On Wed, 2008-09-24 at 10:07 -0700, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Sep 2008, Ian Kelly wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 10:44 AM, Elliott Hird
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>> Phill is a person, no ratification necessary, unless you're claiming
> >>> that either you're not Phill or you're not a person.
> >>
> >> I am arguing that I am not Phill, yes, that it ratified as Phill, who
> >> didn't
> >> previously exist. I'm not convinced that IS what happened, but that's kind
> >> of
> >> what I'm _hoping_, so to speak.
> >
> > No, you established Phill as an alias for yourself by sending the
> > message and signing it that. When it ratified, it didn't spring Phill
> > into existence. It just ratified that the message was sent by you.
>
> Preferred alternative: It ratified that:
> 1. The message was sent by "Phill"
> 2. We now know that Phill is a non-person.
> 3. Therefore the entity who sent the message is a non-person.
> 4. The entity "Elliot Hird" sent the message.
> 5. Therefore we have ratified that Elliot Hird is a non-person.
> 5. Therefore Elliot Hird cannot be (and can't ever again be) a first-class
> player.
>
> What bribe do I need to make to have these CFJs assigned to me, Murphy?
>
> -Goethe
I doubt that that would get through appeals. Also, probably with Monster
deputisation there are two people you'd have to bribe, nowadays.
--
ais523
