RE: spoon-discuss: RE: spoon-business: Proposal: For consistancy

["Harrison, Andrew" <andy.harrison@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> > > 
> > > This game is an agent.
> > 
> > That could have interesting effects. Why do you want to do 
> that then?
> 
> Because the rules say that an agent is an entity capable of 
> action, and
> that the status of agents may be modified only as specified 
> in the rules.
> I think it is better to do this than to have a fight about it later.
> 
> I have some other proposals coming up that might work better 
> if there is
> no argument that the game is an agent.

Are you interpreting Rule 105 as:
If entity X is capable of action then entity X is an Agent.
or:
If entity X is an Agent then entity X is capable of action.
?

With the first interpetation I would say that the game is not capable of
action and therefore is not an Agent. However if you are using the second
interpretation and you want to introduce a rule that causes the game to
perform actions and you first want to make it an Agent, then that sounds
like fun...

--
The Kid