Re: [s-d] consultation 30 (assigned to Peter)

["Geoffrey Spear" <geoffspear@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 8/3/07, Antonio Dolcetta <antonio.dolcetta@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Peter Cooper Jr. wrote:
> > Antonio Dolcetta wrote:
> >> I'm not convinced I actually *need* the paper to "consent" to pull
> >> the one man agreement off. The sheet of paper thing was just waving
> >> of hands. The exploit is based off the weak definition of "External
> >> force" as "An External Force is anything which exists independently
> >> of the game."
> >>
> >> consider the following: i have an imaginary friend called "Oinotna".
> >>
> >> Oinotna is an external force
> >>
> >> I create an agreement between me and oinotna...
> >
> > Oh, a sheet of paper is certainly an External Force. It's quite possible
> > that your imaginary friend is, too.
> >
> > However, the definition of Agreement says that the parties must have
> > explicitly consented to being part of the Agreement. So, your sheet of
> > paper (and probably your imaginary friend) can't be a party to a B Nomic
> > Agreement.
> >
>
> ok for the sheet of paper, but of course my imaginary fiend gives
> consent, explicitly (and vocally) too, the fact that I'm the only person
> that can hear him is not relevant.

I have no problem with you forming a Faction with your imaginary
friend, provided you don't try to register your imaginary friend as a
Player, and I'll oppose any attempt to change the rules to allow you
to use this Faction to cast more than one vote on any proposal.
Whether that vote is cast as your vote or as your Faction's vote seems
irrelevant to me.


-- 
Geoffrey Spear
http://www.geoffreyspear.com/
_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss