Friday, April 28, 2017

Declaration of Victory: Cuddlebeam Wins

# of people voting against is 5, less than quorum. 6-2. Failed by card.

Adminned at 28 Apr 2017 23:03:12 UTC

Risky instawin but I’m going for it because the cash cost to do it is cheap. Let’s go:

This Overseeing is an atomic action consisting of the following steps:

This Overseeing is an atomic action consisting of the following steps:
-Calculating the Power of each team. Let the power of team A be represented by X and the power of team B be represented by Y.
-Choosing an odd number of rounds for the game between 5 and 25. Traditionally, this is 13.
-Rolling a DICE(X+Y), once for each round. The commissioner does not need to roll this in the GNDT. For a given die, if it is less than or equal to X, team A scores a point. Otherwise, team B scores a point. The team that scores more points during the game wins the game.
-Making a post containing the results of the game.

Since I’ve scored more points during the game, I’ve won the game.

Victory is mine.

Comments

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus:

04-28-2017 11:41:10 UTC

for I had seen this and was planning on it so kudos to you.

Matt:

04-28-2017 12:11:29 UTC

against “Winning the game” ≠ Achieved victory for the current Dynasty.

Cuddlebeam:

04-28-2017 12:18:04 UTC

“The game” is a term already used in the ruleset to refer to, well this “game”, for example here: “Upon doing so, the game immediately goes into Hiatus, if it hasn’t already.”

And I believe that “to win” means to “gain victory”. It’s the normal English use of the word: http://www.dictionary.com/browse/win?s=ts

Matt:

04-28-2017 12:22:35 UTC

I agree but the game is also used in context of a Bloggsball game. There exists an overloading of the term in the ruleset. Based on context of the sub-rule and locality of the sub-rule, “game” in this instead more than likely refers to a Bloggsball game and not the dynasty.

Cuddlebeam:

04-28-2017 12:31:49 UTC

I agree. Formally, we can divide the key phrase as:

[target word] = (interpretation1/interpretation2/...interpretationx)

The team that scores more points during the [game]=(game of Bloggsball/game of Blognomic) wins the [game]=(game of Bloggsball/game of Blognomic).

Formally, it could be one or the other, but we don’t know for sure which because its ambiguous, so we’re at a bit of a stalemate there. So the only reasons left to use to decide for one or the other are informal ones unfortunately (which is kind of why I believe this play is “risky”, but hey, it could work, so I’m going for it).

Crumb:

04-28-2017 13:48:38 UTC

The team wins the game. You are not a team. You are the manager.  against

Cuddlebeam:

04-28-2017 14:08:35 UTC

Exactly.

“A Full Team is a Manager employing three Bloggers.”

I’m part of that Team.

Cuddlebeam:

04-28-2017 14:11:43 UTC

Or rather, think of it as “A Full Team is a Manager doing X”

I’m that Manager, because I’m doing X, therefore I’m a Full Team, ergo a Team, the Team who wins the game.

pokes:

04-28-2017 14:21:26 UTC

against By the definition of Full Team you personally have won the game. But I believe, as Matt does, that “the game” in the rule refers to the Bloggsball game, not Blognomic.

card:

04-28-2017 14:33:07 UTC

against
Why would you think this would work?

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus:

04-28-2017 14:33:18 UTC

However, given the ambiguity we have no way of establishing this.

card:

04-28-2017 14:34:12 UTC

against
Why would you think this would work?

Crumb:

04-28-2017 14:57:18 UTC

Conceded that you are part of the team. Question to more experienced player: Do victory conditions usually call it “winning the game”?

card:

04-28-2017 15:15:16 UTC

No, it’s usually called “achieving victory” or “has achieved victory”

The Second Dynasty of Amnistar c. 2007 https://wiki.blognomic.com/index.php?title=Ruleset_45#Buyout
The First Dynasty of Bucky c. 2007 https://wiki.blognomic.com/index.php?title=Ruleset_46#Buyout
The First Dynasty of spikebrennan c. 2007 - 2008 https://blognomic.com/archive/victory_conditions_take_2/
The Ninth Dynasty of Kevan c. 2011 https://wiki.blognomic.com/index.php?title=Ruleset_94#Death
The Eighth Dynasty of Josh c. 2013 https://wiki.blognomic.com/index.php?title=Ruleset_115#It.27s_good_to_be_King

Crumb:

04-28-2017 15:20:57 UTC

Thanks card. Nice try Cuddlebeam, and good job on spotting that you could play your own team, too. I think my vote stands though. It is pretty clear in context that the game in question is not the whole dynasty.

Sphinx:

04-28-2017 17:13:19 UTC

I think it’s fairly clear that the spirit of the rule refers to the bloggsball match, but I think both interpretations are equally valid.
for

Oracular rufio:

04-28-2017 17:46:51 UTC

against per Matt

Oracular rufio:

04-28-2017 18:15:39 UTC

To clarify, achieving victory is different than winning.  Achieving victory means that the dynasty ends, a new one starts with you as the Emperor, etc.  Winning presumably means that Blognomic is over.  There is no provision for winning Blognomic in the ruleset, and if there was, it wouldn’t be achieved by passing a DoV anyway.  You can make the argument that you’ve won Blognomic and that therefore the game is over, but I think there will be a CFJ if you do that.

Cuddlebeam:

04-28-2017 18:54:24 UTC

I disagree

Oracular rufio:

04-28-2017 19:36:52 UTC

Terms that are explicitly defined in the ruleset overrule standard English definitions.  If achieving victory meant winning in the ruleset, the game would have ended after the first dynasty.  But it didn’t, so clearly they are not the same.

Cuddlebeam:

04-28-2017 20:06:04 UTC

Yes, but in the same way, we’ve had discrepancies in rule interpretation between us and precedents before, argumentum ad “precedent” doesn’t apply always unless there is (current) consensus on the precedent itself.

derrick:

04-28-2017 20:15:13 UTC

against

The rules clearly refer to the match between the player, not blognomic. Nice try.

Oracular rufio:

04-28-2017 20:21:00 UTC

It’s not an argument from precedent, Cuddlebeam, it’s an argument based on the fact that “victory” has a specific definition in the ruleset.  The fact that Blognomic has never been won is just evidence in support of that.

Cuddlebeam:

04-28-2017 20:35:53 UTC

Ah, ok. I can see that, but I disagree with it because there is no instance of victory being defined like how Idle, Proposals, etc are all defined, so I don’t think that Victory is a keyword (or at least, not one stricter than for example “purchasing”, which hasn’t got strictly defined mechanics yet we make it synonym to “buying” and such).

Oracular rufio:

04-28-2017 20:38:25 UTC

There is literally an entire section called “Victory and Ascension” which basically exists to define what achieving victory means

Cuddlebeam:

04-28-2017 20:48:40 UTC

Woops lol. That’s true. I still believe that it’s not stricter than “purchasing”/“buying” though.