Re: [s-b] request for playerhood

["Jamie Dallaire" <bad.leprechaun@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 5:34 PM, Roger Hicks <pidgepot@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 1:22 PM, Geoffrey Spear <geoffspear@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>  > I consent to be governed by the rules.
>  >
>  >  I submit the following Consultation:
>  >  {{
>  >  Question: Is Wooble a Player?
>  >
>  >  Reasoning: Wooble "has become" (and I believe the tense of the verb in
>  >  Rule 4E4 is relevant here) a Player in the manner specified by the
>  >  Rules at the time he did so.  He fulfills all requirements for
>  >  continued Playerhood as specified by the rules, although it must be
>  >  admitted that he did not, in fact, continue to be a player
>  >  continuously since becoming a Player.  The Rule as written does not
>  >  seem to preclude an External Force from being defined as a Player
>  >  simply because he has, sometime in the past, ceased to be one.
>  >  }}
>
>  This is Consultation #118. I assign it to Priest Billy Pilgrim

I Answer Consultation 118 NO.

Reasoning: Though the Supplicant's Reasoning seems sound, e neglects
to point out that Rule 4E4 also specifies that "No restrictions may be
placed on when a player may forfeit". Forfeiting is also shown to be
an action that causes a Player to cease being a Player, in the very
same Rule. Any definition of a Player that would preclude the ability
to cease becoming a Player thus enters into a direct contradiction
with this part of Rule 4E4. To my understanding, there exists no real
mechanism to determine how to resolve a conflict within a Rule in B,
but I believe that it is preferable and within the spirit of nomics in
general, as well as consistent with the original intent behind this
Rule, that a Player may cease to be a Player by forfeiting (even if e
later changes eir mind...). The alternative would leave multiple
"Players" who thought they had left the game trapped inside the game,
as well as muddle much of what has happened and been contested and
resolved in the past few months (surrounding Players ceasing to be
Players - pikhq's rapier comes to mind).

Oracularity: The gamestate is conclusively set to reflect the
non-Playerhood of Wooble and any other Player who has forfeited the
game more recently than e has become a Player. Any Outsider who has
become a Player and not then forfeited since this Oracularity reached
the Public Forum is exempt from any clauses in this Oracularity that
come prior to this sentence. In the second paragraph of Rule 4E4,
remove the word "and", remove the period, and then affix the following
to the end of the paragraph: ", and has more recently become a Player
than forfeited the game."

Priest Billy Pilgrim

PS: Do we need precedence rules for what happens when a rule
contradicts itself???
_______________________________________________
spoon-business mailing list
spoon-business@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-business