On Jun 19, 2017, at 6:23 PM, omd <c.ome...@gmail.com> wrote: > I pay ais523 0.5 shinies. > > CFJ: ais523 has 0 shinies. > > Arguments: > > First of all, does 0.5 count as an "amount" per Rule 2483?
Gratuity: there’s an elision here for stylistic reasons, but the rules nonetheless bar attempts to pay non-integral numbers of shinies. By constraining the values of Balance switches and definining “to pay” as > If Agora, a player, or an organization (A) 'pays' X shinies to Agora, a > player, or an organization (B), A's Balance is decreased by X and B's Balance > is increased by X. Any attempt to pay a negative amount is INEFFECTIVE, rules > to the contrary notwithstanding. rule 2483 (“Economics”) effectively only makes it possible to pay amounts that would modify the involved Balance switches from one legal value to another. omd’s payment does not do so, as it would modify eir balance from an integral value to a half-integral value, and half-integral values are not allowed (r. 2483 again). The sentence specifically addressing negative payments is required, and cannot be similarly elided, as it serves a different purpose: it stops people from “paying” someone in order to take all of the “payee”’s Shinies for emself. -o
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
