Re: [s-d] Re: [auto] Peter votes

[Rainbow Wolfe <rainbowdreamwolf@xxxxxxxxx>]

But then that would still involve numbering them. You have to recognise 
illegal actions to recognise that they were illegal. The easiest (as i see 
it) would be to recognise that you are recognising the illegal action, and 
then declare the status of the action as illegal.

The way you seem to be thinking you would recognise that it was illegal, 
then change it to something else, then ignore the fact that you have just 
recognised the illegal action anyway to rename it. :S

- RW

On 6/19/05, Peter Cooper Jr. <pete+bnomic@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> Rainbow Wolfe <rainbowdreamwolf@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> > Leave it as a proposal - just declare it illegal and invalidate. Then it
> > exists (no-renumbering neccesary) and it now has a state as illegal and
> > historical.
> 
> Well, then you kind of have to half-recognize illegal actions, which
> seems a bit odd to me. Maybe we'd need to have "proposal attempts",
> which were numbered in order, but which only became "proposals" under
> certain circumstances? (With something similar for other kinds of
> game-changing objects?)
> 
> --
> Peter C.
> "Uncle Cosmo ... why do they call this a word processor?"
> "It's simple, Skyler ... you've seen what food processors do to food, 
> right?"
> -- MacNelley, "Shoe"
> _______________________________________________
> spoon-discuss mailing list
> spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss
> 



-- 
The wonderful thing about email is, you can spend hours crafting and finely 
tuning your sarcasm and wit for that perfect retort, only to have it appear 
completely and utterly ignored.
_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss