Re: [s-b] [s-d] (no subject)

[Jamie Dallaire <bad.leprechaun@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 8:20 AM, 0x44 <bnomic@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> M P Darke wrote:
>
>> I've been going through the archives of the Oracle, and I've found
>> Consultation 168. This question cannot be answered NO or YES. I find the
>> answer inconsistent.
>>
>>
> That's nice, but it's already Pondered, and you're can only submit a Claim
> within a Jiffy. Also, the answer to Consultation 168 may be incorrect, but
> if it is incorrect it's correct.


"Are the answers to Pondered Consultations correct, after the Consultations
become Pondered?"

Also, I think it's perfectly consistent to answer that question NO. The
answers aren't necessarily correct. This is explicit in the rules now, but
wasn't at the time. (well, unless you mean that it's neither entirely yes
nor entirely no given that some are correct and some are incorrect... In
which case I agree.)

I submit the following Proposal, entitled "For Vague Consultations":
{
In Rule 5E36 (Judgment), replace the sentence:
{{
The selected Priest shall find inspiration in his knowledge of the Rules
and, as a Game Action, Answer his assigned Consultation YES, NO, or, in
cases where neither of these two answers can potentially be logically
correct, PARADOX, causing it to become Answered.
}}
by the following sentence:
{{
The selected Priest shall find inspiration in his knowledge of the Rules
and, as a Game Action, Answer his assigned Consultation YES, NO, SOMETIMES,
or, in cases where neither of these three answers can potentially be
logically correct, PARADOX, causing it to become Answered.
}}
}

[[I was trying to come up with some formulation aimed at explaining in that
rule, in an extra sentence, that questions that were broad enough to apply
to multiple entities (e.g. "consultations" in general) could lead to answers
that should be neither necessarily yes or necessarily no, in which case
answers of NO should be considered logically correct, but I couldn't come up
with anything satisfactory. I think this addition would do a better job
anyway.]]

[[pre-emption: ehird: BINA]]

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