spoon-discuss: RE: spoon-business: How does this look?

["Gavin Doig" <gmd@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> {{
> __Stil a Few Bugs in the System__
> 
> Amend rule 17 by replacing the sentence,
> 'Actions occur upon reaching the appropriate Fora.'
> with,
> 'Actions cannot occur unless they are recognized by the Administrator. When
> an Action is recognized by the Administrator, it is treated as if it had
> happened at the time when it reached the appropriate Fora. The Administrator
> must recognize all actions unless e believes an action is either illegal or
> destructive of play. The Admin must recognize all CFJ's. If the Admin
> refuses to recognize an Action, e must declare so in a Public Forum. All
> recognitions and refusals of recognition must happen in the same
> chronological order as the Actions they respond to arrived in a Public
> Forum.'
>
> [[Thus, really bad ideas can be culled by the Admin, but e must recognize it
> if a CFJ challenges eir lack of Recognition. The chronology bit ensures that
> if I give someone 10 points to pay off Luigi and its not recognized until
> after the end of the nweek, e gets the points before Luigi comes.]]
>
I don't think the chronology stuff works, because Luigi will have automatically broken his legs already, so you'd be changing the past - he'd have used the points, but his legs would still be broken. You'd need to change more than just when the action is treated as having happened. (For my rule 10 thing, there were no side effects, so "treated as if" worked).

Besides which, I still don't see why there's anything at all wrong with rule 17.

> Amend rule 28 to add the sentence 'All fora which have not been designated
>as Public are Private.'
>
> [[So now, if two players have a spoken conversation, we know that that's not
> a Public Forum.]]
>
Don't we know that anyway? And shouldn't this really be a separate proosal?

> Amend rule 128 to replace the text,
> 'A Judge's decision shall have the force of law.'
> with
> 'If an Action is found to be illegal by a CFJ, it may not be recognized by
> the Admin or, if it already was, it is treated as if it were not recognized.
> If an Action which the Admin refused to recognize is found to be legal by a
> CFJ, it shall be treated as if it were recognized.'
>
> [Much better than that 'Force of Law' garbage.]]
>
Well, pretty much anything would be better, but as above I'm not sure if "treated as if" is enough to get round the retroactivity thing.

> If there is a rule 10, repeal it.
> Create a new Rule:
> {{
> __Follow The Rules__
> 
> All game entities and the Administrator must always abide by all the Rules
> then in effect, in the form in which they are then in effect.
> }}{*(uncategorized),10*}
> Change the aforementioned rule's serial number to 10/1.
>
> [[Rule 10 may look useless, but the important word there is 'all'. Without
> it, what rules people are compelled to follow are unregulated, so I could
> say "I declare myself immune to Bandwidth Rationing" and hey!, it's
> permitted!]]
> }}
>
Rule 10 may look useless, but that's because it is. While it may be permitted to say you declare yourself immune to whatever you want, doing so doesn't actually make you immune to anything.

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