[s-b] Consultation 75: Answer

["Anything McGee" <anythingmcgee@xxxxxxxxx>]

Greetings again, everyone. While I am not entirely sure whether Codae was
legitimately the Minister of Questions (and thus whether I was validly
assigned this Consultation), below is my Answer to Consultation 75.


Answer: TRUE.

First, Wooble's message requesting to become a Player stated that he wished
to be "known by the unique name 'Wooble.'" (See
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/archives/spoon-business/spoon-business-200707/msg00022.html.)
The reasoning in Consultation 75, then, is faulty.

Further, while Rule 1-4 states that "An External Force may become a Player
by posting", among other things, a "uniquely identifying name that e wishes
to be known by", the rules do not define the words "name" and "nickname".
(Rule 1-4 does provide regulations regarding which characters are
permissible and how they are recorded, but not what a "name" actually is.)
Thus, I turned to the Oxford English Dictionary, which defines a nickname as
a "name which is given to a person . . . as a supposedly appropriate
replacement for or addition to the proper name." In other words, a nickname
is a type of name and is wholly sufficient for requesting to become a
Player. Even if Wooble had used the words that are used in Consultation 75,
he would still be a Player known as Wooble.


Cheers,
Anything McGee



> {
> Question:  Is there a Player whose name is Wooble?
>
> Reasoning:  When Wooble reregistered, he specified the nickname Wooble.
 The Rules state that a joining Player must specify a uniquely identifying
name.
> }
_______________________________________________
spoon-business mailing list
spoon-business@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-business