On Mon, Jan 5, 2009 at 1:46 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
> This is in keeping with the generally permissive
> Agoran attitude of what constitutes an "entity".
Such as offices?
On Mon, 5 Jan 2009, Elliott Hird wrote:
> On 5 Jan 2009, at 19:19, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
>> And yes I really really and on purpose ducked what happens with those only-
>> somewhat-resty rests in the future... it may even be to your advantage
>> to keep a non-resty rest around (i.e. never go down to
On 5 Jan 2009, at 19:19, Kerim Aydin wrote:
And yes I really really and on purpose ducked what happens with
those only-
somewhat-resty rests in the future... it may even be to your advantage
to keep a non-resty rest around (i.e. never go down to zero) for its
special properties.
Can it cast
On Mon, 5 Jan 2009, Elliott Hird wrote:
> On 5 Jan 2009, at 18:46, Kerim Aydin wrote:
>
>> Therefore, taking A-C together, this court finds that ehird DOES have
>> Rests, that constitute a losing condition and reduce voting power
>> as indicated by the Rules, without violating R101. However, R101
On Mon, Jan 5, 2009 at 1:54 PM, Elliott Hird
wrote:
> Confusing. I have things that are like rests but don't always behave
> like rests...? But that still are rests?
No, you have Rests but the rules CANNOT prevent you from spending Notes.
On 5 Jan 2009, at 18:46, Kerim Aydin wrote:
Therefore, taking A-C together, this court finds that ehird DOES have
Rests, that constitute a losing condition and reduce voting power
as indicated by the Rules, without violating R101. However, R101
takes
precedence over the clause of R2229/0 th
6 matches
Mail list logo
