Kieron Jarvis on 3 Oct 2000 04:38:12 -0000

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

RE: spoon-discuss: Re: spoon-business: RFJ 1

If Joel rules against RFJ1 then he may not be able to definitively prove
himself to be a Player either. If he's not a Player then he is not
Administrator (R208).

I don't know whether he has sent a message to the list stating that he
desires to be a Player (R209). I haven't seen one since I joined.

I'm not going to call an RFJ on this. I am not attacking Joel. I do want to
avoid a situation where weeks later we find that Joel is not officially a
Player and has been voting etc and RFJing as a Player. So, I'll trust him to
do the right thing or let someone else call the RFJ.


-----Original Message-----

(Mon, 02 Oct 2000) Thus Spake Joel Uckelman:
> I assign number 1 to the RFJ I made yesterday, and select myself as Judge:
> Those that have declared emselves Players are not Players.
> . . .
> . . .  so I want to be sure I am ruling
> correctly. If anyone would like to make further argument why my
> interpretation is incorrect, I would be glad to consider it before making
> the judgment (tomorrow evening, probably).

I think perhaps we should ask the question, are there any players at all?  I
could submit a Request for Judgement on the following statement:  The Player
called Joel Uckelman is incapable of passing the Turning Test, and thus is
not a player.  Since Joel's status as a player is called into question,
he be a judge?  And who would administer the Turing Test?  Perhaps we need
Officer in Charge of Administering Turing Tests.
Of course I won't submit such an RFJ lest, for that act of sabotage, I be
crucified. ;)

Adam Tomjack