Re: [spoon-discuss] Re: [Spoon-business] NWEEK 36 BALLOT

[bd <bdonlan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Friday 14 March 2003 12:09 am, Glotmorf wrote:
> On 3/13/03 at 4:34 PM bd wrote:
> >On Thursday 13 March 2003 09:31 am, Glotmorf wrote:
> >> >Proposal 1378/1: mmm, donuts (bd)
> >>
> >> "Your face is flushed, sir.  Have you been drinking?"
> >> "Your eyes are glazed, officer.  Have you been eating donuts?"
> >>
> >> No.  Biggest problem I see with this is that there's no motivation for
> >> actually having a donut.  Aside from that, I like the current
> >> offense-driven cop system.
> >
> >The idea was that you could buy one and throw it, to temporarily throw off
> >the
> >cops. Incidentally, would anyone mind if all instances of 'cops', 'police
> >officers', etc are replaced with 'Keystone Kops'? And the addion of cream
> >pies? ;)
>
> Yes, but since you're totally replacing the rule, the cops would no longer
> be driven to pursue you because of offenses; the only reason they'd be
> after you is if you had a donut.  So, unless you had, say, two donuts, you
> wouldn't have to throw off their scent.  And there's no benefit to having a
> donut in and of itself.

The original rule said nothing about offenses - mine is just a sectioning of 
the original rule, with donuts.
-- 
bd
I finally went to the eye doctor.  I got contacts.  I only need them to
read, so I got flip-ups.
		-- Steven Wright
_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss