Jeremy Cook on Wed, 3 Nov 2004 21:23:17 -0600 (CST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
[s-d] Re: [s-b] Work is sucking the lifeforce from me--I mean, more than usual |
On Wed, Nov 03, 2004 at 10:18:02PM -0500, Daniel Lepage wrote: > > On Nov 3, 2004, at 10.00 PM, Jeremy Cook wrote: > > > On Mon, Nov 01, 2004 at 02:29:54AM -0500, Daniel Lepage wrote: > >>> I rule TRUE on the cfi. While it is true that there are many many > >>> examples of card games where cards which are laid down don't leave > >>> the > >>> player's possession, or even in some cases the player's hand, there's > >>> still one thing they have in common--it's awfully hard to lay cards > >>> down which have already been laid down without picking them back up > >>> again. Common usage is a necessary evil, and it's certainly > >>> applicable > >>> in this case. As picking the Cards up is not otherwise allowed for by > >>> the Rules, and the act of picking the Cards up would modify the game > >>> state, I'm going to have to rule that it can't be done. > >> > >> For reasons I've explained in a series of earlier posts, I Recall > >> Shenanigans on this CFI. > > > > What were those reasons again? > > > > I rule FALSE on this CFI. r1726 makes the general claim that all cards > > must have an Image. r1903 makes the specific claim that there exist > > cards without one. I rule that such a specific claim does not > > contradict > > a general claim, by analogy with the following paragraph from r33: > > > > "The unconditional permitting of an action is a Blanket Permission. The > > conditional prohibiting of an action is a Specific Restriction. A > > Specific Restriction for an action is not considered to be in conflict > > with a Blanket Permission for that action, unless the implementation of > > the Specific Restriction eliminates any possible circumstance in which > > the action can be performed." > > The CFI I was Recalling Shenanigans on was entitled "CFJ on Wonko" and > was on the statement "Wonko did not succeed in laying down eir sequence > of Green, Blue, and Indigo more than once." Oh yeah. I'm not a legal Appellate Judge on that, since I'm the Plaintiff. Anyway, what were the reasons? Zarpint _______________________________________________ spoon-discuss mailing list spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss