Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Intent to Begin Nomaoic

[Gaelan Steele via agora-discussion]

> On Sep 2, 2020, at 3:51 PM, Gaelan Steele via agora-discussion 
> <agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> 
> OK, so here's what's going on: I received a proposal along the lines of 
> "these players get 100 points. They all win." I won't reveal the names or 
> number of these players for obvious reasons, but, at the point when it 
> happened, it was exactly enough players to pass a proposal… as long as 
> Cuddlebeam's NttPF registration didn't count. To be honest, I'm pretty 
> disappointed—it's a very early and unsatisfying end, *and* it relies on 
> someone accidentally sending a message NttPF, which IMO is rather 
> unsportsmanlike. I have several options in front of me, and I'd like some 
> advice on where to go.
> 
> 1) I could end the game, declaring these players as winners and giving up on 
> the tournament. This is the most "technically correct" option, but also the 
> most disappointing for me and other people that actually wanted to try 
> playing this. But perhaps the fact that this was the first proposal is a 
> pretty good indication that the idea wasn't that workable in the first place.
> 2) I could do that, then start another free tournament. If I did so, I'd 
> probably add a rule that exactly one player could win—I think the ability to 
> declare multiple winners makes a bit of a mess of the incentives in a nomic 
> like this. This has the advantage of giving the players their (somewhat) 
> deserved win, but gives us another opportunity at actually playing this. The 
> disadvantage is that it might cheapen both the tournament victory and 
> (through the proliferation of free tournaments) Agoran wins as a whole.
> 3) As above, but with an entirely unofficial tournament, played on DIS or on 
> another forum entirely.
> 4) Find some way to wiggle out of the win, probably by ruling that 
> CuddleBeam's registration succeeded. I have fairly large latitude over the 
> adjudication of the rules, but even so, this might be a bit of a stretch; I 
> think the two options would be to rule that "public" means something other 
> than what it means in an Agoran context, or to use my ability to arbitrarily 
> reconcile errors made in adjudication (I already recorded Cuddlebeam as a 
> player upon eir first registration) to "ratify" the fact that Cuddlebeam 
> registered. In some way, this feels like the "fairest" option (again, I 
> strongly look down upon abuses of NttPF messages), but it is also a fairly 
> significant judicial intervention.
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> Gaelan

I should add that this is normally more information about the gamestate than 
I'd reveal, but given that the game might be over anyway, it's kind of moot.

Gaelan