On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 4:43 PM, comex <[email protected]> wrote:
> Destroying something is not altering it.  While it's possible to word
> destruction as a change to 'existence', saying this is awkward and
> unnatural.  You wouldn't usually call 'existence' an aspect of
> something.

I call for judgement on the statement:
* Rule 2140 exists.

Arguments: See above.

Reply via email to