Glotmorf on 15 Apr 2003 05:20:01 -0000

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [spoon-discuss] Re: [Spoon-business] Athena's Society

On 4/15/03 at 12:26 AM Daniel Lepage wrote:

>On Monday, April 14, 2003, at 10:02  PM, Baron von Skippy wrote:
>>> I change my name to Athena.
>>> Athena's Society changes its charter to read as follows:
>>> {{
>>> If Athena's Society has points or BNS greater than the number of
>>> Members it has plus one, Athena's Society transfers one of that
>>> propoerty to each of its Members that can have that property, plus
>>> one to M-Tek. Athena's Society performs Managerial Actions or changes
>>> its Charter when the Prez of M-Tek says it does.
>>> }}
>>> 						Athena (formerly Glotmorf)
>> -*sighs* Let that be a lesson, kids. Don't write yourself into rules.
>> It's a bad idea.-
>I DON'T CFI this, but I would like to open it to discussion:
>Statement: The sentence "Names given to game entities or types of game
>entities must be unique." in Rule 2 means that no entity may change eir
>name to a name ever used by another entity, regardless of whether or
>not the other entity still exists.
>Defendant: Glotmorf
>Analysis by Plaintiff:
>Regardless of whether or not an object exists any more, if it once
>existed with an official name, then that name identifies that object.
>To create another object with the same name would be to cause that name
>to no longer uniquely identify an object; such a name would thus no
>longer be unique, violating Rule 2. As it is impossible to perform any
>action that violates the rules, it is thus impossible for any entity to
>change its name to the name of any other object, extant or otherwise.
>Anyone have any thoughts?

The sentence "Names given to game entities or types of game entities must be unique" could be (and I suspect was intended to be) interpreted to mean the giving of names to entities upon their creation.  If a player changes eir name, e's not being given a name, but is in fact altering an existing name for emself.

Aside from that, I question whether an entity that ceases to exist from the point of view of the game has a bearing on the game.  Mr. in a Spacesuit's proposal would change that somewhat, by making former players continue to exist in a game context, though statless; that would more likely have prevented my doing what I did than Rule 2 does.

Under the circumstances, though, I'm more inclined to put on my benevolent tyrant hat and point out that this heads off the constitutional crisis I mentioned earlier; with no Athena, there would be no way at all to change the charter or membership of Athena's Society.  With Athena declared a "former player", there would be no workaround either.

Why am I the one to take the reins of Athena's Society?  In the words of Al Franken, "Because I thought of it first."


The Ivory Mini-Tower: a cyber-anthropologist's blog

spoon-discuss mailing list