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

[Alex Smith <ais523@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 2009-02-03 at 15:27 +0000, James Baxter wrote:
> 5E10 says game actions are defined by the rules.
> Your contract is not a rule.
> The interpretation of 5E10 cannot, therefore, apply to your contract.
> 5E54 also states that you must be able to perform the prequisite action and requiring it does not make it possible.

We've been over this before, but I'll do it again.

Rule 5e10 says:
{{{
A Game Action is defined as any activity specified by the Rules that
changes the state of the game.
}}}
Rule 5e57 said:
{{{
Contracts may be modified with the explicit approval of all parties, as
well as in any other way allowed by that Contract.
}}}

So in other words, rule 5e57 says that my contract could be modified by
changing the rules I wanted. (No disagreement here, I hope; as far as I
can tell, everyone agrees that if I could change the rules, I could
change the contract; and that 5e57 does not by itself let me change the
rules so I can change the contract.)

Rule 5e57, therefore, specifies a way in which a contract can be
changed. So it's a way I can do /something/ that changes the gamestate.
In other words, changing the rules the way I wanted is an "activity
specified by the rules that changes the state of the game"; changing the
rules as I wanted indeed changes the state of the game (because it
changes a contract), and it is indeed specified by the rules (rule
5e57). So rule 5e10 therefore makes it possible. (The scam doesn't work
without the combination of both rules.) Just because the contract
specifies a way to change the rules doesn't mean that rule 5e57 doesn't
also specify it (and the fact that rule 5e57 specifies it /because/ the
contract specifies it is immaterial).

-- 
ais523

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