Daniel Lepage on Sun, 2 Dec 2007 05:04:04 +0100 (CET) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
Re: [s-d] [s-b] Consultation |
On Dec 1, 2007, at 5:46 PM, Roger Hicks wrote: > On Dec 1, 2007 10:30 AM, Mike McGann <mike.mcgann@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> With the proposed change in the RP, something is unregulated and >> permitted if it isn't regulated or prohibited by a rule. Posing the >> question of "is X regulated?" may not be easy to answer. If the >> argument is, "But this works in Agora", then would replacing Rule >> 2125 >> with "Whatever is not prohibited or regulated by a rule is permitted >> and unregulated. However, for the purposes of this rule an action or >> in-game entity is regulated if described by a rule." be the same as >> Rule 2125 stands right now? I think someone should submit that as a >> Proposal over there, I'd love to read the discussion :-) >> > I'm not claiming my wording in the RP is the end all be all of > solutions. I recommend no one tries to exploit what they see as holes > in the permissibility system until we can all come to an agreement on > how it should read. My RP is just a first-shot attempt. Wordnet says regulation means "an authoritative rule", which means that all rules are regulations, so anything the rules talk about is regulated by definition. -- WOnko _______________________________________________ spoon-discuss mailing list spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss