Re: [s-d] [s-b] THE MOST NOBLE AND RESPECTABLE RULESET OF THE NOMIC FORM

Arkady English on Thu, 22 Sep 2011 14:11:53 -0700 (MST)

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [s-d] [s-b] THE MOST NOBLE AND RESPECTABLE RULESET OF THE NOMIC FORMERLY KNOWN AS B:

To: discussion list for B Nomic <spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [s-d] [s-b] THE MOST NOBLE AND RESPECTABLE RULESET OF THE NOMIC FORMERLY KNOWN AS B:
From: Arkady English <arkadyenglish@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2011 22:11:49 +0100
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:x-google-sender-delegation:in-reply-to :references:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=QhzEcfMg78C2oj1fP+nGU/6P0n3K9DRIPY4JvgebJ+Y=; b=wta0H8UZoEAe/OvViWvsvs5vjrrnich8Yge5FyPaVBz7L7wFsDo1TXvl6IkDCZp0dO 5wPmnVYY7VxFS79Ee9bGSKtKozFV/CmuMlVo3kLcv7NMroISyA73hcSHgK+K9Igc4dn5 YfE7gaHVSQLiIUCacWeilex9xsCesC4d37lRU=
In-reply-to: <1316725115.2217.23.camel@desert>
References: <CAO56fiMa8R6DbBTX5eAH8MF1Kf-9S6=fjjUZpeYO9w6JVc_e_w@mail.gmail.com> <26C6DE5F-BB95-4ED1-90CB-BC765B6C8764@indistinct.org> <CAO56fiM9xqsnP14hp-Dq5WrFiNv3VmExHzADw5dAR0jWdAYQvg@mail.gmail.com> <1316725115.2217.23.camel@desert>

On 22 September 2011 21:58, Alex Smith <ais523@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 21:45 +0100, Rainbow Wolfe wrote:
>> 26. The creation of a rule fails if a third of the players object to it
>> in the week following its creation.
>> [[Value = -1 (INVALID)
>> 0x44 +1, 0x44 +1, Turiski -1, Rainbow Wolfe -1, Arkady -1]]
>
> Didn't Arkady just create a time paradox with that? -1ing a rule
> probably counts as objecting to it, and the rule was quite valid when
> creating it, so the third -1 would retroactively cause the creation of
> the rule that allowed creations of rules to retroactively fail to fail.
>
> --
> ?
>
> _______________________________________________
> spoon-discuss mailing list
> spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss
>

I should point out that I did explicitly disfavor rule 26.

Also, when I disfavored it, I'm pretty sure it was at +1.

So I don't think I caused a time paradox.
_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [s-d] [s-b] THE MOST NOBLE AND RESPECTABLE RULESET OF THE NOMIC FORMERLY KNOWN AS B:
  - From: Rainbow Wolfe

References:
- Re: [s-d] [s-b] THE MOST NOBLE AND RESPECTABLE RULESET OF THE NOMIC FORMERLY KNOWN AS B:
  - From: Rainbow Wolfe
- Re: [s-d] [s-b] THE MOST NOBLE AND RESPECTABLE RULESET OF THE NOMIC FORMERLY KNOWN AS B:
  - From: Alex Smith

Prev by Date: Re: [s-d] [s-b] THE MOST NOBLE AND RESPECTABLE RULESET OF THE NOMIC FORMERLY KNOWN AS B:
Next by Date: Re: [s-d] [s-b] THE MOST NOBLE AND RESPECTABLE RULESET OF THE NOMIC FORMERLY KNOWN AS B:
Previous by thread: Re: [s-d] [s-b] THE MOST NOBLE AND RESPECTABLE RULESET OF THE NOMIC FORMERLY KNOWN AS B:
Next by thread: Re: [s-d] [s-b] THE MOST NOBLE AND RESPECTABLE RULESET OF THE NOMIC FORMERLY KNOWN AS B:
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread