On 10/23/2011 06:40 PM, omd wrote: > On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 4:04 PM, John Smith <spamba...@yahoo.com> > wrote: >> I suggest that a Player file a Motion to Reconsider CfJ 3109. >> Among other objections, the judgment is inconsistent with the >> judge's arguments. All information necessary to render a judgment >> of TRUE or FALSE is public, and the statement makes precise sense >> even after determining that the document "Victory Condition of >> Being Bucky" is not a Victory Condition. > > Mr. Smith, the statement is nonsensical because referring to the > Victory Condition of Being Bucky, without quotes, implies that there > is such an entity that is a Victory Condition.
A question that presupposes a falsehood may be nonsensical, but a statement that presupposes a falsehood is simply false.
