Re: [s-d] [s-b] Consultation: declarations of invalidity

[Ed Murphy <emurphy42@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

BobTHJ wrote:

> In my estimation, every action needs to be valid until it is declared
> invalid, at which point the gamestate is retroactively changed to
> reflect that invalidity. Note that this is the way we have handled
> things all along. My refresh proposal was designed to limit this
> retroactive calculation to a maximum of one day.

This is still assuming that declaring an action invalid /makes/ it
invalid.  I don't think we've reached consensus on that yet.

This seems a good time to review the paradigms of Platonism (the
gamestate has objective existence separate from our records) vs.
Pragmatism (i.e. it doesn't).  Under Platonism, if an error is
discovered, then records are adjusted to match what the gamestate
really was all along.  The related concepts of Plato-Pragmatism (i.e.
moving away from automatic events and toward announcement-based
events), ratification (i.e. changing the gamestate to match records),
and equity (i.e. "this mistake can't practically be reversed, what do
we consider fair after-the-fact compensation?") all act to get
Pragmatic effects out of a Platonic interpretation.

In either case, your one-day challenge can be interpreted in a few
different ways:

   1) After the challenge time limit expires, the action retroactively
      becomes valid.

   2) After the challenge time limit expires, the gamestate becomes what
      it would have been if the action had been valid.

   3) Upon a challenge, the action retroactively becomes invalid.  If
      overturned on consultation, it retroactively becomes valid.

   4) Upon a challenge, the gamestate becomes what it would have been if
      the action had been invalid.  If overturned on consultation, the
      gamestate becomes what it would have been if the action had been
      valid.

1 and 3 are retroactive, hence explicitly prohibited.  2 and 4 simulate
retroactivity, hence explicitly allowed.  I favor 2 over 4, both because
I think it makes more sense, and because it seems to avoid crises.
_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss