Re: [s-d] [s-b] BobTHJ's Refresh Proposal

["Mike McGann" <mike.mcgann@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Nov 26, 2007 3:27 PM, Roger Hicks <pidgepot@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> What is flawed about it? I personally never saw this as a flaw, and
> every other nomic I know of (with the exception of B) has this rule
> (or a close variant thereof).

I can't seem to find the reference for this at the moment, but this is
basically saying "Anything that is not prohibited by the rules is
allowed" but shouldn't it be "Nothing is permitted unless allowed by a
rule?". With your addition, if someone creates a rule that simply says
"First player to get 100 marbles wins", you can then simply say "I
give myself 100 marbles. I win." since giving yourself 100 marbles is
not regulated and therefore allowed. It is harder to nail down and try
to regulate everything needed than to simply have things disallowed by
default.

I think there are also some general problems with timing and change of
game state. If an illegal game action is performed (that doesn't
require support or objections), who decides if it is legal or not?
When does game state change? Who has the authority to recind that game
action or to clean up any game state? Illegal actions could then cause
a chain reaction of other actions by other players in response which
could all be illegal as well. Consultations can be used to interpret
the rules but not to change game state. Oracularities could take a
full nweek to go into effect. What happens in the mean time? Also,
would that be retroactively changing the game state, which is not
allowed?

The problem with the devices was a Consultation was answered by Wooble
that "could" have allowed Players to create Blueprints. Wooble
immediately created one, but the issue hadn't been decided yet. So how
do you contest the blueprint creation? By submitting a Consultation?
It would be the exact same Consultation that was Answered by Wooble.
At that point in time, was the action of creating the blueprint legal
or illegal or in limbo? What happens in limbo?

Also, the "AFO" decided to join as a Player and then immediately
submitted a Consultation and a Proposal. It wasn't clear if the AFO
was a Player or not and there was not a general consensus on this. If
was deemed to not be a Player, then the Consultation and Proposal are
illegal. Is it legal until proven illegal? Game state changed as soon
as it was given a Consultation Number and a Proposal Number. Can the
game state be easily changed to fix this? In this case, probably, but
in others cases it may not be so easy.

Take this case. I have zero points. As a game action, I give myself
300 points. That of course is illegal, but says who? Okay, submit a
Consultation and then an Oracularity to set my points back to zero.
Well, you have to wait for the voting period. In the mean time, I
convert all 300 points to m1500, this can go on, and on...

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