Re: [s-d] [s-b] Hmmm... another consultation

["Roger Hicks" <pidgepot@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Nov 23, 2007 8:27 AM, Geoffrey Spear <geoffspear@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I answer Consultation 40 No.
>
> Rule 5-1 explicitly allows Agreements that are not intended to comply
> with B's rules to be accepted as valid; it would be outside the spirit
> of the rules to require such agreements to be joined by a Game Action.
>
> Indeed, 5-2's text definitely suggests that Agreements which are not
> Factions are outside the game.  Both non-Faction Agreements and
> Factions are bound solely by their own internal mechanisms for
> deciding their membership and conducting any business that doesn't
> directly involve game actions within B.
>
You gave arguments but not an answer...

BobTHJ
_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss