DIS: Re: BUS: [FRC] Mantaining Respect for Games and Others

[Publius Scribonius Scholasticus]

I believe that this should have been ruled INVALID as the "us"
references other Counselors and thus should have referenced them with
appropriate respect. Additionally, I ask the court whether INVALID
arguments will be counted towards the 10 non-procedural arguments.
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 11:03 AM Rebecca <edwardostra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I present the following procedural argument to the court:
>
> Your most humble and gracious honour: the ridiculous requirements on us 411
> regarding the f0rm of our arguments are piling up, detracting from the
> quality of our arguments. I therefore ask the court to rule that no further
> such requirements shall be imposed until at least 10 non-procedural
> arguments are made.
>
> On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 12:44 AM, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus <
> p.scribonius.scholasti...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I present the following procedural argument to the court:
> >
> > Your Honor, My Fellow Counselors V.J. Rada and Aris seem to have no
> > respect for the Great and Ancient Nomics. I ask the court that all
> > Counselors SHALL refer to FRC and Agora as the Great and Ancient Nomic
> > of the FRC and the Great and Ancient Nomic of Agora, respectively, in
> > order to show respect not just to persons, but also for the Great and
> > Ancient Nomics. Additionally, your honor, I ask the court that @11
> > Counselors SHALL NOT use "wildly non-standard 5pe11ink" when
> > addressing individuals, Great and Ancient Nomics, or the court, as
> > doing so lessens the respect shown to the addressed person or entity.
> >
>
>
>
> --
> From V.J. Rada