Re: [s-d] [s-b] Assignments of Consultations 179-187

["Craig Daniel" <teucer@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, Jan 2, 2009 at 2:28 PM, Jay Campbell <bnomic@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>>  Rule 5E44: "Players and Colours are Legal Entities.
>>  Nobody is therefore not a Legal Entity and cannot be in possesion of
>> mackerel.
>>
>
> This doesn't preclude other game objects from being Legal Entities. It's an
> inclusive declaration, not exclusive (e.g. if it were prefixed with Only).

This is true. The common-sense interpretation differs, and my Exceptio
rule would make that clearly correct, but at present I'm not sure
either answer is INCONSISTENT with the wording of the rules.

> My argument is countered a bit by the part that says things can be in the
> possession of "a Legal Entity or Nobody," which seems to suggest Nobody
> isn't a legal entity.

True. Although if we're using a logical OR rather than XOR here, it
could be both - which is only possible if Nobody is a Legal Entity. I
don't think e is, though.
_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss