On Sun, Oct 26, 2008 at 1:00 AM, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Revisiting my B.N. thesis (11/29/07) on partnerships, I've identified
> the following general models of partnership control. Can anyone think
> of any others?
Neat divisions! I'm not familiar with Agora's partnerships yet,
On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 22:00, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Revisiting my B.N. thesis (11/29/07) on partnerships, I've identified
> the following general models of partnership control. Can anyone think
> of any others?
>
> * Consentual (e.g. Pineapple, Human Point Two)
> * Capitalist (
I wrote:
> Proposal: Udder chaos
> (AI = 3, please)
>
> Upon the adoption of this proposal, the following document is ratified:
>
> Other than the alleged actions listed below, no actions legally
> significant to Agora were performed via #really-a-cow.
>
> [All times are UTC]
Here's my take o
Revisiting my B.N. thesis (11/29/07) on partnerships, I've identified
the following general models of partnership control. Can anyone think
of any others?
* Consentual (e.g. Pineapple, Human Point Two)
* Capitalist (e.g. Primo, Reformed Bank)
* Unilateral (e.g. AFO)
* Democratic (e.g. Per
ehird wrote:
> Full disclosure. Both I and ais have root on the serv in q.
Gratuituous arguments:
This may be covered by the precedent of CFJ 1719.
On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 4:31 PM, Benjamin Schultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I provide the long headers of the quoted message as evidence. I compared
> the headers to a recent message from ais523 and from ehird; the routing
> information did not match either one. However, I may have misread the
On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 3:05 PM, Elliott Hird
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 25 Oct 2008, at 21:19, Ian Kelly wrote:
>
>> FOR x 5. Down with the PBA!
>
>
> Damn that evil thing with the qualities of not being incredibly exploitable
> re: rates!
>
> Seriously, what's wrong with it?
Nothing in par
On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 3:24 PM, Geoffrey Spear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 4:19 PM, Ian Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> 5807 O 1 1.0 comex Paul Wellstone Mental Health and Addiction
>>> Equity Act of 2008
>> FOR x 5. Down with the PBA!
>
> An AI 1 prop
Full disclosure. Both I and ais have root on the serv in q.
On 25/10/2008, Benjamin Schultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Oct 25, 2008, at 1:16 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> I spend E G# B to increase ehird's caste to Delta, unless this would
>> violate the Note Exchange agreement. (I don't t
root wrote:
> I submit the following proposal titled "Secure contract adjustments" (AI=2):
While you're at it, you may as well replace "one or more of any of"
with something less stomach-churning.
On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 4:19 PM, Ian Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> 5807 O 1 1.0 comex Paul Wellstone Mental Health and Addiction
>> Equity Act of 2008
> FOR x 5. Down with the PBA!
An AI 1 proposal can't amend a contract anyway.
On 25 Oct 2008, at 21:19, Ian Kelly wrote:
FOR x 5. Down with the PBA!
Damn that evil thing with the qualities of not being incredibly
exploitable re: rates!
Seriously, what's wrong with it?
--
ehird
On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 12:07 PM, warrigal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 1:16 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I spend E G# B to increase ehird's caste to Delta, unless this would
>> violate the Note Exchange agreement. (I don't think it does, but this
>> is from memory.)
>
On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 10:16 AM, Geoffrey Spear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> 5818 D 1 3.0 comex Require Clear Announcements
> AGAINST
Why?
On 25 Oct 2008, at 19:07, warrigal wrote:
Claim of error: The above was actually sent by ehird. Thank you for
pointing out that a fake From: address was used.
It absolutely was not, as e said e was going to do it privately on
IRC beforehand.
--
ehird
On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 1:16 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I spend E G# B to increase ehird's caste to Delta, unless this would
> violate the Note Exchange agreement. (I don't think it does, but this
> is from memory.)
>
> Also, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> has stopped working again; this message is
> b
On 25 Oct 2008, at 18:16, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I spend E G# B to increase ehird's caste to Delta, unless this would
violate the Note Exchange agreement. (I don't think it does, but this
is from memory.)
Oh, you taunter...
--
ehird
On 25 Oct 2008, at 16:04, warrigal wrote:
E has more of a vote, if eir votes are AGAINST.
But in other cases...
--
ehird
warrigal wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 7:01 AM, Elliott Hird
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On 25 Oct 2008, at 02:37, warrigal wrote:
>>> If you join the Llama Party, you can force BobTHJ and me to vote
>>> AGAINST (unless we're both FOR it, in which case you'll be voting
>>> AGAINST and we'll
On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 7:01 AM, Elliott Hird
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 25 Oct 2008, at 02:37, warrigal wrote:
>>
>> If you join the Llama Party, you can force BobTHJ and me to vote
>> AGAINST (unless we're both FOR it, in which case you'll be voting
>> AGAINST and we'll be voting FOR).
>
> I
On 25 Oct 2008, at 02:37, warrigal wrote:
If you join the Llama Party, you can force BobTHJ and me to vote
AGAINST (unless we're both FOR it, in which case you'll be voting
AGAINST and we'll be voting FOR).
If e joins the Llama Party e has less of a vote.
--
ehird
21 matches
Mail list logo
