| Jamie Dallaire on Thu, 1 Jan 2009 13:01:15 -0700 (MST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
| Re: [s-b] Assignments of Consultations 179-187 |
On Thu, Jan 1, 2009 at 2:58 PM, Warrigal <ihope127+w@xxxxxxxxx<ihope127%2Bw@xxxxxxxxx> > wrote: > On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 7:09 PM, Charles Schaefer > <chuckles11489@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Answer: NO. > > Reasoning: The rules are silent on this matter, so I will legislate from > the > > bench. When a player forfeits, their mackerel cease to exist. The answer > to > > this specific consultation arguably would have been YES if ehird had > > transferred any mackerel to anyone since the era reset, but I can find no > > evidence that he did so. > > I claim this to be CONSISTENT. If the rules are silent, the matter has > to be decided one way or the other. I claim the Answer to be INCONSISTENT. If neither YES nor NO is appropriate, there is always PARADOX. BP _______________________________________________ spoon-business mailing list spoon-business@xxxxxxxxx http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-business