On Sun, 1 Oct 2017, Aris Merchant wrote: > On Sun, Oct 1, 2017 at 1:19 PM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote: > > > > > > On Sun, 1 Oct 2017, Aris Merchant wrote: > >> >> As with the other proto, I dislike making subjective platonic > >> >> restrictions; this applies especially for wins. I'm definitely > >> >> not opposed to making illegal wins invalid, but there should be a more > >> >> robust mechanism to do so. > >> > > >> > Ditto- be specific and not high level about this one. > >> > >> Would a requirement that a person announce that a rule was broken > >> within a week to invalidate the win be sufficient? > > > > Sounds about right. How about attaching it to a CoE-like mechanism? A CoE/ > > allegation of rule-breaking on a win announcement halts it until resolved > > (including e.g. suspending Herald's requirement to award Champion), with a > > standard "if a CFJ finds that a rules breach was significantly and directly > > required for a win to occur, the win fails, RttC notwithstanding..." > > Current phrasing: > "If a person would otherwise win the game, but e broke the rules to do so, > or another person broke the rules to help em win with eir advance > knowledge, and this fact is publicly announced within a week, the win is > invalidated. "
Fair enough for not using CFJs. But you also have to set standards as winning takes a while and breaking the game can happen in the past. For example, as written, if I broke a rule 6 months ago to get myself a ribbon, and no one noticed it and it self-ratified - for how long should I be refused a ribbon win? I think this should primarily apply to the endgame - if the breach was recent, and directly materially significant when the endgame happens. Right now I'm thinking of it as a more over-arching philosophical question. We're still acting like a rules-breakage is a "crime". But what if we say Hey, our metaphor is the referee. This is a Game. If the ref calls it, fine, we take away the win. But if the ref misses it, or it was in the past, it stands (I mean, you don't unwind the whole game because an early foul gave a minor positional advantage that led to a score). So having just written that, I'm going to change the opinion I started this message with. I think we shouldn't tie it to platonic winning and platonic rules-breakages in any way. We should tie it to actual Cards. -G.
