[s-d] Re: [s-b] New Cfi: Nice try peter.

[Alex Truelsen <dichotomousmind@xxxxxxxxx>]

I think you need to make a Statement for this one. I wonder what would 
happen if I submitted a CFI with the statement "this statement is false..." 
well, besides it being refused by everyone.

[[BvS]]

On 5/13/05, eugman@xxxxxxxxxxx <eugman@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> I ask that this cfi only be admitted if proposal 74 is not changed from 
> it's current form upon being added to the ballot. I'm going to be busy 
> tonight and cannot submit this right after the next nday starts. I don't 
> want to outlaw posting nonsensical proposals. It is just putting them on the 
> ballot that is a problem.
> 
> I submit the following CFI:
> {{
> == Nice try, Peter. ==
> 
> Defendant Peter
> 
> Analysis by Plaintiff:
> The rules say that each Proposal consists of a list of Gamestate Changes, 
> that is, changes to the state and/or existence of some number of Game 
> Objects. P74 contains one line in the interrogative form and the rest are 
> declarative. A proposal needs statments in the imperative form in order to 
> command any changes to the gamestate. Now even though there is a precedent 
> of using a declarative to demonstrate the existence of a game object this 
> proposal does not even do that. This proposal does not reference any 
> existing game objects nor does it declare the existence of new ones. I 
> therefore find this proposal not meeting its requirements
> }}
> _______________________________________________
> spoon-business mailing list
> spoon-business@xxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-business
>
_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss