spoon-discuss: Re: spoon-business: Objection

["David Chudzicki" <deniador@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

I would assume that there is a precident for not requiring further evidence 
of ability to pass the Turing Test (the rules require ability to pass it, of 
course, not actually having passed it), making the grounds for Dan's 
objection worthless.  However, he need not supply any grounds whatsoever for 
an objection to be valid by the rules (nevermind an objection that makes any 
sense).  Therefore I suppose I must wait for my motion to be put on the next 
nweeks ballot (at which point I would assume it passes).  Of course, if I 
wanted to join a little sooner perhaps I could make the motion again once 
all the garbage that you guys allowed with poorly thought out rules 
[wink-wink] about what happens after a win is solved.  But in any case, I 
don't expect to become a player within the next couple days.  Another 
possibility is for Dan to rescind his objection (as per rule 301/0) when he 
is convinced that it is no longer needed (if it has not been "recognized" at 
that point).
Sincerely,
David Chudzicki (a human being, verified or not)

> From: Dan <wald7330@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Reply-To: spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
> To: "'nomic-business'" <spoon-business@xxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: spoon-business: Objection
> Date: Wed, 9 May 2001 17:58:30 -0400 (EDT)
>
>
> I object to the addition of David's motion to add a player, on the grounds
> that e has not demonstrated eir ability to pass the Turing Test.
>
> ack.  I go away for a couple of weeks and all hell breaks loose.  Now I'm
> crabby.  Also I want to keep the bank from having all those points until
> we cut PurpleBob's win cycle.
>
> Oh, and congrats to winner Purplebob.
>
> Poulenc

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com