Rainbow Wolfe on Sat, 24 Sep 2011 14:45:59 -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:


Turiski sent an update to the game before you sent yours. When I sent my
changes I correlated both together which included deleting the rule in
question.

You should have the mail/thread if you look back.

- Rainbow Wolfe

On 23 September 2011 21:12, 0x44 <bnomic@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> 0x44 implicitly  supported it when e created the rule. E also acted on
> behalf of 0x44 to support it in the same message that defined the rule.
>
>
> On Sep 23, 2011, at 12:07 PM, Arkady English wrote:
>
> > That's not the source of my confusion...at what point did 0x44 support
> > a second time? I also missed Turiski disfavoring it.
> >
> > On 23 September 2011 19:54, Rainbow Wolfe <rainbowdreamwolf@xxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> >> We have currently 11 players, 3 and a bit players would be a third. Your
> >> interpretation is quite correct but the rule would not have existed, or
> >> should not have existed for anyone else to object to. By your rule we
> would
> >> have needed part of another player to object which would not be
> technically
> >> possible.
> >>
> >> - Rainbow Wolfe
> >>
> >> On 22 September 2011 22:11, Arkady English <arkadyenglish@xxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> 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
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Hobbes: Why are you digging a hole?
> >>
> >> Calvin: I'm looking for buried treasure.
> >>
> >> Hobbes: What have you found?
> >>
> >> Calvin: A few dirty rocks, a weird root, and some disgusting grubs.
> >>
> >> Hobbes: On your first try?
> >>
> >> Calvin: There's treasure everywhere!
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> spoon-discuss mailing list
> >> spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
> >> http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > spoon-discuss mailing list
> > spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
> > http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss
>
> _______________________________________________
> spoon-discuss mailing list
> spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss
>



-- 
Hobbes: Why are you digging a hole?

Calvin: I'm looking for buried treasure.

Hobbes: What have you found?

Calvin: A few dirty rocks, a weird root, and some disgusting grubs.

Hobbes: On your first try?

Calvin: There's treasure everywhere!
_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss