Re: [s-d] Judgement draft

[Antonio Dolcetta <antonio.dolcetta@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 24 Nov 2006, at 22:41, shadowfirebird@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

>> You will notice that the draft does not say that Judges have the  
>> power of altering gamestate, they just guide the interpretation of  
>> the rules.
>
> So if I ask for a judgement on the statement "I have won because X"
> the judge  can reply true or false but e doesn't have the power to
> grant me a Win?
>
> Note that I'm not saying that I think it wouldn't work.  I'm asking
> how it would work.
>

Umm, to explain the idea behind it i'll make an example:

suppose you submit the statement: "X", further Reasoning that X  
follows from Y and Z.

If the judgment is: true, then it means that yes, since Y and Z it  
must also be X. If X is "i should win", the administrator (or whoever  
hands out the wins) acknowledges that this is the official  
interpretation of the rules, and is "forced" to grant you a win.
If the judgment is false, then the official interpretation of the  
rules is that X does not follow from Y and Z, if necessary the  
judge's Reasoning might even say that from Y and Z comes W, and if W  
is "Antonio has 15 points", then whoever grants points gives Antonio  
his points, because the rules already say so, but their  
interpretation was unclear, and the RFJ cleared it up.
Is it really necessary to explicitly give the judge the power to  
modify the gamestate ?


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