On Thu, 18 Jul 2013, omd wrote: > Proposal: Down with bromides (AI=3)
I'm not sure the experiment with phrasing certain limitations of the reach of the game as "rights" was or was not a success, except in setting game tone. That said: > [ i. is meaningless. While disguised, this is a version of "obey the rules". Pointless CFJs may arise without it. Mainly just keeping the form of the original Suber rule for historical reasons, to say "this is a game, and the domain of the game is restricted to the rules". Common sense for any 'game', though nothing in Nomic goes by common sense. > ii. was only considered to have an effect once, and it probably > shouldn't have been judged that way. It is unlikely to ever be > generally violated. I agree, especially considering there's no guarantee here that the formal process be "fair". Nice for new players to know I suppose, and nice to put up front that any "person" can do this, not just players. > iii. and iv. are no fun. My only sticking point, personally. I wouldn't personally play a game without an anti-mousetrap guarantee. Been there, done that. Your kind of fun... not mine. In fact, elevating these protections from buried bits of the judgement rule to up-front "rights" were what motivated me to write the "rights" in the first place. Has stopped scams in the several. > v. is guaranteed elsewhere. Indeed, it was taken from R478 when written so is redundant; only reason to put it here was that if some things were to be defined as rights, this should be included in the list up front. I didn't repeal the bit of R478 at the time because I liked the writing style. Still, the R478 rule is weaker, it only prevents outright "prohibitions" on participation, not "limitations" (such as delays). > vi. is unlikely to ever be generally violated. This one has been concretely used, for example in determining what happens if the rules change mid-way through a punishment (I forget the CFJ context there). Still, such cases are rare enough that they can probably be fixed by a proposal whenever something massively unfair happens. > vii. is almost meaningless and common sense.] As witnessed by Agora XX, we've never 'solved' the whole cease-to-be- a-player, forfeit, deregister thing. We probably never will. It's another Suber-era historical thing. > Please treat Agora right good forever. If I am proud of one (mostly accidental) contribution to bad Agoran slang, it would be this one. -G.
