| shadowfirebird on Tue, 12 Dec 2006 06:09:09 -0700 (MST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
| Re: [s-d] RFJ 0008 judgement |
> [[Incidentally, if I was able to judge the reasoning, and I agree with > Optional that im not, I would still Rule False: I think that though > RFJ6 had three clauses it still only had one statement.]] I am SO pleased that you said that. It was bugging me. A "statement" can be several pages long. (Although I think in the context of an RFJ you would be hard put to manage that!) _______________________________________________ spoon-discuss mailing list spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss