[s-d] Re: [s-b] [auto] Peter votes

[Daniel Lepage <dpl33@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On May 22, 2005, at 5.56 PM, automailer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

> Proposal 95/0: Random junk.                             : Against
> Proposal 96/0: We Recognize All, Capicse Kiddos?        : Against
> And I don't think this does anything more than "The game is governed 
> by the rules" that we already have. And if there's no way to 
> distinguish it from a legal Game Action, then nobody would try to 
> suggest that it was not in fact a legal game action.

I disagree. The default case was created precisely because people *did* 
suggest that some Actions weren't legal, even though it couldn't be 
proven illegal. It involved the Cursed Sushi of Babel: actions taken by 
the holder of the Sushi couldn't take actions in forum messages unless 
those forum messages were put into  AltaVista's Babel Fish engine and 
translated into Korean and back (hence Rob's analysis of CFJ 218, 
<http://www.bnomic.org/history.php?rn=218>). The holder then posted a 
normal message, claiming that e'd found some text that e could put into 
Babel Fish to produce his normal message. We thought this was almost 
certainly false, but it was ruled that because we couldn't *prove* it 
false, we had to assume that it was true; that is, because it was 
theoretically possible to take a legal game action that looked 
*exactly* like what the player did, we had to assume that this is 
indeed what happened.

--
Wonko

You can only be young once. But you can always be immature.
     -Dave Barry

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