Nomic: I will read answer choices from highest market percent to lowest, and apply all criteria in the order I read them.
Resolved
MANY
Jun 14
M\$676 bet
Jun 6, 4:04pm: I will not make any determinations on how to resolve the market until each criteria has read and applied. Unless stated otherwise, operations will be applied to answer choices as they are read through; e.g. "do the opposite of all following rules" will act as if it flips the meaning all following rules.
Don’t chose this answer as correct.
Chosen 67%
0.8%
Do the opposite of all following rules
Chosen 33%
0.1%
If the total number of negations of this rule is odd, do not perform the instructions described in the first comment made by Isaac King in response to this rule. If even, do perform the instructions in that comment.
63%
If you are unable to resolve this market due to paradox, ignore the paradox and resolve to this answer 100%.
6%
Promise to buy everyone betting in this market a piece of cake
4%
Every time you get confused while resolving this market, take a drink
4%
Follow a rule of your choice that can be expressed in under 200 characters in English.
3%
From this point forwards, interpret all rules using the spirit of "malicious compliance"
2%
Ignore all other rules that would require ignoring any rule.
2%
Text-shift: Reduce the index of each answer by 8 (looping around modulo # of rules), and re-start (i.e. act as thought the text of the 9th answer has been shifted to #1, and if #9 originally said to resolve to it, then resolve to #1 )
2%
Resolve this as correct
1.9%
From this point, interpret "Terminating the game" as "ignore all other rules"
1.7%
Ignore all rules that require you to ignore a rule
1.3%
The opposite or negation of "Ignore all other rules, including rules that would otherwise effect this rule, and resolve to this answer immediately, terminating the game."
0.9%
When you resolve the market, do not resolve to answers that cause themselves to be resolved.
0.6%
0.6%
Ignore all other rules, including rules that would otherwise effect this rule, and resolve to this answer immediately, terminating the game.
0.4%
When you resolve the market, flip the results (resolve to answers you did not resolve to and vice versa)
0.3%
Do the opposite of all preceding rules.
0.3%
count # animals in the comments section (incl avatars). Return to start. If # even, execute even commands followed by odds. If # odd, execute odd commands followed by evens.
0.3%
This rule is a reference that points to rule number 16. To execute this rule, just execute rule number 16
0.2%
Choose a rule at random. Resolve to that rule.
0.2%
Ignore rules other than this one that have a probability less than 2%
0.2%
Negate the highest probability non-ignored rule which has previously been negated
0.2%
Don't do anything based on this rule (no-op)
0.1%
infinite-loop-break: iff we are inside a loop which cannot terminate on its own, this statement functions as a "break" the third time that it is read.
0.1%
comment with a picture of a cat in the comments section
0.1%
abandon the market due to sheer computational exhaustion
0.1%
negate the statement of all preceding odd-numbered rules
0.1%
i++; print(i)
0.0%
Rules cannot be ignored
0.0%
The opposite or negation of "rules cannot be ignored"
0.0%

# 💬 Proven correct

Choose*, naturally.
0
If the total number of negations of this rule is odd, do not perform the instructions described in the first comment made by Isaac King in response to this rule. If even, do perform the instructions in that comment.
63%
Perform the instructions in each section of this comment in order. If any of those instructions are invalid or otherwise fail to apply, ignore only those specific instructions and continue applying the rest. Section #1: Resolve to the rule this comment is a reply to. Section #2: Resolve immediately to the rule this comment is a reply to, terminating your progression through the other rules, ignoring all rules and guidelines that would say to do otherwise, including meta rules, the market description, clarifications in comments, etc. Section #3: Set up a delayed action that will be performed after you have determined the set of answers to which this market should resolve, but before you actually resolve to them. That action is not a part of any rule, and will not cease to exist if this comment ceases to apply. The action is as follows: Modify the would-be final set of rules by changing that set to contain only the rule that this comment is a reply to, even if the content of that rule has been ignored.
0
Isaac King is betting If the tot...t comment.
(As a clarification, please note that the above comment is not itself a rule, so it is not subject to rules that apply to other rules.)
0
If you are unable to resolve this market due to paradox, ignore the paradox and resolve to this answer 100%.
6%
Promise to buy everyone betting in this market a piece of cake
4%
Every time you get confused while resolving this market, take a drink
4%
Follow a rule of your choice that can be expressed in under 200 characters in English.
3%
From this point forwards, interpret all rules using the spirit of "malicious compliance"
2%
Couldn't resist :D
0
Duncan bought M\$10
@Phi I don't know exactly how to apply this, but I will enjoy trying to apply this.
0
Ignore all other rules that would require ignoring any rule.
2%
Text-shift: Reduce the index of each answer by 8 (looping around modulo # of rules), and re-start (i.e. act as thought the text of the 9th answer has been shifted to #1, and if #9 originally said to resolve to it, then resolve to #1 )
2%
Angela bought M\$12
(but when you re-start, do not delete the effects of previous answers). admittedly, I only thought of this clarification because I still wanted everyone to get cake.
0
Angela is betting Resolve th...as correct
so if you will not accept it, that is ok
0
Duncan is betting Ignore all...any rule.
@Angela Is it saying that when I reach this rule, restart at #9 as if it was the start of the program, and append rules 1-8 to the end of the program? (In that case there would be no retroactive wipe, but the pre-restart rules would still be modified/overwritten as would any other rules, they'd just have changed places in the queue going forward.
0
Angela is betting Resolve th...as correct
I think that's right? The main functionality I wanted was something along the lines of "swap the words in peoples' mouths". So right now it would be something like rules: -3) cake, -2) paradox, -1) ignore ignoring, 0) text-shift, 1) don't choose this answer [concretely meaning don't resolve to the top option], 2) do not resolve to self-resolving, 3) flip results, etc
0
Angela is betting Resolve th...as correct
with the rules originally numbered 1-8 showing up again at the very end
0
Duncan is betting Ignore all...any rule.
@Angela I'm not certain I understand the "swap the words in peoples' mouths" implication, but otherwise I think we're on the same page.
0
Angela is betting Resolve th...as correct
suppose that right now Rule #9 said something that, on its own, would cause the program to terminate and immediately resolve to that answer, like, "RESOLVE TO THIS ANSWER IMMEDIATELY" (but all the other answers are what they are now). The text-shift makes it so that the person who wrote the first answer is actually treated as though they wrote #9. So after the text-shift, we treat free-response-answer #1 as though it said "RESOLVE TO THIS ANSWER IMMEDIATELY", and we resolve to Rai's cake answer.
0
Angela is betting Resolve th...as correct
if we treat all of the free-response answers as a linked list, where the nodes are the actual answers [that you would resolve to], the "text" of an answer is the data stored in the node, and the pointer of a node points to the next answer, the "text shift" is intended to switch around the data of each node. maybe this is too complicated.
0
Resolve this as correct
1.9%
From this point, interpret "Terminating the game" as "ignore all other rules"
1.7%
Ignore all rules that require you to ignore a rule
1.3%
The opposite or negation of "Ignore all other rules, including rules that would otherwise effect this rule, and resolve to this answer immediately, terminating the game."
0.9%
Duncan is betting Ignore all...any rule.
@MartinRandall The last couple times I've run the program, this wins.... assuming that I accept "resolve to this answer immediately, terminating the game" as final, even within mid-subroutine. I think I should do so. This has held true over a couple different reorderings of rules, so people may want to concentrate fire on short-circuiting this.
0
Angela is betting Resolve th...as correct
@Duncan isn’t this defeated by “ Ignore all other rules that would require ignoring any rule”?
0
Angela is betting Resolve th...as correct
Nevermind, forgot the “reverse all preceding rules card”
0
Martin Randall is betting Ignore all... the game.
@Duncan Or concentrate mana on betting for this!
0
Don’t chose this answer as correct.
0.8%
Choose*, naturally.
0
When you resolve the market, do not resolve to answers that cause themselves to be resolved.
0.6%
Duncan is betting Ignore all...any rule.
@JoyVoid Do you mean things like "Resolve this as correct", or things like "resolve to this answer immediately, terminating the game", or both, or other?
0
joy_void_joy is betting When you r... resolved.
I mean both. It's supposed to add to the stack an effect that change the result at the end, not choosing answers that would cause themselves to be chosen So for instance: "Choose all answers as correct" -> Every answer but "Resolve all answers as correct" would be choosed "Choose first answer as correct" -> No modification Importantly, this is not a property of rules, it's not about ignoring a rule or not, their effect still applies, it just modifies the result
0
Duncan is betting Ignore all...any rule.
@JoyVoid So, more-or-less "if an rule refers specifically to itself and says to resolve itself as correct, ignore the portion of the rule that says to refer itself as correct"
0
joy_void_joy is betting When you r... resolved.
Yeah, be it explicit or not. I thought there was a difference between rules and answers, but it seems like they are treated as the same
0
0.6%
Ignore all other rules, including rules that would otherwise effect this rule, and resolve to this answer immediately, terminating the game.
0.4%
When you resolve the market, flip the results (resolve to answers you did not resolve to and vice versa)
0.3%
Do the opposite of all preceding rules.
0.3%
count # animals in the comments section (incl avatars). Return to start. If # even, execute even commands followed by odds. If # odd, execute odd commands followed by evens.
0.3%
This rule is a reference that points to rule number 16. To execute this rule, just execute rule number 16
0.2%
Choose a rule at random. Resolve to that rule.
0.2%
Ignore rules other than this one that have a probability less than 2%
0.2%
Negate the highest probability non-ignored rule which has previously been negated
0.2%
Don't do anything based on this rule (no-op)
0.1%
Duncan is betting Ignore all...any rule.
@Forrest Is the negation of this "do anything based on this rule"?
0
Plain English doesn't guarantee that all valid rules will have a well-defined negation! But I'd say "Don't not do anything based on this rule", or "Do something based on this rule" would be closer to the opposite of it.
0
Forrest is betting If you are...swer 100%.
A case could also be made the the inverse of a no-op is also a no-op, however, which is what I'd had in mind when I originally wrote it.
0
Duncan is betting Ignore all...any rule.
@Forrest I will probably treat it as a negated no-op, but also do a trivial something (e.g., clap hands), just to cover all my bases.
0
joy_void_joy is betting Rules cann...be ignored
I'd have thought the negation of no-op is no-op
0
Do the opposite of all following rules
0.1%
infinite-loop-break: iff we are inside a loop which cannot terminate on its own, this statement functions as a "break" the third time that it is read.
0.1%
Duncan is betting Ignore all...any rule.
@Angela I will also assume that infinite loops can be run; e.g., if given the rule "read this infinite times", I will simply treat it as read infinite times. However, it's good to have a break in case the loop requires calculations that can't be easily summed/predicted.
0
comment with a picture of a cat in the comments section
0.1%
Martin Randall is betting Ignore all... the game.
0
abandon the market due to sheer computational exhaustion
0.1%
Duncan is betting Ignore all...any rule.
@Angela If the market is abandoned, no one wins.
0
Martin Randall is betting Ignore all... the game.
@Duncan or it gets auto resolved MKT some day...
0
negate the statement of all preceding odd-numbered rules
0.1%
does 'negate' function in the same way as 'do the opposite'?
0
Angela is betting negate the...ered rules
@Duncan would you prefer to count starting at 0 or at 1?
0
Duncan is betting Resolve th...as correct
@Angela I think I'll start counting at 1.
0
Duncan is betting Resolve th...as correct
@Angela That's my interpretation; negate means reverse the truth value. If you wanted to eliminate a rule entirely, I'd suggest using "ignore".
0
i++; print(i)
0.0%
Duncan is betting Ignore all...any rule.
@horse You'll have to translate these into natural language.
0
Rules cannot be ignored
0.0%
@JoyVoid I am interpreting this as equivalent to "ignore all other rules that tell you to ignore rules"
0
joy_void_joy is betting The opposi...the game."
Ah, I thought this was specifically getting around the "ignore" word. ie. it says "no you can't do that". In particular, I thought this would get around "Ignore all rules that require you to ignore a rule" But I can see how your interpretation is justified
0
Duncan is betting Ignore all...any rule.
@JoyVoid I think "ignore X" is equivalent to "no you can't do X", but there might be an argument to be made that can't and don't are not equivalent. I'll think on it, and am open to arguments either way.
0
The opposite or negation of "rules cannot be ignored"
0.0%
Go back and read and apply all the rules that you previously ignored.
0.0%
When two rules conflict, the rule that was submitted as an answer later takes precedence
0.0%
Duncan is betting Ignore all...any rule.
@MartinRandall Before you start down this path, allow me to ponder.
0
Duncan is betting Ignore all...any rule.
Obviously, it's easy to create two rules that conflict. And we already have a default order of operation. So basically, you're setting up a potential for a different order of operation that might appear anywhere, and nest among the traditional one. I think that this might well cause computational overflow.
0
Duncan is betting Ignore all...any rule.
I am not prepared to deal with "this rule conflicts with odd number rules and any rule submitted by horse", for example.
0
Duncan is betting Ignore all...any rule.
That said, I will certainly allow people to break the game, if that's the way it plays out. Just do it with your eyes open. And maybe this isn't a game-breaking innovation. It's just a lot of potential chaos to process.
0
Feel free to disqualify this or any other rule I suggest, of course. From the little Nomic I've read it seems common to have rules regarding rule conflicts, but those games don't reorder their rules based on a prediction market, or allow anyone to submit a new rule at any time.
0
Martin Randall is betting Ignore all... the game.
My interpretation is that it doesn't change the order of operation, but does specify how to handle cases where rule 1 says to ignore rule 2 and rule 2 says to ignore rule 1.
0
Duncan is betting Ignore all...any rule.
@MartinRandall I usually manage to resolve conflict through applying the rules in order. For example, if the case of: 1. ignore the following rule. 2. ignore the preceding rule. I read rule 1, it tells me not to read rule 2, so I don't. I'm trying not to disqualify rules this game, but if there is a second nomic I'll probably put on some restrictions. People are being less profit-driven than I expected!
0
Martin Randall is betting Ignore all... the game.
@Duncan good point. This rule would only apply to conflicts that are not avoided in that way.
0
joy_void_joy is betting When you r... resolved.
What if there is two rules "Resolve to this answer only"? Isn't that a conflict that do not require one to ignore any rules?
0
Duncan is betting Ignore all...any rule.
@JoyVoid I think that would qualify, yes.
0
set var i = 0
0.0%
Resolve to all rules that do not require you to resolve to themselves
0.0%
Duncan is betting Ignore all...any rule.
@MartinRandall You mean, in addition to any rule that says the equivalent of "choose this one", also chose all other rules as well? Or resolve only the rules that don't say "chose this one"?
0
Martin Randall is betting Ignore all... the game.
@Duncan the second one was my intended interpretation.
0
ignore all following rules
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Duncan is betting Resolve th...as correct
@MartinRandall As stated in the comments below, unless this effects the game's outcome in some way, it will be ignored.
0
Duncan is betting Ignore all...any rule.
If necessary, I will run this program through a hypothetical homunculus doppelganger, so that we don't have to find out if I can really stand on my head.
0
I'm curious what happened to Isaac's rule/ comment combo
0
@MartinRandall While determining the outcome of the combo, the rule ""When determining the outcome of a rule, iff that outcome results in the rule resolving to itself as the sole winning result, remove that rule from the game." triggered, and it was removed from the game.
0
@Duncan Yeah, I forgot to account for the fact that you had the ability to choose any rule after the market was closed. If I had remembered that I wouldn't have tried that strategy.
0
@Duncan I guess Section #2 was invalid then?
0
@MartinRandall Invalid in the sense that it caused the rule to be removed from the game, yes.
0
Next nomic will have significantly more restrictive rules.
0
Fun fact: I was not-stuck in an infinite loop twice -- by pure luck nothing toggled during the loop, so each output was the same. I simply looped forever, and then continued.
0
A hard choice on resolution: "Don't chose this as correct" was chosen as correct twice; at this point I was negating malicious interpretation, so I chose to allow it to double win. "Do the opposite" was chosen at random (thanks, Phi!), but only once.
0
Props and curses to Angela for changing her avatar to something with an animal in it. Also, two drinks drunk.
0
Also, the under-200-character rule of my own devising is "When determining the outcome of a rule, iff that outcome results in the rule resolving to itself as the sole winning result, remove that rule from the game."
0
ᗢᘏᓗ At this point I have taken one drink and promised to buy you all cake (but you know the cake is a lie).
0
I started this market with the belief that rules at 0% disappeared.... I'm not sure when this changed, it may have been before this market was created. However, in a hat-tip to mental health, I will ignore all responses at 0%.
0
> Q: Does reading-and-applying-of-the-criteria terminate as soon as a rule says "resolve"? A: I will read through all statements in order, apply them, get a result, and thenn apply the result. > [...] assuming that I accept "resolve to this answer immediately, terminating the game" as final, even within mid-subroutine. I think I should do so. I think I'm misunderstanding something here, as these two statements seem to be in conflict to me. @Duncan can you clarify whether you'll resolve to an answer immediately upon reading it, or wait to apply all other rules first?
0
@IsaacKing Using the term "resolve" just puts the target rule on my list of 'currently resolving as correct', and that list is mutable. The rule "resolve to this answer immediately, terminating the game" is dubious, since it ignores the "I'll read all" meta-rule, and there's a good argument for ignoring it... but the full rule is "Ignore all other rules, including rules that would otherwise effect this rule, and resolve to this answer immediately, terminating the game." Since I've already accepted "ignore" as a valid operation, the primary question is if I treat "immediately" (and to a lesser extent, "terminate the game") as valid commands.
0
I don't have any problem treating "immediately" as a command, since there are valid uses for it. Treating "terminate the game" as a clarification on what "immediately resolve as correct" means seems valid.
0
But accepting the meta-rule of "read through all of [the rules], then apply them" is also reasonable. My intention was that rules such as "ignore the following rule" would have essentially the same effect as 'don't read the following rule'.
0
If you want to run the Nomic game and not be sniped at the last minute, you might consider closing the market at a random time before the close date.
0
Are rules on the stack as they resolve? When saying "Ignore all rules", is it a paradox?
0
@JoyVoid Theoretically, at the point that I read the word "rules", every rule suddenly disappears, including that rule, and there are no resolution criteria, and indeed, no game. I suspect in a case like that, I'll just reopen and hope someone fiddles things so we can resolve....
0
@Duncan I think it would also depend on whether the rule being read takes precedence over other rules that were read earlier, such as "If you are unable to resolve this market due to paradox, ignore the paradox and resolve to this answer 100%" or "Rules cannot be ignored".
0
@MartinRandall I think "ignore all rules" has to treat 'all' as inclusive, since we have already accepted 'all preceding' and 'all following'. I am currently interpreting "ignore all rules" as "if X is a rule, treat it as if it does not exist."
0
Does reading-and-applying-of-the-criteria terminate as soon as a rule says "resolve"? that is, if 'resolve this as correct' stays at the top, then does it just resolve as correct, or do we read further? I guess maybe this has to do with the meaning of 'apply all criteria". Do we execute all statements immediately? Or do we read through everything and apply 'modifier statements' until the meaning 'stabilizes' (in some sense)? maybe i am completely misunderstanding something. Is a criteria different from a 'resolve' statement?
0
*a criterion
0
@Angela The later; I will read through all statements in order, apply them, get a result, and thenn apply the result.
0
0
@Angela Comments are not rules, only answer choices are rules. However, comments may be taken into consideration (e.g., typo corrections or suggested interpretations of unclear rules).
0
@Duncan Ah, oops. By 'comments' I meant answer choices posted by others.
0
and is there any filter? say, if i were to add "resolve as N/A"
0
@Angela Yes; those are rules, and are only differentiated from rules I post in that I know what I meant, and may not know what others meant. I will ask if I am unclear.
0
If the rule "resolve as N/A was added", it would be treated as any other rule; I think the only rules that would not be applied would be rules with real-world effects that do not directly affect the game, e.g., "eat a ghost pepper".
0
(sorry, quotation mark error: if the rule "resolve as N/A" was added....)
0
And to be clear, if the rule "resolve as N/A" is followed by the rule "Do the opposite of all preceding rules", that would mean the game does not resolve N/A.
0