Friday, February 17, 2017

Call for Judgment: I’m not Dead anymore.

Quorum against, failed 1-5 by Kevan.

Adminned at 17 Feb 2017 16:39:50 UTC

I’m not actually Dead, nor do I have any sympthoms, please remove them all.

In Diseases, Death, it says:

A Villager who is exhibiting the symptom of Death is considered to be Dead.

A Dead Villager who is not the Doctor may not take actions defined by dynastic rules, except those in the rule “Spectral Actions”.

Exhibiting is an action, because “to exhibit” is a verb which involves exposing or offering to view (http://www.dictionary.com/browse/exhibit). For example, replace the verb “to exhibit” with “to dance” to make it more intuitive. I can’t choose to stop doing it due to the removal of the “mays” back then, but I’m still compelled to do it . For example, a person who compulsively coughs, has to cough all the time. They have no choice in coughing or not, and coughing is an action, and in the game’s flavor context, coughing is the act of exhibition of a symptom called “Cough”. However, due to that I’m Dead, I can no longer exhibit because its an action (of the dynastic kind), therefore, I can no longer be considered to be Dead.

So, oddly, I can’t be considered to be dead if I become dead.

As I’m not Dead, I can take dynastic actions. I also don’t employ my right to have diseases (either because I can’t and/or I simply choose not too employ it at any applicable moment, whichever works for the purpose of losing all symptoms/diseases). Such a right is exposed in “Diseases”:

Each Villager has zero or more Diseases, tracked privately by the Doctor.

As I no longer have Diseases, I would no longer have any Symptoms, because Symptoms belong to the Diseases I possess, as exposed in Diseases:

Each Disease has a number of Symptoms, listed in order from earliest to latest.

-> Diseases HAVE symptoms. Diseases are effectively a kind of inventory or “bag” that contain my Symptoms, because I, as a villager can’t HAVE Symptoms. I can exhibit them though. And the ones that I exhibit are the ones that my Diseases have.
and, in Doctor’s Rounds:

[...] that Villager gains the earliest Symptom of that Disease which they do not already exhibit

I gain Symptoms, which would need to be stored in my inventory of Diseases, because Villagers can’t HAVE Symptoms, but they can HAVE Diseases (and they merely exhibit the Symptoms found in the Diseases that they have as exposed earlier).

You could argue that since Symptoms are in my “bag” of Diseases, that I “have” them too, but that’s never explicitly stated, and I can have someone else’s stuff in my “bag”, because its merely a container. I have or “possess” the container (Disease), but not what the container contains (Symptoms). But my container has/possesses its contents, which are things that I could exhibit.

Henceforth, I wish to have recognized that I no longer have any diseases nor Symptoms (such as Death).

Getting “revived” by the Bet would be cool too tbh lol.

Also, sorry for editting this a lot, I add things as they pop into my head. I’d appreciate discussion in “notes” before anything as well to fully expose and develop my point (and to give you a final version without this compulsive adjusting).

Comments

pokes:

02-17-2017 01:47:29 UTC

If I disagree with “Exhibiting is an action”, do I still need to read the rest?

pokes:

02-17-2017 01:49:50 UTC

Ah shoot, I meant to make that a Note:. Apologies.

Cuddlebeam:

02-17-2017 01:54:00 UTC

I believe it depends on why exactly its wrong, without info on that it’s hard for me to tell.

Cuddlebeam:

02-17-2017 01:55:27 UTC

Also, don’t worry, I can always make a new CfJ (it’s just a bit messy but oh well).

pokes:

02-17-2017 01:57:05 UTC

There are at least three separate issues here and if I have to CfJ them all together, against :

- Is exhibiting an action?

- Does “Each Villager has zero or more Diseases, tracked privately by the Doctor” expose some right to not have diseases?

- Does losing a disease lose the symptoms, as though you have lost a bag containing them?

Cuddlebeam:

02-17-2017 02:05:30 UTC

>“Is exhibiting an action?”
-Exhibiting is an action, yes. It’s explained in the CfJ here:

“Exhibiting is an action, because “to exhibit” is a verb which involves exposing or offering to view (http://www.dictionary.com/browse/exhibit). For example, replace the verb “to exhibit” with “to dance” to make it more intuitive. I can’t choose to stop doing it due to the removal of the “mays” back then, but I’m still compelled to do it . For example, a person who compulsively coughs, has to cough all the time. They have no choice in coughing or not, and coughing is an action, and in the game’s flavor context, coughing is the act of exhibition of a symptom called “Cough”. “

>“Does “Each Villager has zero or more Diseases, tracked privately by the Doctor” expose some right to not have diseases?”
-This quote in particular exposes the amount you can have (zero or more). Notably, choosing to have no Diseases at all is, well, zero (the “choosing” thing as per the “may” exploit explained earlier and abused before with the “infinite” cocktail loophole, which I can explain again/further if needed).

>Does losing a disease lose the symptoms, as though you have lost a bag containing them?
-Yes, because I exhibit symptoms from diseases that I have. If I have no diseases, I have no symptoms available to exhibit. (You have a point there though, as the symptoms would still “be there”, but they’d just have no effect and it’d still be able to be “alive” again, because they incur their effects through exhibition).

Cuddlebeam:

02-17-2017 02:08:01 UTC

Here is where that “may” exploit is featured btw: https://blognomic.com/archive/give_me_back_my_water

orkboi:

02-17-2017 02:08:06 UTC

having death noted by your name in the GNDT sufficiently constitutes exhibiting, I think. On the other points….
against

pokes:

02-17-2017 02:13:09 UTC

(1) Is exhibiting an action?

This is ambiguous. “Exhibit” and “dance” are both verbs, but they aren’t equivalent verbs in their level of activity. I could also argue that “taking an action” involves doing something that you as a person do, not something that you as an in-game Villager do.

(2) Right to not have diseases

I still don’t understand this argument.

(3) Do you lose the symptoms?

This is irrelevant to me until I understand (2).

Cuddlebeam:

02-17-2017 02:18:07 UTC

1) It’s up to interpretation, yeah, but if its so, then the argument still holds that I potentially could.

2)The quote to hold that up is “The Diseases a Villager may have are:” in “Diseases”. Cornerstone word in that rule: may. May is “is permitted to” as per the glossary. For example, you “may take this cookie”. You’ve got the right to take it now, but you don’t have to take it if you don’t want to. Same with the Diseases because of that “may” in there.

Viv:

02-17-2017 08:13:24 UTC

against
A corpse can exhibit features. It can’t, for example, exhibit art.

Exhibit has a passive and an active meaning. The dead are merely losing the active part.

You might say “exhibit” is a “bag” that contains several meanings. There’s something for you in that “bag”, and it involves being dead.

I’m open to the construction of a local gallery for the dead where they can put on spectral exhibitions. Might draw a captive audience.

Kevan:

02-17-2017 09:36:28 UTC

against

pokes:

02-17-2017 11:20:19 UTC

(2): “permitted to X” doesn’t imply “permitted to not X”. I’m certainly permitted to pay taxes.

quirck:

02-17-2017 16:36:01 UTC

against