comex wrote: > On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 2:24 PM, Alexander Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > - the statement of the CFJ's truth depends on an unknown state > > within a contract > Preventing contract escalation into gamestate ambiguity is better than > allowing them and just preventing wins based on them. The idea is to rule out paradoxes similar to previous paradoxes. Ideally legislation would prevent them being paradoxes too, but that list has a nod to each previous paradox (apart from the BobTHJ registration status one, because it was really weird and if it happened again, I wouldn't consider that boring.) > > Each such winner > > SHALL also submit a proposal that causes all such tortoises to > > become Boring. > Hmm... how would this work? The ambiguity in the gamestate may well > be fixed during the two week period before the winner wins, but even > that wouldn't cause the tortoise to become Boring, it would just cause > future similar CFJs to not be tortoises at all (because UNDECIDABLE > would not be an appropriate judgement). I'd intended modifying the list of Boring Proposals to redefine "Boring". Sorry if that wasn't clear. -- ais523
<<winmail.dat>>
