On Sat, Jul 5, 2008 at 8:34 AM, ihope <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 5, 2008 at 2:33 AM, Quazie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 7:47 PM, ihope <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> I agree to the following: "This is a pledge. Guvf vf n cyrqtr. Vina
>>> Ubcr PKKIVV FUNYY fngvfsl gur Jvaavat Pbaqvgvba bs Zhfvpvnafuvc nf
>>> fbba nf cbffvoyr."
>>>
>>> I initiate a CFJ on the statement 'The contract Ivan Hope just agreed
>>> to is a pledge because it states "Guvf vf n cyrqtr.", which is "This
>>> is a pledge." in rot13.'
>>
>> I think that the CFJ should be judged FALSE. The pledge is a pledge
>> because it says it's a pledge in non-rot13.
>
> Yes, but does the "Guvf vf n cyrqtr." also make it a pledge? (Perhaps
> I should have said "Guvf vf n ybpngvba." instead.)
>
> --Ivan Hope CXXVII
>
It seems irrelevant. If I made a pledge that said {this is a pledge,
this is a pledge}, it doesn't matter which of the 'this is a pledge'
statements made it a pledge, because one of them did.
