| Justin Ahmann on Mon, 10 Dec 2007 15:39:14 -0700 (MST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
| Re: [s-d] [s-b] Voting + Some Game Actions |
So? Codae ----- Original Message ---- From: 0x44 <bnomic@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> To: spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx Sent: Monday, December 10, 2007 12:28:54 AM Subject: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Voting + Some Game Actions You can't usurp the Ministry of Goods. You are already the Artisan. -- 0x44; Justin Ahmann wrote: > I usurp the Ministry of Questions. > > I usurp the Ministry of Goods. > > Codae > > > ----- Original Message ---- > From: 0x44 <bnomic@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > To: B-Nomic Business <spoon-business@xxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Sunday, December 9, 2007 11:37:18 PM > Subject: Re: [s-b] [s-d] Voting + Some Game Actions > > I object to your usurpation of the Ministry of Questions. > > -- > 0x44; > > > > Jamie Dallaire wrote: > >> The Oracle continues to defy me. >> >> I usurp the Ministry of Questions. >> >> Billy Pilgrim >> >> On Dec 9, 2007 11:12 PM, Geoffrey Spear <geoffspear@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> >> >>> On Dec 9, 2007 7:57 PM, Jamie Dallaire <bad.leprechaun@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>> >>>> You are entirely correct about the Proposal Numbers, Oracle. I did mean >>>> >>>> >>> to >>> >>> >>>> speak of Proposal 212. Your Proposal 202, however, was not included >>>> >>>> >>> because >>> >>> >>>> its effects pale beside the might of Proposal 212, by which they are >>>> engulfed mercilessly. >>>> >>>> That said, Oracle, I bid you to explain why you find my Consultations to >>>> >>>> >>> be >>> >>> >>>> unworthy, and to explain how I may correct them to bring their worth to >>>> >>>> >>> an >>> >>> >>>> acceptable level. >>>> >>>> >>> Partially because they were not phrased in the form of Questions. >>> >>> Of course, I'm happy to admit that it was mostly because I'm not >>> afraid to abuse the power granted to me by the rules for the greater >>> good of maintaining the integrity of the democratic process. It was >>> clearly not the will of the voters that the game cease to be called "B >>> Nomic" and if you can exploit one loophole in the Rules to try to >>> subvert that will I'm happy to exploit other loopholes to see that >>> it's not subverted. >>> >>> >>> >>>> Note that the Rules do not bind me to submitting a single Consultation >>>> >>>> >>> per >>> >>> >>>> declaration of invalidity. >>>> >>>> Also note that unless you explain your ZOTTING satisfactorily, I shall >>>> >>>> >>> usurp >>> >>> >>>> your position as Minister of Questions. No doubt all Players will agree >>>> >>>> >>> that >>> >>> >>>> these Consultations must be seen through. >>>> >>>> >>> True, but I'd say if I can't muster a second Objection from somewhere >>> then my intuition about the will of the Players is clearly wrong, and >>> I'd then welcome an Oracularity declaring that the game shall >>> henceforth no longer be called B Nomic and that we still have a >>> Membership Test defined even if it's not used. >>> >>> -- >>> Geoffrey Spear >>> http://www.geoffreyspear.com/ >>> _______________________________________________ >>> spoon-discuss mailing list >>> spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx >>> http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss >>> >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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-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 _______________________________________________ spoon-discuss mailing list spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss