Unknown magic sites in starting provinces?

[Peter Ebbesen]

Originally posted by Gandalf Parker:

HOWEVER it is possible for hidden sites to be given to capitals by using map commands. As far as I know, no map available for download has done that but I have been playing with the idea.

It is done in Version 0.8 of my Orania Wars - Nasty Edition, that I hope to hape up for download tomorrow pending playtesting - Well, to be more precise, there are additional fixed KNOWN sites in each capital rather than hidden sites, as fixed hidden sites benefits the human player much more than the AI.

[Graeme Dice]

Originally posted by NTJedi:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Graeme Dice:
[qb] Something which does not exist cannot be either known or unknown.

There are probably hundreds of extinct prehistoric plants which have left no trace of existence on this earth. This would be classified as unknown and nonexistent.

---

No, they would be classified as unknown only. They existed, so to say that they are non-existent is ridiculous.

Also because of special circumstances some prehistoric plants have been identified... and would be classified as known and nonexistent.

No, they would be classified as known and extinct.

A futuristic fuel used for flight in the year 3850 would also be unknown and nonexistent.

No, it would be non-existent only. There is no information to determine whether it is known or not.

The copper mine programmed to be created when an event occurs.

And until that event occurs, it does not exist. Thus there is no information about it whatsoever.

I suggest, once again, that you learn to understand English properly before claiming that you can make arguments about the semantics or words.

[GavinWheeler]

"Last night I saw, upon the stair
a little man who was not there.
He wasn't there again today -
I wish that man would go away"

[Goad]

I think it's really unfair of all you guys to keep taunting NT Jedi like this. Sure, it was funny at first. But after 6 pages, doesn't anyone start to find it cruel?

The ability to distinguish between concept and instance may be fundamentally important if you're, say, a philosopher or theoretical scientist, but it's really not that important for some guy to enjoy playing some game. People can't help or change the basic level of intellect they're born with, why torment the guy about it?

Besides, my friend who's a psychiatrist told me that such a persistent inability to distinguish between concept & instance in otherwise functionally intelligent adults can be a symptom of latent mental illness, and if that's the case here it makes it doubly unfair for you all to keep poking at him like this.

[Peter Ebbesen]

Originally posted by Goad:
I think it's really unfair of all you guys to keep taunting NT Jedi like this. Sure, it was funny at first. But after 6 pages, doesn't anyone start to find it cruel?

Actually yes. It brings to mind the adage: "I would engage you in a battle of wits, save I never fight an unarmed man" - which would be both cruel and unjustified. It must be the persistent self-righteous refusal to distinguish between the general and the specific (or concept and instance), that just manages to rub the scientifically trained wrong.

I blame our education.

....And the fact that we are a bunch of intellectual nitpickers. That goes with the territory.

[NTJedi]

Originally posted by Graeme Dice:
Something which does not exist cannot be either known or unknown.

I went and acquired actual proof where the phrase ‘known and nonexistent’ are being used to further prove my point. Despite all this actual physical proof I seriously believe PeterEbbesen or Graeme Dice lack the honor to apologize for being wrong and rude.
I would also like to point out that they have not given any proof except for their weak opinion.


Supreme Court Document
Municipal Research & Services Center of Washington

http://www.mrsc.org/mc/courts/suprem...58wn2d0180.htm

“1] PRINCIPAL AND AGENT - LIABILITY OF AGENT TO THIRD PERSON -CONTRACTS IN NAME OF PRINCIPAL - NONEXISTENT PRINCIPAL. Where an agent for a nonexistent principal enters into a contract in the name of such principal, and all parties to the contract know the principal to be nonexistent,……. “

Mail Tribune Online
Newspaper Publication
http://www.mailtribune.com/archive/2...9/edit/let.htm

“If President Bush "touted 100,000 jobs more logging on federal lands could bring to the Northwest" that are now known to be nonexistent……”


=========
edited my post so it would not take up so much space.
=========

At the start of the game the programmer would know the copper mine to be nonexistent. The copper mine however would remain unknown and nonexistent to all other players.

The prehistoric plants example is one of the best examples since during the present they are nonexistent yet depending on the specimen can be both known or unknown. The copper mine is very much the same except that it qualifies as being in the future and not the past.

[ March 21, 2004, 18:21: Message edited by: NTJedi ]

[Taqwus]

NTJedi --
Neither example you give supports your case. T'is the _nonexistence of the issue in question_ that is known, not the item itself.
For instance, with the known nonexistence of a principal case, both parties know that the principal does not exist; neither knows the principal. You're confusing objects and properties of objects.

[NTJedi]

Originally posted by Taqwus:
NTJedi --
Neither example you give supports your case. T'is the _nonexistence of the issue in question_ that is known, not the item itself.
For instance, with the known nonexistence of a principal case, both parties know that the principal does not exist; neither knows the principal. You're confusing objects and properties of objects.

Supreme Court Document :
KNOW THE PRINCIPAL TO BE NONEXISTENT
object: "the principal"

The object is known as nonexistent


The Magnanimous Cuckold (comedy)
Author: Fernand Crommelynck
http://newmedia.cgu.edu/stageart/holland/summc.html

Once his jealously has been aroused, Bruno, pursuing an insane logic of his own, cannot rest until he has put all doubts to an end by absolute certainty. He therefore compels the suffering Stella to sleep first with Petrus and then with all the men in the village as he pursues the phantom of an unknown and nonexistent lover.


University of Mississippi
http://home.olemiss.edu/~weiming/654p.htm

“As to the nonexistent value, it is just the negative value of unknown value, since in fact it is known to be nonexistent. The predicate expression……”

The value known to be nonexistent

The copper mine known to be nonexistent


=======

And I have yet to see any proof showing I am wrong... besides opinions.

[ March 21, 2004, 18:37: Message edited by: NTJedi ]

[Taqwus]

NTJedi --
Playwrights aren't exactly reliable citations when it comes to logic. Shall we resort to Gilbert and Sullivan for a serious discussion of piracy or Japanese history? Does Shakespeare serve as an authority on Midsummer rites and faeries? No.
As for your database example, do you know what a 'null' field in a database table refers to, and why you might have one? Have you studied relational databases, actually? Implemented one yet? If so, you might know why it has no bearing on your claims.

[NTJedi]

The prehistoric plants example is one of the best examples since during the present they are nonexistent yet depending on the specimen can be both known or unknown. The copper mine is very much the same except that it qualifies as being in the future and not the past.


More Court Documentation:

http://www.harp.org/wheeler.txt

"..Not only is the resisting party (presumably the
patient) claiming lack of knowledge of the arbitration term, but he asks not to be prevented from litigating a consequential loss controversy that was also unknown and nonexistent at the time of contracting. Viewed in this light, the knowledge factor is ....."


http://www.bakers-legal-pages.com/cc...ions/74185.htm

As Judge Miller explained in his concurring opinion in Ex parte Carillo, 687 S.W.2d 320, 325 (Tex. Crim. App. 1985):

Parole is very much a speculative proposition. Its happening is contingent on many factors unknown and nonexistent at the time of a guilty plea.


There are hundreds of quotes using known and unknown with nonexistent.

And I have yet to see any proof showing I am wrong... besides opinions.

[ March 21, 2004, 18:48: Message edited by: NTJedi ]