Judgement 234:9 VALID +2 Style

From: Aron Wall (aron_at_wall.org)
Date: Sat Apr 09 2005 - 19:47:34 PDT

• Next message: Quazie: "234:10 and sorry ed for sending it just to you at first"
• Previous message: Ed Murphy: "234:9"
• In reply to: Ed Murphy: "234:9"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

Ed Murphy wrote:

> The tenth valid rule of this round ought not to be confused with the
> tenth rule of this round, which will be coming up Very Soon Now.  If
> there is one at all, that is.
>
> The tenth rule of this round shall, if valid, explain at least one
> method by which the TVRotR could satisfy the restriction in 234:3.

Barely on time!

I see no Validity problems with this rule, which carefully avoids
several possible pitfalls.

+1 for finally restricting another rule besides the TVRotR.
+1 for another reason, which I shall not at this time reveal.

Aron Wall

• Next message: Quazie: "234:10 and sorry ed for sending it just to you at first"
• Previous message: Ed Murphy: "234:9"
• In reply to: Ed Murphy: "234:9"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Nov 24 2011 - 10:48 PST