2009/2/20 Geoffrey Spear geoffsp...@gmail.com:
Remove Clause 17, and renumber the following clauses sequentially.
Erm, I believe you want the RBoA.
I read through the AAA contract, and as I understand it it's just for
me to join and request subsidization, and I will have a couple of
lands to start with? Anything tricky I should think about?
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 11:14 AM, Elliott Hird
penguinoftheg...@googlemail.com wrote:
2009/2/20 Geoffrey Spear geoffsp...@gmail.com:
Remove Clause 17, and renumber the following clauses sequentially.
Erm, I believe you want the RBoA.
No, auto rate changes based on transactions would remain,
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 11:27 AM, Jonatan Kilhamn
jonatan.kilh...@gmail.com wrote:
I read through the AAA contract, and as I understand it it's just for
me to join and request subsidization, and I will have a couple of
lands to start with? Anything tricky I should think about?
Not really,
On Fri, 20 Feb 2009, comex wrote:
Defendant's arguments: Barring some controversy over regulated actions
this week (Rule 2125 has not been amended in two months and there are
no current proposals to amend it), a future observer specifically
selecting this week's email SLR, missing Wooble's
comex wrote:
Nevertheless, point taken, and I
plead GUILTY as the text was misleading regardless of whether anyone
is actually misled.
Gratuitous: I would advocate UNAWARE here, as e needed it pointed out to
em before e realized it was potentially misleading.
... oh wait, that's been
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 2:13 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
If leniency is warranted,
the right mechanism would be to say that an Officer should have been
aware of the abuse (so UNAWARE is not an option in the culpability) but
not aware of the seriousness, and that this lack of
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 4:01 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
The judge CAN, with 2 Support, set the fine at a
different integral level between one half and double that
amount,
Aren't 1 and 2 times the only such integral levels?
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 4:15 PM, comex com...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 4:01 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
The judge CAN, with 2 Support, set the fine at a
different integral level between one half and double that
amount,
Aren't 1
On Fri, 20 Feb 2009, comex wrote:
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 4:01 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
The judge CAN, with 2 Support, set the fine at a
different integral level between one half and double that
amount,
Aren't 1 and 2 times the only such
On Fri, 20 Feb 2009, Kerim Aydin wrote:
Er, was mean to imply rounding to integer *after* setting the
multiplication level to any real between 1/2 and 2 and multiplying, so
a default Class 10 crime could be any integer between 5 and 20. Hmm,
also not sure that a geometric range is desired.
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 2:13 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
Gratuitous response:
Officers have a duty that they freely choose to undertake. It's not the
responsibility of others to tell them what their duty is, so UNAWARE
should be a hard(er) defense for an Officer who was
On Fri, 20 Feb 2009, comex wrote:
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 2:13 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote:
Officers have a duty that they freely choose to undertake.
I nominate Goethe for Rulekeepor.
Or that they freely choose not to undertake.
13 matches
Mail list logo
