Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Cleanliness Intent in Rule 105

2020-04-19 Thread Jason Cobb via agora-discussion
On 4/19/20 1:47 PM, Jason Cobb wrote: > On 4/19/20 1:39 PM, Tanner Swett via agora-discussion wrote: >> Does the rule actually say "an statue" currently? Proposal 8354 >> replaced "an instrument" with "a statute", and presumably the >> Rulekeepor accidentally recorded the new wording as "an statue"

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Cleanliness Intent in Rule 105

2020-04-19 Thread Jason Cobb via agora-discussion
On 4/19/20 1:39 PM, Tanner Swett via agora-discussion wrote: > Does the rule actually say "an statue" currently? Proposal 8354 > replaced "an instrument" with "a statute", and presumably the > Rulekeepor accidentally recorded the new wording as "an statue" > instead. Was the mistake ratified? > > —

DIS: Re: BUS: Cleanliness Intent in Rule 105

2020-04-19 Thread Tanner Swett via agora-discussion
Does the rule actually say "an statue" currently? Proposal 8354 replaced "an instrument" with "a statute", and presumably the Rulekeepor accidentally recorded the new wording as "an statue" instead. Was the mistake ratified? —Warrigal

DIS: Re: BUS: Cleanliness Intent in Rule 105

2020-04-19 Thread Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via agora-discussion
On Sun, Apr 19, 2020 at 9:18 AM Rebecca via agora-business < agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > On Sun, Apr 19, 2020 at 8:54 PM Publius Scribonius Scholasticus via > agora-business wrote: > > > I intend, without objection, to replace "statue" with "statute" in the > > first paragraph of rul

DIS: Re: BUS: Cleanliness

2019-02-18 Thread Timon Walshe-Grey
Because it's spelled as "Judgement" everywhere else in the rule. -twg ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On Monday, February 18, 2019 11:12 PM, James Cook wrote: > I object to the below-quoted intention. > > (Based on some brief research, both spellings are common. For example, > I think Judgmen