Re: [s-b] Answer to Consultation 39

["Geoffrey Spear" <geoffspear@xxxxxxxxx>]

I claim this answer is INCONSISTENT with established doctrine.


On Nov 22, 2007 4:32 PM, Mike McGann <mike.mcgann@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> {{I answer Yes to Consultation 39}}
>
> Reasoning:
>
> By Rule 2-5:
> "Any player may as a Game Action submit a Consultation."
>
> Is the AFO a Player?
>
> To answer: "Rule 1-4 states that an External Force may become a Player
> by requesting to become a Player, and can only do so if he is capable
> of passing a Membership Test (note the use of the singular)."
>
> Rule 3-15 says:
> "All personal pronouns shall be taken to refer to entities of any
> gender or of no gender regardless of the purported gender of the words
> used"
>
> He is a personal pronoun. The AFO is an entity and it is of no gender.
> It is legal to refer to the AFO as he, her, I, we, you, it, or they
> (although some usages may be considered confusing or in bad form).
>
> To become a player, an External Force has to fulfill the following requirements:
>
> * He is capable of passing a Membership Test, although he may not be
> required to take said test
> * He is not currently a Player
> * He has a working e-mail address
>
> Items 2 and 3 have been done--it is item 1 that is in contention. Is
> it capable of passing a Membership Test? Any or all of:
>
> * Proof of uniqueness from all other known sentient beings
> * Refer to one's self in the first person singular without being awkward
> * Send, and receive a reply to, an email to another entity
> * Be capable of thought as an individual.
>
> Since it only has to actually pass one of these, it can pass with #3
> quite easily. If the AFO states an email address to use for
> communication, and it responds to all email sent to that address, it
> cannot be shown that it fails #3.
>
> Therefore, the AFO is a Player. The Registrar still has the power to
> reject the registration if he chooses.
>
> Also, I find that the requirements for becoming a Player need a major
> revision. They seem to be written in a style that makes it easy for
> anyone to become a Player but to have some (but vague) power to reject
> admission when needed. I feel that the latter part does not work.
>
> As an aside--can anyone provide proof that Hose and Wooble are unique
> from all other sentient beings?
>
> - Priest Hose
> _______________________________________________
> spoon-business mailing list
> spoon-business@xxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-business
>



-- 
Geoffrey Spear
http://www.geoffreyspear.com/
_______________________________________________
spoon-business mailing list
spoon-business@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-business