I vote as follows, and act on behalf of Gaelan to vote as follows:
> 8096* twg, D. Margaux 2.0 PTPMFUBGOFTDAODWTVOAWIC [1]
AGAINST
> 8097* G. 1.0 Left||Right
FOR
> 8098* G. 3.0 Zombie Overstock
FOR
> 8099* Aris 1.5 Patent Petitions
FOR
>
No idea if I got this all correct. But here goes.
I spend 1 apple to move to (0, 2).
I spend 1 apple to move to (1, 2).
I spend 1 apple to move to (2, 2) and take all the assets from the
facility at that location.
I spend 1 apple to move to (2, 1) and take all the assets from the
facility at
I agree to the exchanged Contract with this hash. -G.
On Sat, 29 Sep 2018, D Margaux wrote:
> G. and I have exchanged a document that has text with the following SHA256
> hash:
>
> 58629980096A5E997EC5CF62C04B59EBFBEEAF81DD4785B50CCF190E1F24CE2D
>
> I agree to be bound by that text and I
G. and I have exchanged a document that has text with the following SHA256
hash:
58629980096A5E997EC5CF62C04B59EBFBEEAF81DD4785B50CCF190E1F24CE2D
I agree to be bound by that text and I agree and consent for that text to
be a contract between me and G., if G. likewise agrees.
I vote, and act on behalf of Tenaior to vote, as I voted last upon each of
the following proposals.
-Aris
On Sun, Sep 23, 2018 at 5:17 PM Aris Merchant <
thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I reiterate my vote on each listed proposal.
>
> -Aris
>
> On Sun, Sep 23, 2018 at 5:13 PM Aris
I vote AGAINST 8081B, and cause Gaelan to vote AGAINST 8081B.
On Sat, 29 Sep 2018, D Margaux wrote:
> I change my vote, and cause nichdel to change eir vote, on the Point
> Installation Act v.2 (8081B) to AGAINST.
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 7:14 PM Timon Walshe-Grey wrote:
> >
> >
I change my vote, and cause nichdel to change eir vote, on the Point
Installation Act v.2 (8081B) to AGAINST.
On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 7:14 PM Timon Walshe-Grey wrote:
>
> Changed my mind again - I act on behalf of Kenyon to vote PRESENT on all
these proposals.
>
> (Helps them beat quorum even
I reiterate my judgement of TRUE on CFJ 3658.
> 3658 called by twg 27 August 2018, assigned to G. 9 September 2018: "The
> Treasuror's report of August 27, 2018, or a portion thereof, is
> doubted."
Judge's Arguments
Imagine three possible claims of error referencing a hypothetical
I pay 1 apple to move to (-1, 2). I pay 1 apple to move to (0, 2). I
take the coins at (0, 2).
[Comment: I am pretty confident that I can do this, even if the
initial transfer was
INEFFECTIVE, because I have Corona's implied consent]
If Corona has transferred these facilities to me, then I pay
I CoE the most recent Treasuror report: "D. Margaux's attempt to act on behalf
of Corona to transfer all Corona's liquid assets to D. Margaux failed."
In response to that CoE, I cite the CFJ in the below-quoted message.
(Purpose of the above is to block self-ratification.)
Also, I favour this
10 matches
Mail list logo
