Re: [s-d] [s-b] Era 5 Consultation 1

Jay Campbell on Wed, 3 Dec 2008 15:54:48 -0700 (MST)

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [s-d] [s-b] Era 5 Consultation 1

To: discussion list for B Nomic <spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Era 5 Consultation 1
From: Jay Campbell <bnomic@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2008 14:54:43 -0800
In-reply-to: <0D5021DD-F7B3-48FD-B133-56BD0DE1A151@xxxxxxxxx>
References: <49370BE1.9070506@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <0D5021DD-F7B3-48FD-B133-56BD0DE1A151@xxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.18 (Windows/20081105)

Elliott Hird wrote:
> On 3 Dec 2008, at 22:44, Jay Campbell wrote:
>
>   
>> I encourage an Answer at least as interesting as Paradox.
>>     
>
> The rule change itself didn't cause that to happen; it was indirect.
>   

Everyone is at square 0,0 and not everyone is allowed to be. Something 
caused it. Whatever caused it, wherever you draw the line, that's the 
invalid action. I submit that enacting the refresh proposal is the most 
conspicuous action to examine.
_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [s-d] [s-b] Era 5 Consultation 1
  - From: Elliott Hird

References:
- Re: [s-d] [s-b] Era 5 Consultation 1
  - From: Elliott Hird

Prev by Date: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Era 5 Consultation 1
Next by Date: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Era 5 Consultation 1
Previous by thread: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Era 5 Consultation 1
Next by thread: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Era 5 Consultation 1
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread