El 25/02/2020 a las 16:42, Alexis Hunt via agora-discussion escribió:
On Tue, 25 Feb 2020 at 10:39, sukil via agora-discussion
wrote:
(Slightly deviating from the topic, but it appears first on r1728): any
reason why point 3 of this rule says "an integer multiple of 0.1 with a
minimum of 1"?
On Tue, 25 Feb 2020 at 10:39, sukil via agora-discussion
wrote:
> (Slightly deviating from the topic, but it appears first on r1728): any
> reason why point 3 of this rule says "an integer multiple of 0.1 with a
> minimum of 1"? Maybe I'm being super pedantic here, but integers don't
> have
(Slightly deviating from the topic, but it appears first on r1728): any
reason why point 3 of this rule says "an integer multiple of 0.1 with a
minimum of 1"? Maybe I'm being super pedantic here, but integers don't
have anything after the decimal point, so why not just use number or
real
On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 8:51 PM Edward Murphy via agora-discussion
wrote:
> > "Without objection" and "without objections" both sound okay to me. I
> > prefer the first, but I don't know why. Maybe I'm just used to it.
>
> The second makes it sound like there need to be objection/s/, plural, to
>
Falsifian wrote:
"Without objection" and "without objections" both sound okay to me. I
prefer the first, but I don't know why. Maybe I'm just used to it.
The second makes it sound like there need to be objection/s/, plural, to
block the relevant action.
On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 12:45 PM sukil via agora-discussion
wrote:
>
>
> El 14/02/2020 a las 18:06, James Cook escribió:
> > On Thu, 13 Feb 2020 at 13:06, sukil via agora-discussion
> > wrote:
> >> El 13/02/2020 a las 13:24, AIS523--- via agora-discussion escribió:
> >>> On Thu, 2020-02-13 at
El 14/02/2020 a las 18:06, James Cook escribió:
On Thu, 13 Feb 2020 at 13:06, sukil via agora-discussion
wrote:
El 13/02/2020 a las 13:24, AIS523--- via agora-discussion escribió:
On Thu, 2020-02-13 at 12:40 +0100, sukil via agora-discussion wrote:
Hi,
I was reading the rules before
On Thu, 13 Feb 2020 at 13:06, sukil via agora-discussion
wrote:
> El 13/02/2020 a las 13:24, AIS523--- via agora-discussion escribió:
> > On Thu, 2020-02-13 at 12:40 +0100, sukil via agora-discussion wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I was reading the rules before registering and came across something
>
El 13/02/2020 a las 13:24, AIS523--- via agora-discussion escribió:
On Thu, 2020-02-13 at 12:40 +0100, sukil via agora-discussion wrote:
Hi,
I was reading the rules before registering and came across something
I didn't understand, I hope you guys can clarify this for me (I was
going to
Ah, I see now, double negatives (approximate term) confuse me. Thanks!
El 13/02/2020 a las 13:24, AIS523--- via agora-discussion escribió:
On Thu, 2020-02-13 at 12:40 +0100, sukil via agora-discussion wrote:
Hi,
I was reading the rules before registering and came across something
I didn't
On Thu, 2020-02-13 at 12:40 +0100, sukil via agora-discussion wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I was reading the rules before registering and came across something
> I didn't understand, I hope you guys can clarify this for me (I was
> going to propose some change for the first part, but then I might be
> the
Re-reading the rules it seems that my first point only applies to the
objections part, the rest is clear.
Hi,
I was reading the rules before registering and came across something I
didn't understand, I hope you guys can clarify this for me (I was going
to propose some change for the first part, but then I might be the only
one who doesn't understand this).
First, we have objections, consent
13 matches
Mail list logo
