spoon-discuss: RE: spoon-business: Game Action

["Gavin Doig" <gmd@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> [[Players *may* forfeit for themselves, but nothing in the
> rules to say I can't do it for them.  I think this is what
> Glotmorf's CFJs were getting at...the decision on the
> inevitable CFJ for this should be interesting. 
>
Forfeiting is regulated; therefore, this fails. Of course, it will become legal in 1 nweek... apparently, that's the way people want it.

> Especially
> since I am now the only available judge, and all of you
> who have just forfeited can't submit a CFJ.]]
>
Ah, no. It doesn't work like that. You're only the only available judge if the CFJ is true (assuming the CFJ is wordes as "this works"). If it's false, then anyone can be selected.

The usual way nomics deal with this is by means of a "thread split" - keep 2 separate records (threads) of each potential game state. In the thread where this doesn't work, the admin can distribute the CFJ as normal, and he should do so, in case that thread is right. In the thread where this works, he's quite correctly pointed out that he cannot assign it to anyone. If the judge in the "doesn't work" thread thinks that it does work, then he's free to "judge" false, or ignore the CFJ, or whatever, since it was never really assigned to him.

This is where Platonism really shines - once we've decided which of our threads reflects the game state, we can just ignore anything which only happened in the other thread, and everything is fine. Well, unless you've broken the game, but... well, that's *your* fault. ;-)

uin.
-- 

_______________________________________________
Sign-up for your own FREE Personalized E-mail at Mail.com
http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup

Win a ski trip!
http://www.nowcode.com/register.asp?affiliate=1net2phone3a