On 04/07/2010 09:25 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
On Wed, 7 Apr 2010, Ed Murphy wrote:
G. wrote:
Er, why not make it just by order they are awarded champion, which
can't be simultaneous? This creates a pre-known unbargainable hierarchy
among conspirators for a win (if that ever should matter). -G.
What do you mean it can't be simultaneous? "I award Champion to
each player satisfying @CONDITIONS" shouldn't become ineffective
just because some other rule cares about the ordering.
Sure it should. It's an administrative convenience like most other
conditionals, ambiguity should cause it to fail if the ambiguity
creates substantial differences. Which reminds me: is the precedent
still in place that "if the order of a set of commands is
ambiguous, and the order matters, than all the actions fail"? It
was written in the rules, removed in the great repeals, but I don't
remember if it's been re-established since as a precedent (or not).
-G.
I have worked out a temporal model of Agora based on infinitely
divisible but discrete units of time (think rational numbers). While it
has never seen official use (the issue it was contrived for had a
resolution that didn't require it), based on it and implication in the
rules that actions can be simultaneous, I would say that the actions
occur simultaneously and it's up to the game to sort things out.
-coppro
