Craig Daniel on Thu, 6 Nov 2008 14:35:34 -0700 (MST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
Re: [s-b] [s-d] Ministry of Questions actions |
And to the public forum... On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 4:35 PM, Craig Daniel <teucer@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > In mistakenly judging Consultation 138, Charles makes a good point. > Appropriating much of his wording from the reasoning because I see no > obvious way to improve on it, I answer the Consultation as follows: > > Answer: NO. > Reasoning: As non-Priest Charles said: "I know of no way to determine > the actual answer, but I feel that an answer of PARADOX would not be > appropriate, since both answers could potentially be logically > correct. Thus, I am making the arbitrary decision to answer YES." I, > however, am making the opposite arbitrary decision because I regard it > as poor economic policy for B to arbitrarily delete mackerel that was > placed in the corporation's hands in the first place out of a belief > that it would not consequently be vanishing for no reason. Since the > refresh proposal, in repealing comex's Corporation, would have > destroyed the mackerel in question otherwise, I feel that if an > Arbitrary answer must be chosen it ought to be NO. > > - teucer > _______________________________________________ spoon-business mailing list spoon-business@xxxxxxxxx http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-business