Antonio Dolcetta on Mon, 26 Feb 2007 14:22:43 -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 21:17, shadowfirebird@xxxxxxxxx wrote: > Antonio, I hope that you will take this as constructive > criticism. No > malice is intended. > why should I take it otherwise ? > > 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 > > > "everything has sort of worked", not because of the rules, but > because we > chose to ignore them. The only alternative I see is zotting all consultations until the rule is fixed. I am merely acting in conformance with game custom. > You point out that you are not forced to zot > malformed questions. So why start now? > because i think it's in my (and your) interest to do it. I might be mistaken of course. > 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. > > > Until that proposal is in place, we rely on you to act without > favour. It's not a question of favour. The first incarnation of the RFJ system failed because some malformed questions were not refused. I'm trying to not let that happen anymore. that's all. Also I assure you that I have no particular interest about either comex's scam succeeding or you stopping it. _______________________________________________ spoon-discuss mailing list spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss