thinking

(no subject)

If we accept the usual sloppy oversimplification of ascribing sentience and purpose to collective entities, we can say that every State aspires to the condition where everything not mandatory is forbidden and vice versa. However, the lawmaking process grows so complex that some activities wind up being both (e.g., any reasonably inclusive obscenity law violates itself), and lawyers must be called in to decide which applies.

Allegedly private entities such as Google and Facebook have also reached this level of complexity, and Worldcon is getting there: The title of one of this year’s Hugo nominees violates the convention’s Code of Conduct. (Because it also violates Facebook’s rules, I will simply direct the reader to the Best Related Work category.)