On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 4:29 PM grok via agora-business <agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 9, 2020, 3:06 PM Cuddle Beam via agora-discussion < > agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > > what is ISTIDDIES? > > > > On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 9:59 PM Alex Smith via agora-discussion < > > agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > > > > On Tuesday, 9 June 2020, 20:16:09 GMT+1, Kerim Aydin via > > agora-discussion > > > <agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > > > On 6/9/2020 11:21 AM, Alex Smith via agora-discussion wrote: > > > > > I submit the following proposal, "Barrel Rolling", AI-1: > > > > >> A player CAN win the game, but it will cost em 100 barrels. > > > > > This is unusual wording for this, and it looks a lot like it would > > > permit a player to win the game without having 100 barrels. > > > > > > > > Using what method? > > > > > > The rule states that a player CAN win the game. It doesn't specify a > > > mechanism. So on a straightforward reading, either players can win the > > > game, or they can't due to a lack of mechanism, but neither seems to > > have a > > > dependency on their barrel quantities. (In particular, the rule states > > that > > > players in general CAN win the game, not just players who have 100 > > barrels.) > > > > > > I guess the sentence in question is meant to be a) insufficiently precise > > > to define a mechanism in its own right, thus preventing players who are > > > short on barrels winning the game because they have no way short of an > > > ISIDTID fallacy to attempt to do so; but b) sufficiently precise to > > trigger > > > rule 2579, which provides the mechanism. By rule 2152, "CAN" means > > > "Attempts to perform the described action are successful"; most rules > > that > > > want players to be able to perform an action under certain circumstances > > > state that attempts succeed under only those circumstances, whereas this > > > rule is apparently defined so that attempting to perform the action is > > > automatically successful, but limits the performance of the action by > > > restricting what would count as an attempt. That's an almost > > unprecedented > > > situation (and very unintuitive because it relies on the rule being > > > reinterpreted into something other than the obvious reading by a > > > higher-powered rule). > > > > > > For what it's worth, I think using ISIDTID to try to win the game without > > > 100 barrels might actually work here. Assuming you think it works (or > > maybe > > > even if you don't), an announcement "I win the game, but this costs me > > 100 > > > barrels" is clearly an /attempt/ to win the game, and thus by the new > > rule, > > > and rule 2152, the attempt succeeds. The announcement didn't actually > > > trigger anything within the rules directly; but it was evidence of an > > > attempt to trigger them, and by the rules, it succeeded! > > > > > > -- > > > ais523 > > > > > I submit the following notice of honour: > > +1 ais523 for thoughtful addition to the discussion > -1 cuddlebeam for eir "joke" > > >
This fails because ais523 isn't a player.