Re: [s-b] Consultation assignments

["Craig Daniel" <teucer@xxxxxxxxx>]

> teucer to Consultation 130 "At the time of submission of this
> consultation, is the player named Charles the only player with a Baby
> Blue sock?" (was Phil's)

Answer: YES.

Reasoning: I find the logic behind j's old ruling persuasive - but for
the fact that it is missing a key step which invalidates his premise.
As I understand the rules, the fact that only a corporation can
willfully destroy socks does not mean that the socks cannot be
destroyed by the actions of the rules as those rules are traditionally
understood to operate. I must therefore agree with those who found his
old ruling inconsistent and overturn j's previous Answer. It is thus
my contention that socks vanish when their sockholders cease to be
players.

Oracularity: To clarify the above and prevent further confusion, the
following text will be added to the end of rule 4E86:
{

When a player leaves the game, all of their socks are automatically destroyed.
}

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