Re: [s-b] MoQ Report - Consultations 155-160 Priest Assignments

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

On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 1:03 PM, Craig Daniel <teucer@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 1:01 PM, Craig Daniel <teucer@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 10:17 PM, Jamie Dallaire
> > <bad.leprechaun@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 10:14 PM, Jamie Dallaire
> >> <bad.leprechaun@xxxxxxxxx>wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 9:04 PM, Jamie Dallaire <
> bad.leprechaun@xxxxxxxxx>wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>  *Consultation 160:*
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Supplicant: Sgeo
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Question: Is the MoM ever allowed to turn the Clock On?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Reasoning: When there are no unfulfilled Ministerial obligations,
> the
> >>>>>> MoM is obligated to turn the Clock On. However, when the MoM is so
> >>>>>> obligated, there exists an unfulfilled Ministerial
> obligation,preventing the
> >>>>>> MoM from turning the Clock On. But then, there exists no such
> obligation,
> >>>>>> etc.
> >
> >> I assign Consultation 160 to Priest teucer.
> >
> > I answer YES.
> >
> > Reasoning: For the good of the game this one needs to be answered YES
> > by whatever tortured logic we can find to do so Consistently, and I
> > hope the following is good enough.
> >
> > The MoM is obligated to turn the Clock on only if there are no
> > unfulfilled Ministerial obligations at the instant when they do so.
> > The obligation to turn the Clock on comes into being (allowing it to
> > happen) and is fulfilled at the exact same instant.
> >
> > Before the Clock gets turned on, the question of whether it must (and
> > thus may) be turned on is answerable only as a paradox - if there is
> > such an obligation, it is unfulfilled, and so the obligation doesn't
> > exist, meaning no obligations are unfulfilled. But once the MoM
> > decides to assume that they may turn on the Clock, then at the same
> > instant the Clock becomes on, the paradox ceases to exist and turning
> > it on comes to be mandatory - making it fortunate for the metamin that
> > they have just fulfilled that obligation.
> >
> >  - teucer
> >
>
> I submit the above to the Public Forum.


I declare teucer Answer to be Inconsistent. I'd answer this one yes too, but
with different reasoning. Could it be that you're confusing violations of
the rules (i.e. crimes) with outright breaking the rules (i.e. impossible)?
I don't see any other reason you'd go through such tortured logic "for the
good of the game".

"The Clock can be turned On or Off by any player as a game action; however,
doing so is a violation of the rules unless the rules specifically state
that it isn't."

I could turn on the clock, you could turn on the clock, anyone could turn it
on or off at anytime. Including the MoM. It's just a violation of the Rules
at most times. If it turns out it's never -not- a violation of the rules,
then that does need to be fixed. But it's not a big issue, since we can just
choose not to prosecute the MoM for this.

>
>
> I also submit the following Consultation:
> {Question: Ten seconds before the Clock most recently became On, was
> the MoM allowed to turn it on?}


This is Consultation 171. I'll go roll the dice real soon.

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