Re: 169:A (more) (fwd)

From: Anton Cox (
Date: Wed Oct 03 2001 - 09:20:46 PDT

On Wed, 3 Oct 2001, Jesse Welton wrote:

> I would say that your 169:6 retroactively made me guilty of
> unoriginality (from 169:3).

It is a tricky question as to what is an action, and what a
quality. That "square 3 has the property of keeping safe", (or that "rolling
seven has the property of introducing a new constraint to the game")
are not "things that have being going on that I was unaware of" is
(***relatively***) uncontroversial.

That "our tokens have properties", or that "players have properties which
can vary" are also such is perhaps more controversial.

I was taking the view that "what was going on" was those events that I
could be expected to detect (ie concrete actions), as opposed to 'abstract'
properties that later turn out to affect the game. Clearly, one can
interpret the phrase to mean every state in the game - but then, as
Jesse has pointed out, almost all rules would fail. So the question
is, how does one interpret the phrase in its most generous sense (to
the other players).

Best Wishes


Rule Date: 2001-10-03 16:20:04 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Nov 24 2011 - 10:48 PST