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

[Craig Daniel <teucer@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 12:31 PM, Daniel Lepage <dplepage@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> It's good to see some familiar faces lurking on the spoon-fora!
>
> FWIW, I would like to go on the record again claiming that the Imaginary
> Period was a myth - B did not die because of a bug, but because a perceived
> bug caused the players to stop playing[0].

Yes, I agree - the game died for what in hindsight is our foolishness.
However, the Imaginary Period (eras 4 and 5) consists of a span of
time when, from a purely Platonist view, it really is correct that no
gameplay occurred. This was then fixed, before a completely different
bug (which likely wasn't actually there, both for the reason you
mention and because I contend that rule 0 is using absolute time to
define a new type of gametime, *not* to create deadlines dependent on
absolute time) led to a perception that a much larger fraction of the
game had been disproven and that restoring it was impossible.

> In a Platonic interpretation the game is still running, although the
> current rules etc. are inaccessible because nobody's been maintaining the
> wiki. The Emergency ended; the statement that the Emergency Coordinator
> would apply the winning Refresh Proposal turned out to be false[1]. The
> standard timekeeping method restarted, and Normal [[?!?]] Play resumed. The
> Clock ticked forwards, until the next automated clock stop[2]. So
> currently, the Clock is stopped, the Watch[3] has been advancing for
> months, and the game is waiting for whatever minister is needed to start it
> again.
>> However, in the more practical interpretation the game is over in the sense
> that nobody is playing it, which pretty much makes it definitionally not a
> game.
>
> I liked the nweek 112 reset[4], and IIRC it worked pretty well. I'd be
> careful with a ratification system, though - we used that once upon a time
> until a player won by hiding game actions in eir signature and the "Statute
> of Limitations" rule automatically made them retroactively true.

Yes, B history suggests that 112 was actually quite successful. The
nweek 112 reset does, however, comment out the ability of the clock to
reset for each new nweek. This is trivially easy to fix, but when B
discovered it we had to go back and start an emergency using a by then
outdated emergency procedure because the one we had regarded as
current was felt to be invalid.

Anyhow, how do people feel about starting a new game of 112 Nomic on
these lists?

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