Re: [s-b] Answer to Consultation 117

["Jamie Dallaire" <bad.leprechaun@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Sat, Mar 1, 2008 at 6:35 PM, Justin Ahmann
<quesmarktion@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> PARADOX.
>
>  Oracularity: Create a new rule, entitled "Greep", with the following text:
>
>  {
>  As a Game Action, the Oracle may Greep.  This results in the repeal of all rules whose numbers are less than 45 and greater than 40, as well as this rule.
>  }
>
>  Codae

I declare this Answer to be INCONSISTENT. (The Consultation asks
whether there exists a proposal 355 submitted by BobTHJ). The Proposal
either exists or doesn't, as per the ruleset, and even if the
determination of its (non)existence is difficult, this does not make
it a paradox. It only makes it ambiguous.

Billy Pilgrim

PS: It seems I've won by Paradox because no one bothered to
counter-claim 0x44's answer to my consultation... It feels like a very
cheap victory ;-)
_______________________________________________
spoon-business mailing list
spoon-business@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-business