Zarpint on Mon, 12 Apr 2004 12:17:20 -0500 (CDT)

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

Re: [Spoon-business] Re: [spoon-discuss] p1833

On Mon, 12 Apr 2004, [iso-8859-1] Bill Adlam wrote:

> Wonko pointed out:
> > Rule 19 states that when a proposal passes, the gamestate changes
> > listed within are made. This takes precedence over rule 27, which
> > states that a player who is ineligible for a Win may not win.
> But if a proposal breaks any rule, it violates r10, which has a still
> higher precedence.

No, proposals have to follow the Rules. Since r19 takes precedence over
r27, following the Rules means following r19.

> > Actually, r27 is botched - it says ineligible players "may not win",
> > not "may not be awarded wins"; it was determined by some CFI or other
> > that "to win" and "to be awarded a win" are not the same thing.

That's not botched. That's how it was intended, I would suppose. It makes
sense that ineligible players couldn't win normally, but could be awarded
a win - why would we want to stop that?

> In that case, I award myself a Win.

You don't have that authority to change the gamestate. A prop does.

Zarpint Jeremy Cook    "All thy toiling only breeds new dreams, new dreams;
mcfoufou@xxxxxxxxx         there is no truth saving in thine own heart."               --W.B. Yeats, The Song of the Happy Shepherd
spoon-discuss mailing list