Posted by Rooqweaz on September 28, 2000 at 09:19:00:

In Reply to: Keep kicking that dead horse (text) posted by Clown Bake on September 28, 2000 at 07:06:50:

> Now I do not get where you are going with the negative and positive propositions but I really do not see the point in it. You should have a role if your character is doing something "wierd" and it is a good idea to have a role if you are playing a normal character.

> Stop trying to compare apples with oranges especially when you only have a barrel of apples.

ok, I will try to demonstrate the structure to make it easier for you.

No imms agree you only need a role when you do something wierd
=> so there are case when: you need a role and you don't something wierd.
(for example, when imm don't know you., you can add more cases)
=> does not mean you need a role in every cases
nor it is good idea to have a role when you are playing a normal char
(ok, maybe it is better you have, but it is not what WAS SAID)

about negative/positive
simply two predicats ".not." or positive

Cyradia: .NOT. truth - "you need a role only when..."
me truth - "you need .. when..."

and I DO NOT COMPARE
even more, I SAID YOU CAN"T COMPARE these two propositions
like PROUD BLADE DID.
clear?

Follow Ups:

• Crack is bad. Cyradia(IMM) 14:17:55 9/28/2000 (0)
• Say What? N/T battleboy 11:13:36 9/28/2000 (0)
• I give up. I condemn you to Forum Search hell. (n/t) Proud Blade(VIP) 09:58:57 9/28/2000 (0)

Post a Followup