On Sep 12, 2017, at 9:31 PM, Cuddle Beam <cuddleb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I transfer my Stamp (the only one I have) to o. So, I’m not completely sure this worked. I’m in the middle of adjudicating your previous action wrt this stamp: On Sep 12, 2017, at 1:27 AM, Cuddle Beam <cuddleb...@gmail.com> wrote: > If it is possible for me to do all the following in this sentence, I destroy > my Stamp and cause Agora to transfer to me 23 shinies. I had understood your "If it is possible for me to do all the following in this sentence” as an allusion to the currently-fuzzy state of stamps. However, interpreted strictly, this condition does not hold, as it is _not_ possible to destroy stamps. Destroying assets is a regulated action (r. 2166), but since you owned that nominal stamp, you can perform that part, but causing Agora to pay you is also regulated (r. 2166 again), and no clause states that you CAN cause such a transfer. I was inclined to permit this pair of actions anyways, under the guidelines I sent to a-d a few days ago, but if I do, then you have no stamp to transfer to me. I had a look at the a-d thread following your attempt to destroy your own stamp, but I found no enlightenment there. I think there are three possible outcomes, here. Note that in all of them both actions actually failed, and I’m dealing only with the nominal outcome: 1. Your stamp destruction nominally succeeded, as if the rules are what they will be if BILLY MAYS HERE et al are enacted. We’ll have to fix the game state with ratification. As you have no nominal stamp, your nominal transfer to me fails. 2. Your stamp destruction nominally failed, for reasons that are not clear to me. (If so, your nominal attempt to pay Agora definitely failed.) Your nominal transfer of 1 stamp to me succeeds. 3. Both of these actions fail, nominally and actually. Which is it? Why? -o
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
