conjunction what's your function?

Futbol

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Messages
432
Reaction score
303
Location
Detroit
Country
llUnited States
If victory conditions specify the words and/or what in ASL terms does that mean? i.e do both VC have to be fulfilled or one?
 

Robin Reeve

The Swiss Moron
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Messages
19,594
Reaction score
5,557
Location
St-Légier
First name
Robin
Country
llSwitzerland
If "or" was alone, someone could see it as an exclusive "or" (logical XOR, either... or) and consider that fulfilling both VC would be a loss.
If "and" was alone, you would have to meet both VC to win.
"And/or" is an inclusive "or" (logical OR), which allows to fulfill one or the other VC or both to win.
 

gorkowskij

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
162
Reaction score
502
Country
llUnited States
You need fulfill only one condition to win, but you will not lose by fulfilling both. It sounds nuts, because it is, but in the early days some rules lawyers would argue for your loss if the condition was "or" but you had fulfilled both A "and" B.
 

Robin Reeve

The Swiss Moron
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Messages
19,594
Reaction score
5,557
Location
St-Légier
First name
Robin
Country
llSwitzerland
You need fulfill only one condition to win, but you will not lose by fulfilling both. It sounds nuts, because it is, but in the early days some rules lawyers would argue for your loss if the condition was "or" but you had fulfilled both A "and" B.
It is not rules lawyering to consider that "or" can be ambiguous.
If you have studied some basic logics, you will know that there are two types of "or" :
  1. the exculsive or (XOR), which offers mutually exclusive choices - you can only choose one possibility.
  2. the inclusive or (OR) which allows multiple choices - you can choose more than one possibility.
The "and/or" expression clarifies which "or" the VC are speaking of.
ASL is a game which does use a very precise and technical writing system, so one should expect such technicity in VC.
If such precision seems "nuts" to you, may I ask why you are actually playing ASL?
 

gorkowskij

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
162
Reaction score
502
Country
llUnited States
It is not rules lawyering to consider that "or" can be ambiguous.
If you have studied some basic logics, you will know that there are two types of "or" :
  1. the exculsive or (XOR), which offers mutually exclusive choices - you can only choose one possibility.
  2. the inclusive or (OR) which allows multiple choices - you can choose more than one possibility.
The "and/or" expression clarifies which "or" the VC are speaking of.
ASL is a game which does use a very precise and technical writing system, so one should expect such technicity in VC.
If such precision seems "nuts" to you, may I ask why you are actually playing ASL?
I play ASL because it's fun. Started with SL circa 1982ish. A few years after starting, I learned all that AND/OR stuff in high school (English, Geometry and Basic computer programming), but haven't really needed it anywhere else (including in ASL scenarios) since then. Maybe I just have a charmed life?
 

Larry

Elder Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2003
Messages
5,383
Reaction score
1,735
Location
Guada La Habra
Country
llUnited States
It is the failure of some early on to recognize that "or" is both conjunctive and disjunctive. A or B does not exclude A and B. Because some said A or B excludes A and B, we have the ALJ convention of "or" is disjunctive, "and" is conjunctive, and if A, B, or A and B satisfies the criteria, we use "and/or."
 

sdennis

Elder Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2005
Messages
1,486
Reaction score
963
Location
Wixom, Michigan
Country
llUnited States
I am a 30 year software engineer and I am well familiar with OR, XOR, AND, etc. I use them daily in my job. Even though I got a D+ in Boolean Algebra (8AM class what can I say) if you want to tell me that in a game A or B is not fulfilled by doing both, we can have a drink, I'll even buy because we will never play again... there is rules lawyering and there is rules lawyering... sheesh!
 

Larry

Elder Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2003
Messages
5,383
Reaction score
1,735
Location
Guada La Habra
Country
llUnited States
First we kill all the lawyers - William Shakespeare
Context my friend:

JACK CADE. Be brave, then; for your captain is brave, and vows reformation. There shall be in England seven half-penny loaves sold for a penny: the three-hoop'd pot shall have ten hoops; and I will make it felony to drink small beer: all the realm shall be in common; and in Cheapside shall my palfrey go to grass: and when I am king,– as king I will be,–

ALL. God save your majesty!

JACK CADE. I thank you, good people:– there shall be no money; all shall eat and drink on my score; and I will apparel them all in one livery, that they may agree like brothers, and worship me their lord.

DICK. The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers.

Jack CADE. Nay, that I mean to do. Is not this a lamentable thing, that of the skin of an innocent lamb should be made parchment, that parchment, being scribbl'd o'er, should undo a man? Some say the bee stings; but I say 't is the bee's wax, for I did but seal once to a thing, and I was never mine own man since.
Kill all the lawyers only if you aim to deprive everyone of rights. Turns out that lawyers are necessary. Not necessarily good, but necessary. They are also cannibals, they eat their own.
 

MichalS

Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2018
Messages
91
Reaction score
88
Location
Bratislava & Wien
First name
Michal
Country
llSlovakia
Had a problem recently with exactly this formulation of VC - The Red House (RB7) scenario:
“The Russians win at game end by Controlling building CC19 and/or >= 4 buildings in the German setup area.”
The funny thing is, CC19 is in the German setup area and the "and/or" formulation just adds confusion and is redundant.
Why not just write: “The Russians win at game end by Controlling building CC19 or >= 4 buildings in the German setup area.”?
 

Robin Reeve

The Swiss Moron
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Messages
19,594
Reaction score
5,557
Location
St-Légier
First name
Robin
Country
llSwitzerland
The "or" could exclude CC19 from the four buildings.
 

MichalS

Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2018
Messages
91
Reaction score
88
Location
Bratislava & Wien
First name
Michal
Country
llSlovakia
I don't think so. First of all, CC19 is a building. Second, if I control CC19 and 1 to 2 other buildings, I would still fulfil the first VC.
 

Eagle4ty

Forum Guru
Joined
Nov 7, 2007
Messages
6,913
Reaction score
5,094
Location
Eau Claire, Wi
Country
llUnited States
I don't think so. First of all, CC19 is a building. Second, if I control CC19 and 1 to 2 other buildings, I would still fulfil the first VC.
From the way it's written I believe the Russians could just control building CC19 to win; if they control 4+ buildings in the German setup area but did not control building BB19 they would also win. If they control BB19 and any other buildings in the German setup area, more power to them, and they'll also win.
 

MichalS

Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2018
Messages
91
Reaction score
88
Location
Bratislava & Wien
First name
Michal
Country
llSlovakia
From the way it's written I believe the Russians could just control building CC19 to win; if they control 4+ buildings in the German setup area but did not control building BB19 they would also win. If they control BB19 and any other buildings in the German setup area, more power to them, and they'll also win.
That is indeed correct. To me the formulation with the conjunction is clear, but I understand how it might caused problems for some (I had to discuss this with my opponent who interpreted the VC incorrectly). And I think the cause of the problem - in this particular case - lies partly in the redundancy of the formulation. So I suggested an alternative formulation which instead of "and/or" contains only an "or", and which I believe is more understandable and logically elegant.
 

Robin Reeve

The Swiss Moron
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Messages
19,594
Reaction score
5,557
Location
St-Légier
First name
Robin
Country
llSwitzerland
How would you differentiate an exclusive or (XOR) from an inclusive one (OR)?
The "or" conjunction can mean both, thus the "and/or" which indicates that it is an inclusive or.
 

MichalS

Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2018
Messages
91
Reaction score
88
Location
Bratislava & Wien
First name
Michal
Country
llSlovakia
You mean that my "or" is a logical systems language's XOR - and that for the rules text, we might need both. I have no quibble with that.
(I think that "or" to mean inclusive* and "OR" to mean exclusive would have been more elegant, but that is not my main argument.)
I am saying that in this case (RB7) an "or" (i.e. exclusive) is less redundant and possibly easier to understand as it is closer to spoken language.

* The fact that the way "or" is used in regular language already includes the option of both options being correct (i.e. inclusive) is verified by a simple negation following the rules of logical systems language.
 

Robin Reeve

The Swiss Moron
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Messages
19,594
Reaction score
5,557
Location
St-Légier
First name
Robin
Country
llSwitzerland
You mean that my "or" is a logical systems language's XOR - and that for the rules text, we might need both. I have no quibble with that.
(I think that "or" to mean inclusive* and "OR" to mean exclusive would have been more elegant, but that is not my main argument.)
I am saying that in this case (RB7) an "or" (i.e. exclusive) is less redundant and possibly easier to understand as it is closer to spoken language.

* The fact that the way "or" is used in regular language already includes the option of both options being correct (i.e. inclusive) is verified by a simple negation following the rules of logical systems language.
No. I mean that "or" in current language is ambiguous.
One can consider it as inclusive (as you seem to do); another can consider it exclusive.
ASL rules (including VC and SSR) is not meant to try to be close to spoken language: it is a very technical language (e.g. adjacent is not always ADJACENT), which uses acronyms and special signs.

I will readily concede that some rules lawyering, mixed with bad faith, can be a trait of a number of ASL players.
Debating about rules interactions and (in)coherences is even "a hobby within the hobby", where some rules questions are just asked for the sake of trying to find a loophole and solving the tension (well, some players even seem bent on proving that the rules are badly written - but they are an exception).
So VC must be written in a way that escapes any ambiguity.
"And/or" is ugly in itself, but it helps clarify things without taking too much space.

An alternative wording, only using "or" of the debated VC could be : "The Russians win at game end by Controlling building CC19 or >= 4 buildings (of which one may be CC19) in the German setup area.”
This clarifies that the "or" can only be logically inclusive.
 
Top