Re: [s-d] [s-b] Consultation 196 on ehird and the time rip

[Ed Murphy <emurphy42@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Billy Pilgrim wrote:

> On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 11:11 AM, Elliott Hird <
> penguinofthegods@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
>> On 30 Jan 2009, at 15:51, Jamie Dallaire wrote:
>>
>>> Sure. I don't mind approving it away. I'll let you implement it since you
>>> know better than me what you did. You're unambiguously a Player now so you
>>> can do it.
>>>
>> Okay, I've edited the rule 5E10 page to remove the Temporal Prime
>> Directive,
>> which we need to Approve away for this to work. We can tweak it back in
>> after.
>>
>> I intend to Approve the Public Display http://b.nomic.net/index.php/Rules.
> 
> 
> I Object. Too easy to hack (not a persistent display, though I realize
> there's no easy way to get out of this using the wiki...)

"I intend to Approve <the PD> in the form it had when I announced
this intent."  Anyone can then (with minor tedium) confirm that he
isn't sneaking any stealth-edits into the process.

>> I intend to Approve the Public Display http://b.nomic.net/index.php/
>> Ehird_playerhood_hack.
> 
> 
> I Object to this one as well since it will contravene the temporal prime
> directive.
> 
> Suggestion: why can't we just tweak/approve something that says set the
> gamestate to what it would be IF ehird had been a Player since jan 16th?
> [doesn't actually change the past so not a problem... And then no need to
> mess with the rules.]

Agreed.  Also, for single documents such as Ehird_playerhood_hack, you
can intend to Approve a specified revision.

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