> I'm guessing you switched to "Compose messages as plain
> text" from
> "Compose messages as color and graphics" in the options?
Actually, since I'm using Yahoo Webmail, I had to change to classic mode (I
didn't realize it was still available), and then the plaintext button was right
there in
Gabriel Vistica wrote:
>>Gabriel Vistica wrote:
>>> comex wrote:
Just a heads up: it's good form to use plain text rather than HTML
mil on the list.
>>>
>>> Got it. Shouldn't be a problem anyway, since my HTML is mostly
>>> limited to newlines, links, and basic text formatting, and it's
>Gabriel Vistica wrote:
>> comex wrote:
>>> Just a heads up: it's good form to use plain text rather than HTML
>>> mil on the list.
>>
>> Got it. Shouldn't be a problem anyway, since my HTML is mostly
>> limited to newlines, links, and basic text formatting, and it's a
>> little rusty.
>
>I don'
Gabriel Vistica wrote:
> comex wrote:
>> Just a heads up: it's good form to use plain text rather than HTML
>> mil on the list.
>
> Got it. Shouldn't be a problem anyway, since my HTML is mostly
> limited to newlines, links, and basic text formatting, and it's a
> little rusty.
I don't know whet
comex wrote:
>Just a heads up: it's good form to use plain text rather than HTML
>mil on the list.
Got it. Shouldn't be a problem anyway, since my HTML is mostly limited to
newlines, links, and basic text formatting, and it's a little rusty.
On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 6:26 PM, Gabriel Vistica wrote:
> Thanks, guys!
Just a heads up: it's good form to use plain text rather than HTML
mail on the list.
--
-c.
Thanks, guys!
Benjamin Caplan wrote:
> Gabriel Vistica wrote:
>>> Proposal 6380, if it passes, should make the whole thing
>>> irrelevant.
>>
>> Irrelevant as in stopping the contract's attempt and preventing
>> transfers, or as in making the contract redundant by allowing
>> transfers?
>> (I haven't really
On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 6:14 PM, Gabriel Vistica wrote:
>>Proposal 6380, if it passes, should make the whole thing irrelevant.
>
> Irrelevant as in stopping the contract's attempt and preventing transfers,
> or as in making the contract redundant by allowing transfers?
> (I haven't really had a cha
Gabriel Vistica wrote:
>> Proposal 6380, if it passes, should make the whole thing
>> irrelevant.
>
> Irrelevant as in stopping the contract's attempt and preventing
> transfers, or as in making the contract redundant by allowing
> transfers?
> (I haven't really had a chance to get a feel for t
>Gabriel Vistica wrote:
>>>Roger Hicks wrote:
On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 15:12, Benjamin Caplan wrote:
> Unless someone else joins, the LPRS will only be a person for the next
> week, so I won't bother re-intending intending registration.
>
I join the LPRS.
>>>
>>>I intend, with t
compsciguy wrote:
> Checked the short and full rulesets, and I can't find it anywhere. What
> is the LPRS?
A fair amount of gameplay is governed by contracts rather than
rules. In this case, see
http://agora-notary.wikidot.com/lesser-points-relay-service
Gabriel Vistica wrote:
>>Roger Hicks wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 15:12, Benjamin Caplan wrote:
Unless someone else joins, the LPRS will only be a person for the next
week, so I won't bother re-intending intending registration.
>>> I join the LPRS.
>>
>>I intend, with the majori
>Roger Hicks wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 15:12, Benjamin Caplan wrote:
>>> Unless someone else joins, the LPRS will only be a person for the next
>>> week, so I won't bother re-intending intending registration.
>>>
>> I join the LPRS.
>
>I intend, with the majority consent of {coppro, C-walker
C-walker wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 6:26 AM, Benjamin
> Caplan wrote:
>> [I forgot about the LPRS because it hasn't been used. You can NoV me for
>> slacking off if you care, but I'm guessing you don't.]
>>
>> Parties to the LPRS:
>> Pavitra [Pointer]
>> coppro
>
> You two look lonely. I jo
Thanks, everybody!
--compsciguy
2009/7/1 Gabriel Vistica :
> Hi everybody,
>
> I've been watching for a couple of days now, wanting to figure out some of
> what is going on before I jump in.
> Could someone explain to me the "Lead Sheet" report (what its for, what
> certain things mean, etc.)?
That is the Conductor's report, pub
Gabriel Vistica wrote:
> Hi everybody,
>
> I've been watching for a couple of days now, wanting to figure out some
> of what is going on before I jump in.
> Could someone explain to me the "Lead Sheet" report (what its for, what
> certain things mean, etc.)?
>
> Thanks,
> compsciguy
> Gabriel V
2009/7/1 Ed Murphy :
> As CotC, I intend (without 3 objections) to change this case's
> Interest Index to 0.
You can't; only the Justiciar and the Justiciar can do that. Which is
silly enough that it might be false.
--Warrigal, who thinks that citing Agora's rules in APA format is silly
On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 4:15 PM, Gabriel Vistica wrote:
> Hi everybody,
>
> I've been watching for a couple of days now, wanting to figure out some of
> what is going on before I jump in.
> Could someone explain to me the "Lead Sheet" report (what its for, what
> certain things mean, etc.)?
The lea
Hi everybody,
I've been watching for a couple of days now, wanting to figure out some of what
is going on before I jump in.
Could someone explain to me the "Lead Sheet" report (what its for, what certain
things mean, etc.)?
Thanks,
compsciguy
Gabriel Vistica
On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 6:05 PM, Jonatan
Kilhamn wrote:
> By the way, that conductor's report was in just before the monthly
> notes are to be processed. If I get really bored I might do those
> tomorrow, but I probably won't as I don't get paid nowadays. Go
> resolve the election, will you, H. IAD
This came up in ##nomic. My proposal "fix veto" failed quorum a few
months ago. Meanwhile, R106 still takes precedence over R2019, so
vetoing still doesn't actually work. The Cards proposal includes the
following:
Title: Majority Leader.
Position: The Majority Leader CAN veto a speci
On Wed, 1 Jul 2009, Sean Hunt wrote:
> Sean Hunt wrote:
>>> Proposal 6394 (Democratic, AI=2.0, Interest=1) by Goethe
>>> Coda
>> Endorse G.
>> I liked the Parliament one better.
>
> I retract this vote and vote AGAINST; the non-Major Arcana decks have no
> Dealers and thus do not exist.
Huh? The
Jonatan Kilhamn wrote:
> 2009/7/1 Sean Hunt :
>> Jonatan Kilhamn wrote:
>>> No, wait, yes there will. We should install someone to do the
>>> transition, the Cards proposal has this "The Conductor shall publish
>>> one last report, then any player can cause this rule to repeal itself"
>>> thing.
>>
2009/7/1 Sean Hunt :
> Jonatan Kilhamn wrote:
>> No, wait, yes there will. We should install someone to do the
>> transition, the Cards proposal has this "The Conductor shall publish
>> one last report, then any player can cause this rule to repeal itself"
>> thing.
>
> Ah. I guess it will fall on
Jonatan Kilhamn wrote:
> No, wait, yes there will. We should install someone to do the
> transition, the Cards proposal has this "The Conductor shall publish
> one last report, then any player can cause this rule to repeal itself"
> thing.
Ah. I guess it will fall on me then. Do you want to work o
2009/7/1 Jonatan Kilhamn :
> 2009/7/1 Sean Hunt :
>> Jonatan Kilhamn wrote:
>>> Sorry, for some reason I thought that you had lured yourself into a
>>> trap with that "SHALL NOT change eir nickname", but then it still was
>>> Agora's Birthday when you changed back... As everyone knows who I'm
>>> r
2009/7/1 Sean Hunt :
> Jonatan Kilhamn wrote:
>> Sorry, for some reason I thought that you had lured yourself into a
>> trap with that "SHALL NOT change eir nickname", but then it still was
>> Agora's Birthday when you changed back... As everyone knows who I'm
>> referring to this won't have to be
29 matches
Mail list logo
