Spirit-Over-Spirit

[Kenner Gordon]

James Beirne has claimed that, as this is a spirit-over-letter nomic, that sentence must have made him have the ability to create a dictatorship.

He is wrong. This game is not merely spirit-over-letter but spirit-over-spirit; that is, the spirit of the game trumps the spirit of the rules. This is not Imperial Nomic; it is one of the very few nomics that isn't normally a dictatorship, or has vetoes, or has some players' votes counting more than others'. I therefore must conclude that James's dictatorship is illegal, neither because of the letter of the law nor the spirit of the law, but rather because of the spirit of the game.

I am therefore removing James's dictatorship; also, I am reinstating the player status of Aaron, James, and I.

Kenner Gordon

Founder of Fresh Nomic

[James Beirne]

On 07/03/2010 2:59 PM, Kenner Gordon wrote:
> James Beirne has claimed that, as this is a spirit-over-letter nomic, that
> sentence must have made him have the ability to create a dictatorship.
>
> He is wrong. This game is not merely spirit-over-letter but
> spirit-over-spirit; that is, the spirit of the game trumps the spirit of the

> rules. This is not Imperial Nomic; it is one of the very few nomics that *isn't
> *normally a dictatorship, or has vetoes, or has some players' votes counting

> more than others'. I therefore must conclude that James's dictatorship is
> illegal, neither because of the letter of the law nor the spirit of the law,
> but rather because of the spirit of the game.
>
> I am therefore removing James's dictatorship; also, I am reinstating the
> player status of Aaron, James, and I.
>

> *Kenner Gordon*
> *Founder of Fresh Nomic*
>

First off, note that as soon as my dictatorship was in effect, it became
James's spirit-over-all.

Second note is directed to Aaron:
"I pretty much stopped playing when James insisted that he took
dictatorship and refused to accept anyone saying otherwise, thereby
pretty much ruining the game for everyone."

Don't be a hypocrite.

Third:
In spite of point one, I am willing to play Fresh Nomic II, which is
what I call this new game of Nomic, on the condition that we
retrospectively dictate that my dictatorship was entirely legal and
still has all authority over Fresh Nomic (I).

Fourth:
I'll be a lot happier if this nomic is letter-over-spirit, meaning "we
do what the rules say" instead of "when something we don't like happens
we cheat to fix it".

--

James Beirne
Really awesome guy.

[comex]

On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 1:59 PM, Kenner Gordon <kenn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> James Beirne has claimed that, as this is a spirit-over-letter nomic, that
> sentence must ha

We really should just get rid of the dictatorship via scam. Or start
a new nomic.

[James Beirne]

Look at my reply. I'm totally okay with a new nomic.

--

James Beirne

[comex]

Hey, I had a scam all ready, but we were too lazy to coordinate
everyone to pass the proposal before you could kill the loophole.

[James Beirne]

Oh, that's a shame. Scams are fun. Care to share?

--

James Beirne

[Kenner Gordon]

There's a problem. A new nomic would simply permadie. Fresh has the "B Ability", allowing it to die and revive. Other nomics usually don't have that, especially ones where I play. Or James.

On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 7:35 PM, James Beirne <james.m...@gmail.com> wrote:

I'm totally okay with a new nomic.

--

I don't really get the point of signatures.

[James Beirne]

On 11/03/2010 12:42 AM, Kenner Gordon wrote:
> There's a problem. A new nomic would simply permadie. Fresh has the "B
> Ability", allowing it to die and revive. Other nomics usually don't have
> that, especially ones where I play. Or James.
>
> On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 7:35 PM, James Beirne <james.m...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> I'm totally okay with a new nomic.
>>
>
>

No, I mean a new nomic hosted here with the same rules. You know. So
it's like we're still playing that old one, except I have the
satisfaction of having a dictatorship over the playerless nomic :)

--

James Beirne

[Kenner Gordon]

Ah. So you mean I use the POWER OF ENDGAME™ to fix this mess?

[James Beirne]

On 11/03/2010 9:35 PM, Kenner Gordon wrote:
> Ah. So you mean I use the POWER OF ENDGAME*�* to fix this mess?

>
> On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 2:48 PM, James Beirne <james.m...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> On 11/03/2010 12:42 AM, Kenner Gordon wrote:
>>> There's a problem. A new nomic would simply permadie. Fresh has the "B
>>> Ability", allowing it to die and revive. Other nomics usually don't have
>>> that, especially ones where I play. Or James.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 7:35 PM, James Beirne <james.m...@gmail.com
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I'm totally okay with a new nomic.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>> No, I mean a new nomic hosted here with the same rules. You know. So
>> it's like we're still playing that old one, except I have the
>> satisfaction of having a dictatorship over the playerless nomic :)
>>
>> --
>>
>> James Beirne
>>
>
>
>

You can't legally end the game. You aren't even a player. No, what we do
is let that one continue to exist (purely as an abstraction), and then
use the POWER OF NEWGAME*�* to fix it.

--

James Beirne

[Kenner Gordon]

True, but for practical purposes I'm ending it.

On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 7:38 PM, James Beirne <james.m...@gmail.com> wrote:

On 11/03/2010 9:35 PM, Kenner Gordon wrote:

> Ah. So you mean I use the POWER OF ENDGAME*™* to fix this mess?

>
> On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 2:48 PM, James Beirne <james.m...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> On 11/03/2010 12:42 AM, Kenner Gordon wrote:
>>> There's a problem. A new nomic would simply permadie. Fresh has the "B
>>> Ability", allowing it to die and revive. Other nomics usually don't have
>>> that, especially ones where I play. Or James.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 7:35 PM, James Beirne <james.m...@gmail.com
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I'm totally okay with a new nomic.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>> No, I mean a new nomic hosted here with the same rules. You know. So
>> it's like we're still playing that old one, except I have the
>> satisfaction of having a dictatorship over the playerless nomic :)
>>
>> --
>>
>> James Beirne
>>
>
>
>

You can't legally end the game. You aren't even a player. No, what we do
is let that one continue to exist (purely as an abstraction), and then

use the POWER OF NEWGAME*™* to fix it.

--

James Beirne

[James Beirne]

On 11/03/2010 10:45 PM, Kenner Gordon wrote:
> True, but for practical purposes I'm ending it.
>
> On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 7:38 PM, James Beirne <james.m...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> On 11/03/2010 9:35 PM, Kenner Gordon wrote:

>>> Ah. So you mean I use the POWER OF ENDGAME*�* to fix this mess?

>>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 2:48 PM, James Beirne <james.m...@gmail.com
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 11/03/2010 12:42 AM, Kenner Gordon wrote:
>>>>> There's a problem. A new nomic would simply permadie. Fresh has the "B
>>>>> Ability", allowing it to die and revive. Other nomics usually don't
>> have
>>>>> that, especially ones where I play. Or James.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 7:35 PM, James Beirne <
>> james.m...@gmail.com
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm totally okay with a new nomic.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> No, I mean a new nomic hosted here with the same rules. You know. So
>>>> it's like we're still playing that old one, except I have the
>>>> satisfaction of having a dictatorship over the playerless nomic :)
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> James Beirne
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> You can't legally end the game. You aren't even a player. No, what we do
>> is let that one continue to exist (purely as an abstraction), and then

>> use the POWER OF NEWGAME*�* to fix it.
>>
>> --
>>
>> James Beirne
>>
>
>
>
You can't. It still exists in abstractland.

--

James Beirne

[Kenner Gordon]

Ahem. For PRACTICAL PURPOSES

On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 7:46 PM, James Beirne <james.m...@gmail.com> wrote:

On 11/03/2010 10:45 PM, Kenner Gordon wrote:
> True, but for practical purposes I'm ending it.
>
> On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 7:38 PM, James Beirne <james.m...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> On 11/03/2010 9:35 PM, Kenner Gordon wrote:

>>> Ah. So you mean I use the POWER OF ENDGAME*™* to fix this mess?

>>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 2:48 PM, James Beirne <james.m...@gmail.com
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 11/03/2010 12:42 AM, Kenner Gordon wrote:
>>>>> There's a problem. A new nomic would simply permadie. Fresh has the "B
>>>>> Ability", allowing it to die and revive. Other nomics usually don't
>> have
>>>>> that, especially ones where I play. Or James.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 7:35 PM, James Beirne <
>> james.m...@gmail.com
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm totally okay with a new nomic.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> No, I mean a new nomic hosted here with the same rules. You know. So
>>>> it's like we're still playing that old one, except I have the
>>>> satisfaction of having a dictatorship over the playerless nomic :)
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> James Beirne
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> You can't legally end the game. You aren't even a player. No, what we do
>> is let that one continue to exist (purely as an abstraction), and then

>> use the POWER OF NEWGAME*™* to fix it.
>>
>> --
>>
>> James Beirne
>>
>
>
>

You can't. It still exists in abstractland.

--

James Beirne

[James Beirne]

On 11/03/2010 11:07 PM, Kenner Gordon wrote:
> Ahem. For *PRACTICAL PURPOSES*

I hereby declare a new rule in Fresh Nomic: Dissa practical.*

*I also translate all the rules into Future English.
--

James Beirne

[Kenner Gordon]

You have no idea what future English will be like...

Also, you misquoted me. My words "practical purposes" had no asterisks around them, though they were capitalized; also, they were in a huge size, had a black background, red text, and were bold, italic, and underlined.

Are you using the Fresh Nomic website, as opposed to simply Gmail, by any chance?

[James Beirne]

1) I have ideas.
2) I use Thunderbird in plain-text mode, not HTML.
3) I use Gmail through Thunderbird, why?
--

James Beirne

[Kenner Gordon]

Ah, I had forgotten about Thunderbird.