Re: [s-b] Consultations on the Pencil Sharpener

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

On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 9:29 PM, Craig Daniel <teucer@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> I submit the following Consultation, naming comex as the unbeliever:
>
> {Question: Does teucer have any mackerel?
>
> Arguments: if the Pencil Sharpener works as advertised (and I believe
> it does), then the mackerel it destroyed of mine are, in fact, the
> entirety of my mackerel. At least, they might be. The sum is enough
> for this to be the case, but when I bought a rapier I didn't specify
> whether or not all of the mackerel being spent to buy and use it had
> been created by the Laser Printer. Nor did Warrigal specify whether
> the ten he loaned me came from my prior holdings or not.
>
> If mackerel are non-fungible (which, as they are distinct game
> objects, seems reasonable) then none of the various game actions
> involving them this era worked, since nobody ever specified which
> mackerel they were destroying and so forth. The Laser Printer would
> have worked, except that we didn't actually have a color to create it
> in. Thus, the Pencil Sharpener fails because the mackerel it destroys
> don't exist. I still have exactly m100 per the PD, as do the four
> other squared players (comex, ehird, Sgeo, and Warrigal).
>
> If mackerel are fungible (which also seems reasonable; they're
> currency, after all) then the pencil sharpener failed because it
> failed to specify what quantity of mackerel were being destroyed.
>
> By the way, if a specific number of mackerel were to have been
> specified in this case - or if some strange fluke might inspire the
> Priest to answer NO on the grounds that the sharpener worked when both
> interpretations suggest otherwise, also a plausible decision - it's
> worth noting that it still may not be able to affect me. Laws do not
> have the force of the Ruleset behind them except on squares of the
> color where they are the Laws; as the Laws of White cannot oblige me
> to destroy my macks I remain only mostly convinced they can destroy
> them directly. But I am mostly convinced, and so would have to judge
> that a properly-worded Sharpener would have worked if I were assigned
> to do so.}


This is Consultation 163.
_______________________________________________
spoon-business mailing list
spoon-business@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-business