Re: [s-d] [s-b] Reassignment

[Ed Murphy <emurphy42@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

ais523 wrote:

> On Tue, 2009-02-03 at 07:46 -0800, Ed Murphy wrote:
>> As I understand it, the argument for YES is that a rule saying "X may
>> Y by Z" does not thereby say "X may Z".  Note that, when Z is not
>> defined by the rules, then 5E57 explicitly designates it as a Thing
>> (even if it's an abstract piece of contract-defined gamestate that
>> doesn't use an ownable-object-like metaphor) and allows a contract to
>> create it.
> 
> The problem is that even with that argument, Z still becomes a "activity
> specified by the Rules that changes the state of the game". Yes, I think
> that this is a serious bug in rule 5e10.

That just defines Z as a Game Action.  A rule needs to say "X may Z"
before 5E10 will expand it to "X may Z as a Game Action".
_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss