On Fri, 28 Jun 2013, Charles Walker wrote:
> On 28 June 2013 05:49, Steven Gardner <[email protected]> wrote:
> > What I'd be looking for is a ruleset which fixes bugs likes changing rule
> > numbers, defines simultaneity, incorporates some lessons about pragmatism in
> > a minimally committal way and generally leaves the rest open for players to
> > explore politics and law and not bug-fixes and mechanics.
>
> I've actually started the project you suggest of designing an ideal
> inital ruleset for blitz style play.
>
> I would be interested to read how you might phrase your "lessons about
> pragmatism".
Just on the "undecidable" part, I'd make the following suggestions from
current Agora:
1. Use "determinate". If a judgement finds a certain aspect of the
game indeterminate, it is just called indeterminate, no biggie.
Anything indeterminate is "ignored" in determining any win, and
judges are encouraged to isolate the minimal amount of indeterminism
in figuring this out (e.g., if a certain points award is indeterminate,
then just those points are indeterminate, not the whole of the
player's score.
2. If, notwithstanding the above, play truly can't continue, or
the fundamental determination of winning is impossible, everyone
loses.
-Goethe
