Re: [s-d] Re: [auto] Peter votes

["Daniel Peter Lepage" <dpl33@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

> But then that would still involve numbering them. You have to recognise
> illegal actions to recognise that they were illegal. The easiest (as i see
> it) would be to recognise that you are recognising the illegal action, and
> then declare the status of the action as illegal.
>
> The way you seem to be thinking you would recognise that it was illegal,
> then change it to something else, then ignore the fact that you have just
> recognised the illegal action anyway to rename it. :S

Any recognition of illegal actions seems dangerous to me... under your
scheme, anyone could break my proposal scripts by saying "I submit
10^(20^30) proposals, all with the text 'I win'". By your scheme, we'd
have to give the next proposal an absurdly high serial number because so
many lesser numbers would be consumed by illegality.

What you really want to do is to say "If an action was illegal, but we
thought it was legal, then it gets to keep its number". The Statute of
Limitations did a pretty good job of this: it said that if a Minister
asserted something about the game, and nobody objected in 10 days, then
the state of the game changed to where it would be as though the assertion
were actually true. Thus, if I say "RainbowWolfe's new proposal is p243",
and nobody complains, then I'm right, even if p242 later turns out to have
been illegal.

-- 
Wonko

_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss