============================== CFJ 2995 ==============================
Yally is a player.
Called by ais523: 15 Apr 2011 23:44:02 GMT
Assigned to Murphy: 19 Apr 2011 06:52:30 GMT
Judged TRUE by Murphy: 19 Apr 2011 06:59:23 GMT
Recently Yally embarked upon a campaign of systematic rules-breaking,
pointing out that all the punishments listed in the ruleset for
rules-breaking could be avoided via more rules-breaking. However,
generally speaking, someone who refuses to abide by the rules of a game
is, in fact, not playing it, but a different game. Despite the attempts
of the rules to define who's playing the game or not, in terms of a
switch, it is generally accepted (except among some players of The Game)
that games cannot freely cause arbitrary persons to be playing them;
children sometimes invent games in which there are penalties for not
playing them, but this sort of thing is not generally accepted as making
Thus, because Yally was operating to a different set of rules than
everyone else - intentionally not obeying the rules as written - it is
quite likely that he is not a player, beyond the power of anything in
the rules to make him one. (Just like you wouldn't consider a rule
defining, say, Hillary Clinton as a player, as actually causing her to
Gratuitous Arguments by Yally:
Nomics are generally seen as different from other games in this sense. Nomics
define what is possible and what is legal. If I were to suddenly perform
actions that were impossible under the ruleset, then yes, I would not be
playing this game. However, performing illegal actions merely entitles me to a
punishment; the fact that the punishment system is flawed does not mean I am
not playing the game. Consider, for example, someone who performs an
impossible action in real life. If a person traveled faster than the speed of
light, then that person would not be real (he must be fictional). However, if
someone stole a loaf of bread, he wouldn't cease to be in existence - he would
merely be punished by relevant authorities.
Gratuitous Arguments by omd:
Although the Rules don't have authority to cause Mrs.
Clinton to be playing the game, they do have the authority to cause
her to be a Player, defined by Rule 869 as "an entity whose
citizenship is Registered". Like many terms defined by the rules, it
has a definition similar but not identical to the ordinary one.
Gratuitous Arguments by G.:
In support of Quazie's gratuitous argument, my recent
judgement (2987) noted that if one uses common definitions of what is
expected in "games"as a guide for interpreting Agora, then one should
use "games of nomic" and not just "games in general". -G.
Judge Murphy's Arguments:
I accept the gratuitous arguments. TRUE.