On 2013-07-30, Matt Berlin wrote: > Does fool's announcement of intent to destroy a promise: > > a) destroy the promise > b) begin the destruction of the promise > c) schedule the destruction of the promise > d) place a time-limit on the action of destroying the promise > e) only announce intent > > I'm approaching from "order of operations".
Destroying a promise with notice is a kind of dependent action. By Rule 1728, announcing intent to perform an action with notice is necessary (1728(a), which also places other restrictions) but not sufficient (1728(b)-(d)) to allow a player to perform an action by announcement. So I think that the announcement accomplishes (d) and (e) (taking (e) to be non-exclusive), but not the other three. I think I'm missing something in the rules, though. Actions performed with notice require Agoran Satisfaction (1728(c)). Rule 2124, which defines Agoran Satisfaction, appears to require the action to fall into one or more of the following categories: without N objections, with N supports, or with N Agoran Consent. Where in the rules is it specified how Agora can be Satisfied with an action to be performed with notice? I'm working from the 2013-07-27 Short Logical Ruleset, so I might not have the current rules. -- Michael Slone
