Re: [s-d] [s-b] Fire sale!

["Jamie Dallaire" <bad.leprechaun@xxxxxxxxx>]

Interesting, Hose! We come up with diametrically opposed views about players
(they probably don't exist vs they have to be game objects) yet still come
to the conclusion that pikhq didn't cease to be a player!

Hmm let me revise/add to what I just said a little bit:

"A Player is an Outsider who consents to be governed by the rules, fulfills
all requirements for continued playerhood specified by the rules, and has
become a Player in a manner specified by the rules that were in effect at
the time e became a Player.

Any Human External Force that is not already a Player may request to join
the game by posting a message to a Public Forum containing a request to
become a Player and a uniquely identifying name that e wishes to be known
by."
I guess my point here might be mostly about the naming. What the above says,
in other words, is that some Outsiders can be called Players, and these are
the ones who consent and all that other stuff. They become Players by
requesting to do so and specifying a name by which they wish to be known.
pikhq the player was the same entity as the outsider that typed up his junk
(what I mean is that it's not like players are projections of outsiders, or
distinct from their corresponding outsiders in any way. they are the same
thing). pikhq (I'm using the player name to refer to the outsider/player,
even though we probably shouldn't use the player name to refer to the
outsider) ceased to be a player but this didn't make him cease to be an
outsider...

It's sort of unsatisfactory to call that outsider Josiah Worchester (since
it's the projection of Josiah) or to call that outsider pikhq (since that's
the name the outsider chose to be known by as a player, which he is not
anymore).

It's sort of like I write some semi-autobiographical fiction in which the
protagonist is a projection of my own character. But I can't really use my
own name for him. Then this protagonist begins a life as a rock star (I said
SEMI-autobiographical) and adopts a stage name. The rock star and the
protagonist are the same person (though distinct from the actual me).
Eventually the protagonist converts to some hardcore prohibitive religion
and completely retires from the world of music. He might not be accurately
referred to as "Slash" (or whatever) anymore even though the tabloids would
still do it.

Since "the projection of Josiah Worchester into the game of B Nomic" is
really unwieldy to type, I suggest we refer to this alleged outsider as

STEVE

from now on if we plan to talk about him much more. I submit that the owner
of that ghost rapier is STEVE.

Billy Pilgrim

On Jan 10, 2008 8:38 PM, Jamie Dallaire <bad.leprechaun@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> I think pikhq still is a Game Object. (I will nuance this sentence
> lower...)
>
> - pikhq is an External Force, or at least the human who types at a
> keyboard and signs his messages pikhq is an External Force. That is, Josiah
> Worchester (whether or not that is his real name...) is an External Force.
> No doubt about that.
> - an Outsider is a Game Object that represents the projection of an
> External Force into the game. Nothing indicates which External Forces are
> projected into the game as Outsiders and which are not. For all we know, my
> dog, my baby cousin, the "y" key on my keyboard, and my copy of Gran Turismo
> 2 for Playstation may be projected into the game as Outsiders (which are
> Game Objects).
>    - What is clear is that all current Players are Outsiders, since only
> Outsiders may become Players. One could attempt to argue that the rules
> never explicitly projected our human selves into the game, but I would
> counter that with 2 arguments
>       - 1) the logical one: at the time when most of us (including pikhq)
> became players, the rule specifying that all actions that change the
> gamestate must be explicitly permitted by the rules was not in place.
>       - 2) the utilitarian one: if we were never projected into the game,
> we are not players, and we are not playing. all this time we have just been
> sending meaningless words to a couple mailing lists.
>    - If we current players are all Outsiders, then by the same logic,
> pikhq/Josiah was both a player and an Outsider immediately before
> forfeiting.
> - When pikhq forfeit, that rule about explicitly specified changes WAS in
> place, meaning the only gamestate changes that happened when pikhq forfeit
> was that pikhq ceased to be a player. The Outsider (a game object) that
> represents the projection of Josiah Worchester could not cease to be an
> Outsider because it was not allowed by the Rules. (Whether any players who
> forfeit before this rule came into effect also ceased to be outsiders is
> beyond the point)
>
> Thus, unless I screwed up somewhere (please tell me), I think we can be
> quite confident that the rapier in question still exists. Its owner is "the
> Outsider that represents the projection of Josiah Worchester into the game
> of B Nomic". This seems to be true whether you take the philosophical
> position that one particular quark out of the many that make up my bedsheet
> is also projected as an Outsider (in which case that quark's projection
> could possibly own a device) or that that quark is not projected (in which
> case you might think that Josiah Worchester is "trapped" inside the game, or
> at least that his projection is).
>
> Billy Pilgrim
>
> On Jan 10, 2008 8:15 PM, Justin Ahmann <quesmarktion@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > But is pikhq still a Game Object?
> >
> > Codae
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----
> > From: Jamie Dallaire <bad.leprechaun@xxxxxxxxx>
> > To: discussion list for B Nomic < spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2008 8:14:26 PM
> > Subject: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Fire sale!
> >
> > Hmmm. That would make sense.
> >
> > On Jan 10, 2008 8:08 PM, ihope <ihope127@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > > On Jan 10, 2008 7:57 PM, Aaron Coquet < farfromunique@xxxxxxxxx>
> > wrote:
> > > > Is there anywhere in the rules that says something to the effect of,
> > > "When a
> > > > player quits the game, they are no longer a COO, DOO or other type
> > of
> > > > Something-Owning object"?
> > >
> > > I doubt it. The only applicable rule seems to be:
> > >
> > > 'A "device owner object", or DOO, is a type of game object that may
> > > own devices. All players are device owner objects.'
> > >
> > > Therefore, whether or not something other than a Player is a DOO is
> > > undefined, unless defined elsewhere. I'd say, then, that pikhq is
> > > still a DOO despite not still being a Player.
> > >
> > > --Ivan Hope CXXVII
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > spoon-discuss mailing list
> > > spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
> > > http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > spoon-discuss mailing list
> > spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
> > http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss
> > _______________________________________________
> > spoon-discuss mailing list
> > spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
> > http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss
> >
>
>
_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss