On 2/22/14, 1:44 , Fool wrote: [snip] > It is correct that R1698 had a chance to act before the game ended. So Alex > Smith's proposed amendment would have been effective in preventing the end of > the game. But in absense of that amendment, it remains to be shown that ending > Agora falls under "causing Agora to become ossified". > > Agora's not ossified, it's just done. Now, G. objects that it depends on what > the meaning of the word "is" is... A finished game still "exists", and is > therefore ossified, therefore ending is prevented by R1698. I don't see in > what sense this could be true.
The R1698 definition of "Agora is ossified" does not become undefined if Agora does not exist.  The definition only asks whether it would be possible to pass proposals or make arbitrary gamestate changes. These questions have clear answers if Agora were to "cease to exist".  The definition would presumably cease to be effective, but, fortunately, we're checking the definition at a time when it is clearly effective. - woggle