On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 9:17 AM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote: > > > On Thu, 28 Jun 2012, Ozymandias Haynes wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 8:55 AM, Elliott Hird >> <penguinoftheg...@googlemail.com> wrote: >> > Note that a judgement of UNDECIDABLE will not allow you to win by >> > paradox, as a turtle's paradox cannot arise from the case itself, per >> > rule 2358. >> >> Oh, you're right. I guess I should have spent more time reading the >> rules before posting! That clause is a really elegant way to put a >> stop to these kinds of shenanigans. > > Yep! The modern version of the win by paradox rule came into being > after a "true" paradox was created via retroactive action (i.e. a > time travel paradox) so we said, "neat, anyone who does that should > win!" But the first version of the rule didn't have that protection, > which led to a rash of "those kind of shenanigans" in CFJs. > > -G. > > >
I have another idea for a win by paradox which circumvents the restrictions on self-reference. As I am ignorant of Agoran custom, I thought I would ask first: would it be poor form of me to submit a new CFJ before the first one has worked its way through the system? -Ozymandias
