Re: [s-d] Re: Peter tries to Scam

[Jeremy Cook <athena@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sun, Jan 09, 2005 at 04:30:50PM -0500, Peter Cooper Jr. wrote:
> Iain <iop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> > The "standard"(?!) interpretation of r18 is that it applies to the
> > effects of actions, not just the cause: so the creation of points
> > and the changing of rules are both regulated elsewhere in the rule
> > set, hence neither is permitted by r18. I think this (or a very
> > similar) scam has been attempted before.... but since we stopped
> > giving titles for such things, I cant recall when or who...
> 
> Dan Schmidt <tiber264@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> > Too late. Zarpint tried did this a few nweeks earlier
> > and it didn't work. Nowhere in the rules does it say
> > that making 1000 points or changing rules are actions.

I did?

> 
> Well, those reasonings make sense (and I expected that someone had
> tried this before), but then my question would be: why does r393
> ("Players may not change the game state.") exist, whereas I don't see
> a similar restriction for other Game Objects?

Because societies have only gradually gained legal personality in
this game. That was written before societies existed.

So I guess a society could do something unregulated that changed
the game state right now.

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