Ed Murphy wrote:
Eris wrote:
On 9/26/07, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
b) Any other votes are unprotected. The vote collector CAN
invalidate or change an unprotected vote by announcement
when e resolves the decision.
Actually, I'm just tired of people
Eris wrote:
On 9/26/07, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
b) Any other votes are unprotected. The vote collector CAN
invalidate or change an unprotected vote by announcement
when e resolves the decision.
Actually, I'm just tired of people voting 31415926xF
On 9/26/07, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> b) Any other votes are unprotected. The vote collector CAN
> invalidate or change an unprotected vote by announcement
> when e resolves the decision.
SCAM SCAM SCAM?
--
Taral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Please let me k
root wrote:
Suber
Michael
Kelly, Steve
Maud
Chuck
Goethe
Blob
Sherlock
Andre
Each known celestial body constantly exerts upon each other
known celestial body a gravitational force equal to the product
of the masses of the two bodies divided by the s
root wrote:
5236 D1 3AFO Ministers Without Portfolio
AGAINST (Murphy, did you intend for this to repeal R2019 immediately
after amending it?)
No, I forgot that the proto was re-using that rule rather than
creating a new one. Will fix in the next version.
comex, as for your "ge
The following is a proto-agreement.
Suber (Mass=10^6): primary star of the Agoran system
The name of this contract is the Celestial Manifest. It is a
list of all the celestial bodies of the Agoran system that are
known to the Agoran Astronomical Society. If Suber is ever
On 9/26/07, Ian Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> When this proposal is adopted, the Goddess Eris gains one Blue VC.
Tasty!
--
Taral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you."
-- Unknown
Proto: Overturned sentencing fix
Amend Rule 2126 (Voting Credits) by replacing the text reading:
(-B) A player who is recused from a judicial case with cause
loses one Blue VC. A player who is the prior judge in an
appeal case where a judgement other than AFFIRM is as
On Wednesday 26 September 2007, Taral wrote:
> On 9/22/07, Taral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 9/22/07, comex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > I would prefer reassign :)
> >
> > Why?
>
> We are running out of time. comex, can you please articulate your
> reasons for preferring REASSIGN over REM
On 9/22/07, Taral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 9/22/07, comex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I would prefer reassign :)
>
> Why?
We are running out of time. comex, can you please articulate your
reasons for preferring REASSIGN over REMAND? I prefer REMAND unless
there's something wrong with the
On 9/26/07, Geoffrey Spear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 9/26/07, Ian Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I once again intend to cause the panel to judge REMAND with the
> > arguments I've previously proposed.
>
> I consent to this judgement again. (But does this intention need to be
> announced
On 9/24/07, Zefram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I hereby recuse the judicial panel of BobTHJ, root, and Wooble from CFJ
> 1711a. I hereby assign the judicial panel of comex, root, and Wooble
> as judge of CFJ 1711a.
>
> Detail: http://zenith.homelinux.net/cotc/viewcase.php?cfj=1711a
>
> ==
12 matches
Mail list logo
