On 20 June 2013 22:43, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote: > On Thu, 20 Jun 2013, omd wrote: >> I consider wins by paradox to fall into this category, but since they >> tend to come out of nowhere and be unstoppable (typically the >> undefined behavior is achieved and CFJed on in a single message), >> there is no real way to stop them. > > Little tid-bit: That first paradox (my card win) I actually spotted > a couple weeks ahead and it took a while to assemble the cards. When > I played it, someone else said: "darn! I was trying to do that!" So at > least for once it was 'playable and competitive' and not just a called > CFJ (which may have been another reason that it raised fewer hackles).
From: orja...@math.ntnu.no (Orjan Johansen) Subject: Re: nomic; winning by paradox Date: 1998/11/27 Message-ID: <73m8tu$8j0$1...@due.unit.no>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 416193373 References: <73kjtl$ak0$1...@mohawk.hwcn.org> <365e8285.d0fd0...@tp3.ruhr-uni-bochum.de.nospam> Organization: Norwegian University of Science and Technology Newsgroups: rec.games.abstract In article <365e8285.d0fd0...@tp3.ruhr-uni-bochum.de.nospam>, Klaus Herrmanns <kla...@tp3.ruhr-uni-bochum.de.nospam> wrote: > >To be honest, from the Email nomics I know I'm not aware of any wins by >paradox. For Email nomics, the idea is to keep playing after a win. This >is fine if it was a win by points or some other structure within the >game. But a win by paradox usually crashes the game. >From my vague and unreliable memory: In Agora nomic we had (presumably long before you joined) a win by paradox rule, I think inherited from Nomic World. It had a provision that if a paradox arose, the Rules would be rewinded to the latest point before it was introduced---not that I recall this provision ever being invoked. However, at some point someone managed to argue that there had been a paradox in the initial Rules, something they had no provision to recover from, except to halt the game. Then someone noted that this would conflict with the higher precedence Rule which required passing of Proposals to be possible. So essentially we got down to the conclusion that the game would go on, regardless, and moreover the idea that a single undeniable inconsistency would automatically wreak havoc on the entire game was discarded - rejecting reductio ad absurdum, as it were. Soon (?) we lost interest in paradoxes and repealed the Win by Paradox Rule. Greetings, Ørjan.
