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

[0x4461736864617368 <bnomic@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

The very first line in Priest Wooble's reply is his answer.


Roger Hicks wrote:
> 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
>   

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