> On Aug 23, 2017, at 12:27 AM, V.J Rada <vijar...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> As an academic question, how do the current rules resolve welcome packages >>>> when Agora holds less than 50 shinies? K’s welcome package is complete, >>>> but there aren’t enough shinies left for the next one. > > I assume the parts of the rules banning negative transfers conflicts > with the part of the rules demanding a transfer of 50 shinies and the > conflict of rules provisions control. The welcome package rule is > "Assets" with power 3. I think without looking that the same rule bans > negative transfers and does so earlier? So the later provision > overrides the earlier & puts Agora into debt? Does that make CFJs > actually give you money?
I believe that CFJs, as currently implemented, cannot change the game state, only clarify ambiguous states. If it appears that CFJs create shinies de novo, then you should try it and find out, I guess. So here’s my theory: Under the previous implementation of shinies, it was possible for Agora to have a negative balance, because Agora’s balance was a switch taking integer values. The current implementation is in terms of the Assets rules, though, and I’m fairly sure that rule 2166 (“Assets”, power 3) does not permit the existence of a negative number of a fungible asset: > An asset is an entity defined as such by the ruleset (hereafter its backing > document), and existing solely because its backing document defines its > existence. Agora’s “balance” is a straight count of the number of distinct Shinies it holds, not an abstract quantity; as a count, it must be non-negative. Since rule 2499 (“Welcome Packages”) has power 1, it cannot override rule 2166. Rule 2499 only authorizes welcome packages of exactly 50 shinies, specifically to be transferred from Agora, so I -think- that no welcome packages are possible while Agora’s balance is below 50. Anyone see any holes in this? -o
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
