[spoon-discuss] 1637 and all that

[Bill Adlam <sagitta_elegans@xxxxxxxxx>]

SkArcher wrote, in reply to Zarpint:

> > But I really don't understand the opposition to r1637. Not only is
> it
> > important philosophically to emancipate ourselves like that, it's 
> > important
> > practically, since a game rule may at some time conflict with some 
> > national
> > or international law, and it's very important to make clear that
> the game
> > rules are the only ones that apply. Further, some game action
> unspecified
> > in the rules may conflict, so it's not enough just to have the
> Ruleset
> > take precedence - we need to remove other legal systems from
> existence,
> > or we will be having to deal with all of them in CFIs or such.
> 
> I don't think it has any effect at all. Rule 10 provides all the
> possible 
> ruling that could be necessary to make our rules override national or
> international laws

In combination with Rule 18, which states that only the Ruleset
prohibits actions.  I like the spirit of 1637, but in combination with
rule 10 it comes uncomfortably close to repealing a lot of the ruleset.
 It would be equally assertive but more interesting to repeal a select
few laws, treaties and regulations.

Sagitta

________________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping" 
your friends today! Download Messenger Now 
http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com/download/index.html
_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss