On Tuesday 24 June 2008 1:24:01 Alexander Smith wrote:
> There seems to have been quite a bit of paradox theft recently,
> so I've come up with this to try to clamp down on it.
>
> Proto: Boring Paradoxes (AI=3, II=1)
> {{{{
> Amend rule 2110 to the following:
> {{{
> A tortoise is an inquiry case for which the question of veracity
> is UNDECIDABLE.
>
> A tortoise is Boring if and only if at least one of the
> following conditions holds:
> Each such winner
> SHALL also submit a proposal that causes all such tortoises to
> become Boring.
Probably better to say "that, if adopted, would cause". Just in case.
Alternatively, keep the "substantially the same paradox" wording and
make this a condition for Boringness:
- it is about substantially the same paradox as another
tortoise that was initiated before it was
This would prevent the kind of immediate paradox plagiarism we've
recently seen (adopting proposals incorporates a significant delay;
a copycat CFJ called (say) half an hour after its original is called
will likely be able to duck the cutoff by proposal.
In fact, I think it may be possible to spam wins, subject to the rule
on excess CFJs. Calling 5 highly similar CFJs five minutes before the
end of the week and 5 more ten minutes later would possibly create ten
tortoises.
Of course, if you bribed (or were) the CotC, there would be no limit.
Pavitra
