On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 8:15 PM, Alex Smith <ais...@bham.ac.uk> wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-05-27 at 20:07 -0500, Aaron Goldfein wrote:
> > Because I'm about to have imperial-style control over the nomic. And
> > that post announcing Fresh's death was made just before I showed up.
>
> Arguably, a full dictatorship by one person over a nomic is one way for
> it to die, unless it's relinquished quickly; unless the nomic was
> designed as an imperial nomic in the first place, dictatorships that
> hang around and are actually used can quickly kill a nomic as the other
> players leave. (As opposed to several of my apparent dictatorships over
> B, which I maintained for a few weeks simply to be able to use dictator
> power in order to pull it out of yet another self-destruction (although
> all that turned out never to have happened); and the dictatorships over
> Agora that people have managed on occasion, which tend to only last the
> course of one message, or at most until the CFJs are sorted out, then
> given back.)
>
> --
> ais523
Besides, even if I abused that power horribly, according to the Agoran
ruleset, it is still a nomic as:
A nomic is the single entity defined by a nomic ruleset as a
whole. Each nomic ruleset defines exactly one nomic, and each
nomic is defined by exactly one nomic ruleset
and a nomic ruleset is:
A nomic ruleset is a set of explicit rules that provides means
for itself to be altered arbitrarily, including changes to those
rules that govern rule changes. Not all rule changes need be
possible in one step; an arbitrarily complex combination of
actions (possibly including intermediate rule changes) can be
required, so long as any rule change is theoretically achievable
in finite time.
Fresh Nomic has a nomic ruleset as I can make any arbitrary change in a
finite time. Therefore, it is a nomic.
