Re: [s-d] Judgement draft

[Antonio Dolcetta <antonio.dolcetta@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 24 Nov 2006, at 23:43, shadowfirebird@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

> So what you're saying is that the judge does not need to modify the
> game state because once e's clarified the rules then the rules do it
> for him?

Exactly, that's the idea.

>
> Well, that makes sense.  But I'm uggered if I know whether it works.
>
> What if the rule says "at point x in the game if y happened, give
> Antonio 10 points."  And you ask for a judgement on whether y
> happened.  And it goes in your favour.  I could (perversely,
> awkwardly) argue that since we're no longer at point x, the rules no
> longer grant you the points.

I'd say that since point x happened, I should have gotten my points,  
since the rules and the current resolved RFJs say so. If necessary I  
could issue a new RFJ to that effect and see what happens.




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