Re: [s-d] [s-b] Consultations on the Pencil Sharpener

Jamie Dallaire on Wed, 17 Dec 2008 19:07:18 -0700 (MST)

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [s-d] [s-b] Consultations on the Pencil Sharpener

To: spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Consultations on the Pencil Sharpener
From: "Jamie Dallaire" <bad.leprechaun@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2008 21:06:38 -0500
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; bh=JwiBQDSOK8fzZ4XeV5cSWpppoJm8THTQ6zjrPdIEs28=; b=Q3eMbgrqwGQ0EDU888w/ZECcLPXXXUZJZntEny/Y+qTNxxavGPATt/P6pF75WQVetl smFztPElrx6MTgg5HgKZrWoaFm6TL2WVsr4ImtzBWjvnS4I6uI6WdQd8mHOIOww6Aeep eKXUn4uyJHbVOa/RuyHFTkI9BUGI4VkvQRhM8=
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:references; b=wKhe6Aq+NNcAJSZ8YFcMjgiV0x7NetnJd21oenFEGlN6uy5pNkneVPYq2vN7nkl/8i eoY9HqcjxOh1kHz6OAcoTZDxzFON1PX1j9/sqjCUlUP2rYMnRFU0cyqMHWJ3Dv0fjVCb X80lvZzsxADnSSEJmiL7sRIQgf9hd51zYRBmc=
In-reply-to: <D50C9E1C-03D4-4EFF-B481-0145722BB53E@xxxxxxxxx>
References: <55b258c20812151829q19e0a575qe77b5f551a9bbae8@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1DD0D63A-9CC0-473F-98AE-CD5CF5FE007F@xxxxxxxxx> <2D0CCFE1-7F69-4E05-B248-61D1DAEEC355@xxxxxxxxx> <4947FEC2.4070005@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <798984B7-1EEC-4CA8-A33F-77FE84572415@xxxxxxxxx> <4948183C.90208@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <55b258c20812161325t4bd4a67eve92f28c32a648f47@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4948265D.20309@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <44e5a2650812161413x44f708a5y8f48857d9c4505f3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <D50C9E1C-03D4-4EFF-B481-0145722BB53E@xxxxxxxxx>

On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 5:15 PM, Elliott Hird <
penguinofthegods@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>
> On 16 Dec 2008, at 22:13, Jamie Dallaire wrote:
>
>  I think the only grounds for it having happened anyway is that the initial
>> Laws for uncoloured squares don't use the dependent actions mechanism
>> (which
>> requires intent, support/objection, then performance). The initial laws
>> just
>> use vague "with consent" language that could be interpreted a number of
>> ways.
>>
>
> my intent was to require the resolve; it is needed, I think, because it's
> "SOMEONE can do it with consent", i.e. the someone has to do it.
>
> I claim comex's answer on that Consultation to be INCONSISTENT.


can't, you're the unbeliever
_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss

References:
- Re: [s-d] [s-b] Consultations on the Pencil Sharpener
  - From: Elliott Hird
- Re: [s-d] [s-b] Consultations on the Pencil Sharpener
  - From: Elliott Hird
- Re: [s-d] [s-b] Consultations on the Pencil Sharpener
  - From: Ed Murphy
- Re: [s-d] [s-b] Consultations on the Pencil Sharpener
  - From: Elliott Hird
- Re: [s-d] [s-b] Consultations on the Pencil Sharpener
  - From: Ed Murphy
- Re: [s-d] [s-b] Consultations on the Pencil Sharpener
  - From: Craig Daniel
- Re: [s-d] [s-b] Consultations on the Pencil Sharpener
  - From: Ed Murphy
- Re: [s-d] [s-b] Consultations on the Pencil Sharpener
  - From: Jamie Dallaire

Prev by Date: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Busy Grid Bits
Next by Date: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Busy Grid Bits
Previous by thread: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Consultations on the Pencil Sharpener
Next by thread: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Consultations on the Pencil Sharpener
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread