On Thu, 17 Aug 2017, Aris Merchant wrote: > On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 8:52 AM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote: > > On Thu, 17 Aug 2017, Alex Smith wrote: > >> On Thu, 2017-08-17 at 00:48 -0400, Owen Jacobson wrote: > >> > Per Rule 2166 (“Assets”), I indent, without objection, to destroy > >> > Agora, no sooner than August 20th 2017, 01:00, Eastern time. > >> > >> Just to make sure, I object. (We have several protections against > >> actions that make the game nonexistent or unplayable, so it's likely > >> that this couldn't succeed. It's possible, though, that destroying > >> Agora has an effect that doesn't make the nomic we're playing > >> unplayable. What does it mean to destroy a nomic anyway?) > > > > Well, by common definition, if a nomic by its own rules was "destroyed", > > I'd say that instance of it would "cease to exist" and it would > > basically say "this nomic has ended, game over." > > > > True. Rules 101 and 1698 prevent it, in this case, and you'd have to > repeal both to make it work (or pass a rule of greater power). Would > anyone object to raising them to power 4, or 3.9, or something, just > to prevent this from accidentally happening?
R101 has gone through major changes to reflect the flavor of the current game, "the game may be won, but the game never ends" to me is more about flavor than protection (like "please treat Agora Right Good Forever"). R1698 (and maybe R2449) have more mechanical protections IMO. So I'd leave R101 at power-3, personally. Elevating R1698 sounds like a good idea though. One question is which of 1698, 1030, and 1551 should be highest - do their global protections interact in odd ways that mean we should be careful about their order? -G.
