Re: DIS: Re: BUS: It's a lot like unresolvable precedence

2008-10-18 Thread ihope
On Sat, Oct 18, 2008 at 12:43 AM, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ivan Hope wrote: >> To add to the confusion, I now wish to be known as Warrigal. >> >> --Ivan Hope CXXVII > > That's going to be a bit confusing. Mind if we call you New-Bruce > for short? Yes, because New-Bruce is not short

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: It's a lot like unresolvable precedence

2008-10-17 Thread Ed Murphy
Ivan Hope wrote: > On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 10:42 PM, Geoffrey Spear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 4:46 PM, ihope <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> Arguments: No rule said I didn't have a full >>> set of ribbons, so it was up to me to decide that I did. >> Rule 2199 says owners

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: It's a lot like unresolvable precedence

2008-10-17 Thread ihope
On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 10:42 PM, Geoffrey Spear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 4:46 PM, ihope <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Arguments: No rule said I didn't have a full >> set of ribbons, so it was up to me to decide that I did. > > Rule 2199 says ownership of ribbons is limi

DIS: Re: BUS: It's a lot like unresolvable precedence

2008-10-17 Thread Geoffrey Spear
On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 4:46 PM, ihope <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Arguments: No rule said I didn't have a full > set of ribbons, so it was up to me to decide that I did. Rule 2199 says ownership of ribbons is limited to players. You're not a player, ergo you cannot own ribbons.

DIS: Re: BUS: It's a lot like unresolvable precedence

2008-10-17 Thread ihope
On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 4:55 PM, Ian Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 2:46 PM, ihope <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I have a full set of ribbons. Therefore, I destroy one ribbon of each >> color in my possession, satisfying the Winning Condition of >> Renaissance. >> >> I C