Re: [s-d] [s-b] Submitting another consultation.

[0x4461736864617368 <bnomic@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I guess that answers that. :)

--
0x4461736864617368;



Geoffrey Spear wrote:
> "The Oracle may arbitrarily override the normal assignment of
> Consultation numbers, and choose a number of his liking for a new
> Consultation."
>
> Even without this provision, it's clear that I created these as
> Consultations by taking the game action of submitting them to the
> public forum.  Whether the Oracle numbered them appropriately is, IMO,
> immaterial.  The Oracle doesn't possess the power to make a
> Consultation invalid; all he can do is assign them or ZOT them (in
> which case they're still Consultations, albeit ones that will never be
> Answered).
>
> On Nov 20, 2007 8:33 AM, 0x4461736864617368 <bnomic@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>   
>> {{
>>     Question: Are the two previous consultations currently known as
>> Consultations 37 and 38 valid?
>>
>>     Reasoning:
>>        Rule 2-5 states that Consultations automatically gain a
>> Consultation number upon submission. Each number shall be equal to 1 or
>> to the greatest existing Consultation number increased by one. The
>> highest Consultation number prior to two previous was 68, therefore
>> Consultations 37 and 38 are not Consultations.
>>
>>     Unbeliever: Billy Pilgrim
>> }}
>>
>>
>> --
>> --
>> 0x4461736864617368;
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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