 We’ll call the third response-type restriction. Restriction approaches preserve the package-delivery model, but don’t uniformly disallow interestingly self-locating doxastic states as objects of communication. Restrictionists take the fact that assertions of “my pants are on fire” don’t lead to credulous addressees getting into the “my pants are on fire” doxastic state to be a reason to think that the English sentence doesn’t conventionally communicate the self-locating doxastic state. But they don’t go on to impose a blanket ban on self-locating doxastic states as objects of communication, and they allow that other sentences might conventionally encode other self-locating doxastic states as objects of package-delivery-model communication. So while the “I am Mike Titelbaum” and “I am the greatest” doxastic states are more-or-less uniformly disastrous as objects of package-delivery communication, package-delivery communication of the “we are in Amsterdam”, “it’s getting hot in here”, and “that’s Gilmore Lake” states, for example, would quite frequently be unproblematic, and even quite useful.