On Thu, 20 Nov 2008, comex wrote:
> So you're arguing that increasing a voting limit means increasing
> caste which is secured? That seems like a stretch to me... "in X case
> the voting limit is caste [in other cases the voting limit is
> something else]" + "increase voting limit" = "increase caste"?
"X value is defined as what Y is" does not imply that Y value is defined
as whatever X is. It's meaningless to ask what happens when X changes
by a method outside of changing Y, as X by definition can't take a value
outside Y.
I'm saying in mathematical definitional terms VL ~ {Caste} by definition.
VL is defined as a number in the range {Caste}. Changing Caste changes
VL's allowed range and VL can't be changed outside of the range {Caste}.
That's different than saying changing VL changes Caste.
-G.
