Re: DIS: Re: BUS: PBA Amendment

2008-11-23 Thread Roger Hicks
On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 05:16, Elliott Hird <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 23 Nov 2008, at 06:09, Roger Hicks wrote: > >> I object, primarily because I don't want to adjust my recordkeeping >> scripts. > > Suber has some words to say for you. (Along the lines of "since nomic is > fluid > any scrip

DIS: Re: BUS: PBA Amendment

2008-11-23 Thread Joshua Boehme
On Sat, 22 Nov 2008 23:09:13 -0700 "Roger Hicks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 19:19, Charles Reiss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I intend, with the support of the people, to amend the PBA by > > replacing section 17 with: > > {{ > > 17. Every midnight (UTC) that the PBA ha

DIS: Re: BUS: PBA Amendment

2008-11-23 Thread Elliott Hird
On 23 Nov 2008, at 06:09, Roger Hicks wrote: I object, primarily because I don't want to adjust my recordkeeping scripts. Suber has some words to say for you. (Along the lines of "since nomic is fluid any scripts used must be fluid too") But regardless, I'm happy with changing _my_ script

DIS: Re: BUS: PBA Amendment

2008-11-22 Thread Ian Kelly
On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 7:47 PM, Ian Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 7:45 PM, Elliott Hird > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On 23/11/2008, Charles Reiss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> I intend, with the support of the people, to amend the PBA by >>> replacing section 17 wi

DIS: Re: BUS: PBA Amendment

2008-11-22 Thread Ian Kelly
On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 7:45 PM, Elliott Hird <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 23/11/2008, Charles Reiss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I intend, with the support of the people, to amend the PBA by >> replacing section 17 with: >> {{ >> 17. Every midnight (UTC) that the PBA had zero of a given Eligib