root wrote:
> The point has been raised that the restriction should make players
> think before sitting up, but frankly, we need more judges, not fewer.
I'm willing to enter into some kind of binding agreement as a non-player
to return timely pseudo-judgments free of charge, if anyone wishes.
Mur
On 10/24/07, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Regarding Proposal 5261, CotC Zefram is evidently willing to
> delay processing a bit so that players wishing to lie down
> have an opportunity to do so.
The judicial system is often slow enough as it is. While Zefram's
consideration is apprecia
2 matches
Mail list logo
