anyway.



thread: 2012-12-20 : Positioning: Retroactive

On 2012-12-22, Gordon wrote:

Not enough room in marginalia.  I’m not sure exactly what to make of this thought, but it might trump my previous post, so before I shut down the computer ...

Maybe I (and others?) are hung up on a particular use of “legitimate.”  Because if I say “desireable” instead, suddenly le Principe does gain full dominion.  It’s always possible for someone to ADD information such that, while my move might still be valid, it’s not one I WANT to make.  Again, with the Mirror Mage: “Uh, whoops,I really want you folks in this room a while - can I change the mirror into a camera?”  Given the right circumstance (trust of the speaker, reasons offered by other players, etc.), I might choose to forego the legitimate move.  In other circumstances, it might be very bad form to be asked to forego, or to agree to forego - but I won’t KNOW until the opportunity has passed.

So even if my example does demonstrate a pre-known legitimacy, it doesn’t demonstrate an absolute “this WILL happen barring players escalating to ‘bishops can too move like knights’ claims.”

Can’t quite think this through right now (it’s late), but - do I do damage to anything important if I tack “desireability” into a very broad definition of “legit”?



 

This makes GcL go "Wow, one way of thinking about how this happens is pretty wild"
You are part of the group that needs to create a reception for your move. I think.

This makes...
initials
...go...
short response
optional explanation (be brief!):

if you're human, not a spambot, type "human":