At least for me personally, I've never (earnestly) used the four factors in my life. For us the text is the law, and there is 99% of the time a common sense way to grapple with the text.
On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 10:02 AM Aris Merchant via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 12:41 PM Aris Merchant < > thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 10:20 AM Kerim Aydin via agora-business > > <agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On 6/13/2020 10:07 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote: > > > > On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 1:04 PM Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > >> On 6/13/2020 9:52 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote: > > > >>> In CFJ 1500, the Court found that words should be > > > >>> interpreted by their common language definition after a definition > in > > > >>> the rules has been overturned. The Court presently believes that > this > > > >>> is somewhat misguided: while the common language definition should > be > > > >>> used in any interpretation, the past definition in the rules and > its > > > >>> historical usage within Agora should also be looked at, where > > > >>> reasonable, as part of the game custom criterion. > > > >> > > > >> I'm very concerned about this bit and considering a motion. This > > greatly > > > >> expands the scope of what we have to remember about past rules, > > greatly > > > >> reduces clarity to new players, and considering there's many common > > terms > > > >> that we drag into rules-definitions (e.g. "refer" or whatever) they > > should > > > >> revert really quickly to common definitions when removed from the > > rules. > > > >> > > > >> Shiny was removed from the ruleset in early 2018. That's two years. > > > >> What's the limit? > > > >> > > > >> -G. > > > >> > > > > > > > > I thought that might be controversial. I think that the limit is the > > > > point at which almost no one remembers the definition. Here, the > > > > context and the recency both implied the definition. In the instance > > > > of "refer", as long as we don't leave the mechanic after returning > the > > > > definition, it will almost immediately return to solely its common > > > > language definition. > > > > I may end up overturning this to some extent in CFJ 3846. I think > > there's a better way of handling language interpetation than a case by > > case full four factors analysis. I'm not sure whether we want to move > > to reconsider. > > > Aris: *plans to fundamentally rethink the way Agorans look at language* > Aris: "Gee, I wonder if this is going to be controversial?" > > -Aris > -- >From R. Lee
