Please substitute propose for prose
21 july 2008 Taral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 9:32 AM, Sgeo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> What was the result? How can equity case judgements not violate R101?
>
> Because people implicitly agree to them when they join a contract. Or
> when they join the game, depending on
On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 12:52 PM, Kerim Aydin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Jul 2008, Taral wrote:
>> Because people implicitly agree to them when they join a contract. Or
>> when they join the game, depending on your reading.
>
> I agree with you wholly, I just don't think it's in the ca
On Mon, 21 Jul 2008, Taral wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 9:32 AM, Sgeo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> What was the result? How can equity case judgements not violate R101?
>
> Because people implicitly agree to them when they join a contract. Or
> when they join the game, depending on your readi
On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 9:32 AM, Sgeo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What was the result? How can equity case judgements not violate R101?
Because people implicitly agree to them when they join a contract. Or
when they join the game, depending on your reading.
--
Taral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Please
On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 12:30 PM, Taral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 4:15 PM, Sgeo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I initiate a CFJ on the following statement:
>> "Equity case judgements violate R101(iv)."
>
> Been there, done that.
>
> --
> Taral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> "Please
On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 4:15 PM, Sgeo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I initiate a CFJ on the following statement:
> "Equity case judgements violate R101(iv)."
Been there, done that.
--
Taral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you."
-- Unknown
On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 4:57 PM, Zefram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ais523 wrote:
>>However, given the PNP's stated method of acting, it might be quite
>>difficult to return the chits; it would require amending the contract
>>with support from all its members,
>
> ... which can be manifested by a c
ais523 wrote:
>However, given the PNP's stated method of acting, it might be quite
>difficult to return the chits; it would require amending the contract
>with support from all its members,
... which can be manifested by a contract between all the members,
such as an equation regarding the PNP.
-
On Sunday 6 July 2008 5:07:30 Geoffrey Spear wrote:
> I hereby initiate an equity case regarding the PerlNomic Partnership
> contract. The parties to the contract are Pavitra, Wooble, abliss,
> ais523, chuck, comex, ehird, erez, ihope, jay, norgg, and woggle.
>
> It was not envisioned that the se
On Wed, 28 Nov 2007, Josiah Worcester wrote:
> For evidence of this contract, ask H. Notary Goethe.
Actually, ask the judge to ask H. Notary Goethe. Or ask Murphy
to also ask Goethe. That is, if there was anything to ask. On
which I couldn't possibly comment.
-Goethe
pikhq wrote:
I do hereby initiate an equity CFJ on the following:
Murphy is in breach of our contract concerning marks by not sending me 1 blue
mark and 1 black mark.
Murphy and I are parties to the contract in question.
For evidence of this contract, ask H. Notary Goethe.
It's a fair cop.
12 matches
Mail list logo
