Re: [s-d] [s-b] Consultation: Is ehird still a Player?

[Tyler <wisety@xxxxxxxxx>]

I don't get it, why is ehird not being a player a paradox? And, btw, hooray
for long-standing game custom!

On Mon, Jan 5, 2009 at 7:28 AM, Craig Daniel <teucer@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 11:33 PM, Warrigal <ihope127+w@xxxxxxxxx<ihope127%2Bw@xxxxxxxxx>>
> wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 5:04 PM, 0x44 <bnomic@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> I submit the following consultation: Is the External Force formerly
> known as
> >> ehird still a Player?
> >
> > I assign this, Consultation 9999+i, to teucer. I murphily Resign from
> > the Ministry of Questions.
>
> I answer Consultation 9999+i FALSE.
>
> Arguments:
> First, I cannot consistently answer it TRUE, as no Consultation with
> that number can both exist and have that as the correct answer. But
> this is largely irrelevant.
> Second, ehird resigned. E claims this required calculation of
> something ambiguous. Longstanding game custom is that this means that
> what action is being taken must be unambiguous; actions whose details
> require referencing results of the busy beaver function for which the
> output is unknown, for example, are not valid. Forfeiture does not
> require anyone to calculate anything to understand that it is, in
> fact, forfeiture.
> Third, if ehird's assertion that an action which requires others to
> calculate something ambiguous to know its effects counts and is thus
> afflicted by the aforementioned rule, it is still irrelevant. Figuring
> out what the rules say is not the same as calculating a number, and
> thus the fate of ehird's macks, while ambiguous, is not a calculation.
> Fourth, rule 5e1 states that the only true name of this game is B
> Nomic, which logically entails the assertion that this is a game.
> Since "game" is nowhere defined in the ruleset, it has its most common
> English meaning, which is an activity with rules which people engage
> in for recreation. It is inherent in the nature of leisure activities,
> including games, that they be voluntary, ergo, rule 5e1 allows players
> to stop playing. (They can and generally should, however, specify the
> results of such for those that are continuing to play.) Thus even if
> rule 5e10 had attempted to stop ehird forfeiting, Rule 5e1 takes
> precedence over it.
>
> Citing arguments two through four above as reasons why it can't be
> TRUE and the inverse of argument one to invalidate a FALSE judgment, I
> answer Consultation 9999 PARADOX.
>
>  - teucer
>  _______________________________________________
> spoon-business mailing list
> spoon-business@xxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-business
>



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