On Fri, 16 Nov 2007, Levi Stephen wrote: > Kerim Aydin wrote: >> Funnily enough, I wonder if this is too broad. "hostile action" could be >> any scam. How about "hostile action by another nomic"? -Goethe > > That's a good point. I made a choice to leave out the 'by another nomic' > clause > as I thought it provided a loophole (e.g., our game's not a nomic it's a > collaborative rule creating web game).
Peter Suber defines nomic as "a game where changing the rules is a move" so anything fitting that description would be caught here, and considering the opponent is a nomic (and we have ambassadorships defined for nomics specifically) I think defining it by nomics works ok. -Goethe
