From pycyn@aol.com Sat Mar 04 10:01:57 2000 Received: (qmail 9159 invoked from network); 4 Mar 2000 18:02:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m4.onelist.org with QMQP; 4 Mar 2000 18:02:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-d09.mx.aol.com) (205.188.157.41) by mta1.onelist.com with SMTP; 4 Mar 2000 18:02:12 -0000 Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-d09.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v25.3.) id h.67.20af34a (3856) for ; Sat, 4 Mar 2000 13:02:07 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <67.20af34a.25f2a99f@aol.com> Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2000 13:02:07 EST Subject: Re: [lojban] Final Clubs oops To: lojban@onelist.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows sub 30 X-eGroups-From: Pycyn@aol.com From: pycyn@aol.com Well, the definition isn't a real definition (maybe) except in the context where there is a set of final clubs. Then, of course, the definition is just fine. It originated, no doubt, from the selection of one maximally preclusive set of clubs as the final set. But once that choice was made -- however it was made -- the result follows automatically. One could even add new final clubs by simply having them preclude all the current final clubs. I gather that Xorxes' remaining problem is to find a way to specify how that original choice was made, but that does not seem to be in the definition, only in the history. This is unsatisfying intellectually, but works for the real world (or wherever Yale happens to be). pc