Re: DIS: Agora XX: 11th report

If I am to be hoisted, it will be *with* my petard, not by it. For ’tis the sport to have the engineer Hoist with his own petard: -- Hamlet Act III, Scene IV Blob (exploding pedant) On 29/06/2013, at 10:18 AM, Fool wrote: > On 28/06/2013 7:43 PM, Steven Gardner wrote: >> Firstly, I think yo

Re: DIS: Agora XX: 11th report

On 28/06/2013 7:43 PM, Steven Gardner wrote: Firstly, I think you're missing the point about injustice, Dan. I could be, but am I really? The right protects the accused against unjust attaint by the gov't. In the case before us, legislator and victim are the same. He was hoist by his own pet

Re: DIS: Agora XX: 11th report

Firstly, I think you're missing the point about injustice, Dan. Secondly, the first part of the Canadian charter you quote is the relevant bit here, not the second. And that part supports my argument. -- Steve Gardner via mobile On 29 Jun 2013 09:14, "Fool" wrote: > On 28/06/2013 9:42 AM, Steve

Re: DIS: Agora XX: 11th report

On 28/06/2013 9:42 AM, Steven Gardner wrote: The point of a ban on retroactive application of a rule, especially one which, like R345, criminalises a certain action, is to avoid a particularly galling kind of injustice: namely, that people do things which they rightly believe at the time are leg

Re: DIS: Agora XX: 11th report

On Fri, 28 Jun 2013, Charles Walker wrote: > On 28 June 2013 05:49, Steven Gardner wrote: > > What I'd be looking for is a ruleset which fixes bugs likes changing rule > > numbers, defines simultaneity, incorporates some lessons about pragmatism in > > a minimally committal way and generally lea

Re: DIS: Agora XX: 11th report

On 28 June 2013 10:47, Fool wrote: > On 27/06/2013 8:43 PM, Steven Gardner wrote: > >> On 28 June 2013 10:36, Fool > > wrote: >> >> >> In this case, the effect was your forfeiture (or requirement to >> forfeit). It was based on events that occurred prior, but th

Re: DIS: Agora XX: 11th report

You'll have to forgive me if I say things which seem obvious -- please remember that I've been away for 9 years and no longer know what is common knowledge. I think the most basic insight is that events (such things as making proposals, voting, transferring units of whatever media of exchange are

Re: DIS: Agora XX: 11th report

On 28 June 2013 05:49, Steven Gardner wrote: > What I'd be looking for is a ruleset which fixes bugs likes changing rule > numbers, defines simultaneity, incorporates some lessons about pragmatism in > a minimally committal way and generally leaves the rest open for players to > explore politics a

Re: DIS: Agora XX: 11th report

I just came across my old Thesis, which I'd completely forgotten about, "The concept of a 'rule change' in Peter Suber's Initial Set". Like everyone else, we seem to have assumed that the claim labelled (*) in the Thesis is false. It's be interesting to design an initial set which clears up the con

Re: DIS: Agora XX: 11th report

On Fri, 28 Jun 2013, Steven Gardner wrote: > What I'd be looking for is a ruleset which fixes bugs likes changing rule > numbers, defines simultaneity, incorporates > some lessons about pragmatism in a minimally committal way and generally > leaves the rest open for players to explore > politic

Re: DIS: Agora XX: 11th report

On 28 June 2013 14:18, Aaron Goldfein wrote: > On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 8:49 PM, Steven Gardner > wrote: > > It would be an interesting project to design a terse and elegant, > non-buggy > > set of initial Rules suitable playing blitz nomic on a mailing list. > > Or we could just squash all the b

Re: DIS: Agora XX: 11th report

On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 8:49 PM, Steven Gardner wrote: > It would be an interesting project to design a terse and elegant, non-buggy > set of initial Rules suitable playing blitz nomic on a mailing list. Or we could just squash all the bugs and continue where we left off last year. Ideal blitz ru

Re: DIS: Agora XX: 11th report

It would be an interesting project to design a terse and elegant, non-buggy set of initial Rules suitable playing blitz nomic on a mailing list. On 28 June 2013 13:37, Malcolm Ryan wrote: > Yes, this is definitely a problem with the "return to the original rules" > idea. The original rules had a

Re: DIS: Agora XX: 11th report

Yes, this is definitely a problem with the "return to the original rules" idea. The original rules had a lot of bugs. If this just means revisiting those bugs every year, I'm not keen. Blob On 28/06/2013, at 11:47 AM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > On Thu, 27 Jun 2013, Kerim Aydin wrote: >> On Fri

Re: DIS: Agora XX: 11th report

On Fri, 28 Jun 2013, Malcolm Ryan wrote: > Aand we return to the old Platonic vs Pragmatic debate. that has plagued Agora for a looong time...

Re: DIS: Agora XX: 11th report

On Thu, 27 Jun 2013, Kerim Aydin wrote: > On Fri, 28 Jun 2013, Malcolm Ryan wrote: > > Aand we return to the old Platonic vs Pragmatic debate. > > that has plagued Agora for a looong time... Oh, and remind me next year to come up with a Drinking Game for observers. 1. Drink if platoni

Re: DIS: Agora XX: 11th report

On Thu, 27 Jun 2013, Fool wrote: > On 27/06/2013 8:55 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > > Of course, this raises the age old question of whether, if e does an > > "illegal" thing, whether it actually fails (since we haven't differentiated > > IMPOSSIBLE from ILLEGAL here at all...) > > > > Okay, fo

Re: DIS: Agora XX: 11th report

On 27/06/2013 9:27 PM, Malcolm Ryan wrote: Aand we return to the old Platonic vs Pragmatic debate. Blob (staying low) Yeah, Platonic, you lose. Pragmatic, I read you some of my poetry first. RESISTANCE IS USELESS. -Dan

Re: DIS: Agora XX: 11th report

Aand we return to the old Platonic vs Pragmatic debate. Blob (staying low) On 28/06/2013, at 11:06 AM, Fool wrote: > On 27/06/2013 8:55 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: >> >> Of course, this raises the age old question of whether, if e does an >> "illegal" thing, whether it actually fails (since we h

Re: DIS: Agora XX: 11th report

On 27/06/2013 8:55 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: Of course, this raises the age old question of whether, if e does an "illegal" thing, whether it actually fails (since we haven't differentiated IMPOSSIBLE from ILLEGAL here at all...) Okay, for the sake of argument: then that also applies to all play

Re: DIS: Agora XX: 11th report

On Thu, 27 Jun 2013, Fool wrote: > On 27/06/2013 8:37 PM, Steven Gardner wrote: > > The argument (setting aside the retroactivity claim) is that Blob was > > immediately required to forfeit. Not doing so would to be sure be > > violation of the Rules, but it still can't happen unless Blob sends a

Re: DIS: Agora XX: 11th report

I'd say e remains a player with full rights to continue to play up until the moment e forfeits. On 28 June 2013 10:50, Fool wrote: > On 27/06/2013 8:37 PM, Steven Gardner wrote: > >> The argument (setting aside the retroactivity claim) is that Blob was >> immediately required to forfeit. Not doi

Re: DIS: Agora XX: 11th report

On 27/06/2013 8:37 PM, Steven Gardner wrote: The argument (setting aside the retroactivity claim) is that Blob was immediately required to forfeit. Not doing so would to be sure be violation of the Rules, but it still can't happen unless Blob sends a message say that e forfeits. Okay, for the s

Re: DIS: Agora XX: 11th report

On 27/06/2013 8:43 PM, Steven Gardner wrote: On 28 June 2013 10:36, Fool mailto:fool1...@gmail.com>> wrote: In this case, the effect was your forfeiture (or requirement to forfeit). It was based on events that occurred prior, but the effect was not retroactive. I disagree. R345 de

Re: DIS: Agora XX: 11th report

On 28 June 2013 10:36, Fool wrote: > > In this case, the effect was your forfeiture (or requirement to forfeit). > It was based on events that occurred prior, but the effect was not > retroactive. > I disagree. R345 describes a sequence of actions that lead to forfeiture. To avoid retroactive ap

Re: DIS: Agora XX: 11th report

The argument (setting aside the retroactivity claim) is that Blob was immediately required to forfeit. Not doing so would to be sure be violation of the Rules, but it still can't happen unless Blob sends a message say that e forfeits. On 28 June 2013 10:32, Fool wrote: > On 27/06/2013 8:19 PM, M

Re: DIS: Agora XX: 11th report

On 27/06/2013 8:15 PM, Malcolm Ryan wrote: I call for judgement on the following statement. "Blob does not have to forfeit under rule 345." Reasoning: Rule 345 says "If a player proposes a rule change that is not adopted..." I made proposal 346 BEFORE this rule came into effect. Rule 108 forb

Re: DIS: Agora XX: 11th report

On 27/06/2013 8:19 PM, Malcolm Ryan wrote: I call for judgment on the following statement: "At the 12:16am GMT on June 28 2013, Blob had not forfeited." Reasoning: The rules make it clear that forfeiting is a voluntary player action. Rule 345 says a player "must" forfeit. It does not say that

Re: DIS: Agora XX: 11th report

Oh, Goethe has already CFJ'ed this. Oops. Blob (on the lam) On 28/06/2013, at 10:19 AM, Malcolm Ryan wrote: > I call for judgment on the following statement: > > "At the 12:16am GMT on June 28 2013, Blob had not forfeited." > > Reasoning: The rules make it clear that forfeiting is a voluntary

Re: DIS: Agora XX: 11th report

I call for judgment on the following statement: "At the 12:16am GMT on June 28 2013, Blob had not forfeited." Reasoning: The rules make it clear that forfeiting is a voluntary player action. Rule 345 says a player "must" forfeit. It does not say that they "are deemed to have forfeited". Blob

Re: DIS: Agora XX: 11th report

I call for judgement on the following statement. "Blob does not have to forfeit under rule 345." Reasoning: Rule 345 says "If a player proposes a rule change that is not adopted..." I made proposal 346 BEFORE this rule came into effect. Rule 108 forbids retroactive application. Blob On 27/06

Re: DIS: Agora XX: 11th report

On Thu, 27 Jun 2013, Kerim Aydin wrote: > CFJ: Blob has forfeited. > > The rule in question (345) states: > If a player proposes a rule change which is not adopted at the end > of its voting period, that player must immediately forfeit the > game. > > Note that the wording is a req

Re: DIS: Agora XX: 11th report

CFJ: Blob has forfeited. The rule in question (345) states: If a player proposes a rule change which is not adopted at the end of its voting period, that player must immediately forfeit the game. Note that the wording is a requirement placed on the player to act, not an automatic e

Re: DIS: Agora XX: 11th report

On 27 June 2013 22:38, Fool wrote: > > If I receive any proposals promptly, I will distribute. H. Speaker, I submit the following Proposals, separated by '==='. === Amend Rule 207 to read: Voters may vote either for or against any proposal within its prescribed voting period. Only messages w

DIS: Agora XX: 11th report

Good day Agorans, A correction from last report brought to my attention by Yally. It does involve the disputed interpretation of the order of events when the voting on multiple proposals closes "simultaneously". I am going with the interpretation that they pass sequentially in order I number