| teucer on Sun, 25 Jan 2009 15:41:04 -0700 (MST) | 
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
	
	| Re: [s-d] [s-b] Old assignment | 
 
- To: spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Old assignment
- From: teucer@xxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2009 17:40:58 -0500
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;	h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:sender:received:in-reply-to	:references:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to	:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;	bh=MwG/212ZzmuCXuxKf7NijAeQ8xLEBOkLVygBDpEWtYs=;	b=TpevQCss2kehqKmqYMyz0ZNrd9rHcR6Qrq65d8mqFicTH2WuCILSnmQAV3Kj1eKQn8	1ms5tYdQb3xztnZp9FIsZRyt49lY/YsHqyz306cpiwJxLznAgegoq9AXHRH6E5pAggwQ	MSXSZrClc20TwXuE+Oo7yL3CXQD8/A/8DzR9s=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;	h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date	:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type	:content-transfer-encoding;	b=EC8YqhRDcqN4yI6E527E3G4+Sm+35vw6tQkcygoVT2a7m59WXIv2i2Iv0r3hlgMvXM	zlzCUYxf8zjuf9UA0bWfe8dRWOSZZlgjZsL/VNOjVExyAequV6dJDnj87iEyae+s35lx	3gLlNr05jE/ESvnJfJDWJN/1oMJmKdC+GVjQA=
- In-reply-to: <497CB073.3050900@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- References: <497CAD63.6010904@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <497CB073.3050900@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On 1/25/09, Jay Campbell <bnomic@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Ed Murphy wrote:
>> I assign Consultation 191 to Priest j.
>>
>
> Q: "Is it possible for a Player to forfeit in the past, by submitting in
> the present a message that he does so?"
>
> I answer this NO. The phrase in question is "any player may forfeit the
> game at any time" and per game convention it should not be parsed to
> suggest actions may have retroactive effects, but instead that the
> action of forfeiture may be taken at any then-present moment.
NTTPF.
_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss
- Prev by Date:
Re: [s-d] [s-b] Tweakity, tweakity, tweakity, tweakity, tweakity,	tweak... 	what's that? Oh.
- Next by Date:
Re: [s-d] [s-b]  Tweakity, tweakity, tweakity, tweakity, tweakity,	tweak... what's that? Oh.
- Previous by thread:
Re: [s-d] [s-b] Tweakity, tweakity, tweakity, tweakity, tweakity,	tweak... 	what's that? Oh.
- Next by thread:
Re: [s-d] [s-b]   Old assignment
- Index(es):