On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 11:15 AM, Jonatan Kilhamn
wrote:
> I would think it absolutely hilarious to have such a rule without
> taking that precaution. Why would it have to ever be satisfied?
NttBF
--
-c.
woggle wrote:
> On 10/3/09 11:30 AM, Ed Murphy wrote:
>> In 2674a and 2674b, Walker and ais523 opined REMAND, the other three
>> panelists didn't opine on time. Overtime period is in progress;
>> Justiciar woggle can publish a Justiciar's Opinion of REMAND, otherwise
>> I'll make the panel REMAND
ehird wrote:
> 2009/10/2 Geoffrey Spear :
>> I CFJ on: "The Short Logical Ruleset is neither short nor logical."
>
> Arguments: "Short" is a relative term. It is certainly short compared
> to its companion, the Full Logical Ruleset. It is also logical, i.e.
> it has meaning when applied logically
On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 6:55 PM, comex wrote:
> Fails, the relevant text was amended by
ough, send button
--
-c.
On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 3:49 PM, Ed Murphy wrote:
> Voting results for Proposals 6502 - 6513:
>
> [This notice resolves the Agoran decisions of whether to adopt the
> following proposals. For each decision, the options available to
> Agora are ADOPTED (*), REJECTED (x), and FAILED QUORUM (!).]
>
On Sat, 2009-10-03 at 14:17 -0700, Ed Murphy wrote:
> ais523 wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 2009-10-03 at 13:05 -0700, Ed Murphy wrote:
> >>> 6515 O 0 1.7 ehird No
> >> FOR (this should surprise no one)
> > You really think it's good for Agora to exile one of its more active
> > players for a
ais523 wrote:
> On Sat, 2009-10-03 at 13:05 -0700, Ed Murphy wrote:
>>> 6515 O 0 1.7 ehird No
>> FOR (this should surprise no one)
> You really think it's good for Agora to exile one of its more active
> players for a minimum of several months?
Even if 6515 passes (doubtful), if you
On Sat, 2009-10-03 at 13:05 -0700, Ed Murphy wrote:
> > 6515 O 0 1.7 ehird No
> FOR (this should surprise no one)
You really think it's good for Agora to exile one of its more active
players for a minimum of several months?
--
ais523
On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 13:12, Sean Hunt wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 11:44 AM, Roger Hicks wrote:
>> This was supposed to be sent as part of my recent automated action
>> e-mail but there must be a bug:
>>
>> I award the patent title Champion to coppro
>>
>> I award the patent title Champion t
2009/10/3 Aaron Goldfein :
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 9:29 PM, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 8:24 PM, Aaron Goldfein
>> wrote:
>> > Perhaps a winning condition should be having won the game in each
>> > currently
>> > recognized way.
>>
>> Paradox, you can't satisfy that wi
10 matches
Mail list logo
