nix via agora-discussion [2022-05-16 08:58]: > On 5/16/22 08:56, juan via agora-discussion wrote: > > I've been thinking about Rule 202. I think its partially ineffective, if > > not contradictory. The hash-maneuver does not prevent anyone from guessing > > who proposed what. As there are few proposals, ever, one can hash them all > > and compare against the hashes associated with players' moves. > > > > Am I mistaken? > > You mean hash the plaintext and see if it matches? The plaintext is not > provided by the Herald. You'd have to get it from another player. Well, then I didn't understand this correctly:
> When a player takes a turn, the Herald shall announce player taking > the turn and the number of points gained by the player. The Herald > shall also announce the number of the proposed rule-change and a > cryptographic hash of its contents, but shall list proposed > rule-changes separately and in a different order from any other > information e publishes in the course of a player's turn, such that it > is not clear which players proposed which rule-changes. Specifically, “shall list proposed rule-changes […]”. It is my understanding that the Herald is to announce, together with the fact that a specific player took a turn, the number of the proposed rule-change that he put forth. The text (as in ”list proposed rule-changes”) is to be published not in association to the player; but, then, my original remark comes into play. What is the intention of the rule? What data is to be published, and with which associations? -- juan
