Re: [s-d] [s-b] Consultation: declarations of invalidity

["Roger Hicks" <pidgepot@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Dec 7, 2007 10:26 AM, Geoffrey Spear <geoffspear@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> This is invalid.  The Unbeliever may not make a claim as to
> consistency.  Much to my regret, since that makes 2 of us who think
> this is inconsistent and neither of us can make a claim. Of course, we
> can always declare the game action of answering this Consultation to
> be Invalid, which while outside the spirit of the rules would appear
> to be legal.
>
> I add the argument that Rule 1-10 says "Game Actions occur upon
> reaching the appropriate fora".  If they have no effect on the
> gamestate at this time, then what does "occur" mean?

Indeed. My mistake.

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