On 5/28/08, Geoffrey Spear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Whereas the rules define only one privilege at the moment, that > privilege uses language which is at best ambiguous, and putting the > ruleset as a whole under the flawed equity court system would be > problematic at best, I submit the following proposal, entitled "No > private law", and set its AI to 3:
I'm not entirely sure the right to keep the map up top is such a bad thing. Seriously. At least put it in Rule 1727.
