Re: [s-d] [s-b] [Oracle] CFI 101/0

[James Baxter <jebaxter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> Date: Sat, 19 Dec 2009 23:57:09 -0500
> From: teucer@xxxxxxxxx
> To: spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [s-d] [s-b] [Oracle] CFI 101/0
> 
> On Sat, Dec 19, 2009 at 11:50 PM, 0x44 <bnomic@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > I answer CFI 101 SURE_WHY_NOT
> 
> This is an obvious synonym of "True," but the use of obvious synonyms
> is not currently sanctioned by the ruleset.
> 
> I will state for the reference of others that I believe 0x44 has ruled
> that this is True, and the clock is therefore on (and has been since
> the end of the emergency, making my previous report accurate -
> technically, it's a report about the gamestate once the clock is back
> on), but I'm not 100% sure. I don't care to CFI the matter at the
> moment, though.



I'll accept that the judgement is true but rule 41/0 states that one of four responses must be given with an argument and I'm not seeing that from 0x44's answer so e still has to give a proper answer to avoid being recused. 		 	   		  
_________________________________________________________________
View your other email accounts from your Hotmail inbox. Add them now.
http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/186394592/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss