[Nomic02] Re: Nomic start
Sat, 11 Jan 2003 03:03:56 -0000
> I meant rule 5. The Limitation of Scope rule. The proposed rules 7 and 8
> seem to express everything I want from rule 5.
I disagree. Rule 5 as it stands states that the game cannot affect things
that are not part of it, as well as the other way around. Without it, we
could (in theory) pass a rule to the effect of "Carl Muckenhoupt must pay
each of the other players $5 each time he wishes to perform any action
within the game". Possibly this could be incorporated into Rule 7, but I
think it ought to be mentioned.
>> Would it be possible for you to modify the mailing list to include a
>> Reply-To: email@example.com header, to make replying easier?
> I could, but I'm a little reluctant to because that's Considered
> Harmful. (http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html) Given a
> reasonable mail client - and even the command-line-based Unix
> "mail" command counts as "reasonable" by this criterion - replying to
> the list is no more difficult than replying to the author of a
> message. However, there is also the reasonable argument that using the
> reply-to-all function usually replies to both the list and the sender who
> is also on the list, which is redundant and wasteful and potentially
> snowballs until everyone on the list is receiving two copies of every
> reply. So I'll make this change unless someone objects.
Well, Mulberry manages to make replying to the list somewhat more
complicated than replying to just the author, but having looked again it
turns out it is at least possible (without having to copy the emails
addresses by hand). So, given the reasons listed in the web page you cited,
I'm willing to retract this request - though by all means do it anyway if
you think it'll reduce the frequency with which we receive two copies of
each reply to posts to the list ...