From: Anton Cox (A.G.Cox_at_city.ac.uk)
Date: Wed Oct 03 2001 - 08:48:15 PDT
This was meant (I am told) for the list, not just me. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2001 11:33:09 -0400 (EDT) From: Jesse Welton <jwelton_at_pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu> To: Anton Cox <A.G.Cox_at_city.ac.uk> Subject: Re: 169:A (more) Anton Cox wrote: > > Also, if I wanted to be super-pedantic, I could argue that in 169:1 we > were told that > > "hopefully you will all have copies of the board and so you will > know what is going on." > > I dont think that the "hopefully" modified can be reasonably attached > to anything other than the state of ownership of a copy (ie the quote > is of the form "(hopefully X) and so Y"). I do have a copy of the > board, and thus by the rest of the quote "I will know what is going > on." > > If Aron's rule holds, then ever since the start of the round I have > not known what is going on (ie, that there was a counter and that it > was decreasing), which seems to be another way in which his rule > contradicts 169:1. Now this, I don't buy at all. In *this* respect, Aron's rule is no different from any other which revealed a rule of the game. For example, one could have argued that 169:2 was INVALID because we didn't know ever since the beginning of the round that the Safe House protects pieces on it from events caused by other spaces. -Jesse -- Rule Date: 2001-10-03 15:47:33 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Nov 24 2011 - 10:48 PST