Goethe wrote:
> Appeals Results of 2282a and 2322a were in error. By the new appeals court
> Rule 911 adopted 12-Dec-08, the result of a failed consensus or time clock
> runout is a platonic REMAND:
> If the time period ends with no majority judgement, the panel
> acts to deliver a ju
Goethe wrote:
> Appeals Results of 2282a and 2322a were in error. By the new appeals court
> Rule 911 adopted 12-Dec-08, the result of a failed consensus or time clock
> runout is a platonic REMAND:
> If the time period ends with no majority judgement, the panel
> acts to deliver a ju
On Tue, 3 Feb 2009, Charles Reiss wrote:
> I suppose the outcome isn't too bad if this is not treated as a
> special case, a corporation owning a majority stake in itself would
> effectively lock out action expect by means allowed by the
> corporation's contract (assuming we allow that mechanism;
On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 18:00, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> On Tue, 3 Feb 2009, Charles Reiss wrote:
>> Which reminds me, one needs to consider how to deal with a corporation
>> owning its own shares.
>
> Manumission?
When real corporations do this, it's to decrease the number of shares
in circulation (
On Tue, 3 Feb 2009, Charles Reiss wrote:
> Which reminds me, one needs to consider how to deal with a corporation
> owning its own shares.
Manumission?
On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 17:12, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> On Tue, 3 Feb 2009, Charles Reiss wrote:
>>>d. Key Power: *Any* shareholder (member or non member) may act
>>>on behalf of the corporation with the support of [shareholders
>>>adding up to a majority] Corporations CANNOT a
On Tue, 3 Feb 2009, Ed Murphy wrote:
> I pledge (any player CAN terminate this pledge if it has existed
> for at least two weeks) to either (a) resolve all four of these
> intents in the above order and get FRContest point awards caught
> up between intents #2 and #3, or (b) not resolve any of the
On Tue, 3 Feb 2009, Charles Reiss wrote:
>>d. Key Power: *Any* shareholder (member or non member) may act
>>on behalf of the corporation with the support of [shareholders
>>adding up to a majority] Corporations CANNOT and SHALL NOT
>>forbid non-members from so acting
On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 14:15, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
> Proto-proto: Zombies Incorporated.
>
> [The following would take enacting several mechanisms; e.g. shares,
> auctions, maybe debts. Therefore soliciting expressions of interest
> before continuing].
>
> 1. Cleanup: All inactive, non-participa
Proto-proto: Zombies Incorporated.
[The following would take enacting several mechanisms; e.g. shares,
auctions, maybe debts. Therefore soliciting expressions of interest
before continuing].
1. Cleanup: All inactive, non-participating, or "scammy" partnerships
are deregistered. "Useful
ais523 wrote:
> Oh well, peer pressure it is. (Could someone explain?) I'll change the
> patent title, but not the proposal title.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cassandra
On Tue, 3 Feb 2009, Alex Smith wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-02-03 at 09:58 -0800, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>> I see what you're doing with the indirection here (attempting to
>> empower R1728 at power 3), but you haven't convinced me yet. The
>> indirection doesn't remove the impossible nature of the task.
>>
On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 12:40 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> Ridiculously strong words for someone who's just made emself
> inactive and thus is unwilling to do the work emself.
I didn't make myself inactive, I made myself supine and still hold an office.
On Tue, 2009-02-03 at 09:58 -0800, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> I see what you're doing with the indirection here (attempting to
> empower R1728 at power 3), but you haven't convinced me yet. The
> indirection doesn't remove the impossible nature of the task.
> Take a close look at R2140:
> No entit
On Tue, 3 Feb 2009, comex wrote:
> I cause Rule 2238 to amend itself to read:
>
> ais523 CAN cause this rule to amend itself by announcement.
>
> comex CAN, with support, cause Rule 1728 to amend Rule 2141.
>
> comex CAN, with support, cause Rule 1728 to change the power of
> t
On Monday 02 February 2009 10:06:43 Kerim Aydin wrote:
> Wouldn't it be Canti Cygneus? (e.g. My swan song + your swan song
> = our swan songs not our swans song). -Goethe
It depends. Is each person who publishes a Cantus Cygneus a "swan" in
the metaphor? If so, my swan's song + your swan's song
On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 11:12 AM, Alex Smith wrote:
> (h) Cassandra, to be awarded to any player who noticed a scam,
> thought up a way to stop it, warned everyone clearly, and yet
You need another 'and' in there.
On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 10:24 AM, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 10:11 AM, Alex Smith wrote:
>> (h) Eagle-eyed, to be awarded to any player who noticed a scam,
>> thought up a way to stop it, warned everyone clearly, and yet
>> the scam happened anyway due
Wooble wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 10:11 AM, Alex Smith wrote:
>> (h) Eagle-eyed, to be awarded to any player who noticed a scam,
>> thought up a way to stop it, warned everyone clearly, and yet
>> the scam happened anyway due to apathy on the part of other
>>
On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 10:11 AM, Alex Smith wrote:
> (h) Eagle-eyed, to be awarded to any player who noticed a scam,
> thought up a way to stop it, warned everyone clearly, and yet
> the scam happened anyway due to apathy on the part of other
> players.
I'd pre
20 matches
Mail list logo
