Re: [s-d] [s-b] Consultations on the Pencil Sharpener

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

On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 5:06 PM, Ed Murphy <emurphy42@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> teucer wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 4:06 PM, Ed Murphy <emurphy42@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> >> ehird wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 16 Dec 2008, at 19:17, Ed Murphy wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> If e only had m15, then that failed.
> >>> e did that right after gaining a boatload of money.
> >> By what method?  We've established that the Laser Printer didn't work.
> >
> > Actually, we've established (or rather, comex established) the opposite.
>
> The rules never actually say that Pondered answers are necessarily
> correct, nor that they become correct.
>
> I maintain that comex's answer is incorrect.  Re-read comex's answer
> carefully; it reasonably addressed "I intend to X" vs. "I consent to X",
> but did not address either of these vs. "I perform X".
>
> I'm also relying on the gimpy web mail archive, so if one of them did
> say "I perform X" and I missed it, then just point me to the message
> in which they did so.


I'm pretty sure they never performed anything.

I think the only grounds for it having happened anyway is that the initial
Laws for uncoloured squares don't use the dependent actions mechanism (which
requires intent, support/objection, then performance). The initial laws just
use vague "with consent" language that could be interpreted a number of
ways.

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