Be careful about applying Agora norms, three and a half decades later, to Suber’s 1982 ruleset.
On May 28, 2017, at 12:21 PM, CuddleBeam <[email protected]> wrote: > - "Interestingly, Suber’s ruleset leaves very basic actions such as joining > or leaving the game unregulated allowing them to occur in any manner." > > This is a bizarre point which I wish could be expanded on. What makes the > verbs "join" or "leave" special? ("to join" doesn't even explicitly exist as > a word anywhere! And its abstract!). I’m not the person to which you are responding, exactly, but, I have a thought. In as much as joining is special, it’s at least plausible to me that Suber’s ruleset presumed some gameplay norms from other contemporary games, vis., that the set of players would be determined at the start of the game and would be relatively fixed over the duration of the game. I don’t see anything to suggest that Suber considered joining or leaving the game at all - but “player” is nonetheless a special and distinct status from “non-player” in Suber’s original rules. Only players may vote, and only players are constrained to follow the rules, and only players may propose rule-changes. That, in turn, conveys specialness on the actions of “joining” (becoming a player when a non-player) and “leaving” (becoming a non-player when a player), as those transitions affect the fundamental nature of a person or entity’s relationship with the game. -o
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
