Re: [s-d] [s-b] Consultation 197 on I Propose Synonyms

[Jamie Dallaire <bad.leprechaun@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 10:14 AM, comex <comexk@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 1:09 AM, Jamie Dallaire
> <bad.leprechaun@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Note that despite 5E13's requirement that the Action of Submitting be
> taken
> > in a PF message to successfully submit a Game Document, game custom has
> long
> > been to disregard this (I'm not sure how long that particular requirement
> > has been around, however). For example, some players routinely submit
> > Proposals that consist of the entire text of a message with a title like
> > "Proposal: Hubba Gubba". These do not explicitly purport to Submit a Game
> > Document, but do fulfill the 5E13 requirement that the Game Document be
> > fully described.
>
> The difference, I think, is that with such a method of submission, the
> text of the proposal is still certain.  If I say I propose that a rule
> be created with text "X", what is the text of the proposal?  "Create a
> rule with text 'X'"?  "Let a rule be created with text 'X'"?


There are certain Xs for which that mode of submission is highly
inappropriate, as I pointed out in my example, or as in your example too. I
was just saying there could be potential Xs for which the document text is
unambiguous. e.g.

subject: Proposal: Hubba Gubba

body: blablablablabla

vs.

body: I propose: blablablabla

It's pretty clear that the game document text there is blablablabla, and we
can have unnamed proposals. I'm not saying it's a good way of submitting,
just that there are instances where it could work.



ehird said:

> I Answer NO.
>

INCONSISTENT; {X} includes the {...} quotes, the X
is the placeholder.

Fair enough. Didn't realize you necessarily meant to include the curlies. I
guess I misread the question.

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