Re: [s-d] [s-b] Transactions

["Jamie Dallaire" <bad.leprechaun@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 12:35 PM, Jamie Dallaire
<bad.leprechaun@xxxxxxxxx>wrote:

> On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 12:24 PM, comex <comexk@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 11:20 AM, ehird <penguinofthegods@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>> > It's aligned wrongly.
>>
>> No it's not.  The } is exactly the same distance from the two {s, so
>> the two transaction blocks are the same size and end at the same
>> point.  (The intent of course is that they happen at the same time, so
>> I simultaneously join B Nomic, forfeit C Nomic (due to Rule 4E83),
>> forfeit B Nomic, and join C Nomic.)
>
>
> Here's the deal, though. If read as one transaction, this fails (see my
> oracularity on the matter). If read as two separate transactions, your
> attempt to forfeit succeeds (nothing can keep you from doing it) in both
> nomics (Rule 4E83) but your attempt to join fails in both nomics, since
> you're already a Player.
>

I should specify, you're already a Player or maybe you simultaneously
deregistered, in which case you still can't join because you've been a
Player during the current or past nweek.

>
>
> So unless it's one big transaction, you're out :-(
>
_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss