c. wrote: > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 5:17 PM, Ed Murphy <emurph...@socal.rr.com> wrote: >> [If e.g. a report saying "X has either Y or Z widgets" is ratified, then >> if X had Y widgets, then e still does; if X had Z widgets, then e still >> does; if X had neither Y nor Z widgets, then that needs to be sorted out >> by other means, but that's no worse than the present situation. Also >> pre-empts any retarded-monkey claims that ratification performs and/or >> ambiguates unrelated portions of gamestate.] > > So if the report says e has 5 or 6 widgets, but e has 4, e gains one > as the minimal modification? What if it says e has 2 or 6? Does > asset creation and destruction have the same weight? What if widgets > are a class of position cards and a rule (over which R1551 takes > precedence) says they can't be created?
Again, these are arguably problems with the current version of the rule as well. It might well be better to specify that any portion of the gamestate disclaimered in the document doesn't change.
