Re: Re: [s-d] Re: Re: Re: [s-b] Wonko's loophole

Bryan Donlan on Thu, 11 Nov 2004 13:34:22 -0600 (CST)

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

Re: Re: [s-d] Re: Re: Re: [s-b] Wonko's loophole

To: discussion list for B Nomic <spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Re: [s-d] Re: Re: Re: [s-b] Wonko's loophole
From: Bryan Donlan <bdonlan@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 14:34:19 -0500
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:references; b=Xh9yKaw1FQvxY+S2akmPSbjl52FVf6afOAL7/nbWLOJ9QriXgYd4FzPanrrTkJDY7M2pIswq2+Y2NJMMW9gEFZMtYchyM+SJuv60prqozNgwQBljDtSDjf4G57xz7+mo7Yco9PT+E+0jYVOQo2hib31Em6RxCqPc6Fqch1jU/6c=
In-reply-to: <20041111171507.24658.qmail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <20041111171507.24658.qmail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 09:15:07 -0800 (PST), Dan Schmidt
<tiber264@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> When I say "indistingush" I mean "use rule 699/1 as a
> loophole".

That's an interesting definition. Would've helped if you gave it ahead
of time though :)

> All actions that change the gamestate are illegal
> under 393/0.

If that's really the case, we have no game. However, r393 defers to
all other rules, so it's moot.

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

References:
- Re: Re: [s-d] Re: Re: Re: [s-b] Wonko's loophole
  - From: Dan Schmidt

Prev by Date: Re: Re: [s-d] Re: Re: Re: [s-b] Wonko's loophole
Next by Date: [s-d] Re: [s-b] Looptek (Win)
Previous by thread: Re: Re: [s-d] Re: Re: Re: [s-b] Wonko's loophole
Next by thread: [s-d] Re: [s-b] [auto] Wonko votes
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread