This doesn't seem like it addresses the issue of Ambassador Abuse, although it wasn't mentioned in the CfJ itself. As far as I can tell, if Ambassador Abuse works, it would be required to be at the same time, and is there any reason that same time != same message?
On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 1:41 PM, Benjamin Schultz <ben.dov.schu...@gmail.com > wrote: > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 1:33 PM, Jonathan Rouillard < > jonathan.rouill...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Detail: http://cotc.psychose.ca/viewcase.php?cfj=3358 >> >> ============================== CFJ 3358 ============================== >> >> It is LEGAL for the Clerk of the Courts to award Yaks to Walker >> without additional awards or transfers in the same message. >> >> ======================================================================== >> > > Why wouldn't it be? I am aware of no reason that Yak awards or transfers > must be batched into one message. It is a good idea, I admit, as it > reduces the waste of sending out separate emails for each award or transfer. > > So, trivially TRUE. > -- > OscarMeyr
