On Sat, 1 Aug 2015, Sean Hunt wrote:
> On Aug 1, 2015 12:24, "omd" <c.ome...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Aug 1, 2015 at 1:59 PM, Tanner Swett <tannersw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Rule 2358, which defined Win by Paradox, was present in the ruleset
> > > published on 25 August 2013, but absent in the ruleset published on 17
> > > December 2013. I couldn't find any proposals which repealed the rule.
> > > So where did it go?
> >
> > Proposal 7609:
> > http://iw.qoid.us/message/%3Calpine.LRH.2.01.1312131214090.30888%40hymn02.u.washington.edu%3E
> >
>
> So what happens if a paradox is found, anyway?
The first paradox win recorded was a "true" paradox in that
it was a retroactive play that cancelled itself out.
I was record keeper and tracked the two resulting game states
until a proposal re-united them (fortunately the split was limited
to the domain of Cards in which it occurred - I was worried that
the paradox would extend to whether the proposal passed but
it didn't.
There was no paradox win rule at time. People thought the
paradox was cool enough to propose it as a win condition
(and the proposal grandfathered the first paradox to a win,
so I guess *technically* it was a win by proposal).
