Re: [s-d] Time Jump

[Jamie Dallaire <bad.leprechaun@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 5:16 PM, James Baxter <jebaxter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>wrote:

>
> > Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 22:09:39 +0000
> > From: bnomic@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > To: spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: Re: [s-d] Time Jump
> >
> > Rule 5e10 doesn't say that Game Actions cannot permit or cause
> retroactive
> > changes to the game.
> >
> > Further, calculating what happened last nweek is trivial, none of the
> > required actions occurred because no ndays passed. The nweek is not
> defined
> > as a number of ndays, it is merely incremented upon the nday becoming
> > greater than 12.
>
> Rule 5E10 says "require or force" which means the same as "permit or
> cause".
>
> Was there a beginning of nweek 154 or an end of nweek 153?


I have to agree with 0x44 here. For example, take the Beast. "At the start
of each nday 1, 5, and 9, the OCB performs a single Trick". Because ndays
153-9, 154-1, and 154-5 did not have a start at 00:00 UTC in the traditional
sense, the Beast simply didn't perform any tricks then.

That said, the question of whether nweeks 153 and 154 had an end or a
beginning is a very good one! That might change things like:

- In my previous post about Proposals, would the end of 153, if considered
as such, be equivalent to the end of the voting period (which never started)
on proposals from that nweek? If so, they're not in limbo, rather tallying
happened and found a tie on everything, which means they are Lost.

- Ministerial elections are in limbo regardless, since their deadline is not
the end of the nweek, but rather end of nday 10 of that nweek, which was
never reached.

- If nweek 154 has a beginning, then since none of us voted in the previous
nweek, we all lost the Vested property. Quorum is 0! Wait, we don't have a
quorum anymore, do we?

- If nweek 154 has a beginning, by the same logic nday 154-5 has a
beginning, and the Beast performed an action when 0x44 activated that Tweak!

- I'm sure there's a lot more to think about too.

Also, I was about to argue that 0x44 failed to ratify the clock display
because he did not receive the 4 support required to approve a public
display. Well, he did it via Tweak. If Tweaks can ratify, and we have
unlimited Tweaks, we really don't need the approval mechanism anymore.
(though I'd suggest keeping it in for when Tweaks go to hell, which they
invariably will).

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