Re: [s-d] [s-b] Consultation

[Jamie Dallaire <bad.leprechaun@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hmmmm. so maybe we oughtta loosen the definition of agreements further and
then try to makes some of those (unwilling, unknowing) agreements out there
in the real world part of the game dynamics somehow...

On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 3:08 PM, Charles Walker <
charles.w.walker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> True. I think the rules might need changing there. In response to 0x44, I
> would say that e is right to say that it is unlikely that Agora will vote
> by
> nday 13, but they might in the future.
>
> On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 6:57 PM, Jamie Dallaire <bad.leprechaun@xxxxxxxxx
> >wrote:
> >
> >
> > Yeah, my interpretation would be that Agora (along with a WHOLE BUNCH of
> > other organizations/states/contracts/etc. out there) is a partnership.
> They
> > are all recognized by B Nomic by virtue of fulfilling the 3 criteria
> > listed.
> >
> > The only bit that might NOT make it (and some other groups) an agreement
> is
> > that it does not refer to its members as "parties". B can't just
> > arbitrarily
> > decide that what someone else calls a member, a disciple, or a citizen is
> > in
> > fact a "party".
> >
> > It's sort of a moot point anyway until anyone tries to make Agora a
> > Faction,
> > since other than potential factionhood, being an Agreement currently does
> > not mean a thing in B.
> >
> > BP
> > _______________________________________________
> > spoon-discuss mailing list
> > spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
> > http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss
> >
> _______________________________________________
> spoon-discuss mailing list
> spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss
>
_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss