Thursday, September 28, 2006

Question on “The Harvest”

The first line of “THe Harvest” says

“If no Vegetable has done so that day or within the previous 6 hours…”

Hix recently reverted two Harvests claiming Harvest has already happened today. Both times it happened after the six hours.

The way I read the statement was “(If no V has done so that day)F or (within the previous 6 hours)T” and thus the two harvests should have happened.
Hix apparently read the “or” as an “and”, thus saying the harvest shouldn’t have happened.

I do not know for sure how CoJ’s work yet to know how to fix this. Can someone else post a CoJ to try and clear the rule up?

posted by Clucky at 28 Sep 2006 20:55:00 UTC Comments (3)

Comments

Hix:

28-09-2006 21:30:51 UTC

I see how you evaluated “No V has done so that day” as false, but how do you get “within the previous 6 hours” to evaluate as true?  “within the previous 6 hours” isn’t even a complete thought.  You must have evaluated “no V has done so within the previous 6 hours”.

But the line doesn’t read “If no Vegetable has done so that day, or no Vegetable has done so within the previous 6 hours”

I guess what I’m saying is “that day or within the previous 6 hours” should be viewed as a unit.  Yes, a Vegetable has done the harvest “that day or within the previous 6 hours”, so it is not the case that no vegetable has done so “that day or within the previous 6 hours”.  As the author of the original harvest proposal, I can tell you that this was definitely my intent.  (I definitely didn’t mean for 2 harvests in a row to be able to occur in quick succession, just because they technically occurred on different days (which would be allowed under your interpretation))

I think we should just interpret it the way I intended (i.e. once per day, but no more than once per 6 hours) for now.  Actually, some of us were talking in the IRC channel about how once per day might not be frequent enough.  I’ll propose to change the troublesome line in the Ruleset to a simpler “If no Vegetable has done so within the last X hours”.  If that passes, there won’t be any more ambiguity.

Clucky: he/him

28-09-2006 21:35:19 UTC

Ok. I see so its

not (Vegtable done so that day OR Vegtable has done so within last 24 hours) = not (T or F) = not T = F.

Instead of

(not vegtable has done so that day) OR (not Vegtable has done so wtihin last 24 hours) = not T or not F = F or T = T.

I understand now. Thanks for clearing it up! No need for a CfJ now =).

Angry Grasshopper:

28-09-2006 23:48:55 UTC

Although you’ve decided you don’t disagree on the wording, you will eventually want to make a Call for Judgment for something.

All you have to do is create a post in the category ‘Call for Judgment’ that describes your problem and your resolution to it. The rest of us will read it and vote accordingly. You should probably read the rules for proposals and CfJ’s to see how they differ, because occasionally a sneaky player will legally use a CfJ for eir own nefarious ends. ;)