Re: [s-d] [s-b] Inflationary Language

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

Hmmm, so I think you're right. Rule 4E8 states that outsiders may be
permitted to create game documents by the rules. THis part doesn't mean they
can create them willy nilly, just that the rules in different palces can say
when/where/how specific types of game documents can be created. which they
do, for tweaks, consultations, proposals, contracts, etc.

BUT a contract, which is not a rule, has no authority to allow for the
creation of motions, whether by outsiders, players, legal entities,
corporations, etc. That would be creating a game object in a manner not
specified by the rules.

So are motions something that has no effect outside the scope of the
contract? Nothing ever says this, in fact the contract claims they are game
documents. Which is patently false.

Contracts/corporations have been created in the past, and this is not in
dispute unless any of those was created BY another contract or corporation
(which isn't an outsider) but I don't think this has happened. But if we
consider motions to be game documents, they never actually existed...

Do we want to backtrack gamestate on that or just ratify some displays?

Good catch, j!

BP

On Sat, Oct 4, 2008 at 3:55 PM, Jay Campbell <bnomic@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>
> >> Strike this whole message. Looking back, we went through all this over
> >> the Switch itself, which is why in the end it specified changing "the
> >> third word of this document" rather than creating a (meta-)Object. You'd
> >> think I'd have learnt something.
> >>
> >
> >
> > OK that just confused me. I thought you had a point there with your bit
> > about the switch, no?
> >
>
> I did have a point, but history didn't back me up. The switch in the
> form of a meta-object WAS objected to.
>
> There's another example in Blue Corp:
>
> "Any Voting Sockholder may attempt to amend this contract by posting a
> Motion by announcement. The Motion is a Game Document and should specify
> a list of Contract Actions."
>
> As Potential Sockholders, Corporations may become Voting Stockholders,
> so this bit of text ASSUMES that a corporation is allowed to create a
> specific sub-type of Game Document called a Motion.
>
> Either corps are allowed to create objects somewhat willy nilly, or
> incorporated Blue sockholders can't post Motions.
> _______________________________________________
> 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