[s-b] Paradox?

[Alexander Smith <AIS523@xxxxxxxxxx>]

I submit a Consultation on the following question, with the OCB as the Unbeliever:
{{{Is the Operantly Conditioned Beast a Player?}}} and with the Reasoning:
{{{According to rule 4e71, the OCB is a player; no other rule causes it to be a
player. According to rule 4e27, "No text in any Rule shall be interpreted as a
specific Player's name, unless that rule explicitly states that said text shall
be interpreted as a specific Player's name." Rule 4e71 does not explicitly state
that its text shall be interpreted as a specific Player's name. Therefore, if the
OCB is not a player, it is a player due to rule 4e71 as nothing contradicts this;
however, if the OCB is a Player, then rule 4e27 (which takes precedence over rule
4e71) implies that the text "Operantly Conditioned Beast" in rule 4e71, being the
name of a player, cannot refer to the player itself but must instead refer to
something else; and without rule 4e71 being capable of making it a player, it
therefore isn't a player. In other words, the OCB is a player if and only if it
isn't a player.

Pity this isn't Agora, I could probably have got a win from it there. In B, all
we get from something like this is massive gamestate recalculation.}}}
-- 
ais523
_______________________________________________
spoon-business mailing list
spoon-business@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-business