Antonio Dolcetta on Mon, 26 Feb 2007 12:43:24 -0700 (MST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
Re: [s-d] [s-b] oracle report |
On 26 Feb 2007, at 20:23, shadowfirebird@xxxxxxxxx wrote: > Antonio, I am a bit concerned about this. > > Consultations have to be (a) phrased as a question, but they also > have to be > (b) phrased in a form that gives an answer of true or false. > > It seems a little odd to zot a consultation that follows (b) but > not (a) > when you haven't zotted consultations that follow (a) but not (b). > Do you > see what I mean? > > (And, lets get this out of the way: it is *not* possible to phrase a > consultation so that it honours (a) *and* (b). Only *statements* > can be > true or false. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ > Categorical_propositions) I am aware of this. However I present you with the following facts: 1) all previous consultations have been phrased as questions and everything has sort of worked. (you have submitted some of them yourself) 2) I am allowed (but not forced) to zot consultations that are malformed 3) there is a proposed fix in the pipeline which I believe will fix all consultations that are posed as a question, but which will not have any effect on consultations that are not questions. I think your questions are fully worthy, but I don't want to worsen the situation by letting them though as they are. Please resubmit them as questions and I will let them pass. _______________________________________________ spoon-discuss mailing list spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss