On Thu, 21 Jun 2018, Timon Walshe-Grey wrote:
> PREAMBLE. This contract is to be interpreted as if it were capable of
> defining switches.
> If the Cartographor is a party to this contract, e is the recordkeepor
> for chess pieces.
Define who tracks these switches or are they untracked? (being the
recordkeepor for chess pieces doesn't mean recordkeepor for the switches).
More generally, this puts a burden on the Cartographer. And this also
implies that if the Cartographer isn't a party, there's no recordkeepor?
What if the office changes hands during things? It's better IMO to define
a gamemaster, usually the person who creates the contract. It can be
hardcoded and should be someone who agrees ahead of time.
> (Parties to this contract are ENCOURAGED to vote for
> any Proposal that would enable backing documents to define switches
> possessed by the assets those backing documents define.)
There are arguments for or against this but I'd cut this and advocate/
propose it separately.
> Any party to this contract MAY, by announcement, move a chess piece.
I think in place of MAY you want "CAN, subject to the restrictions of
this contract,"
> The current turn is a singleton switch with possible values "White's
> turn" (the default value) and "Black's turn".
Turn-based games can sometimes stall out waiting for the other players'
turn - what happens if you end up with only one person taking black and
they don't respond? Maybe add a game clock: "if a move isn't made by
X time, than [either a PASS or the other side can move that color]"
> When a Pawn is moved to a Unit of Land with a Latitude of -3 or 4,
> the person who moved the Pawn CAN and MUST in the same message,
> by announcement, create a Knight, Bishop, Rook or Queen
The way this reads, a player moves the pawn (successfully), but if
e fails to create a piece, then e breaks the terms of the contract (fails
the MUST) but the pawn is still stuck in the last rank and can't be
converted. Better to have the whole move succeed or fail as a unit.
Use something like "When a pawn is moved to [...] the move
announcement must also specify a piece [of these types] to be created,
or the pawn move fails. After the pawn moves, the specified piece is
created and the pawn is destroyed".
> parties to this contract SHOULD agree between themselves some reward
> for Black people (if the destroyed King was White) or White people (if
> the destroyed King was Black).
I'd hard-code the reward a bit more. I'd suggest making this a Free
Tournament (R2566) although I don't know if having this be Regulations
rather than a Contract makes anything in here not work (e.g. you can't
become "party" to a set of regulations I don't think). You could do it
by reference though. Set up the Contract, then make a Tournament with a
single regulation: "whomever wins the Contract wins the Tournament".
