Do you even have enough shinies for all these contracts?

On Tue, 13 Feb 2018 at 22:21, Cuddle Beam <cuddleb...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Anyways, I deleted the post, but here is an archive of it:
> http://archive.is/FQpip
>
> I need to go sleep, godspeed to me lol.
>
> On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 4:11 AM, Cuddle Beam <cuddleb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > https://twitter.com/Cuddlebeam/status/963611395257503744
> >
> > I CFJ with shinies the following: That destruction (the twitter one
> linked
> > above) was legal.
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 4:09 AM, Cuddle Beam <cuddleb...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Another try:
> >>
> >> I create a contract (Cuddlebeam's Cool Contract 2) by paying 1 shiny to
> >> Agora, with the following text:
> >>
> >> -------
> >> ~~~~Cuddlebeam's Cool Contract 2.~~~~
> >>
> >> "This sentence is false."
> >> The way this contract is destroyed is by making a post in Cuddlebeam's
> >> Twitter (@Cuddlebeam), with such a post being in the form of "I hereby
> >> destroy Cuddlebeam's Cool Contract. Bipity Bopity X!", where X is the
> >> state of the truth-value of the statement above in the form of a string
> >> (for example "true" or "false").
> >> -------
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 3:58 AM, Cuddle Beam <cuddleb...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Just in case:
> >>>
> >>> I CFJ with a payment of shinies the following: That destruction I just
> >>> did was possible.
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 3:54 AM, Cuddle Beam <cuddleb...@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> I object to that intent :P
> >>>>
> >>>> Another try:
> >>>>
> >>>> I create a contract (Cuddlebeam's Cool Contract) by paying 1 shiny to
> >>>> Agora, with the following text:
> >>>>
> >>>> -------
> >>>> ~~~~Cuddlebeam's Cool Contract.~~~~
> >>>>
> >>>> "This sentence is false."
> >>>> The way this contract is destroyed is by announcement, with such
> >>>> announcement message being in the form of "I hereby destroy
> Cuddlebeam's
> >>>> Cool Contract. Bipity Bopity X!", where X is the state of the
> truth-value
> >>>> of the statement above in the form of a string (for example "true" or
> >>>> "false").
> >>>> -------
> >>>>
> >>>> I hereby destroy Cuddlebeam's Cool Contract. Bipity Bopity true!
> >>>>
> >>>> I free-CFJ the following: That destruction I just did was legal.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 3:05 AM, Alexis Hunt <aler...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> CFJ 3620:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> > I create a contract by paying 1 shiny to Agora, with the following
> >>>>> text:
> >>>>> > -------
> >>>>> > "This sentence is false."
> >>>>> > If the statement above is true, I owe 1 shinies to Agora, but if
> its
> >>>>> > false, I owe no shinies to Agora.
> >>>>> > While I owe any Shinies to Agora, I also owe 1 shiny to CuddleBeam
> >>>>> but I
> >>>>> > do not owe any shinies to any person.
> >>>>> > I shall, must, have to, and do so automatically, if possible, pay
> >>>>> Agora
> >>>>> > and CuddleBeam what I owe them within a week of owing.
> >>>>> > -------
> >>>>>
> >>>>> > I raise a CFJ on the following: The above contract compels me to
> pay
> >>>>> > CuddleBeam at least one shiny.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Rule 2523 provides that obligations in contracts to refrain from
> >>>>> actions
> >>>>> that are subject to inextricable conditionals are, effectively,
> >>>>> ineffective. It says nothing, however, about positive obligations to
> >>>>> act.
> >>>>> So the mere attempt to use an indeterminate statement to impose the
> >>>>> obligation is not barred.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> There are some questions about exactly how the text of the contract
> >>>>> should
> >>>>> be interpreted, since it says "I owe 1 shinies to Agora" which is a
> >>>>> sentence written as if it's always speaking. However, unlike with
> >>>>> rules, we
> >>>>> are directed by Rule 2525 to apply, among other things, the intent of
> >>>>> the
> >>>>> parties. In this case, I think it is correct to resolve the ambiguity
> >>>>> about
> >>>>> a possibly unfulfillable obligation in favour of the interpretation
> of
> >>>>> the
> >>>>> parties.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Note that there is no way for a contract to automatically transfer
> >>>>> shinies.
> >>>>> If it were possible, then the effect of the contract would be to
> >>>>> effect a
> >>>>> transfer immediately, meaning that the obligation (if it exists) is
> >>>>> discharged.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Consequently, I judge this case PARADOXICAL. It is not resolvable
> >>>>> whether
> >>>>> or not there is an obligation, and the rules provide no resolution
> for
> >>>>> the
> >>>>> paradox.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I will go a little bit obiter, however, to observe that this CFJ is
> not
> >>>>> about the legality or possibility of a game action, and thereby fails
> >>>>> to
> >>>>> meet the requirements for a win by paradox.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> CFJ 3621:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> > I create a contract by paying 1 shiny to Agora, with the following
> >>>>> text:
> >>>>> > -------
> >>>>> > "This sentence is false."
> >>>>> > If the statement above is true, I owe 1 shinies to Agora, but if
> its
> >>>>> false,
> >>>>> > I owe no shinies to Agora.
> >>>>> > While I owe any Shinies to Agora, I also owe 1 shiny to Nichdel but
> >>>>> I do
> >>>>> > not owe any shinies to any person.
> >>>>> > I shall, must, have to, and do so automatically, if possible, pay
> >>>>> Agora
> >>>>> and
> >>>>> > Nichdel what I owe them within a week of owing.
> >>>>> > -------
> >>>>>
> >>>>> > I raise a CFJ on the following: The above contract compels me to
> pay
> >>>>> > Nichdel at least one shiny.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> This one is IRRELEVANT; it's trivially determined by the previous
> case.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Proposal: Paradoxical Contract Obligation Fix (AI=2.4)
> >>>>> {{{
> >>>>> Amend Rule 2523 "Contracts as Agreements" by replacing "If whether an
> >>>>> action is permitted or forbidden by a contract" with "If whether an
> >>>>> action
> >>>>> is permitted, forbidden, required, or made optional by a contract".
> >>>>> }}}
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I intend, without objection, to pend this proposal.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> -Alexis
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
>

Reply via email to