Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 2:48 PM, Aaron Goldfein wrote: > If there are no accepted nominations, doesn't the office just become empty? No. The outcome of the election is and nothing happens.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 7:30 AM, Geoffrey Spear wrote: > On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 7:23 AM, Aaron Goldfein > wrote: > > I'm still waiting on Wooble to accept his nominations for Tailor and > > Accountor. > > I didn't even notice I'd been nominated. If no one else consents, I'll > keep the offices b

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

2009/4/21 Geoffrey Spear : > Your contributions certainly put you in an excellent position to criticize em. Idling is not comparable.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 7:23 AM, Aaron Goldfein wrote: > I'm still waiting on Wooble to accept his nominations for Tailor and > Accountor. I didn't even notice I'd been nominated. If no one else consents, I'll keep the offices by default.

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 6:01 AM, Geoffrey Spear wrote: > On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 9:34 PM, Elliott Hird > wrote: > > Getting Dvorak to do anything but vote? ha! > > Your contributions certainly put you in an excellent position to criticize > em. > I'm still waiting on Wooble to accept his nominat

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 9:34 PM, Elliott Hird wrote: > Getting Dvorak to do anything but vote? ha! Your contributions certainly put you in an excellent position to criticize em.

DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

On 2009-04-21, Aaron Goldfein wrote: > I nominate BobTHJ, Dvorak Herring, and Taral for each of the following > offices: Accountor, Tailor, and Rulekeepor. > > -Yally > Getting Dvorak to do anything but vote? ha!

DIS: Re: BUS: nominations

On Mon, 2008-12-15 at 11:15 -0500, Geoffrey Spear wrote: > I nominate myself for Conductor. > > I nominate ais523, BobTHJ, and ehird for Accountor. > I do not yet accept, but I'll think about it. -- ais523

DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 1:01 PM, Roger Hicks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I accept the nomination for Scorekeepor and Accountor. I decline the others. You earlier declined the same nomination (quoted in a different thread) for Accountor. Under a strict reading of Rule 2154 I think this makes you

DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations for Grand Poobah

On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 10:15 AM, comex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I decline this nomination. Remind me why we switched from consenting > to declining again? No one commented on that bit in Goethe's election refactoring proposal. I'd be happy to vote for a proposal that removed the implied con

DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations for Grand Poobah

On Jul 29, 2008, at 3:06 PM, Ed Murphy wrote: I nominate BobTHJ, comex, Goethe, OscarMeyr, Quazie, root, Sgeo, Taral, woggle, and Wooble for Grand Poobah. Campaign speech, after a fashion: As I recall, I was the last Grand Warden of the Oligarchy. It would be symmetric for me to be the

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: nominations for IADoP

On Thu, 21 Feb 2008, Ben Caplan wrote: > I never realized before just how much *gratuitous* information is in > the report. Apparently Agorans enjoy paperwork. Technically, that > report could be shortened to: > > - > IADoP's Organization Chart It used to be (not that long ago? I didn't noti

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: nominations for IADoP

On Thursday 21 February 2008 10:57 Geoffrey Spear wrote: > When the elections in question were resolved, it was noted that the > first attempt to resolve the votes on those proposals has > self-ratified so in every case the earlier date was correct. Ok. > I think I've actually got an up-to-date IA

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: nominations for IADoP

On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 11:47 AM, Ben Caplan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thursday 21 February 2008 14:11 Geoffrey Spear wrote: > > I nominate Goethe, OscarMeyr, Pavitra, and Wooble for IADoP. > > Hmm... > > What happened with pikhq's nominations on (16 or 19) January? I've > spent the last

DIS: Re: BUS: nominations for IADoP

On Thursday 21 February 2008 14:11 Geoffrey Spear wrote: > I nominate Goethe, OscarMeyr, Pavitra, and Wooble for IADoP. Hmm... What happened with pikhq's nominations on (16 or 19) January? I've spent the last half-hour trying to sort it out. Was it just left ambiguous?

DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

On Jan 19, 2008 2:26 PM, Josiah Worcester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If the first attempt at resolving the voting for proposals 5390-5404 was > unsuccesful: > I nominate avpx for Mad Scientist. > I nominate Iammars and woggle for Tailor. > I nominate Murphy for Conductor. > > I SUPPORT all of th

DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

pikhq wrote: If the first attempt at resolving the voting for proposals 5390-5404 was unsuccesful: I nominate avpx for Mad Scientist. I nominate Iammars and woggle for Tailor. I nominate Murphy for Conductor. I SUPPORT all of the above. I consent. I support all of the above.

DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

I nominate Murphy for Conductor. IADoP notes on this one: Murphy has installed emself as Conductor. There were no other nominations, so it's probably not necessary to resolve this one. Levi

DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

Levi Stephen wrote: As no attempt was made last quarter, I nominate comex, Zefram and pikhq for Promotor Levi I'm not going to bother with resolving this, as comex and pikhq refused eir nominations. Levi

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

On Jan 15, 2008 10:34 PM, Josiah Worcester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tuesday 15 January 2008 20:27:48 Iammars wrote: > > On Jan 15, 2008 10:24 PM, Josiah Worcester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I nominate avpx for Mad Scientist. > > > > > > I nominate woggle for Tailor. > > > > > > I nomi

DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

On Jan 15, 2008 10:24 PM, Josiah Worcester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I nominate avpx for Mad Scientist. > > I nominate woggle for Tailor. > > I nominate Murphy for Conductor. > Aww. I want to be Mad Scientist. -- -Iammars www.jmcteague.com

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

root wrote: On Jan 11, 2008 6:07 PM, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Something that can afford to be broken for a while without significantly affecting anything else. (We may not have any good candidates, in which case we may want to adopt one for testing purposes.) We could bring back

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

On Jan 11, 2008 6:07 PM, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Something that can afford to be broken for a while without > significantly affecting anything else. (We may not have any > good candidates, in which case we may want to adopt one for > testing purposes.) We could bring back cards. ;-

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

On Jan 11, 2008 8:07 PM, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Something that can afford to be broken for a while without > significantly affecting anything else. (We may not have any > good candidates, in which case we may want to adopt one for > testing purposes.) When we say "broken", we usua

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

Iammars wrote: On Jan 11, 2008 7:56 PM, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: I, for one, would rather wait for the CotC to do it right. The judicial system is not the place to experiment with automatic message generation. This begs the question: Where

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

On Jan 11, 2008 7:56 PM, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I, for one, would rather wait for the CotC to do it right. The > judicial system is not the place to experiment with automatic > message generation. > > This begs the question: Where is the right place? -- -Iammars www.jmcte

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

comex wrote: If such a thing were implemented, any confusion would only occur if someone was delibrately trying to confuse it, i.e. "I de-register". This probably wouldn't happen and if so, I'm sure the CotC would be EXCUSED :) Or all messages could be disclaimered with "if it is possible and

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

On Jan 11, 2008 7:37 PM, Roger Hicks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The rule could be easily amended to prevent criminal charges if a > poorly qualified judge were auto-assigned. Unqualified judges would > still be a problem, but how often would this come up? It's not like > people are deregistering

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

comex wrote: On Jan 11, 2008 7:13 PM, Roger Hicks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Why would automatic assignment be too difficult? Posture and activity changes can easily be tracked manually, and if an occasional invalid judge were to be assigned due to the manual changes not being updated the judge

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

On Jan 11, 2008 7:37 PM, Roger Hicks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Jan 11, 2008 5:31 PM, Charles Reiss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Jan 11, 2008 7:13 PM, Roger Hicks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Why would automatic assignment be too difficult? Posture and activity > > > changes can easi

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

On Jan 11, 2008 5:31 PM, Charles Reiss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Jan 11, 2008 7:13 PM, Roger Hicks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Why would automatic assignment be too difficult? Posture and activity > > changes can easily be tracked manually, and if an occasional invalid > > judge were to be

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

comex wrote: This is a non-issue as far as I can see. If a player submits a CFJ through a web interface, it doesn't actually exist in the gamestate until the submission is posted on a public forum. So the interface would in any case email business on eir behalf (CFJ 1719). That's just to subm

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

On Jan 11, 2008 7:13 PM, Roger Hicks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Why would automatic assignment be too difficult? Posture and activity > changes can easily be tracked manually, and if an occasional invalid > judge were to be assigned due to the manual changes not being updated > the judge assignme

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

On Jan 11, 2008 7:10 PM, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have offline files of CFJs 1-61, most of 667-1072, and everything > from 1077 onward, and have been slowly back-populating the most recent > ones into the database. I'll do 818 now as a special case (and am > open to further request

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

On Jan 11, 2008 7:13 PM, Roger Hicks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Why would automatic assignment be too difficult? Posture and activity > changes can easily be tracked manually, and if an occasional invalid > judge were to be assigned due to the manual changes not being updated > the judge assignme

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

On Jan 11, 2008 5:04 PM, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > comex wrote: > > > This is a non-issue as far as I can see. If a player submits a CFJ > > through a web interface, it doesn't actually exist in the gamestate > > until the submission is posted on a public forum. So the interface > >

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

comex wrote: - I will try to get stuff from Zefram's archives into the database. (I don't know how flexible the database structure is, but...) CFJ 818*, for example, makes excellent reading, but it's too old to even be in the current database's Stare Decisis. I have offline files of CFJs 1-61

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

comex wrote: It was relocated once before (from Eris's server to mine), but it took a good bit of head-scratching. I could give you a shell account, but then you'd be cut off whenever my server's net connection decided to flake out for a while. (The cfj.qoid.us mirror is a good workaround for

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

On 1/11/08, Kerim Aydin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If a program scanned emails for a CFJ, and when detected, automatically > took the CFJ, scanned the eligibility list, and emailed out an judge > assignment without human intervention, I don't doubt someone would craft > a CFJ to get a broken, ill

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

On Fri, 11 Jan 2008, comex wrote: > On Jan 11, 2008 3:46 PM, Kerim Aydin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> (on the Rules if not on the database) > What? If a program scanned emails for a CFJ, and when detected, automatically took the CFJ, scanned the eligibility list, and emailed out an judge assig

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

On Jan 11, 2008 3:46 PM, Kerim Aydin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > (on the Rules if not on the database) What? > Doing this doesn't need a rules change, it just needs the CotC to implement > such a thing and announce its availability. Which is what I'll do if elected CotC. ;)

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

On Fri, 11 Jan 2008, Zefram wrote: > This is why we must not rely on automation. It's why Nomic World died, > leading to the creation of Agora. For Agora to go that route would be > to ignore the lessons of history. I think Nomic World died because the technology was so heavily dependent on the

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

On Jan 11, 2008 1:09 PM, Zefram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This is the right way to do such a thing. I'm opposed to the use of an > HTTP mechanism for taking game actions, because it's not publicly visible. > The archival of the game via the lists is important. > > This is why we must not rely o

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

On Jan 11, 2008 12:58 PM, Geoffrey Spear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I see from the B Nomic archives that there was a period when email > messages were parsed for game actions, though, and from what I can > tell it seems to have worked reasonably well. I'd thought you were > around back then but

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

Geoffrey Spear wrote: >The ideal system would have the database subscribed to agora-business >with a parser that can identify messages that are calling CFJs, This is the right way to do such a thing. I'm opposed to the use of an HTTP mechanism for taking game actions, because it's not publicly vi

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

On Jan 11, 2008 12:46 PM, comex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 1/11/08, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > This would change if I were CotC again, as the database would drive > > the carrying-out-of-duties rather than the other way round. > > I will probably submit a conditional vote like: >

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

On 1/11/08, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This would change if I were CotC again, as the database would drive > the carrying-out-of-duties rather than the other way round. I will probably submit a conditional vote like: - If at least one COMEX vote has been cast, I vote COMEX; otherwise,

DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

comex wrote: For the CotC election I intend to vote for and only for a candidate who will maintain a database with a web interface (preferably *the* database) emself. Currently we have, in effect, two redundant databases (one of which is a set of text files), one maintained by Murphy, one Zefra

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

pikhq wrote: On Friday 11 January 2008 04:27:57 Zefram wrote: I nominate myself for Clerk of the Courts. I consent to and support my own nomination. Why did you self-nominate? You'd just keep your CotC job, since he's been objected to enough already. ;) No, I hadn't been. At the time,

DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

On Friday 11 January 2008 04:27:57 Zefram wrote: > Ed Murphy wrote: > >I nominate BobTHJ, comex, OscarMeyr, Wooble, and Zefram for Assessor. > > I object to the nominations of BobTHJ, comex, and Zefram for assessor. > > Note that under rule 1450 I can't be installed as assessor while I'm > promotor

DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

On Thursday 10 January 2008 21:20:00 Ed Murphy wrote: > I nominate BobTHJ, comex, OscarMeyr, Wooble, and Zefram for Assessor. > > I nominate myself for Clerk of the Courts. I consent. I object to your self-nomination. Zefram is doing a good job of it.

DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

On 12/31/07, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I nominate Eris for Clerk of the Courts, just to see the look on > eir face. Mmm, tempting, but no. -- Eris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown

DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

On Dec 31, 2007, at 9:55 PM, Ed Murphy wrote: I nominate Eris for Clerk of the Courts, just to see the look on eir face. I nominate avpx, BobTHJ, and OscarMeyr for Registrar. I SUPPORT the nominations of TG Eris, avpx, and root. I suppose (a non-official term) BobTHJ. I'll flip a coin late

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

On 11/18/07, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Yes, there was; they only became meaningless when a second nomination > was accepted within the four-day window. Oh, quite right. -- Taral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

Eris wrote: On 11/17/07, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Um, people, you can't vote yet (Rule 2154). They can vote in the Agoran Consent decisions, though those decisions can't be resolved because there are multiple consenting nominees. Okay, you can't vote *meaningfully* yet. :D The or

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

On 11/17/07, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Um, people, you can't vote yet (Rule 2154). > > They can vote in the Agoran Consent decisions, though those decisions > can't be resolved because there are multiple consenting nominees. Okay, you can't vote *meaningfully* yet. :D The original n

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

Eris wrote: On 11/17/07, Benjamin Schultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Good enough for me at this point. I SUPPORT Pikhq and OPPOSE Wooble. Um, people, you can't vote yet (Rule 2154). They can vote in the Agoran Consent decisions, though those decisions can't be resolved because there are mu

DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

On Saturday 17 November 2007, Roger Hicks wrote: > I nominate Fookiemyartug for Scorekeepor. Fookiemyartug consents to > this nomination. I vote SUPPORT for Fookiemyartug. Fookiemyartug votes > SUPPORT for Fookiemyartug. On Saturday 17 November 2007, Taral wrote: > Um, people, you can't vote yet

DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

On Saturday 17 November 2007 20:42:35 Roger Hicks wrote: > I nominate Fookiemyartug for Scorekeepor. Fookiemyartug consents to > this nomination. I vote SUPPORT for Fookiemyartug. Fookiemyartug votes > SUPPORT for Fookiemyartug. I OPPOSE this.

DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

On 11/17/07, Benjamin Schultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Good enough for me at this point. I SUPPORT Pikhq and OPPOSE Wooble. Um, people, you can't vote yet (Rule 2154). -- Taral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown

DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

On Saturday 17 November 2007 16:58:50 comex wrote: > On Nov 17, 2007 6:33 PM, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I nominate pikhq and Wooble for Scorekeepor. > > > > I nominate comex for Scorekeepor. I consent to be Scorekeepor. > I vote against comex as Scorekeepor.

DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

On Thursday 04 October 2007 09:33:13 Ian Kelly wrote: > On 10/4/07, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The AFO nominates Levi, Peekee, and pikhq for Ambassador, Herald, > > and IADoP. Grr. We *do* have a new herald. I hereby retract my support for the current herald vote; sorry.

DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

On Thursday 04 October 2007 02:09:02 Ed Murphy wrote: > The AFO nominates Levi, Peekee, and pikhq for Ambassador, Herald, > and IADoP. > > (For each combination of nominee and office, this is an Agoran > decision on whether to approve installing that nominee to that > office, with Agoran consent a

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

comex wrote: On 10/4/07, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: The AFO nominates Levi, Peekee, and pikhq for Ambassador, Herald, and IADoP. So you are nominating each person for all three offices? Yes. (Well, the AFO is.)

DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

On 10/4/07, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The AFO nominates Levi, Peekee, and pikhq for Ambassador, Herald, > and IADoP. So you are nominating each person for all three offices?

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

On 10/3/07, Taral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 9/17/07, Taral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I announce the initiation of an Agoran decision for the position of > > Scorekeepor as per Rule 2154. The options are Wooble and Zefram. > > You know what's funny? There's no requirement to resolve. Rul

DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

On 9/17/07, Taral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I announce the initiation of an Agoran decision for the position of > Scorekeepor as per Rule 2154. The options are Wooble and Zefram. You know what's funny? There's no requirement to resolve. -- Taral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "Please let me know if ther

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

On 9/18/07, comex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tuesday 18 September 2007, Ian Kelly wrote: > > Why? I don't have any problems with partnerships voting in elections. > > > > -root > > Hmm... > > Well, then why can't they vote in democratic proposals, etc.? > > Presently, a group of n people can

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

On Tuesday 18 September 2007, Ian Kelly wrote: > Why? I don't have any problems with partnerships voting in elections. > > -root Hmm... Well, then why can't they vote in democratic proposals, etc.? Presently, a group of n people can have (2^n)-1 votes in an election. Every subset of the group

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

On 9/18/07, comex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tuesday 18 September 2007, Ed Murphy wrote: > > I recommend that the other partners of the AFO not re-cast this > > vote without giving an argument in support of eir choice. > > > Hmm... > I wonder how long until someone proposes disallowing partner

DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

On Tuesday 18 September 2007, Ed Murphy wrote: > I recommend that the other partners of the AFO not re-cast this > vote without giving an argument in support of eir choice. Hmm... I wonder how long until someone proposes disallowing partnerships from voting on 2154 decisions. If you do, make me

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

Quoting Taral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: On 9/18/07, Peekee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Quoting Ian Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On 9/17/07, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > I announce the initiation of an Agoran decision for the position of >> > Scorekeepor as per Rule 2154. The options are

DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

On 9/18/07, Peekee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Quoting Ian Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > On 9/17/07, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > I announce the initiation of an Agoran decision for the position of > >> > Scorekeepor as per Rule 2154. The options are Wooble and Zefram. > >> > >>

DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

pikhq wrote: Kmail sent my email to discussions by mistake. That's by design. Most responses to a-b are of a discussionary nature, so Reply-To: is set to a-d. As root mentioned, several of us have occasionally forgotten to change it when appropriate. A rarer case is mixing up a-b and a-o du

DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

On 9/17/07, Josiah Worcester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Kmail sent my email to discussions by mistake. Don't worry; we've all done it. -root

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

On 9/17/07, Josiah Worcester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Monday 17 September 2007 20:16:08 Ian Kelly wrote: > > I vote for Wooble as well. > > > > -root > > > > I join you in that vote. Zefram doesn't need more titles (unless we > want to make meaningless titles just for him? :p). NttPF (Not t

DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

On Monday 17 September 2007 20:16:08 Ian Kelly wrote: > I vote for Wooble as well. > > -root > I join you in that vote. Zefram doesn't need more titles (unless we want to make meaningless titles just for him? :p). pikhq

DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

On 9/8/07, Zefram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I OBJECT to [the PP holding office] Why?

Re: DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

Eris wrote: On 9/7/07, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I nominate Eris and Pavitra for International Associate Director of Personnel. I consent This is effective; R2154 doesn't require this consent to be public.

DIS: Re: BUS: Nominations

On 9/7/07, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I nominate Eris and Pavitra for International Associate Director > of Personnel. I consent -- Eris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give you." -- Unknown