Re: [spoon-discuss] Re: [Spoon-business] CFI -- Dropping da Big One

[Wonko <dplepage@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Quoth Glotmorf,

> On 10/4/02 at 6:52 PM Wonko wrote:
> 
>> Quoth Glotmorf,
>> 
>>> I make the following CFI:
>>> 
>>> Statement:
>>> 
>>> Points, shillings, units of raw material, big sticks, balls of wax,
>> athames,
>>> piles of kindling, towels, large and small lumps of scrap metal, pinball
>> guns,
>>> gnomes, beer cans, alcoholic beverages, shears, cotton sponges, bonus
>> boxes,
>>> shares of stock and airspeeders ceased to exist as of the beginning of
>> nweek
>>> 24.
>>> 
>>> Analysis:
>>> 
>>> The above objects, within their respective types, are indistinguishable
>> from
>>> one another.  They are all defined with rules whose Chutzpah is 1.
>>> 
>>> Rule 2 states all game entities must have uniquely identifying names.
>>> 
>>> Therefore, the objects mentioned above did not exist as of the beginning
>> of
>>> nweek 24.
>> 
>> Seems to me that a better interpretation might be that your proposal failed
>> to create rule 6, on the grounds that 'Entity' was already defined in such
>> a
>> way that this wasn't an issue, and by altering r6, your proposal was
>> violation r2 by making it so that there were entities without unique names.
>> 
>> Side note: If Mr. Morf's interpretation stands, then we also don't have a
>> Grid. Or more accurately, we have a Grid, but it has no Grid Squares or
>> Surface Squares, 'cause they're all non-uniquely named. But that's okay,
>> because the interpretation is bogus anyway.
> 
> Of course grid squares are uniquely named.  Each is uniquely identified by its
> (x,y) position.  That's why I didn't include service malls either, because
> each is uniquely identified as the service mall at (x,y).  Same with Big
> Rocks.  Sirens have names.  Gnome bags are one per player, therefore each
> gnome bag is <Player X>'s gnome bag.  Lots of things are uniquely named.  But
> points aren't.

I don't think I'd call a Grid Square's coordinates 'names'. For example,
under the old Tower of Babel rule, multiple objects were considered to be
Grid Squares, and they all had the same coordinates. Nothing says that each
Grid Square must have unique coordinates. And even if something did, I'm
still not sure that I'd call them names; they're more like attributes than
names.

As for the others, they're not uniquely identified like that. The fact that
there is a Service Mall on each of those specific Grid squares doesn't mean
that there can't be more than one; there just happens not to be at the
moment. Same thing with Big Rocks, since although there are rules to try to
discourage people from putting two Rocks on one square, there's no rule that
actually *says* there can't be more than one. And again, even if there were
such a rule, the position isn't a name, it's an attribute.

Sirens I'll agree have unique names, simply because Dave is required to name
them. But the others still don't look uniquely *named* to me.

> Funny that you're saying my proposal would have failed to create rule 6.
> According to your logic in other arguments, I can create proposals, and
> proposals can change the ruleset any way they want.  Can't have it both ways,
> dude.

Hmmm... Perhaps I am waffling a bit here... I thought my argument was really
that anything could be put into a proposal, and the changes could be
implemented however we wanted provided it wasn't made illegal by a rule
which superseded the one which implements proposals... Where did I say that
any proposal could do anything?

-- 
Wonko

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