On 12 October 2010 14:47, Geoffrey Spear <geoffsp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 5:27 PM, Jonatan Kilhamn
> <jonatan.kilh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I spend a fee to move myself a position up the list, as many times as I can.
>
> I CFJ on: {{Tiger moved at least one position on the List of
> Succession as a result of the quoted message.}}
>
> Arguments: There has been no PSM report in about a month, and it's not
> reasonable to expect the Herald to do the PSM's job. Without such a
> report, it's doubtful whether any attempt to perform a fee-based
> action "as many times as I can" can be said to be clearly specified.
>
> On the other hand, by R2283, an attempt to perform a fee-based action
> is a self-ratifying claim to have enough ergs to perform the action;
> arguably Tiger should move to the top of the list but be subject to
> punishment for Assaulting the Batteries a number of times.
>
I think that would be a self-ratifying claim that I had as many ergs
as the number of ergs I had, or something equally circular like that.
i didn't say "I move to the top of the list, one position at a time
(some of these might fail)". What I said was intended to be
interpreted as "I spend a fee (...) as many times as I can". On the
other hand, one might argue that it could also be read "I (...) move
one position up on the list, as many times as I can", which is then
limited by anything which limits the number of movements - I'd say
ergs, but failing that reaching the top of the list. I've been taught
that my intended reading is the only one that actually exists given
the commas, but I've learned here that some grammar is way more
ambiguous than I thought before. (I recall something with a "which"
that didn't make sense to me at all, but others claimed was a
plausible interpretation".
--
-Tiger
