On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 4:15 PM Aris Merchant via agora-discussion <agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 2:09 PM grok via agora-discussion > <agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > I think what I'm actually suggesting is that there's enough precedent that > > a sympathetic judge may stay eir judgment or issue a clarifying judgment in > > favor of common practice to give players enough time to patch up the rule. > > The text of the rules has to take precedence, according to Rule 217. > If there's ambiguity it can be resolved in favor of game custom and > the game's best interests, but this appears to me to unambiguously > cause a failure. > > Rule 217/12 (Power=3) > Interpreting the Rules > > When interpreting and applying the rules, the text of the rules > takes precedence. Where the text is silent, inconsistent, or > unclear, it is to be augmented by game custom, common sense, past > judgements, and consideration of the best interests of the game. > > Definitions and prescriptions in the rules are only to be applied > using direct, forward reasoning; in particular, an absurdity that > can be concluded from the assumption that a statement about > rule-defined concepts is false does not constitute proof that it > is true. Definitions in lower-powered Rules do not overrule > common-sense interpretations or common definitions of terms in > higher-powered rules, but may constructively make reasonable > clarifications to those definitions. For this purpose, a > clarification is reasonable if and only if it adds detail without > changing the underlying general meaning of the term and without > causing the higher powered rule to be read in a way inconsistent > with its text. > > Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, any rule change that would > (1) prevent a person from initiating a formal process to resolve > matters of controversy, in the reasonable expectation that the > controversy will thereby be resolved; or (2) prevent a person from > causing formal reconsideration of any judicial determination that > e should be punished, is wholly void and without effect. > > -Aris
either way, i wonder if it's worth an interim fix while g continues to lead the auction overhaul effort.
