On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 10:47, ais523 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I call for judgement on the following statement: "This CFJ has ID number
> 2146."
> I act on behalf of the Monster to deputise for the CotC to assign that
> CFJ an ID number of 2146.
> I call for judgement on the following statement: "This CFH has ID number
> 1."
> I act on behalf of the Monster to deputise for the CotC to assign that
> CFJ an ID number of 1.
>
> These are linked assignments; I act on behalf of the Monster to deputise
> for the CotC to assign them both to comex. (This should suit eir general
> playing style, after all.)
>
> Arguments:
> See rule 2193, which reads in part:
> {{{
> Any Monster (a deputy) CAN perform an action as if e held a
> particular office (deputise for that office) if:
>
> (a) the rules require the holder of that office, by virtue of
> holding that office, to perform the action (or, if the
> office is vacant, would so require if the office were
> filled
> }}}
> I think Murphy was the only person who voted against the recent proposal
> to add that to the rule. As a rather obvious scam, I added it without
> the restrictions that would require the action to be one that the CotC
> CAN do, and also removed the time limit; therefore, the deputisation
> works even though I'm not the CotC and even though an ID number of 1
> would be INVALID if actually assigned by the person forced to assign an
> ID number to it. (I can act on behalf of the Monster due to rule 2192;
> possibly this is the first time anyone has done so.) In other words,
> nowadays SHALL implies CAN; if anyone SHALL do something, then I CAN do
> that thing. (I don't quite think this leads to a dictatorship, but I can
> certainly cause healthy amounts of chaos if needed; if this scam works,
> and I don't see why it wouldn't, I suggest that the rest of Agora bribe
> me with something nice and permanent to persuade me to give the power
> up.)
Oh, I see you address the INVALID bit here. So easy counterargument:
it is plainly NOT required for the CotC to assign the ID number 1 or
any other invalid assignment. In fact, the CotC CANNOT do that and
SHALL NOT do that (by virtue of being obliged to assign the smallest
ID number possible, which cannot be done simulatenously with assigning
an INVALID number).
-woggle
