spoon-discuss: Re: spoon-business: So this dosent happen again

["ID Scott, Science 99" <Iain.Scott.01@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> If the "this" that this is trying to prevent happening again has to 
>do with imaginary friends, might I note that there still doesn't exist 
>a proper definition of "player" in the rules.  

But it does, I think, stop completly random entities voting.
A workable defenition of a player is left to the student :-)


cheers,
Iain 

>There's the turing test 
>requirement, and Our Admin's de facto email address requirement, but 
>nothing that, say, identifies a "player" as being tied to a single 
>personality or state of consciousness.  Otherwise, not only are 
imaginary friends valid, equally valid are (with reference to a 
currently popular movie, name withheld to avoid plot spoilage) 
hallucinations.  Tying playerness to states of consciousness or 
personalities eliminates these, while not discriminating against 
sufferers of multiple personality disorder. (Like me.) (Stop that.)
> 
> But I'm telling you right now...if Dad the Lawyer comes back from the grave and wants to play, I'm gonna get annoyed if y'all tell him no.