On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 11:21 AM Alexis Hunt via agora-discussion <agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > On Thu, 30 Jan 2020 at 14:00, Aris Merchant via agora-discussion > <agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > Please cut the natural fact/legal fact distinction. It isn't helping > > anything, and is just confusing and unnecessary complexity. > > Hm, I'm not entirely sure it is, because this wording makes it very > clear that legal fictions override natural facts. If you have an > alternative wording that can accomplish the same goal, I'd appreciate > the suggestion.
"A legal fiction is a fact, as defined by this rule, that is held to be true for game purposes, regardless of whether it is otherwise objectively correct". That's terrible wording, but I'm sure you can rephrase it a bit to come up with something you like. The key point is the "that is held to be true for game purposes", since it captures the idea that it is correct as far as the game is concerned. -Aris
