On Sun, 3 May 2009, Ed Murphy wrote: > A public message claiming to be a game-defined entity (e.g. a > distribution of proposals) is not generally that entity, but must > match the circumstances defined for that entity (e.g. being sent > by the Promotor).
This would be very nice to have. The question right now is, can we infer this in the current ruleset? Right now there are two types of action: 1. The player is authorized to act via a type of publication. 2. Rules define a certain type of Notice as a publication containing certain information. Player acts by posting said Notice. Notice triggers actions. In spite of my earlier example, "Proposal Distribution" is actually the first (as are most actions) as the rules say that the Promotor "distributes a proposal". Interestingly, I don't know what sort of regulations the second type has at all. R2125 covers actions. If the only action is "publishing certain information" (and any publication of said information is automatically such a Notice) that's covered by R101; other rules may it ILLEGAL but not IMPOSSIBLE. But if we take the view that what's actually happening is that an Entity (the Notice) is being created[*], then the creation is a regulated act, and Rules may make it IMPOSSIBLE to create the entity. I don't see anything in the rules generally to decide between these two interpretations (other than the usual "tradition and good of the game"). -Goethe *sometimes the creation is explicit; "initiating" an Agoran decision is a reasonable synonym for "creating" a decision process. In those cases it's clearly a regulated creation.
