[Nomic] Proposal: No finality

[David (Birch)]

You could just have rule 0 overrule the rule that lets you overrule things, 
by name, and then "all other rules" wouldn't need naming.

On Sep 23 2004, Adam Biltcliffe wrote:

> On Sep 23 2004, Jonathan David Amery wrote:
> 
> > No finality
> > 
> > In the event of someone winning the game then the following occur:
> > 
> > a) They are recognised to have won the game.
> > b) All gameplay stops, except as mandated by this rule.
> > c) A new rule is created with the following text:
> > ---
> > 0, No fun here
> > 
> > It is not possible to win the game.  This rule takes precidence over
> > all other rules.
> > ---
> > d) If it is possible for play to proceed then gameplay resumes.
> > e) If it is not possible for play to proceed then the player who won
> > the game may make whatever changes they wish to the rules for the
> > purpose of allowing gameplay to continue; except that they may not
> > change rule 0.
> > f) Gameplay resumes.
> 
> This seems to be about the right spirit, but the implementation is 
> flawed. Specifically, Rule 0, if created as above, would not be permitted 
> to override any rules which state that it is possible to win the game, 
> since it doesn't name them explicitly, and so a contradiction would be 
> created. I suggest a simpler proposal along the lines of "If a player 
> wins, they <are recognised in some glorious way>. Winning the game does 
> not cause the game to end."
> 
> adam
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Nomic-talk mailing list
> Nomic-talk@srcf.ucam.org
> http://www.srcf.ucam.org/mailman/listinfo/nomic-talk
> 

-- 
----------
dtb26@cam.ac.uk
phone number 07906 638541