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.

Reply via email to