure if the spectators did, but whatever.... Don't think I won't hold it against you in the game, though. ;) > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 1:08 PM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] FW: Re: OFF LIST OFFER > > > P > > I think i got a bad sense of the spirit of the game by entering > amidst your dispute > > p > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From barturo@e... Fri Feb 09 10:38:29 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: BArturo@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 9 Feb 2001 18:38:29 -0000 Received: (qmail 53835 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2001 18:38:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 9 Feb 2001 18:38:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 9 Feb 2001 19:39:33 -0000 Received: from batman.ess ([12.31.9.2]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA22916 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 13:38:27 -0500 (EST) Received: by BATMAN with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id <1MR7KT8J>; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 13:33:22 -0500 Message-ID: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF0372EC@BATMAN> To: "'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'" Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Election of scorekeeper Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 13:33:21 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C092C6.C7C63710" From: "Arturo, Bob" ------_=_NextPart_001_01C092C6.C7C63710 Content-Type: text/plain That's good for me -----Original Message----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia [mailto:eventi@n...] Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 1:19 PM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Election of scorekeeper If all agree, how about by Monday Midnight(EST)? > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 1:18 PM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Election of scorekeeper > > > Since there is no specific time limit for nominations and > announcements should there be an unofficial time limit > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor www. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at webmaster@e.... ------_=_NextPart_001_01C092C6.C7C63710 Content-Type: text/html Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
    That's=20 good for me
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Eugene Ventimiglia=20 [mailto:eventi@n...]
    Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 1:19=20 PM
    To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com
    Subject: RE:=20 [scatterbrains] Election of scorekeeper

    If all ag= ree,=20 how about by Monday Midnight(EST)?

    > -----Original=20 Message-----
    > From: Paul Kirkland=20 [mailto:pkirklan@e...]
    > Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 1= :18=20 PM
    > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com
    > Subject: RE:=20 [scatterbrains] Election of scorekeeper
    >
    >
    > Since t= here=20 is no specific time limit for nominations and
    > announcements shou= ld=20 there be an unofficial time limit
    >
    >
    > To unsubscrib= e=20 from this group, send an email to:
    >=20 scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com
    >
    >
    >
    =

    To=20 unsubscribe from this group, send an email=20 to:
    scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com




    * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the s= pecified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that= any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. <= /FONT>

    If you are not the specified recipient,= please notify us at webmaster@e....



    ------_=_NextPart_001_01C092C6.C7C63710-- From sga5892@n... Fri Feb 09 10:40:46 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: sga5892@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 9 Feb 2001 18:40:46 -0000 Received: (qmail 59548 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2001 18:40:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 9 Feb 2001 18:40:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-gw3.njit.edu) (128.235.251.11) by mta3 with SMTP; 9 Feb 2001 19:41:51 -0000 Received: from mailhost.njit.edu (mailhost.njit.edu [128.235.251.108]) by mail-gw3.njit.edu (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f19Iei101334 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 13:40:44 -0500 Received: from steve0 (dhcp194-216.njit.edu) by mailhost.njit.edu (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9) with SMTP id <0G8I00E7Y6JVYD@m...> for scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 13:40:43 -0500 (EST) Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Fri, 09 Feb 2001 13:40:59 -0500 Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2001 13:40:59 -0500 Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Election of scorekeeper To: "'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'" Reply-to: "sga5892@n..." Message-id: <01C0929D.EFD4DF00.sga5892@n...> Organization: NJIT MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit From: "Steven G. Arturo" fine by me -----Original Message----- From: Arturo, Bob [SMTP:barturo@e...] Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 1:33 PM To: 'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com' Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Election of scorekeeper That's good for me -----Original Message----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia [mailto:eventi@n...] Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 1:19 PM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Election of scorekeeper If all agree, how about by Monday Midnight(EST)? > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 1:18 PM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Election of scorekeeper > > > Since there is no specific time limit for nominations and > announcements should there be an unofficial time limit > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor www. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at webmaster@e.... << File: ATT00008.htm >> From f_hemker@h... Fri Feb 09 11:50:52 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: f_hemker@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 9 Feb 2001 19:50:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 97399 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2001 19:50:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 9 Feb 2001 19:50:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hp.egroups.com) (10.1.2.220) by mta1 with SMTP; 9 Feb 2001 19:50:51 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: f_hemker@h... Received: from [10.1.10.121] by hp.egroups.com with NNFMP; 09 Feb 2001 19:50:51 -0000 Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2001 19:50:47 -0000 To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: New Computer Message-ID: <961hmn+l3qp@eGroups.com> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 108 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 63.82.115.205 From: f_hemker@h... Just finished installing my new G4 Cube in the office.... We're going to see some mad posting now. -Fritz From bernardo@c... Fri Feb 09 11:51:00 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 9 Feb 2001 19:51:00 -0000 Received: (qmail 19285 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2001 19:51:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 9 Feb 2001 19:51:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta3 with SMTP; 9 Feb 2001 20:52:05 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-14.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.199]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f19Jotk76346 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 14:50:55 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <001501c092d1$86e13460$c7a811d0@computer> To: References: Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Election of scorekeeper Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 14:50:12 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" OK. ----- Original Message ----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia To: Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 1:19 PM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Election of scorekeeper > If all agree, how about by Monday Midnight(EST)? > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 1:18 PM > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Election of scorekeeper > > > > > > Since there is no specific time limit for nominations and > > announcements should there be an unofficial time limit > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Fri Feb 09 11:54:44 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 9 Feb 2001 19:54:44 -0000 Received: (qmail 7673 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2001 19:54:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 9 Feb 2001 19:54:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta3 with SMTP; 9 Feb 2001 20:55:49 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-14.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.199]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f19Jsgk76580 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 14:54:42 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <002501c092d2$0c72a000$c7a811d0@computer> To: References: <00e1e0516180921ISWEBNT@d...> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] FW: Re: OFF LIST OFFER Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 14:53:59 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" Yeah, you kind of came in like a hurricane, but remember your Hobbes. Politics isn't so much about *you*, but about the "publick Person" that you create. It's got less to do with the spirit of the game - which is kind of legalistic and bickering is certainly part of it - than the fact that you were creating a first impression. ----- Original Message ----- From: Paul Kirkland To: Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 1:08 PM Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] FW: Re: OFF LIST OFFER > P > > I think i got a bad sense of the spirit of the game by entering > amidst your dispute > > p > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From pkirklan@e... Fri Feb 09 11:56:04 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 9 Feb 2001 19:56:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 87931 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2001 19:56:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 9 Feb 2001 19:56:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta3 with SMTP; 9 Feb 2001 20:57:08 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Fri, 9 Feb 2001 14:13:00 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 9 Feb 01 14:05:30 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 9 Feb 01 14:05:21 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 14:05:14 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] FW: Re: OFF LIST OFFER Priority: normal In-reply-to: References: <00e1e0516180921ISWEBNT@d...> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <010140013200921ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 9 Feb 01, at 13:32, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > Dude- > Seriously, NO HARD FEELINGS!!! It's a game. I had fun, I hope you > did, I'm > not sure if the spectators did, but whatever.... > > Don't think I won't hold it against you in the game, though. ;) > yeah I only kept it up for the fun of it As to spectators: Clearly my biggest mistake was going public. I pretty much knew it woudl serve no function. But, I had to carry through on the "threat'" The other mistake was the rational assumption that you needed the vote or wouldn't have bothered. I think our pionts selling converstaion of yesterday is a fine example of bad negotiating on both of our parts. I don't think the implied messages of either of our offers was clear to the other. As to "going public" I need to work on a the public private distinction. I started out unclear on whether private communication was permitted by convention if not prohibited by law. (If I had know otherwise, I probably woudl have tried the rounding thing in private too with someone willling to test the expanding points theory until I was sure I had some support) I thought Patrick would play along to further test the lack of authority in the system. If I was doing it now I would have put it that way in private. I thought that was frowned upon. BTW I don't think my sarcastic tone comes across in writing as much as I think it does, at least to those of you I do not know. and I seriously did get my sense of the tone from the call to judgment I joined in the middle of For the recond (not that i think anyone cares) I DID start out with a real reason for challenging the payment aspect of the proposal. (sarcastically in relation to Honors v. Wealth , and seriously in connection to commerce possibilities in the city of Scatterbrains E, of course you should hold it against me in the game, I just hope I am not B. Boxer yet. > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 1:08 PM > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] FW: Re: OFF LIST OFFER > > > > > > P > > > > I think i got a bad sense of the spirit of the game by entering > > amidst your dispute > > > > p > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981743455/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > -> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Fri Feb 09 11:59:42 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 9 Feb 2001 19:59:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 97015 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2001 19:59:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 9 Feb 2001 19:59:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 9 Feb 2001 21:00:46 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id OAA01186 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 14:59:40 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] New Computer Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 15:01:15 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <961hmn+l3qp@eGroups.com> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" That's one fine piece of Acrylic... BTW- before Jobs demo'd it at MacWorld, there was speculation that it was really an upside-down acrylic wastepaper basket, mocked up by some graphic artist. > -----Original Message----- > From: f_hemker@h... [mailto:f_hemker@h...] > Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 2:51 PM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [scatterbrains] New Computer > > > Just finished installing my new G4 Cube in the office.... > > We're going to see some mad posting now. > > -Fritz > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From pkirklan@e... Fri Feb 09 12:01:31 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 9 Feb 2001 20:01:31 -0000 Received: (qmail 2105 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2001 20:01:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 9 Feb 2001 20:01:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta3 with SMTP; 9 Feb 2001 21:02:35 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Fri, 9 Feb 2001 14:18:28 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 9 Feb 01 14:10:57 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 9 Feb 01 14:10:39 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 14:10:32 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] FW: Re: OFF LIST OFFER Priority: normal In-reply-to: <002501c092d2$0c72a000$c7a811d0@computer> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <00dc72818200921ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 9 Feb 01, at 14:53, Patrick D. Bernardo wrote: > Yeah, you kind of came in like a hurricane, but remember your Hobbes. > Politics isn't so much about *you*, but about the "publick Person" > that you create. It's got less to do with the spirit of the game - > which is kind of legalistic and bickering is certainly part of it - > than the fact that you were creating a first impression. > > See yest note on Niet and apology. wrong pol phil at the wrong time. I got my class to put Soc to death in the morning (and maybe me too). I hope I can at least salvage him. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Paul Kirkland > To: > Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 1:08 PM > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] FW: Re: OFF LIST OFFER > > > > P > > > > I think i got a bad sense of the spirit of the game by entering > > amidst your dispute > > > > p > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981748484/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > -> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Fri Feb 09 12:02:45 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 9 Feb 2001 20:02:44 -0000 Received: (qmail 35885 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2001 20:02:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 9 Feb 2001 20:02:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta3 with SMTP; 9 Feb 2001 21:03:48 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-14.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.199]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f19K2fk77405 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 15:02:42 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <003701c092d3$2a38e3a0$c7a811d0@computer> To: References: <00e1e0516180921ISWEBNT@d...> <010140013200921ISWEBNT@d...> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] FW: Re: OFF LIST OFFER Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 15:01:58 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" ----- Original Message ----- From: Paul Kirkland To: Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 3:05 PM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] FW: Re: OFF LIST OFFER > As to spectators: Clearly my biggest mistake was going public. I > pretty much knew it woudl serve no function. But, I had to carry > through on the "threat'" > There was nothing wrong with "going public". But you did it in kind of a frenzied fashion. I got back from Husserl class to find 20something messages on my computer. Sporadically, inside these messages, there was contained some weird partial quotes about some kind of point-vote swapping deal. There was more traces of an expose rather than an actual "going public." I felt kind of like I was reading an Umberto Eco novel, or a Derrida essay. > I thought Patrick would play along to > further test the lack of authority in the system. If I was doing it now > I would have put it that way in private. I thought that was frowned > upon. > Uh, Paul. If it *were* frowned upon, how would anyone know, given that you did it privately? > BTW I don't think my sarcastic tone comes across in writing as > much as I think it does, at least to those of you I do not know. > [see above] > and I seriously did get my sense of the tone from the call to > judgment I joined in the middle of > Oh, now, playing the victim. Remember - my call to judgement had some merit (Fritz's opinion aside). > E, of course you should hold it against me in the game, I just hope > I am not B. Boxer yet. > We can all hope that. From eventi@n... Fri Feb 09 12:06:58 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 9 Feb 2001 20:06:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 61712 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2001 20:06:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 9 Feb 2001 20:06:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 9 Feb 2001 21:08:02 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id PAA01947 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 15:06:56 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] FW: Re: OFF LIST OFFER Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 15:08:31 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <010140013200921ISWEBNT@d...> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" On 9 Feb 01, at 13:32, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > Dude- > > Seriously, NO HARD FEELINGS!!! It's a game. I had fun, I hope you > > did, I'm > > not sure if the spectators did, but whatever.... > > > > Don't think I won't hold it against you in the game, though. ;) > > > yeah I only kept it up for the fun of it > > As to spectators: Clearly my biggest mistake was going public. I > pretty much knew it woudl serve no function. But, I had to carry > through on the "threat'" > > ... > BTW I don't think my sarcastic tone comes across in writing as > much as I think it does, at least to those of you I do not know. Sucks doesn't it. > > and I seriously did get my sense of the tone from the call to > judgment I joined in the middle of > > For the recond (not that i think anyone cares) I DID start out with a > real reason for challenging the payment aspect of the proposal. > (sarcastically in relation to Honors v. Wealth , and seriously in > connection to commerce possibilities in the city of Scatterbrains > > > E, of course you should hold it against me in the game, I just hope > I am not B. Boxer yet. I don't have the energy for that... I probably would have ignored you if it wasn't my proposal, and I wasn't so friggin stuck on this program I'm working on. I dare say SA & BA did. --e From eventi@n... Fri Feb 09 12:14:04 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 9 Feb 2001 20:14:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 80636 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2001 20:14:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 9 Feb 2001 20:14:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 9 Feb 2001 21:15:08 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id PAA02606 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 15:14:02 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Election of scorekeeper Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 15:15:37 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_005A_01C092AB.27EB0330" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <003801c092b8$55dc1ba0$c2a811d0@computer> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" ------=_NextPart_000_005A_01C092AB.27EB0330 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I'd like to officially state my intentions _not_ to seek office at this time, and announce my support for Pat Bernardo for the office of scorekeeper. -----Original Message----- From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 11:50 AM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: [scatterbrains] Election of scorekeeper Hi! My name is Patrick Bernardo. I am running for scorekeeper of Scatterbrains. If elected, I promise I'll be your friend. Thank you for your consideration. Yahoo! Groups Sponsor www. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com ------=_NextPart_000_005A_01C092AB.27EB0330 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
    I'd=20 like to officially state my intentions _not_ to seek office at this time, a= nd=20 announce my support for Pat Bernardo for the office of=20 scorekeeper.
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Patrick D. Bernardo=20 [mailto:bernardo@c...]
    Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 = 11:50=20 AM
    To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com
    Subject:=20 [scatterbrains] Election of scorekeeper

    Hi!
     
    My name is Patrick Bernardo.  I am = running=20 for scorekeeper of Scatterbrains.  If elected, I promise I'll be you= r=20 friend.
     
    Thank you for your consideration.=
     
     


    To=20 unsubscribe from this group, send an email=20 to:
    scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com


    ------=_NextPart_000_005A_01C092AB.27EB0330-- From pkirklan@e... Fri Feb 09 12:16:23 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 9 Feb 2001 20:16:23 -0000 Received: (qmail 64574 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2001 20:16:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 9 Feb 2001 20:16:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta3 with SMTP; 9 Feb 2001 21:17:26 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Fri, 9 Feb 2001 14:33:18 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 9 Feb 01 14:25:48 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 9 Feb 01 14:25:45 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 14:25:37 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] FW: Re: OFF LIST OFFER Priority: normal In-reply-to: <003701c092d3$2a38e3a0$c7a811d0@computer> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <010481833200921ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 9 Feb 01, at 15:01, Patrick D. Bernardo wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Paul Kirkland > To: > Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 3:05 PM > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] FW: Re: OFF LIST OFFER > > > > As to spectators: Clearly my biggest mistake was going public. I > > pretty much knew it woudl serve no function. But, I had to carry > > through on the "threat'" > > > There was nothing wrong with "going public". But you did it in kind > of a frenzied fashion. I got back from Husserl class to find > 20something messages on my computer. Sporadically, inside these > messages, there was contained some weird partial quotes about some > kind of point-vote swapping deal. There was more traces of an expose > rather than an actual "going public." I felt kind of like I was > reading an Umberto Eco novel, or a Derrida essay. > > > I thought Patrick would play along to > > further test the lack of authority in the system. If I was doing it > > now I would have put it that way in private. I thought that was > > frowned upon. > > > > Uh, Paul. If it *were* frowned upon, how would anyone know, given > that you did it privately? > Uh, Patrick doesn't the context answer that question > > BTW I don't think my sarcastic tone comes across in writing as > > much as I think it does, at least to those of you I do not know. > > > > [see above] > > > and I seriously did get my sense of the tone from the call to > > judgment I joined in the middle of > > > Oh, now, playing the victim. Remember - my call to judgement had some > merit (Fritz's opinion aside). Yes, I admit it had merit, dammit I was just trying to say that I now think I have a modified sense of the spirit and that part of my lost point was to point out the merits of your case and thus the need for some position with power That was the only point to my rounding theory, that was why I thought you would play along. I thought it had merits too, but the "implied preference of the law for integer scoring was trumped by the expressed preference of the lawmaker otherwise. > > > E, of course you should hold it against me in the game, I just hope > > I am not B. Boxer yet. > > > We can all hope that. > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981748965/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > -> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From pkirklan@e... Fri Feb 09 12:21:51 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 9 Feb 2001 20:21:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 86169 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2001 20:21:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 9 Feb 2001 20:21:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta1 with SMTP; 9 Feb 2001 20:21:49 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Fri, 9 Feb 2001 14:38:46 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 9 Feb 01 14:31:16 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 9 Feb 01 14:30:53 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 14:30:52 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] FW: Re: OFF LIST OFFER Priority: normal In-reply-to: References: <010140013200921ISWEBNT@d...> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <00e534638200921ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 9 Feb 01, at 15:08, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > On 9 Feb 01, at 13:32, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > > > Dude- > > > Seriously, NO HARD FEELINGS!!! It's a game. I had fun, I hope > > > you did, I'm > > > not sure if the spectators did, but whatever.... > > > > > > Don't think I won't hold it against you in the game, though. ;) > > > > > yeah I only kept it up for the fun of it > > > > As to spectators: Clearly my biggest mistake was going public. I > > pretty much knew it woudl serve no function. But, I had to carry > > through on the "threat'" > > > ... > > BTW I don't think my sarcastic tone comes across in writing as > > much as I think it does, at least to those of you I do not know. > > Sucks doesn't it. > > > > > and I seriously did get my sense of the tone from the call to > > judgment I joined in the middle of > > > > For the recond (not that i think anyone cares) I DID start out with > > a real reason for challenging the payment aspect of the proposal. > > (sarcastically in relation to Honors v. Wealth , and seriously in > > connection to commerce possibilities in the city of Scatterbrains > > > > > > E, of course you should hold it against me in the game, I just hope > > I am not B. Boxer yet. > > I don't have the energy for that... I probably would have ignored you > if it wasn't my proposal, and I wasn't so friggin stuck on this > program I'm working on. Ah, the effects of real world difficulties. You should have to make sense of dissertation readers whose criticisms seem to be in complete conflict with themselves. (no sarcastic reply necessary I already hear it) I dare say SA & BA did. thank god > --e > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981749219/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > -> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Fri Feb 09 12:22:14 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 9 Feb 2001 20:22:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 79958 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2001 20:22:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 9 Feb 2001 20:22:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 9 Feb 2001 20:22:12 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-10.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.195]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f19KMAk79165 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 15:22:10 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <005801c092d5$e2a000c0$c7a811d0@computer> To: References: <010481833200921ISWEBNT@d...> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] FW: Re: OFF LIST OFFER Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 15:21:27 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" ----- Original Message ----- From: Paul Kirkland > On 9 Feb 01, at 15:01, Patrick D. Bernardo wrote: > > From: Paul Kirkland > > > > > I thought Patrick would play along to > > > further test the lack of authority in the system. If I was doing it > > > now I would have put it that way in private. I thought that was > > > frowned upon. > > Uh, Paul. If it *were* frowned upon, how would anyone know, given > > that you did it privately? > > > Uh, Patrick doesn't the context answer that question > Only if you assume that you would have offered me in on the idea, and I would have been so *shocked and appalled* that I immediately blew your cover. So why didn't you take the 17.5 points that Eug was offering you to vote for his prop? > That was the only point to my rounding theory, that was why I > thought you would play along. I thought it had merits too, but the > "implied preference of the law for integer scoring was trumped by > the expressed preference of the lawmaker otherwise. > > But "the lawmaker" with the "expressed preference" was *ME*!!!! From sga5892@n... Fri Feb 09 12:28:00 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: sga5892@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 9 Feb 2001 20:27:57 -0000 Received: (qmail 17895 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2001 20:27:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 9 Feb 2001 20:27:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-gw3.njit.edu) (128.235.251.11) by mta2 with SMTP; 9 Feb 2001 20:27:54 -0000 Received: from mailhost.njit.edu (mailhost.njit.edu [128.235.251.108]) by mail-gw3.njit.edu (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f19KRp112257 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 15:27:51 -0500 Received: from steve0 (dhcp194-216.njit.edu) by mailhost.njit.edu (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9) with SMTP id <0G8I00I6YBIE16@m...> for scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 15:27:51 -0500 (EST) Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Fri, 09 Feb 2001 15:28:07 -0500 Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2001 15:28:06 -0500 Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] FW: Re: OFF LIST OFFER To: "'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'" Reply-to: "sga5892@n..." Message-id: <01C092AC.E73DEF80.sga5892@n...> Organization: NJIT MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit From: "Steven G. Arturo" y'all can toss the salad and choose the dressing... ill be the one complaining later that the lettuce is limp steve0 -----Original Message----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia [SMTP:eventi@n...] Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 3:09 PM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] FW: Re: OFF LIST OFFER On 9 Feb 01, at 13:32, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > Dude- > > Seriously, NO HARD FEELINGS!!! It's a game. I had fun, I hope you > > did, I'm > > not sure if the spectators did, but whatever.... > > > > Don't think I won't hold it against you in the game, though. ;) > > > yeah I only kept it up for the fun of it > > As to spectators: Clearly my biggest mistake was going public. I > pretty much knew it woudl serve no function. But, I had to carry > through on the "threat'" > > ... > BTW I don't think my sarcastic tone comes across in writing as > much as I think it does, at least to those of you I do not know. Sucks doesn't it. > > and I seriously did get my sense of the tone from the call to > judgment I joined in the middle of > > For the recond (not that i think anyone cares) I DID start out with a > real reason for challenging the payment aspect of the proposal. > (sarcastically in relation to Honors v. Wealth , and seriously in > connection to commerce possibilities in the city of Scatterbrains > > > E, of course you should hold it against me in the game, I just hope > I am not B. Boxer yet. I don't have the energy for that... I probably would have ignored you if it wasn't my proposal, and I wasn't so friggin stuck on this program I'm working on. I dare say SA & BA did. --e To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com From eventi@n... Fri Feb 09 12:31:38 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 9 Feb 2001 20:31:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 82723 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2001 20:31:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 9 Feb 2001 20:31:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 9 Feb 2001 20:31:34 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id PAA04297 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 15:31:33 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] FW: Re: OFF LIST OFFER Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 15:33:08 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <01C092AC.E73DEF80.sga5892@n...> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" This calls for a SubGenius response: I've sired space monsters across Asia, I cook and *eat* my dead; *Yip, yip, YEEEEEEE!* I'm the Unshaven Thorn Tree of a corporate galaxy! YEEE HAW! Whoop! I'm ready! I pay no taxes! Yes, I'm a Crime Fighting Master Criminal! Who'll blow me down, whose candle will I fart out? I'll freeze *your* spew before it hits the bathroom tile! I bend *crowbars* with my meat ax and a thought. > -----Original Message----- > From: Steven G. Arturo [mailto:sga5892@n...] > Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 3:28 PM > To: 'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com' > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] FW: Re: OFF LIST OFFER > > > y'all can toss the salad and choose the dressing... > > ill be the one complaining later that the lettuce is limp > > steve0 > > -----Original Message----- > From: Eugene Ventimiglia [SMTP:eventi@n...] > Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 3:09 PM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] FW: Re: OFF LIST OFFER > > On 9 Feb 01, at 13:32, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > > > > Dude- > > > Seriously, NO HARD FEELINGS!!! It's a game. I had fun, I hope you > > > did, I'm > > > not sure if the spectators did, but whatever.... > > > > > > Don't think I won't hold it against you in the game, though. ;) > > > > > yeah I only kept it up for the fun of it > > > > As to spectators: Clearly my biggest mistake was going public. I > > pretty much knew it woudl serve no function. But, I had to carry > > through on the "threat'" > > > ... > > BTW I don't think my sarcastic tone comes across in writing as > > much as I think it does, at least to those of you I do not know. > > Sucks doesn't it. > > > > > and I seriously did get my sense of the tone from the call to > > judgment I joined in the middle of > > > > For the recond (not that i think anyone cares) I DID start out with a > > real reason for challenging the payment aspect of the proposal. > > (sarcastically in relation to Honors v. Wealth , and seriously in > > connection to commerce possibilities in the city of Scatterbrains > > > > > > E, of course you should hold it against me in the game, I just hope > > I am not B. Boxer yet. > > I don't have the energy for that... I probably would have ignored > you if it > wasn't my proposal, and I wasn't so friggin stuck on this program I'm > working on. I dare say SA & BA did. > --e > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Fri Feb 09 12:32:56 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 9 Feb 2001 20:32:56 -0000 Received: (qmail 31623 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2001 20:32:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 9 Feb 2001 20:32:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 9 Feb 2001 20:32:54 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-10.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.195]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f19KWqk80187 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 15:32:52 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <007601c092d7$6198c640$c7a811d0@computer> To: References: Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] FW: Re: OFF LIST OFFER Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 15:32:09 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" ----- Original Message ----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia To: Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 3:33 PM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] FW: Re: OFF LIST OFFER > This calls for a SubGenius response: > > I've sired space monsters across Asia, I cook and *eat* my dead; *Yip, yip, > YEEEEEEE!* I'm the Unshaven Thorn Tree of a corporate galaxy! YEEE HAW! > Whoop! I'm ready! I pay no taxes! Yes, I'm a Crime Fighting Master Criminal! > Who'll blow me down, whose candle will I fart out? I'll freeze *your* spew > before it hits the bathroom tile! I bend *crowbars* with my meat ax and a > thought. > One of yours? Or a saved alt.slack post? From pkirklan@e... Fri Feb 09 12:33:43 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 9 Feb 2001 20:33:43 -0000 Received: (qmail 17586 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2001 20:33:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 9 Feb 2001 20:33:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta2 with SMTP; 9 Feb 2001 20:33:42 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Fri, 9 Feb 2001 14:50:39 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 9 Feb 01 14:43:10 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 9 Feb 01 14:42:58 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 14:42:54 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] FW: Re: OFF LIST OFFER Priority: normal In-reply-to: <005801c092d5$e2a000c0$c7a811d0@computer> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <010c03950200921ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 9 Feb 01, at 15:21, Patrick D. Bernardo wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Paul Kirkland > > On 9 Feb 01, at 15:01, Patrick D. Bernardo wrote: > > > From: Paul Kirkland > > > > > > > I thought Patrick would play along to > > > > further test the lack of authority in the system. If I was > > > > doing it now I would have put it that way in private. I thought > > > > that was frowned upon. > > > Uh, Paul. If it *were* frowned upon, how would anyone know, given > > > that you did it privately? > > > > > Uh, Patrick doesn't the context answer that question > > > Only if you assume that you would have offered me in on the idea, and > I would have been so *shocked and appalled* that I immediately blew > your cover. No but I assumed something more like: please keep all communicatino about Nomic in Nomic. Besides I was writing to you about the Apology instead. > > So why didn't you take the 17.5 points that Eug was offering you to > vote for his prop? that was not the offer > > > That was the only point to my rounding theory, that was why I > > thought you would play along. I thought it had merits too, but the > > "implied preference of the law for integer scoring was trumped by > > the expressed preference of the lawmaker otherwise. > > > > > But "the lawmaker" with the "expressed preference" was *ME*!!!! > No shit. It was you I tried to get in on it first. The 2.5 as a half of your introduction rewad was cover I tried to send it at a time where you would be most likely to see it first and tried to communicate it indirectly for fun. It wasn't for points. If we had set up a back and forth exchange, it could and I assume would have been challenged under 311, but it might have helped the case for the need for a stronger executive (again, your case) (and I might have been able to keep the orginal 2.5 (or 3) points under the guise of a joining gift from my introducer. p > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981750134/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > -> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@n... Fri Feb 09 12:35:05 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 9 Feb 2001 20:35:05 -0000 Received: (qmail 21133 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2001 20:35:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 9 Feb 2001 20:35:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 9 Feb 2001 21:36:09 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id PAA04661 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 15:35:04 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] FW: Re: OFF LIST OFFER Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 15:36:38 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <007601c092d7$6198c640$c7a811d0@computer> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" Better: http://www.elsewhere.org/cgi-bin/brag > > > One of yours? Or a saved alt.slack post? From pkirklan@e... Fri Feb 09 15:13:39 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 9 Feb 2001 23:13:39 -0000 Received: (qmail 34955 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2001 23:13:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 9 Feb 2001 23:13:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta3 with SMTP; 10 Feb 2001 00:14:42 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Fri, 9 Feb 2001 17:30:33 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 9 Feb 01 17:23:04 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 9 Feb 01 17:22:50 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 17:22:46 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: extra political goods Priority: normal In-reply-to: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF0372EB@BATMAN> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <00fda3330230921ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 9 Feb 01, at 13:02, Arturo, Bob wrote: have a good weekend all enjoy the beer It would have made a great currency > Well Pat's brewing a batch and I'll be tomorrow. So the beer is > covered. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 1:10 PM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] In the interest of levity... > > > that's just what this city is missing > titties and beer > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > 088:N/ > A=567076/R=0/*http://www.astrocenter.com/scripts/AstroWeb.dll?ya?Af=31 > 2&De=F e1> FREE 2001 Forecast from Astrocenter.com! > > l/S=17 00057088:N/A=567076/rand=670784164> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or > copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not > the specified recipient, please notify us at > webmaster@e.... > > > From pkirklan@e... Fri Feb 09 15:16:06 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 9 Feb 2001 23:16:06 -0000 Received: (qmail 92464 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2001 23:16:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 9 Feb 2001 23:16:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta2 with SMTP; 9 Feb 2001 23:16:04 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Fri, 9 Feb 2001 17:33:01 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 9 Feb 01 17:25:33 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 9 Feb 01 17:25:19 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 17:25:17 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] extra political goods Priority: normal References: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF0372EB@BATMAN> In-reply-to: <00fda3330230921ISWEBNT@d...> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <011140133230921ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 9 Feb 01, at 17:22, Paul Kirkland wrote: > On 9 Feb 01, at 13:02, Arturo, Bob wrote: > > have a good weekend all > enjoy the beer > > It would have made a great currency > p.s we can do the poll as soon as everyone expresses their intention OR monday midnight right? surprise surprise, I have no intention to run > > Well Pat's brewing a batch and I'll be tomorrow. So the beer is > > covered. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 1:10 PM > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] In the interest of levity... > > > > > > that's just what this city is missing > > titties and beer > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > > > > 57 088:N/ > > A=567076/R=0/*http://www.astrocenter.com/scripts/AstroWeb.dll?ya?Af= > > 31 2&De=F e1> FREE 2001 Forecast from Astrocenter.com! > > > > > ai l/S=17 00057088:N/A=567076/rand=670784164> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or > > copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not > > the specified recipient, please notify us at > > webmaster@e.... > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981760420/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > -> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@w... Fri Feb 09 15:26:08 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@w... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 9 Feb 2001 23:26:08 -0000 Received: (qmail 65839 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2001 23:26:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 9 Feb 2001 23:26:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ns1-3.wyndtell.com) (63.81.201.11) by mta1 with SMTP; 9 Feb 2001 23:26:06 -0000 Received: from nova.wyndtell.com (nova.wyndtell.com [63.81.201.78]) by ns1-3.wyndtell.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f1A0NKB25891 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 16:23:20 -0800 Received: (root@localhost) by nova.wyndtell.com (8.8.8/SCA-6.6) id SAA25710; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 18:26:05 -0500 (EST) To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Question about turn end Message-Id: <15308871.1350@w...> Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2001 15:26:05 -0800 X-eGroups-From: eventi@w... (Eugene Ventimiglia) From: eventi@w... I think that my turn is over, and Bobby's has begun. My only problem is that 'scoring' is one of the four parts of a turn, and it hasn't been officially done yet. Since Prop 312 necame law after the vote(205), it may be necessary for the scorekeeper to 'score' the turn before my turn is considered over, and Bobby's begins. Is it necessary for the SK to record the score to end the proponant's turn? Just sorta interrested in all of your opinions on this. I'm almost certain that BA will have his proposal in within 5 business days of today. From eventi@w... Fri Feb 09 15:40:08 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@w... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 9 Feb 2001 23:40:08 -0000 Received: (qmail 50231 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2001 23:40:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 9 Feb 2001 23:40:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ns1-3.wyndtell.com) (63.81.201.11) by mta1 with SMTP; 9 Feb 2001 23:40:07 -0000 Received: from nova.wyndtell.com (nova.wyndtell.com [63.81.201.78]) by ns1-3.wyndtell.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f1A0bLB31631 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 16:37:21 -0800 Received: (root@localhost) by nova.wyndtell.com (8.8.8/SCA-6.6) id SAA02734; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 18:40:06 -0500 (EST) To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: re[2]: [scatterbrains] extra political goods In-Reply-To: 33230921 X-Status: 6Y Message-Id: <15308871.1354@w...> Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2001 15:40:05 -0800 X-eGroups-From: eventi@w... (Eugene Ventimiglia) From: eventi@w... I was going to suggest that. If Steven, Bob, and Fritz would state their intentions, we can poll ASAP, or skip it if it's only Pat. On 9 Feb 01, at 17:22, Paul Kirkland wrote: > On 9 Feb 01, at 13:02, Arturo, Bob wrote: > > have a good weekend all > enjoy the beer > > It would have made a great currency > p.s we can do the poll as soon as everyone expresses their intention OR monday midnight right? surprise surprise, I have no intention to run > > Well Pat's brewing a batch and I'll be tomorrow. So the beer is > > covered. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 1:10 PM > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] In the interest of levity... > > > > > > that's just what this city is missing > > titties and beer > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > > > > 57 088:N/ > > A=567076/R=0/*http://www.astrocenter.com/scripts/AstroWeb.dll?ya?Af= > > 31 2&De=F e1> FREE 2001 Forecast from Astrocenter.com! > > > > > ai l/S=17 00057088:N/A=567076/rand=670784164> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or > > copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not > > the specified recipient, please notify us at > > webmaster@e.... > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981760420/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > -> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com From pkirklan@e... Fri Feb 09 15:41:50 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 9 Feb 2001 23:41:50 -0000 Received: (qmail 2765 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2001 23:41:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 9 Feb 2001 23:41:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta3 with SMTP; 10 Feb 2001 00:42:54 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Fri, 9 Feb 2001 17:58:46 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 9 Feb 01 17:51:17 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 9 Feb 01 17:51:08 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 17:51:02 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Question about turn end Priority: normal In-reply-to: <15308871.1350@w...> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <00e944658230921ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 9 Feb 01, at 15:26, eventi@w... wrote: i was going to ask you that, but along with it, does the scorekeeper need to make the current unofficial score immediately and does he get paid for it. Does this depend on whether it is part of the scoring and thus part of this turn? i would lean toward interpreting it as part of a turn, it is "scoring". I think we should answer this rather than leave it open assuming Bobby announces a proposal that is "in time " either way. The only other situation in which it might matter would be if there was a questino as to who would be judge. But, if the scorekeeper had an interest in this he has two days to do the official scoring. > I think that my turn is over, and Bobby's has begun. My only problem > is that 'scoring' is one of the four parts of a turn, and it hasn't > been officially done yet. Since Prop 312 necame law after the > vote(205), it may be necessary for the scorekeeper to 'score' the turn > before my turn is considered over, and Bobby's begins. > Is it necessary for the SK to record the score to end the > proponant's turn? Just sorta interrested in all of your opinions on > this. I'm almost certain that BA will have his proposal in within 5 > business days of today. > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981761169/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > -> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@w... Fri Feb 09 15:41:58 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@w... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 9 Feb 2001 23:41:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 64955 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2001 23:41:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 9 Feb 2001 23:41:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ns1-3.wyndtell.com) (63.81.201.11) by mta3 with SMTP; 10 Feb 2001 00:43:02 -0000 Received: from nova.wyndtell.com (nova.wyndtell.com [63.81.201.78]) by ns1-3.wyndtell.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f1A0dBB32472 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 16:39:11 -0800 Received: (root@localhost) by nova.wyndtell.com (8.8.8/SCA-6.6) id SAA03757; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 18:41:56 -0500 (EST) To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Buy me a Beer (dot com) In-Reply-To: 30230921 X-Status: 6Y Message-Id: <15308871.1355@w...> Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2001 15:41:56 -0800 X-eGroups-From: eventi@w... (Eugene Ventimiglia) From: eventi@w... Ok: Stupid business idea... buymeabeer.com Websites and Bars register for a micro-payment system: Click a link on the site, and the webmaster gets a free beer at his favorite bar on you... Many details to work out. Affiliate sites: caniget60centsforthebus.com spare-a-smoke.com hookabrotherup.com ------ From: Subject:[scatterbrains] extra political goods[3A847F45] On 9 Feb 01, at 13:02, Arturo, Bob wrote: have a good weekend all enjoy the beer It would have made a great currency > Well Pat's brewing a batch and I'll be tomorrow. So the beer is > covered. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 1:10 PM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] In the interest of levity... > > > that's just what this city is missing > titties and beer > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > 088:N/ > A=567076/R=0/*http://www.astrocenter.com/scripts/AstroWeb.dll?ya?Af=31 > 2&De=F e1> FREE 2001 Forecast from Astrocenter.com! > > l/S=17 00057088:N/A=567076/rand=670784164> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or > copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not > the specified recipient, please notify us at > webmaster@e.... > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com From pkirklan@e... Fri Feb 09 15:44:18 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 9 Feb 2001 23:44:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 71217 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2001 23:44:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 9 Feb 2001 23:44:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta2 with SMTP; 9 Feb 2001 23:44:18 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Fri, 9 Feb 2001 18:01:14 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 9 Feb 01 17:53:46 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 9 Feb 01 17:53:38 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 17:53:35 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: re[2]: [scatterbrains] extra political goods Priority: normal References: 33230921 In-reply-to: <15308871.1354@w...> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <00fba1401000a21ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 9 Feb 01, at 15:40, eventi@w... wrote: > I was going to suggest that. If Steven, Bob, and Fritz would state > their intentions, we can poll ASAP, or skip it if it's only Pat. > that was what I meant, especially a good idea in light of your latest concern. This woudl let us get on to new things more quickly > On 9 Feb 01, at 17:22, Paul Kirkland wrote: > > > On 9 Feb 01, at 13:02, Arturo, Bob wrote: > > > > have a good weekend all > > enjoy the beer > > > > It would have made a great currency > > > > p.s we can do the poll as soon as everyone expresses their > intention OR monday midnight right? > surprise surprise, I have no intention to run > > > > Well Pat's brewing a batch and I'll be tomorrow. So the beer is > > > covered. > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > > Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 1:10 PM > > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] In the interest of levity... > > > > > > > > > that's just what this city is missing > > > titties and beer > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > > > > > > > 00 57 088:N/ > > > A=567076/R=0/*http://www.astrocenter.com/scripts/AstroWeb.dll?ya?A > > > f= 31 2&De=F e1> FREE 2001 Forecast from Astrocenter.com! > > > > > > > > pm ai l/S=17 00057088:N/A=567076/rand=670784164> > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > > > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution > > > or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are > > > not the specified recipient, please notify us at > > > webmaster@e.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here > > for more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981760420/ > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > -_ -> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981762009/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > -> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Fri Feb 09 15:46:35 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 9 Feb 2001 23:46:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 91703 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2001 23:46:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 9 Feb 2001 23:46:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 9 Feb 2001 23:46:33 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-07.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.192]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f19NkUk30631 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 18:46:31 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <001101c092f2$6ebb8d60$c0a811d0@computer> To: References: <15308871.1355@w...> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Buy me a Beer (dot com) Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 18:45:48 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" Actually, Eug, that's a pretty damn good idea. The part would be working it out. But it could work sort of like Paypal, if you run it right. People "buy" a drink on Thursday, the drink is cashed in on Saturday, and with enough of this, you make tons on the 2 days of interest. It'll work well if you can get enough places to sign up, obviously. Also, you could market it to/through the online dating services and chat rooms where people are meeting each other across the country... ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 6:41 PM Subject: [scatterbrains] Buy me a Beer (dot com) > Ok: Stupid business idea... > > buymeabeer.com > > Websites and Bars register for a micro-payment system: Click a link on the site, and the webmaster gets a free beer at his favorite bar on you... Many details to work out. > > Affiliate sites: > caniget60centsforthebus.com > spare-a-smoke.com > hookabrotherup.com > > ------ > From: > Subject:[scatterbrains] extra political goods[3A847F45] > On 9 Feb 01, at 13:02, Arturo, Bob wrote: > > have a good weekend all > enjoy the beer > > It would have made a great currency > > > Well Pat's brewing a batch and I'll be tomorrow. So the beer is > > covered. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 1:10 PM > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] In the interest of levity... > > > > > > that's just what this city is missing > > titties and beer > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > > > > 088:N/ > > A=567076/R=0/*http://www.astrocenter.com/scripts/AstroWeb.dll?ya?Af=31 > > 2&De=F e1> FREE 2001 Forecast from Astrocenter.com! > > > > > l/S=17 00057088:N/A=567076/rand=670784164> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or > > copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not > > the specified recipient, please notify us at > > webmaster@e.... > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From pkirklan@e... Fri Feb 09 15:48:17 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 9 Feb 2001 23:48:17 -0000 Received: (qmail 80685 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2001 23:48:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 9 Feb 2001 23:48:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta2 with SMTP; 9 Feb 2001 23:48:15 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Fri, 9 Feb 2001 18:05:11 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 9 Feb 01 17:57:43 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 9 Feb 01 17:57:26 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 17:57:21 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Buy me a Beer (dot com) Priority: normal References: 30230921 In-reply-to: <15308871.1355@w...> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <0117e1105000a21ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 9 Feb 01, at 15:41, eventi@w... wrote: > Ok: Stupid business idea... > > buymeabeer.com > > Websites and Bars register for a micro-payment system: Click a link on > the site, and the webmaster gets a free beer at his favorite bar on > you... Many details to work out. That's a damn good stupid business idea. Call Poor Phil's on Oak Park ave in Oak park ave if you get it started, make sure they are in for it.. Hmm...Maybe I will go check myself. > > Affiliate sites: > caniget60centsforthebus.com > spare-a-smoke.com > hookabrotherup.com > > ------ > From: > Subject:[scatterbrains] extra political goods[3A847F45] > On 9 Feb 01, at 13:02, Arturo, Bob wrote: > > have a good weekend all > enjoy the beer > > It would have made a great currency > > > Well Pat's brewing a batch and I'll be tomorrow. So the beer is > > covered. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 1:10 PM > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] In the interest of levity... > > > > > > that's just what this city is missing > > titties and beer > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > > > > 57 088:N/ > > A=567076/R=0/*http://www.astrocenter.com/scripts/AstroWeb.dll?ya?Af= > > 31 2&De=F e1> FREE 2001 Forecast from Astrocenter.com! > > > > > ai l/S=17 00057088:N/A=567076/rand=670784164> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or > > copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not > > the specified recipient, please notify us at > > webmaster@e.... > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981762118/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > -> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From pkirklan@e... Fri Feb 09 15:53:19 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 9 Feb 2001 23:53:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 93053 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2001 23:53:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 9 Feb 2001 23:53:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta2 with SMTP; 9 Feb 2001 23:53:18 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Fri, 9 Feb 2001 18:10:08 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 9 Feb 01 18:02:40 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 9 Feb 01 18:02:14 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 18:02:14 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Buy me a Beer (dot com) Priority: normal In-reply-to: <001101c092f2$6ebb8d60$c0a811d0@computer> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <010c10810000a21ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 9 Feb 01, at 18:45, Patrick D. Bernardo wrote: Now we're thinking real community serivice. I'd buy you a beer right now for thinking of it, e. and pat's right How many other idiots are talking to each other from un "beer- buyable range" online? of course getting the bars is the problem, as a business idea it just might work with those damn chain places like Chili's TGI Friday's Speaking of which, this time I mean it, time for a real beer > Actually, Eug, that's a pretty damn good idea. The part would be > working it out. But it could work sort of like Paypal, if you run it > right. People "buy" a drink on Thursday, the drink is cashed in on > Saturday, and with enough of this, you make tons on the 2 days of > interest. > > It'll work well if you can get enough places to sign up, obviously. > Also, you could market it to/through the online dating services and > chat rooms where people are meeting each other across the country... > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: > Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 6:41 PM > Subject: [scatterbrains] Buy me a Beer (dot com) > > > > Ok: Stupid business idea... > > > > buymeabeer.com > > > > Websites and Bars register for a micro-payment system: Click a link > > on the > site, and the webmaster gets a free beer at his favorite bar on you... > Many details to work out. > > Affiliate sites: > > caniget60centsforthebus.com > spare-a-smoke.com > hookabrotherup.com > > > ------ > From: > Subject:[scatterbrains] > extra political goods[3A847F45] > On 9 Feb 01, at 13:02, Arturo, Bob > wrote: > > have a good weekend all > enjoy the beer > > It would have > made a great currency > > > Well Pat's brewing a batch and I'll be > tomorrow. So the beer is > > covered. > > > > -----Original > Message----- > > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > > > Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 1:10 PM > > To: > scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] In the > interest of levity... > > > > > > that's just what this city is > missing > > titties and beer > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > > > > > > 088:N/ > > > A=567076/R=0/*http://www.astrocenter.com/scripts/AstroWeb.dll?ya?Af=31 > > > 2&De=F e1> FREE 2001 Forecast from Astrocenter.com! > > > > > > > l/S=17 00057088:N/A=567076/rand=670784164> > > > > To unsubscribe > from this group, send an email to: > > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > * > NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > > > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or > > > copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not > > > the specified recipient, please notify us at > > > webmaster@e.... > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe > from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > To unsubscribe > from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981762395/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > -> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From eventi@w... Fri Feb 09 16:10:49 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@w... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 10 Feb 2001 00:10:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 98597 invoked from network); 10 Feb 2001 00:10:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 10 Feb 2001 00:10:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ns1-3.wyndtell.com) (63.81.201.11) by mta3 with SMTP; 10 Feb 2001 01:11:53 -0000 Received: from nova.wyndtell.com (nova.wyndtell.com [63.81.201.78]) by ns1-3.wyndtell.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f1A182B11496 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 17:08:03 -0800 Received: (root@localhost) by nova.wyndtell.com (8.8.8/SCA-6.6) id TAA18434; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 19:10:47 -0500 (EST) To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: re[2]: [scatterbrains] Question about turn end In-Reply-To: 58230921 X-Status: 6Y Message-Id: <15308871.1358@w...> Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2001 16:10:47 -0800 X-eGroups-From: eventi@w... (Eugene Ventimiglia) From: eventi@w... 205 says that 312 is law now, the question is whether part 4 of the turn-rule requires SK to record the score for the turn to end. I think it's unfortunate (now that 312's in), but it does. Part 4 should be taken out, but until it is, I think we'll be stuck waiting for SK to finish each turn. ------ From: Subject:Re: [scatterbrains] Question about turn end[3A8485B7] On 9 Feb 01, at 15:26, eventi@w... wrote: i was going to ask you that, but along with it, does the scorekeeper need to make the current unofficial score immediately and does he get paid for it. Does this depend on whether it is part of the scoring and thus part of this turn? i would lean toward interpreting it as part of a turn, it is "scoring". I think we should answer this rather than leave it open assuming Bobby announces a proposal that is "in time " either way. The only other situation in which it might matter would be if there was a questino as to who would be judge. But, if the scorekeeper had an interest in this he has two days to do the official scoring. > I think that my turn is over, and Bobby's has begun. My only problem > is that 'scoring' is one of the four parts of a turn, and it hasn't > been officially done yet. Since Prop 312 necame law after the > vote(205), it may be necessary for the scorekeeper to 'score' the turn > before my turn is considered over, and Bobby's begins. > Is it necessary for the SK to record the score to end the > proponant's turn? Just sorta interrested in all of your opinions on > this. I'm almost certain that BA will have his proposal in within 5 > business days of today. > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981761169/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > -> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com From bernardo@c... Sat Feb 10 06:32:25 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 10 Feb 2001 14:32:24 -0000 Received: (qmail 30898 invoked from network); 10 Feb 2001 14:32:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 10 Feb 2001 14:32:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 10 Feb 2001 14:32:23 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-10.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.195]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f1AEWLk92247 for ; Sat, 10 Feb 2001 09:32:21 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <000801c0936e$2f1ba380$c3a811d0@computer> To: References: <15308871.1358@w...> Subject: Re: re[2]: [scatterbrains] Question about turn end Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 09:31:38 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 7:10 PM Subject: re[2]: [scatterbrains] Question about turn end > 205 says that 312 is law now, the question is whether part 4 of the turn-rule requires SK to record the score for the turn to end. I think it's unfortunate (now that 312's in), but it does. Part 4 should be taken out, but until it is, I think we'll be stuck waiting for SK to finish each turn. I think that you're right about the future cases (that the SK, in a sense, "finishes" the turn), but I think that an argument can be made that 312 isn't really law until your turn is over. Thus, e should score this turn, and the election of the SK can proceed as Bobby begins his turn. Since your turn began before 312, applying 312 to your turn would be ex post facto. From eventi@n... Sat Feb 10 06:53:40 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 10 Feb 2001 14:53:40 -0000 Received: (qmail 47608 invoked from network); 10 Feb 2001 14:53:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 10 Feb 2001 14:53:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 10 Feb 2001 14:53:39 -0000 Received: from win (win.venti.nyic.com [64.29.109.18]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id JAA28959 for ; Sat, 10 Feb 2001 09:53:37 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <002301c09371$438a52a0$126d1d40@v...> To: References: <15308871.1358@w...> <000801c0936e$2f1ba380$c3a811d0@computer> Subject: Re: re[2]: [scatterbrains] Question about turn end Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 09:53:11 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" Rule205:An adopted rule-change takes full effect at the moment of the completion of the vote that adopted it. There's room for argument here? I'm on your side, but if this were written on the bottom of a boardgame's box, you wouldn't think to argue it. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" To: Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2001 9:31 AM Subject: Re: re[2]: [scatterbrains] Question about turn end > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: > Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 7:10 PM > Subject: re[2]: [scatterbrains] Question about turn end > > > > 205 says that 312 is law now, the question is whether part 4 of the > turn-rule requires SK to record the score for the turn to end. I think it's > unfortunate (now that 312's in), but it does. Part 4 should be taken out, > but until it is, I think we'll be stuck waiting for SK to finish each turn. > > I think that you're right about the future cases (that the SK, in a sense, > "finishes" the turn), but I think that an argument can be made that 312 > isn't really law until your turn is over. Thus, e should score this turn, > and the election of the SK can proceed as Bobby begins his turn. Since your > turn began before 312, applying 312 to your turn would be ex post facto. > From bernardo@c... Sat Feb 10 07:22:36 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 10 Feb 2001 15:22:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 21958 invoked from network); 10 Feb 2001 15:22:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 10 Feb 2001 15:22:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 10 Feb 2001 15:22:34 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-10.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.195]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f1AFMWk95448 for ; Sat, 10 Feb 2001 10:22:32 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <000501c09375$31a61ac0$c3a811d0@computer> To: References: <15308871.1358@w...> <000801c0936e$2f1ba380$c3a811d0@computer> <002301c09371$438a52a0$126d1d40@v...> Subject: Re: re[2]: [scatterbrains] Question about turn end Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 10:21:49 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" I think that the room for argument is that when you take into account Rule 107 - "No rule-change may take effect earlier than the moment of the completion of the vote that adopted it, even if its wording explicitly states otherwise. No rule-change may have retroactive application." - which would take precedence over 205 by 110. The question is, if your turn began before 312, as it must have, should 312 change the procedure for understanding your turn? Here's a related (though far from perfect) example: you're in Scatterbrains University, and have majored in World Domination. After you have already started the program, SU decides to change the requirements for WD majors. You will still graduate with the requirements that were in effect when you entered the school. Likewise, GWB's tax plan to the contrary, when the US gov proposes a new tax plan it will not affect your taxes until a full tax year has passed. Now GWB's plan is the exception that proves the rule, since he must specifically make it retroactive. (But such retroactivity is prohibited in Scatterbrains-land.) Practically speaking, this lets us finish your turn, and multi-task by starting Bob's at the same time that we figure out a new SK... ----- Original Message ----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia To: Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2001 9:53 AM Subject: Re: re[2]: [scatterbrains] Question about turn end > > Rule205:An adopted rule-change takes full effect at the moment of the > completion of the vote that adopted it. > > > There's room for argument here? I'm on your side, but if this were written > on the bottom of a boardgame's box, you wouldn't think to argue it. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" > To: > Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2001 9:31 AM > Subject: Re: re[2]: [scatterbrains] Question about turn end > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: > > To: > > Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 7:10 PM > > Subject: re[2]: [scatterbrains] Question about turn end > > > > > > > 205 says that 312 is law now, the question is whether part 4 of the > > turn-rule requires SK to record the score for the turn to end. I think > it's > > unfortunate (now that 312's in), but it does. Part 4 should be taken out, > > but until it is, I think we'll be stuck waiting for SK to finish each > turn. > > > > I think that you're right about the future cases (that the SK, in a sense, > > "finishes" the turn), but I think that an argument can be made that 312 > > isn't really law until your turn is over. Thus, e should score this turn, > > and the election of the SK can proceed as Bobby begins his turn. Since > your > > turn began before 312, applying 312 to your turn would be ex post facto. > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From pkirklan@e... Sat Feb 10 13:27:14 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 10 Feb 2001 21:27:13 -0000 Received: (qmail 80727 invoked from network); 10 Feb 2001 21:27:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 10 Feb 2001 21:27:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta2 with SMTP; 10 Feb 2001 21:27:12 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Sat, 10 Feb 2001 15:44:59 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 10 Feb 01 15:36:42 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 10 Feb 01 15:36:36 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 15:36:30 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: re[2]: [scatterbrains] Question about turn end Priority: normal In-reply-to: <000801c0936e$2f1ba380$c3a811d0@computer> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <0114c5944210a21ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 10 Feb 01, at 9:31, Patrick D. Bernardo wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: > Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 7:10 PM > Subject: re[2]: [scatterbrains] Question about turn end > > > > 205 says that 312 is law now, the question is whether part 4 of the > turn-rule requires SK to record the score for the turn to end. I think > it's unfortunate (now that 312's in), but it does. Part 4 should be > taken out, but until it is, I think we'll be stuck waiting for SK to > finish each turn. > > I think that you're right about the future cases (that the SK, in a > sense, "finishes" the turn), but I think that an argument can be made > that 312 isn't really law until your turn is over. Thus, e should > score this turn, and the election of the SK can proceed as Bobby > begins his turn. Since your turn began before 312, applying 312 to > your turn would be ex post facto. > You wrote the law, but it soundst to me. like it takes place in distinct phases. If scoring is a separete phase it would take place under the new law. (i.e., not ex post facto, because it applies to scoring only) if everyone would announce there intentions we could just elect the scorekeeper first by agreement. If anyone thinks 306 needs to be amended then they'll have to propose it. > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981815546/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > -> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From pkirklan@e... Sat Feb 10 13:37:36 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 10 Feb 2001 21:37:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 66859 invoked from network); 10 Feb 2001 21:37:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 10 Feb 2001 21:37:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta3 with SMTP; 10 Feb 2001 22:38:39 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Sat, 10 Feb 2001 15:55:22 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 10 Feb 01 15:47:05 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 10 Feb 01 15:46:50 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 15:46:43 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: re[2]: [scatterbrains] Question about turn end Priority: normal In-reply-to: <000501c09375$31a61ac0$c3a811d0@computer> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <0106c2255210a21ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 10 Feb 01, at 10:21, Patrick D. Bernardo wrote: > I think that the room for argument is that when you take into account > Rule 107 > > - "No rule-change may take effect earlier than the moment of the > completion > of the vote that adopted it, even if its wording explicitly states > otherwise. No rule-change may have retroactive application." - I don't want to be picky but it is only retroactive if you consider scoring to currently be officially "automatic," If it takes place AFTER then it is under the new law. Easier than opinions on this would be if S, B, and F announce thier intentions on running for SK ASAP. > > which would take precedence over 205 by 110. The question is, if your > turn began before 312, as it must have, should 312 change the > procedure for understanding your turn? Here's a related (though far > from perfect) example: you're in Scatterbrains University, and have > majored in World Domination. After you have already started the > program, SU decides to change the requirements for WD majors. You > will still graduate with the requirements that were in effect when you > entered the school. Likewise, GWB's tax plan to the contrary, when > the US gov proposes a new tax plan it will not affect your taxes until > a full tax year has passed. Now GWB's plan is the exception that > proves the rule, since he must specifically make it retroactive. (But > such retroactivity is prohibited in Scatterbrains-land.) > > Practically speaking, this lets us finish your turn, and multi-task by > starting Bob's at the same time that we figure out a new SK... > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Eugene Ventimiglia > To: > Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2001 9:53 AM > Subject: Re: re[2]: [scatterbrains] Question about turn end > > > > > > Rule205:An adopted rule-change takes full effect at the moment > > of the > > completion of the vote that adopted it. > > > > > > There's room for argument here? I'm on your side, but if this were > written > > on the bottom of a boardgame's box, you wouldn't think to argue it. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" > > To: > > Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2001 9:31 AM > > Subject: Re: re[2]: [scatterbrains] Question about turn end > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: > > > To: > > > Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 7:10 PM > > > Subject: re[2]: [scatterbrains] Question about turn end > > > > > > > > > > 205 says that 312 is law now, the question is whether part 4 of > > > > the > > > turn-rule requires SK to record the score for the turn to end. I > > > think > > it's > > > unfortunate (now that 312's in), but it does. Part 4 should be > > > taken > out, > > > but until it is, I think we'll be stuck waiting for SK to finish > > > each > > turn. > > > > > > I think that you're right about the future cases (that the SK, in > > > a > sense, > > > "finishes" the turn), but I think that an argument can be made > > > that 312 isn't really law until your turn is over. Thus, e should > > > score this > turn, > > > and the election of the SK can proceed as Bobby begins his turn. > > > Since > > your > > > turn began before 312, applying 312 to your turn would be ex post > > > facto. > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981818557/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > -> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From barturo@e... Mon Feb 12 05:17:05 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: BArturo@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 12 Feb 2001 13:17:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 80165 invoked from network); 12 Feb 2001 13:17:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 12 Feb 2001 13:17:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 12 Feb 2001 13:17:04 -0000 Received: from batman.ess ([12.31.9.2]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with ESMTP id IAA26668 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 08:17:03 -0500 (EST) Received: by BATMAN with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id <1MR7KT8X>; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 08:11:52 -0500 Message-ID: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF0372F1@BATMAN> To: "'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'" Subject: Scorekeeper Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 08:11:47 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" From: "Arturo, Bob" I Robert F. Arturo do officially announce that I do not plan to run for the office of Scorekeeper at this time. * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at webmaster@e.... From sga5892@n... Mon Feb 12 21:33:19 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: sga5892@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 13 Feb 2001 05:33:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 93240 invoked from network); 13 Feb 2001 05:33:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Feb 2001 05:33:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-gw4.njit.edu) (128.235.251.32) by mta3 with SMTP; 13 Feb 2001 06:34:23 -0000 Received: from mailhost.njit.edu (mailhost.njit.edu [128.235.251.108]) by mail-gw4.njit.edu (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f1D5XHZ21478 for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2001 00:33:17 -0500 Received: from steve0 (dhcp194-216.njit.edu) by mailhost.njit.edu (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9) with SMTP id <0G8O00A08KRF3V@m...> for scatterbrains@egroups.com; Tue, 13 Feb 2001 00:33:15 -0500 (EST) Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Tue, 13 Feb 2001 00:33:42 -0500 Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 00:33:40 -0500 Subject: the office of scorekeeper To: "'scatterbrains@egroups.com'" Reply-to: "sga5892@n..." Message-id: <01C09554.9DECB0A0.sga5892@n...> Organization: NJIT MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit From: "Steven G. Arturo" i, steven arturo, am nominating myself for the office of scorekeeper in the nomic group. pat, i do not mean to come across as your arch enemy in this game (as eug frolics with many, many points). i just would like us to go through the motions of how it is to elect an official, even if my candidacy were an unwanted one. steve From eventi@n... Mon Feb 12 22:05:01 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 13 Feb 2001 06:05:00 -0000 Received: (qmail 47696 invoked from network); 13 Feb 2001 06:05:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Feb 2001 06:05:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 13 Feb 2001 06:04:59 -0000 Received: from win (win.venti.nyic.com [64.29.109.18]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id BAA24726 for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2001 01:04:58 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <000d01c09582$ec7ee480$126d1d40@v...> To: References: <01C09554.9DECB0A0.sga5892@n...> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] the office of scorekeeper Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 01:04:39 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" OK, it's after the self-imposed deadline, but I think we should accept the application. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steven G. Arturo" To: "'scatterbrains@egroups.com'" Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2001 12:33 AM Subject: [scatterbrains] the office of scorekeeper > i, steven arturo, am nominating myself for the office of scorekeeper in the > nomic group. > > pat, i do not mean to come across as your arch enemy in this game (as eug > frolics with many, many points). i just would like us to go through the > motions of how it is to elect an official, even if my candidacy were an > unwanted one. > > steve > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Mon Feb 12 22:08:55 2001 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 55134 invoked from network); 13 Feb 2001 06:08:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Feb 2001 06:08:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hk.egroups.com) (10.1.10.43) by mta1 with SMTP; 13 Feb 2001 06:08:55 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: notify@yahoogroups.com Received: from [10.1.2.52] by hk.egroups.com with NNFMP; 13 Feb 2001 06:08:54 -0000 Date: 13 Feb 2001 06:08:49 -0000 Message-ID: <982044529.278.26633.ac@yahoogroups.com> X-eGroups-Application: poll From: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: New poll for scatterbrains MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Enter your vote today! A new poll has been created for the scatterbrains group: Who should be the Scorekeeper o Steven Arturo o Patrick Bernardo To vote, please visit the following web page: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scatterbrains/polls Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the Yahoo! Groups web site listed above. Thanks! Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms From bernardo@c... Tue Feb 13 04:38:33 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 13 Feb 2001 12:38:32 -0000 Received: (qmail 12818 invoked from network); 13 Feb 2001 12:38:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Feb 2001 12:38:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta1 with SMTP; 13 Feb 2001 12:38:31 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-09.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.194]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f1DCcTk37801 for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2001 07:38:29 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <000c01c095b9$c5afe020$c2a811d0@computer> To: References: <01C09554.9DECB0A0.sga5892@n...> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] the office of scorekeeper Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 07:37:46 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" Aargh! Steven must die! I'm kidding, Steve. That's cool. But you *will* be my arch-enemy if you don't start using caps. :) ----- Original Message ----- From: Steven G. Arturo To: 'scatterbrains@egroups.com' Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2001 12:33 AM Subject: [scatterbrains] the office of scorekeeper > i, steven arturo, am nominating myself for the office of scorekeeper in the > nomic group. > > pat, i do not mean to come across as your arch enemy in this game (as eug > frolics with many, many points). i just would like us to go through the > motions of how it is to elect an official, even if my candidacy were an > unwanted one. > > steve > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From f_hemker@h... Tue Feb 13 07:13:20 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: f_hemker@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 13 Feb 2001 15:13:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 74045 invoked from network); 13 Feb 2001 15:13:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Feb 2001 15:13:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO f19.egroups.com) (10.1.2.136) by mta1 with SMTP; 13 Feb 2001 15:13:19 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: f_hemker@h... Received: from [10.1.2.55] by f19.egroups.com with NNFMP; 13 Feb 2001 15:13:18 -0000 Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 15:13:16 -0000 To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: New poll for scatterbrains Message-ID: <96biuc+mk48@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: <982044529.278.26633.ac@yahoogroups.com> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 678 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 63.82.115.205 From: f_hemker@h... Shouldn't there have been a choice for none of the above? Or a write in space? -Fritz --- In scatterbrains@y..., scatterbrains@y... wrote: > > Enter your vote today! A new poll has been created for the > scatterbrains group: > > Who should be the Scorekeeper > > o Steven Arturo > o Patrick Bernardo > > > To vote, please visit the following web page: > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scatterbrains/polls > > Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are > not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the Yahoo! Groups > web site listed above. > > Thanks! > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms From eventi@n... Tue Feb 13 07:18:52 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 13 Feb 2001 15:18:52 -0000 Received: (qmail 45256 invoked from network); 13 Feb 2001 15:18:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 13 Feb 2001 15:18:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 13 Feb 2001 15:18:52 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id KAA26595 for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2001 10:18:51 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: New poll for scatterbrains Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 10:20:22 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <96biuc+mk48@eGroups.com> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" Mechanical difficulties: Yahoo Groups doesn't allow write ins, and I didn't think of None Of The Above. You could announce your intent to abstain or write in to the list, I suppose. Or I could re-design the poll, but we'd lose the vote so far. --e > -----Original Message----- > From: f_hemker@h... [mailto:f_hemker@h...] > Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2001 10:13 AM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: New poll for scatterbrains > > > Shouldn't there have been a choice for none of the above? Or a > write in space? > > -Fritz > > --- In scatterbrains@y..., scatterbrains@y... wrote: > > > > Enter your vote today! A new poll has been created for the > > scatterbrains group: > > > > Who should be the Scorekeeper > > > > o Steven Arturo > > o Patrick Bernardo > > > > > > To vote, please visit the following web page: > > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scatterbrains/polls > > > > Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are > > not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the Yahoo! > Groups > > web site listed above. > > > > Thanks! > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From f_hemker@h... Tue Feb 13 07:27:30 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: f_hemker@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 13 Feb 2001 15:27:30 -0000 Received: (qmail 42758 invoked from network); 13 Feb 2001 15:27:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Feb 2001 15:27:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ef.egroups.com) (10.1.2.111) by mta1 with SMTP; 13 Feb 2001 15:27:29 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: f_hemker@h... Received: from [10.1.2.43] by ef.egroups.com with NNFMP; 13 Feb 2001 15:27:29 -0000 Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 15:27:28 -0000 To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: New poll for scatterbrains Message-ID: <96bjp0+6l89@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 1630 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 63.82.115.205 From: f_hemker@h... I suppose we could just chalk this up for this to remember for next time. No worries, I cast my vote. I just wondered if perhaps there were members who were conflicted. -Fritz --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Eugene Ventimiglia" wrote: > Mechanical difficulties: Yahoo Groups doesn't allow write ins, and I didn't > think of None Of The Above. You could announce your intent to abstain or > write in to the list, I suppose. Or I could re-design the poll, but we'd > lose the vote so far. > --e > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: f_hemker@h... [mailto:f_hemker@h...] > > Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2001 10:13 AM > > To: scatterbrains@y... > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: New poll for scatterbrains > > > > > > Shouldn't there have been a choice for none of the above? Or a > > write in space? > > > > -Fritz > > > > --- In scatterbrains@y..., scatterbrains@y... wrote: > > > > > > Enter your vote today! A new poll has been created for the > > > scatterbrains group: > > > > > > Who should be the Scorekeeper > > > > > > o Steven Arturo > > > o Patrick Bernardo > > > > > > > > > To vote, please visit the following web page: > > > > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scatterbrains/polls > > > > > > Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are > > > not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the Yahoo! > > Groups > > > web site listed above. > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > From barturo@e... Tue Feb 13 07:41:10 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: BArturo@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 13 Feb 2001 15:41:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 53544 invoked from network); 13 Feb 2001 15:41:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Feb 2001 15:41:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 13 Feb 2001 15:41:09 -0000 Received: from batman.ess ([12.31.9.2]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA28752 for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2001 10:40:58 -0500 (EST) Received: by BATMAN with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id <1MR7KT9X>; Tue, 13 Feb 2001 10:35:35 -0500 Message-ID: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF0372FC@BATMAN> To: "'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'" Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: New poll for scatterbrains Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 10:35:30 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C095D2.98FCD0B0" From: "Arturo, Bob" ------_=_NextPart_001_01C095D2.98FCD0B0 Content-Type: text/plain Like me -----Original Message----- From: f_hemker@h... [mailto:f_hemker@h...] Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2001 10:27 AM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: New poll for scatterbrains I suppose we could just chalk this up for this to remember for next time. No worries, I cast my vote. I just wondered if perhaps there were members who were conflicted. -Fritz --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Eugene Ventimiglia" wrote: > Mechanical difficulties: Yahoo Groups doesn't allow write ins, and I didn't > think of None Of The Above. You could announce your intent to abstain or > write in to the list, I suppose. Or I could re-design the poll, but we'd > lose the vote so far. > --e > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: f_hemker@h... [mailto:f_hemker@h...] > > Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2001 10:13 AM > > To: scatterbrains@y... > > Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: New poll for scatterbrains > > > > > > Shouldn't there have been a choice for none of the above? Or a > > write in space? > > > > -Fritz > > > > --- In scatterbrains@y..., scatterbrains@y... wrote: > > > > > > Enter your vote today! A new poll has been created for the > > > scatterbrains group: > > > > > > Who should be the Scorekeeper > > > > > > o Steven Arturo > > > o Patrick Bernardo > > > > > > > > > To vote, please visit the following web page: > > > > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scatterbrains/polls > > > > > > Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are > > > not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the Yahoo! > > Groups > > > web site listed above. > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor www. .com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at webmaster@e.... ------_=_NextPart_001_01C095D2.98FCD0B0 Content-Type: text/html Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
    Like=20 me
    -----Original Message-----
    From: f_hemker@h...= =20 [mailto:f_hemker@h...]
    Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2001 = 10:27=20 AM
    To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com
    Subject:=20 [scatterbrains] Re: New poll for scatterbrains

    I= =20 suppose we could just chalk this up for this to remember for
    next=20 time.

    No worries, I cast my vote.  I just wondered if perhaps= =20 there were
    members who were conflicted.

    -Fritz
    --- In=20 scatterbrains@y..., "Eugene Ventimiglia" <eventi@n...>=20
    wrote:
    > Mechanical difficulties: Yahoo Groups doesn't allow wr= ite=20 ins,
    and I didn't
    > think of None Of The Above. You could annou= nce=20 your intent to
    abstain or
    > write in to the list, I suppose.&nb= sp;=20 Or I could re-design the poll, but
    we'd
    > lose the vote so=20 far.
    >       --e
    >
    > >=20 -----Original Message-----
    > > From: f_hemker@h...=20 [mailto:f_hemker@h...]
    > > Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2001 10:1= 3=20 AM
    > > To: scatterbrains@y...
    > > Subject: [scatterbrai= ns]=20 Re: New poll for scatterbrains
    > >
    > >
    > >=20 Shouldn't there have been a choice for none of the above? 
    Or=20 a
    > > write in space?
    > >
    > > -Fritz
    >=20 >
    > > --- In scatterbrains@y..., scatterbrains@y... wrote:>=20 > >
    > > > Enter your vote today!  A new poll has b= een=20 created for the
    > > > scatterbrains group:
    > >=20 >
    > > > Who should be the Scorekeeper
    > > >>=20 > >   o Steven Arturo
    > > >   o Pat= rick=20 Bernardo
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > To vote, p= lease=20 visit the following web page:
    > > >
    > > > http://groups.= yahoo.com/group/scatterbrains/polls
    >=20 > >
    > > > Note: Please do not reply to this message. Po= ll=20 votes are
    > > > not collected via email. To vote, you must go= to=20 the Yahoo!
    > > Groups
    > > > web site listed=20 above.
    > > >
    > > > Thanks!
    > > >
    &= gt;=20 > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
    > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/term= s
    >=20 >
    > >
    > >
    > > To unsubscribe from this grou= p,=20 send an email to:
    > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com
    &= gt;=20 >
    > >
    > >



    To=20 unsubscribe from this group, send an email=20 to:
    scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com




    * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the s= pecified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that= any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. <= /FONT>

    If you are not the specified recipient,= please notify us at webmaster@e....



    ------_=_NextPart_001_01C095D2.98FCD0B0-- From pkirklan@e... Tue Feb 13 08:21:13 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 13 Feb 2001 16:21:13 -0000 Received: (qmail 73814 invoked from network); 13 Feb 2001 16:21:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Feb 2001 16:21:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta3 with SMTP; 13 Feb 2001 17:22:17 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Tue, 13 Feb 2001 10:38:30 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 13 Feb 01 10:30:51 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 13 Feb 01 10:30:38 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 10:30:36 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: New poll for scatterbrains Priority: normal In-reply-to: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF0372FC@BATMAN> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <018643038160d21ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" that should do it. From eventi@n... Tue Feb 13 08:28:43 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 13 Feb 2001 16:28:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 97294 invoked from network); 13 Feb 2001 16:28:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Feb 2001 16:28:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 13 Feb 2001 17:29:46 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id LAA03595 for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2001 11:28:39 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: New poll for scatterbrains Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 11:30:10 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <018643038160d21ISWEBNT@d...> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" This is really too f'in funny > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2001 11:31 AM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: New poll for scatterbrains > > > that should do it. > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Tue Feb 13 08:29:04 2001 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 98482 invoked from network); 13 Feb 2001 16:29:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Feb 2001 16:29:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ho.egroups.com) (10.1.2.219) by mta1 with SMTP; 13 Feb 2001 16:29:04 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: notify@yahoogroups.com Received: from [10.1.10.114] by ho.egroups.com with NNFMP; 13 Feb 2001 16:29:04 -0000 Date: 13 Feb 2001 16:29:03 -0000 Message-ID: <982081743.2240.45775.f6@yahoogroups.com> X-eGroups-Application: polls From: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Poll results for scatterbrains MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The following scatterbrains poll is now closed. Here are the final results: POLL QUESTION: Who should be the Scorekeeper CHOICES AND RESULTS - Steven Arturo, 3 votes, 50.00% - Patrick Bernardo, 3 votes, 50.00% INDIVIDUAL VOTES - Steven Arturo - barturo@e... - f_hemker@h... - sga5892@n... - Patrick Bernardo - bernardo@c... - pkirklan@e... - eventi@c... For more information about this group, please visit http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scatterbrains For help with Yahoo! Groups, please visit http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms From scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Tue Feb 13 08:39:05 2001 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 56813 invoked from network); 13 Feb 2001 16:39:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Feb 2001 16:39:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mu.egroups.com) (10.1.1.40) by mta1 with SMTP; 13 Feb 2001 16:39:04 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: notify@yahoogroups.com Received: from [10.1.10.69] by mu.egroups.com with NNFMP; 13 Feb 2001 16:39:04 -0000 Date: 13 Feb 2001 16:39:00 -0000 Message-ID: <982082340.574.99918.jd@yahoogroups.com> X-eGroups-Application: poll From: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: New poll for scatterbrains MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Enter your vote today! A new poll has been created for the scatterbrains group: Who should be the new Scorekeeper? (RUNOFF) o Steven Arturo o Patrick Bernardo o Joe Walsh (None of the Above) To vote, please visit the following web page: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scatterbrains/polls Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the Yahoo! Groups web site listed above. Thanks! Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms From pkirklan@e... Tue Feb 13 08:44:01 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 13 Feb 2001 16:44:01 -0000 Received: (qmail 71421 invoked from network); 13 Feb 2001 16:44:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Feb 2001 16:44:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta3 with SMTP; 13 Feb 2001 17:45:05 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Tue, 13 Feb 2001 11:01:19 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 13 Feb 01 10:53:39 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 13 Feb 01 10:53:15 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 10:53:12 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Poll results for scatterbrains Priority: normal In-reply-to: <982081743.2240.45775.f6@yahoogroups.com> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <015e21901170d21ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" Wait wait I accidentally voted for Pat Buchanan OR Just ask Sandra Day O Conner From f_hemker@h... Tue Feb 13 08:47:04 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: f_hemker@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 13 Feb 2001 16:47:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 80020 invoked from network); 13 Feb 2001 16:47:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Feb 2001 16:47:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mw.egroups.com) (10.1.2.2) by mta1 with SMTP; 13 Feb 2001 16:47:03 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: f_hemker@h... Received: from [10.1.2.208] by mw.egroups.com with NNFMP; 13 Feb 2001 16:47:02 -0000 Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 16:47:01 -0000 To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Run Off Election Message-ID: <96boe5+i0s4@eGroups.com> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 178 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 63.82.115.205 From: f_hemker@h... Perhaps we should hear from the candidates regarding their suitability. Of course, they could also grease the wheels a bit... Just don't end up like poor Arron Burr. -Fritz From sga5892@n... Tue Feb 13 08:54:53 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: sga5892@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 13 Feb 2001 16:54:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 73342 invoked from network); 13 Feb 2001 16:54:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Feb 2001 16:54:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-gw3.njit.edu) (128.235.251.11) by mta1 with SMTP; 13 Feb 2001 16:54:49 -0000 Received: from mailhost.njit.edu (mailhost.njit.edu [128.235.251.108]) by mail-gw3.njit.edu (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f1DGsni24645 for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2001 11:54:49 -0500 Received: from steve0 (dhcp194-216.njit.edu) by mailhost.njit.edu (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9) with SMTP id <0G8P00BHEGBB6E@m...> for scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com; Tue, 13 Feb 2001 11:54:47 -0500 (EST) Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Tue, 13 Feb 2001 11:55:14 -0500 Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 11:55:12 -0500 Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Poll results for scatterbrains To: "'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'" Reply-to: "sga5892@n..." Message-id: <01C095B3.D3255E20.sga5892@n...> Organization: NJIT MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit From: "Steven G. Arturo" i voted for myself? how stupid can i be! -----Original Message----- From: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com [SMTP:scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2001 11:29 AM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: [scatterbrains] Poll results for scatterbrains The following scatterbrains poll is now closed. Here are the final results: POLL QUESTION: Who should be the Scorekeeper CHOICES AND RESULTS - Steven Arturo, 3 votes, 50.00% - Patrick Bernardo, 3 votes, 50.00% INDIVIDUAL VOTES - Steven Arturo - barturo@e... - f_hemker@h... - sga5892@n... - Patrick Bernardo - bernardo@c... - pkirklan@e... - eventi@c... For more information about this group, please visit http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scatterbrains For help with Yahoo! Groups, please visit http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com From bernardo@c... Tue Feb 13 23:08:41 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 14 Feb 2001 07:08:40 -0000 Received: (qmail 80026 invoked from network); 14 Feb 2001 07:08:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 14 Feb 2001 07:08:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta3 with SMTP; 14 Feb 2001 08:09:45 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-02.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.187]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f1E78ck05387 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 02:08:39 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <001701c09654$db5e8d40$bba811d0@computer> To: References: <96biuc+mk48@eGroups.com> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: New poll for scatterbrains Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 02:07:54 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" Hey thanks a lot! ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2001 10:13 AM Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: New poll for scatterbrains > Shouldn't there have been a choice for none of the above? Or a > write in space? > > -Fritz > > --- In scatterbrains@y..., scatterbrains@y... wrote: > > > > Enter your vote today! A new poll has been created for the > > scatterbrains group: > > > > Who should be the Scorekeeper > > > > o Steven Arturo > > o Patrick Bernardo > > > > > > To vote, please visit the following web page: > > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scatterbrains/polls > > > > Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are > > not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the Yahoo! > Groups > > web site listed above. > > > > Thanks! > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Tue Feb 13 23:10:10 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 14 Feb 2001 07:10:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 94701 invoked from network); 14 Feb 2001 07:10:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 14 Feb 2001 07:10:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta1 with SMTP; 14 Feb 2001 07:10:09 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-02.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.187]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f1E7A7k05459 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 02:10:07 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <003d01c09655$10603160$bba811d0@computer> To: References: <96boe5+i0s4@eGroups.com> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Run Off Election Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 02:09:23 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" I plan on shooting all those who oppose me. ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2001 11:47 AM Subject: [scatterbrains] Run Off Election > Perhaps we should hear from the candidates regarding their > suitability. Of course, they could also grease the wheels a bit... > > Just don't end up like poor Arron Burr. > > > -Fritz > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From f_hemker@h... Wed Feb 14 05:59:49 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: f_hemker@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 14 Feb 2001 13:59:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 63634 invoked from network); 14 Feb 2001 13:58:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 14 Feb 2001 13:58:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO c9.egroups.com) (10.1.2.66) by mta1 with SMTP; 14 Feb 2001 13:58:57 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: f_hemker@h... Received: from [10.1.2.207] by c9.egroups.com with NNFMP; 14 Feb 2001 13:58:57 -0000 Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 13:58:57 -0000 To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: Run Off Election Message-ID: <96e2v1+nubl@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: <003d01c09655$10603160$bba811d0@computer> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 723 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 63.82.115.205 From: f_hemker@h... I will not get my comeuppance. Do you hear me? No comeuppance! No comeuppance! -Fritz --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Patrick D. Bernardo" wrote: > I plan on shooting all those who oppose me. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: > Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2001 11:47 AM > Subject: [scatterbrains] Run Off Election > > > > Perhaps we should hear from the candidates regarding their > > suitability. Of course, they could also grease the wheels a bit... > > > > Just don't end up like poor Arron Burr. > > > > > > -Fritz > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > From scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Wed Feb 14 06:24:09 2001 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 81601 invoked from network); 14 Feb 2001 14:23:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 14 Feb 2001 14:23:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hl.egroups.com) (10.1.10.44) by mta1 with SMTP; 14 Feb 2001 14:23:53 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: notify@yahoogroups.com Received: from [10.1.10.118] by hl.egroups.com with NNFMP; 14 Feb 2001 14:23:53 -0000 Date: 14 Feb 2001 14:23:51 -0000 Message-ID: <982160631.296.27283.fc@yahoogroups.com> X-eGroups-Application: polls From: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Poll results for scatterbrains MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The following scatterbrains poll is now closed. Here are the final results: POLL QUESTION: Who should be the new Scorekeeper? (RUNOFF) CHOICES AND RESULTS - Steven Arturo, 1 votes, 16.67% - Patrick Bernardo, 4 votes, 66.67% - Joe Walsh (None of the Above), 1 votes, 16.67% INDIVIDUAL VOTES - Steven Arturo - f_hemker@h... - Patrick Bernardo - bernardo@c... - sga5892@n... - pkirklan@e... - eventi@c... - Joe Walsh (None of the Above) - barturo@e... For more information about this group, please visit http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scatterbrains For help with Yahoo! Groups, please visit http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms From f_hemker@h... Wed Feb 14 07:15:04 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: f_hemker@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 14 Feb 2001 15:14:57 -0000 Received: (qmail 42280 invoked from network); 14 Feb 2001 15:13:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 14 Feb 2001 15:13:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ml.egroups.com) (10.1.1.31) by mta1 with SMTP; 14 Feb 2001 15:13:30 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: f_hemker@h... Received: from [10.1.10.100] by ml.egroups.com with NNFMP; 14 Feb 2001 15:13:29 -0000 Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 15:13:25 -0000 To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: Poll results for scatterbrains Message-ID: <96e7al+o8rp@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: <982160631.296.27283.fc@yahoogroups.com> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 993 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 63.82.115.205 From: f_hemker@h... Wait a second. Steven didn't even vote for himself? Grrr.... -Fritz, who won't be getting his comeuppance either. --- In scatterbrains@y..., scatterbrains@y... wrote: > > The following scatterbrains poll is now closed. Here are the > final results: > > > POLL QUESTION: Who should be the new Scorekeeper? > (RUNOFF) > > CHOICES AND RESULTS > - Steven Arturo, 1 votes, 16.67% > - Patrick Bernardo, 4 votes, 66.67% > - Joe Walsh (None of the Above), 1 votes, 16.67% > > INDIVIDUAL VOTES > - Steven Arturo > - f_hemker@h... > - Patrick Bernardo > - bernardo@c... > - sga5892@n... > - pkirklan@e... > - eventi@c... > - Joe Walsh (None of the Above) > - barturo@e... > > > For more information about this group, please visit > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scatterbrains > > For help with Yahoo! Groups, please visit > http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/ > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms From bernardo@c... Wed Feb 14 07:30:47 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 14 Feb 2001 15:30:46 -0000 Received: (qmail 78416 invoked from network); 14 Feb 2001 15:30:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 14 Feb 2001 15:30:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta3 with SMTP; 14 Feb 2001 16:31:25 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-17.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.202]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f1EFUIk41459 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 10:30:19 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <001301c0969a$f0e2cfa0$caa811d0@computer> To: References: <982160631.296.27283.fc@yahoogroups.com> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Poll results for scatterbrains Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 10:29:35 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" I want to thank my fellow citizens for their wisdom and good taste. I will give my first SK report after I kill Socrates. ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 9:23 AM Subject: [scatterbrains] Poll results for scatterbrains > > The following scatterbrains poll is now closed. Here are the > final results: > > > POLL QUESTION: Who should be the new Scorekeeper? > (RUNOFF) > > CHOICES AND RESULTS > - Steven Arturo, 1 votes, 16.67% > - Patrick Bernardo, 4 votes, 66.67% > - Joe Walsh (None of the Above), 1 votes, 16.67% > > INDIVIDUAL VOTES > - Steven Arturo > - f_hemker@h... > - Patrick Bernardo > - bernardo@c... > - sga5892@n... > - pkirklan@e... > - eventi@c... > - Joe Walsh (None of the Above) > - barturo@e... > > > For more information about this group, please visit > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scatterbrains > > For help with Yahoo! Groups, please visit > http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/ > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From barturo@e... Wed Feb 14 07:36:15 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: BArturo@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 14 Feb 2001 15:36:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 13847 invoked from network); 14 Feb 2001 15:35:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 14 Feb 2001 15:35:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 14 Feb 2001 16:36:41 -0000 Received: from batman.ess ([12.31.9.2]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA06726 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 10:35:34 -0500 (EST) Received: by BATMAN with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id <1MR7KT0P>; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 10:30:15 -0500 Message-ID: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF0372FE@BATMAN> To: "'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'" Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Poll results for scatterbrains Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 10:30:13 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C0969B.066F5230" From: "Arturo, Bob" ------_=_NextPart_001_01C0969B.066F5230 Content-Type: text/plain Can you play the guitar? -----Original Message----- From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 10:30 AM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Poll results for scatterbrains I want to thank my fellow citizens for their wisdom and good taste. I will give my first SK report after I kill Socrates. ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 9:23 AM Subject: [scatterbrains] Poll results for scatterbrains > > The following scatterbrains poll is now closed. Here are the > final results: > > > POLL QUESTION: Who should be the new Scorekeeper? > (RUNOFF) > > CHOICES AND RESULTS > - Steven Arturo, 1 votes, 16.67% > - Patrick Bernardo, 4 votes, 66.67% > - Joe Walsh (None of the Above), 1 votes, 16.67% > > INDIVIDUAL VOTES > - Steven Arturo > - f_hemker@h... > - Patrick Bernardo > - bernardo@c... > - sga5892@n... > - pkirklan@e... > - eventi@c... > - Joe Walsh (None of the Above) > - barturo@e... > > > For more information about this group, please visit > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scatterbrains > > For help with Yahoo! Groups, please visit > http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/ > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor Classmates.com Click here for Classmates.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at webmaster@e.... ------_=_NextPart_001_01C0969B.066F5230 Content-Type: text/html Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
    Can=20 you play the guitar?
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Patrick D. Bernardo=20 [mailto:bernardo@c...]
    Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 20= 01=20 10:30 AM
    To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com
    Subject: R= e:=20 [scatterbrains] Poll results for scatterbrains

    I= want=20 to thank my fellow citizens for their wisdom and good taste.  I=20 will
    give my first SK report after I kill Socrates.

    ----- Origi= nal=20 Message -----
    From: <scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com>
    To:=20 <scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com>
    Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 20= 01=20 9:23 AM
    Subject: [scatterbrains] Poll results for=20 scatterbrains


    >
    > The following scatterbrains poll is= now=20 closed.  Here are the
    > final results:
    >
    >
    >= POLL=20 QUESTION: Who should be the new Scorekeeper?
    > (RUNOFF)
    >
    = >=20 CHOICES AND RESULTS
    > - Steven Arturo, 1 votes, 16.67%
    > - Pa= trick=20 Bernardo, 4 votes, 66.67%
    > - Joe Walsh (None of the Above), 1 vote= s,=20 16.67%
    >
    > INDIVIDUAL VOTES
    > - Steven=20 Arturo
    >      - f_hemker@h...
    &g= t; -=20 Patrick Bernardo
    >      -=20 bernardo@c...
    >      -=20 sga5892@n...
    >      -=20 pkirklan@e...
    >      -=20 eventi@c...
    > - Joe Walsh (None of the=20 Above)
    >      -=20 barturo@e...
    >
    >
    > For more informati= on=20 about this group, please visit
    > http://groups.yahoo.= com/group/scatterbrains
    >
    >=20 For help with Yahoo! Groups, please visit
    > http://help.yahoo.com/help= /us/groups/
    >
    >=20 Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/term= s
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    &g= t;=20 To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    >=20 scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com
    >
    >
    >



    To=20 unsubscribe from this group, send an email=20 to:
    scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com




    * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the s= pecified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that= any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. <= /FONT>

    If you are not the specified recipient,= please notify us at webmaster@e....



    ------_=_NextPart_001_01C0969B.066F5230-- From sga5892@n... Wed Feb 14 09:09:57 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: sga5892@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 14 Feb 2001 17:09:54 -0000 Received: (qmail 30337 invoked from network); 14 Feb 2001 17:09:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 14 Feb 2001 17:09:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-gw4.njit.edu) (128.235.251.32) by mta2 with SMTP; 14 Feb 2001 17:09:53 -0000 Received: from mailhost.njit.edu (mailhost.njit.edu [128.235.251.108]) by mail-gw4.njit.edu (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f1EH9pc27578 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 12:09:51 -0500 Received: from steve0 (dhcp194-216.njit.edu) by mailhost.njit.edu (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9) with SMTP id <0G8R00CKUBOE83@m...> for scatterbrains@egroups.com; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 12:09:50 -0500 (EST) Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 12:09:50 -0500 Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 12:09:46 -0500 Subject: updating the score To: "'scatterbrains@egroups.com'" Reply-to: "sga5892@n..." Message-id: <01C0967F.07D53480.sga5892@n...> Organization: NJIT MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit From: "Steven G. Arturo" hey bat, update the scores already... didn't have cyanide for socrates this time around? From sga5892@n... Wed Feb 14 09:12:17 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: sga5892@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 14 Feb 2001 17:12:17 -0000 Received: (qmail 52610 invoked from network); 14 Feb 2001 17:07:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 14 Feb 2001 17:07:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-gw4.njit.edu) (128.235.251.32) by mta2 with SMTP; 14 Feb 2001 17:07:52 -0000 Received: from mailhost.njit.edu (mailhost.njit.edu [128.235.251.108]) by mail-gw4.njit.edu (8.10.0/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f1EH7oc27419 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 12:07:51 -0500 Received: from steve0 (dhcp194-216.njit.edu) by mailhost.njit.edu (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9) with SMTP id <0G8R00CINBL183@m...> for scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 12:07:49 -0500 (EST) Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 12:07:49 -0500 Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 12:07:48 -0500 Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Poll results for scatterbrains To: "'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'" Reply-to: "sga5892@n..." Message-id: <01C0967E.C0226860.sga5892@n...> Organization: NJIT MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit From: "Steven G. Arturo" i concede the office of scorekeeper to mr. bernardo. due to the lack of a judicial branch that i can adequately exploit (a counsel might be able to sway my position on this), i will not contest the results of this election, nor the polling practices of this section of the population. steve0 -----Original Message----- From: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com [SMTP:scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 9:24 AM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: [scatterbrains] Poll results for scatterbrains The following scatterbrains poll is now closed. Here are the final results: POLL QUESTION: Who should be the new Scorekeeper? (RUNOFF) CHOICES AND RESULTS - Steven Arturo, 1 votes, 16.67% - Patrick Bernardo, 4 votes, 66.67% - Joe Walsh (None of the Above), 1 votes, 16.67% INDIVIDUAL VOTES - Steven Arturo - f_hemker@h... - Patrick Bernardo - bernardo@c... - sga5892@n... - pkirklan@e... - eventi@c... - Joe Walsh (None of the Above) - barturo@e... For more information about this group, please visit http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scatterbrains For help with Yahoo! Groups, please visit http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com From eventi@n... Wed Feb 14 09:22:38 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 14 Feb 2001 17:22:37 -0000 Received: (qmail 71199 invoked from network); 14 Feb 2001 17:22:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 14 Feb 2001 17:22:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 14 Feb 2001 18:23:08 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id MAA17353 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 12:22:03 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Poll results for scatterbrains Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 12:23:33 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <01C0967E.C0226860.sga5892@n...> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" You might have half if a case IF YOU VOTED FOR YOURSELF!!!!!! > -----Original Message----- > From: Steven G. Arturo [mailto:sga5892@n...] > Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 12:08 PM > To: 'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com' > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Poll results for scatterbrains > > > i concede the office of scorekeeper to mr. bernardo. due to the > lack of a > judicial branch that i can adequately exploit (a counsel might be able to > sway my position on this), i will not contest the results of this > election, > nor the polling practices of this section of the population. > > steve0 > > -----Original Message----- > From: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com [SMTP:scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com] > Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 9:24 AM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [scatterbrains] Poll results for scatterbrains > > > The following scatterbrains poll is now closed. Here are the > final results: > > > POLL QUESTION: Who should be the new Scorekeeper? > (RUNOFF) > > CHOICES AND RESULTS > - Steven Arturo, 1 votes, 16.67% > - Patrick Bernardo, 4 votes, 66.67% > - Joe Walsh (None of the Above), 1 votes, 16.67% > > INDIVIDUAL VOTES > - Steven Arturo > - f_hemker@h... > - Patrick Bernardo > - bernardo@c... > - sga5892@n... > - pkirklan@e... > - eventi@c... > - Joe Walsh (None of the Above) > - barturo@e... > > > For more information about this group, please visit > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scatterbrains > > For help with Yahoo! Groups, please visit > http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/ > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From pkirklan@e... Wed Feb 14 11:54:20 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 14 Feb 2001 19:54:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 63501 invoked from network); 14 Feb 2001 19:54:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 14 Feb 2001 19:54:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta2 with SMTP; 14 Feb 2001 19:54:07 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Wed, 14 Feb 2001 14:12:10 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 14 Feb 01 14:03:45 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 14 Feb 01 14:03:38 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 14:03:34 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] updating the score Priority: normal In-reply-to: <01C0967F.07D53480.sga5892@n...> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <01a741012200e21ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 14 Feb 01, at 12:09, Steven G. Arturo wrote: What if Athens used a butterfly ballot > hey bat, update the scores already... didn't have cyanide for socrates > this time around? > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/982170604/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > -> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Wed Feb 14 12:26:36 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 14 Feb 2001 20:26:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 58134 invoked from network); 14 Feb 2001 20:26:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 14 Feb 2001 20:26:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta3 with SMTP; 14 Feb 2001 21:27:39 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-17.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.202]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f1EKQXk69202 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 15:26:33 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <000b01c096c4$52d1a000$caa811d0@computer> To: References: <01C0967F.07D53480.sga5892@n...> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] updating the score Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 15:25:48 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" Hemlock, Steve, hemlock. ----- Original Message ----- From: Steven G. Arturo To: 'scatterbrains@egroups.com' Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 12:09 PM Subject: [scatterbrains] updating the score > hey bat, update the scores already... didn't have cyanide for socrates this time around? > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Wed Feb 14 12:40:12 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 14 Feb 2001 20:40:12 -0000 Received: (qmail 76429 invoked from network); 14 Feb 2001 20:40:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 14 Feb 2001 20:40:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta1 with SMTP; 14 Feb 2001 20:40:11 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-17.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.202]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f1EKe9k70249 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 15:40:09 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <003901c096c6$399aa120$caa811d0@computer> To: Subject: Score report for Round 312 Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 15:39:25 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0036_01C0969C.4F7E0F60" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" ------=_NextPart_000_0036_01C0969C.4F7E0F60 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Friends, Scatterbrainers, countrymen: lend me your eyes. I come not to smi= te and punish, but to praise and reward. Here, with all solemnity and power vested in me, are the scores from Round = 312*: Eugene Ventimiglia gets 10 points for passage of Rule 312. (4/6*15) Steven Arturo gets 10 points for voting against successful Rule 312 (Vid. 2= 04) Paul Kirkland gets 10 points for voting against successful Rule 312 (Vid. 2= 04) The rest shall remain as they are. (Get thee to a brewery (bar, really, bu= t it doesn't really work as well)) *For the purpose of clarity, I will refer to scoring as Round N, where N is= the same number as the Proposal. As of now, the rank order is as follows: EV:64 SA:39 PB:38 BA:20 FH:18.5 PK:10.5 ------=_NextPart_000_0036_01C0969C.4F7E0F60 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
    Friends, Scatterbrainers, countrymen: lend= me your=20 eyes.  I come not to smite and punish, but to praise and=20 reward.
     
    Here, with all solemnity and power vested = in me,=20 are the scores from Round 312*:
     
    Eugene Ventimiglia gets 10 points for pass= age of=20 Rule 312. (4/6*15)
    Steven Arturo gets 10 points for voting ag= ainst=20 successful Rule 312 (Vid. 204)
    Paul Kirkland gets 10 points for voting ag= ainst=20 successful Rule 312 (Vid. 204)
     
    The rest shall remain as they are.  (= Get thee=20 to a brewery (bar, really, but it doesn't really work as well))
     
     
    *For the purpose of clarity, I will refer = to=20 scoring as Round N, where N is the same number as the Proposal.
     
    As of now, the rank order is as=20 follows:
     
    EV:64
    SA:39
    PB:38
    BA:20
    FH:18.5
    PK:10.5
    ------=_NextPart_000_0036_01C0969C.4F7E0F60-- From barturo@e... Wed Feb 14 12:48:46 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: BArturo@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 14 Feb 2001 20:48:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 20944 invoked from network); 14 Feb 2001 20:48:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 14 Feb 2001 20:48:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 14 Feb 2001 21:49:46 -0000 Received: from batman.ess ([12.31.9.2]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with ESMTP id PAA07859 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 15:48:41 -0500 (EST) Received: by BATMAN with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id <1MR7KT08>; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 15:43:25 -0500 Message-ID: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF037301@BATMAN> To: "'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'" Subject: Proposal 313 Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 15:43:23 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" From: "Arturo, Bob" Begin Proposal 313 Voting on Proposals Voting will take place with the use of Polls. The player Proposing a rule will create a Poll with the following specifications: 1: The Poll question will have the Proposal Number 2: An email will be sent out to all the players detailing the Final Proposal 3: The Poll will include a question accepting or opposing the Proposal 4: All players will submit their vote 5: The Poll will stay open as long as it takes for everyone to vote * If the Poll is not hidden all votes are final. If you would like to change your vote there will be 1 point deducted from your total score for every vote change made. * If the Poll is hidden then the person submitting the proposal MUST vote for their proposal or there will be a 5 point penalty deducted from there score. End Proposal 3113 * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at webmaster@e.... From barturo@e... Wed Feb 14 12:50:07 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: BArturo@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 14 Feb 2001 20:50:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 14199 invoked from network); 14 Feb 2001 20:50:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 14 Feb 2001 20:50:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 14 Feb 2001 20:50:07 -0000 Received: from batman.ess ([12.31.9.2]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with ESMTP id PAA08032 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 15:50:05 -0500 (EST) Received: by BATMAN with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id <1MR7KT00>; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 15:44:49 -0500 Message-ID: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF037302@BATMAN> To: "'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'" Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Score report for Round 312 Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 15:44:48 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C096C6.F85D50D0" From: "Arturo, Bob" ------_=_NextPart_001_01C096C6.F85D50D0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Thanks Mr. Batnardo -----Original Message----- From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 3:39 PM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: [scatterbrains] Score report for Round 312 Friends, Scatterbrainers, countrymen: lend me your eyes. I come not to smite and punish, but to praise and reward. Here, with all solemnity and power vested in me, are the scores from Round 312*: Eugene Ventimiglia gets 10 points for passage of Rule 312. (4/6*15) Steven Arturo gets 10 points for voting against successful Rule 312 (Vid. 204) Paul Kirkland gets 10 points for voting against successful Rule 312 (Vid. 204) The rest shall remain as they are. (Get thee to a brewery (bar, really, but it doesn't really work as well)) *For the purpose of clarity, I will refer to scoring as Round N, where N is the same number as the Proposal. As of now, the rank order is as follows: EV:64 SA:39 PB:38 BA:20 FH:18.5 PK:10.5 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor www. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at webmaster@e.... ------_=_NextPart_001_01C096C6.F85D50D0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
    Thanks=20 Mr. Batnardo
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Patrick D. Bernardo=20 [mailto:bernardo@c...]
    Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 20= 01=20 3:39 PM
    To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com
    Subject:=20 [scatterbrains] Score report for Round 312

    Friends, Scatterbrainers, countrymen: le= nd me=20 your eyes.  I come not to smite and punish, but to praise and=20 reward.
     
    Here, with all solemnity and power veste= d in me,=20 are the scores from Round 312*:
     
    Eugene Ventimiglia gets 10 points for pa= ssage of=20 Rule 312. (4/6*15)
    Steven Arturo gets 10 points for voting = against=20 successful Rule 312 (Vid. 204)
    Paul Kirkland gets 10 points for voting = against=20 successful Rule 312 (Vid. 204)
     
    The rest shall remain as they are. = (Get=20 thee to a brewery (bar, really, but it doesn't really work as=20 well))
     
     
    *For the purpose of clarity, I will refe= r to=20 scoring as Round N, where N is the same number as the Proposal.
     
    As of now, the rank order is as=20 follows:
     
    EV:64
    SA:39
    PB:38
    BA:20
    FH:18.5
    PK:10.5


    To=20 unsubscribe from this group, send an email=20 to:
    scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com




    * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the s= pecified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that= any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. <= /FONT>

    If you are not the specified recipient,= please notify us at webmaster@e....



    ------_=_NextPart_001_01C096C6.F85D50D0-- From pkirklan@e... Wed Feb 14 12:55:23 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 14 Feb 2001 20:55:22 -0000 Received: (qmail 49957 invoked from network); 14 Feb 2001 20:55:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 14 Feb 2001 20:55:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta1 with SMTP; 14 Feb 2001 20:55:21 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Wed, 14 Feb 2001 15:13:15 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 14 Feb 01 15:04:51 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 14 Feb 01 15:04:33 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 15:04:25 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Score report for Round 312 Priority: normal In-reply-to: <003901c096c6$399aa120$caa811d0@computer> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <01ab51513210e21ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 14 Feb 01, at 15:39, Patrick D. Bernardo wrote: Why do I suspect that you've been reading will safire not will shak > Friends, Scatterbrainers, countrymen: lend me your eyes. I come not > to smite and punish, but to praise and reward. > > Here, with all solemnity and power vested in me, are the scores from > Round 312*: > > Eugene Ventimiglia gets 10 points for passage of Rule 312. (4/6*15) > Steven Arturo gets 10 points for voting against successful Rule 312 > (Vid. 204) Paul Kirkland gets 10 points for voting against successful > Rule 312 (Vid. 204) > > The rest shall remain as they are. (Get thee to a brewery (bar, > really, but it doesn't really work as well)) > > > *For the purpose of clarity, I will refer to scoring as Round N, where > N is the same number as the Proposal. > > As of now, the rank order is as follows: > > EV:64 > SA:39 > PB:38 > BA:20 > FH:18.5 > PK:10.5 > From eventi@n... Wed Feb 14 12:55:59 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 14 Feb 2001 20:55:59 -0000 Received: (qmail 30947 invoked from network); 14 Feb 2001 20:55:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 14 Feb 2001 20:55:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 14 Feb 2001 21:57:04 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id PAA08604 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 15:55:59 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Proposal 313 Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 15:57:28 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF037301@BATMAN> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" Somebody buy this man a beer!!! Wouldn't change a thing. Well maybe spelling. > -----Original Message----- > From: Arturo, Bob [mailto:barturo@e...] > Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 3:43 PM > To: 'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com' > Subject: [scatterbrains] Proposal 313 > > > Begin Proposal 313 > > Voting on Proposals > Voting will take place with the use of Polls. The player Proposing a rule > will create a Poll with the following specifications: > 1: The Poll question will have the Proposal Number > 2: An email will be sent out to all the players detailing the Final > Proposal > 3: The Poll will include a question accepting or opposing the > Proposal > 4: All players will submit their vote > 5: The Poll will stay open as long as it takes for everyone to vote > > * If the Poll is not hidden all votes are final. If you would like to > change your vote there will be 1 point deducted from your total > score for every vote change made. > > * If the Poll is hidden then the person submitting the proposal MUST vote > for their proposal or there will be a 5 point penalty > deducted from there > score. > > End Proposal 3113 > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution > or copying > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > webmaster@e.... > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From f_hemker@h... Wed Feb 14 13:17:04 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: f_hemker@h... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 14 Feb 2001 21:17:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 58652 invoked from network); 14 Feb 2001 21:15:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 14 Feb 2001 21:15:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hh.egroups.com) (10.1.10.40) by mta1 with SMTP; 14 Feb 2001 21:15:37 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: f_hemker@h... Received: from [10.1.2.116] by hh.egroups.com with NNFMP; 14 Feb 2001 21:15:37 -0000 Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 21:15:32 -0000 To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: Proposal 313 Message-ID: <96eshk+fp2u@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF037301@BATMAN> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 1596 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 63.82.115.205 From: f_hemker@h... How about abstentions? No time limit on votes? If I don't like a proposal, but everyone else does, I could "filibuster" it for a long time without a time limit of some kind. The game might grind to a halt but for the pigheadedness of one man. Even with the -5 point deduction you might still come out ahead when voting against your own passing proposal. -Fritz --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Arturo, Bob" wrote: > Begin Proposal 313 > > Voting on Proposals > Voting will take place with the use of Polls. The player Proposing a rule > will create a Poll with the following specifications: > 1: The Poll question will have the Proposal Number > 2: An email will be sent out to all the players detailing the Final > Proposal > 3: The Poll will include a question accepting or opposing the > Proposal > 4: All players will submit their vote > 5: The Poll will stay open as long as it takes for everyone to vote > > * If the Poll is not hidden all votes are final. If you would like to > change your vote there will be 1 point deducted from your total > score for every vote change made. > > * If the Poll is hidden then the person submitting the proposal MUST vote > for their proposal or there will be a 5 point penalty deducted from there > score. > > End Proposal 3113 > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > webmaster@e... From eventi@n... Wed Feb 14 13:24:33 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 14 Feb 2001 21:24:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 34122 invoked from network); 14 Feb 2001 21:24:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 14 Feb 2001 21:24:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 14 Feb 2001 21:24:18 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id QAA11475 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 16:24:18 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 313 Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 16:25:47 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <96eshk+fp2u@eGroups.com> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" > How about abstentions? 305 prohibits abstentions. > > No time limit on votes? If I don't like a proposal, but everyone > else does, I could "filibuster" it for a long time without a time limit > of some kind. The game might grind to a halt but for the > pigheadedness of one man. Agreed, but what to do after the time limit? > > Even with the -5 point deduction you might still come out ahead > when voting against your own passing proposal. > > -Fritz > > --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Arturo, Bob" wrote: > > Begin Proposal 313 > > > > Voting on Proposals > > Voting will take place with the use of Polls. The player > Proposing a rule > > will create a Poll with the following specifications: > > 1: The Poll question will have the Proposal Number > > 2: An email will be sent out to all the players detailing the Final > > Proposal > > 3: The Poll will include a question accepting or opposing the > > Proposal > > 4: All players will submit their vote > > 5: The Poll will stay open as long as it takes for everyone to > vote > > > > * If the Poll is not hidden all votes are final. If you would like to > > change your vote there will be 1 point deducted from your total > > score for every vote change made. > > > > * If the Poll is hidden then the person submitting the proposal > MUST vote > > for their proposal or there will be a 5 point penalty deducted > from there > > score. > > > > End Proposal 3113 > > > > > > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution > or copying > > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > > webmaster@e... > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From pkirklan@e... Wed Feb 14 13:27:55 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 14 Feb 2001 21:27:55 -0000 Received: (qmail 22234 invoked from network); 14 Feb 2001 21:27:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 14 Feb 2001 21:27:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta2 with SMTP; 14 Feb 2001 21:27:54 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Wed, 14 Feb 2001 15:45:57 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 14 Feb 01 15:37:32 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 14 Feb 01 15:37:16 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 15:37:06 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Proposal 313 Priority: normal In-reply-to: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF037301@BATMAN> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <01ba15745210e21ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 14 Feb 01, at 15:43, Arturo, Bob wrote: I agree with the spirit of the penalty for voting agaisnt your own proposal, but might this not be better handled in another way. perhaps a future proposal would better make all votes a reflection of one's opinion of the proposal than a calclution of point advantage. What if someone has a genuine change of heart after debate (I will grant that practically it is unlikely that this happen AND the proposal pass), but it seems this should be peritted. p > Begin Proposal 313 > > Voting on Proposals > Voting will take place with the use of Polls. The player Proposing a > rule will create a Poll with the following specifications: > 1: The Poll question will have the Proposal Number > 2: An email will be sent out to all the players detailing the Final > Proposal > 3: The Poll will include a question accepting or opposing the > Proposal > 4: All players will submit their vote > 5: The Poll will stay open as long as it takes for everyone to vote > > * If the Poll is not hidden all votes are final. If you would like to > change your vote there will be 1 point deducted from your total score > for every vote change made. > > * If the Poll is hidden then the person submitting the proposal MUST > vote > for their proposal or there will be a 5 point penalty deducted from > there score. > > End Proposal 3113 > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or > copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not > the specified recipient, please notify us at > webmaster@e.... > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/982183736/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > -> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From pkirklan@e... Wed Feb 14 13:30:53 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 14 Feb 2001 21:30:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 30531 invoked from network); 14 Feb 2001 21:30:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 14 Feb 2001 21:30:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta1 with SMTP; 14 Feb 2001 21:30:52 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Wed, 14 Feb 2001 15:48:56 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 14 Feb 01 15:40:31 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 14 Feb 01 15:40:25 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 15:40:21 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 313 Priority: normal In-reply-to: References: <96eshk+fp2u@eGroups.com> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <019fe5648210e21ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 14 Feb 01, at 16:25, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > > How about abstentions? > > 305 prohibits abstentions. is an active vote to abstain the same as not voting? ike voting none of the above raher than not shown up? This may be for another prop fritz > > > > > No time limit on votes? If I don't like a proposal, but everyone > > else does, I could "filibuster" it for a long time without a time > > limit of some kind. The game might grind to a halt but for the > > pigheadedness of one man. > > Agreed, but what to do after the time limit? > > > > > Even with the -5 point deduction you might still come out ahead when > > voting against your own passing proposal. > > > > -Fritz > > > > --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Arturo, Bob" wrote: > > > Begin Proposal 313 > > > > > > Voting on Proposals > > > Voting will take place with the use of Polls. The player > > Proposing a rule > > > will create a Poll with the following specifications: > > > 1: The Poll question will have the Proposal Number > > > 2: An email will be sent out to all the players detailing the > > > Final Proposal 3: The Poll will include a question accepting or > > > opposing the Proposal 4: All players will submit their vote 5: > > > The Poll will stay open as long as it takes for everyone to > > vote > > > > > > * If the Poll is not hidden all votes are final. If you would > > > like to > > > change your vote there will be 1 point deducted from your total > > > score for every vote change made. > > > > > > * If the Poll is hidden then the person submitting the proposal > > MUST vote > > > for their proposal or there will be a 5 point penalty deducted > > from there > > > score. > > > > > > End Proposal 3113 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > > > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution > > or copying > > > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > > > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > > > webmaster@e... > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/982185874/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > -> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From bernardo@c... Wed Feb 14 13:31:35 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 14 Feb 2001 21:31:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 29346 invoked from network); 14 Feb 2001 21:31:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 14 Feb 2001 21:31:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta1 with SMTP; 14 Feb 2001 21:31:34 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-17.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.202]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f1ELVWk75565 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 16:31:32 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <00d001c096cd$675bb7a0$caa811d0@computer> To: References: Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 313 Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 16:30:49 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" ----- Original Message ----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia > > No time limit on votes? If I don't like a proposal, but everyone > > else does, I could "filibuster" it for a long time without a time limit > > of some kind. The game might grind to a halt but for the > > pigheadedness of one man. > > Agreed, but what to do after the time limit? > Drink beer? From bernardo@c... Wed Feb 14 13:35:07 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 14 Feb 2001 21:35:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 64666 invoked from network); 14 Feb 2001 21:35:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 14 Feb 2001 21:35:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta1 with SMTP; 14 Feb 2001 21:35:06 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-17.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.202]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f1ELZ4k75798 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 16:35:05 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <00d601c096cd$e5f562a0$caa811d0@computer> To: References: <01ba15745210e21ISWEBNT@d...> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Proposal 313 Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 16:34:21 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" > On 14 Feb 01, at 15:43, Glaucon wrote: > > I agree with the spirit of the penalty for voting agaisnt your own > proposal, but might this not be better handled in another way. > perhaps a future proposal would better make all votes a reflection of > one's opinion of the proposal than a calclution of point advantage. > Dear sir, You cannot legislate the state of the soul. Sincerely Plato. (The much-overlooked 52nd letter) > What if someone has a genuine change of heart after debate > (I will grant that practically it is unlikely that this happen AND the > proposal pass), but it seems this should be peritted. > From barturo@e... Wed Feb 14 13:35:18 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: BArturo@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 14 Feb 2001 21:35:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 43328 invoked from network); 14 Feb 2001 21:35:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 14 Feb 2001 21:35:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 14 Feb 2001 21:35:17 -0000 Received: from batman.ess ([12.31.9.2]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with ESMTP id QAA12486 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 16:35:15 -0500 (EST) Received: by BATMAN with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id <1MR7K4AD>; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 16:29:58 -0500 Message-ID: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF037304@BATMAN> To: "'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'" Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 313 Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 16:29:57 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C096CD.473FF5D0" From: "Arturo, Bob" ------_=_NextPart_001_01C096CD.473FF5D0 Content-Type: text/plain I thought about a time limit but if a player decided to hold up the progress of the game because they did not like the proposal then that could be in violation of the game. The player could be called out to vote by a judge and that judge could I guess impose a penalty. -----Original Message----- From: f_hemker@h... [mailto:f_hemker@h...] Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 4:16 PM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 313 How about abstentions? No time limit on votes? If I don't like a proposal, but everyone else does, I could "filibuster" it for a long time without a time limit of some kind. The game might grind to a halt but for the pigheadedness of one man. Even with the -5 point deduction you might still come out ahead when voting against your own passing proposal. -Fritz --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Arturo, Bob" wrote: > Begin Proposal 313 > > Voting on Proposals > Voting will take place with the use of Polls. The player Proposing a rule > will create a Poll with the following specifications: > 1: The Poll question will have the Proposal Number > 2: An email will be sent out to all the players detailing the Final > Proposal > 3: The Poll will include a question accepting or opposing the > Proposal > 4: All players will submit their vote > 5: The Poll will stay open as long as it takes for everyone to vote > > * If the Poll is not hidden all votes are final. If you would like to > change your vote there will be 1 point deducted from your total > score for every vote change made. > > * If the Poll is hidden then the person submitting the proposal MUST vote > for their proposal or there will be a 5 point penalty deducted from there > score. > > End Proposal 3113 > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > webmaster@e... Yahoo! Groups Sponsor Choose 3 DVDs for $0.49 each! Choose 3 DVDs for $0.49 each! To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at webmaster@e.... ------_=_NextPart_001_01C096CD.473FF5D0 Content-Type: text/html Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
    I=20 thought about a time limit but if a player decided to hold up the progress = of=20 the game because they did not like the proposal then that could be in= =20 violation of the game. The player could be called out to vote by a judge an= d=20 that judge could I guess impose a penalty.
     
     -----Original Message-----
    Fr= om:=20 f_hemker@h... [mailto:f_hemker@h...]
    Sent: Wednesda= y,=20 February 14, 2001 4:16 PM
    To:=20 scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com
    Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Propos= al=20 313

    How about abstentions?

    No time limit on=20 votes?  If I don't like a proposal, but everyone
    else does, I co= uld=20 "filibuster" it for a long time without a time limit
    of some kind.&nb= sp;=20 The game might grind to a halt but for the
    pigheadedness of one=20 man.

    Even with the -5 point deduction you might still come out ahe= ad=20
    when voting against your own passing proposal.

    -Fritz

    -= -- In=20 scatterbrains@y..., "Arturo, Bob" <barturo@e...> wrote:
    > Beg= in=20 Proposal 313
    >
    >       Voting on=20 Proposals
    > Voting will take place with the use of Polls. The playe= r=20
    Proposing a rule
    > will create a Poll with the following=20 specifications:
    >       1: The Poll questi= on=20 will have the Proposal Number
    >       2: = An=20 email will be sent out to all the players detailing the Final
    >=20 Proposal
    >       3: The Poll will include = a=20 question accepting or opposing the
    > Proposal
    >=20       4: All players will submit their vote
    &= gt;=20       5: The Poll will stay open as long as it t= akes=20 for everyone to
    vote
    >
    >  * If the Poll is not hidd= en=20 all votes are final. If you would like to
    > change your vote there = will=20 be 1 point deducted from your total
    > score for every vote change=20 made.
    >
    >  * If the Poll is hidden then the person=20 submitting the proposal
    MUST vote
    > for their proposal or there= will=20 be a 5 point penalty       deducted
    from=20 there
    > score.
    >
    > End Proposal 3113
    >
    >= =20
    >
    >
    > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specifie= d=20 recipient of this
    > confidential email, you are hereby notified tha= t any=20 distribution
    or copying
    > of this transmission is strictly=20 prohibited.
    > If you are not the specified recipient, please notif= y us=20 at
    > webmaster@e...



    To=20 unsubscribe from this group, send an email=20 to:
    scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com




    * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the s= pecified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that= any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. <= /FONT>

    If you are not the specified recipient,= please notify us at webmaster@e....



    ------_=_NextPart_001_01C096CD.473FF5D0-- From bernardo@c... Wed Feb 14 13:37:15 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 14 Feb 2001 21:37:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 70724 invoked from network); 14 Feb 2001 21:37:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 14 Feb 2001 21:37:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta2 with SMTP; 14 Feb 2001 21:37:15 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-17.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.202]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f1ELbBk76101 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 16:37:12 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <00e801c096ce$31a68580$caa811d0@computer> To: References: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF037304@BATMAN> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 313 Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 16:36:28 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_00E5_01C096A4.479194E0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" ------=_NextPart_000_00E5_01C096A4.479194E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Improbable. I could not vote, and assert to the judge that "I intend to vo= te, but not right now." There's no way for the judge to ever find me in vi= olation of the rules, since there is no *action* to judge. You know, somebody should of thought of this earlier, and created a chief m= agistracy position. That would have been a good idea.=20=20 ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Arturo, Bob=20 To: 'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'=20 Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 4:29 PM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 313 I thought about a time limit but if a player decided to hold up the progr= ess of the game because they did not like the proposal then that could be i= n violation of the game. The player could be called out to vote by a judge = and that judge could I guess impose a penalty. -----Original Message----- From: f_hemker@h... [mailto:f_hemker@h...] Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 4:16 PM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 313 How about abstentions? No time limit on votes? If I don't like a proposal, but everyone=20 else does, I could "filibuster" it for a long time without a time limit= =20 of some kind. The game might grind to a halt but for the=20 pigheadedness of one man. Even with the -5 point deduction you might still come out ahead=20 when voting against your own passing proposal. -Fritz --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Arturo, Bob" wrote: > Begin Proposal 313 >=20 > Voting on Proposals > Voting will take place with the use of Polls. The player=20 Proposing a rule > will create a Poll with the following specifications: > 1: The Poll question will have the Proposal Number=20 > 2: An email will be sent out to all the players detailing the F= inal > Proposal > 3: The Poll will include a question accepting or opposing the > Proposal > 4: All players will submit their vote > 5: The Poll will stay open as long as it takes for everyone to= =20 vote >=20 > * If the Poll is not hidden all votes are final. If you would like t= o > change your vote there will be 1 point deducted from your total > score for every vote change made. >=20 > * If the Poll is hidden then the person submitting the proposal=20 MUST vote > for their proposal or there will be a 5 point penalty deducted= =20 from there > score. >=20 > End Proposal 3113 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution=20 or copying > of this transmission is strictly prohibited.=20 > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > webmaster@e... To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor=20 =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 Do you know the name you want? Enter the domain name below an= d press GO!=20=20 www.=20=20=20 =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 =20=20=20=20=20=20=20 =20=20=20=20=20=20=20 To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this confide= ntial email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of th= is transmission is strictly prohibited.=20 If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at webmaster@eng= ineeredsecurity.com.=20 ------=_NextPart_000_00E5_01C096A4.479194E0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
    Improbable.  I could not vote, and as= sert to=20 the judge that "I intend to vote, but not right now."  There's no way = for=20 the judge to ever find me in violation of the rules, since there is no *act= ion*=20 to judge.
     
    You know, somebody should of thought of th= is=20 earlier, and created a chief magistracy position.  That would have bee= n a=20 good idea. 
    ----- Original Message -----
    Fro= m:=20 Arturo, Bob
    To: 'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'=
    Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001= 4:29=20 PM
    Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: P= roposal=20 313

    I=20 thought about a time limit but if a player decided to hold up the progres= s of=20 the game because they did not like the proposal then that could be i= n=20 violation of the game. The player could be called out to vote by a judge = and=20 that judge could I guess impose a penalty.
     
     -----Original=20 Message-----
    From: f_hemker@h... [mailto:f_hemker@h...]
    = Sent:=20 Wednesday, February 14, 2001 4:16 PM
    To:=20 scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com
    Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Prop= osal=20 313

    How about abstentions?

    No time limit on=20 votes?  If I don't like a proposal, but everyone
    else does, I = could=20 "filibuster" it for a long time without a time limit
    of some kind.&= nbsp;=20 The game might grind to a halt but for the
    pigheadedness of one=20 man.

    Even with the -5 point deduction you might still come out a= head=20
    when voting against your own passing proposal.

    -Fritz
    ---=20 In scatterbrains@y..., "Arturo, Bob" <barturo@e...> wrote:
    >= ;=20 Begin Proposal 313
    >
    >       Voti= ng on=20 Proposals
    > Voting will take place with the use of Polls. The pla= yer=20
    Proposing a rule
    > will create a Poll with the following=20 specifications:
    >       1: The Poll ques= tion=20 will have the Proposal Number
    >       2= : An=20 email will be sent out to all the players detailing the Final
    >=20 Proposal
    >       3: The Poll will includ= e a=20 question accepting or opposing the
    > Proposal
    >=20       4: All players will submit their vote>=20       5: The Poll will stay open as long as it= =20 takes for everyone to
    vote
    >
    >  * If the Poll is = not=20 hidden all votes are final. If you would like to
    > change your vo= te=20 there will be 1 point deducted from your total
    > score for every = vote=20 change made.
    >
    >  * If the Poll is hidden then the pe= rson=20 submitting the proposal
    MUST vote
    > for their proposal or the= re=20 will be a 5 point penalty       deducted
    f= rom=20 there
    > score.
    >
    > End Proposal 3113
    >
    >= ;=20
    >
    >
    > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specif= ied=20 recipient of this
    > confidential email, you are hereby notified t= hat=20 any distribution
    or copying
    > of this transmission is strictl= y=20 prohibited.
    > If you are not the specified recipient, please not= ify=20 us at
    > webmaster@e...



    To unsubscribe fro= m=20 this group, send an email=20 to:
    scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com




    To=20 unsubscribe from this group, send an email=20 to:
    scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com




    * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the s= pecified=20 recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any=20 distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited.=20

    If you are not the specified recipient,= please=20 notify us at webmaster@e....=20



    ------=_NextPart_000_00E5_01C096A4.479194E0-- From barturo@e... Wed Feb 14 13:37:23 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: BArturo@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 14 Feb 2001 21:37:23 -0000 Received: (qmail 71117 invoked from network); 14 Feb 2001 21:37:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 14 Feb 2001 21:37:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta2 with SMTP; 14 Feb 2001 21:37:22 -0000 Received: from batman.ess ([12.31.9.2]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with ESMTP id QAA12709 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 16:37:22 -0500 (EST) Received: by BATMAN with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id <1MR7K4AF>; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 16:32:05 -0500 Message-ID: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF037305@BATMAN> To: "'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'" Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 313 Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 16:32:05 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C096CD.935E0B50" From: "Arturo, Bob" ------_=_NextPart_001_01C096CD.935E0B50 Content-Type: text/plain -----Original Message----- From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 4:31 PM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 313 ----- Original Message ----- From: Eugene Ventimiglia > > No time limit on votes? If I don't like a proposal, but everyone > > else does, I could "filibuster" it for a long time without a time limit > > of some kind. The game might grind to a halt but for the > > pigheadedness of one man. > > Agreed, but what to do after the time limit? > Drink beer? [Arturo, Bob] How about Buymeabeer.com? Yahoo! Groups Sponsor Choose 3 DVDs for $0.49 each! Choose 3 DVDs for $0.49 each! To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at webmaster@e.... ------_=_NextPart_001_01C096CD.935E0B50 Content-Type: text/html Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
     
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Patrick D. Bernardo=20 [mailto:bernardo@c...]
    Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 20= 01=20 4:31 PM
    To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com
    Subject: Re= :=20 [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 313


    ----- Original Message -----
    From: Eugene Ventimig= lia=20 <eventi@n...>

    > > No time limit on votes?  If= I=20 don't like a proposal, but everyone
    > > else does, I could=20 "filibuster" it for a long time without a time limit
    > > of some= =20 kind.  The game might grind to a halt but for the
    > >=20 pigheadedness of one man.
    >
    > Agreed, but what to do after th= e=20 time limit?
    >
    Drink beer?
    [Arturo,=20 Bob] 
     
    How about=20 Buymeabeer.com? 


    <= BR>To=20 unsubscribe from this group, send an email=20 to:
    scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com




    * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the s= pecified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that= any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. <= /FONT>

    If you are not the specified recipient,= please notify us at webmaster@e....



    ------_=_NextPart_001_01C096CD.935E0B50-- From eventi@n... Wed Feb 14 13:38:09 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 14 Feb 2001 21:38:09 -0000 Received: (qmail 51367 invoked from network); 14 Feb 2001 21:38:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 14 Feb 2001 21:38:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 14 Feb 2001 22:39:13 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id QAA12790 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 16:38:08 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 313 Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 16:39:38 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_00B7_01C096A4.B8959E70" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <00e801c096ce$31a68580$caa811d0@computer> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" ------=_NextPart_000_00B7_01C096A4.B8959E70 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Why don't you do that next time around? -----Original Message----- From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 4:36 PM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 313 Improbable. I could not vote, and assert to the judge that "I intend to vote, but not right now." There's no way for the judge to ever find me in violation of the rules, since there is no *action* to judge. You know, somebody should of thought of this earlier, and created a chief magistracy position. That would have been a good idea. ----- Original Message ----- From: Arturo, Bob To: 'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com' Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 4:29 PM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 313 I thought about a time limit but if a player decided to hold up the progress of the game because they did not like the proposal then that could be in violation of the game. The player could be called out to vote by a judge and that judge could I guess impose a penalty. -----Original Message----- From: f_hemker@h... [mailto:f_hemker@h...] Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 4:16 PM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 313 How about abstentions? No time limit on votes? If I don't like a proposal, but everyone else does, I could "filibuster" it for a long time without a time limit of some kind. The game might grind to a halt but for the pigheadedness of one man. Even with the -5 point deduction you might still come out ahead when voting against your own passing proposal. -Fritz --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Arturo, Bob" wrote: > Begin Proposal 313 > > Voting on Proposals > Voting will take place with the use of Polls. The player Proposing a rule > will create a Poll with the following specifications: > 1: The Poll question will have the Proposal Number > 2: An email will be sent out to all the players detailing the Final > Proposal > 3: The Poll will include a question accepting or opposing the > Proposal > 4: All players will submit their vote > 5: The Poll will stay open as long as it takes for everyone to vote > > * If the Poll is not hidden all votes are final. If you would like to > change your vote there will be 1 point deducted from your total > score for every vote change made. > > * If the Poll is hidden then the person submitting the proposal MUST vote > for their proposal or there will be a 5 point penalty deducted from there > score. > > End Proposal 3113 > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > webmaster@e... To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at webmaster@e.... Yahoo! Groups Sponsor www. .com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com ------=_NextPart_000_00B7_01C096A4.B8959E70 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
    Why=20 don't you do that next time around?
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Patrick D. Bernardo=20 [mailto:bernardo@c...]
    Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 20= 01=20 4:36 PM
    To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com
    Subject: Re= :=20 [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 313

    Improbable.  I could not vote, and = assert to=20 the judge that "I intend to vote, but not right now."  There's no wa= y for=20 the judge to ever find me in violation of the rules, since there is no=20 *action* to judge.
     
    You know, somebody should of thought of = this=20 earlier, and created a chief magistracy position.  That would have b= een a=20 good idea. 
    ----- Original Message -----
    F= rom:=20 Arturo, Bob
    To: 'scatterbrains@yahoogro= ups.com'=20
    Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 20= 01 4:29=20 PM
    Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re:= =20 Proposal 313

    I=20 thought about a time limit but if a player decided to hold up the progr= ess=20 of the game because they did not like the proposal then that could= be=20 in violation of the game. The player could be called out to vote by a j= udge=20 and that judge could I guess impose a penalty.
     
     -----Original=20 Message-----
    From: f_hemker@h... [mailto:f_hemker@h...]Sent:=20 Wednesday, February 14, 2001 4:16 PM
    To:=20 scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com
    Subject: [scatterbrains] Re:=20 Proposal 313

    How about abstentions?

    No time limit on=20 votes?  If I don't like a proposal, but everyone
    else does, = I=20 could "filibuster" it for a long time without a time limit
    of som= e=20 kind.  The game might grind to a halt but for the
    pigheadedn= ess=20 of one man.

    Even with the -5 point deduction you might still c= ome=20 out ahead
    when voting against your own passing=20 proposal.

    -Fritz

    --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Arturo, Bo= b"=20 <barturo@e...> wrote:
    > Begin Proposal 313
    >
    &g= t;=20       Voting on Proposals
    > Voting wil= l=20 take place with the use of Polls. The player
    Proposing a rule
    = >=20 will create a Poll with the following specifications:
    >=20       1: The Poll question will have the Pro= posal=20 Number
    >       2: An email will be se= nt=20 out to all the players detailing the Final
    > Proposal
    >=20       3: The Poll will include a question=20 accepting or opposing the
    > Proposal
    >=20       4: All players will submit their=20 vote
    >       5: The Poll will stay ope= n as=20 long as it takes for everyone to
    vote
    >
    >  * If= the=20 Poll is not hidden all votes are final. If you would like to
    >= =20 change your vote there will be 1 point deducted from your total
    &g= t;=20 score for every vote change made.
    >
    >  * If the Pol= l is=20 hidden then the person submitting the proposal
    MUST vote
    > = for=20 their proposal or there will be a 5 point penalty=20       deducted
    from there
    >=20 score.
    >
    > End Proposal 3113
    >
    >
    >=20
    >
    > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified=20 recipient of this
    > confidential email, you are hereby notified= that=20 any distribution
    or copying
    > of this transmission is stric= tly=20 prohibited.
    > If you are not the specified recipient, please n= otify=20 us at
    > webmaster@e...



    To unsubscribe f= rom=20 this group, send an email=20 to:
    scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com




    To=20 unsubscribe from this group, send an email=20 to:
    scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com




    * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the= =20 specified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified= that=20 any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited= .=20

    If you are not the specified recipien= t, please=20 notify us at webmaster@e....=20





    To=20 unsubscribe from this group, send an email=20 to:
    scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com


    ------=_NextPart_000_00B7_01C096A4.B8959E70-- From bernardo@c... Wed Feb 14 13:38:39 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bernardo@c... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 14 Feb 2001 21:38:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 52737 invoked from network); 14 Feb 2001 21:38:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 14 Feb 2001 21:38:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO outland.cyberwar.com) (208.17.174.42) by mta3 with SMTP; 14 Feb 2001 22:39:43 -0000 Received: from computer (ppp07-17.cyberwar.com [208.17.168.202]) by outland.cyberwar.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f1ELcak76224 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 16:38:36 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <00f801c096ce$641067c0$caa811d0@computer> To: References: <01ab51513210e21ISWEBNT@d...> Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Score report for Round 312 Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 16:37:53 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "Patrick D. Bernardo" ----- Original Message ----- From: Paul Kirkland > On 14 Feb 01, at 15:39, Patrick D. Bernardo wrote: > > Why do I suspect that you've been reading will safire not will shak > I dunno - proper punctuation? From pkirklan@e... Wed Feb 14 13:42:17 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 14 Feb 2001 21:42:16 -0000 Received: (qmail 32365 invoked from network); 14 Feb 2001 21:42:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 14 Feb 2001 21:42:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta1 with SMTP; 14 Feb 2001 21:42:15 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Wed, 14 Feb 2001 16:00:20 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 14 Feb 01 15:51:57 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 14 Feb 01 15:51:44 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 15:51:39 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Proposal 313 Priority: normal In-reply-to: <00d601c096cd$e5f562a0$caa811d0@computer> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <01c382000220e21ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 14 Feb 01, at 16:34, Patrick D. Bernardo wrote: Dear Plato, No but you can increase the likelihood that it will be in his self- interest to choose good laws. james madison I.e., an overall deduction in points for voting against a proposal may take some corruption out of the system. > > > On 14 Feb 01, at 15:43, Glaucon wrote: > > > > I agree with the spirit of the penalty for voting agaisnt your own > > proposal, but might this not be better handled in another way. > > perhaps a future proposal would better make all votes a reflection > > of one's opinion of the proposal than a calclution of point > > advantage. > > > Dear sir, > > You cannot legislate the state of the soul. > > Sincerely > > Plato. > (The much-overlooked 52nd letter) > > > What if someone has a genuine change of heart after debate > > (I will grant that practically it is unlikely that this happen AND > > the proposal pass), but it seems this should be peritted. > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/982186508/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > -> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From pkirklan@e... Wed Feb 14 13:45:44 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 14 Feb 2001 21:45:43 -0000 Received: (qmail 42167 invoked from network); 14 Feb 2001 21:45:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 14 Feb 2001 21:45:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta3 with SMTP; 14 Feb 2001 22:46:47 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Wed, 14 Feb 2001 16:03:48 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 14 Feb 01 15:55:25 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 14 Feb 01 15:55:13 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 15:55:10 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 313 Priority: normal In-reply-to: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF037305@BATMAN> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <01d544803220e21ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 14 Feb 01, at 16:32, Arturo, Bob wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 4:31 PM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 313 > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Eugene Ventimiglia > > > > No time limit on votes? If I don't like a proposal, but everyone > > > else does, I could "filibuster" it for a long time without a time > > > limit of some kind. The game might grind to a halt but for the > > > pigheadedness of one man. > > > > Agreed, but what to do after the time limit? > > > Drink beer? > [Arturo, Bob] > > How about Buymeabeer.com? > Still the best idea i've heard yet. What if worked through beer companies rather than bars? > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > 088:N/ A=579810/*http://www.columbiahouse.com/gateway?token=7644> > Choose 3 DVDs for $0.49 each! Choose 3 DVDs for $0.49 each! > > l/S=17 00057088:N/A=579810/rand=714526375> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or > copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not > the specified recipient, please notify us at > webmaster@e.... > > > From pkirklan@e... Wed Feb 14 13:49:13 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 14 Feb 2001 21:49:13 -0000 Received: (qmail 79458 invoked from network); 14 Feb 2001 21:49:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 14 Feb 2001 21:49:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta3 with SMTP; 14 Feb 2001 22:50:17 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Wed, 14 Feb 2001 16:07:17 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 14 Feb 01 15:58:54 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 14 Feb 01 15:58:41 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 15:58:35 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Score report for Round 312 Priority: normal In-reply-to: <00f801c096ce$641067c0$caa811d0@computer> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <01c571707220e21ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 14 Feb 01, at 16:37, Patrick D. Bernardo wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Paul Kirkland > > On 14 Feb 01, at 15:39, Patrick D. Bernardo wrote: > > > > Why do I suspect that you've been reading will safire not will shak You didn't see the "On Language" about openings and closings of political speeches two or three weeks ago? > > > I dunno - proper punctuation? > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for > more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/982186722/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------_ > -> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From barturo@e... Wed Feb 14 13:54:19 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: BArturo@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 14 Feb 2001 21:54:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 67074 invoked from network); 14 Feb 2001 21:54:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 14 Feb 2001 21:54:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 14 Feb 2001 22:55:22 -0000 Received: from batman.ess ([12.31.9.2]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with ESMTP id QAA14249 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 16:54:15 -0500 (EST) Received: by BATMAN with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id <1MR7K4AG>; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 16:48:58 -0500 Message-ID: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF037306@BATMAN> To: "'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com'" Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 313 Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 16:48:57 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C096CF.EED13AA0" From: "Arturo, Bob" ------_=_NextPart_001_01C096CF.EED13AA0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Your right. I rather not have a time limit but it looks like I have no choice. -----Original Message----- From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 4:36 PM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 313 Improbable. I could not vote, and assert to the judge that "I intend to vote, but not right now." There's no way for the judge to ever find me in violation of the rules, since there is no *action* to judge. You know, somebody should of thought of this earlier, and created a chief magistracy position. That would have been a good idea. ----- Original Message ----- From: Arturo, Bob To: 'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com' Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 4:29 PM Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 313 I thought about a time limit but if a player decided to hold up the progress of the game because they did not like the proposal then that could be in violation of the game. The player could be called out to vote by a judge and that judge could I guess impose a penalty. -----Original Message----- From: f_hemker@h... [ mailto:f_hemker@h... ] Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 4:16 PM To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 313 How about abstentions? No time limit on votes? If I don't like a proposal, but everyone else does, I could "filibuster" it for a long time without a time limit of some kind. The game might grind to a halt but for the pigheadedness of one man. Even with the -5 point deduction you might still come out ahead when voting against your own passing proposal. -Fritz --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Arturo, Bob" wrote: > Begin Proposal 313 > > Voting on Proposals > Voting will take place with the use of Polls. The player Proposing a rule > will create a Poll with the following specifications: > 1: The Poll question will have the Proposal Number > 2: An email will be sent out to all the players detailing the Final > Proposal > 3: The Poll will include a question accepting or opposing the > Proposal > 4: All players will submit their vote > 5: The Poll will stay open as long as it takes for everyone to vote > > * If the Poll is not hidden all votes are final. If you would like to > change your vote there will be 1 point deducted from your total > score for every vote change made. > > * If the Poll is hidden then the person submitting the proposal MUST vote > for their proposal or there will be a 5 point penalty deducted from there > score. > > End Proposal 3113 > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > webmaster@e... To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at webmaster@e.... Yahoo! Groups Sponsor www. .com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at webmaster@e.... ------_=_NextPart_001_01C096CF.EED13AA0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"

    Your right. I rather not have a time limit but it looks like I have no choice.

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...]
    Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 4:36 PM
    To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com
    Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 313

    Improbable.  I could not vote, and assert to the judge that "I intend to vote, but not right now."  There's no way for the judge to ever find me in violation of the rules, since there is no *action* to judge.
     
    You know, somebody should of thought of this earlier, and created a chief magistracy position.  That would have been a good idea. 
    ----- Original Message -----
    Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 4:29 PM
    Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 313

    I thought about a time limit but if a player decided to hold up the progress of the game because they did not like the proposal then that could be in violation of the game. The player could be called out to vote by a judge and that judge could I guess impose a penalty.
     
     -----Original Message-----
    From: f_hemker@h... [mailto:f_hemker@h...]
    Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 4:16 PM
    To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com
    Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 313

    How about abstentions?

    No time limit on votes?  If I don't like a proposal, but everyone
    else does, I could "filibuster" it for a long time without a time limit
    of some kind.  The game might grind to a halt but for the
    pigheadedness of one man.

    Even with the -5 point deduction you might still come out ahead
    when voting against your own passing proposal.

    -Fritz

    --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Arturo, Bob" <barturo@e...> wrote:
    > Begin Proposal 313
    >
    >       Voting on Proposals
    > Voting will take place with the use of Polls. The player
    Proposing a rule
    > will create a Poll with the following specifications:
    >       1: The Poll question will have the Proposal Number
    >       2: An email will be sent out to all the players detailing the Final
    > Proposal
    >       3: The Poll will include a question accepting or opposing the
    > Proposal
    >       4: All players will submit their vote
    >       5: The Poll will stay open as long as it takes for everyone to
    vote
    >
    >  * If the Poll is not hidden all votes are final. If you would like to
    > change your vote there will be 1 point deducted from your total
    > score for every vote change made.
    >
    >  * If the Poll is hidden then the person submitting the proposal
    MUST vote
    > for their proposal or there will be a 5 point penalty       deducted
    from there
    > score.
    >
    > End Proposal 3113
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this
    > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution
    or copying
    > of this transmission is strictly prohibited.
    > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at
    > webmaster@e...



    To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com




    To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com




    * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited.

    If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at webmaster@e....





    To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com




    * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited.

    If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at webmaster@e....



    ------_=_NextPart_001_01C096CF.EED13AA0-- From eventi@n... Wed Feb 14 13:54:53 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eventi@n... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 14 Feb 2001 21:54:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 99720 invoked from network); 14 Feb 2001 21:54:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 14 Feb 2001 21:54:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nyic.com) (64.29.96.13) by mta1 with SMTP; 14 Feb 2001 21:54:52 -0000 Received: from vlad (vlad.nyic.com [209.73.237.163]) by mail.nyic.com (8.9.0/8.9.1) with SMTP id QAA14312 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 16:54:52 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: BuyMeABeer.com (was Proposal 313) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 16:56:21 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 In-Reply-To: <01d544803220e21ISWEBNT@d...> Importance: Normal From: "Eugene Ventimiglia" The friggin name's taken. But anyway, search for "buy me a beer" on Google, and you'll come up with all sorts of Free Projects, where the author says. "This is free, but if you ever meet me, buy me a beer." Anyway, for anyone who hasn't been following the Free Sofware Movement (which would be everyone who's not me...), they often say "Free(Beer) Software" when referring to gratis, and "Free(Speech) Software" when it's libre (un-encumbered by copyright, or copy"lefted", to prevent intellectual ownership) There could be a product tie in. - Click here to buy Linus a beer > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Kirkland [mailto:pkirklan@e...] > Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 4:55 PM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 313 > > > On 14 Feb 01, at 16:32, Arturo, Bob wrote: > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > > Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 4:31 PM > > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 313 > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Eugene Ventimiglia > > > > > > No time limit on votes? If I don't like a proposal, but everyone > > > > else does, I could "filibuster" it for a long time without a time > > > > limit of some kind. The game might grind to a halt but for the > > > > pigheadedness of one man. > > > > > > Agreed, but what to do after the time limit? > > > > > Drink beer? > > [Arturo, Bob] > > > > How about Buymeabeer.com? > > > Still the best idea i've heard yet. > What if worked through beer companies rather than bars? > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > > > > 088:N/ A=579810/*http://www.columbiahouse.com/gateway?token=7644> > > Choose 3 DVDs for $0.49 each! Choose 3 DVDs for $0.49 each! > > > > > l/S=17 00057088:N/A=579810/rand=714526375> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or > > copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not > > the specified recipient, please notify us at > > webmaster@e.... > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > From pkirklan@e... Wed Feb 14 13:58:08 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 14 Feb 2001 21:58:08 -0000 Received: (qmail 30031 invoked from network); 14 Feb 2001 21:58:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 14 Feb 2001 21:58:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta2 with SMTP; 14 Feb 2001 21:58:07 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Wed, 14 Feb 2001 16:16:13 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 14 Feb 01 16:07:49 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 14 Feb 01 16:07:41 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 16:07:36 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 313 Priority: normal In-reply-to: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF037306@BATMAN> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <01d731316220e21ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 14 Feb 01, at 16:48, Arturo, Bob wrote: > Your right. I rather not have a time limit but it looks like I have no > choice. > I'm not so sure > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 4:36 PM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 313 > > > Improbable. I could not vote, and assert to the judge that "I intend > to vote, but not right now." There's no way for the judge to ever > find me in violation of the rules, since there is no *action* to > judge. > > You know, somebody should of thought of this earlier, and created a > chief magistracy position. That would have been a good idea. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Arturo, Bob > To: 'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com' > > > Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 4:29 PM > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 313 > > I thought about a time limit but if a player decided to hold up the > progress of the game because they did not like the proposal then that > could be in violation of the game. The player could be called out to > vote by a judge and that judge could I guess impose a penalty. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: f_hemker@h... [ > mailto:f_hemker@h... ] > Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 4:16 PM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 313 > > > > How about abstentions? > > No time limit on votes? If I don't like a proposal, but everyone else > does, I could "filibuster" it for a long time without a time limit of > some kind. The game might grind to a halt but for the pigheadedness > of one man. > > Even with the -5 point deduction you might still come out ahead > when voting against your own passing proposal. > > -Fritz > > --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Arturo, Bob" wrote: > > Begin Proposal 313 > > > > Voting on Proposals > > Voting will take place with the use of Polls. The player > Proposing a rule > > will create a Poll with the following specifications: > > 1: The Poll question will have the Proposal Number > > 2: An email will be sent out to all the players detailing the > > Final > > Proposal > > 3: The Poll will include a question accepting or opposing the > > Proposal > > 4: All players will submit their vote > > 5: The Poll will stay open as long as it takes for everyone to > > > vote > > > > * If the Poll is not hidden all votes are final. If you would like > > to > > change your vote there will be 1 point deducted from your total > > score for every vote change made. > > > > * If the Poll is hidden then the person submitting the proposal > MUST vote > > for their proposal or there will be a 5 point penalty deducted > > > from there > > score. > > > > End Proposal 3113 > > > > > > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution > or copying > > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > > webmaster@e... > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or > copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > webmaster@e.... > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > > > 700057 088:N/A=572117/R=1/*http://domains.yahoo.com> > 700057 088:N/A=572117/R=2/*http://domains.yahoo.com> > > www. .com > > oupmai l/S=1700057088:N/A=572117/rand=287105048> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or > copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not > the specified recipient, please notify us at > webmaster@e.... > > > From pkirklan@e... Wed Feb 14 14:02:14 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 14 Feb 2001 22:02:13 -0000 Received: (qmail 89540 invoked from network); 14 Feb 2001 22:02:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 14 Feb 2001 22:02:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta2 with SMTP; 14 Feb 2001 22:02:06 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Wed, 14 Feb 2001 16:20:12 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 14 Feb 01 16:11:47 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 14 Feb 01 16:11:21 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 16:11:17 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 313 Priority: normal In-reply-to: <09A2E3F9D279D41185D8009027B8CDDF037306@BATMAN> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <01a661220220e21ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 14 Feb 01, at 16:48, Arturo, Bob wrote: > Your right. I rather not have a time limit but it looks like I have no > choice. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick D. Bernardo [mailto:bernardo@c...] > Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 4:36 PM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 313 > > > Improbable. I could not vote, and assert to the judge that "I intend > to vote, but not right now." There's no way for the judge to ever > find me in violation of the rules, since there is no *action* to > judge. > > You know, somebody should of thought of this earlier, and created a > chief magistracy position. That would have been a good idea. cool it al, perhaps the enforcment power power needs simply to be more accountable (oh say, regulary elected) -- jim > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Arturo, Bob > To: 'scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com' > > > Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 4:29 PM > Subject: RE: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 313 > > I thought about a time limit but if a player decided to hold up the > progress of the game because they did not like the proposal then that > could be in violation of the game. The player could be called out to > vote by a judge and that judge could I guess impose a penalty. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: f_hemker@h... [ > mailto:f_hemker@h... ] > Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 4:16 PM > To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [scatterbrains] Re: Proposal 313 > > > > How about abstentions? > > No time limit on votes? If I don't like a proposal, but everyone else > does, I could "filibuster" it for a long time without a time limit of > some kind. The game might grind to a halt but for the pigheadedness > of one man. > > Even with the -5 point deduction you might still come out ahead > when voting against your own passing proposal. > > -Fritz > > --- In scatterbrains@y..., "Arturo, Bob" wrote: > > Begin Proposal 313 > > > > Voting on Proposals > > Voting will take place with the use of Polls. The player > Proposing a rule > > will create a Poll with the following specifications: > > 1: The Poll question will have the Proposal Number > > 2: An email will be sent out to all the players detailing the > > Final > > Proposal > > 3: The Poll will include a question accepting or opposing the > > Proposal > > 4: All players will submit their vote > > 5: The Poll will stay open as long as it takes for everyone to > > > vote > > > > * If the Poll is not hidden all votes are final. If you would like > > to > > change your vote there will be 1 point deducted from your total > > score for every vote change made. > > > > * If the Poll is hidden then the person submitting the proposal > MUST vote > > for their proposal or there will be a 5 point penalty deducted > > > from there > > score. > > > > End Proposal 3113 > > > > > > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution > or copying > > of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > > webmaster@e... > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or > copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. > > If you are not the specified recipient, please notify us at > webmaster@e.... > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > > > 700057 088:N/A=572117/R=1/*http://domains.yahoo.com> > 700057 088:N/A=572117/R=2/*http://domains.yahoo.com> > > www. .com > > oupmai l/S=1700057088:N/A=572117/rand=287105048> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > scatterbrains-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > > > > * NOTICE * - If the reader is not the specified recipient of this > confidential email, you are hereby notified that any distribution or > copying of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not > the specified recipient, please notify us at > webmaster@e.... > > > From pkirklan@e... Wed Feb 14 14:05:36 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: pkirklan@e... X-Apparently-To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_3); 14 Feb 2001 22:05:36 -0000 Received: (qmail 793 invoked from network); 14 Feb 2001 22:05:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 14 Feb 2001 22:05:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dom198.dom.edu) (207.56.177.198) by mta3 with SMTP; 14 Feb 2001 23:06:40 -0000 Received: from email.dom.edu ([207.56.176.100]) by dom198.dom.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19); Wed, 14 Feb 2001 16:23:40 -0600 Received: from EMAIL/SpoolDir by email.dom.edu (Mercury 1.47); 14 Feb 01 16:15:16 CST Received: from SpoolDir by EMAIL (Mercury 1.47); 14 Feb 01 16:15:01 CST Organization: Dominican Univ., River Forest, IL To: scatterbrains@yahoogroups.com Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 16:14:52 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: [scatterbrains] BuyMeABeer.com (was Proposal 313) Priority: normal In-reply-to: References: <01d544803220e21ISWEBNT@d...> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12b) Return-Path: pkirklan@e... Message-ID: <01d3d4023220e21ISWEBNT@d...> From: "Paul Kirkland" On 14 Feb 01, at 16:56, Eugene Ventimiglia wrote: > The friggin name's taken. shouldn't it be buyyaabeer.com (ok that looks funny) buyuabeer.com Wouldn't the one paying go to the sight. No, I didn't check. > > But anyway, search for "buy me a beer" on Google