On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 3:16 PM, Kerim Aydin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The "great simplification" purposefully dropped this but didn't replace > it with anything, on the grounds that doing such would make it part of > "game custom and precedence" as long as the rules remained silent.
Suber's justification for including a "you must follow the rules" rule seems to argue directly against this line of reasoning. He said (http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/writing/nomic.htm) that the rule was included rather than leaving it as an unwritten metarule of all games so that it could be explicitly repealed, as unwise as that would be. It's my thinking along these same lines that if something is purposely dropped from the ruleset, it should be seen not as a game custom that should continue to be followed, but an outdated rule that was explicitly rejected as unsuitable, and if anything the exact opposite of the removed wording should be followed.
