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

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

On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 1:12 PM, Alex Smith <ais523@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Mon, 2008-10-20 at 13:03 -0400, Jamie Dallaire wrote:
>
> > If the certainty of Wooble's argument cannot be ascertained, I don't
> think
> > this changes anything for the purposes of PEPhood. If we consider the
> > initial Emergency procedure, then we were clearly not Players at the time
> it
> > began, and therefore are not PEPs (as above). If we consider the currenty
> > Emergency procedure, then it is uncertain whether or not we are Players,
> but
> > the relevant instant for assessing certainty is that at which the current
> > Emergency began, making us PEPs (as above).
> >
> Are you really certain that the player list was certain before the
> emergency began?


I make no claim to being certain of that. What I DO claim is that, whether
or not the playerhood of a subset of Players was uncertain at the time that
the initial Emergency began, it IS certain that I (and, I suspect, you) was
NOT a Player at the time the initial emergency began.

Unless, of course, it turns out that there were no inactive players before I
came around, or that any such players were personally notified of prior
emergencies...

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