[spoon-discuss] Re: Eclairs

[Daniel Lepage <dpl33@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Friday, November 14, 2003, at 03:33 PM, Rob Speer wrote:

> On Fri, Nov 14, 2003 at 08:08:50PM +0000, SkArcher wrote:
> > On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 14:38:44 -0500, Craig <ragnarok@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > > > > > I smear Political Go.
> > > > > > Then I eat it.
> > > > >
> > > > > Dude. Doesn't eating it, like, destroy the game?
> > >
> > > > Well, eating isn't defined by the rules, so I'm
> > > > assuming it's basically a non-action.
> > >
> > > Oh. I thought eating a chocolate eclair destroyed it.
> >
> > I eat Rob
>
> So I decided to look up what the effects of eating are. It's not 
> defined
> in the rules at all, and therefore (by the same rule as the Eclair 
> rule)
> eating is not a permissible action.

By r33:

Whenever one section of a rule conflicts with another section of the 
same rule, the section which appears later in the rule takes precedence 
over the earlier section; however, if a subsection of a subsection of a 
rule conflicts with the subsection it is nested within, the 
higher-level subsection takes precedence.


Since r1638 first says that undefined actions cannot be performed, and 
*then* states that Chocolate Eclairs are objects that can be eaten or 
smeared, you can be eaten or smeared.

--
Wonko

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