Craig Daniel on Fri, 21 Nov 2008 21:52:32 -0700 (MST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
Re: [s-b] [Emergency] PEPs |
On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 8:24 PM, Geoffrey Spear <wooble@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Point of order: after Rule 4E3 was amended on 10 December 2007, it > became unclear who the Players of the game were, since the wording of > 4E3 and 4E4 combine to make it impossible for an Outsider, not being > an External Force, to become a player. Thus the PEPs are: As I read the distinction, an External Force can project into the game, thus creating an Outsider. No External Force can directly interact with the game, except through an Outsider. Ergo, it is impossible for the external force known as "Craig Daniel" to submit game actions. But when said external force posts to the Public Forum in ways that interact with the game, e is projecting emself into it. That projection takes the form of a series of messages, and there is a rules-defined game object which represents that projection; said game object is an Outsider. One of two things is true: The first option is that the rules work as we all think they do. The Outsider and the External Force are actually the same thing, and the one in question became a player by the name of teucer; that Outsider is unambiguously a PEP. I actually think this scenario is highly unlikely. The second is that posts about what "I" do that were authored by Craig Daniel (the External Force) rather than actually by the Outsider (who Craig Daniel believes is named "teucer" and a player) were without effect; the straightforward version of this says that to take an action, he would have had to specify something along the lines of "My in-game projection does the following:" - in which case nobody is paranoid, since we all said "I become paranoid" rather than "my in-game projection becomes paranoid," and so there is no emergency. This affects *everyone*, by the way, since even if you as an External Force were once a player you stopped being one once Players were defined as being Outsiders which were not External Forces. In this scenario one might argue that messages signed with player names were done on behalf of the Outsiders, but in some cases those are the same as the External Forces' names, which leads to confusion. In case of choice two being correct: I intend for the Game Object representing my projection into this game to become a player under the name of teucer. That Game Object becomes Paranoid. But there are also two variants on scenario number two; I find both far more likely than scenario 2 in its pure form. In scenario 2a, only Outsiders can act; their External Forces cannot act on their behalf. In scenario 2b, because the projection takes the form of posts to the PF (and the Wiki), those posts comprise the actions of the Outsider formed therefrom anyhow - that is, the things the External Force says it does, it doesn't succeed in doing, which is why Craig Daniel failed to become a player upon posting his intent to do so, but his Outsider mirrored this act and actually did it; the Outsider is now named teucer and is a player, which makes it a PEP. In Scenario 2b, everything works as it does in Scenario 1, except that behind the scenes things are strange in a way that reminds me a bit of JAGS Wonderland. (Great game, by the way; I recommend it to everyone.) Craig Daniel the External Force claims to do things, and is completely wrong; he doesn't - but teucer, who is his projection into the game and an entirely different entity, *actually does* what he claimed he had done. Scenario 2a is like scenario 2, except without the workaround of acting on behalf of your Outsider being allowed. Since Outsiders, not External Forces, are PEPs, we all failed to become paranoid. Some of us aren't reflected as PEPs at all, while the rest (including Wooble) can't make those PEPs do anything, including become paranoid. So, in scenario 1 I am a PEP, and a paranoid one. In Scenario 2b, the same is true, for weird values of "I" and lots of sophistry about what's going on Platonically. (Hell, *very* Platonically; there's even a cave and shadow puppets involved.) Scenario 2, the pure version, has the interesting feature that the list of PEPs is exactly as Wooble claims except that I am now on it as the only one to be Paranoid. And in Scenario 2a, which is the only one in which I am not a player, the game is completely dead, as nobody can do anything and we can't start an emergency to fix it. One of these four scenarios is correct. (I think it's 2b.) But only one. In each one, there is no ambiguity about the PEP list and the emergency either works as normal or hasn't started anyhow. If you see ambiguity in which scenario it is, though - a reasonable thing to assert - then it's actually crystal clear who the PEPs are; they're the Outsiders (*not* External Forces) who were playing when the ambiguity arose. Ergo, in Scenario 1 the PEP list is as Wooble claims, which does not include four paranoid PEPs, so no emergency exists and the flag is in fact Jolly Roger. In Scenario 2 no PEPs are paranoid (I'm the only paranoid entity in that scenario and am a player but, given the ambiguity, not a PEP), so there is no emergency. In scenario 2b, the same list holds, and people are paranoid as we expect them to be, same as in scenario 1; there is no emergency. And in scenario 2a, that is the PEP list, but it doesn't matter because nobody can twiddle their panic button and become paranoid. In other words, thanks to the ambiguity there is no current emergency. The emergency procedure rule thus does not apply and so my ambiguous status as a player when it was thought to have begun is irrelevant. Which means that we need to decide, outside of emergency protocols, which scenario is true. The fact that the Consultation on Wooble's playerhood is still outstanding, leaving him ambiguous having been not playing right before the ambiguous reregistration is irrelevant; he's a PEP thanks to an earlier ambiguity. I intend, without objection, to activate the following Tweak: {This is the version of the gamestate in which scenario 2b from the above analysis is correct. /* Note: this is different from making it correct, which would still be ambiguous depending on which other one had been right before.*/} Now for the fun part: *If* we are unambiguously in one of the four scenarios, as we will be after the Tweak resolves (if it resolves; Wooble, please don't be That Guy and object) then there is no ambiguity anymore about who's a player. Suddenly, the Emergency returns if we're in scenario 1 or 2b - and because the specific scenario was always true, the emergency comes back with the Pause having been initialized when J said it was. It's like a nomic version of the two-slit experiment, and the Tweak collapses the waveform. Fun times! - teucer _______________________________________________ spoon-business mailing list spoon-business@xxxxxxxxx http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-business