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." dynamicwind.com --W.B. Yeats, The Song of the Happy Shepherd _______________________________________________ spoon-discuss mailing list spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss