Daniel Lepage on 31 Jul 2003 01:31:10 -0000

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

Re: [spoon-discuss] Re: [Spoon-business] NWEEK 46 BALLOT

On Wednesday, July 30, 2003, at 09:12  PM, Baron von Skippy wrote:

What cleverness? What McGee did was to make a statement in a prop that
he edidn't even realise was going to be so large. e did it by mistake

Not exactly by mistake, if I read eir msgs correctly; e just didn't
realize the full implications of it. That doesn't change the fact that
nobody else did anything particularly clever either.

-From where I stand, Wonko, you're not making the most stable argument. You're saying, essentially, that we shouldn't jump on possible ways to win as fast as possible, which is something you've been doing for a while now.

I didn't say you shouldn't jump on ways to win; I'm saying you shouldn't jump on things that you didn't come up with, unless you've got a new take on it. If you'd done something differently than Anything did, I wouldn't have objected, because at least you'd be coming up with something new (that's why I don't really object to WC's Society victory attempt; though I don't think it works either). But I think that if you, SkArcher, and Glotmorf all get Wins out of this, it's devaluing the Win, because none of you three did anything that seems particularly special or winworthy; you just copied what McGee did.

You even take people's scams when you don't agree with them, just on the off chance that you're wrong.

I do?

But the one time you don't do this, you've got the moral high ground? I think not. As things stand, you're the only one arguing Anything's case here. If e doesn't have a problem with it (and indeed is being a far better sport about this than I would have expected, even trying to repay me points /you/ tried to take), why do you?-

I'm not arguing Anything's case. E says e doesn't deserve any credit, and that's fine with me. I'm arguing against your attempt to give yourself credit for the scam, when I don't see how you have any more claim to it than e does. Or than Rob does, for that matter - e was the first person to incorporate the bit about 'other events related to the passage or failure of the proposal' into the ruleset (p115, nweek 1).


spoon-discuss mailing list