Cool. I highly support a 3-way proposal composition in this form if
the wording can be figured out.
But I don't think this version works, because the proposals have to be
resolved (by the Assessor) sequentially not simultaneously, and
conditionals can't be resolved based on future conditions (e.g. when
you resolve Slate A proposal, you can't wait until "later in the day"
or even "later in the same message" to see if B also wins, you have to
evaluate each conditional in sequence based on what's been resolved
so far in the sequence).
On Wed, 19 Sep 2018, D Margaux wrote:
> I submit and pend the following proposals. The names were randomly
> assigned.
>
>
> /////
> Title: Slate A to Win
> Author: D Margaux
> AI: 1
>
> The Slate A players are Corona, VJ Rada, Aris, and omd.
>
> The Slate A players win the game, unless the Slate B players also win the
> game today.
> /////
>
> /////
> Title: Slate B to Win
> Author: D Margaux
> AI: 1
>
> The Slate B players are Publius Scribonius Scholasticus, Trigon, ATMunn,
> and twg.
>
> The Slate B players win the game, unless the Slate C players also win the
> game today.
> /////
>
> /////
> Title: Slate C to Win
> Author: D Margaux
> AI: 1
>
> The Slate C players are Cuddle Beam, Murphy, G., and D. Margaux.
>
> The Slate C players win the game, unless the Slate A players also win the
> game today.
> /////
>
