DIS: Rests

2009-02-09 Thread Geoffrey Spear
H. Insulator, I believe this is the current status of Rests; I'm removing the non-note-related parts from the Conductor's report: Rests - comex - 6 ehird - 5 Murphy - 12 pikhq - 2 Quazie - 2 root - 1 Sgeo - 2 Taral - 2 w1n5t0n - 2 All other persons have no Rests. History --- Fri 9 Jan

DIS: Re: OFF: [Dep. Anarchist] Repealment proposals

2009-02-09 Thread Geoffrey Spear
On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 2:49 AM, Jonatan Kilhamn jonatan.kilh...@gmail.com wrote: The following proposals are made as a part of the Anarchist's weekly duties. Said duties have not been performed within the tme limit, so I hereby deputise for the office regarding this duty. Proposal: Repeal

DIS: Re: OFF: [Dep. Anarchist] Repealment proposals

2009-02-09 Thread Jonatan Kilhamn
Geoffrey Spear wrote jonatan.kilh...@gmail.com wrote: The following proposals are made as a part of the Anarchist's weekly duties. Said duties have not been performed within the tme limit, so I hereby deputise for the office regarding this duty. Proposal: Repeal R2147 Repeal Rule 2147

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Dep. Anarchist] Repealment proposals

2009-02-09 Thread comexk
On 2/9/09, Jonatan Kilhamn jonatan.kilh...@gmail.com wrote: I realised that after posting. Is there anything I could do officially to fix this? Post another message adding to that one, posting a new one declaring that one void, or nothing at all? I believe you can validly retract those

DIS: Still learning this...

2009-02-09 Thread Jonatan Kilhamn
From the thread going on in Business right now: --- On 2/9/09, Alex Smith ais...@bham.ac.uk wrote: I contest the last 5 of these. Punishing em 6 times for what is essentially the same inaction is manifestly unjust, and may break R101. Alright, then I submit the following NoVs: (snip) --- The

Re: DIS: Still learning this...

2009-02-09 Thread Elliott Hird
2009/2/9 Jonatan Kilhamn jonatan.kilh...@gmail.com: From the thread going on in Business right now: --- On 2/9/09, Alex Smith ais...@bham.ac.uk wrote: I contest the last 5 of these. Punishing em 6 times for what is essentially the same inaction is manifestly unjust, and may break R101.

Re: DIS: Still learning this...

2009-02-09 Thread Alex Smith
On Mon, 2009-02-09 at 20:17 +0100, Jonatan Kilhamn wrote: From the thread going on in Business right now: --- On 2/9/09, Alex Smith ais...@bham.ac.uk wrote: I contest the last 5 of these. Punishing em 6 times for what is essentially the same inaction is manifestly unjust, and may break

Re: DIS: Still learning this...

2009-02-09 Thread Kerim Aydin
On Mon, 9 Feb 2009, Alex Smith wrote: agora-discussion@agoranomic.org is the default reply-to address for the Agora mailing lists. It's something of a bug at your end, in that your mail client's showing the reply-to rather than the From as the author. There's probably some way to change that

Re: DIS: Still learning this...

2009-02-09 Thread comex
On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 2:35 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote: No it has to do with showing names/aliases. That's the name that shows up in the archives themselves when no name outside of the actual address is supplied. Look at the archive list's address shown on comex's last two

Re: DIS: Still learning this...

2009-02-09 Thread Jonatan Kilhamn
2009/2/9 comex com...@gmail.com: On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 2:35 PM, Kerim Aydin ke...@u.washington.edu wrote: No it has to do with showing names/aliases. That's the name that shows up in the archives themselves when no name outside of the actual address is supplied. Look at the archive list's

Re: DIS: Missing pledge?

2009-02-09 Thread Ed Murphy
ais523 wrote: Murphy wrote: {{{ I pledge to transfer a prop from myself to the eventual judge of these CFJs for giving em eight cases at once. }}} Did this ever happen? (A reminder seems to make more sense than an equity case for something like this...) I've already given you one this

DIS: Re: BUS: Following Wooble's lead

2009-02-09 Thread Kerim Aydin
On Mon, 9 Feb 2009, Ed Murphy wrote: Rules to the contrary notwithstanding, any Notice of Violation alleging a rule violation prior to the adoption of this rule is invalid. If this rule has existed for at least 200 days, then any player CAN (by announcement) cause it to

DIS: Re: OFF: [Insulator] Fnord!

2009-02-09 Thread comex
On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 7:03 PM, Ed Murphy emurph...@socal.rr.com wrote: Fri 13 Feb 18:15:40 comex +2 02/09:001 (if uncontested) 02/09:001 18:15:40 comex Murphy 18682CFJ 2339 Hmm?

Re: DIS: Re: OFF: [Insulator] Fnord!

2009-02-09 Thread Ed Murphy
comex wrote: On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 7:03 PM, Ed Murphy emurph...@socal.rr.com wrote: Fri 13 Feb 18:15:40 comex +2 02/09:001 (if uncontested) 02/09:001 18:15:40 comex Murphy 18682CFJ 2339 Hmm? Sorry, copied the wrong name. Fixed in draft.

DIS: lol, rotation

2009-02-09 Thread Ed Murphy
I entered a rotation into the database, but forgot to add the comment before assigning 2363. (I blame my head cold.) The net effect of this is that I'm sitting instead of standing; all other sitting players would be sitting anyway, due to recent assignments.