Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Bad Murphy!

2008-12-05 Thread Ed Murphy
ehird wrote: > On 06/12/2008, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> ehird wrote: >> >>> I object to the termination of Warrigal's Grand Poobah pledge. >> There are two reasonable referents (The List, and the older one that >> explicitly mentions October), so I don't think this objection is >> sp

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Bad Murphy!

2008-12-05 Thread Elliott Hird
On 06/12/2008, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ehird wrote: > >> I object to the termination of Warrigal's Grand Poobah pledge. > > There are two reasonable referents (The List, and the older one that > explicitly mentions October), so I don't think this objection is > specific enough to be

DIS: Re: BUS: Bad Murphy!

2008-12-05 Thread Ed Murphy
ehird wrote: > I object to the termination of Warrigal's Grand Poobah pledge. There are two reasonable referents (The List, and the older one that explicitly mentions October), so I don't think this objection is specific enough to be effective.

DIS: Re: BUS: Bad Murphy!

2008-12-04 Thread Warrigal
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 3:26 PM, Elliott Hird <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I object to the termination of Warrigal's Grand Poobah pledge. Thank you. --Warrigal "I Think"

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Bad Murphy!

2008-12-04 Thread Elliott Hird
On 4 Dec 2008, at 21:01, Sgeo wrote: But then Warrigal has no means of fixing it.. Um, amending it?

DIS: Re: BUS: Bad Murphy!

2008-12-04 Thread Sgeo
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 3:26 PM, Elliott Hird <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I object to the termination of Warrigal's Grand Poobah pledge. > But then Warrigal has no means of fixing it..