Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Judgement and CFJ

2012-07-06 Thread comexk
Sent from my iPhone On Jul 6, 2012, at 4:46 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > I think ais523 was right on the money in 2906. > It basically reduces to "'This statement is UNDECIDABLE' is incorrect." > (If it is TRUE that it is undecidable, then Rule 2367 makes it incorrect. > But if it is incorre

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Judgement and CFJ

2012-07-06 Thread Kerim Aydin
On Fri, 6 Jul 2012, omd wrote: > On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 2:18 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > > > > >> On Jul 6, 2012, at 7:00 AM, Ed Murphy wrote: > >> > 3240: UNDECIDABLE > >> > > >> > I accept the caller's arguments. Ozymandias has not won the game, so > >> > neither TRUE nor FALSE is appropriat

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Judgement and CFJ

2012-07-06 Thread omd
On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 2:18 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote: > > >> On Jul 6, 2012, at 7:00 AM, Ed Murphy wrote: >> > 3240: UNDECIDABLE >> > >> > I accept the caller's arguments. Ozymandias has not won the game, so >> > neither TRUE nor FALSE is appropriate. >> > >> > CFJ: It would be ILLEGAL for a play

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Judgement and CFJ

2012-07-06 Thread Kerim Aydin
> On Jul 6, 2012, at 7:00 AM, Ed Murphy wrote: > > 3240: UNDECIDABLE > > > > I accept the caller's arguments. Ozymandias has not won the game, so > > neither TRUE nor FALSE is appropriate. > > > > CFJ: It would be ILLEGAL for a player to publish a message whose body > > consisted solely of

DIS: Re: BUS: Judgement and CFJ

2012-07-06 Thread comexk
Rule 2367. Sent from my iPhone On Jul 6, 2012, at 7:00 AM, Ed Murphy wrote: > 3240: UNDECIDABLE > > I accept the caller's arguments. Ozymandias has not won the game, so > neither TRUE nor FALSE is appropriate. > > CFJ: It would be ILLEGAL for a player to publish a message whose body > cons

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Judgement and CFJ

2012-07-06 Thread Elliott Hird
On 6 July 2012 15:14, Ed Murphy wrote: > Mind you, nothing prevents Ozymandias (or anyone else) from CFJing on > the same statement - though, if one instance has already been judged > UNDECIDABLE, then further instances might be judged "IRRELEVANT, points > out nothing new". Wait, we got rid of t

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Judgement and CFJ

2012-07-06 Thread Ed Murphy
ehird wrote: On 6 July 2012 15:00, Ed Murphy wrote: CFJ: It would be ILLEGAL for a player to publish a message whose body consisted solely of the text "I intend, without objection, to ratify the statement of CFJ 3240.". Oh, sneaky... Very nice. Mind you, nothing prevents Ozymandias (or an

DIS: Re: BUS: Judgement and CFJ

2012-07-06 Thread Elliott Hird
On 6 July 2012 15:00, Ed Murphy wrote: > CFJ: It would be ILLEGAL for a player to publish a message whose body > consisted solely of the text "I intend, without objection, to ratify > the statement of CFJ 3240.". Oh, sneaky... Very nice.