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

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

On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 8:04 PM, Jamie Dallaire <bad.leprechaun@xxxxxxxxx>wrote:

> On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 5:58 PM, Craig Daniel <teucer@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 5:08 PM, Jamie Dallaire
>> <bad.leprechaun@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 2:39 PM, Craig Daniel <teucer@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 1:56 PM, Ed Murphy <emurphy42@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>> >> >      - teucer's macks were set to m100 by ais523's Refresh Proposal
>> >> >      - teucer purchased a rapier (m75)
>> >>
>> >> Under this interpretation I had already given m30 to ehird, and
>> >> destroyed m30 to color a square, so I can't have gotten the rapier.
>> >>
>> >> >    so teucer had m15 when this consultation was submitted (and I
>> >> >    believe e still has m15 now).
>> >>
>> >> I have never had less than m40 under this interpretation of events,
>> >> and am at m50 now.
>> >>
>> >> Oh, by the way: I find comex's answer on 162 CONSISTENT.
>> >
>> > Bah. My brain is too much jelly to figure out how much mack you've got
>> now.
>>
>> Depending on the answers to various Consultations, it is either 18Kish or
>> 50.
>>
>> Prompted by ehird, I submit the following Consultations:
>>
>> {Question: Are the answers to Pondered Consultations correct, after
>> the Consultations become Pondered?
>> Unbeliever: ehird
>> Arguments: if not, then what the fuck is the point of Consultations?
>> Also, if not, then lots of PDs have been treated as correct because
>> they reflected game reality as described by Pondered Consultations,
>> possibly without actually doing so; these having not been ratified,
>> there have been unfulfilled ministerial obligations at various points
>> and we're probably in some sort of clock crisis.}
>
> This is Consultation 168.
>
I assign Consultation 168 to Priest Ivan Hope/Warrigal.

>
>
>> {Question: Do the answers to Pondered Consultations become correct
>> when the Consultations become Pondered?
>> Unbeliever: ehird
>> Arguments: Assuming the above to be found TRUE, as it should be (IMO),
>> either they become correct when Pondered or they are understood to
>> have always been correct. Since we have the power to find Inconsistent
>> those Consultations that don't plausibly reflect pre-Consultation game
>> reality, I'm inclined to think the answer is No - their truth value
>> does not change as a result of being Pondered; they're just the final
>> word on what was or was not already the case.}
>
> This is Consultation 169.
>
I assign Consultation 169 to Priest Ty-Guy6.

>
>
>> {Question: Do Pondered Consultations create precedents that affect how
>> to accurately judge other Consultations?
>> Unbeliever: ehird
>> Arguments: if Pondered Consultations have truthful Answers per the
>> Arguments above, then those Answers must be taken into account by
>> subsequent Consultations or the result of the gamestate is
>> paradoxical. A No answer here is obviously Inconsistent if the Answers
>> to Pondered Consultations are true, by the way, but obviously correct
>> if the answers to the above two Consultations are both No. If a Yes
>> answer becomes Pondered (the outcome I believe should be the case),
>> I'm going to make a habit of including relevant precedents in
>> Consultations I submit - and whenever anybody else does so I will find
>> Inconsistent any answer that ignores them all.}
>
> This is Consultation 170.
>
I assign Consultation 170 to Priest JamesB.

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