Interesting how "CFJ 1911-1914 (called Mar 18, 2008): Physical realities supersede the Rules by default." and "CFJ: 3580 Called: 21 Oct 2017: The rules can override reality for game purposes." are around at the same time. (It works, though)
I also massively disagree with CFJ 3580, for the " Agora exists platonically, and so can exist without the rest of reality" thing, for the same reasons that CFJ 3622 gave that judgement. The game relies on our perception and ability to process information and solely exists as an individual experience in each of our minds. It's why we have disagreements, even at times with both sides believing they are each giving the true "platonic" interpretation. Agora isn't run some platonic God-hardware, it's run on us, some silly apes with internet. Perspectivism, perspectivism, perspectivism. Is there some way to challenge past CFJs? Besides the moot thing, which is too late now to do for that. On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 4:46 AM, Aris Merchant < thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote: > H. Rulekeepor, some suggested annotations follow. I've chosen things > that might be of historical interest pretty much randomly. > > -Aris > --- > Rule: 869 > CFJ: 3625 > Called: 12 Feb 2018 > Consent to abide by some of the rules does not suffice for registration. > > Rule: 2141 > CFJ: 3622 > Called: 7 Feb 2018 > A statement by the rules that some event occurs, provided without all > information necessary to understand the event, is not sufficient to > cause the event to occur. > (I'd suggest rephrasing this one, I couldn't think of a better way to > word it. You've already annotated the case on R1650, but I believe > that it has broader implications.) > > Rule: 2517 > CFJ: 3617 > Called: 29 Nov 2017 > An inextricable (paradoxical, in the case in question) conditional is > not satisfied, and therefore cannot impose an obligation. > > Rule: 2141 > CFJ: 3580 > Called: 21 Oct 2017 > The rules can override reality for game purposes. > > Rule: 101 > CFJ: 3580 > Called: 21 Oct 2017 > Agora exists platonically, and so can exist without the rest of reality. > > Rule: 2152 (not sure of the best place to put this) > CFJ: 3539 > Called: 6 Jul 2017 > A late obligation can still be fulfilled. > > Rule: 2201 > CFJ: 3522 > Called: 9 Jun 2017 > A claim of a self-ratifying document that has been marked as disputed > does not self-ratify. > > Rule: 105 > CFJ: 3482 > Called: 3 May 2017 > A rule that has been repealed no longer has a power. > > Rule: 478 (R217 might be appropriate instead, because that seems to be > the traditional place to stick annotations about the clarity of > statements.) > CFJ: 3477 > Called: 22 Apr 2017 > When a statement can be read in an ambiguous way or in a clear way, it > should be read to be clear, absent evidence to the contrary. > > Rule: 217 > CFJ: 3472 > Called: 17 Nov 2016 > If a statement is clearly translatable via machine translation (e.g. > Google Translate), it is a sufficiently clear communication for game > purposes. > > Rule: 2143 > CFJ: 3462 > Called: 21 Oct 2016 > A inaccurate report is still a report, unless it "exhibit[s] gross > sloppiness and negligence, equivalent in severity to lying in the > report or not publishing it." > > Rule: 2160 > CFJ: 3462 > Called: 21 Oct 2016 > In normal deputization, the deputy "actually" gains the office > immediately after deputizing for it. >
