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

[Craig Daniel <teucer@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 11:43 AM, Kerim Aydin <kerim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Sep 2012, Elliott Hird wrote:
>> On 11 September 2012 01:18, Kerim Aydin <kerim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > If someone would make a move, assuming we all just joined a
>> > "new" game with the posted ruleset, perhaps enough of us
>> > would play along to make a game of it?
>>
>> It's hard to reconcile that with B's strictly platonist culture. But
>> it might be worth a shot anyway. (If anyone figures out how to change
>> the real B's gamestate, it could be used to unify old and new B.)
>
> Oh, I'm not claiming we'd be playing "the" B Nomic.  Just that we're
> starting a new game on the B fora that happens to start with the
> current B ruleset.

Indeed. The original B is provably dead, through an excess of
platonism. (I say excess because it became so Platonist as to discover
that it had retroactively been dead dating all the way back to an era
when it was rather thoroughly pragmatic.) However, the final alleged
(but not actual) B Nomic ruleset is nonetheless a set of rules for a
possible game, and there's no reason not to play that game. (It does
have a comment bug that means it can only be played in a pragmatic
fashion, not a platonic one, but since we are starting an entirely new
nomic whose initial ruleset happens to be derived from B, there's no
reason we have to play as we were when B Classic was still a thing.)

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