Tuesday, July 18, 2006

Proposal: (Officially) Changing the Modus Ponens

Vetoed by Hix.—Chronos

Adminned at 19 Jul 2006 13:04:40 UTC

Replace the following paragraph within rule 2.15 The Modus Ponens:

The subrule’s Requirements describe a set of game events and / or gamestates. Often, a Traveller may pick a subrule, and carry out that subrule’s Action. A traveller may only carry out that subrule’s Action if that subrule’s requirements are true. When a Traveller performs an Action, e must post a weblog entry explaining eir Action and state how the requirements were all fulfilled.

With:

The subrule’s Requirements describe a set of game events and / or gamestates. Often, a Traveller may pick up to three different subrules, and carry out those subrules’ Actions. Travellers specify the order in which the Actions occur.  A traveller may only carry out each of those subrule’s Actions if that subrule’s requirements are true. When a Traveller performs a set of Actions, e must post a weblog entry explaining the order of eir Actions and state how the requirements were all fulfilled.

(Note: Let’s see if I can get it right this time)

Comments

Kevan: he/him

18-07-2006 07:58:13 UTC

for

Thelonious:

18-07-2006 08:06:41 UTC

for

TAE:

18-07-2006 12:22:31 UTC

imperial
My only concern with this wording is that its not clear what happens under the following situation:

I choose to do actions A, B, and C in that order.  The requirements for all the actions are met right now, but after I do A the requirements for B will no longer be met.  Can I do A, B, and C?  What if the condition for B will only be met if I do A first?

This may not be fatal so I am not goting to vote against, but I wouldn’t mind knowing what you think the limitations of this rule are.

ChronosPhaenon:

18-07-2006 12:37:03 UTC

for

kaddar:

18-07-2006 13:54:43 UTC

TAE: because requirements must be met to carry out an action (not to pick one), if you have carried out A, and haven’t carried out B, then if B’s requirements are no longer fulfilled, then the action cannot be taken.


oh, also,  for

Hix:

19-07-2006 00:52:17 UTC

(There will likely not be a “Rule 2.15 The Modus Ponens” if/when this proposal is Enacted)

Bucky:

19-07-2006 01:33:14 UTC

Why not?  for

ChronosPhaenon:

19-07-2006 17:42:50 UTC

‘cos of rule deletion

ChronosPhaenon:

19-07-2006 19:49:06 UTC

can someone please self-kill or veto this, so the queue moves?

Hix:

19-07-2006 20:03:03 UTC

veto as you wish