Subject: RE: Simplex
From: Julian Sutter <>
Date: Friday, September 11, 1998 15:14:33

I would like to state my position on this issue:
115 states that "Whatever is not prohibited or regulated by a law is
permitted and unregulated, with the sole exception of changing the laws,
which is permitted only when a law or set of laws explicitly or implicitly
permits it."
This law allows me to declare any messages received, as well as further
messages received from the simplex citizen called "Tom Muller" null and
void, and due to the fact that there is no law forcing me to recognize
either the existance of "Thingies" or "Muscle Man Murphy". 115 states that
anything not regulated by rules is permissable, so this is permissable. I
do not acknowledge the existance of any rules that are not part of the
Furthermore, I announce my internion to vote 'nay' on any propositions that
I feel would place to much power in the hands of one person ar group of

> -----Original Message-----
> From: McAllister []
> Sent: Friday, September 11, 1998 2:28
> To: Gabe Drummond-Cole; Nick LeToureau; Tom Mueller; Alex Perez; Eric
> Reinecke; Julian Sutter; Tyrrell McAllister; Jeff Reinecke
> Subject: Re: Simplex
> Although 115 allows anyone to make any action, including the action of
> creating any item, I do not see in the rule set any law compelling any
> other individual to acknowledge the existence of the created item or to
> acknowledge that it possesses the specific properties described by the
> creator. The only entities for which the rule set compels recognition of
> existence at any given time are: the laws in existence at that time (law
> #101) , and propositions (as defined in law #103) for purposes of voting
> (law #104).
> With that in mind, I state the following.
> I have not, do not and will not, until further notice, officially
> acknowledge(d) the existence of any action, public or private,
> taken by the
> citizen of Simplex known as Tom Mueller when Simplex started, or by Gabe,
> known in Simplex as Mr. Harf, other than those actions which the rule set
> compels me to acknowledge, namely, proposing propositions and voting on
> propositions.
> I stress that this is not a public action, if public action were to be
> defined as "A public action is any communication to all the citizens of
> Simplex which
> can effect a thingie," (though to my official knowledge, it as never been
> defined as such before this moment) for the following reasons:
> 1) to my official knowledge, no thingies exist.
> 2) this communication, in and of itself, is not meant to affect any
> thingies, should they exist, but is only a public service statement
> describing certain current psychological properties of the
> citizen known as
> Tyrrell McAllister. Whatever the effects of Tyrrell McAllister's
> psychology may be, including those effects regarding thingies,
> they are not
> contained within this communication. They are only (in part) described.