Re: [s-d] [s-b] Consultation assignments

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

On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 11:06 PM, Craig Daniel <teucer@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>
> > It doesn't say that. "A Laundry Corporation is a Corporation which may
> > create or destroy socks of its appropriate color." It doesn't say there
> > Socks can't be destroyed any other way, except the default from 4e2, so
> > the submitted Oracularity would tie things off neatly.
>
> J is correct. 4E68 calls for one kind of sock destruction but does not
> deny the possibility of other types - and it didn't occur to me when
> writing my reasoning that someone could think the sentence j quoted
> meant socks couldn't otherwise be destroyed, or I'd have quoted the
> text to show why that seems odd.


The default from 4E2 was added specifically to avoid this kind of situation.
I think your reading of the situation would, ultimately, also allow events
like the following to happen:

The Oracle can Assign Consultations to Priests. I'm just a random Player,
not the Oracle. But the Consultations rule does not deny the possibility of
other types of consultation assignments. Therefore, I have the power to
assign this Consultation to myself.

OR

Players may Vote. Rules don't say other entities can Vote. My Corporation
Votes for my Proposals.

Here's the way I read it:

4E68: Laundry Corps can destroy their Color's Socks.
4E2: Socks can't be destroyed in any way not specified in the Rules.

ergo, Socks can't be destroyed just because some sockholder decided to quit.
Note that I'm NOT implying that Socks can't be destroyed through non-4E68
means, such as Oracularities, Proposals, Tweaks, potentially Beast Tricks,
etc. But only because the Rules allow those kinds of actions/events to alter
gamestate in non-specific ways (which satisfies 4e2). Nothing in the Rules
says a forfeit has the power to change gamestate except for that Outsider's
status as a Player and their Attributes, and for any specific provisions in
the Rules (e.g. the one that your oracularity tried to implement ---
auto-sock destruction upon forfeit, which now WOULD work because a rule
would allow sock destruction by this means (satisfying 4e2).

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