Re: [s-d] Judgement on RFJ 5.

Iain Scott on Fri, 8 Dec 2006 06:08:12 -0700 (MST)

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

Re: [s-d] Judgement on RFJ 5.

To: "discussion list for B Nomic" <spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [s-d] Judgement on RFJ 5.
From: "Iain Scott" <iopgod@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2006 13:08:04 +0000
In-reply-to: <2f4350400612080442qd73bb0bw139369cca62a74ed@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <410-22006125831650220@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <7b4a1ba30612080224h3760e063k9923a91b8db935b9@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <ubqmebo0i.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <2f4350400612080442qd73bb0bw139369cca62a74ed@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

On 12/8/06, shadowfirebird@xxxxxxxxx <shadowfirebird@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>I'd hope that they wouldn't be
> interpreted by a raging pedant, or the game would get pretty boring.
>

My experiance is that nomic rule sets are _always_ interpreted by
raging pedants, and thats the exciting bit!

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

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [s-d] Judgement on RFJ 5.
  - From: shadowfirebird

References:
- Re: [s-d] [s-b] Judgement on RFJ 5.
  - From: Iain Scott
- Re: [s-d] Judgement on RFJ 5.
  - From: Peter Cooper Jr.
- Re: [s-d] Judgement on RFJ 5.
  - From: shadowfirebird

Prev by Date: Re: [s-d] Judgement on RFJ 5.
Next by Date: Re: [s-d] Judgement on RFJ 5.
Previous by thread: Re: [s-d] Judgement on RFJ 5.
Next by thread: Re: [s-d] Judgement on RFJ 5.
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread