Re: [s-b] [s-d] Consultation: Did the s**m work?

["Geoffrey Spear" <geoffspear@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Jan 1, 2008 1:56 PM, Josiah Worcester <josiahw@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Tuesday 01 January 2008 11:54:40 Jamie Dallaire wrote:
> > "If he deems it necessary the Priest may also submit as a game action an
> > Oracularity detailing changes needed to correct the state of the game." -
> > Rule 18
> >
> > Priest Murphy has answered the consultation asking whether I currently have
> > 11 Hit Point YES. He believes the state of the game is correct if I possess
> > >10 hit points. His oracularity would reduce my hit points to 10. Therefore,
> > I argue that Priest Murphy's oracularity does not "correct" the state of the
> > game, as Rule 18 says oracularities should.
> >
> > I declare the Answer and Oracularity for Consultation 80 to be INCONSISTENT
> > with each other and with established doctrine.
> >
> > Billy Pilgrim
> >
> > On Jan 1, 2008 4:06 AM, Jamie Dallaire <bad.leprechaun@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > > On Dec 31, 2007 9:15 PM, Justin Ahmann <quesmarktion@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I give Billy Pilgrim m5 as consolation.
> > >
> > >
> > > Score!
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > spoon-business mailing list
> > spoon-business@xxxxxxxxx
> > http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-business
> >
>
> I, too, call consultation 80 as inconsistent with existing doctrine. Wheee!

I also claim Murphy's answer is Inconsistent.

--Wooble


-- 
Geoffrey Spear
http://www.geoffreyspear.com/
_______________________________________________
spoon-business mailing list
spoon-business@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-business