On Sat, 4 Apr 2020 at 22:16, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> Sorry, I should have been more clear, and I wasn't asking specifically > about this situation. > > Consider an auction with one lot and the following bids: > > - Alice: 2 coins > > - Bob: 1 coin > > > Per Rule 2551, a person's priority is "their position in the list of > persons who have bid on the Auction, sorted by the value of their > non-withdrawn bids in descending order." This list is [Alice, Bob]. > Assuming 0-based indexing (because I can), Alice's priority is 0, and > Bob's priority is 1. > > Also per Rule 2551, "For each lot in the Auction, the winner of that lot > is the player with the highest priority on the Auction who has not won > any previous lot." Bob has the highest priority (1 vs. 0), so e is the > winner the sole lot, despite having a smaller bid. > I think that the rule admits an interpretation either way; your interpretation is viable, but it's also very standard for "first position" to be highest priority and there's no specific callout to numerical values of position in the rule. So I would tend to the opinion that common sense and good of the game would decide here. -Alexis
