Rule 6

[Borachio]

Should Classical Hero allow Rule 6: No rule is more important than another and no rule is cast in stone , apart from rule 6?

I forgot to include:

1. don't know
2. both
3. neither
4. both and neither
5. etc

If you require a new poll, let me know.

 

[azzaman333]

May as well. What's the worst that could happen.

 

[Borachio]

This is all nonsense, as I'm sure you know.

@azzaman333 I don't know.

 

[rugbyLEAGUEfan]

Between countless sub forums and threads doing my head in , I humbly request that you simply post rule 6 without me having to navigate the other one .

 

[Borachio]

Sorry! Excellent point.

 

[Silurian]

What about the other rules.

 

[Borachio]

I'm afraid there's nothing you can do about the other rules until you have settled this one. Logically speaking (although my logic isn't hot - ask a logician, there's bound to be one about the place. Morally speaking is a whole different ball park. Not in my field at all. I've forgotten the field's name. Is it ethics? For theological questions consult Plotinus?). But feel free to express any view you have on the subject.

 

[Camikaze]

I feel I've missed something, because what's this got to do with classical_hero?

 

[Borachio]

CH said that Rule 6 was logically flawed. And I agreed.

Actually CH said it was recursively defined and therefore invalid. It's in the thread just look there. (if you can) I'm feeling a bit frazed or I'd fetch it for you.

Akkon888 might know how to sort it out.

So, and this is probably labouring the point, no further proposal(s) can be made to this model, without some resolution of the issue: if Rule 6 is recursively defined Proposal(s) must also be recursively defined (actually you should look at the thread and see for yourself).

Unless I am completely muddled (which seems very likely to me).

I vote we just abandon the whole thing and let it sink out of view.

So, don't vote, i.e. vote by not voting.

 

[Tee Kay]

There is no Rule 6.

 

[Borachio]

What? Has it gone? Oer.

If there is no Rule 6, how can it be logically inconsistent?

edit: no, it's still there.

Help! I can't do logic.

Let this thing sink outta sight.

 

[classical_hero]

She said that Rule 6 was logically flawed. And I agreed with her.

Actually she said it was recursively defined and therefore invalid. It's in the thread just look there. (if you can) I'm feeling a bit frazed or I'd fetch it for you.

Akkon888 might know how to sort it out.

So, and this is probably labouring the point, no further proposal(s) can be made to this model, without some resolution of the issue: if Rule 6 is recursively defined Proposal(s) must also be recursively defined (actually you should look at the thread and see for yourself).

Unless I am completely muddled (which seems very likely to me).

I vote we just abandon the whole thing and let it sink out of view.

So, don't vote, i.e. vote by not voting.

Just because I have a female avatar does not make me female.

 

[Borachio]

Yes I realise that and I have edited my post accordingly just now as you were posting. I suggest you amend yours accordingly. (You do look female though - you're not implying there's anything wrong with being female, are you? I myself am largely female, apart from the bits of me which are not.)

 

[MajKira]

only females allowed to use female avas
Rule 6

 

[Mr. Dictator]

Just because I have a female avatar does not make me female.

Doesn't the bible frown upon dressing oneself up as the opposite gender?

 

[Borachio]

Well if it does it shouldn't. I'm perplexed by the fashion fascistas.

Banning socks and sandals. (might look daft, though I think it doesn't - I quite like those Japanese wooden flipflops and the socks with a big toe) The Romans built Hadrians Wall wearing socks and hobnailed sandals. (you might think I've made that up - check it out)

Making a grown man wear a collar and tie.

Making anyone wear a collar and tie.

(Good grief. I'm beginning to sound like Reasons to be Cynical.)

 

[Mr. Dictator]

Well if it does it shouldn't. I'm perplexed by the fashion fascistas.

Banning socks and sandals.

Socks and sandals are not ok.

As to the rest, when in doubt, "Suit up!"

 

[Borachio]

I humbly request that you justify your statements.

 

[Mr. Dictator]

I humbly request that you justify your statements.

I can't, but next time I go to a party, I'll get the ladies to write down a few testimonials

 

[Borachio]

only females allowed to use female avas
Rule 6

This should be Rule 8; if we were permitted to proceed. At the moment we have an existential impasse over Rule 6. Hence the poll. Thank you for expressing your opinion. Please do not hesitate to bring it up again at the next let's suggest stuff. Please do not hesitate to make any further suggestions as and when they occur to you.