Being Peter
Let's say that we're implementing a particularly irrational and volatile character. Some of the time she remains composed; some of the time she reacts with unexpected vehemence for reasons only partly related to what was said.
Moreover, her responses are divided between successful and failing outcomes, where success indicates that she's not too upset and failure means that she is distraught; we use this to determine how the rest of the room reacts.
Here we want Inform to consult every appropriate attitude rule until it gets to some answer; if an attitude rule does not provide a result, the default 'no outcome' will mean that we go on to the next rule, and so on.
Now, as we saw, the 'no outcome' result will never be returned and printed as Maggie's reaction, precisely because it is "no outcome". Therefore, we provide a final attitude rule which will give her a default response to all statements:
Test me with "ask maggie about love / ask maggie about income / take off hat / ask maggie about income".
The company is assembled here for champagne. Most of it, anyway: Mary is on the phone to her babysitter, Roger is keeping her anxious company, and Carol doesn't drink. But everyone else.
You can see Maggie here.
>(Testing.)
>[1] ask maggie about love
Everyone waits to see what the reaction will be: she gets angry.
Everyone is pointedly silent.
>[2] ask maggie about income
Everyone waits to see what the reaction will be: she gets angry.
Everyone is pointedly silent.
>[3] take off hat
You take off the top hat.
>[4] ask maggie about income
Everyone waits to see what the reaction will be: she is only mildly annoyed.
There is general relief.
There are plenty of contexts where we might want named outcomes for clarity but not want to print the results literally afterward.