From: jcm3_at_cec.wustl.edu
Date: Tue May 18 2004 - 09:18:47 PDT
224:2 VALID +2, no effect! What a mess. Ok here is what has happened: 1) With no previous valid rules, 224:2 is clearly valid. 2) 224:1 is now seconded. Although the rule is still INVALID, I am going to judge its *content* to be in effect (as stated in 224:1). This is what I get for allowing INVALID rules to have effects :( 3) 224:2 now has no effect on the game, because it has not been seconded. Therefore 224:1 is NOT seconded. 4) The ROs state that a rule can only be judged INVALID if it is inconsistent with a previous VALID rule. I won't say that 224:1 is inconsistent with 224:2, but 224:1 is not even VALID. Ok, I am not beneath letting a paradox remain active during this round. But for the sake of my single brain, I am going to interpret the 224:1 clause "rules in round 224 must be seconded before taking effect" to not provide a provision for retracting seconding. 224:1 *was* seconded, so it is in effect. 224:1 is invalid *with* an effect 224:2 is valid with *no* effect Ruling: VALID Style: +1 Seconds a rule +1 On theme: ignorance would be a key to hive intelligence. It would get really hard to think if most thoughts weren't ignored. Jae > I second rule 224:1. > > However I don't recall reading it. All future rules must > claim that > their authors are ignorant of previous rules. (Ignorance > of course is > no excuse for non-compliance.) >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Nov 24 2011 - 10:48 PST