[Nomic02] Re: Nomic start
Fri, 10 Jan 2003 22:11:10 -0500 (EST)
On Sat, 11 Jan 2003, Adam Biltcliffe wrote:
> > 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.
I don't see where you get that from, exactly. Why would #5 prevent us
from making a rule like that? baf's in the game since he's one of the
players, and even if he weren't, we could make a rule adding him to the
game state. Of course, baf would probably vote against such a rule, but
that's a different matter.
_/<-= Admiral Jota =->\_
\<-= email@example.com =->/