On Thu, 13 Aug 2015, Tanner Swett wrote:
> You know, I'm starting to feel like Agora really isn't the nomic for
> me. Whenever we're faced with a choice between multiple valid and
> justifiable interpretations of the rules, we seem to rarely simply go
> with whichever option is most convenient or intended; we instead
> interpret the letter of the rules as literally and mechanically as
> possible. Rule 217 allows and encourages us to apply "common sense"
> and "the best interests of the game" where the rules are ambiguous,
> but we don't. The resulting messes and risk of failure are undoubtedly
> fun for some. But for me, not so much.
I keep trying to come up with a "Less Logical Ruleset" version.
The idea being that all the details are regulated to footnotes,
and the texts themselves are short.
It would look like this:
RULE TEXT:
A Person can Join or Leave Agora by announcing that they
do so.
RULE FOOTNOTES (not shown in LLR; still considered same power as
rule text):
(a) A Person is an intelligent biological entity only;
(b) a person who joins agrees to abide by the rules;
(c) the joining sets the value of the Citizenship Switch
(default Unregistered) to Registered.
(d) interpretation of messages to leave and join should be
strongly interpreted in favor of the person's intent.
(e) Certain further restrictions to joining may apply;
(f) Restrictions to leaving MAY NOT apply.
RULE TEXT:
A public message is a message sent via a public forum, or sent
to all players and containing a clear designation of intent to
be public.
RULE FOOTNOTES:
(a) [Long: How the Registrar makes and maintains fora];
(b) [More detailed definition of "announcements"]
