Re: [s-b] C Nomic

[Jay Campbell <bnomic@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I, C Nomic Player Wooble, submit the following:

BEGIN TRANSACTION

Assertion: The name of this game is C Nomic.

I gain the Ordained property.
I take the Ministry of Law.
I assign Tyler's cross-nomic Consultation a number of 131 and a Priest 
of Wooble, the only Ordained player.

I Anwer this Consultation as False. Proposal 485 said any *changes* the 
the gamestate would happen simultaneously, but C Nomic was not initially 
populated with Game Objects except those created by the Rules (e.g. Sock 
Corporations).

END TRANSACTION

Consultation 131 becomes Answered in C Nomic, and per rule 4E83, in B Nomic.



Tyler wrote:
> All right, that's the final straw.  In my capacity as Player of B Nomic and
> C Nomic, I'll submit the following Consultation to end all this
> multi-nomic silliness:
>
> "Is it true that, since the time proposal 485 Passed, C Nomic has been
> identical to B Nomic?"
>
> Reasoning:
> "Proposal 485 created another nomic called C Nomic, as far anyone can tell.
> When it did so, it specified that it was identical to B Nomic. Therefore the
> Game Objects of B Nomic must be Game Objects in C Nomic also. Rule 2 could
> not have stopped this from becoming true, because while there was only B
> Nomic, it only had control over what happened in B Nomic, and it did not
> govern C Nomic until after the moment of its creation.
>
> Please could the Priest assigned this Consultation make an Oracularity to
> take care of actions, such as transactions, that are valid in only one of
> the two nomics, as all changes to one nomic are supposedly happening also in
> the other."
>
> I assign this Consultation (to?) the number 131 and the Priest Billy
> Pilgrim. Good luck.
>
> Further considerations:
>
> If the Consultation or assignment isn't valid in C Nomic because C Nomic is
> empty, that doesn't matter in terms of B Nomic, so I don't care.
>
> If the Consultation isn't valid because it refers to a different nomic, an
> External Force, well then, Rule 83 can't really change B Nomic to reflect
> changes to an External Force, now can it? So I don't care that way either.
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 3:21 PM, Jay Campbell <bnomic@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>   
>>
>> I request to become a C Nomic player using the unique name of Wooble.
>>
>> [ nifty, the public display says I have points ... ]
>>
>> BEGIN TRANSACTION
>>
>> Assertion: The name of this game is C Nomic.
>>
>> I create a contract named J's C Holding Company using the text from B
>> Nomic's J's Holding Company.
>>
>> I, C Nomic Player Wooble (hi!) convert all my points to macks, and
>> transfer all my macks and socks to J's Holding Company.
>>
>> END TRANSACTION
>>
>> [ did somebody already do this? ]
>> _______________________________________________
>> spoon-business mailing list
>> spoon-business@xxxxxxxxx
>> http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-business
>>
>>     
>
>
>
>   

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