Re: [s-b] [s-d] 113.3 Administrator's Update

[bd <nomic@xxxxxxx>]

Jake Eakle wrote:
> I appear to have something of a dilemma. Section four of Rule 2-5,
> "Accepting RFJs", says
> 
> "The selected Judge shall as a Game Action accept eir assigned RFJ by
> changing it's state to Accepted."
> 
> This appears to me to mean that I *must* accept my assigned RFJ, but that I
> must do this by changing its state to Accepted. However, there appears to be
> no way for me to so change its state. Also, under the current definition of
> Game Action, it doesn't really make sense for me to perform one "by" doing
> something other than posting to a public forum stating that I do. So even if
> there was a way for me to change its state to Accepted, I don't think that
> would be a valid way to perform a Game Action.

One could say that the imperative form implies that the player is 
permitted to do so. However, I agree that this is somewhat nonsensical - 
rules should never use the imperative form.

I submit the following RFJ:
{{
__Ordering operations__

If a Rule specifies that a player shall or must perform some game 
action, without a condition indicating the consequences should they not 
perform that game action, said player is considered to automatically 
perform the game action in question, without need for them to 
acknowledge or state that fact.

Reasoning: Since the rules have control over only the gamestate, 'shall' 
forms cannot actually cause an External Force to perform some action 
outside the game. However, Outsiders are within the gamestate, and thus 
the rules can cause them to take action - even if the external force 
does nothing.
}}

I also submit a proposal:
{{
__Jurisdictional boundaries__

Create a new rule:
{{
__Jurisdictional boundaries__

No rule may attempt to order an external force to perform some task; any 
statement which professes to give such an order [[e.g., Bob shall do X]] 
serves only to permit the player to perform the action in question. 
However, it is permissible for a rule to state that a Player or other 
Outsider performs some action, provided the External Force backing the 
Outsider is not required to act.
}}

}}


> Also, once the above is somehow resolved and I have successfully accepted my
> RFJ, I appear to have another dilemma. First, the same section goes on to
> say
> 
> "The selected Judge may also change the RFJ's state to Invalid, if e
> considers the contained Statement to be unclear, ambiguous, or irrelevant."
> 
> but right below that, in the next section, it says
> 
> "Once an RFJ is Accepted, the selected Judge shall as a Game Action render
> Judgment on it to the best of eir knowledge of the Rules. "
> 
> and
> 
> "Once Judgment is rendered, the state of the RFJ becomes Resolved"
> 
> This seems to imply that as soon as it's accepted, ie, before I get a chance
> to change it to Invalid, I have to render judgment on it, and that once I
> do, it becomes resolved. However, it doesn't say I'm no longer the selected
> judge, after that, so I guess I can still change its state to Invalid
> *after* I've rendered judgment on it, causing it to only guide further
> interpretation of the rules for a very short time.

Hmm, if my RFJ above is true, then the judge must've automatically ruled 
instantly... I wonder how that works out?
_______________________________________________
spoon-business mailing list
spoon-business@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-business