sneak in the word "subtle", they'll never see it coming On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 4:03 AM, Josh T <draconicdarkn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> To put it in other words, "If you were assigning words/phrases that other > people have to sneak into proposals without arousing other people's > suspicion, what do you think are reasonable choices?" > > The idea is that *I* have an idea of what I intend to assign as > words/phrases, but this might not be what people expect, and I'm doing a > reality check. (Hint: There is a reason why the contract is called what it > is) > > 天火狐 > > On 26 October 2017 at 21:46, ATMunn <iamingodsa...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I'm not really sure what is meant by the first question. >> >> On 10/26/2017 9:34 PM, Josh T wrote: >> >>> For the purposes to provide everyone involved with a fun game, I would >>> like to ask those interested to partake in a voluntary anonymous survey so >>> I have an idea of what people are expecting. I will probably be making >>> word/phrase lists on Saturday after I resolve my intent to amend the >>> contract so that it is usable and pull / update that list as people make or >>> concede the wager. The survey can be found here: >>> https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSf1aKvKLkD-kzBPrgBJ >>> aRyl32nA028tjNlZXNCKvu35Vw5E8Q/viewform >>> >>> 天火狐 >>> >>> On 26 October 2017 at 00:25, VJ Rada <vijar...@gmail.com <mailto: >>> vijar...@gmail.com>> wrote: >>> >>> I become a party to the Order >>> >>> On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 3:21 PM, Josh T <draconicdarkn...@gmail.com >>> <mailto:draconicdarkn...@gmail.com>> wrote: >>> > NttPF. >>> > >>> > I posted the intent to amend. I'm heading to bed though, so if I >>> missed >>> > things let me know and I'll amend to fix it ASAP. >>> > >>> > 天火狐 >>> > >>> > On 26 October 2017 at 00:19, VJ Rada <vijar...@gmail.com <mailto: >>> vijar...@gmail.com>> wrote: >>> >> >>> >> I become a party to the Order. >>> >> >>> >> I will wager if you change the party/participant thing. >>> >> >>> >> On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 2:59 PM, Nic Evans <nich...@gmail.com >>> <mailto:nich...@gmail.com>> wrote: >>> >> > I become a party of Order of the Occult Hand. I like the idea >>> >> > tremendously but there's two qualms: >>> >> > >>> >> > * Party and participant are used interchangeably when they are >>> in fact >>> >> > not. Party includes the proprietor, participant does not. This >>> leads, >>> >> > either intentionally or accidentally, to the bigger issue: >>> >> > >>> >> > * The proprietor appears to be able to look for the occult >>> hand, >>> >> > potentially making this a giant scam. >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> -- >>> >> From V.J. Rada >>> > >>> > >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> From V.J. Rada >>> >>> >>> >
