Re: [s-d] [s-b] Consultation 45 Answer; Blueprint

[0x44 <bnomic@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I object, it is unfair to rat holes and shampoo stores to compare them
to Consultation 45.


Justin Ahmann wrote:
> I claim the answer to Proposal 45 to be INCONSISTENT with the "Rat Hole and Shampoo Store," where Claims of (in)consistency claim (in)consistency between a Consultation's Answer and the "Rat Hole and Shampoo Store."
>
> Codae
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Antonio Dolcetta <antonio.dolcetta@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: B Nomic business <spoon-business@xxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2007 8:26:20 AM
> Subject: Re: [s-b] Consultation 45 Answer; Blueprint
>
> ttpf
>
> Geoffrey Spear wrote:
>   
>> On Nov 25, 2007 11:08 AM, Jamie Dallaire <bad.leprechaun@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>  
>>     
>>>> A)
>>>>
>>>> {{
>>>> Is it true that any player can define a blueprint?
>>>> }}
>>>>      
>>>>         
>>> This is Consultation Number 45 and I assign it to Priest Wooble.
>>>    
>>>       
>> I answer YES.
>>
>> While the rules don't explicitly allow the creation of Blueprints
>> except by the Artisan, they don't forbid it, either.  Everyone who
>> voted to foolishly repeal the Monopoly Rule may kick themselves.
>>
>>  
>>     
> INCONSISTENT with established doctrine
> This topic has already been discussed to the point that it's not even
> funny anymore.
>
> Shame on you Wooble!
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> spoon-business mailing list
> spoon-business@xxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-business
> _______________________________________________
> 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