Re: [s-b] Good grief

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

On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 8:23 AM, Elliott Hird <
penguinofthegods@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On 11 Dec 2008, at 23:41, Jay Campbell wrote:
>
>  I turn the clock on.
>>
>
> Consultation: Jay violated the rules by turning the clock on in the
> above-quoted message.
>
> Arguments: there were unfilled ministerial obligations and outdated PDs. We
> need updated reports to play this game. The pragmatic clock is just to avoid
> clock crises. I recommend a very short Jail time or a minimal mack fine, as
> this is the first offense.


I ZOT the above Consultation because it is malformed.

ehird, please resubmit it in the form of a question. Rule 5E36 does say that
Consultations can be statements, but in my opinion, the Rule currently
directs us to consider statements to represent malformed questions. See the
proposal below for an explanation.

ehird, note that this ZOTTING shouldn't slow down the processing of your
question, because I'm still not assigning priests till later to allow for
ordainment.

I submit the following Proposal, entitled "Grammatical Statements in
Consultations":
{
In Rule 5E36 (Judgment), replace the following text:
{{
If a Statement is submitted, it shall be treated as a Question of the form
"is <statement> true?".
}}
by:
{{
If a Statement is submitted, it shall be treated as a Question of the form
"is it true that <statement>?".
}}

[[Arguments: seriously, try it with the above ZOTTED Consultation by ehird.
It yields: Is Jay violated the rules by turning the clock on in the
above-quoted message true? Maybe a little better if you consider it to be:
Is "Jay violated the rules by turning the clock on in the above-quoted
message" true? Still would make a lot more sense as: Is it true that Jay
violated the rules by turning the clock on in the above-quoted message?]]
}

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