Monday, June 11, 2012

Call for Judgment: Were we Enlightened guardians, Were we apes designing humans?

Times out 1-7 and fails. -scshunt

Adminned at 15 Jun 2012 23:46:13 UTC

The second paragraph from rule 2.2.4 Unblocking Chakras reads as follow:

If a Time Monk would be eligible to achieve Victory in the Dynasty that they currently occupy, were they Enlightened, and if that Dynasty has not yet been Unblocked, then they may Unblock that Dynasty by making a blog post with the Title “Unblocking a Chakra: Dynasty X”, where X is the Dynasty they occupy, and placing an asterisk beside that Dynasty in the Dynastic History list on the UTD. Upon doing so, the Monk who Unblocked the Dynasty gains 1 Chronotohm. They may also add ‘XX Chakra (YY)’ to their Chakra field, where YY is the number of the Dynasty that they have Unblocked, and XX is the Chakra that has been unlocked.

I believe the phrase “were they Enlightened” implies that this paragraph only applies to Time Monks who are Enlightened; therefore is it not yet possible for a Time Monk to Unblock a Chakra, as we’re all currently Unenlightened.

Another interpretation for this paragraph would be “If the only unmatched condition for a Time Monk to be eligible to achieve Victory in the Dynasty they currently occupy is to be Enlightened, and if that Dynasty has not yet been Unblocked, then they may[...]”. However, being Enlightened is a part of the gamestate defined in the Hard Rules in the Ruleset for Dynasty 100, whereas the eligibility to achieve Victory in a specific Dynasty depends only in the parts of the gamestate defined in that Dynasty’s dynastic rules; therefore if a Time Monk would be eligible to achieve Victory in the Dynasty they occupy if they were Enlightened, then they in fact are eligible to achieve Victory. Thus “were they Enlightened” is completely redundant with that interpretation, which leads me to believe that is not the correct interpretation.

To relieve any ambiguity, replace in rule 2.2.4 Unblocking Chakras:

If a Time Monk would be eligible to achieve Victory in the Dynasty that they currently occupy, were they Enlightened, and if that Dynasty has not yet been Unblocked, then they may

with:

If an Enlightened Time Monk is eligible to achieve Victory in the Dynasty that they currently occupy, and if that Dynasty has not yet been Unblocked, then they may

Revert in the gamestate every change that did not match my interpretation of rule 2.2.4; specifically, set every Time Monk’s Chakra’s field in the GNDT to blank.

Well I guess most of you (if not all) disagree with my interpretation. And I do agree that with the Seven Chakras Proposal passed, and the sentence “An Enlightened Time Monk has achieved victory.”, my interpretation is no longer playable; but that may actually be a good thing, as I mentioned a couple days ago.

Comments

Kevan: he/him

11-06-2012 21:24:41 UTC

against I’m biased because I wrote the rule, but I really can’t see the first reading. Are you saying that “if a Monk could eat, were they hungry, then that Monk may buy groceries” could be read as “if a Monk could eat and is hungry, then that Monk may buy groceries”, the way you see it?

The “Time Monk may not declare Victory if he or she is Unenlightened” of Ruleset 100 goes for other dynasties as well, I’m not sure where you’re getting the idea that an earlier-Dynasty Victory only depends on “the parts of the gamestate defined in that Dynasty’s dynastic rules”. Ruleset 100 always applies. “A Time Monk is subject to the Dynastic Rules of the final ruleset of the Dynasty that they occupy, as well as the Core Rules, Glossary and Hard Rules of Dynasty 100.”

Clucky: Puzzle Master he/him

11-06-2012 21:24:47 UTC

against How does “were they Enlightened” mean “only if they are Enlightened? It means the exact opposed, namely “If they were Enlightened, could they do this”. You cannot obtain victory without being Enlightened, so we need that clause.

Josh: he/they

11-06-2012 21:31:17 UTC

against

Cpt_Koen:

11-06-2012 22:22:15 UTC

Kevan: Yes, I think “if a Monk could eat, were they hungry, then they may buy groceries” can be read to different ways: either “were they hungry” applies to “a Monk could eat”, or to “they may buy groceries”.
Is that incorrect?

Also, achieving and declaring Victory are two different things.
When a Time Monk has achieved Victory in an earlier Dynasty, they may Unblock a Chakra, but not declare Victory if they’re Unenlightened;
when a Time Monk is Enlightened, they have achieved Victory, and may declare Victory.

moonroof:

11-06-2012 22:53:34 UTC

imperial

Clucky: Puzzle Master he/him

11-06-2012 23:09:55 UTC

“If a Monk could eat, were they hungry, then they may buy groceries”

the “were they hungry” means “assuming they were hungry”. So that statement means “If, all things being the same but the Monk is hungry, they would be allowed to eat, then they may buy groceries”

In order to apply the the second clause, it would have to say something like “If I Monk can eat, they may buy groceries if they are hungry” or something else weird like that. I really don’t get how it can apply to the second clause in this case.

Bucky:

12-06-2012 00:06:24 UTC

against

Bucky:

12-06-2012 00:40:05 UTC

against , for real this time.  (NEVER do that again, Josh)

Clucky: Puzzle Master he/him

12-06-2012 06:19:00 UTC

what happened Bucky? All I see are two against votes from you

Purplebeard:

12-06-2012 07:24:36 UTC

against

Darknight: he/him

13-06-2012 01:34:25 UTC

against

Bucky:

13-06-2012 01:51:47 UTC

Clucky: Josh included language in a proposal that temporarily made it illegal for me to vote.

Klisz:

13-06-2012 02:18:47 UTC

against