|
|
|||||||
| View Poll Results: yes, but how much have you lost playing poker during your lifetime? | |||
| Less than 50k |
   
|
16 | 32.65% |
| 50 - 100k |
  
|
1 | 2.04% |
| 100 - 200k |
  
|
2 | 4.08% |
| 200 - 300k |
  
|
0 | 0% |
| 300 -500k |
  
|
0 | 0% |
| 500k - 1mm |
  
|
3 | 6.12% |
| 1mm-2mm |
|
0 | 0% |
| 2mm-3mm |
|
0 | 0% |
| 3mm-4mm |
|
0 | 0% |
| 4mm+ |
|
27 | 55.10% |
| Voters: 49. You may not vote on this poll | |||
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#25
08-24-2007, 11:25 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: For moral relativists
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] What does Jerry's agreement have to do with consistency? Seems like you want to use consistency as your way of saying any moral system that does not allow individual choice doesn't meet your criteria, but you don't want to come out and say that. [/ QUOTE ] If rules *imposed* upon a participant can be changed at the whim of other participants, the system is almost certainly doomed to be inconsistent. EDIT: further, your phrasing indicates you think I went about this process in the opposite order that I actually did. I started with the preferences, then found systems that met those, rather than starting with a chosen system then trying to find preferences that would select it and select against others. [/ QUOTE ] Nobody changed the rules in my scenario. [/ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] According to our town charter, this is a violation. [/ QUOTE ] Was the town charter chisled into the monolith? 
|
|
|
Threaded Mode