Re: [s-d] [s-b] Consultation 183

[Ed Murphy <emurphy42@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

j wrote:

>> It says: game actions can happen by being caused by a rule.
>>
>> So we have two ways of performing game actions.
>>
>> 1) Post, to a public forum, that you are performing a game actions that is
>> permitted by the rules.
>>
>> 2) automatically, according to a rule that causes the game action to occur.
>>   
> 
> It was #2 - The game action happened automatically, because Contracts 
> are an extension of the Rules. Contracts can cause obligations (and 
> their triggered automatic execution) and are able to consult the general 
> world to see if a qualifying action has occurred - e.g. the transfer of 
> macks, the joining of a Contract.
> 
> No limitation was put in place stating only internal game state is 
> accessible. Contracts should be able to watch all sorts of External 
> Forces. I should be able to create a Contract that pays players based on 
> S&P 500 movement. In comex's case, the contract tracked (or reliably 
> assumed to track) player breathing.
> 
> The only problem is that the Rule doesn't spell out "explicit consent".

What aspect of 5E57's "No Player shall be made a Party to a Contract
without their explicit consent" is being disputed?  The only way I
see it working is if it's backed by one of the "5E10 is broken and
lets anyone do anything" interpretations.
_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss