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

Alexander Smith on Fri, 12 Dec 2008 06:40:15 -0700 (MST)

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

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

To: "discussion list for B Nomic" <spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Intents
From: Alexander Smith <AIS523@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 13:38:49 +0000
References: <6bf32280812111558q2d8ec584i31eaafe6be1e8e19@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx><1229077088.11003.14.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <5CD7770F-19C2-404A-89F3-AAD0A1D4B251@xxxxxxxxx>
Thread-index: AclcXJmQy3rTo+p6Ts+mCRlRbemOhAAAl13v
Thread-topic: [s-d] [s-b] Intents

ehird wrote:
> On 12 Dec 2008, at 10:18, Alex Smith wrote:
> > They're still rules-defined attributes of objects, pretty obviously  
> > from
> > the rules.
> Haha! Except for the part where your RP REMOVED THEM.
>From 5e2, yes. They're still mentioned in 5e28, not explicitly, but
clearly enough to indicate that they're some sort of property, if not
obviously a switch. Or does repealing text from one rule now suddenly
repeal it from all other rules too?

-- 
ais523

<<winmail.dat>>

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

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [s-d] [s-b] Intents
  - From: Elliott Hird

References:
- Re: [s-d] [s-b] Intents
  - From: Alex Smith
- Re: [s-d] [s-b] Intents
  - From: Elliott Hird

Prev by Date: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Intents
Next by Date: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Intents
Previous by thread: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Intents
Next by thread: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Intents
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread