Re: [s-b] Re: Upper House Ruling on CFI "15 points for DOOM!"

Iain Scott on Tue, 1 Mar 2005 17:15:30 -0600 (CST)

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

Re: [s-b] Re: Upper House Ruling on CFI "15 points for DOOM!"

To: spoon-business@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [s-b] Re: Upper House Ruling on CFI "15 points for DOOM!"
From: Iain Scott <iopgod@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 23:15:20 +0000
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:references; b=cElthWEzE59ovajOxW3CEwVcjB4zhVaDF35HnJwhId0UN2+/m/ZpNeHtOgElgswo0ksP/Kc0hKD/6Kgm+5Ygl505cyC2qo+J2kfU/FkH2TYJ25mkyp3F7X7+FDXTfOLqf33bddOwrVESt8OboXpOsCKqnD1VVKNhiKivgL9nFf0=
In-reply-to: <86u0nzuj5t.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <20050226194424.A600@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <86u0nzuj5t.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

I think I forgot to post my ruling, if indeed I need to:

Plaintiff: Peter

Statement: When Peter played eir Card of DOOM! on nweek 80 nday
3, e gained 15 points.

Ruling: FALSE

Analysis:
I personally parse the rule (fairly ambiguously written, I must admit)
as: IF (cards are correctly chosen) THEN (discard 'em, give 15 points,
etc.) ELSE (other things, not including 15 points).

Would it be an abuse of Executive Tidyness to de-ambiguise this rule,
or would a proposal be more appropriate?


-- 
cheers,
Iain
_______________________________________________
spoon-business mailing list
spoon-business@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-business

Prev by Date: [s-b] Smiting and Oblivion
Next by Date: [s-b] [auto] NDate 81.8
Previous by thread: Re: [s-b] Smiting and Oblivion
Next by thread: [s-b] [auto] NDate 81.8
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread