[Bnomic-private] Re: Actions

[Jeremy Cook]

On Fri, Sep 17, 2004 at 12:25:50PM +0100, Iain Scott wrote:
> At 11:44 17/09/04, you wrote:
> 
> >Or winning could be based on something besides scams. But that's a 
> >philosophy thing.
> 
> 
> Nah... the whole point of nomics is that it imposible to constuct a ruleset 
> which dosent start to contradict itself or leave loopholes...

Well, winning is based on something besides scams; it's based on getting
1000 points. Scams are currently the easiest way to do this, since
otherwise it would take twenty or so nweeks.

It's always possible to build a scam, but there are Nomics more focused
on the process of playing than the creation of loopholes. (Suber
originally distinguished 'procedural' and 'substantive' games; a better
distinction might be procedural vs. substantive players.)

Zarpint