On Dec 3, 2007 3:30 AM, Zefram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Roger Hicks wrote:
> >(Note: The votes for DSPBCORMKPYOAFA and AGAINT are invalid as these
> >are not possible options)
>
> Rubbish. You can tell that DSPBCORMKPYOAFA is (a synonym for) a valid
> vote value, because of the way in which we used it. You might not be
> able to tell *which* option it means, but it's obvious that it refers
> to some vote option. Even if the word is nonsensical.
>
Sorry, but there is a difference here. nkep was a nonsensical word
that had meaning only through the provisions of the Fookiemyartug
contract. This was fine, as nkep was entirely unregulated by the rules
and defined to have meaning apart from the ruleset by Fookiemyartug's
contract. Here, you are trying to define a nonsensical word to be
synonymous with an action that is regulated by the ruleset, and
therefore not viable.
At no time did I claim that nkep was a synonym for any other
game-defined action. The issue was that nkep was a synonym for a non
game defined action and therefore permissible. If we follow your logic
(of allowing anyone to use a nonsensical word as a synonym for a game
action) then utter chaos would ensue:
{
I publish an official report which states that I won the game.
I akslfhashdf this report
players ignore this, assuming it is nonsense.
several weeks later I claim that akslfhashdf is synonymous with ratify.
}
BobTHJ
