On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 7:59 PM, Ørjan Johansen oer...@nvg.ntnu.no wrote:
On Thu, 1 Aug 2013, Charles Walker wrote:
Davy I may, however, struggle with the requirement to be generally
capable of communicating via email.
I dunno, I hear cats are quite proficient at using keyboards.
On Fri, 2 Aug 2013, Benjamin Schultz wrote:
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 7:59 PM, Ørjan Johansen oer...@nvg.ntnu.no wrote:
I dunno, I hear cats are quite proficient at using keyboards.
Greetings,
Ørjan.
I think you mean sleeping on keyboards.
I fail to see how sleeping on is not using.
On 31 Jul 2013, at 22:25, Jonathan Rouillard jonathan.rouill...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 3:55 PM, Alex Smith ais...@bham.ac.uk wrote:
On Wed, 2013-07-31 at 12:49 -0700, John Smith wrote:
Fails because you aren't authorized to act on behalf of Davy 1.
Saying 'Person X told
On Thu, 1 Aug 2013, Charles Walker wrote:
Davy I may, however, struggle with the requirement to be generally
capable of communicating via email.
I dunno, I hear cats are quite proficient at using keyboards.
Greetings,
Ørjan.
On 31/07/2013 7:59 PM, Ørjan Johansen wrote:
On Thu, 1 Aug 2013, Charles Walker wrote:
Davy I may, however, struggle with the requirement to be generally
capable of communicating via email.
I dunno, I hear cats are quite proficient at using keyboards.
And it's impressive how badly a lot
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 5:46 PM, Fool fool1...@gmail.com wrote:
In the name of Davy I, Queen of Agora Nomic, CAT 24, and her other realms, I
cause the new rule created by proposal 7537 to amend itself to read:
Hmm... it is interesting how Rule 101 (iv) might be interpreted in
view of there only
On 29/07/2013 5:48 PM, omd wrote:
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 5:46 PM, Foolfool1...@gmail.com wrote:
In the name of Davy I, Queen of Agora Nomic, CAT 24, and her other realms, I
cause the new rule created by proposal 7537 to amend itself to read:
Hmm... it is interesting how Rule 101 (iv) might
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 5:49 PM, Fool fool1...@gmail.com wrote:
How rule 101 might HAVE been interpreted, past tense. Your proposal passed.
Hey, wasn't my idea...
Good point.
Wasn't that Lindrum's justification in Nomic World for why e didn't
require proposals to change rules? Since a rule saying Only proposals
can change rules had the word Initially?
On Mon, 17 Nov 2008, Sgeo wrote:
Wasn't that Lindrum's justification in Nomic World for why e didn't
require proposals to change rules? Since a rule saying Only proposals
can change rules had the word Initially?
E made many bad (read: illegal) interpretations. Another was defining
reasonable
On 17 Nov 2008, at 15:09, Kerim Aydin wrote:
E made many bad (read: illegal) interpretations. Another was
defining
reasonable time for response as 3 minutes. The reason it all
worked
is that the rules made emself, as the judge, the final arbiter of
eir own
interpretations, with no
On Mon, 17 Nov 2008, Elliott Hird wrote:
On 17 Nov 2008, at 15:09, Kerim Aydin wrote:
E made many bad (read: illegal) interpretations. Another was defining
reasonable time for response as 3 minutes. The reason it all worked
is that the rules made emself, as the judge, the final arbiter of
ehird wrote:
2008/11/17 Ed Murphy [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Aha. I initiate an inquiry case on the following statement,
disqualifying comex:
Neither Proposal 5956 nor Proposal 5962 has been adopted.
Arguments:
Strong precedent is that one-off increases work.
What strong precedent? I
On Sun, 16 Nov 2008, Ed Murphy wrote:
2008/11/17 Ed Murphy [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Aha. I initiate an inquiry case on the following statement,
disqualifying comex:
Neither Proposal 5956 nor Proposal 5962 has been adopted.
Arguments:
Strong precedent is that one-off increases work.
14 matches
Mail list logo
