Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 9037408" data-attributes="member: 71699">Given it's play there are no mandatory standards for it. If a group are satisfied, any putative mismatch amounts to distance from some normal expectation. I'm unwilling to start from - that's not the best way to play the game. I'm more interested in starting from a basic assumption of validity.I'm not so much thinking of generic systems, but rather interpreting and using rules to form a game identity distinct to the group. The distributions of recognisably similar game identities are uneven: a normal distribution (all different, but with a lot of similarity), then some relatively empty areas, and then another less strong norm (how it's played in some local scene), and so on.This is partly self-informing, where there is in place an idea that the proper modes of addressing a game are submission and constrained freedom, as opposed to subversion and creation.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="clearstream, post: 9037408, member: 71699"] Given it's play there are no mandatory standards for it. If a group are satisfied, any putative mismatch amounts to distance from some normal expectation. I'm unwilling to start from - that's not the best way to play the game. I'm more interested in starting from a basic assumption of validity. I'm not so much thinking of generic systems, but rather interpreting and using rules to form a game identity distinct to the group. The distributions of recognisably similar game identities are uneven: a normal distribution (all different, but with a lot of similarity), then some relatively empty areas, and then another less strong norm (how it's played in some local scene), and so on. This is partly self-informing, where there is in place an idea that the proper modes of addressing a game are submission and constrained freedom, as opposed to subversion and creation. [/QUOTE]

Verification