Consider the following premises. For all x_8, x_8 is not a sailor. For all x_8, if x_8 were a janitor, then x_8 is playing a game. For all x_8, if x_8 plays a game, then x_8 is a sailor. For all x_8, if x_8 were a sailor, then x_8 is bored. There is at least one x_8 for which if x_8 were bored, then x_8 is a janitor. Can we infer the following from them? If we can, name the inference rule being used: For all x_8, x_8 is a janitor.
 From the fact that for all x_8, if x_8 were a sailor, then x_8 is bored, and that there is at least one x_8 for which if x_8 were bored, then x_8 is a janitor we can infer that there is at least one x_8 for which if x_8 were a sailor, then x_8 is a janitor via existential transitivity. From the fact that for all x_8, if x_8 were a janitor, then x_8 is playing a game, and that for all x_8, if x_8 plays a game, then x_8 is a sailor we can infer that for all x_8, if x_8 were a janitor, then x_8 is a sailor via universal transitivity. From the fact that there is at least one x_8 for which if x_8 were a sailor, then x_8 is a janitor, and that for all x_8, if x_8 were a janitor, then x_8 is a sailor we can infer that there is at least one x_8 for which x_8 is a sailor if and only if x_8 is a janitor via existential biconditional introduction. Finally, from the fact that there is at least one x_8 for which x_8 is a sailor if and only if x_8 is a janitor, and that for all x_8, x_8 is not a sailor we can infer that there is at least one x_8 for which x_8 is not a janitor via existential biconditional elimination, which contradicts that For all x_8, x_8 is a janitor. Therefore, the answer is no.