> On Sep 8, 2017, at 12:15 AM, Owen Jacobson <o...@grimoire.ca> wrote: > > >> On Sep 7, 2017, at 11:58 PM, Kyle Anderson <kyescott5...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> I hate to be annoying, but will someone explain to me what just happened >> with stamps? I've read through the posts, but I'm confused at why they no >> longer exist. I thought that the scam did not succeed, though I'm not >> entirely sure why. Did the scam work? >> >> Sorry, just trying to wrap my head around this. There's a lot to follow >> tonight. >> >> K > > I hold that neither CuddleBeam’s scams, nor Gaelan’s scam, worked. > Furthermore, there may not be any stamps at all. > > The rule “Mother, May I?” defines several terms. Key for unpicking this > situation are the terms “CAN” and “MAY”. A rule stating that something CAN be > done defines a mechanism for doing it. A rule saying that something MAY be > done prevents the doing of a thing from drawing a penalty. This distinction > has gone wrong several times. > > The rule “Economic Victory” defines stamps, and states that several things > MAY be done, but does not state that those things CAN be done. The rule > “Regulated Actions” is phrased in such a way that a CAN would be required for > those actions to be possible. One of the things that the rule states MAY be > done is the destruction, by announcement, of any stamp, with Agora paying the > announcing player the current Stamp Value. Had MAY been CAN, this rule would > have allowed Gaelan to sequentially destroy stamps and harvest their value, > regardless of who owned the stamps.
Oh, and: Nobody who noticed this flaw in the wording of the rules chose to remark on it - I think out of sportsagoranship, since the intent of the rules regarding stamps is pretty clear - which allowed several “impossible” actions to be treated as if they happened for long enough for the results to become true through self-ratifying reports. -o
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
