On Mon, 4 Sep 2017, Aris Merchant wrote: > On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 5:12 PM, Kerim Aydin <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Tue, 5 Sep 2017, V.J Rada wrote: > >> >but is there anything the prohibits spending > >> >shinies below 0? > >> > >> Yes, it's like the 1st sentence of assets. You can't go below 0 shinies. > > > > Thanks! > > > >> Anyway ordinary meaning of spend enforces common sense here. > > > > It's reasonable to say that ordinary meaning says the shiny is > > no longer available to whomever spent it. > > > > But why does the "ordinary meaning" mean the shiny goes to Agora? > > > > The actual rules definition (for AP) is that the AP is removed > > from the game entirely. When something is "spent", by common > > language, it's no longer useful. So I'd say that "common language" > > tells us that when you spend something, it's spent and gone - > > not back in Agora's hands. Since that's the definition for "spent" > > for AP, why doesn't it apply to shines? > > Actually, that's not a bad outcome: > > "In circumstances where another asset would be destroyed, an > indestructible asset is generally transferred to Agora, subject to > modification by its backing document and the intervention of other > rules." (Rule 2166, Assets) > > So the person tries to destroy it and it goes to Agora instead.
Ooooh, I love it when something works exactly as intended but for completely the wrong reason. +1 props.
