thread: 2009-07-13 : How About Some Q and A
On 2009-07-16, Callan wrote:
Hi Vincent,
What you might call an agreement, I might not. Unless your going to tell me what I should and shouldn't see as an agreement, those outcomes don't contradict me. They don't meet my standards for being an agreement. That doesn't prove anything in a general sense, but for my particular case there is no lumpley principle going on in those outcomes. People aren't leaving the table, I'll grant - that doesn't mean agreements happening, by my standards...I think I had this conversation with Guy Shalev, once. Or would you say if you call it an agreement, then I have to call it that too - you don't need me to agree it is an agreement?
For example, by my standards if the GM gave all the players a thump with a stick until they shut up about the smelly chamberlain, that isn't agreement. Giving that example because by your standards, it probably isn't agreement either and we probably share common ground on atleast that. Gads, I hope so, anyway.
I think you shouldn't change your examples - playing around with presumed standing agreements, as you put it, is something important to examine. Something I for one would never have guessed otherwise.
