On Sun, 12 Jan 2020 at 06:13, Alexis Hunt <aler...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, 12 Jan 2020 at 01:07, James Cook <jc...@cs.berkeley.edu> wrote: >> >> On Sun, 12 Jan 2020 at 06:05, James Cook <jc...@cs.berkeley.edu> wrote: >> > However, the use of the word "it" in the text "but already owned it" >> > in R2602 indicates to me that the text of the rule is written with the >> > point of view that there's only one of each ribbon colour. Otherwise >> > it could have been written "but already owned a ribbon of that >> > colour". >> >> Or, maybe, there's at most one ribbon of each colour per player. >> >> - Falsifian > > > The critical distinction is that "once for each time the condition is > fulfilled" is not very well defined for a continuous condition. The condition > "If a player has earned a ribbon in the past 7 days but already owned it" > becomes true the moment the ribbon is earned and ceases to be true 7 days > later. And it definitely doesn't become "true twice" if e earns a ribbon a > second time; it just extends the period of time for which it is true.
I don't think this is a case of "once for each time the condition is fulfulled". If "(until e earns another ribbon)" were deleted from the text of the rule, what you're saying would make sense to me. But to me it seems obvious that the intended meaning of the text "(until e earns another ribbon)" is something close to "here, the word 'once' means that after a player triggers this rule, e CANNOT trigger it again until e earns another ribbon". Can you suggest any other interpretation that the author of the rule could plausibly have intended? - Falsifian
