Here is a web interface for my ugly rule-wrapping Python script, which
supports wrapping things like lists.
http://agora.qoid.us/aword.cgi
On Sun, 2009-03-29 at 17:54 +0100, Alex Smith wrote:
> On Sun, 2009-03-29 at 10:51 -0600, Sean Hunt wrote:
> > CoE: Vote Market II us a contract.
>
> Accepted, I missed Murphy joining.
>
Actually, no, denied. It isn't public, as far as I can tell; it's a
private publically-known contract. (It was
On Sun, 2009-03-29 at 10:51 -0600, Sean Hunt wrote:
> CoE: Vote Market II us a contract.
Accepted, I missed Murphy joining.
--
ais523
Alex Smith wrote:
> The following is a list of public contracts.
>
> (2008-11-22 ehird)
> (2008-12-03 Taral)
> (2008-12-28 comex)
> (2009-01-03 Warrigal #3)
> (2009-01-09 comex)
> (2009-02-11 AFO)
> Agoran Loan Service
> Airstrip One
> Association of Federated Organizations
> Bayes
> B N
On Sun, Mar 29, 2009 at 2:17 AM, Ed Murphy wrote:
> Wasn't that repealed already? It's not in the latest SLR nor FLR,
> though comex's historical rules browser doesn't explicitly note its
> repeal.
Which reminds me to scratch an itch... For a while I've been recording
repeals in the RCS log, and
On Mon, 2009-03-23 at 01:21 -0400, Warrigal wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 9:31 PM, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
> > http://www.nomictools.com/agora/aaa
> >
> > Federal Subsidy: 7
>
> I join the AAA. I ask for subs.
>
You already were a party, according to my records.
--
ais523
On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 6:31 PM, Alex Smith wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-03-27 at 22:10 +, Alex Smith wrote:
> > This is the Enigma results from last week's puzzles: 4x4, er ev hg is ni
> > no, and Bits and Bytes.
>
> Because many contestants are likely to be interested, I'd like to
> informally req
On Sun, Mar 29, 2009 at 2:21 AM, Ed Murphy wrote:
> ehird wrote:
>
>> 2009/3/28 Alex Smith :
>>> I cause rule 2214 to amend itself by replacing its text with "Indy CAN
>>> cause this rule to amend itself by announcement.", using the authority
>>> from Open It Up.
>>>
>>> --
>>> ais523
>>
>> Contex
On Sat, 2009-03-28 at 23:21 -0700, Ed Murphy wrote:
> To prove that, you'd have to prove that B's 5th Era was not only broken,
> but specifically broken in such a way that their alleged "Export"
> proposal was either (a) not a proposal at all, or (b) neither adopted
> nor rejected.
The proposal wa
9 matches
Mail list logo
