Maud wrote:
Persons have certain rights and privileges. Those rights which
are enumerated in the rules or recognized by the Agoran courts
may not be abridged, reduced, limited, or remove by Agoran law,
^^^^^^ "removed"
and any provision of an otherwise binding agreement which would
do so is unenforceable. Those privileges which are enumerated
in the rules or recognized by the Agoran courts are assumed to
exist in the absence of an explicit, binding agreement to the
contrary. This rule takes precedence over all other rules.
Merely possessing a right does not by itself provide a mechanism
by which the right can be exercised. However, the rules must
provide mechanisms by which the following rights can be
exercised.
I suggest adding R1698-style protection against the rules coming
to lack such mechanisms.
(f) Each person who is a player has the right to perform
unregulated actions.
Why not just "player"?
Ends and their Means shall be considered equivalent in the
following technical sense. Whenever a person performs an action
which is a Means to some End, e shall be considered to have
performed the End, even if the End could not naturally be
performed. If a person somehow would simultaneously peform
"perform" ^^^^^^
multiple Means with the same End, e shall be considered to have
thereby performed the End only once. A person cannot perform an
End unless there is at least one Means to that End which e can
naturally perform.
A player "publishes" or "announces" something by sending an
appropriate message to a public forum. A player performs an
action "by announcement" by announcing that e performs it. A
player performs an action "by private message" to some player by
sending an appropriate private message to the specified player.
Any action performed by sending a message is performed at the
time date-stampted on that message.
^^^^^^^^ "stamped"
Enact a rule, titled "The Orderly Comparison of Threats", reading:
The Order of the Evil Eye, or more briefly the Order, is a total
order consisting of all nonnegative real numbers in their
standard mathematical order together with a special element
called Unanimity, which is strictly greater than any other
element of the Order.
Whenever the rules indicate that two indices are to be compared,
they shall be compared as though they were members of the Order.
Nice re-use of name. But why not define the Order as being a Threat?
